Interpersonal Communication in Social Networking Sites: An Investigation in the Framework of Uses and Gratification Theory

Aysen Temel Eginli 1 *, Neslihan Ozmelek Tas 1
More Detail
1 Ege University, Turkey
* Corresponding Author
Online Journal of Communication and Media Technologies, Volume 8, Issue 2, pp. 81-104.
OPEN ACCESS   12620 Views   12071 Downloads   Published online: 24 Apr 2018
Download Full Text (PDF)


In the twenty-first century, thanks to the development of information and communication technologies that, communication possibilities between people is getting unlimited. People can reach and follow anyone as whenever they want. Especially, after the development of web 2.0 which ensures interactive communication, social media has become much dominant in people’s lives. The social media is valuable for people to create social networks and sustain their relations, also protects the communication between them. Therefore, it has a fundamental place in people’s lives. Renckstorf and his friends (1996) evaluated the media usage of the people in the base of social interaction, and they created the model which is named Media Use as Social Action/MASA. The MASA model clarifies the people’s media usage as a social movement. In addition, according to MASA, people use the media for their self-wants and self-needs. In this regard, people use the media for interpersonal communication purposes in four ways. These purposes are, getting information, doing cooperation, having relation, expressing and explaining and strategical use (Petric et al. 2011). In this work, people’s aim of the using social media, especially for the aim of interpersonal communication, is explained in the base of theories. Also, in this paper, the results are evaluated that obtained from structured interviews based on the classification of MASA model, and thus, it is aimed to clarify which communication purposes do the people use the social network sites. When the results of research are evaluated in terms of Uses and Gratification theory which concerns on what people do with the media more than the effect of media on people, users of social network sites indicate that social network sites are characterized by informational-cooperative, relational-socialization, expressive, strategic, and four-dimensionality, but are responsive to the need for a large number of interpersonal communication.


Temel Eginli, A., & Ozmelek Tas, N. (2018). Interpersonal Communication in Social Networking Sites: An Investigation in the Framework of Uses and Gratification Theory. Online Journal of Communication and Media Technologies, 8(2), 81-104.


  • Al-Khaddam, H.K. (2013). Impact of Social Networks on Interpersonal Communication of the Students University College Irbid Girls: Facebook as a Model, Cross-Cultural Communication, Vol.9, No.5, 17-22.
  • Antheunis, M.L, Valkenburg, P.M.& Peter, J. (2008). Getting Acquainted through Social Network Sites: Testing a Model of Online Uncertainty Reduction and Social Attraction, Amsterdam School of Communications Research, University of Amsterdam.
  • Bachrach, Y. , Kosinski, M. , Graepel, T. , Kohli, P. and Stillwell, D. (2012). Personality and Patterns of Facebook Usage, Web Science’s 12, June22-24, 2012, Evanston, USA.
  • Bala, K.(2014). Social Media and Changing Communication Patterns, Global Media Journal-Indian Edition, 5 (1), 1-6.
  • Bandura, A. (2001). Social cognitive theory of mass communication, Media Psychology, 3 (3), 265-299.
  • Bateman, P.J, Pike, J.C. & Butler, B.S.(2011). To disclose or not: publicness in social networking sites, Information Technology & People, Vol. 24 No. 1, 78-100.
  • Beitzel, B. (2012). Information-Processing Theory for Classroom Teachers, OpenStax-CNX modüle, m42774,
  • Blumler, J. G. , & Katz, E. (Eds.). (1974). The uses of mass communications: Current perspectives on gratifications research. Beverly Hills, CA: SAGE Publications.
  • Boyce, C. & Palena, N. (2006). Conducting In-Depth Interviews: A Guide for Designing and Conducting In-Depth Interviews for Evaluation Input. Watertown: Pathfinder International. Erişim Adresi: 19/09/2016 tarihinde adresinden erişilmiştir. Boyd, D.M. and Ellison, N.B. (2008). Social Network Sites: Definition, History, and Scholarship. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 13(1), 210–230.
  • Brandtzæg, P. B. (2012). Social networking sites: Their users and social implications - A longitudinal study. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 17 (4), 467-488.
  • Bryant, J. & Oliver, M.B. (2008). Media Effects: Advances in Theory and Research, New York- London: Routledge, Taylor& Francis Group.
  • Castells, M. (2010). The rise of network society, Chicester, England: Wiley-Blackwell.
  • Collin, P. , Rahilly, K.; Richardson, I.and Third, A. (2011). The Benefits of Social Networking Services: A literatüre review. Cooperative Research Centre for Young People, Technology and Wellbeing. Melbourne.
  • Dijk van, J. (2006). The network society, Social aspects of new media. London, Thousans Oaks, New Delhi: Sage Publications.
  • Eke, H. N. , Omekwu, C. O. and Odoh, J. N. , (2014). The use of Social Networking Sites among the Undergraduate Students of University of Nigeria, Nsukka. Library Philosophy and Practice (e-journal), 1195.
  • 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.
  • Ellison, N. B. & Boyd. D. (2013). Sociality through Social Network Sites. In Dutton, W.H. (Ed.) The Oxford Handbook of Internet Studies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Erlin, T. & Arita Fitri, S. (2015). Using Social Networks: Facebook Usage at the Riau College Students, Procedia Computer Science, 59, 559-566.
  • Flaherty, L. M. , Pearce, K. J. & Rubin, R. B. (1998). Internet and face‐to‐face communication: Not functional alternatives, Communication Quarterly, 46(3), 250- 268.
  • Gudykunst, W. B. (1985). A Model of Uncertainty Reduction in Intercultural Encounters, Journal of Language and Social Psychology, Vol 4, Issue 2, 79-98.
  • Henson, B., Reyns, B. W. & Fisher, B.S.(2011). Security in the 21st Century Examining the Link Between Online Social Network Activity, Privacy, and Interpersonal Victimization, Criminal Justice Review, 36(3), 253-268.
  • Houghton, D. J. (2012) The effects of day-to-day interaction via social network sites on interpersonal relationships, A thesis submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosphy, University of Bath, School of Management, England.
  • Joinson, A. N. (2008). "Looking at”, "Looking up” or "Keeping up with” People? Motives and Uses of Facebook, CHI 2008 Proceedings · Online Social Networks, April 5-10, Florence, Italy.
  • Junco, R. (2011). The relationship between frequency of Facebook use, participation in Facebook activities, and student engagement, Computers & Education, 58, 162-171.
  • Kaplan, A. M. & Haenlein, M. (2010). Users of the World, unite! The challenges and opportunities of social media, Business Horizons, 53 (1), 59-68.
  • Katz, E. , Blumler, J.G. , Gurevitch, M. (1974). Uses and Gratifications Research. The Public Opinion Quarterly, Winter.
  • Lee, A. J. (2004). Effects of Visual Representation on Social Influence in Computer Mediated Communication Experimental Tests of the Social Identity Model of Deindividuation Effects, Human Communication Research, 30 (2), 234–259.
  • Levinson, P. (2009). New New Media, Boston: Ally&Bacon.
  • Li, D.C. (2011). Online social network acceptance: a social perspective. Internet Research, 21(5), 562-580.
  • Mazman, S. G. & Usluel, Y. K. (2011). Gender Differences in Using Social Networks, TOJET: The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 10 (2), 133-139.
  • McGuire, W. J. (1974). Psychological motives and communication gratification, In J. G. Blumler & E. Katz (Eds.), The uses of mass communications: Current perspectives on gratifications research. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.
  • McLuhan, M. (2016). Understanding Media, The extensions of man, CreateSpace Independent Publishing Platform.
  • Mims, A. B. , Llanes, L. L. & Didona, T. (2013). An Investigation into Facebook and its Relationship with Interpersonal Skills. The 2013 WEI International Academic Conference Proceedings, Orlandı, USA.
  • Mustafa, S. E. & Hamzah, A. (2011).Online Social Networking: A New Form of Social Interaction, International Journal of Social Science and Humanity, Vol. 1. No.2, 96-104.
  • Ngcongo, L. C. (2016). The Uses and Gratifications of Social Media, Baccalaureus Technologiae: Public Relations Management, Department of Integrated Communications Faculty of Humanities, Tshwane University of Technology.
  • Oloo, F. L. (2013). “Instagratification”: Uses and Gratification of Instagram by University Students for Interpersonal Communication. Masters of Arts Thesis in Communication and Media Studies, Eastern Mediterranean University, Gazimağusa, North Cyrprus.
  • Parks, M. R. & Floyd, K. (1996). Making Friends in Cyberspace. Journal of Communication, 46 (1), 80-97.
  • Perse, E. M. & Courtright, J. A. (1993). Normative Images of Communication Media: Mass and Interpersonal Channels in the New Mediated Environment. Human Communication Research, (19)4, 485–503.
  • Petric, G. , Petrovcic, A. & Vehovar, V. (2011). Social uses of interpersonal communication technologies in a complex media environment. European Journal of Communication, 26(2), 116-132.
  • Quan-Haase, A. & Young, A. L. (2010). Uses and gratifications of social media: A comparison of Facebook and instant messaging. Bulletin of Science, Technology and Society, 30 (5), 350-361.
  • Raacke, J. & Bonds-Raacke, J. (2008). MySpace and Facebook: Applying the Uses and Gratifications Theory to Exploring Friend-Networking Sites, CyberPsychology&Behavior, 11 (2).
  • Ramirez, A. , Dimmick, J. , Feaster, J. , & Lin, S. F. (2008). Revisiting interpersonal media competition: The gratification niches of instant messaging, e-mail, and the telephone. Communication Research, 35, 529-547.
  • Renckstorf, K., McQuail, D. and Jankowski, N. (eds) (1996). Media Use as Social Action: A European Approach to Audience Studies. London: John Libbey.
  • Rheingold, H. (1993). The virtual community : homesteading on the electronic frontier. Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley Pub.
  • Spiliotopoulos, T. , Karnik, M. , Oakley, I. , Venkanathan, J. & Nisi, V. (2013). Towards Understanding Social Media: Two Studies Exploring the Uses and Gratifications of Facebook, Proceedings of HCI, Korea.
  • Stafford, T. F. , Stafford, M. R. , & Schkade, L. L. (2008). Determining uses and gratifications for the internet, Decision Sciences, 35, 259-288.
  • Tekin, H. H. (2006). Nitel Araştırma Yönteminin Bir Veri Toplama Tekniği Olarak Derinlemesine Görüşme, Sosyoloji Dergisi, 3(13), 101-116.
  • Thelwall, M. (2009). Social network sites: Users and uses. In: M. Zelkowitz (Ed.), Advances in Computers, 76. Elseveir: Amsterdam, pp. 19-73.
  • Valenzuela, S. , Park, N. & Kee, K. F. (2009). Is There Social Capital in Social Network Site?: Facebook Use and College Students’ Life Satisfaction, Trust, and Participation. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 14, 875-901.
  • Westerman, D. , Van Der, H. K. & Walther, J. B. (2008). How do people really seek information about others? Information seeking across Internet and traditional communication channels. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 13, 751– 767.
  • 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.
  • Wittel, A. (2001). Towards a network sociality. Theory, Culture and Society, 18, 31-50.
  • Zeitel-Bank, N. & Tat, U. (June 2014). Social Media and Its Effects on Individuals and Social Systems, Human Capital without Borders: Knowledge and Learning for Quality of Life Management, Knowledge and Learning, International Conference, 25-27 June, 2014, Portoroz, Slovenia.
  • Zhao, S. (2006). Do Internet Users Have More Social Ties? A Call for Differentiated Analyses of Internet Use. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 11, 844- 862.