May O. LwinProfessor, Wee Kim Wee School of Communication and Information

Associate Dean, College of Humanities, Arts & Social SciencesSenior Fellow, Asian Consumer Insights Institute

Nanyang Technological University

Cyber Wellness & Singapore FamiliesResearch Recap & Agenda

Research Overview

• Parental mediation

• Parental Styles

• Co-use

• School & teachers

• Peers

Socialisation agents

• Cyber bullying

• Online harassment

• Internet addiction

• Game addiction

• Disclosure

• Exposure to restricted info

Risk

• Intergenerational bonding

• Family communication

• Reduced risk

Outcomes

What can parents do?

Parental Mediation/Styles

“Effort by parents to translate complexities of the physical/social environment and the mass media into terms that children can

understand”

Regulated Mediation

Also known as rule-making

Setting limits or prohibitions to media usage

Usually time based

• Been shown to reduce children’s online risks• Especially so for children with low

self-control

• Also reduces opportunities for learning online

Active Mediation

Also known as instructive mediation

Explanatory communication about online media and its content

Assumes that parents have knowledge about internet

Helps children interpret their

experiences online

Types of Parental Mediation Matrix

RestrictiveSelective

Laissez Faire

Active Mediation

LowHigh

Low

“You can do whatever you want”

No Internet on weekdays!

No Facebook until you are 16!

Spend only 10 minutes a day surfing the Internet

“Let’s talk about the things to watch out for when you are online”

“Also.. you should stop online work at 10 pm so you can get good rest”

Hig

h

Re

gu

late

d M

ed

iati

on

Promotive

“Be careful when talking to strangers online because…”

“If someone bullies you online, you should ...”

“Tell me more about your online experiences…”

Protecting children’s privacy online:How parental mediation strategies affect website

safeguard effectiveness

2.97

2.5

1.93

1.64

2.32

2

1.51 1.59

1.1

1.3

1.5

1.7

1.9

2.1

2.3

2.5

2.7

2.9

3.1

Laissez faire Restictive Promotive Selective

Safeguard absent Safeguard present

2.1

1.61

1.05

1.63

1.4

1.011

1.3

1.6

1.9

2.2

Laissez faire Restrictive Promotive

Chart 2. Willingness to disclose sensitive information (13-14 yrs)

Chart 1. Willingness to disclose sensitive information (10-12 yrs)

Protecting children’s privacy online:How parental mediation strategies affect website

safeguard effectiveness

1.74 1.7

1.3

2.05

2.46

1.36

1.1

1.3

1.5

1.7

1.9

2.1

2.3

2.5

2.7

2.9

3.1

Laissez faire Restictive Promotive

Safeguard absent Safeguard present

Chart 3. Willingness to disclose sensitive information (15-17 yrs)

Percentage of teenagers who reported that their parents, peers and teachers engaged in the following

activities with them:

37.4 36

48.1

38.5

23.8

34.9

25.220 21.2

31.5

74.4

63.1

36.1

48.2 47.5

10.6

27.4

10.6

0102030405060708090

100

Explain whysome websites

are good or bad

Suggest ways touse the Internet

safely

Talk to me aboutwhat kinds of

things should orshould not beshared online

Talk to me aboutwhat I would doif someone on

the Internet everbother me

Recommendgood websites

for me or peopleof my age

Help me whensomething is

difficult to do orfind on the

Internet

Parents Peers Teachers

Consequential Effects studied in Singapore context by research team

• Limiting Exposure

• Online Harassment (w Benjamin Li)

• Disclosure (w Veronica Liu, A/P Rebecca Ang)

• Cyber Addiction (w Edmund Lee, A/P Shirley Ho)

• Cyber Bullying (w Chen Liang, A/P Shirley Ho)

• Materialism (w Dr Wonsun Shin, Dr Dixon Ho)

Social Networking Site Use andMaterialistic Values among Youth:

The Safeguarding Role of the Parent‒Child Relationship and Self-regulation

Dixon HoNanyang Business School

May LwinWee Kim Wee School of Communication and Information

Wonsun ShinWee Kim Wee School of Communication and Information

Objectives

1. Does Social Network Site (SNS) use relate to young users’ materialism?

2. Does social (parental mediation),

3. and dispositional (self regulation) factors

… mitigate the adverse impact of SNS use?

Concept

• Cultivation theory suggests that heavy television viewers’ perceptions of social reality resemble dominant television portrayals and be biased upward (e.g., an inflated estimation of affluence and violence that resembles television portrayals) (Morgan & Shanahan, 2010).

• Frequent viewing of consumption-related content on SNSs would lead users to overestimate their peers’ level of spending and consumption (Chou & Edge, 2012).

Hypothesis (1)

H1: Consumption-oriented SNS use has a positive relationship with young users’ materialism (through the mediation of social perception)

Hypothesis (2)

• High-quality parent–child relationships entail open parent–child discussion of issues related to media, which in turn helps youth to develop critical thinking skills (Fujioka & Austin, 2003).

• Youth growing up with high-quality parent–child relationships are less likely to emphasise materialistic values over other values (Dittmar et al., 2014). Consequently, these individuals are less susceptible to the influence of media.

• We predict that parent–child relationship quality would buffer the impact of consumption-oriented SNS use on young users’ materialism.

Hypothesis (2)

H2: Parent–child relationship quality negatively moderates the relationship between consumption-oriented SNS use and materialism.

Hypothesis (3)

• Self-regulation competence could shield young from harmful effects of consumption-oriented SNS use (Bridgett et al., 2015). Highly self-regulated young avoid paying excessive attention to SNSs and control affective and emotional response to content (Baumeister & Heatherton, 1996).

• We predict that self-regulation competence buffers the impact of consumption-oriented SNS use on materialism:

• H3: Self-regulation competence negatively moderates the effects of consumption-oriented SNS use on materialism.

Data Collection

• Self-administrated surveys

• 903 students

• Age: 17 to 24 (M = 19.60, SD = 1.62)

• Male/Female 46/54%

Consumption-Oriented SNS Use

Use of SNS as a reflection of consumer culture

• Frequent exposure to such contentand/or imagery can affect attitudestowards material possessions andwealth

• Examples of consumption-orientedSNS use:

• Posting photos of purchases

• Commenting of peers’ posts

• Reading & forwarding marketing messages

Social Perception

Perception of peers’ spending

• SNS users’ frequent viewing of consumption-related content would lead to overestimation of peers’ level of spending and consumption, affecting their materialism

• Examples:

• My friends spend far more than I do.

• I find my peers buy new things very often.

Materialism

Importance ascribed to the ownership and acquisition of material goods in achieving

major life goals or desired states

• Vivid and polished visuals shared amongst SNS users provides salient frame of reference for social comparisons

• Potential negative impact on psychological health and well being

• Examples:

• I like a lot of luxury in my life.

• I admire people who own expensive houses, cars and clothes.

Self-Regulation

• Self-regulation associated with psychosocial functioning attributes:

• Planning ahead

• Consider alternatives before acting

• Linking behaviours to long term consequences

Ability to overcome impulses and adjust course action in pursuit of valuable personal goals

over time

Parent-Child Relationship Quality

Relationship and communication between parent and child

• Supports self acceptance

• Satisfaction of needs

• Secure family environment

Analysis

• SEM using EQS 6.1

– Control for measurement error and test direct and indirect (mediation) effect simultaneously

– Measurement model with all multi-item measures has good fit (NNFI = .90, CFI = .94, SRMR = .04, RMSEA = .04)

– All factor loadings for observable variables significant and > .40.

Structural Model 1

• NNFI = 0.90, CFI = 0.91, SRMR = 0.05, RMSEA = 0.06

• COS leads to Materialism but this effect could be accounted for by social perception

• H1 is supported

Consumption-oriented SNS use

Materialism

Socialcommunication

Non-socialcommunication

GenderSocio-economicstatus

Time spent on SNS

Time spent on media

.34*

• NNFI = 0.90, CFI = 0.91, SRMR = 0.05, RMSEA = 0.06

• Social perception fully mediates the relationship between consumption-oriented SNS use and materialism

• H1 is supported

Structural Model 2

Consumption-oriented SNS use

materialism

Socialcommunication

Non-socialcommunication

GenderSocio-economicstatus

Time spent on SNS

Time spent on media

Socialperception

.53* .27*

.02

.12* .10*

* P < .01

.02*

Multi-group analysis

• Multi-group analysis in SEM test H2

– Self-regulation negatively moderates the relationship between consumption-oriented SNS use and materialism

• Create three distinct groups of low, medium, and high self-regulation

• Compare path models between low and high group

• Results suggest that path estimate a is significantly different between the low and high group (Δχ2 = 2.79)

– low regulation a = .60, high regulation a = 0.46

– Consumption-oriented SNS use has a weaker effect on materialism when self-regulation is at high levels

Multi-group analysis

• Multi-group analysis in SEM test H3

– Parent-child relationship quality moderates the relationship between consumption-oriented SNS use and materialism

• Create three distinct groups of low, medium, and high relationship quality

• Compare path models between low and high group

• Results suggest that path estimate a is significantly different between the low and high group

– low quality a = .52, high quality: a = .44

– Consumption-oriented SNS use has a weaker effect on materialism when parent relationship quality is high

Implications

• Consumption-oriented SNS use leads to materialism has implications both practical (in terms of guiding the young) and academic (direct effect that has potential for other facets of character development)

• Both social and dispositional factors mitigatethe adverse impact of SNS use, which suggests:(next slide)

Policy Implications

• Regulations

– Ad regulations to balance content?

• Education

– Develop programmes to help parents garner nurturing family relationships

– Cultivate and empower children to self regulate

• External agencies can encourage parents to develop “higher-quality” relationships with children

Limitations & Future Research

• Cross-sectional study

– Include typology of parenting

– Longitudinal studies are encouraged

• Issue of Generalizability

– Data collected in Singapore

– Cross-cultural studies should be considered in the future and for wider groups of population

• Role of teachers and educators?

THANKYOU