Zusammenfassung
Dieser Buchbeitrag beschäftigt sich mit Social Media aus der Perspektive der kommunikationswissenschaftlichen Forschung. Dabei wird argumentiert, dass die Berücksichtigung einer kommunikationswissenschaftlichen Perspektive unerlässlich für eine ganzheitliche Annäherung an Social Media ist. Auch wenn sich die Kommunikationswissenschaft in ihrer Forschung immer wieder u. a. soziologischer und psychologischer Theorien bedient, entwickelt sie doch einen eigenen Blick auf den Forschungsgegenstand Social Media. Konkret bespricht dieser Buchbeitrag die Affordances der verschiedenen Social-Media-Plattformen, unterscheidet zwischen symmetrischen und asymmetrischen Plattformen, erläutert die Praktiken des Second Screenings sowie Influencer-Kommunikation auf Social Media, skizziert relevante theoretische Ansätze wie die „rich-get-richer“ vs. „social compensation theory“ und diskutiert deren Relevanz für die Forschung zu Social Media. Der Beitrag zeigt abschließend Desiderata und methodische Herausforderungen für die zukünftige kommunikationswissenschaftliche Social-Media-Forschung sowie Implikationen für die Praxis auf.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
Literatur
Altendorfer, L.-M. (2019). Influencer in der digitalen Gesundheitskommunikation: Instagramer, YouTuber und Co. zwischen Qualität, Ethik und Professionalisierung. Nomos.
Boerman, S. C. (2020). The effects of the standardized Instagram disclosure for micro- and meso-influencers. Computers in Human Behavior, 103, 199–207. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2019.09.015.
Boulianne, S. (2020). Twenty years of digital media effects on civic and political participation. Communication Research, 47(7), 947–966. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650218808186.
Breves, A. J., Heidenreich, A., Liebers, N., & Schramm, H. (2021). Blind trust? The importance and interplay of parasocial relationships and advertising disclosures in explaining influencers’ persuasive effects on their followers. International Journal of Advertising, 40(7), 1209–1229. https://doi.org/10.1080/02650487.2021.1881237.
Bucher, T., & Helmond, A. (2017). The Affordances of social media platforms In J. Burgess, T. Poell, & A. Marwick (Hrsg.), The SAGE handbook of social media (233–253; preprint version document: S. 1–41). Sage.
Boyd, D. (2010). Social network sites as networked publics: Affordances, dynamics and implications. In Z. Papacharissi (Hrsg.), A networked self: Identity, community, and culture on social network sites (S. 39–58). Routledge.
Busemann, K., & Tippelt, F. (2014). Second Screen: Parallelnutzung von Fernsehen und Internet. Media Perspektiven, 7–8, 408–416.
Chadwick, A., O’Loughlin, B., & Vaccari, C. (2017). Why people dual screen political debates and why it matters for democratic engagement. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 61(2), 220–239. https://doi.org/10.1080/08838151.2017.1309415.
de Veirman, M., Cauberghe, V., & Hudders, L. (2017). Marketing through Instagram influencers: The impact of number of followers and product divergence on brand attitude. International Journal of Advertising, 36(5), 798–828. https://doi.org/10.1080/02650487.2017.1348035.
Dekoninck, H., & Schmuck, D. (2022). The mobilizing power of influencers for pro-environmental behavior intentions and political participation. Environmental Communication, 16(4), 458–472. https://doi.org/10.1080/17524032.2022.2027801.
Dias, P. (2016). Motivations for multi-screening: An exploratory study on motivations and gratifications. European Journal of Communication, 31(6), 678–693. https://doi.org/10.1177/0267323116674111.
Diener, E. (1980). Deindividuation: The absence of self-awareness and self-regulation in group members. In P. B. Paulus (Hrsg.), Psychology of Group Influence (S. 209–242.). Erlbaum.
Döhring, N. (2008). Social ldentity model of deindividuation effects (SIDE). In N. C. Krämer, S. Schwan, D. Unz, & M. Suckfüll (Hrsg.), Medienpsychologie (S. 298–305). Kohlhammer.
Evans, S. K., Pearce, K. E., Vitak, J., & Treem, J. W. (2017). Explicating affordances: A conceptual framework for understanding affordances in communication research. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 22(1), 35–52. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcc4.12180.
Festinger, L., Pepitone, A., & Newcomb, T. (1952). Some consequences of de-individuation in a group. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 47, 382–389.
Gil de Zúñiga, H., Garcia-Perdomo, V., & McGregor, S. C. (2015). What is second screening? Exploring motivations of second screen use and its effect on online political participation. Journal of Communication, 65(5), 793–815. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcom.12174.
Gil de Zúñiga, H., & Liu, J. H. (2017). Second screening politics in the social media sphere: Advancing research on dual screen use in political communication with evidence from 20 countries. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 61, 193–219. https://doi.org/10.1080/08838151.2017.1309420.
Gil de Zúñiga, H., Huber, B., & Strauß, N. (2018). Social media and democracy. El Profesional de la Información, 27(6), 1172–1180. https://doi.org/10.3145/epi.2018.nov.01.
Gottfried, J. A., Hardy, B. W., Holbert, R. L., Winneg, K. M., & Jamieson, K. H. (2017). The changing nature of political debate consumption: Social media, multitasking, and knowledge acquisition. Political Communication, 34(2), 172–199. https://doi.org/10.1080/10584609.2016.1154120.
Halpern, D., & Gibbs, J. (2013). Social media as a catalyst for online deliberation? Exploring the affordances of facebook and youtube for political expression. Computers in Human Behavior, 29, 1159–1168. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2012.10.008.
Huber, B., Gil de Zúñiga, H., Diehl, T., & Liu, J. (2019). Effects of second screening: Building social media social capital through dual screen use. Human Communication Research, 45(3), 334–365. https://doi.org/10.1093/hcr/hqz004.
Huber, B., Gil de Zúñiga, H., & Liu, J. (2020). Assessing political second screening behavior and personality traits: The roles of economic development, freedom of expression and monochromatic vs. polychromatic cultures. Telematics and Informatics, 49, 101365. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2020.101365 .
Huber, B., Lepenies, R., Quesada Baena, L., & Allgaier, J. (2022). Beyond individualized responsibility attributions? How eco influencers communicate sustainability on TikTok. Environmental Communication. https://doi.org/10.1080/17524032.2022.2131868.
Johnstone, L., & Lindh, C. (2018). The sustainability-age dilemma: A theory of (un)planned behaviour via influencers. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 17(1), 127–139. https://doi.org/10.1002/cb.1693.
Kim, Y., Hsu, S. H., & de Zúñiga, H. G. (2013). Influence of social media use on discussion network heterogeneity and civic engagement: The moderating role of personality traits. Journal of Communication, 63(3), 498–516.
Klemm, M. (2015). Komische Zuschauer. Praktiken und Strategien des Do-it-yourself-Vergnügens im Social TV. In H. Diekmannshenke, S. Neuhaus & U. Schaffers (Hrsg.), Das Komische in der Kultur (S. 209–227). Tectum.
Kraut, R., Kiesler, S., Boneva, B., Cummings, J., Helgeson, V., & Crawford, A. (2002). Internet paradox revised. Journal of Social Issues, 58, 49–74. https://doi.org/10.1111/1540-4560.00248.
Kwon, H. E., Oh, W., & Kim, T. (2017). Platform structures, homing preferences, and homophilous propensities in online social networks. Journal of Management Information Systems, 34(3), 768–802. https://doi.org/10.1080/07421222.2017.1373008.
Lin, T. T. C., & Chiang, Y.-H. (2017). Dual screening: Examining social predictors and impact on online and offline political participation among Taiwanese Internet users. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 61, 240–263. https://doi.org/10.1080/08838151.2017.1309419.
Literat, I., & Kligler-Vilenchik, N. (2019). Youth collective political expression on social media: The role of affordances and memetic dimensions for voicing political views. New Media & Society, 21(9), 1988–2009. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444819837571.
McGregor, S. C., & Mourão, R. R. (2017). Second screening Donald Trump: Conditional indirect effects on political participation. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 61, 264–290. https://doi.org/10.1080/08838151.2017.1309418.
McKenna, K. Y. A., & Bargh, J. (1998). Coming out in the age of the Internet: Identity “demarginalization” through virtual group participation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75(3), 681–694. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.75.3.681.
SevenOne Media (2022). Media Activity Guide 2022. https://www.seven.one/documents/20182/6085232/Media+Activity+Guide+2022+deutsch.pdf/9fd470a8-7315-5932-6be0-ec77e9c935bd?t=1666105513360. Zugegriffen: 14. Juni 2023.
Moore, A., Fredheim, R., Wyss, D., & Beste, S. (2021). Deliberation and identity rules: The effect of anonymity, pseudonyms and real-name requirements on the cognitive complexity of online news comments. Political Studies, 69(1), 45–65. https://doi.org/10.1177/0032321719891385.
Nee, R. C., & Dozier, D. M. (2017). Second screen effects: Linking multiscreen media use to television engagement and incidental learning. Convergence, 23(2), 214–226. https://doi.org/10.1177/1354856515592510.
Nielsen (2013). Action figures: How second screens are transforming TV viewing. https://www.nielsen.com/de/insights/2013/action-figures-how-second-screens-are-transforming-tv-viewing/. Zugegriffen: 14. Juni 2023.
Postmes, T., & Spears, R. (1998). Deindividuation and antinormative behavior: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 123(3), 238–259. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.123.3.238.
Rossini, P. (2020). Beyond Incivility: Unterstanding patterns of uncivil and intolerant discourse in online political talk. Communication Research, 49(3), 1–27. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650220921314.
Rowe, I. (2015). Civility 2.0: A comparative analysis of incivility in online political discussion. Information, Communication & Society, 18(2), 121–138. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2014.940365.
Schellewald, A. (2021). Communicative forms on TikTok: Perspectives from digital ethnography. International Journal of Communication, 15, 1437–1457.
Schmuck, D. (2021). Social media influencers and environmental communication. In B. Takahashi, J. Metag, J. Thaker, & S. E. Comfort (Hrsg.), The handbook of international trends in environmental communication (S. 373–387). Routledge.
Schroll, C., & Huber, B. (2022). Assessing levels and forms of incivility and deliberative quality in online discussions on COVID-19: A cross-platform analysis. Frontiers in Politcal Science, 4. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpos.2022.814002.
Stollfuß, S. (2020). Soziales Fernseherleben: Social TV. Formen, Dynamiken und Entwicklungen am Beispiel des Contentnetzwerks funk. Media Perspektiven, 12, 649–660.
Strippel, C. (2017). Praktiken der Second-Screen-Nutzung. Konzeptioneller Rahmen für die Analyse der Parallelnutzung von zwei Bildschirmen. In U. Göttlich, L. Heinz, & M. Herbers (Hrsg.), Ko-Orientierung in der Medienrezeption. Medien − Kultur − Kommunikation (S. 107–136). Springer VS. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-14929-1_7.
Taddicken, M., & Schmidt, J.-H. (2023). Entwicklung und Verbreitung sozialer Medien. In J.-H. Schmidt & M. Taddicken (Hrsg.), Handbuch Soziale Medien (S. 3–17). Springer Fachmedien. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-25995-2_1.
Vaccari, C., Chadwick, A., & OʼLoughlin, B. (2015). Dual screening the political: Media events, social media, and citizen engagement. Journal of Communication, 65(6), 1041–1061. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcom.12187.
Van Cauwenberge, A., Schaap, G., & Van Roy, R. (2014). “TV no longer commands our full attention”: Effects of second-screen viewing and task relevance on cognitive load and learning from news. Computers in Human Behavior, 38, 100–109. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.05.021.
Vazquez, D., Wu, X., Nguyen, B., Kent, A., Gutierrez, A., & Chen, T. (2020). Investigating narrative involvement, parasocial interactions, and impulse buying behaviours within a second screen social commerce context. International Journal of Information Management, 53, 102135. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2020.102135.
Zimbardo, P. G. (1969). The human choice: Individuation, reason, and order vs. deindividuation, impulse, and chaos. In W. J. Arnold & D. Levine (Hrsg.), Nebraska Symposium on Motivation (S. 237–307). University of Nebraska Press.
Zulli, D., & Zulli, D. J. (2022). Extending the internet meme: Conceptualizing technological mimesis and imitation publics on the TikTok platform. New Media & Society, 24(8), 1872–1890. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444820983603.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2023 Der/die Autor(en), exklusiv lizenziert an Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH, ein Teil von Springer Nature
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Huber, B. (2023). Social Media – eine kommunikationswissenschaftliche Perspektive. In: Langner, AK., Schuster, G. (eds) Holistische Social-Media-Strategien. Springer Gabler, Wiesbaden. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-42563-0_3
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-42563-0_3
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer Gabler, Wiesbaden
Print ISBN: 978-3-658-42562-3
Online ISBN: 978-3-658-42563-0
eBook Packages: Business and Economics (German Language)