跳到主要內容

簡易檢索 / 詳目顯示

研究生: 鍾佳紜
Jhong, Jia-Yun
論文名稱: 不同平台特徵對使用者社交梳理行為策略與幸福感之間的關聯探討:以Instagram與Threads為例
Exploring the Relationship Between Platform Characteristics and User Social Grooming Strategies and Well-being: A Comparative Study of Instagram and Threads
指導教授: 林日璇
Lin, Jih-Hsuan
口試委員: 郭貞
Kuo, Cheng
韓義興
Han, Yi-Hsing
學位類別: 碩士
Master
系所名稱: 創新國際學院 - 全球傳播與創新科技碩士學位學程
Master’s Program in Global Communication and Innovation Technology
論文出版年: 2025
畢業學年度: 114
語文別: 英文
論文頁數: 110
中文關鍵詞: 社交梳理策略平台特徵主觀幸福感InstagramThreads
外文關鍵詞: Social Grooming Strategy, Platform Characteristics, Subjective Well-being, Instagram, Threads
相關次數: 點閱:18下載:0
分享至:
查詢本校圖書館目錄 查詢臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統 勘誤回報
  • 本研究旨在探討不同平台特徵如何影響使用者的社交梳理行為策略,進而影響其主觀幸福感與社會安全感,以 Instagram 與 Threads 為例,分析同一使用者在兩平台間的行為一致性與策略轉換。
    鑑於兩平台在互動設計與內容呈現上的差異,Instagram以圖像與影片為主,強調自我呈現與社交回饋;而 Threads 以文字交流為核心,傾向促進即時、私密且真實的情感互動。研究以社會交換理論與社交梳理理論為基礎,透過問卷調查蒐集 557 份有效樣本,並運用潛在類別分析(Latent Class Analysis)、配對樣本 t 檢定與變異數分析等統計方法加以驗證,分析平台特徵、社交策略與心理結果之間的關聯。
    研究結果顯示,平台特徵確實影響使用者的社交梳理行為策略,Instagram 使用者傾向採取展示與形象導向的互動策略,而 Threads 則引導較親密與真實的交流形式。進一步分析指出,社交梳理策略與幸福感、社會安全感之間存在正向關聯,且平台特徵對心理結果的影響部分透過行為策略中介。
    本研究揭示不同平台脈絡下的社交互動差異與適應性,說明平台設計如何形塑使用者的社會行為與心理經驗,並對未來社群媒體設計及使用者心理福祉推廣提出理論與實務層面上的啟示。


    This study aims to explore how different platform characteristics influence users' social grooming strategies, thereby affecting their subjective well-being and sense of social security. Using Instagram and Threads as case studies, it analyzes behavioral consistency and strategy switching among the same users across both platforms.
    Given the differences in interaction design and content presentation between the two platforms, Instagram emphasizes self-presentation and social feedback through images and videos. At the same time, Threads focuses on text-based communication, promoting real-time, intimate, and authentic emotional interactions. Grounded in social exchange theory and social grooming theory, this study collected 557 valid survey responses. It employed Latent Class Analysis, paired t-tests, and ANOVA to validate correlations between platform characteristics, social strategies, and psychological outcomes.
    Results indicate that platform characteristics significantly influence users' social grooming strategies: Instagram users tend toward display and image-oriented interactions, while Threads fosters more intimate and authentic exchanges. Further analysis reveals positive correlations between social grooming strategies and well-being, with platform characteristics partially mediating this effect through behavioral strategies.
    This study reveals differences in social interactions and adaptability across distinct platform contexts, illustrating how platform design shapes users' social behaviors and psychological experiences. It offers theoretical and practical implications for future social media design and for promoting users' psychological well-being.

    摘要 iii
    ABSTRACT iv
    1. INTRODUCTION 1
    1.1. Research Background and Motivation 1
    1.2. Research Objective 4
    2. LITERATURE REVIEW 6
    2.1. Platform Characteristics and Interaction Patterns of Social Media 6
    2.1.1. Platform Characteristics of Instagram and Users’ Social Interaction Patterns 6
    2.1.2. Platform Characteristics of Threads and Users’ Social Interaction Patterns 9
    2.1.3. The Potential Impact of Social Media Platform Characteristics on User Behavior 13
    2.2. Social Grooming Theory: Strategies, Platform Applications, Psychological Impacts 15
    2.2.1. Social Grooming Theory and Strategy Typologies 15
    2.2.2. The Evolution of Social Grooming on Digital Platforms 16
    2.2.3. Categorizing User Types and Social Grooming Behaviors 17
    2.2.4. The Relationship Between Social Grooming Strategies and Well-being: Differential Psychological Outcomes 19
    2.3. Theoretical background 21
    2.3.1. Self-Presentation Theory: Image Construction in Social Media 21
    2.3.2. Association of Self-Presentation with Social Grooming Strategies 23
    2.3.3. Social Capital Theory: The Basis of Social Returns in Community Interaction 25
    2.4. Subjective Well-being and Social Security 28
    2.4.1. Subjective Well-being 28
    2.4.2. Social Security 29
    2.4.3. Platform Interaction and Psychological Feelings 31
    3. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY 34
    3.1. Research Framework 34
    3.2. Research Questions and Assumptions 34
    3.3. Research Subjects and Internet Survey Method 36
    3.3.1. Research Subjects 36
    3.3.2. Internet Survey Method 36
    3.4. Questionnaire Design 37
    3.5. VARIABLE MEASUREMENT 40
    3.5.1. Independent Variable 41
    3.5.2. Intermediate Variable 41
    3.5.3. Dependent Variable 44
    3.6. Covariate 45
    4. RESULT 46
    4.1. Descriptive Statistics of The Sample 46
    4.1.1. Sample Demographics Distribution 46
    4.1.2. Instagram and Threads Usage Behavior Overview 47
    4.2. Scale Reliability Test 50
    4.3. Research Questions and Hypothesis Testing 55
    4.3.1. Platform Feature Differentiation Testing 55
    4.3.2. Testing Differences in Social Grooming Strategies 58
    4.3.3. The Relationship Between Platform Characteristics and Social Grooming Strategies 61
    4.3.4. Differential Analysis of Social Grooming Behavior Strategies and Their Psychological Outcomes 66
    4.3.5. Indirect Relationship Analysis Between Platform Characteristics, Social Grooming Strategies, and Psychological Outcomes 77
    4.3.6. Exploratory Research Question: Cross-Platform Behavioral Consistency Analysis 80
    5. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION 84
    5.1. Discussion of Findings 84
    5.1.1. Limitation 87
    5.1.2. Future Research 88
    5.2. Conclusion 89
    REFERENCE 91
    APPENDIX 104

    Afolaranmi, A. O. (2023). Prospect of Threads in Contrast to Twitter as an Online Social Network Tool for Conflict Resolution. British Journal of Multidisciplinary and Advanced Studies, 4(4), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.37745/bjmas.2022.0250
    Auxier, B., & Anderson, M. (n.d.). A majority of Americans say they use YouTube and Facebook, while use of Instagram, Snapchat and TikTok is especially common among adults under 30.
    B K, A., Abraham, S. M., & Narayanan, N. (2024). Instagram Threads: A Study on the User’s Perspective of the App. 2024 1st International Conference on Trends in Engineering Systems and Technologies (ICTEST), 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1109/ICTEST60614.2024.10576174
    Baumeister, R. F., & Leary, M. R. (1995). The need to belong: Desire for interpersonal attachments as a fundamental human motivation. Psychological Bulletin, 117(3), 497–529. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.117.3.497
    Baym, N. K. (2010). Personal Connections in the Digital Age.
    Blank, G., & Lutz, C. (2017). Representativeness of Social Media in Great Britain: Investigating Facebook, LinkedIn, Twitter, Pinterest, Google+, and Instagram [American Behavioral Scientist, 61(7), 741–756.]. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0002764217717559
    Blau, P. M. (1964). Exchange and power in social life. https://www.scirp.org/reference/referencespapers?referenceid=611884
    Blau, P. M. (1964). Exchange And Power In Social Life.
    Brandtzæg, P. B. (2010). Towards a unified Media-User Typology (MUT): A meta-analysis and review of the research literature on media-user typologies. Computers in Human Behavior, 26(5), 940–956. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2010.02.008
    Bright, L. F., Kleiser, S. B., & Grau, S. L. (2015a). Too much Facebook? An exploratory examination of social media fatigue. Computers in Human Behavior, 44, 148–155. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.11.048
    Bright, L. F., Kleiser, S. B., & Grau, S. L. (2015b). Too much Facebook? An exploratory examination of social media fatigue. Computers in Human Behavior, 44, 148–155. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.11.048
    Burke, M., & Kraut, R. E. (2016). The Relationship Between Facebook Use and Well-Being Depends on Communication Type and Tie Strength: FACEBOOK AND WELL-BEING. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 21(4), 265–281. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcc4.12162
    Burke, M., Kraut, R., & Marlow, C. (2011). Social capital on facebook: Differentiating uses and users. Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 571–580. https://doi.org/10.1145/1978942.1979023
    Carr, C. T., Schrock, D. B., & Dauterman, P. (2012). Speech Acts Within Facebook Status Messages. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 31(2), 176–196. https://doi.org/10.1177/0261927X12438535
    Chen, W., & Lee, K.-H. (2013). Sharing, Liking, Commenting, and Distressed? The Pathway Between Facebook Interaction and Psychological Distress. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 16(10), 728–734. https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2012.0272
    Chou, H.-T. G., & Edge, N. (2012). “They are happier and having better lives than I am”: The impact of using Facebook on perceptions of others’ lives. Cyberpsychology, Behavior and Social Networking, 15(2), 117–121. https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2011.0324
    Collins, L. & Lanza. (2010). Latent Class and Latent Transition Analysis: With Applications in the Social, Behavioral, and Health Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470567333.indsub
    Daft, R. L., & Lengel, R. H. (1986). Organizational Information Requirements, Media Richness and Structural Design.
    Deters, F. G., & Mehl, M. R. (2013). Does Posting Facebook Status Updates Increase or Decrease Loneliness? An Online Social Networking Experiment. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 4(5), 579–586. https://doi.org/10.1177/1948550612469233
    Diener, E. (1984). Subjective well-being. Psychological Bulletin, 95(3), 542–575. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.95.3.542
    Diener, E., Emmons, R. A., Larsen, R. J., & Griffin, S. (1985). The Satisfaction With Life Scale. Journal of Personality Assessment, 49(1), 71–75. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327752jpa4901_13
    Dunbar, R. (1996). Grooming, Gossip, and the Evolution of Language. https://www.hup.harvard.edu/books/9780674363366
    Dunbar, R. I. M. (2018). The Anatomy of Friendship. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 22(1), 32–51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2017.10.004
    Ellison, N. B., Steinfield, C., & Lampe, C. (2007). The Benefits of Facebook “Friends:” Social Capital and College Students’ Use of Online Social Network Sites. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 12(4), 1143–1168. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2007.00367.x
    Ellison, N. B., Vitak, J., Gray, R., & Lampe, C. (2014). Cultivating Social Resources on Social Network Sites: Facebook Relationship Maintenance Behaviors and Their Role in Social Capital Processes. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 19(4), 855–870. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcc4.12078
    Goffman, E. (1959). The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life.
    High, A. C., Ruppel, E. K., McEwan, B., & Caughlin, J. P. (2023). Computer-Mediated Communication and Well-Being in the Age of Social Media: A Systematic Review. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 40(2), 420–458. https://doi.org/10.1177/02654075221106449
    Hogan, B. (2010). The Presentation of Self in the Age of Social Media: Distinguishing Performances and Exhibitions Online. Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society, 30(6), 377–386. https://doi.org/10.1177/0270467610385893
    Kim, J., & Lee, J.-E. R. (2011). The Facebook Paths to Happiness: Effects of the Number of Facebook Friends and Self-Presentation on Subjective Well-Being. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 14(6), 359–364. https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2010.0374
    Kim, S., Ma, I., & Son, J. (2024). How does stress experienced on instagram differ from threads? Comparing social media fatigue based on platform types. Computers in Human Behavior, 157, 108249. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2024.108249
    Kross, E., Verduyn, P., Demiralp, E., Park, J., Lee, D. S., Lin, N., Shablack, H., Jonides, J., & Ybarra, O. (2013). Facebook Use Predicts Declines in Subjective Well-Being in Young Adults. PLoS ONE, 8(8), e69841. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0069841
    Lai, F., Wang, L., Zhang, J., Shan, S., Chen, J., & Tian, L. (2023). Relationship between Social Media Use and Social Anxiety in College Students: Mediation Effect of Communication Capacity. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 20(4), 3657. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20043657
    Lanza, S. T., & Rhoades, B. L. (2013). Latent class analysis: An alternative perspective on subgroup analysis in prevention and treatment. Prevention Science: The Official Journal of the Society for Prevention Research, 14(2), 157–168. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11121-011-0201-1
    Lee, E. J. (2017). The Effects of Instagram Hashtags on Social Capital and Online Civic Engagement: International Journal of Interactive Communication Systems and Technologies, 7(1), 48–58. https://doi.org/10.4018/IJICST.2017010104
    Lee, E., Lee, J.-A., Moon, J. H., & Sung, Y. (2015). Pictures Speak Louder than Words: Motivations for Using Instagram. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 18(9), 552–556. https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2015.0157
    Lestari, D. W., & Ambarwati, R. (2024). Social Network Analysis: Understanding User Behavior in Threads. Kontigensi : Jurnal Ilmiah Manajemen, 12(1), 115–124. https://doi.org/10.56457/jimk.v12i1.505
    Lin, J.-H. T. (2019). Strategic Social Grooming: Emergent Social Grooming Styles on Facebook, Social Capital and Well-Being. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 24(3), 90–107. https://doi.org/10.1093/jcmc/zmz002
    Lin, J.-H. T., & Hsieh, Y.-S. (2021). Longitudinal Social Grooming Transition Patterns on Facebook, Social Capital, and Well-Being. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 26(6), 320–342. https://doi.org/10.1093/jcmc/zmab011
    Lin, N. (2001). Social Capital: A Theory of Social Structure and Action. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511815447
    Marwick, A. E., & Boyd, D. (2011). I tweet honestly, I tweet passionately: Twitter users, context collapse, and the imagined audience. New Media & Society, 13(1), 114–133. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444810365313
    Masanori Takano. (2017). Two types of social grooming methods depending on the trade-off between the number and strength of social relationships. Royal Society Open Science, 5. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.180148
    Nadkarni, A., & Hofmann, S. G. (2012). Why do people use Facebook? Personality and Individual Differences, 52(3), 243–249. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2011.11.007
    Nesi, J., & Prinstein, M. J. (2015). Using Social Media for Social Comparison and Feedback-Seeking: Gender and Popularity Moderate Associations with Depressive Symptoms. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 43(8), 1427–1438. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10802-015-0020-0
    Nonnecke, B., & Preece, J. (2001). Why Lurkers Lurk. Americas Conference on Information Systems.
    Papacharissi, Z. (2013). Zizi Papacharissi (2010, Malden, MA: Polity Press), A Private Sphere: Democracy in a Digital Age. Comunicação e Sociedade, 23, 306–309. https://doi.org/10.17231/comsoc.23(2013).1631
    Petersen, K. J., Qualter, P., & Humphrey, N. (2019). The Application of Latent Class Analysis for Investigating Population Child Mental Health: A Systematic Review. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 1214. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01214
    Putnam, R. (2000). Bowling Alone: The Collapse and Revival of American Community. https://doi.org/10.1145/358916.361990
    Quan-Haase, A., & Young, A. L. (2010). Uses and Gratifications of Social Media: A Comparison of Facebook and Instant Messaging. Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society, 30(5), 350–361. https://doi.org/10.1177/0270467610380009
    Register, Y. (2023). Attached to ``The Algorithm’’: Making Sense of Algorithmic Precarity on Instagram.
    Reimann, L.-E., Ozimek, P., Rohmann, E., & Bierhoff, H.-W. (2023). Post more! The mediating role of social capital between Instagram use and satisfaction with life. Current Psychology, 42(14), 12175–12189. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-021-02579-6
    Reinecke, L., & Trepte, S. (2014). Authenticity and well-being on social network sites: A two-wave longitudinal study on the effects of online authenticity and the positivity bias in SNS communication. Computers in Human Behavior, 30, 95–102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2013.07.030
    Schlenker. (1980). Impression Management The Self-Concept, Social Identity, and Interpersonal Relations. https://www.scirp.org/reference/referencespapers?referenceid=1560457
    Sheldon, P., & Bryant, K. (2016). Instagram: Motives for its use and relationship to narcissism and contextual age. Computers in Human Behavior, 58, 89–97. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.12.059
    Silva, T., Barbosa, G., & Silva, I. (2018). Evaluation of User Experience and Sociability on Platforms of Ephemeral Narratives: An Instagram Stories Case Study. In WebMedia ’18: Proceedings of the 24th Brazilian Symposium on Multimedia and the Web (p. 337). https://doi.org/10.1145/3243082.3243084
    Subarna, A. D., & Arianti, A. S. (2020). Analysis on User Interfaces Readability: A Case Study of Instagram. IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering, 879(1), 012118. https://doi.org/10.1088/1757-899X/879/1/012118
    Sun, X., Li, B. J., Zhang, H., & Zhang, G. (2023). Social media use for coping with stress and psychological adjustment: A transactional model of stress and coping perspective. Frontiers in Psychology, 14, 1140312. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1140312
    Sundar, S. S., & Limperos, A. (2013). Uses and Grats 2.0: New Gratifications for New Media. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 57, 504–525. https://doi.org/10.1080/08838151.2013.845827
    Tandoc, E. C., Lou, C., & Min, V. L. H. (2019). Platform-swinging in a poly-social-media context: How and why users navigate multiple social media platforms. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 24(1), 21–35. https://doi.org/10.1093/jcmc/zmy022
    Toma, C. L. (2010). Affirming the self through online profiles: Beneficial effects of social networking sites. Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, 1749–1752. https://doi.org/10.1145/1753326.1753588
    Valenzuela, S., Park, N., & Kee, K. F. (2009). Is There Social Capital in a Social Network Site?: Facebook Use and College Students’ Life Satisfaction, Trust, and Participation. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 14(4), 875–901. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2009.01474.x
    Van Deursen, A. J., & Van Dijk, J. A. (2014). The digital divide shifts to differences in usage. New Media & Society, 16(3), 507–526. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444813487959
    Verduyn, P., Ybarra, O., Résibois, M., Jonides, J., & Kross, E. (2017). Do Social Network Sites Enhance or Undermine Subjective Well‐Being? A Critical Review. Social Issues and Policy Review, 11(1), 274–302. https://doi.org/10.1111/sipr.12033
    Vermunt, J. K., & Magidson, J. (2003). Latent class models for classification. Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, 41(3–4), 531–537. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-9473(02)00179-2
    Walther, J. B. (1996). Computer-mediated communication: Impersonal, interpersonal, and hyperpersonal. 23, 3–43.
    Whiting, A., & Williams, D. (2013). Why people use social media: A uses and gratifications approach. Qualitative Market Research: An International Journal, 16(4), 362–369. https://doi.org/10.1108/QMR-06-2013-0041
    Wu, P., Feng, R., & Zhang, J. (2024). The relationship between loneliness and problematic social media usage in Chinese university students: A longitudinal study. BMC Psychology, 12(1), 13. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40359-023-01498-4
    Yang, C., & Bradford Brown, B. (2016). Online Self-Presentation on Facebook and Self Development During the College Transition. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 45(2), 402–416. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-015-0385-y
    Zhang, P., He, Y., Haq, E.-U., He, J., & Tyson, G. (2024). The Emergence of Threads: The Birth of a New Social Network (arXiv:2406.19277). arXiv. http://arxiv.org/abs/2406.19277

    無法下載圖示 全文公開日期 2029/01/18
    QR CODE
    :::