CC BY-NC-ND
0Available online at www.sciencedirect.com
ScienceDirect
Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences 15 (2011) 895-898
WCES-2011
A Comparison of motivation, frequency and content of S.M.S. messages sent in boys and girls high school student
Shima Shahyad a *, Shahla Pakdaman a, Mohamood Hiedary a, MirnaderMiri, b Masoud
Asadi c,Azad Nasri d, Asghar ShirAlipour c
a Faculty of Psychology and Education, ShahidBeheshty University,Tehran ,Iran
b Faculty of Psychology and Education, Tehran University, Tehran ,Iran c Faculty of Psychology and Education,Tarbiat Moalem University, Tehran ,Iran d Faculty of Psychology and Education,Slamic Azad University,Abhar ,Iran
Abstract
The purpose of the present research was to comparison of content, motivation and frequency of S.M.S Messages sent by boys versus girls. 288 high school students (125 girls and 138 boys) aged 14 to 18 participated in the study that have been chosen via cluster multistage sampling method and completed Type of SMS using Assessment Questionnaire (TSAQ; Shayad, 2010). Data was analyzed by using multivariate analysis of covariance (MANOVA). The results showed that there was a significant difference between boys and girls with regard to motivation, content and frequency of S.M.S messages. Girls send S.M.S more frequently than boys. In fact they send an average of 39 S.M.S a day versus 15 S.M.S sent of the average by a high school boy. Girls seek reassuring information while boys try to sending information for assurance and avoid of face-to-face relationship when they have recourse to S.M.S Boys also send more S.M.S with uncommon content, gibe content and impersonal information.
Key words: Number of sent S.M .S ; Motivation ; Content ; Adolescent; High School Student
1. Introduction
S.M.S is a nonverbal communication service which allows its users to communicate through a combination of digits and letters (160 letters / digits maximum). The first S.M.S was sent in 1992 and right from then its usage began to rapidly spread. S.M.S is a very low cost means of communication. Furthermore it allows direct contact between communicating parties. Sending, and receiving S.M.S needs not be and usually is not synchronous and this allows communicating parties to avoid unwanted live communication while being still on-line throughout the day. (Scharl, & Murphy, 2005). S.M.S users are not hampered in their communication by formalities. S.M.S Is a potent way of expressing things that would have been otherwise very embarrassing to express. People believe that It Is possible through S.M.S to become more intimate with one's friends (Barry, 2002). Social communication is undergoing drastic change as S.M.S usage rapidly expands. A study by Nokia conducted on a sample of 3300 individuals revealed that S.M.S constituted the bulk of mobile phone communications (Reid & Reid, 2004) S.M.S addiction is recognized as a new form of neurosis in young adults ( Meals, 2003). Despite popularity of S.M.S messaging in Iran and particularly among younger generation. Very few studies have been conducted on the content
* Shima Shahyad.Tel: 09122484452; fax: +98-021-3388-2314 E-mail address:shima.shahyad@2mail.com
1877-0428 © 2011 Published by Elsevier Ltd. doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.03.207
and motivation of these messages (Barry2002).A study with the aim of comparing boys and girls with regard to content and motivation of their messages can provide authorities and planners with guidance on how to tackle misuse of S.M.S The current study was thus initiated with the above facts being seriously taken into consideration.
2. Method
The statistical community of this research was all high school students in Tehran city. sample includes 151 girls and 141 boys that have been chosen multistage random sampling method. data were analyzed by using multivariate analysis of covariance (MANOVA) and the chi square test.
3. Measures
Questionnaire on Types of S.M.S usage: This questionnaire was complied with the aim of measuring S.M.S usage types. It comprises 45 questions and has 4 parts with regard to content .The first part which deals with motivation comprises 29 questions. The second part, which deals with S.M.S contents, comprises 12 questions. The third part, which deals with frequency of usage, comprises 2 questions and the last part which deals with preferred receiving parties comprises 2 questions. kronbach alpha coefficient and retest were used to measure the validity of this questionnaire. The calculated validities for the two said methods were 0.85 and 0.74 respectively. Face validity of the questionnaire was confirmed by 5 experienced psychologists and factorial analysis was used to establish its construct validity. kronbach alpha coefficient for the purviews of motivation and content was calculated as 0.74 and 0.60 respectively (Shahyad , 2010).
4. Results
Tablet. mean and standard deviations of motive, content and number of using S.M.S
variable girls boys
M SD M SD
number of using S.M.S 39/8 105/83 15/33 23/92
economical motivation 29/37 7/02 29/32 8/27
common motivation 21/92 6/04 23/31 10/56
sending information for assurance 20/63 3/93 18/58 4/73
avoid of face-to-face relationship 8/9 2/96 10/22 3/99
uncommon content 6/85 2/84 8/49 3/77
gibe content 9/05 2/77 10/17 3/17
impersonal information content 8/92 3/05 9/73 4/04
Because it Is known that the dependent variable "number of sent messages" is correlated with the variable" number of received messages" with a correlation of 0.96, the latter was chosen as the covariated variable.
Table2.multivariate analysis of covariance for relation between attachment style and motive, content and number of using S.M.S
source variable SS DF MS F P
number of number of using S.M.S 1395589/539 1 1395589/539 3470/032 0/001
received economical motivation 272/781 1 272/781 4/594 0/033
messages common motivation 287/12 1 287/12 3/739 0/054
sending information 11/311 1 11/311 0/597 0/44
for assurance
avoid of face-to-face 2/806 1 2/806 0/222 0/638
relationship
uncommon content 48/476 1 48/476 4/446 0/036
gibe content 17/218 1 17/218 1/899 0/169
impersonal 0/305 1 0/305 0/023 0/879
information content
number of using S.M.S 1542/714 1 1542/714 3/836 0/051
economical motivation 16/11 1 16/11 0/271 0/603
common motivation 158/473 1 158/473 2/064 0/152
sending information 182/835 1 182/835 2/064 0/002
for assurance
avoid of face-to-face 116/47 1 116/47 9/231 0/003
relationship
uncommon content 222/698 1 222/698 20/426 0/001
gibe content 117/216 1 117/216 12/927 0/001
impersonal 52/809 1 52/809 4/047 0/045
information content
The Results of table 2 shows that ther there is a significant effect by the number of received messages of the number of sent message (F=3470.032,P>0.05). Also there is a significant effect by economical motivation and uncommon content (F=4.446,P<0.05). After eliminating the effect of the proportion of received messages, girl and boys demonstrated significant differences with regard to number of sent messages (F=3.836,P<0.05), re-assuring information as a motivation for S.M.S usage (F=9.648,P<0.05), avoid of face-to-face relationship (F=9.231,P>0.05), uncommon content (F20.426,P<0.05), gibe content (F=12.927,P<0.05) and impersonal information content (F=4.047,P<0.05).
5. Discussion
Our main aim was to investigate possible gender - related differences between boys and girls with regard to frequency and content and motivation of S.M.S messages send by them. Results show that girls send more S.M.S than boys (This corresponds to findings reported by LING 2001, LING 2007 and Falconer and Kelvin 2005). A possible explanation could be Women's inclination for forming closer social bands (.Ling, 2001; Ling, 2007& Faulkner & Culwin, 2005).
Results also indicate gender-ralated difference between motivations behind S.M.S messages sent by boys and girls. Girls are mostly motivated by being informed and feeling secure as a result of the information received. Boys the other hand are mostly motivated by avoid of face-to-face relationship. These findings conform to (Sun ,2004; Debrand & Jhonson, 2008). A probable explanation could be different communication styles in men and women. Social network which mainly consist of women are emotion - oriented while those mainly consisting of men are duty - oriented.
Men communicate mostly with the aim of maintaining their position within community. Women are intrinsically more social and more probable to disclose personal matters to their friends. Women's social network are more closely knit (Igarashi, Takai, & Yoshida, 2005). It is not strange, thus, that girls are more disposed toward providing assurances and alleviating their friend's worries ( Ling, 2001). One particularity of S.M.S is self - disclosure with the aim of de-escalating tensions(Manteghi, 2008). As stated before, women are intrinsically more social and disclose secrets to their friends more openly. They thus are less motivated, as men are, by avoid of face-to-face relationship when they send S.M.S messages. Some gender - related differences can also be seen in the purview of content. This also conforms to findings by (Ling ,2001 & Manteghi ,2008). Compared to boys, girls send less messages with impersonal information content, gibe content. sexual stereotypes may be a possible explanation for such behaviour. Women are expected to be more caring and more sociable ( Debra& Arthu ,2004). They thus are less motivated to send messages with impersonal information content, gibe content. They also less frequently send messages with uncommon content, thanks to shyness and inhibition expected from them by the society ( Manteghi ,2008).Two sets of consequences is realizable for the current study. With regard to theoretical consequences, this study has reaffirmed that gender - related differences in communication styles are reflected in motivation, frequency and content of S.M.S messages.
On the practical level our study can help launch preventive and intervention programs to protect members of box sexes (and specially girls). However, there are limitations to the results gathered from the current study. For instance, generalizing these results to other social groups and cliques should be done with utmost caution, knowing that our statistical population consisted of university students only. It is recommended that gender-related differences are taken into consideration when preventive and intervention programs are being planned.
References
Barry, M. (2002). The uses and meaning of I Mode in Japan, Estudios de Juventud, 57, 72-151
Debrand, C. C., & Johnson, J. J. (2008). Gender Differences in email and instant messaging: A study of undergraduate. The Journal of Computer Information Systems, 48( 3), 20-25.
Debra J. M., & Arthu P. A. (2004). Handbook of Closeness and Intimacy.Lawrence Erlbaum Associaton Publishers Mbhwah, New Jersey.
Faulkner, X., & Culwin, F. (2005). "When Fingers Do The Talking: A Study of Text Messaging. Interacting with Computers, 17, 167-185.
Igarashi, T., Takai, J., & Yoshida, T. (2005). Gender differences in social network development via mobile phone text messages: A longitudinal study. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 22(5), 691-713.
Ling, R. (2001). Adolescent girls and young adult men: two subcultures of the mobile telephone. Retrieved June 1, 2009, from http:/ www. telenor. Com /rd /pub /rep01/ R34_2001.pdf.
Ling, R. (2007). The length of text messages and use ofpredictive texting: who uses it and how much do they have to say? Computer- mediated communication: Washington, DC.
Manteghi, M.(2008). Parent's Guide to New Communication Technologies. Tehran:Abed publition.
Meals,C.(2003). Text messaging addiction a growing problem. Retrieved June25,2009, from http://badgerherald.com/news/2003/10/08/text_messaging_addic.php.
Reid, D., & Reid, F. (2004). In sight into the social and psychological effects of sms text messaging. Retrieved July 20, 2009, from http:// www.160charactery.org /documents/ social effects of text messaging. Pdf.
Scharl, A., Dickinger, A., & Murphy, J. (2005). Diffusion and success factors of mobile marketing, Electronic commerce Research and Applications, 4 (2), 159- 173.
Shahyad , S. (2010). The role of S.M.S as an intermediary in the relationship between attachment style and realized social protection. (Unpublished M.A thesis). Tehran ,Shahid Beheshty University.
Sun, H. (2004). Expanding the scope of localization: A cultural usability perspective on mobile text messaging use in American and Chinese contexts. Retrieved June 30, 2009, from: http:// www.localization.ie /resource/ Awards/ the ses/ sun-diss. Pdf.
