The MAIN Model for Technological Affordances in Social Media
-
Upload
tyler-gayheart -
Category
Technology
-
view
255 -
download
2
Transcript of The MAIN Model for Technological Affordances in Social Media
![Page 1: The MAIN Model for Technological Affordances in Social Media](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022022412/58f1485b1a28abb96f8b45ff/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
The MAIN Model for Technological Affordances in Social Media Tyler Gayheart University of Kentucky
![Page 2: The MAIN Model for Technological Affordances in Social Media](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022022412/58f1485b1a28abb96f8b45ff/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
MAIN Model Overview● Ten years of research in Media Effects Lab by Shyam Sundar (2008)● MAIN model
○ M = Modality, A = Agency, I = Interactivity, N = Navigability● Technological affordances trigger heuristic cues● Claims that these affordances are present in most digital media and are
promising in their ability to cue cognitive heuristics pertaining to credibility assessments
● The MAIN model is concerned with the technological aspects of digital media
![Page 3: The MAIN Model for Technological Affordances in Social Media](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022022412/58f1485b1a28abb96f8b45ff/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
Process
An affordance (interactivity of a website) conveys a certain cue (invite to live chat) that triggers a heuristic (service) leading to an automatic deduction that good service means good quality of information, thus leading to a high level of credibility.
![Page 4: The MAIN Model for Technological Affordances in Social Media](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022022412/58f1485b1a28abb96f8b45ff/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
RQ’s● RQ1a: Can reliable measures of each of the four technological affordances
associated with the MAIN model be developed? ● RQ1b: Do the psychometric properties of the technological affordance
scales vary as a function of social media platform? ● RQ2a: How does the MAIN model and related technological affordances
predict perceived credibility of Facebook?● RQ2b: How does the MAIN model and related technological affordances
predict perceived credibility of Twitter?● RQ2c: How does the MAIN model and related technological affordances
predict perceived credibility of Snapchat?
![Page 5: The MAIN Model for Technological Affordances in Social Media](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022022412/58f1485b1a28abb96f8b45ff/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
MethodologySurvey conducted Spring 15-16
● Demographic Scale ● Social Media Usage Scale ● 12-item technological affordance scale (MAIN) ● 2-item credibility scale
● N=420 undergraduate students (292 female) ● Ages ranged from 18 to 43 years (M = 20.22, SD = 2.59). ● 113 freshmen, 77 sophomores, 121 juniors, 105 seniors and four specified as either
non-degree seeking visiting/transient students● 344 white, 44 african american, 14 asian, and remaining 18 reported another
ethnicity
![Page 6: The MAIN Model for Technological Affordances in Social Media](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022022412/58f1485b1a28abb96f8b45ff/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
Methodology● 12 - item technological affordance scale
○ MAIN measured across each of the social media channel = technological affordance aggregate
● 2 -item credibility scale ○ Measured across each of the social media channels = credibility
composite for each social channel: facebook, twitter, snapchat● Independent Variables: modality, agency, interactivity and navigability● Dependant Variable: perceived platform credibility composite
![Page 7: The MAIN Model for Technological Affordances in Social Media](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022022412/58f1485b1a28abb96f8b45ff/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
Background/Literature Review● MAIN Model only mentioned or guided literature review, discussion,
results or future research/implications
● No study measured, evaluated or tested the MAIN model directly
● Majority of articles had been published in the last three years were
approached quantitatively
● Heuristics were primarily utilized as they were identified by the MAIN
model
![Page 8: The MAIN Model for Technological Affordances in Social Media](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022022412/58f1485b1a28abb96f8b45ff/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
Reliability● Multi dimensional reliability
results have low internal consistency across the Agency and Interactivity features of the MAIN model.
● Modality and Navigability, along with credibility had internally consistent results across all social media platforms.
![Page 9: The MAIN Model for Technological Affordances in Social Media](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022022412/58f1485b1a28abb96f8b45ff/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
Factor Analysis● Extraction Method: Principal
component analysis - rotation method: varimax
● Loaded across the MAIN factors individually
● Each factor was analyzed separately with unidimensional results
● Internal consistency decreases when analyzed across multiple factors
![Page 10: The MAIN Model for Technological Affordances in Social Media](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022022412/58f1485b1a28abb96f8b45ff/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
Correlation: Technological Affordance and Credibility
![Page 11: The MAIN Model for Technological Affordances in Social Media](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022022412/58f1485b1a28abb96f8b45ff/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
Regression
Modality ( ) Agency ( ) Interactivity( ) Navigability( )
.317 .178 .14
.237 .121 .202 .15
.165 .385 .141 .23
![Page 12: The MAIN Model for Technological Affordances in Social Media](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022022412/58f1485b1a28abb96f8b45ff/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
Limitations and Future Research● RQ1 and RQ1B were supported on a unidimensional basis (individual component of
MAIN) rather than a composite - multidimensional ● Agency and Interactivity might be hard constructs to evaluate and measure● Participants might not perceive some feature sets identified by MAIN
○ Sundar would argue that they are peripherally or centrally process regardless● RQ2a,b,c - MAIN Models Predictive Power?
○ Yes, agency played a role in predicting credibility across all platforms○ But not the way Sundar claims ○ Navigability and Interactivity played little role in predicting credibility
● Future Research: ○ Evaluate psychometric properties associated with Agency and Interactivity○ Determine if there are other elements that would help with a composite measure
outside of MAIN.
![Page 13: The MAIN Model for Technological Affordances in Social Media](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022022412/58f1485b1a28abb96f8b45ff/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
Process
![Page 14: The MAIN Model for Technological Affordances in Social Media](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022022412/58f1485b1a28abb96f8b45ff/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
Conclusion ● The technological affordance scale was internally consistent when analyzed
on a unidimensional basis● When analyzed in a multidimensional scale, the reliability and internal
consistency reduces● RQ2a, RQ2b and RQ2c were supported as Agency was found to have
significant predictive power for credibility across social media platforms, facebook, twitter and snapchat
● Future research:○ Psychometric improvements to technological affordance scale○ Evaluate alternative feature affordance properties not in MAIN
![Page 15: The MAIN Model for Technological Affordances in Social Media](https://reader031.fdocuments.us/reader031/viewer/2022022412/58f1485b1a28abb96f8b45ff/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
Thanks!