International Journal of

ADVANCED AND APPLIED SCIENCES

EISSN: 2313-3724, Print ISSN: 2313-626X

Frequency: 12
line decor
  
line decor

 Volume 10, Issue 7 (July 2023), Pages: 86-98

----------------------------------------------

 Original Research Paper

The impact of social media platforms on communication within Saudi families: A quantitative analysis based on the theory of uses and gratifications

 Author(s): 

 Maher Trimeche 1, 2, *, Mongi Zidi 1, Turki Al-Shalaki 1, Alnair Mohammed Ali Alnair 1, Elyas Saeed Saad Ashwal 1, Mohamed Mohamed Hassan Ibrahim 1, 3, Ashraf Abd El-Hakim Mohamed Megahed 4

 Affiliation(s):

 1Department of Social Sciences, College of Literature and Arts, University of Ha'il, Ha'il, Saudi Arabia
 2Department of Anthropology, College of Literature and Human Sciences, University of Sousse, Sousse, Tunisia
 3Department of Social Work Methods, College of Social Work, Fayoum University, Fayoum, Egypt
 4Department of Sociology and Social Work, Faculty of Arts and Humanities, King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia

  Full Text - PDF          XML

 * Corresponding Author. 

  Corresponding author's ORCID profile: https://orcid.org/0009-0000-1271-7998

 Digital Object Identifier: 

 https://doi.org/10.21833/ijaas.2023.07.011

 Abstract:

This study aims to investigate the influence of social media platforms (SMPs) on communication patterns within Saudi families. The research adopts an analytical description methodology employing a questionnaire tool administered to a sample of 384 male and female students from the University of Hail in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. The statistical treatment utilized the Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS-V26) and included methods such as frequencies, percentages, arithmetic mean, standard deviation, and the chi-square test. Distinguished from prior studies, especially those employing quantitative indicators, this research embraces the theory of uses and gratifications to map communication between family members using SMPs. This approach allows for the determination of the prevalence of selective mutism within the family, considering the patriarchal family structure. The findings indicate that students generally communicate more with their mothers than with their fathers via SMPs. Additionally, male students exhibit higher levels of communication with their parents compared to female students, who tend to communicate more with their mothers than with their fathers. Moreover, the study reveals that the number of hours dedicated to using SMPs and family selective mutism did not display significant differences. Likewise, there were no significant variations between the age of SMP usage onset and family mutism. The study recommends conducting comparative analyses based on a similar approach to unveil communication dynamics in families with varying sociological, cultural, and geographical characteristics. Such research would enable the diagnosis of SMPs' impact on different family structures.

 © 2023 The Authors. Published by IASE.

 This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

 Keywords: Social media platforms, Communication patterns, Uses and gratifications theory, Selective mutism

 Article History: Received 17 January 2023, Received in revised form 10 May 2023, Accepted 17 May 2023

 Acknowledgment 

This research has been funded by the Scientific Research Deanship at the University of Ha'il–Saudi Arabia through project number RG-21 143.

 Compliance with ethical standards

 Conflict of interest: The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

 Citation:

 Trimeche M, Zidi M, Al-Shalaki T, Alnair AMA, Ashwal ESS, Ibrahim MMH, and Megahed AAEM (2023). The impact of social media platforms on communication within Saudi families: A quantitative analysis based on the theory of uses and gratifications. International Journal of Advanced and Applied Sciences, 10(7): 86-98

 Permanent Link to this page

 Figures

 No Figure

 Tables

 Table 1 Table 2 Table 3 Table 4 Table 5 Table 6 Table 7 Table 8 Table 9

----------------------------------------------   

 References (60)

  1. Abdel-Salam DM, Alrowaili HI, Albedaiwi HK, Alessa AI, and Alfayyadh HA (2019). Prevalence of internet addiction and its associated factors among female students at Jouf University, Saudi Arabia. Journal of the Egyptian Public Health Association, 94: 12. https://doi.org/10.1186/s42506-019-0009-6   [Google Scholar] PMid:32813134 PMCid:PMC7366308
  2. Ajina A (2019). Predicting customers' online word of mouth intention: The theory of planned behavior applied to understand youth Saudi social media behaviors. Management Science Letters, 9(10): 1553-1566. https://doi.org/10.5267/j.msl.2019.5.030   [Google Scholar]
  3. Al Omoush KS, Yaseen SG, and Alma’Aitah MA (2012). The impact of Arab cultural values on online social networking: The case of Facebook. Computers in Human Behavior, 28(6): 2387-2399. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2012.07.010   [Google Scholar]
  4. Al-Hantoushi M and Al-Abdullateef S (2014). Internet addiction among secondary school students in Riyadh city, its prevalence, correlates and relation to depression: A questionnaire survey. International Journal of Medical Science and Public Health, 3(1): 10-15. https://doi.org/10.5455/ijmsph.2013.130920131   [Google Scholar]
  5. Alhassan AA, Alqadhib EM, Taha NW, Alahmari RA, Salam M, and Almutairi AF (2018). The relationship between addiction to smartphone usage and depression among adults: A cross sectional study. BMC Psychiatry, 18: 148. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12888-018-1745-4   [Google Scholar] PMid:29801442 PMCid:PMC5970452
  6. Aljehani HA (2019). Impact of social media on social value systems among university students in Saudi Arabia. International Journal of Education and Practice, 7(3): 216-229. https://doi.org/10.18488/journal.61.2019.73.216.229   [Google Scholar]
  7. Alobaid L, BinJadeed H, Alkhamis A, Alotaibi R, Tharkar S, Gosadi I, and Ashry GAD (2018). Burgeoning rise in smartphone usage among school children in Saudi Arabia: Baseline assessment of recognition and attention skills among users and non-users using CANTAB tests. The Ulutas Medical Journal, 4(1): 4-11. https://doi.org/10.5455/umj.20180203121836   [Google Scholar]
  8. Alosaimi FD, Alyahya H, Alshahwan H, Al Mahyijari N, and Shaik SA (2016). Smartphone addiction among university students in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. Saudi Medical Journal, 37(6): 675-683. https://doi.org/10.15537/smj.2016.6.14430   [Google Scholar] PMid:27279515 PMCid:PMC4931650
  9. Alruzayhi MK, Almuhaini MS, Alwassel AI, and Alateeq OM (2018). The effect of smartphone usage on the upper extremity performance among Saudi youth, KSA. Romanian Journal of Rhinology, 8(29): 47-53. https://doi.org/10.2478/rjr-2018-0006   [Google Scholar]
  10. Alshare KA, Moqbel M, and Merhi MI (2023). The double-edged sword of social media usage during the COVID-19 pandemic: Demographical and cultural analyses. Journal of Enterprise Information Management, 36(1): 197-220. https://doi.org/10.1108/JEIM-07-2021-0292   [Google Scholar]
  11. Astleitner H, Bains A, and Hörmann S (2023). The effects of personality and social media experiences on mental health: Examining the mediating role of fear of missing out, ghosting, and vaguebooking. Computers in Human Behavior, 138: 107436. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2022.107436   [Google Scholar]
  12. Ball H, Wanzer MB, and Servoss TJ (2013). Parent–child communication on Facebook: Family communication patterns and young adults' decisions to “Friend” parents. Communication Quarterly, 61(5): 615-629. https://doi.org/10.1080/01463373.2013.822406   [Google Scholar]
  13. Belk RW (2013). Extended self in a digital world. Journal of Consumer Research, 40(3): 477-500. https://doi.org/10.1086/671052   [Google Scholar]
  14. Beyari H (2023). The relationship between social media and the increase in mental health problems. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 20(3): 2383. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20032383   [Google Scholar] PMid:36767749 PMCid:PMC9915628
  15. Boyd DM and Ellison NB (2007). Social network sites: Definition, history, and scholarship. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 13(1): 210-230. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2007.00393.x   [Google Scholar]
  16. Brocke JV, Richter D, and Riemer K (2009). Motives for using social network sites (SNSs)-An analysis of SNS adoption among students. In the 22nd Bled eConference; Facilitating an Open, Effective and Representative eSociety, Bled, Slovenia: 33-49.   [Google Scholar]
  17. Carpentiere D and Petralia A (2023). From bounded rationality to limited consideration: Representation and behavioral analysis. ArXiv Preprint ArXiv:2302.00978. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2302.00978   [Google Scholar]
  18. Chen A (2019). From attachment to addiction: The mediating role of need satisfaction on social networking sites. Computers in Human Behavior, 98: 80-92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2019.03.034   [Google Scholar]
  19. Child JT and Westermann DA (2013). Let's be Facebook friends: Exploring parental Facebook friend requests from a communication privacy management (CPM) perspective. Journal of Family Communication, 13(1): 46-59. https://doi.org/10.1080/15267431.2012.742089   [Google Scholar]
  20. Child JT, Duck AR, Andrews LA, Butauski M, and Petronio S (2015). Young adults’ management of privacy on Facebook with multiple generations of family members. Journal of Family Communication, 15(4): 349-367. https://doi.org/10.1080/15267431.2015.1076425   [Google Scholar]
  21. CITC (2021). Saudi Internet 2021. Communication and Information Technology Commission, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. 
  22. Cohen D (2022). Homo numericus: La "civilisation" qui vient. Albin Michel, Paris, France.   [Google Scholar]
  23. Cortese J and Rubin AM (2010). Uses and gratifications of television home shopping. Atlantic Journal of Communication, 18(2): 89-109. https://doi.org/10.1080/15456870903554924   [Google Scholar]
  24. Cunningham CE, McHolm AE, and Boyle MH (2006). Social phobia, anxiety, oppositional behavior, social skills, and self-concept in children with specific selective mutism, generalized selective mutism, and community controls. European Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 15: 245-255. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00787-006-0529-4   [Google Scholar] PMid:16685476
  25. Doty J and Dworkin J (2014). Parents’ of adolescents use of social networking sites. Computers in Human Behavior, 33: 349-355. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2013.07.012   [Google Scholar]
  26. Dow SP, Sonies BC, Scheib D, Moss SE, and Leonard HL (1995). Practical guidelines for the assessment and treatment of selective mutism. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 34(7): 836-846. https://doi.org/10.1097/00004583-199507000-00006   [Google Scholar] PMid:7649953
  27. El Azab DR, Amin DI, and Mohamed GI (2017). Effect of smart phone using duration and gender on dynamic balance. International Journal of Medical Research and Health Sciences, 6(1): 42-49.   [Google Scholar]
  28. Ellison N, Heino R, and Gibbs J (2006). Managing impressions online: Self-presentation processes in the online dating environment. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 11(2): 415-441. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2006.00020.x   [Google Scholar]
  29. Ford MA, Sladeczek IE, Carlson J, and Kratochwill TR (1998). Selective mutism: Phenomenological characteristics. School Psychology Quarterly, 13(3): 192-227. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0088982   [Google Scholar]
  30. Genedy LMS (2021). The implementation of smartphones in the instructional process in the views of the female students at Hail University. International Journal of Advanced and Applied Sciences, 8(11): 30-36. https://doi.org/10.21833/ijaas.2021.11.004   [Google Scholar]
  31. Griffith DA, Lee HS, and Yalcinkaya G (2023). Understanding the relationship between the use of social media and the prevalence of anxiety at the country level: A multi-country examination. International Business Review: 102102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ibusrev.2023.102102   [Google Scholar]
  32. Hessel HM and LeBouef S (2023). Young adults' perceptions of technology use with extended family. Family Relations, 72(2): 565-584. https://doi.org/10.1111/fare.12815   [Google Scholar]
  33. Jung T, Youn H, and McClung S (2007). Motivations and self-presentation strategies on Korean-based" Cyworld" weblog format personal homepages. Cyberpsychology and Behavior, 10(1): 24-31. https://doi.org/10.1089/cpb.2006.9996   [Google Scholar] PMid:17305445
  34. Kanter M, Afifi T, and Robbins S (2012). The impact of parents “friending” their young adult child on Facebook on perceptions of parental privacy invasions and parent–child relationship quality. Journal of Communication, 62(5): 900-917. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2012.01669.x   [Google Scholar]
  35. Karimi L, Khodabandelou R, Ehsani M, and Ahmad M (2014). Applying the uses and gratifications theory to compare higher education students’ motivation for using social networking sites: Experiences from Iran, Malaysia, United Kingdom, and South Africa. Contemporary Educational Technology, 5(1): 53-72. https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/6115   [Google Scholar]
  36. Kopecký K, Fernández-Martín FD, Szotkowski R, Gómez-García G, and Mikulcová K (2021). Behaviour of children and adolescents and the use of mobile phones in primary schools in the Czech Republic. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18(16): 8352. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18168352   [Google Scholar] PMid:34444102 PMCid:PMC8393999
  37. Lawrence K (2021). The mediating role of social internet use on the correlation of parental efficacy, peer influence and social functioning of adolescents in the current era. Current Research in Behavioral Sciences, 2: 100032. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crbeha.2021.100032   [Google Scholar]
  38. Leijse MM, Koning IM, and van den Eijnden RJ (2023). The influence of parents and peers on adolescents’ problematic social media use revealed. Computers in Human Behavior, 143: 107705. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2023.107705   [Google Scholar]
  39. Ling YL and Li BKT (2019). Children’s usage of social networking sites and family relationship. International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science, 3(9): 67-73.   [Google Scholar]
  40. Lopez AG and Cuarteros KG (2020). Exploring the effects of social media on interpersonal communication among family members. Canadian Journal of Family and Youth/Le Journal Canadien de Famille et de la Jeunesse, 12(1): 66-80. https://doi.org/10.29173/cjfy29491   [Google Scholar]
  41. Melfsen S, Jans T, Romanos M, and Walitza S (2022). Family relationships in selective mutism: A comparison group study of children and adolescents. Children, 9(11): 1634. https://doi.org/10.3390/children9111634   [Google Scholar] PMid:36360362 PMCid:PMC9688778
  42. Mullen C and Hamilton NF (2016). Adolescents' response to parental Facebook friend requests: The comparative influence of privacy management, parent-child relational quality, attitude and peer influence. Computers in Human Behavior, 60: 165-172. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.02.026   [Google Scholar]
  43. Padilla‐Walker LM, Coyne SM, and Fraser AM (2012). Getting a high‐speed family connection: Associations between family media use and family connection. Family Relations, 61(3): 426-440. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3729.2012.00710.x   [Google Scholar]
  44. Park N and Lee S (2014). College students' motivations for Facebook use and psychological outcomes. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media, 58(4): 601-620. https://doi.org/10.1080/08838151.2014.966355   [Google Scholar]
  45. Procentese F, Gatti F, and Di Napoli I (2019). Families and social media use: The role of parents’ perceptions about social media impact on family systems in the relationship between family collective efficacy and open communication. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 16(24): 5006. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16245006   [Google Scholar] PMid:31835396 PMCid:PMC6950110
  46. Raacke J and Bonds-Raacke J (2008). MySpace and Facebook: Applying the uses and gratifications theory to exploring friend-networking sites. Cyberpsychology and Behavior, 11(2): 169-174. https://doi.org/10.1089/cpb.2007.0056   [Google Scholar] PMid:18422409
  47. Ramsey MA, Gentzler AL, Morey JN, Oberhauser AM, and Westerman D (2013). College students' use of communication technology with parents: Comparisons between two cohorts in 2009 and 2011. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 16(10): 747-752. https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2012.0534   [Google Scholar] PMid:23679572
  48. Rosenstein AW and Grant AE (1997). Reconceptualizing the role of habit: A new model of television audience activity. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media, 41(3): 324-344. https://doi.org/10.1080/08838159709364411   [Google Scholar]
  49. Ruggiero TE (2000). Uses and gratifications theory in the 21st century. Mass Communication and Society, 3(1): 3-37. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327825MCS0301_02   [Google Scholar]
  50. Saputri RAM and Yumarni T (2023). Social media addiction and mental health among university students during the COVID-19 pandemic in Indonesia. International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction, 21(1): 96-110. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11469-021-00582-3   [Google Scholar] PMid:34230820 PMCid:PMC8247617
  51. Saquib J (2020). Internet addiction among Saudi Arabian youth. International Journal of Health Sciences, 14(2): 1-2.   [Google Scholar]
  52. Savci M, Akat M, Ercengiz M, Griffiths MD, and Aysan F (2022). Problematic social media use and social connectedness in adolescence: The mediating and moderating role of family life satisfaction. International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction, 20: 2086–2102. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11469-020-00410-0   [Google Scholar]
  53. Shahzad M, Liu AX, and Samuel A (2013). Secure unlocking of mobile touch screen devices by simple gestures: You can see it but you can not do it. In the 19th Annual International Conference on Mobile Computing and Networking, Association for Computing Machinery, Miami, USA: 39-50. https://doi.org/10.1145/2500423.2500434   [Google Scholar]
  54. Shumow L and Lomax R (2002). Parental efficacy: Predictor of parenting behavior and adolescent outcomes. Parenting: Science and Practice, 2(2): 127-150. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327922PAR0202_03   [Google Scholar]
  55. Spiteri Cornish L (2014). ‘Mum, can I play on the Internet?’ Parents’ understanding, perception and responses to online advertising designed for children. International Journal of Advertising, 33(3): 437-473. https://doi.org/10.2501/IJA-33-3-437-473   [Google Scholar]
  56. Tariq A, Muñoz Sáez D, and Khan SR (2022). Social media use and family connectedness: A systematic review of quantitative literature. New Media and Society, 24(3): 815-832. https://doi.org/10.1177/14614448211016885   [Google Scholar]
  57. UNICEF (2019). Global kids online: Comparative report. United Nations International Children's Emergency Fund, New York, USA.   [Google Scholar]
  58. Vaidya A, Pathak V, and Vaidya A (2016). Mobile phone usage among youth. International Journal of Applied Research and Studies, 5(3): 1-16. https://doi.org/10.20908/ijars.v5i3.9483   [Google Scholar]
  59. Wang MP, Chu JT, Viswanath K, Wan A, Lam TH, and Chan SS (2015). Using information and communication technologies for family communication and its association with family well-being in Hong Kong: Family project. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 17(8): e207. https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.4722   [Google Scholar] PMid:26303434 PMCid:PMC4642799
  60. Windahl S, Signitzer B, and Olson JT (2008). Using communication theory: An introduction to planned communication. SAGE Publications, Thousand Oaks, USA.   [Google Scholar]