• Please log in or register to access this feature.
You have free access to this content

Whose Space? Differences Among Users and Non-Users of Social Network Sites

  1. Eszter Hargittai†

Article first published online: 17 DEC 2007

DOI: 10.1111/j.1083-6101.2007.00396.x

Issue

Journal of Computer‐Mediated Communication

Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication

Volume 13, Issue 1, pages 276–297, October 2007

Additional Information

How to Cite

Hargittai, E. (2007), Whose Space? Differences Among Users and Non-Users of Social Network Sites. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 13: 276–297. doi: 10.1111/j.1083-6101.2007.00396.x

Author Information

  1. Communication Studies and Sociology Northwestern University

Publication History

  1. Issue published online: 17 DEC 2007
  2. Article first published online: 17 DEC 2007

SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

ARTICLE TOOLS

View Full Article (HTML) Get PDF (128K)

References

  • Ardinger, N., Inman, P., Lees, B., Martin, T., Roche, A., Savage, K, et al. (2004). UIC Freshman—One Year Later: A Report on the One-Year Retention of the UIC Freshman Class. Chicago: University of Illinois.
  • Bimber, B. (2000). The gender gap on the Internet. Social Science Quarterly, 81(3), 868–876.
  • boyd, d. (2001). Sexing the Internet: Reflections on the role of identification in online communities. Sexualities, Medias, Technologies. University of Surrey. Retrieved September 9, 2007 from http://www.danah.org/papers/SexingTheInternet.conference.pdf
  • boyd, d. (2008). Why youth (heart) social network sites: The role of networked publics in teenage social life. In D.Buckingham (Ed.), Youth, Identity, and Digital Media (pp. 119–1442). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  • boyd, d., & Heer, J. (2006, January). Profiles as conversation: Networked identity performance on Friendster. Proceedings of the Thirty-Ninth Hawai’i International Conference on System Sciences. Los Alamitos, CA: IEEE Press.
  • Carlson, C., Uppal, S., & Prosser, E. C. (2000). Ethnic differences in processes contributing to the self-esteem of early adolescent girls. The Journal of Early Adolescence, 20(1), 44–67.
  • comScore. (2007a). comScore Media Metrix releases top 50 Web ranking for July. Reston, VA. Retrieved September 9, 2007 from http://www.comscore.com/press/release.asp?press=1582
  • comScore. (2007b). Social networking goes global. Reston, VA. Retrieved September 9, 2007 from http://www.comscore.com/press/release.asp?press=1555
  • DiMaggio, P., & Hargittai, E. (2002, August). The new digital inequality: Social stratification among internet users. Paper presented at the American Sociological Association Annual Meeting, Chicago.
  • DiMaggio, P., Hargittai, E., Celeste, C., & Shafer, S. (2004). Digital inequality: From unequal access to differentiated use. In K.Neckerman (Ed.), Social Inequality (pp. 355–400). New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
  • Dwyer, C. (2007). Digital relationships in the ‘MySpace’ generation: Results from a qualitative study. Proceedings of the Fortieth Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. Los Alamitos, CA: IEEE Press.
  • Ellison, N. B., Steinfeld, 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), article 1. Retrieved September 9, 2007 from http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol12/issue4/ellison.html
  • Fox, S. (2004). Older Americans and the Internet. Pew Internet and American Life Project report. Retrieved September 9, 2007 from http://www.pewinternet.org/PPF/r/117/report_display.asp
  • Frissen, V. (1995). Gender is calling: Some reflections on past, present, and future uses of the telephone. In K.Grint & R.Gill (Eds.), The Gender-Technology Relation: Contemporary Theory and Research (pp. 79–94). Bristol, PA: Taylor and Francis.
  • Gross, R., & Acquisti, A. (2005, November). Information revelation and privacy in online social networks (The Facebook case). Proceedings of ACM Workshop on Privacy in the Electronic Society (pp. 71–80). Alexandria, VA: Association for Computing Machinery.
  • Hall, J., & Cooper, J. (1991). Gender, experience and attributions to the computer. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 7(1), 51–60.
  • Hargittai, E. (2002). Second-level digital divide: Differences in people’s online skills. First Monday, 7(4). Retrieved September 9, 2007 from http://www.firstmonday.org/issues/issue7_4/hargittai/
  • Hargittai, E. (2007). A framework for studying differences in people’s digital media uses. In N. K. a. H.-U.Otto (Ed.), Cyberworld Unlimited? (pp. 121–137). Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften/GWV Fachverlage GmbH.
  • Hargittai, E., & Hinnant, A. (2005, March). New dimensions of the digital divide: Differences in young adults’ use of the Internet. Paper presented at the Eastern Sociological Society, Washington, D.C.
  • Hargittai, E., & Shafer, S. (2006). Differences in actual and perceived online skills: The role of gender. Social Science Quarterly, 87(2), 432–448.
    Direct Link:
  • Hassani, S. N. (2006). Locating digital divides at home, work, and everywhere else. Poetics, 34, 250–272.
  • Hempel, J. (2005, December 12). Protecting your kids from cyber-predators. Business Week. Retrieved September 9, 2007 from http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/05_50/b3963015.htm
  • Herring, S. C. (1993). Gender and democracy in computer-mediated communication. Electronic Journal of Communication, 3(2). Retrieved October 29, 2007 from http://ella.slis.indiana.edu/~herring/ejc.txt
  • Herring, S. (1994, June). Gender differences in computer-mediated communication: Bringing familiar baggage to the new frontier. Paper presented at the Making the Net*Work*: Is there a Z39.50 in gender communication? American Library Association Annual Convention, Miami. Retrieved September 11, 2007 from http://www.cpsr.org/cpsr/gender/herring.txt
  • Hodge, M. J. (2006). The Fourth Amendment and privacy issues on the “new” Internet: Facebook.com and MySpace.com. Southern Illinois University Law Journal, 31, 95–123.
  • Howard, P. N., & Jones, S., Eds. (2004). Society Online: The Internet in Context. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
  • Howard, P. N., Rainie, L., & Jones, S. (2001). Days and nights on the Internet: The impact of a diffusing technology. American Behavioral Scientist, 45(3), 383–404.
  • Jackson, L. A., Ervin, K. S., Gardner, P. D., & Schmitt, N. (2001). Gender and the Internet: Women communicating and men searching. Sex Roles, 44(5/6), 363–379.
  • Lamborn, S. D., Mounts, N. S., Steinberg, L., & Dornbusch, S. M. (1991). Patterns of competence and adjustment among adolescents from authoritative, authoritarian, indulgent, and neglectful families. Child Development, 62(5), 1049–1065.
  • Lenhart, A., & Madden, M. (2007). Social networking websites and teens: An overview. Pew Internet and American Life Project report. Retrieved September 9, 2007 from http://www.pewinternet.org/PPF/r/198/report_display.asp
  • Livingstone, S. (1992). The meaning of domestic technologies: A personal construct analysis of familial gender relations. In R.Silverstone & E.Hirsch (Eds.), Consuming Technologies (pp. 113–130). New York: Routledge.
  • Livingstone, S., & Helsper, E. (2007). Gradations in digital inclusion: Children, young people, and the digital divide. New Media and Society, 9, 671–696.
  • Madden, M., & Rainie, L. (2003). America’s online pursuits. Pew Internet and American Life Project report. Retrieved September 9, 2007 from http://www.pewinternet.org/report_display.asp?r=106
  • Madden, M. (2006). Internet penetration and impact. Pew Internet and American Life Project report. Retrieved September 9, 2007 from http://www.pewinternet.org/PPF/r/182/report_display.asp
  • Magid, L. (2006). Protect kids on MySpace. CBS News. Retrieved September 9, 2007 from http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/02/03/scitech/pcanswer/main1277909.shtml
  • Marsden, P. V. (1987). Core discussion networks of Americans. American Sociological Review, 52, 122–131.
  • Mossberger, K., Tolbert, C. J., & Stansbury, M. (2003). Virtual Inequality: Beyond the Digital Divide. Washington, D.C.: Georgetown University Press.
  • Ono, H., & Zavodny, M. (2003). Gender and the Internet. Social Science Quarterly, 84(1), 111–121.
    Direct Link:
  • Pasek, J., More, E., & Romer, D. (2007). Realizing the social Internet? Online social networking meets offline civic engagement. Unpublished manuscript.
  • Pew Internet and American Life Project. (2000). Tracking online life: How women use the Internet to cultivate relationships with family and friends. Washington, D.C.: Pew Research Center.
  • Smith, M., & Kollock, P., Eds. (1999). Communities in Cyberspace. London: Routledge.
  • Stafford, R. (2006, April). Why parents must mind MySpace. Retrieved December 1, 2006 from http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11064451/
  • Steiner, P. (1993). On the Internet, nobody knows you’re a dog. The New Yorker, 69, 61.
  • Stice, E., Cameron, R. P., Hayward, C., Taylor, C. B., & Killen, J. D. (1999). Naturalistic weight-reduction efforts prospectively predict growth in relative weight and onset of obesity among female adolescents. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 67(6), 967–974.
  • Turkle, S. (1995). Life on the Screen: Identity in the Age of the Internet. New York: Simon and Schuster.
  • U.S. Census Bureau. (2000). U.S. Census 2000. Retrieved September 9, 2007 from http://www.census.gov/dmd/www/pdf/d61a.pdf
  • U. S. News and World Report. (2006). Campus ethnic diversity: National universities. America’s Best Colleges 2007. Retrieved October 29, 2007 from http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/usnews/edu/college/rankings/brief/natudoc_campdiv_brief.php
  • University of Illinois - Chicago. (2004). Graduation rate disclosure statement. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago.
  • van Dijk, J. A. G. M. (2005). The Deepening Divide. London: Sage Publications.
  • Wellman, B., & Haythornthwaite, C. (2002). The Internet in Everyday Life. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.
View Full Article (HTML) Get PDF (128K)