A Qualitative Research on Usage Intention and Platform Swinging Behavior of Anonymous Social Applications “Soul”
Abstract
:1. Introduction
1.1. Qualitative Research in Social Media Usage
1.2. Cyber Migration and Platform Swinging
1.3. Research Question and Organization
- RQ1: How do factors influence Soul App UI?
- RQ2: What are the factors eliciting PS behavior among Soul App users?
- RQ3: What is the relationship between UI and PS behavior among Soul App users?
2. Research Method
2.1. Interview Guideline
2.2. Sample Collection
3. Coding and Data Analysis
4. Discussion
4.1. RQ1 Influencing Factors toward Usage Intention: A Qualitative Complement
“I met people from all walks of life, from whom I could obtain advice (or helps) for my work… When I had difficulties in writing my dissertation, I consulted my friends on Soul.” (S3)
“The impact on my life is that Soul App helps me regulate my emotions. I feel much better after venting.” (S8)
“I’ve made a lot of honest friends on Soul App, whom I’ve known for quite a long time and always kept in touch with.” (S9)
“(What attracts me is) the simple and fresh user interface. Soul App can provide the function of matching peers with same interest and the non-cheesy content on Square.” (S23)
“The system still needs to be optimized. At least no delay when sending pictures! No flash back! Otherwise, it affects the quality of user experience negatively.” (S7)
“In my opinion, anonymity can still play a role in protecting privacy.” (S4)
“I am willing to use Soul because I think it does a pretty good job in protecting privacy.” (S2)
“In the virtual world, we still need to be vigilant. After all, there are very odd mix of people.” (S18)
“Currently, I think we no longer have privacy... not much care about it.” (S8)
“Be reasonable and not to expose privacy information, we can probably avoid this risk.” (S15)
“Anonymity is a better way to protect personal privacy. Like information on Sina Weibo can be easily collected. But if one is anonymous, the risk is relative lower. Because of that I am willing to use Soul App continuously.” (S9)
“Anonymity can protect personal privacy to some extent. Something the operators and service providers should do further work to protect our privacy.” (S20)
“Initially, my friend introduced Soul to me I found English corner is useful I think it help me to keep my study.” (S4)
“I will also recommend Soul App to friends. Legitimate use is not afraid of letting others know.” (S19)
“I don’t want people to know that I’m playing Soul because I don’t want the people around me to see my personal emotions.” (S15)
“I met a very interesting person located in Tianjin. I would fall in love with him in reality world. We often chat and share all kinds of interesting things Also I met a depression patient and gradually learn the symptom. Via Soul, I care about him and so on.” (S11)
“When I first used Soul, I met a senior from another university who was in grad school. He is currently studying abroad for Ph.D. We followed each other WeChat and Sina Weibo accounts and still chatted or commented the posts occasionally on Soul during those two years.” (S23)
“I met my ex-boyfriend on Soul. Story of online love came true.” (S10)
4.2. RQ2: Platform Swinging Satisfy Users’ Diversified Needs
“On Soul, I can meet people from various background and learn a lot from them. Moreover, I can improve pleasure in life and gain surprises or joy from them.” (S3)
“(On the App) I met a girl who was depressed and said she wanted to commit suicide, I talked to her for a long time and persuaded her nicely to give up the idea, I thought I was pretty great at that time.” (S14)
“For example, I didn’t know what ‘Mianji’(meet online friends) meant till using Soul, I think it will help to chase some craze among fashionable young people and trigger a bit of relatively new and novel behavior and habits.” (S4)
“WeChat was used to contact family, friends and deal with work; QQ is used as a supplement to contact previous classmates who didn’t use WeChat; and Soul is for passing time and entertainment.” (S17)
“When failing college entrance exam, I was very stressed and sleepless at night feeling no confidence to take the school exam again Via Soul, I matched with a guy by the function of voice calling As a strange senior friend, He gave me a lot of good advice to help me build the confidence. I really appreciate in that period of time (he) very patient to listen to my grievances and so on. Everyone around me was under a lot of pressure during that time, so (coming across him) indeed give me some confidence and stabilize my emotions.” (S1)
“To have a wider social circle and see something I haven’t done before. (S7)
“I’ve met some friends that I can continue to develop into reality, and they’re all very nice and helpful.” (S10)
“The usage between WeChat and Soul is actually complement for circles of acquaintances and circles of strangers, respectively.” (S11)
“I think the motivation of platform swinging is to realize the evolution of friend relationship. If you develop a good friend on Soul, you would like to keep more contact (e.g., following WeChat account each other.” (S9)
“QQ is mainly used for student work, school notifications. WeChat is to contact family and older people. Zhihu is used for searching answers. Soul is mainly to see other people’s moments and chat each other. Summer feels fresh at first because it is a campus community.” (S2)
“WeChat, QQ mainly for family chat, Facebook, instagram, Snapchat to share life and chat with family. Soul, summer, tinder, Tan Tan are used to find a girlfriend.” (S21)
4.3. RQ3: The Relationship between UI and PS
“I will frequently use a special App if I have more demand, which increase UI. For me, WeChat is usually used to contact colleagues, friends, and relatives. If you are not interested in an App, you certainly will not use it. So that the higher or lower UI will affect my usage behavior.” (S7)
“It depends on the individual. For me, I can’t contact my friends and family without WeChat, but Soul has no such big influence on my life, i.e., it’s optional. If I don’t want to use Soul, I won’t use the similar Apps.” (S5)
“My current UI for ASM App is particularly low and I just post the status and view other followed users’ activities in a short time. PS behavior doesn’t come up very often.” (S23)
“If the UI is high, I will spend a lot of time to chat, which this app becomes my main battlefield. In this way, frequency of my swaying among different platform will be reduced. If UI is very low, I will use it for a while and then abandon it after the novelty wearing off quickly.” (S2)
“Generally, PS is related to individuals’ needs and characteristics. If a certain App can meet my social need, I don’t need to swing; Sometimes, even if I’m not very interested, I will occasionally log in a specific App considering my previous happy times on it.” (S1)
“Sometimes, social media fatigue also pushes me to other Apps to distract and get relaxed.” (S20)
“When UI is high, PS behavior between soul and WeChat occurs due to urgent contact from friends; or PS behavior between Soul and Weibo occurs when Soul is waiting for response.” (S23)
“The main functions of social platforms are different. I use WeChat, QQ, etc. to satisfy my diversified demands. So I will continue to swing. I think UI is one side, the motivation to use is the other side.” (S13)
“I think there is no link between UI and PS. For example, If I use Soul App now, I would like to swing another App recommended by my friends, which function works better than Soul. I have an inclusive attitude towards new things, and personally think the high or low UI has no influence on PS.” (S4)
“There exists difference between Soul and Clubhouse in term of English group chatting: feel difficult on clubhouse I will swing to soul to find confidence. (I think UI ) has no impact on PS, depending on whether the friend set up a chatting room or not.” (S16)
“I will do PS regardless of high or low UI. Due to the fact that one App can only target specific user group or certain topics, it is necessary to obtain more information from various platforms via PS behavior.” (S22)
4.4. Implication and Limitation
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Conflicts of Interest
Abbreviations
ASM | Anonymous social media; |
DAUs | Daily active users; |
EA | Emotional attachments; |
PU | Perceived usefulness; |
PEOU | Perceived ease of use; |
PA | Perceived anonymity; |
PPR | Perceived privacy riskiness; |
PPM | Push-pull-mooring; |
PS | Platform Swinging; |
PI | Perceived interactivity; |
SN | Subjective norms; |
SNSs | Social networking sites; |
UI | User intention. |
Appendix A. Interview Outline
- Your name (you may use a pseudonym or nickname)
- Your gender
- Your age
- Your highest education
- Your occupation
- Your emotional state
- Your income
- Which anonymous social apps are you using/have you used?
- When did you start using these anonymous social apps?
- How often do you use them (how often do you log in, how long do you use each time you log in)?
- What specific features do you mainly use?
- How involved are you in the process of using them (e.g., do you post often, view other users’ posts)?
- Please tell us your opinion about anonymous social apps from the perspective of personal use and social influence (public opinion attributes).
- Why do you use anonymous social apps/what do you want to achieve?
- What is the impact of using anonymous social apps on your work and life? (Is it useful to improve your life and work performance, and what role does it play)
- Do you think it is important to maintain a fair amount of anonymity while using the app?
- Would you like to let your friends/family know that you are using anonymous social apps? Why?
- What do you think about the privacy risk of using anonymous social apps?
- What are your memorable experiences in using anonymous social apps? (emotion, catharsis, hollow, etc.)
- Would you like to continue using your current anonymous social app and why?
- What settings, features, styles and other product characteristics do you think would enhance your willingness to use?
- Do you have platform swinging behavior when using anonymous social apps?
- Do you swing between different anonymous social apps (e.g., between Soul and Tan Tan) or between anonymous social apps and social apps (e.g., between Soul and WeChat)?
- Please list the names of all the social media platforms (including but not limited to anonymous social media platforms) you use for swinging.
- Please briefly describe the main social activities you do on each of these social platforms, i.e., how and why you use them. (For example, I mainly use WeChat, QQ, Soul and Tan Tan. In WeChat and QQ, I can get in touch with my family and friends, post my daily news, etc. In Soul and Tan Tan, I match strangers, browse my friends’ profiles, expand my social circle, etc.)
- What needs do you meet with platform swinging? (e.g., to expand your circle, to get better information, to get entertainment, etc.)
- For what reasons do you swing between different social apps (including but not limited to anonymous social apps)?
- How does your willingness to use apps affect your platform swinging behavior? Why? (Do you continue to swing between platforms when your intention to use an anonymous social app is low/high? (Please explain why)
References
- Bumgarner, B.A. You have been poked: Exploring the uses and gratifications of Facebook among emerging adults. First Monday 2007, 12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Blackwell, D.; Leaman, C.; Tramposch, R.; Osborne, C.; Liss, M. Extraversion, neuroticism, attachment style and fear of missing out as predictors of social media use and addiction. Personal. Individ. Differ. 2017, 116, 69–72. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bazarova, N.N.; Choi, Y.H. Self-disclosure in social media: Extending the functional approach to disclosure motivations and characteristics on social network sites. J. Commun. 2014, 64, 635–657. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Joinson, A. Social desirability, anonymity, and Internet-based questionnaires. Behav. Res. Methods Instrum. Comput. 1999, 31, 433–438. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Khan, M.L. Social media engagement: What motivates user participation and consumption on YouTube? Comput. Hum. Behav. 2017, 66, 236–247. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bechmann, A.; Lomborg, S. Mapping actor roles in social media: Different perspectives on value creation in theories of user participation. New Media Soc. 2013, 15, 765–781. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Form F-1. Available online: https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1832879/000119312521156430/d109555df1.htm (accessed on 15 April 2022).
- Amendment No. 1 to Form F-1. Available online: https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/0001832879/000119312521193127/d109555df1a.htm (accessed on 15 April 2022).
- Tsinghua University Released Metaverse Report 2.0, and Soul App is Considered to be the Closest to the Definition of Metaverse—Metaverse Gate. Available online: https://meta-ok.com/metaverse/7197/ (accessed on 15 April 2022).
- Dwivedi, Y.K.; Kapoor, K.K.; Chen, H. Social media marketing and advertising. Mark. Rev. 2015, 15, 289–309. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Moorhead, S.A.; Hazlett, D.E.; Harrison, L.; Carroll, J.K.; Irwin, A.; Hoving, C. A New Dimension of Health Care: Systematic Review of the Uses, Benefits, and Limitations of Social Media for Health Communication. J. Med. Internet Res. 2013, 15, e85. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Hitchcock, L.I.; Battista, A. Social Media for Professional Practice: Integrating Twitter With Social Work Pedagogy. J. Baccalaureate Soc. Work. 2013, 18 (Suppl. 1), 33–45. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fischer, E.; Reuber, A.R. Social interaction via new social media: (How) can interactions on Twitter affect effectual thinking and behavior? J. Bus. Ventur. 2011, 26, 1–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kamal, S.; Chu, S.-C.; Pedram, M. Materialism, Attitudes, and Social Media Usage and Their Impact on Purchase Intention of Luxury Fashion Goods Among American and Arab Young Generations. J. Interact. Advert. 2013, 13, 27–40. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Balakrishnan, B.K.P.D.; Dahnil, M.I.; Yi, W.J. The Impact of Social Media Marketing Medium toward Purchase Intention and Brand Loyalty among Generation Y. Procedia Soc. Behav. Sci. 2014, 148, 177–185. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Ara Eti, I.; Horaira, M.A.; Bari, M.M. Power and stimulus of social media marketing on consumer purchase intention in Bangladesh during the COVID-19. Int. J. Res. Bus. Soc. Sci. 2021, 10, 28–37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gruzd, A.; Staves, K.; Wilk, A. Connected scholars: Examining the role of social media in research practices of faculty using the UTAUT model. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2012, 28, 2340–2350. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, H.; Liu, W.; Yoganathan, V.; Osburg, V.S. COVID-19 information overload and generation Z’s social media discontinuance intention during the pandemic lockdown. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Chang. 2021, 166, 120600. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tsai, C.-C.; Lin, S.S.J. Internet Addiction of Adolescents in Taiwan: An Interview Study. CyberPsychol. Behav. 2003, 6, 649–652. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Nova, F.F.; Rifat, M.R.; Saha, P.; Ahmed, S.I.; Guha, S. Online sexual harassment over anonymous social media in Bangladesh. In Proceedings of the Tenth International Conference on Information and Communication Technologies and Development, Ahmedabad, India, 4–7 January 2019. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sharon, T.; John, N.A. Unpacking (the) secret: Anonymous social media and the impossibility of networked anonymity. New Media Soc. 2018, 20, 4177–4194. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kang, R.; Dabbish, L.; Sutton, K. Strangers on Your Phone. In Proceedings of the 19th ACM Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work & Social Computing, San Francisco, CA, USA, 27 February 2016. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Keaveney, S.M.; Parthasarathy, M. Customer Switching Behavior in Online Services: An Exploratory Study of the Role of Selected Attitudinal, Behavioral, and Demographic Factors. J. Acad. Mark. Sci. 2001, 29, 374–390. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chen, P.-Y.; Hitt, L.M. Measuring Switching Costs and the Determinants of Customer Retention in Internet-Enabled Businesses: A Study of the Online Brokerage Industry. Inf. Syst. Res. 2002, 13, 255–274. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Cheng, Z.; Yang, Y.; Lim, J. Cyber migration: An empirical investigation on factors that affect users’ switch intentions in social networking sites. In Proceedings of the 2009 42nd Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences IEEE, Waikoloa, HI, USA, 5–8 January 2009; pp. 1–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Xiao, X.; Caporusso, N. Comparative Evaluation of Cyber Migration Factors in the Current Social Media Landscape. In Proceedings of the 2018 6th International Conference on Future Internet of Things and Cloud Workshops (FiCloudW), Barcelona, Spain, 6–8 August 2018. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Boyle, P.; Keith, H. Exploring Contemporary Migration; Routledge: London, UK, 2014. [Google Scholar]
- Lee, E.S. A Theory of Migration. Demography 1966, 3, 47–57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Moon, B. Paradigm in Migration Research: Exploring ‘Moorings’ as a Schema. Prog. Hum. Geogr. 1995, 19, 504–524. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Jackson John, A. Migration in Aspects of Modern Sociology: Social Processes; Longman: London, UK; New York, NY, USA, 1986. [Google Scholar]
- Zhang, K.Z.K.; Cheung, C.M.K.; Lee, M.K.O.; Chen, H. Understanding the Blog Service Switching in Hong Kong: An Empirical Investigation. In Proceedings of the 41st Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (HICSS 2008), Walkoloa, HI, USA, 7–10 January 2008. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Chang, I.-C.; Liu, C.-C.; Chen, K. The push, pull and mooring effects in virtual migration for social networking sites. Inf. Syst. J. 2013, 24, 323–346. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Miller, R.; Melton, J. College students and risk-taking behaviour on Twitter versus Facebook. Behav. Inf. Technol. 2015, 34, 678–684. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hsieh, J.-K.; Hsieh, Y.-C.; Chiu, H.-C.; Feng, Y.-C. Post-adoption switching behavior for online service substitutes: A perspective of the push-pull-mooring framework. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2012, 28, 1912–1920. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Choi, H.S.; Yang, S.B. An empirical study on influencing factors of switching intention from online shopping to webrooming. J. Intell. Inf. Syst. 2016, 22, 19–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Hwang, H.S.; Shim, J.W.; Park, S.B. Why we migrate in the virtual world: Factors affecting switching intentions in SNS. Inform. Commun. Soc. 2018, 22, 2127–2137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gerhart, N.; Koohikamali, M. Social network migration and anonymity expectations: What anonymous social network apps offer. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2019, 95, 101–113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Tandoc, E.C.; Lou, C.; Min, V.L.H. Platform-swinging in a poly-social-media context: How and why users navigate multiple social media platforms. J. Comput. Mediat. Commun. 2018, 24, 21–35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Madianou, M.; Miller, D. Migration and New Media: Transnational Families and Polymedia; Routledge: London, UK, 2011. [Google Scholar]
- Gershon, I. Media Ideologies: An Introduction. J. Linguist. Anthropol. 2010, 20, 283–293. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Gershon, I. Breaking Up Is Hard To Do: Media Switching and Media Ideologies. J. Linguist. Anthropol. 2010, 20, 389–405. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Liao, J.; Chen, J.; Dong, X. Understanding the antecedents and outcomes of brand community-swinging in a poly-social-media context: A perspective of channel complementarity theory. Asia Pac. J. Mark. Logist. 2021, 34, 506–523. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Boyle, S.C.; LaBrie, J.; Trager, B.M.; Baez, S. Discrepancies between Objectively Assessed and Self-Reported Daily Social Media Time in the Age of Platform Swinging. OSF Preprints 2022. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zhang, S.; Wang, Q. Refracting the Pandemic: A Field Theory Approach to Chinese Journalists’ Sourcing Options in the Age of COVID-19. Digit. J. 2022, 1–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Larsson, A.O. Winning and losing on social media: Comparing viral political posts across platforms. Converg. Int. J. Res. New Media Technol. 2019, 26, 639–657. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yu, Z.; Song, X. User Intention of Anonymous Social Application “Soul” in China: Analysis based on an Extended Technology Acceptance Model. J. Theor. Appl. Electron. Commer. Res. 2021, 16, 2898–2921. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- iiMedia Report. 2019 Q1 China Stranger Social Market Quarterly Monitoring Report. 2019. Available online: https://www.iimedia.cn/c400/64669.html (accessed on 16 September 2021).
- Glaser, B.G.; Strauss, A.L.; Strutzel, E. The discovery of grounded theory; strategies for qualitative research. Nurs. Res. 1968, 17, 364. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Jiang, Z.; Heng, C.S.; Choi, B.C.F. Research Note-Privacy Concerns and Privacy-Protective Behavior in Synchronous Online Social Interactions. Inf. Syst. Res. 2013, 24, 579–595. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Bennett, W. Communicating Global Activism. Inform. Commun. Soc. 2003, 6, 143–168. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ko, H.; Cho, C.H.; Roberts, M.S. Internet uses and gratifications: A structural equation model of interactive advertising. J. Advert. 2005, 34, 57–70. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zolkepli, I.A.; Kamarulzaman, Y. Social media adoption: The role of media needs and innovation characteristics. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2015, 43, 189–209. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wirtz, B.W.; Nitzsche, P.T.; Ullrich, S. User integration in social media: An empirical analysis. Int. J. Electron. Bus. 2014, 11, 63. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Leiner, D.J.; Kobilke, L.; Rue, C.; Brosius, H.B. Functional domains of social media platforms: Structuring the uses of Facebook to better understand its gratifications. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2018, 83, 194–203. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wang, Z.; Tchernev, J.M.; Solloway, T. A dynamic longitudinal examination of social media use, needs, and gratifications among college students. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2012, 28, 1829–1839. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Festinger, L. A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance (Vol. 2); Stanford University Press: Redwood City, CA, USA, 1957. [Google Scholar]
- Teo, T.S.; Lim, V.K.; Lai, R.Y. Intrinsic and extrinsic motivation in Internet usage. Omega 1999, 27, 25–37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Palmgreen, P.; Wenner, L.A.; Rosengren, K.E. Uses and gratifications research: The past ten years. Media Gratifi. Res. Curr. Perspect. 1985, 11, 37. [Google Scholar]
Variable | Num. of Participants | ||
---|---|---|---|
Gender | Female | 12 | 52.2% |
Male | 11 | 47.8% | |
Age | 18–25 | 17 | 73.9% |
26–30 | 4 | 17.4% | |
31+ | 2 | 8.7% | |
Martial Status | Single | 20 | 87.0% |
In love | 3 | 13.0% | |
History of usage | Within 1 year | 6 | 26.1% |
1–3 years | 10 | 43.5% | |
More than 3 years | 7 | 30.4% | |
Frequency of use | every day | 11 | 47.8% |
Once every few days | 6 | 26.1% | |
Once per week | 4 | 17.4% | |
Once every few weeks or less | 2 | 8.7% | |
Usage time per login | Within 1 h | 12 | 52.2% |
1–3 h | 8 | 34.8% | |
More than 3 h | 3 | 13.0% |
Word | Length | Count | Weighted Percentage (%) |
---|---|---|---|
usage | 2 | 881 | 4.26 |
social | 2 | 785 | 3.79 |
app | 3 | 603 | 2.91 |
anonymous | 2 | 579 | 2.80 |
swing | 2 | 410 | 1.98 |
Soul | 4 | 259 | 1.25 |
platform | 2 | 240 | 1.16 |
influence | 2 | 192 | 0.93 |
behavior | 2 | 159 | 0.77 |
intention | 2 | 154 | 0.74 |
Coding Procedure | Subtheme | Example of Relevant Quotes/Catalogues/Concepts |
---|---|---|
Open Coding | ASM app leads the social trend | “I think Soul will lead to craze trend among fashionable youths and trigger some emerging behaviors and habits.” (S4) |
ASM app affects emotional states | “I met my girlfriend on Soul App and we recorded moments of life which is great impact on me.” (S19) | |
Curiosity | “I saw Soul ads from QQ and downloaded to satisfy curiosity. I can meet different kinds of people and sense the world via Soul.” (S7) | |
Continuous usage intention | “I intend to continually use. Because Soul is a nice to share some views, moods, opinions, etc., as a tree hole.” (S9) | |
Perception of privacy risk | “Be careful, don’t post any message related to individual’s privacy.” (S10) | |
Reasons for platform swinging | “Because the function is different. Depends on the social needs, sometimes keep in contact with acquaintances or strangers. ” (S6) | |
Relationship between swinging and intention | “It has some connection and influence. With the higher intention, I may not use other apps with similar functions. But other app with complementary function is still used.” (S20) | |
Involvement in usage process | “I often read the posts and browse the moments of other Soulers with higher involvement.” (S12) | |
Functions commonly used | “I often match (or connect) with other Soulers to see their interesting moments on the square. ” (S13) | |
Axial Coding | Individual effects | Relieving stress, getting information, satisfying the desire to share, tree holes, socializing with singles, etc. |
Social effects | Triggering trends, promoting market competition, lonely gathering places, cyber violence, underage issues, etc. | |
External factors | Systematic interactivity, anonymity, riskiness | |
Subjective feelings | Subjective norms, usefulness, emotional attachment, ease of use, etc. | |
Purpose of use | Voyeurism, socialization, confession, recreation, etc. | |
Reasons for use | Curiosity, entertainment, anonymity, friendship, etc. | |
History of use | Contact time, use time, continuity of usage, etc. | |
Usage process | Involvement, usage frequency, main functions, social platform choice, etc. | |
Continuous use | Intentions to use for a long time, willing to return, unable to give up usage | |
Stages of use | Intermittent use, uninstallation and reinstallation | |
Migration of social apps | Group influence, work (study) needs, etc. | |
Swing of social apps | Contrast use, swing and willingness, etc. | |
Selective Coding | Motivation | Reason for use, purpose of use |
Prospection | Individual effect, social effect | |
Perception | External factors, subjective feelings | |
Intention | Continuous use, stages of use | |
Platform swinging | Migration of social apps, swinging among social apps | |
Usage behavior | Use history, use process |
Influencing Factors | Data Classification (Num. of Nodes) |
---|---|
Perceived usefulness | Getting help (3), entertainment (2), expanding horizons (2), meeting people (2), enhancing life pleasure (1), improving mindfulness (6), finding companionship (4) |
Perceived ease of use | Convenient to use (23) |
Perceived riskiness | Acceptable to certain risks (3), concerned about privacy agreements (1), no privacy on the Internet (6), operators should protect personal privacy (4), raise their own awareness of prevention (11) |
Perceived anonymity | Attracted by anonymity (12), anonymity protects privacy (6), anonymity reduces concerns (4), anonymity has advantages and disadvantages (4), maintain a neutral attitude (2) |
Subjective norms | Unwilling to let friends know (7), willing to not hide too much (7), willing to share part of it (2), indifferent (4) |
Emotional attachments | Share spit and pour (10), touching and warm (3), care about depressed users (2), meet emotional needs (2), meet interesting people (10), tree holes (4), fall in love (4) |
Perceived interactivity | Various functions (6), simple interface (1), interesting functions (1), system performance needs to be optimized (4), unclear situation of social environment (3) |
Reasons for PS (Num. of Nodes) | Corresponding Materials |
---|---|
Different positioning & functions (13) | “Considering each App is with specific characteristics, I will adopt the proper one.” (S2) |
App/platform Comparison (3) | “When I find other interesting apps, I may use them in comparison.” (S11) |
Platform migration among friends (2) | “At first I only used QQ, but then I got more and more friends on WeChat and it us slowly instead of QQ.” (S6) |
Get different experience (3) | “I can get different experiences among apps, so I choose to swing.” (S3) |
Group influence (1) | “Because many good friends use this app, so I have to use it. I think it is the group influence.” (S13) |
Meet social needs (1) | “I am a very social person. These apps allows me to socialize very well.” (S1) |
Context-specific usage (1) | “The school sends out notices usually via QQ group-chatting, but I also need to use WeChat to contact friends and expose secrets on Soul.” (S8) |
Freshness (1) | “By PS, I can keep to feel fresh.” (S9) |
Complementary to socializing with acquaintances (4) | “I use Soul due to its anonymity. The circle of friends is more extensive and I can see the posts.” (S7) |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2022 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Song, X.; Yu, Z. A Qualitative Research on Usage Intention and Platform Swinging Behavior of Anonymous Social Applications “Soul”. Behav. Sci. 2022, 12, 230. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs12070230
Song X, Yu Z. A Qualitative Research on Usage Intention and Platform Swinging Behavior of Anonymous Social Applications “Soul”. Behavioral Sciences. 2022; 12(7):230. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs12070230
Chicago/Turabian StyleSong, Xiaoxiao, and Zhiyuan Yu. 2022. "A Qualitative Research on Usage Intention and Platform Swinging Behavior of Anonymous Social Applications “Soul”" Behavioral Sciences 12, no. 7: 230. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs12070230
APA StyleSong, X., & Yu, Z. (2022). A Qualitative Research on Usage Intention and Platform Swinging Behavior of Anonymous Social Applications “Soul”. Behavioral Sciences, 12(7), 230. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs12070230