Megan A Moreno1, Alina Arseniev-Koehler2, Dana Litt3, Dimitri Christakis4. 1. Seattle Children's Research Institute, Seattle, Washington; Department of Pediatrics, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington. Electronic address: megan.moreno@seattlehchildrens.org. 2. Seattle Children's Research Institute, Seattle, Washington; Department of Sociology, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington. 3. Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington. 4. Seattle Children's Research Institute, Seattle, Washington; Department of Pediatrics, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Current trends suggest that adolescents and young adults typically maintain a social media "portfolio" of several sites including Facebook and Twitter, but little is known regarding how an individual chooses to display risk behaviors across these different sites. The purpose of this study was to investigate college students' displayed alcohol references on both Facebook and Twitter. METHODS: Among a larger sample of college students from two universities, we identified participants who maintained both Facebook and Twitter profiles. Data collection included evaluation of 5 months of participants' Facebook and Twitter posts for alcohol references, number of social connections (i.e., friends or followers), and number of posts. Phone interviews assessed participants' frequency of Facebook and Twitter use and self-reported alcohol use. Analyses included Fisher's exact test, Wilcoxon matched pair sign test, Friedman rank-sum tests, and logistic regression. RESULTS: Of 112 eligible participants, 94 completed the study. Participants were more likely to display alcohol references on Facebook compared with those on Twitter (76% vs. 34%, p = .02). Participants reported more social connections on Facebook versus Twitter (average 801.2 friends vs. 189.4 followers, p < .001) and were more likely to report daily use of Facebook versus Twitter (94.6% vs. 50%, p < .001). Current alcohol use was predictive of both Facebook and Twitter displayed alcohol references, but mediators differed in each model. CONCLUSIONS: College students were more likely to display alcohol references on Facebook compared with those on Twitter. Understanding these patterns and predictors may inform prevention and intervention efforts directed at particular social media sites.
PURPOSE: Current trends suggest that adolescents and young adults typically maintain a social media "portfolio" of several sites including Facebook and Twitter, but little is known regarding how an individual chooses to display risk behaviors across these different sites. The purpose of this study was to investigate college students' displayed alcohol references on both Facebook and Twitter. METHODS: Among a larger sample of college students from two universities, we identified participants who maintained both Facebook and Twitter profiles. Data collection included evaluation of 5 months of participants' Facebook and Twitter posts for alcohol references, number of social connections (i.e., friends or followers), and number of posts. Phone interviews assessed participants' frequency of Facebook and Twitter use and self-reported alcohol use. Analyses included Fisher's exact test, Wilcoxon matched pair sign test, Friedman rank-sum tests, and logistic regression. RESULTS: Of 112 eligible participants, 94 completed the study. Participants were more likely to display alcohol references on Facebook compared with those on Twitter (76% vs. 34%, p = .02). Participants reported more social connections on Facebook versus Twitter (average 801.2 friends vs. 189.4 followers, p < .001) and were more likely to report daily use of Facebook versus Twitter (94.6% vs. 50%, p < .001). Current alcohol use was predictive of both Facebook and Twitter displayed alcohol references, but mediators differed in each model. CONCLUSIONS: College students were more likely to display alcohol references on Facebook compared with those on Twitter. Understanding these patterns and predictors may inform prevention and intervention efforts directed at particular social media sites.
Authors: Brenda L Curtis; Samantha J Lookatch; Danielle E Ramo; James R McKay; Richard S Feinn; Henry R Kranzler Journal: Alcohol Clin Exp Res Date: 2018-05-22 Impact factor: 3.455
Authors: Frank M Perna; Laura A Dwyer; Gina Tesauro; Jennifer M Taber; Wynne E Norton; Anne M Hartman; Alan C Geller Journal: JAMA Dermatol Date: 2017-05-01 Impact factor: 10.282
Authors: Rupa Jose; Matthew Matero; Garrick Sherman; Brenda Curtis; Salvatore Giorgi; Hansen Andrew Schwartz; Lyle H Ungar Journal: Alcohol Clin Exp Res Date: 2022-05-16 Impact factor: 3.928
Authors: Dana M Litt; Melissa A Lewis; Emma S Spiro; Lovenoor Aulck; Katja A Waldron; Maya K Head-Corliss; Alex Swanson Journal: Drug Alcohol Depend Date: 2018-10-04 Impact factor: 4.492
Authors: Joseph W LaBrie; Bradley M Trager; Sarah C Boyle; Jordan P Davis; Andrew M Earle; Reed M Morgan Journal: Addict Behav Date: 2021-04-08 Impact factor: 4.591
Authors: Andrea C Villanti; Amanda L Johnson; Vinu Ilakkuvan; Megan A Jacobs; Amanda L Graham; Jessica M Rath Journal: J Med Internet Res Date: 2017-06-07 Impact factor: 5.428
Authors: Tan Yigitcanlar; Nayomi Kankanamge; Alexander Preston; Palvinderjit Singh Gill; Maqsood Rezayee; Mahsan Ostadnia; Bo Xia; Giuseppe Ioppolo Journal: Health Inf Sci Syst Date: 2020-10-15