BibTex RIS Kaynak Göster

-

Yıl 2013, Sayı: 44 - İletişim Fakültesi Hakemli Dergisi, 67 - 84, 26.10.2013

Öz

Social sharing sites, on the internet, which have millions of users who are able to share information and links within seconds, is of huge importance when looking at its density of usage. It can be/has been observed that according to studies/research conducted around/on social sharing sites, there has not been enough study/research conducted on how people of a higher level of education perceive or use social sharing sites. In this sense, this study is aimed at targeting academic staff to try to determine how they evaluate and use the internet and social sharing sites. In the survey study conducted on 150 academicians, it was aimed to focus on academicians from a similar background in the sense of public and foundation universities and quantitative and verbal working areas. According to results of the study, academicians, in addition to using the internet to access e-mail, frequently visit social sharing sites. Some of the most important results encountered in the study are; Twitter affects/influences opinions more than Facebook and Twitter is more frequently used by academicians whose study area are verbal disciplines. These and other evaluations show that Twitter and Facebook are defined differently in means of perception. Yet, another important result encountered is that communication on social sharing sites is not seen as important as face to face communication.

Kaynakça

  • Atikkan Z., Tunç A. (2011) Blogdan Al Haberi. İstanbul: Yapı Kredi Yayınları.
  • Bargh J. A. McKenna K. Y. A. (2004). Internet and Social Life, Retrieved January 10, 2013, from http://www.yale.edu/acmelab/articles/Internet_and_Social_Life.pdf
  • Bilgi Teknolojileri ve İletişim Kurumu, Retrieved February, 10, from http://www.btk. gov.tr/kutuphane_ve_veribankasi/raporlar/arastirma_raporlari/dosyalar/EHSTE. pdf#search=%22mobil internet kullanımı%22 Boyd D. Ellison N. B. (2007) Social Network Sites: Defination, History and Scholarship. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 13(1), article 11
  • Connected VivaKi (2012) Retrieved March 7, 2013, from http://smgconnected.com/turkiyedeinternet-kullanimi-ve-mobil-pazar-istatistikleri-2012-q2
  • Correa T., Hinsley A., Gil de Zuniga H. (2010) Who interacts on web?: The intersection of users’ personality and social media use. Computers in Human Behavior, 247–253
  • DiMaggio P. Hargit E. Neuman W. R. (2001). Social implication of the Internet. Annual Review of Sociology, 27, 307-336
  • Freedom House (2012) Retrieved March 20, 2013 from http://www.freedomhouse.org/sites/ default/files/resources/FOTN%202012%20Summary%20of%20Findings.pdf
  • Haberli M. (2012). Yeni Bir Örgütlenme Biçimi Olarak Sanal Cemaatler. İnsan ve Toplum Bilimleri Araştırma Dergisi, 1, 3, 118 - 134
  • Kaplan A. M., Haenlein M. (2010) Users of The World, unite! The Challenges and Opportunies of Social Media. Business Horizons issue 1, Kelley School of Bussiness, Indiana University
  • Kim W. Jeong O. Lee S. (2010) On Social Web Sites. Information Systems, Volume 35, issue 2, 215236
  • Mayfield A. (2008) What is Social Media? E-book: icrossing Retrieved January 5, 2013 from www. icrossing.co.uk/fileadmin/uploads/ebooks/what_is_social_media_icrossing_ebook.pdf
  • NTVMSNBC Retrieved March 18, 2013 from http://arsiv.ntvmsnbc.com/news/55696.asp
  • Pew Internet & American Life Project (2012) Retrieved January 8, 2013 from http://pewinternet. org/Reports/2012/Cell-Internet-Use-2012/Key-Findings.aspx
  • Pew Internet & American Life Project (2012) Retrieved January 27, 2013 from http://pewinternet. org/~/media//Files/Reports/2012/PIP_SNS_and_politics.pdf
  • Slattery M. (2011). Sosyolojide Temel Fikirler. Bursa: Sentez Yayınları.
  • Sennet R. (2008) Ten ve Taş: Batı Uygarlığında Beden ve Şehir. İstanbul: Metis Yayınevi.
  • Türkiye Bilimsel ve Teknik Araştırma Kurumu (TÜBİTAK) (2000) Retrieved February 25, 2013 from http://basin.tubitak.gov.tr/bulten/bilten.htm
  • Türkiye İstatistik Kurumu (TİK) (2012) Retrieved March 27, 2013 from http://www.tuik.gov.tr/ PreHaberBultenleri.do?id=10880
  • Türk Dil Kurumu Retrieved March 20, 2013 from http://www.tdk.gov.tr
  • Van Dijk (2012). Facebook as a Tool for Producing Sociality and Connectivity. Television & New Media 13, 160-176.
  • Vural B. A. Bat M. (2010). Yeni bir iletişim ortamı olarak sosyal medya: Ege üniversitesi İletişim Fakültesine Yönelik Bir Araştırma. Journal of Yasar University 20 (5), 3348–3382
  • Sample Question: Table 1: % 5 (Most Frequently) 4 3 2 1 (Least Frequently) Sending and receiving e-mails 73,1 20 3,1 8 3,1 Political news/information search 3,1 29,2 33,1 20 14,6 Educational information search 20 36,9 33,8 6,9 2,3 Using social sharing sites 3,8 10,8 23,8 40,8 20,8 Shopping (book, clothes, household items, etc.) 2,3 1,5 4,6 30 61,5 Table 2: Mean Scores Sending and receiving e-mails 4,6 Political news /information search 2,9 Educational information search 3,7 Using social sharing sites 2,4 Shopping (book, clothes, household items, etc.) 1,5 Table 3: Twitter % Facebook % Tot ally Agr Agr ee Neither Nor Disagr Tot ally Agr Agr ee Neither Nor Disagr Social sharing sites users are the effective followers of the daily news/agenda. 15,4 18,5 23,1 8,5 6,2 1,5 2,3 4,6 2,3 Social sharing sites affect their users’ ideas about other users. 9,2 34,6 13,1 10 3,8 6,9 26,9 10,8 9,2 0,8 Most users only browse at social sharing sites. 15,4 26,2 17,7 10 10,8 24,6 8,5 11,5 It is mostly enough for me to be in touch with my friends only through social sharing sites. 0,8 5,4 13,1 31,5 19,2 0,8 11,5 8,5 19,2 14,6 I do not regard communication in social sharing sites as virtual. 6,2 18,5 18,5 16,2 11,5 6,2 12,3 10,8 16,2 10 Participation in social sharing sites is as important as face-toface interaction. 4,6 7,7 7,7 27,7 23,8 3,8 3,8 10 19,2 17,7 Table 4: Facebook 1 2 3 4 5 Simple 7,7 10,8 28,5 11,5 1,5 Complicated Activist 6,9 10 30,8 10,8 1,5 Apolitical Entertaining 13,1 32,3 12,3 1,5 0,8 Serious Free 10,8 15,4 25,4 7,7 0,8 Restrictive Table 5: Twitter 1 2 3 4 5 Simple 20,8 14,6 14,6 5,4 2,3 Complicated Activist 12,3 14,6 23,8 4,6 1,5 Apolitical Entertaining 9,2 10 14,6 16,9 6,2 Serious Free 13,8 14,6 23,8 3,8 0,8 Restrictive How often do you agree/disagree or comment on daily personal issues (i.e., like, retweet)? Twitter Facebook Other social sharing network you use frequently (please indicate the name) Every time I use social sharing sites Only for important events (birth, death) I prefer not to comment Other ………. ........... ............... ............................

SOCIAL SHARING SITES AND PARTICIPATION: A STUDY ON ACADEMICS IN ISTANBUL

Yıl 2013, Sayı: 44 - İletişim Fakültesi Hakemli Dergisi, 67 - 84, 26.10.2013

Öz

ABSTRACT

Social sharing sites, on the internet, which have millions of users who are able to share information and links within seconds, is of huge importance when looking at its density of usage. It can be/has been observed that according to studies/research conducted around/on social sharing sites, there has not been enough study/research conducted on how people of a higher level of education per- ceive or use social sharing sites. In this sense, this study is aimed at targeting academic staff to try to determine how they evaluate and use the internet and social sharing sites. In the survey study conducted on 150 academicians, it was aimed to focus on academicians from a similar background in the sense of public and foundation universities and quantitative and verbal working areas. According to results of the study, academicians, in addition to using the internet to access e-mail, frequently visit social sharing sites. Some of the most important results encountered in the study are; Twitter affects/influences opinions more than Facebook and Twitter is more frequently used by academi- cians whose study area are verbal disciplines. These and other evaluations show that Twitter and Facebook are defined differently in means of perception. Yet, another important result encountered is that communication on social sharing sites is not seen as important as face to face communication.

Keywords: Social Media, Social Sharing Sites, Participation

 

SOSYAL PAYLAŞIM SİTELERİ VE KATILIM: İSTANBUL'DAKİ AKADEMİSYENLER ÜZERİNE BİR İNCELEME

ÖZ

İnternet içinde milyonlarca kullanıcısı olan ve her saniye yeni paylaşımlar gerçekleştirilebilen sosyal paylaşım siteleri, kullanım yoğunluğu göz önüne alındığında büyük bir öneme sahiptir. Sosyal paylaşım siteleriyle ilgili yapılan araştırmalar içerisinde üst eğitim seviyesine sahip kişilerin sosyal paylaşım sitelerini nasıl algıladıkları ve nasıl kullandıkları konusunda yeterli çalışma yapılmadığı gözlemlen- mektedir. Bu amaçla çalışma, akademik personel hedef alınarak hazırlanmış ve akademik personelin interneti ve sosyal paylaşım sitelerini nasıl değerlendirdikleri ve nasıl kullandıkları belirlenmeye çalı- şılmıştır. 150 akademisyen üzerinde gerçekleştirilen anket çalışmasında devlet ve vakıf üniversiteleri ve sayısal ve sözel çalışma alanları noktasında birbirine yakın bir dağılım hedeflenmiştir. Araştırma sonuçlarına göre akademisyenler interneti genellikle e-posta amacıyla kullanmakla birlikte, sosyal paylaşım sitelerini de sıklıkla ziyaret etmektedirler. Araştırmada karşılaşılan önemli sonuçlardan bazıları; Twitter'ın fikirleri Facebook'a nazaran daha fazla etkilediği ve Twitter'ın çalışma alanı sözel disiplinler olan akademisyenler tarafından daha fazla kullandığı yönündedir. Bu ve benzeri tespitler Twitter ve Facebook'un algısal olarak farklı tanımlandığını göstermektedir. Yine karşılaşılan önemli bir sonuç sosyal paylaşım sitelerindeki iletişimin yüzyüze iletişim kadar değerli görülmediğidir.

Anahtar Kelimeler: Sosyal Medya, Sosyal Paylaşım Siteleri, Katılım

Kaynakça

  • Atikkan Z., Tunç A. (2011) Blogdan Al Haberi. İstanbul: Yapı Kredi Yayınları.
  • Bargh J. A. McKenna K. Y. A. (2004). Internet and Social Life, Retrieved January 10, 2013, from http://www.yale.edu/acmelab/articles/Internet_and_Social_Life.pdf
  • Bilgi Teknolojileri ve İletişim Kurumu, Retrieved February, 10, from http://www.btk. gov.tr/kutuphane_ve_veribankasi/raporlar/arastirma_raporlari/dosyalar/EHSTE. pdf#search=%22mobil internet kullanımı%22 Boyd D. Ellison N. B. (2007) Social Network Sites: Defination, History and Scholarship. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 13(1), article 11
  • Connected VivaKi (2012) Retrieved March 7, 2013, from http://smgconnected.com/turkiyedeinternet-kullanimi-ve-mobil-pazar-istatistikleri-2012-q2
  • Correa T., Hinsley A., Gil de Zuniga H. (2010) Who interacts on web?: The intersection of users’ personality and social media use. Computers in Human Behavior, 247–253
  • DiMaggio P. Hargit E. Neuman W. R. (2001). Social implication of the Internet. Annual Review of Sociology, 27, 307-336
  • Freedom House (2012) Retrieved March 20, 2013 from http://www.freedomhouse.org/sites/ default/files/resources/FOTN%202012%20Summary%20of%20Findings.pdf
  • Haberli M. (2012). Yeni Bir Örgütlenme Biçimi Olarak Sanal Cemaatler. İnsan ve Toplum Bilimleri Araştırma Dergisi, 1, 3, 118 - 134
  • Kaplan A. M., Haenlein M. (2010) Users of The World, unite! The Challenges and Opportunies of Social Media. Business Horizons issue 1, Kelley School of Bussiness, Indiana University
  • Kim W. Jeong O. Lee S. (2010) On Social Web Sites. Information Systems, Volume 35, issue 2, 215236
  • Mayfield A. (2008) What is Social Media? E-book: icrossing Retrieved January 5, 2013 from www. icrossing.co.uk/fileadmin/uploads/ebooks/what_is_social_media_icrossing_ebook.pdf
  • NTVMSNBC Retrieved March 18, 2013 from http://arsiv.ntvmsnbc.com/news/55696.asp
  • Pew Internet & American Life Project (2012) Retrieved January 8, 2013 from http://pewinternet. org/Reports/2012/Cell-Internet-Use-2012/Key-Findings.aspx
  • Pew Internet & American Life Project (2012) Retrieved January 27, 2013 from http://pewinternet. org/~/media//Files/Reports/2012/PIP_SNS_and_politics.pdf
  • Slattery M. (2011). Sosyolojide Temel Fikirler. Bursa: Sentez Yayınları.
  • Sennet R. (2008) Ten ve Taş: Batı Uygarlığında Beden ve Şehir. İstanbul: Metis Yayınevi.
  • Türkiye Bilimsel ve Teknik Araştırma Kurumu (TÜBİTAK) (2000) Retrieved February 25, 2013 from http://basin.tubitak.gov.tr/bulten/bilten.htm
  • Türkiye İstatistik Kurumu (TİK) (2012) Retrieved March 27, 2013 from http://www.tuik.gov.tr/ PreHaberBultenleri.do?id=10880
  • Türk Dil Kurumu Retrieved March 20, 2013 from http://www.tdk.gov.tr
  • Van Dijk (2012). Facebook as a Tool for Producing Sociality and Connectivity. Television & New Media 13, 160-176.
  • Vural B. A. Bat M. (2010). Yeni bir iletişim ortamı olarak sosyal medya: Ege üniversitesi İletişim Fakültesine Yönelik Bir Araştırma. Journal of Yasar University 20 (5), 3348–3382
  • Sample Question: Table 1: % 5 (Most Frequently) 4 3 2 1 (Least Frequently) Sending and receiving e-mails 73,1 20 3,1 8 3,1 Political news/information search 3,1 29,2 33,1 20 14,6 Educational information search 20 36,9 33,8 6,9 2,3 Using social sharing sites 3,8 10,8 23,8 40,8 20,8 Shopping (book, clothes, household items, etc.) 2,3 1,5 4,6 30 61,5 Table 2: Mean Scores Sending and receiving e-mails 4,6 Political news /information search 2,9 Educational information search 3,7 Using social sharing sites 2,4 Shopping (book, clothes, household items, etc.) 1,5 Table 3: Twitter % Facebook % Tot ally Agr Agr ee Neither Nor Disagr Tot ally Agr Agr ee Neither Nor Disagr Social sharing sites users are the effective followers of the daily news/agenda. 15,4 18,5 23,1 8,5 6,2 1,5 2,3 4,6 2,3 Social sharing sites affect their users’ ideas about other users. 9,2 34,6 13,1 10 3,8 6,9 26,9 10,8 9,2 0,8 Most users only browse at social sharing sites. 15,4 26,2 17,7 10 10,8 24,6 8,5 11,5 It is mostly enough for me to be in touch with my friends only through social sharing sites. 0,8 5,4 13,1 31,5 19,2 0,8 11,5 8,5 19,2 14,6 I do not regard communication in social sharing sites as virtual. 6,2 18,5 18,5 16,2 11,5 6,2 12,3 10,8 16,2 10 Participation in social sharing sites is as important as face-toface interaction. 4,6 7,7 7,7 27,7 23,8 3,8 3,8 10 19,2 17,7 Table 4: Facebook 1 2 3 4 5 Simple 7,7 10,8 28,5 11,5 1,5 Complicated Activist 6,9 10 30,8 10,8 1,5 Apolitical Entertaining 13,1 32,3 12,3 1,5 0,8 Serious Free 10,8 15,4 25,4 7,7 0,8 Restrictive Table 5: Twitter 1 2 3 4 5 Simple 20,8 14,6 14,6 5,4 2,3 Complicated Activist 12,3 14,6 23,8 4,6 1,5 Apolitical Entertaining 9,2 10 14,6 16,9 6,2 Serious Free 13,8 14,6 23,8 3,8 0,8 Restrictive How often do you agree/disagree or comment on daily personal issues (i.e., like, retweet)? Twitter Facebook Other social sharing network you use frequently (please indicate the name) Every time I use social sharing sites Only for important events (birth, death) I prefer not to comment Other ………. ........... ............... ............................
Toplam 22 adet kaynakça vardır.

Ayrıntılar

Birincil Dil Türkçe
Bölüm Makaleler
Yazarlar

Betül Önay Doğan Bu kişi benim

Yayımlanma Tarihi 26 Ekim 2013
Yayımlandığı Sayı Yıl 2013 Sayı: 44 - İletişim Fakültesi Hakemli Dergisi

Kaynak Göster

APA Önay Doğan, B. (2013). SOCIAL SHARING SITES AND PARTICIPATION: A STUDY ON ACADEMICS IN ISTANBUL. İstanbul Üniversitesi İletişim Fakültesi Dergisi | Istanbul University Faculty of Communication Journal(44), 67-84. https://doi.org/10.17064/iüifhd.38586
AMA Önay Doğan B. SOCIAL SHARING SITES AND PARTICIPATION: A STUDY ON ACADEMICS IN ISTANBUL. İstanbul Üniversitesi İletişim Fakültesi Dergisi | Istanbul University Faculty of Communication Journal. Ekim 2013;(44):67-84. doi:10.17064/iüifhd.38586
Chicago Önay Doğan, Betül. “SOCIAL SHARING SITES AND PARTICIPATION: A STUDY ON ACADEMICS IN ISTANBUL”. İstanbul Üniversitesi İletişim Fakültesi Dergisi | Istanbul University Faculty of Communication Journal, sy. 44 (Ekim 2013): 67-84. https://doi.org/10.17064/iüifhd.38586.
EndNote Önay Doğan B (01 Ekim 2013) SOCIAL SHARING SITES AND PARTICIPATION: A STUDY ON ACADEMICS IN ISTANBUL. İstanbul Üniversitesi İletişim Fakültesi Dergisi | Istanbul University Faculty of Communication Journal 44 67–84.
IEEE B. Önay Doğan, “SOCIAL SHARING SITES AND PARTICIPATION: A STUDY ON ACADEMICS IN ISTANBUL”, İstanbul Üniversitesi İletişim Fakültesi Dergisi | Istanbul University Faculty of Communication Journal, sy. 44, ss. 67–84, Ekim 2013, doi: 10.17064/iüifhd.38586.
ISNAD Önay Doğan, Betül. “SOCIAL SHARING SITES AND PARTICIPATION: A STUDY ON ACADEMICS IN ISTANBUL”. İstanbul Üniversitesi İletişim Fakültesi Dergisi | Istanbul University Faculty of Communication Journal 44 (Ekim 2013), 67-84. https://doi.org/10.17064/iüifhd.38586.
JAMA Önay Doğan B. SOCIAL SHARING SITES AND PARTICIPATION: A STUDY ON ACADEMICS IN ISTANBUL. İstanbul Üniversitesi İletişim Fakültesi Dergisi | Istanbul University Faculty of Communication Journal. 2013;:67–84.
MLA Önay Doğan, Betül. “SOCIAL SHARING SITES AND PARTICIPATION: A STUDY ON ACADEMICS IN ISTANBUL”. İstanbul Üniversitesi İletişim Fakültesi Dergisi | Istanbul University Faculty of Communication Journal, sy. 44, 2013, ss. 67-84, doi:10.17064/iüifhd.38586.
Vancouver Önay Doğan B. SOCIAL SHARING SITES AND PARTICIPATION: A STUDY ON ACADEMICS IN ISTANBUL. İstanbul Üniversitesi İletişim Fakültesi Dergisi | Istanbul University Faculty of Communication Journal. 2013(44):67-84.