Openbravo

The survey results in Figure 4.10 indicated that among the research participants Facebook was the most widely used online social networking program. Figure 4.11 indicates that a majority of those users had a regular usage of Facebook, with only 12 participants indicating they did not use Facebook at the start of the FSP course. One interpretation is that Facebook was already known and used among the research participants and the popularity of this mode may have heavily influenced the other non-user’s choice to use Facebook during the 2010 year. It could have created a form of social pressure in that Facebook may have become part of the interaction modes used by the majority of the participants and so those who were not using it may have felt that they needed to. This would have been dependent on the nature of the relationships between the participants.

Social pressure may be a component of the basic social environment that was present during the FSP course 2010. Figure 4.12, Figure 4.21 and Figure 4.22 indicate that the reasons for starting to use Facebook do appear to have a strong social dimension. This is not unexpected as Facebook is a system designed to socially connect people together. However, Figure 4.12 in particular indicates that ‘meeting new people’ ranked low on the scale of reasons to use Facebook. This would seem to indicate that Facebook usage is not a strong factor in the creation of new relationships with others but more of a mode by which to maintain and formalise relationships that have already been made elsewhere. Usually this would be people met within a social environment, such as the FSP course, Figure 4.22 shows that those participants who were using Facebook had at least some of the other participants connected to their Facebook accounts. This would indicate overall that the social environment is key to getting people to use Facebook and also to have them continue to use it once the social environment changes. This strongly suggests that the social environment in which a person is in is a key aspect to promoting and continuing to use online systems. This results in an interesting symbiosis between the real-world and the online-world. The overarching motivating factor for the use of Facebook by the participant group was the social environment of which they were a part while studying. This is a similar

Page | 141 outcome as to that found by the ‘Digital Youth Project” (Ito et al, 2008) which concluded that while young people do use a range of new technologies in their interactions with other people, the basic nature of those interactions are consistent with those before such technologies existed. While new technological ways of interacting with each other continue to develop it would be foolish to too closely associate the nature of the interaction with the mode used.

Expanding this result would seem to suggest that Facebook use, and possibly other digital social networks use, is dictated to a high degree by the social environment in which the users belong. That is, it is not the on-line environment but the off-line environment that promotes the use of online social systems. Past research supports the general idea that the ‘social’ driver for the use of digital social networks such as Facebook are designed around connecting people together (boyd & Ellison, 2008) so it is not a surprising that those who socialised with each other were connected in some way via technological means, be it Facebook or another alternative means. The ease of use of offered by Facebook would also appear to be a positive as technology relies on this to attract and instil a level of confidence in their application (Henderson, et al, 2012). The research by Selwyn (2008), Ryan (2008) and Grasmuck, Martin & Zhao (2009) all indicate that the offline and online identities of Facebook and digital social network users are very similar and so seeing the offline and online relationships are essentially the same is no surprise as well. However, these results seem to emphasise the social need as a driving factor. While the results from this research do support this somewhat, the social environment itself was found to be the primary driving factor for the use of Facebook. Past research may possibly be focusing on the use of digital social networks from the wrong perspective by their examination of online behaviour and its influence on the offline, while a different perspective is how the offline behaviours influence on the online behaviour and use of social technologies such as Facebook.

While Facebook and other such digital social networks allow users to bridge the online and offline environment (boyd & Ellison, 2008) this distinction is less important when the users are geographically co-located. This co-location allows close contact to be available and thus the focus of interaction is toward the offline. The distinction between these ‘worlds’ becomes less important as the online environment is just an extension of the offline and that the social relationships cross into both worlds as supported by the findings of a number of researchers (Selwyn, 2008; Ryan, 2008; Grasmuck, Martin & Zhao, 2009). Identifying that the online supports offline relationships is correct but might be missing an important distinction in the role that digital social networks play in closely co-located groups.

Page | 142 The surveys undertaken as part of the research included a section on Facebook usage to capture a picture over time of how Facebook was used. In the final survey undertaken in early 2011, participants were asked about their use of Facebook during the time after the conclusion of the FSP course which included the three month Christmas holiday and the beginning of the University’s first semester. It is clear from Figure 4.30 that while the participants were geographically dispersed, and many had returned back to their home countries, their use of Facebook generally increased overall however once the university 2011 semester one had started the use of Facebook dropped and the face-to-face interactions increased.

This would indicate that during the time that the research participants were separated from each other they used Facebook in order to keep in contact and to keep up-to- date on the activities of others. This use of Facebook was to overcome the geographic distance that was present and to allow a relatively consistent level of interaction with those to whom they were socially connected. The inverse relationship that is indicated would seem to suggest that face-to-face interactions are the preferred way to interact with others from the FSP course but when geographic distance was a barrier, Facebook offered a convenient and easy way to interact.

The uses of digital social networks such as Facebook can be varied but the literature seems to agree that they are used to formalise the relationships that users have (boyd & Ellison, 2008) and to allow general interaction with those people (Beal & Strauss, 2008). It is this general interaction that allows them to maintain and strengthen these social relationships (Jones & Soltren, 2005; Lewis, Kaufman & Christakis, 2008). The use of Facebook is a key example in that by adding existing social relationships to their ‘friends’ list, users are better able to maintain these social relationships by keeping informed about their activities and sharing information (Williams & Merten, 2009). The research on Facebook use does not seems to discuss in detail what happens to those who do not use Facebook or do not use Facebook often. Previous research indicates that high online usage of digital social networks does not mean that users will have more offline friends or will be able to generate more social capital (Valenzuela, Park & Kee, 2009; Tong, Van Der Heide & Langwell, 2008). This is supported by the research results from this study that showed that social relationships and social capital were created by the face-to-face interactions of the research participants, all promoted by the situation the participants were in being co-located for an extended period of time. What can be learnt is that the offline environment plays a much more important role in social capital creation and the reinforcement of social ties as well as the use of digital social networks.

Overall, it was found that there is a relationship between the offline and online behaviours of the research participants. This is mirrored in the research however

Page | 143 there remains an important distinction between online and offline. There seems to be an explicit acceptance that online behaviours on Facebook influence the offline behaviours and social relationships of users. This does hold true but examining offline behaviours and their effect on the online does warrant further attention from research in the future, especially from the perspective of Facebook that appear to focus on digitally reinforcing the relationships made offline.