MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2064613921 · doi:10.5539/ijps.v7n1p43

Motivations for Using Social Media: An Exploratory Factor Analysis

2015· article· en· W2064613921 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jamal J. Al-Menayes

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Psychological Studies · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicImpact of Technology on Adolescents
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersKuwait University
KeywordsPsychologySocial mediaExploratory factor analysisContext (archaeology)Exploratory researchEntertainmentSocial psychologySample (material)Uses and gratifications theorySociologySocial sciencePsychometricsDevelopmental psychologyWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study aimed to examine motivations to use social media in a sample of university students. Grounded in the theory of Uses and Gratifications, the current research sough to delineate user motivations with exploratory factor analysis. To reach the study goals the researcher used cross-sectional survey methodology in which a questionnaire was distributed to 1327 undergraduate students with their consent. The analysis of the data revealed that almost all respondents used social media. Based on factor analysis results, their motivations for doing so are entertainment, information seeking, personal utility and convenience. These factors were positively related to the user’s experience, time spent, and level of satisfaction with social media. Future studies should consider the cultural values of users and examine other possible motivations, taking into account their context.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.440
GPT teacher head0.538
Teacher spread0.098 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations101
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Psychological StudiesSame topicImpact of Technology on AdolescentsFrench-language works237,207