|کد مقاله||کد نشریه||سال انتشار||مقاله انگلیسی||ترجمه فارسی||نسخه تمام متن|
|350209||618433||2016||6 صفحه PDF||ندارد||دانلود کنید|
• Mixed methods were used to analyze 4001 Yik Yak posts from 42 college campuses.
• A large percentage of posts focused on context specific aspects of campus life.
• Profanity and vulgarity were frequent in posts, as well as sexual references.
• Many posts reflected domains of perceived normative behaviors on college campuses.
• The potential for abusive postings may be mediated by online community policies.
Yik Yak, an anonymous social media application has garnered a pervasive following and secured millions in investment funding. The application has been a consistent topic of discussion on U.S. college campuses and in the media, often described in very negative terms. This study sought to gain an empirical understanding of the nature of communication on the application. Across three days, 4001 anonymous posts from 42 different US college campuses were collected and analyzed using emergent inductive content analysis. Overall, the content associated with each post varied widely, with a large percentage of posts (45.1%, n = 1802) focused upon campus life and announcements or proclamations. Also frequent were posts that included profanity or vulgarities (13.5%, n = 544), posts that asked apparently rhetorical questions (10.1%, n = 405) and posts related to dating, sex and sexuality (9.2%, n = 366). Many of the posts were arguably inflammatory, but few contained individualized personal information. A large proportion of posts reflected domains of perceived normative behaviors on college campuses, such as alcohol, drug use and sexuality. Importantly, posts analyzed were highly context specific, limiting the research team's ability to fully understand or appreciate the impact of a post. Finally, even in light of the highly contextual nature of the posts, based on our limited analysis, the authors of this manuscript conclude that Yik Yak, while a tool with the potential for abuse and misuse, does not represent a significant threat to young adults.
Journal: Computers in Human Behavior - Volume 57, April 2016, Pages 17–22