100% satisfaction guarantee Immediately available after payment Both online and in PDF No strings attached 4.2 TrustPilot
logo-home
Summary

Summary Social Media: Risks & Opportunities

Rating
4.0
(1)
Sold
16
Pages
87
Uploaded on
08-12-2021
Written in
2021/2022

In this document, I have included all lecture notes as well as relevant literature (in blue text). Good luck with the exam! :)

Institution
Course











Whoops! We can’t load your doc right now. Try again or contact support.

Written for

Institution
Study
Course

Document information

Uploaded on
December 8, 2021
Number of pages
87
Written in
2021/2022
Type
Summary

Subjects

Content preview

Social Media: Risks & Opportunities (pink = exam questions & blue = literature)
Lecture 1 – Introduction
Image: Greek god celebrity/model/actor on rollercoaster
- First ride on rollercoaster
- Fabio killed a goose with his face
- This happened 20 years ago, without social media
- Nowadays: would probably make memes, he would become a laughing stock, it would go
viral



Opportunities of social media
- Stay in touch with other
- Persuade people (as a marketeer)
- Entertaining when you’re bored
- Out of curiosity
- Stalking people
- To learn something
- Visibility
- Persistent



Risks of social media
- Influencers only showing perfect (unrealistic) life
- Pressure/feeling the need to be online 24/7
- Conspiracy theories/negativity
- People persuading you to think the same thing
- Mansplaining



Key terms
- Social media = websites and applications that enable users to create and share content and/or
participate in social networking
- Risk = situation involving exposure to danger
- Opportunity = something that can benefit you, help you



Practicalities
- Exam (80%)
- Open and MC
- Written closed book
- Group assignment (20%) + pass/fail pitch
- Expert opinion letter to Ministry of Education, Culture and Science
- And a video pitch of maximum 3 minutes → make it convincing
- Maximum 4 students, 3 is okay
- 10 claims based on lecture topics


1

, - Arguments based on scientific literature
- 2,5 pages
→ Have to pass both with a 6
- Lectures not compulsory but work groups are




Lecture 2 – Experiencing online aggression (victims & perpetrators)
Introduction to online aggression
= Intentional harm delivered by the use of electronic means to a person or a group of people
irrespective of their age, who perceive(s) such acts as offensive, derogatory, harmful or
unwanted
- Bullying = an aggressive, intentional act or behaviour that is carried out by a group or an
individual repeatedly and overtime against a victim who cannot easily defend him- or herself
- Happens repeatedly
- Power balance
- Cyber-aggression encompasses both cyber harassment and cyberbullying, along with other
forms of online aggression


Examples
- Tyler Clementi (18, in the US) committed suicide because his roommate had turned on
webcam when Tyler was making out with his boyfriend and the roommate shared it on the
internet
- Picture of Dutch royal family and princess Amalia got a lot of comments on her weight
- Belgian influencer’s picture on Instagram got a lot of comments on being too thin
- Elementary class picture with a girl in black and white and rude comments on her



Article 1 - Dark Triad personality traits and adolescent cyber-aggression
- Not one explanation why people behave like this
- Dark Triad = negative personality characteristics (socially offensive traits)
1. Narcissism: extreme self-involvement, you feel important and unique, fantasise
about success, want a lot of attention and special favours, exploit others, ignoring
others, focus on own success
= A sense of importance and uniqueness, fantasies of unlimited success,
requiring constant attention, expecting special favours and being
interpersonally exploitative
- Associated with offline aggressions among adolescents
- Function well in online environments (due to controllability of online
self-presentation + shallowness of online relations)
- Narcissistic exploitativeness (exploitative of others, only your own interest in
mind, no moral compassion), a sub-construct of narcissism, is associated with
cyber-aggression among adolescents
2. Machiavellianism: manipulating other people, use their power to gain power
= Manipulative strategies of social conduct that are not correlated with general
intelligence, and that do not necessarily lead to success



2

, - Associated with offline aggressions among adolescents
- Ze gaan over lijken/do whatever means necessary to obtain their goal (being
popular for example)
3. Psychopathy: impulsive, arrogant and deceitful, cold, insensitive (not a lot of
empathy, don’t take feelings of others in account)
= An impulsive behaviour style, an arrogant, deceitful interpersonal style and
deficient affective experience
- Associated with offline aggression among adolescents + cyber-aggression
among adolescents
- Think about themselves, not scared to deceit others in order to get what they
want
- Traits are clustered, however, correlations among the traits are fairly modest
- Different but do correlate
- High on psychopathy probably also high on Machiavellianism
- Each component may still be viewed as distinct aspect of socially aversive behaviour


Present study
- First study to do it with online aggression
- Study association between Dark Triad traits (as a combined Dark Triad cluster) and
cyber-aggression among an adolescent population
- Cyber-aggression?
- Aggressive, intentional act
- Using electronic means
- To a person or a group irrespective of their age, who perceive(s) such acts as
offensive, derogatory, harmful or unwanted

Method
- 324 adolescents aged 14 to 18
- On Facebook
- Convenience sample in schools, scouting organizations and sports clubs
- Online survey
- Ethical approval because of age: privacy, information sheet where to find help, inform
teacher, need parental consent (every parent has to sign a paper that they agree on
participation)
- Instruments
- The Short Dark Triad scale
- Not subconcepts of the traits
- Facebook cyber-aggression scale (e.g., “sending insulting Facebook
messages/comments to someone (repeatedly)”)
- Indicate number of times they engaged in specific activities in the past three
months
- Facebook Intensity Scale
- Those who are more active on social media, have higher probability to be
involved in online aggression
- Narcissism related to being active on social media

Results
- 35,8% engaged at least once in the past three months in one or more than one of the eight
cyber-aggression activities


3

, - Most used activity was “saying things about someone to make the person a laughing stock”
- 17.6% of the respondents at least once in the past three months
- Followed by “sending insulting Facebook messages or comments to someone repeatedly”
- 15.1%




- Non-significant relationships between narcissism + Machiavellianism and cyber-aggression
- Psychopathy and cyber-aggression positive relationship → more psychopathy leads to more
cyber-aggression
- Facebook intensity and cyber-aggression positive relationship → more intense leads to
higher frequency cyber-aggression
- Some correlations: does this Facebook intensity mediates Dark Triad and cyber-aggression?
- No, only direct relationship
- Intensive Facebook users were associated with higher scores on Machiavellianism and
psychopathy, but not with higher scores on narcissism
- Boys scored higher on Machiavellianism, psychopathy, and cyber-aggression, whereas girls
tended to be more intensive Facebook users
- Finally, younger adolescents scored significantly higher on psychopathy in comparison to
older adolescents

Implications
- As personality traits are fairly stabilized in this age group, cyber-aggression may be used as
an indicator of Dark Triad personality traits in adolescent individuals
- Prevention?
- Social perspective-taking skills have been proven successful in overcoming
egocentrism and antisocial behaviour
- Not done well with psychopathy
- Include training of these skills in prevention programs

Limitations
- But short scale and self-report (underestimation probably), socially desirable answers
probably (use social desirability scale to solve this)
- Short Dark Triad instrument did not allow to investigate sub-constructs of
Machiavellianism, narcissism and psychopathy
- Convenience sample
- More girls than boys so cannot generalize
- Only Facebook, maybe different on other platforms



4

Available practice questions

Reviews from verified buyers

Showing all reviews
3 year ago

4.0

1 reviews

5
0
4
1
3
0
2
0
1
0
Trustworthy reviews on Stuvia

All reviews are made by real Stuvia users after verified purchases.

Get to know the seller

Seller avatar
Reputation scores are based on the amount of documents a seller has sold for a fee and the reviews they have received for those documents. There are three levels: Bronze, Silver and Gold. The better the reputation, the more your can rely on the quality of the sellers work.
pcwit Tilburg University
Follow You need to be logged in order to follow users or courses
Sold
166
Member since
6 year
Number of followers
131
Documents
12
Last sold
9 months ago

3.7

17 reviews

5
3
4
9
3
3
2
1
1
1

Why students choose Stuvia

Created by fellow students, verified by reviews

Quality you can trust: written by students who passed their tests and reviewed by others who've used these notes.

Didn't get what you expected? Choose another document

No worries! You can instantly pick a different document that better fits what you're looking for.

Pay as you like, start learning right away

No subscription, no commitments. Pay the way you're used to via credit card and download your PDF document instantly.

Student with book image

“Bought, downloaded, and aced it. It really can be that simple.”

Alisha Student

Frequently asked questions