WhatsApp y la búsqueda de control de la situación informacional por parte de los jóvenes

  1. Lucía Caro Castaño 1
  1. 1 Universidad de Cádiz, España
Journal:
Sphera publica: revista de ciencias sociales y de la comunicación

ISSN: 2695-5725

Year of publication: 2015

Issue Title: Tensiones y desafíos contemporáneos de la comunicación

Volume: 1-2

Issue: 15

Pages: 76-96

Type: Article

DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openOpen access editor

More publications in: Sphera publica: revista de ciencias sociales y de la comunicación

Abstract

Recently, a certain weariness has been detected among young users as far as adopting Facebook is concerned, which is the opposite trend observed about services as WhatsApp. This paper revisits the notion of “informational situation” (Meyrowitz, 1985) in order to understand how interaction design and interface decisions produce different social contexts in these platforms, leading to new phenomena as collapsed contexts and invisible audiences. How each service defines the informational situation helps understand why Facebook may be perceived as stage-like space, while WhatsApp, where a conversational chat model is adopted, would be perceived as a more controllable and private space (backstage).

Bibliographic References

  • Aladro, E., Valbuena, F. & Padilla, G. (2012). Redes sociales y jóvenes universitarios españoles: nuevos ejes de socialización. Austral Comunicación, 1 (1), 9-25. Recuperado de http://webtest.austral.edu.ar/ojs/index.php/australcomunicacion/article/view/2/4].
  • Bernstein, M. S. et al. (2013). Quantifying the Invisible Audience in Social Networks. VVAA, Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 21-30). Nueva York: ACM Press.
  • Boyd, D. (2010). Social Network Sites as Networked Publics. Affordances, Dynamics, and Implications. Z. Papacharissi (Ed.), A Networked Self: Identity, Community and Culture on Social Network Sites (pp. 39-58). Nueva York: Routledge.
  • ⎯⎯⎯⎯ (2014). It’s Complicated. New Haven/Londres: Yale University Press.
  • Boyd et al. (2009). The Conundrum of Visibility: Youth Safety and the Internet. Journal of Children and Media, 3 (4), 410-419. Recuperado de http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/17482790903233465
  • Church, K. & De Oliveira, R. (2013). What’s Up with WhatsApp? Comparing Mobile Instant Messaging Behaviors with Traditional SMS. VVAA, Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction with Mobile Devices and Services (pp. 352-361). Nueva York: ACM Press.
  • CIS (2015). Barómetro de marzo 2015. Estudio nº 3057. Avance de resultados. Recuperado de http://datos.cis.es/pdf/Es3057mar_A.pdf
  • Cohen, S. (2002). Folk Devils and Moral Panics: The Creation of the Mods and Rockers. Londres: Routledge.
  • Colás, P., González, T. & De Pablos, J. (2013). Juventud y redes sociales: motivaciones y usos preferentes. Comunicar, 20 (40), 15-23. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3916/C40-2013-02-01
  • Constine, J. (2013). Facebook Admits Some Decrease Of Usage Amongst Young Teens For The First Time. TechCrunch.com, 30-10-2013. Recuperado de http://techcrunch.com/2013/10/30/facebook-teens-drop
  • Cuesta, U. (2012). Uso “envolvente” del móvil en jóvenes: propuesta de un modelo de análisis. Estudios sobre el Mensaje Periodístico, 18, nº especial octubre, 253-262. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5209/rev_ESMP.2012.v18.40979
  • Cuesta, U. & Gaspar, S. (2013). Análisis motivacional del uso del smartphone entre jóvenes: una investigación cualitativa. Historia y Comunicación Social, 18, nº especial noviembre, 435-447. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5209/rev_HICS.2013.v18.44252
  • Ellison, N., Heino, R. & Gibbs, J. (2006). Managing Impressions Online: Selfpresentation Processes in the Online Dating Environment. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 11 (2), 415-441. DOI: 10.1111/j.1083-6101.2006.00020.x
  • García, A., López-De-Ayala, M. & Catalina, B. (2013). Hábitos de uso en Internet y en las redes sociales de los adolescentes españoles. Comunicar, 21 (41), 195-204. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3916/C41-2013-19
  • Goffman, E. (2006). La presentación de la persona en la vida cotidiana. Buenos Aires: Amorrortu Editores.
  • Granollers, T., Lorés, J. & Cañas, J. J. (2011). Diseño de sistemas interactivos centrados en el usuario. Barcelona: UOC.
  • iStrategy Labs (2014). 3 Million Teens Leave Facebook in 3 Years: The 2014 Facebook Demographic Report. Recuperado de http://istrategylabs.com/2014/01/3-million-teens-leave-facebook-in-3-years-the-2014-facebook-demographic-report
  • Jiménez, R. (2014). Facebook compra WhatsApp por más de 13.800 millones de euros. ElPais.com, 20-02-2014. Recuperado de: http://tecnologia.elpais.com/tecnologia/2014/02/19/actualidad/1392848898_360807.html
  • Joly, A., Maret, P. & Daigremont, J. (2009). Context-awareness, the missing block of social networking. International Journal of Computer Science and Applications, 6 (2), 50-65. Recuperado de http://www.tmrfindia.org/ijcsa/v6i24.pdf
  • Kirkpatrick, D. (2011). El efecto Facebook. La verdadera historia de la empresa que está conectando el mundo. Barcelona: Gestión 2000.
  • Lenhart, A. (2009). Teens and Sexting: How and Why Minor Teens Are Sending Sexually Suggestive Nude or Nearly Nude Images via Text Messaging. Washington D.C.: Pew Research Centre Report. Recuperado de http://pewresearch.org/assets/pdf/teens-and-sexting.pdf
  • Litt, E. (2012). Knock, Knock. Who's There? The Imagined Audience. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 56 (3), 330-345. DOI: 10.1080/08838151.2012.705195
  • Liu, H. (2007). Social Network Profiles as Taste Performances. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 13 (1), 252-275. DOI: 10.1111/j.1083-6101.2007.00395.x
  • Madden, M. & Smith, A. (2010). Reputation Management and Social Media. Washington D.C.: Pew Internet & American Life Project. Recuperado de http://www.pewinternet.org/2010/05/26/reputation-management-and-social-media
  • Madden, M. et al. (2012). Parents, Teens, and Online Privacy. Washington D.C.: Pew Internet & American Life Project. Recuperado de: http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED537515.pdf
  • Madianou, M. & Miller, D. (2013). Polymedia: Towards a new theory of digital media in interpersonal communication. International Journal of Cultural Studies, 16 (2), 169-187. DOI: 10.1177/1367877912452486
  • Mander, J. (2014). Global Web Index Social Summary Q3. Recuperado de http://es.slideshare.net/globalwebindex/gwi-social-summary-q3-2014?related=2
  • Marwick, A. & Boyd, D. (2011). To See and Be Seen: Celebrity Practice on Twitter. Convergence: The International Journal of Research into New Media Technologies, 17 (29), 139-158. DOI: 10.1177/1354856510394539
  • Meyrowitz, J. (1985). No Sense of Place: The Impact of Electronic Media on Social Behavior. Nueva York: Oxford University Press
  • Monge, S. & Olabarri, M. (2011). Los alumnos de la UPV/EHU frente a Tuenti y Facebook: usos y percepciones. Revista Latina de Comunicación Social, (66), 79-100. DOI: 10.4185/RLCS-66-2011-925-079-100
  • Morrison, A. (2014). Facebook and Coaxed Affordances. En A. Poletti & J. Rak (Eds.), Identity Technologies (112-131). Madison: The University of Wisconsin Press.
  • Papacharissi, Z. (2010). Conclusion: A Networked Self. Z. Papacharissi (Ed.), A Networked Self: Identity, Community and Culture on Social Network Sites (pp. 304-318). Nueva York: Routledge.
  • Poltash, N. (2012). Snapchat and Sexting: A Snapshot of Baring Your Bare Essentials. Richmond Journal of Law & Technology, 19 (4), 1-24. Recuperado de http://jolt.richmond.edu/v19i4/article14.pdf
  • Pooley, J. (2014). Sociology and the Socially Mediated Self. S. Waisbord (Ed.), Media Sociology (pp. 224-247). Nueva York: Polity.
  • Rubio-Romero, J. & Perlado, M. (2015). El fenómeno WhatsApp en el contexto de la comunicación personal: una aproximación a través de los jóvenes universitarios. Icono 14, 13 (2), 73-94. DOI: 10.7195/ri14.v13i2.818
  • Rui, J. & Stefanone, M. (2013). Strategic Image Management Online. Information, Communication & Society, 1 (20), 1-20. DOI: 10.1080/1369118X.2013.763834
  • Serrano-Puche, J. (2013). Vidas conectadas: tecnología digital, interacción social e identidad. Historia y Comunicación Social, 18, nº especial noviembre, 353-364. Recuperado de http://revistas.ucm.es/index.php/HICS/article/view/44249
  • Strategy& (2015). Telco Trends for 2015+. Resumen ejecutivo. Recuperado de http://www.strategyand.pwc.com/media/file/Telco-Trends-for-2015-eps.pdf
  • Stutzman, F., Gross, R. & Acquisti, A. (2012). Silent Listeners: The Evolution of Privacy and Disclosure on Facebook. Journal of Privacy and Confidentiality, 4 (2), 7-41.
  • The Cocktail Analysis (2013). V Oleada del Observatorio de las Redes Sociales. Recuperado de http://es.slideshare.net/TCAnalysis/5-oleada-observatorio-redes-sociales
  • ⎯⎯⎯⎯ (2014). VI Oleada del Observatorio Redes Sociales. Recuperado de http://es.slideshare.net/TCAnalysis/6-oleada-observatorio-redes-sociales
  • Turkle, S. (2011). Alone Together. Nueva York: Basic Books.
  • Utz, S., Muscanell, N. & Khalid, C. (2015). Snapchat Elicits More Jealousy than Facebook: A Comparison of Snapchat and Facebook Use. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 18 (3), 141-146.
  • Van Dijck, J. & Poell, T. (2013). Understanding Social Media Logic. Media and Communication, 1 (1), 2-14. DOI: 10.12924/mac2013.01010002
  • Wortham, J. (2014). WhatsApp Deal Bets on a Few Fewer ‘Friends’. NewYorkTimes.com, 21-02-2014. Recuperado de http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/22/technology/whatsapp-deal-bets-on-a-few-fewer-friends.html?_r=0
  • Young, K. (2013). Managing online identity and diverse social networks on Facebook. Webology, 10 (2), art. 109. Recuperado de http://www.webology.org/2013/v10n2/a109.pdf
  • Zhao, S. & Elesh, D. (2008). Copresence as ‘Being With’. Social Contact in Online Public Domains. Information, Communication & Society, 11 (4), 565-583. DOI:10.1080/13691180801998995
Data source: Dialnet