Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

E-impression dimensions

A multi-phase research on the development of parsimonious measurements for online impression within blog domains

  • Published:
Multimedia Tools and Applications Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

As cyberspace becomes a social space, users are increasingly more interested in how they are presented to others online. Nevertheless, the concept of online impressions has not been defined or empirically verified clearly. The main purpose of the study is to empirically verify a set of measurements for e-impressions, which is defined as impressions formed through interpersonal online interactions in blogs. The measurement should be parsimonious in order to be used efficiently by academics and practitioners. In order to achieve the research goal, three consecutive studies were conducted. In the first study, a large-scale online survey was conducted with 8,836 participants to explore important dimensions of e-impressions from a blog visitor’s point of view. In the second study, in-depth interviews with 52 blog authors were conducted to reorganize the dimensions into a parsimonious set of meta-dimensions from a blog author’s view. Finally, in the third study, a confirmatory factor analysis was conducted through a paper-based survey to verify the meta-dimensions of e-impressions. As the final result, four meta-dimensions of e-impressions consisting of fifteen adjectives were identified, and their validity and reliability were verified. This result will be the basis of developing the system of social network services.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Aaker J (1997) Dimensions of brand personality. J Mark Res 34(3):347–356

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Ambe M, Kamada M, Ono M, Shibata T (2005) A study of the impact of a simple stimulus on a receiver’s imagination in mediated communication. Cyberpsychol Behav 8(5):401–415

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Antheunis ML, Schouten AP (2011) The effects of other–generated and system–generated cues on adolescents’ perceived attractiveness on social network sites. JComput–Mediated Comm 16(3):391–406. doi:10.1111/j.1083-6101.2011.01545

    Google Scholar 

  4. Asch SE (1946) Forming impressions of personality. J Abnorm Soc Psychol 41(3):258–290. doi:10.1037/h0055756

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Barash V, Ducheneaut N, Isaacs E, Bellotti V (2010) Faceplant: Impression (mis)management in Facebook status updates. Proceeding of 4th International AAAI Conference on Weblogs and Social Media, Atlanta, GA, May 23–26, 2010, pp. 207–210

  6. Bargh JA, McKenna K, Fitzsimons GM (2002) Can you see the real me? Activation and expression of the “true self” on the Internet. J Soc Issues 58(1):33–48. doi:10.1111/1540-4560.00247

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Brunswick E (1956) Perception and the representative design of psychological experiments, 2nd edn. Wiley, New York

    Google Scholar 

  8. Choi YK, Ahn CY (1993) The study of development and validation of adjective scales to assess the personality. J Korea Psychol 12(2):161–178

    Google Scholar 

  9. Connolly T, Jessup LM, Valacich JS (1990) Effects of anonymity and evaluative tone on idea generation in computer-mediated groups. Manag Sci 36(6):689–703

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Costa PT Jr, McCrae RR (1992) Revised NEO Personality Inventory (NEO-PI-R) and NEO Five-Factor Inventory (NEO-FFI) professional manual, 1st edn. Psychological Assessment Resources, Odessa

    Google Scholar 

  11. Ellison N, Heino R, Gibbs J (2006) Managing impressions online: self-presentation processes in the online dating environment. J Comput-Mediat Commun 11(2):415–441. doi:10.1111/j.1083-6101.2006.00020

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Fornell C, Larcker DF (1981) Evaluating structural equation models with unobservable variables and measurement error. J Mark Res 18:39–50

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Glaser BG, Strauss AL (1967) The discovery of grounded theory: strategies for qualitative research. Aldine Transaction, New Brunswick

    Google Scholar 

  14. Goffman E (1959) The presentation of self in everyday life. Doubleday and Co, New York

    Google Scholar 

  15. Gosling SD, Gaddis S, Vazire S (2007) Personality impressions based on Facebook profiles. Proceeding of International Conference on Weblogs and Social Media, Boulder, Colorado, March 26–28, pp. 1–4

  16. Hahn DW (1993) Perceived dimensions of personality traits. J Kor Psychol: Soc Pers 7(1):198–211

    Google Scholar 

  17. Hair JF, Anderson RE, Tatham RL, Black WC (1995) Multivariate data analysis, 4th edn. Prentice-Hall, NJ

    Google Scholar 

  18. Hancock JT, Dunham PJ (2001) Impression formation in computer mediated communication revisited: an analysis of the breadth and intensity of impressions. Commun Res 28(3):325–347. doi:10.1177/009365001028003004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Herring SC, Scheidt LA, Bonus S, Wright E (2004) Bridging the gap: a genre analysis of weblogs. Proceeding of 37th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Hawaii, January 5–8, pp.101–111

  20. Higgins ET (1987) Self-discrepancy: a theory relating self and affect. Psychol Rev 94(3):319–340. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.94.3.319

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Hiltz SR, Turoff M, Johnson K (1989) Experiments in group decision making, 3: Disinhibition, deindividuation, and group process in pen name and real name computer conferences. Decis Support Syst 5(2):217–232. doi:10.1016/0167-9236(89)90008-0

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. John OP (1990) The big five factor taxonomy: dimensions of personality in the natural language and in questionnaires. In: Pervin LA, John OP (eds) Handbook of personality: theory and research, 1st edn. Guilford, New York, pp 66–100

    Google Scholar 

  23. Kelley HH (1950) The warm-cold variable in first impressions of persons. J Personal 18(4):431–439. doi:10.1111/j.1467-6494.1950.tb01260

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  24. Kim UK (2000) Impact factors of brand personality. J Advert Stud 49:29–53

    Google Scholar 

  25. Kim KS, Chung SW (2000) An exploration of measuring corporate personality. Kor J Consum Advert Psychol 1(1):103–121

    Google Scholar 

  26. Kim J, Lee J, Choi D (2003) Designing emotionally evocative homepages: an empirical study of the quantitative relations between design factors and emotional dimensions. Int J Hum Comput Stud 59(6):899–940

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Lea M, Spears R (1992) Paralanguage and social perception in computer-mediated communication. J Organ Comput Electron Commer 2(3):321–341. doi:10.1080/10919399209540190

    Google Scholar 

  28. Liu Y, Ginther D, Zelhart P (2001) How do frequency and duration of messaging affect impression development in computer-mediated communication? J Univers Comput Sci 7(10):893–913. doi:10.3217/jucs-007-10-0893

    Google Scholar 

  29. McCrae RR, Costa RT (1989) The structure of interpersonal traits: Wiggins’s circumplex and five-factor model. J Personal Soc Psychol 56(4):586–595. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.56.4.586

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. McCrae RR, Costa RT (1997) Personality trait structure as a human universal. Am Psychol 52(5):509–516. doi:10.1037/0003-066X.52.5.509

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. McKenna KYA, Bargh JA (2000) Plan 9 from cyberspace: the implications of the Internet for personality and social psychology. Pers Soc Psychol Rev 4(1):57–75. doi:10.1207/S15327957PSPR0401_6

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. McNeill L (2005) Genre under construction: the diary on the Internet. Language@Internet 2 (Retrieved April 16. 2011, http://www.languageatinternet.de/articles/2005/120)

  33. Mehdizadeh S (2010) Self-presentation 2.0: narcissism and self-esteem on Facebook. Cyberpsychol Behav Soc Netw 13(4):357–364. doi:10.1089/cyber.2009.0257

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Miura A, Yamashita K (2007) Psychological and social influences on blog writing: an online survey of blog authors in Japan. J Comput-Mediat Commun 12:1452–1471

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Nardi BA, Schiano DJ, Gumbrecht, M (2004) Blogging by the rest of us. Proceeding of Computer-Human Interaction 2004 extended abstracts on Human factors in computing systems, Vienna, Austria, April 24–29, 2004, pp.1143–1146. doi:10.1145/985921.986009

  36. Nardi, BA, Schiano DJ, Gumbrecht M (2004) Blogging as social activity, or would you let 900 million people read your diary? CSCW’04 Proceedings of the 2004 ACM conference on Computer supported cooperative work, Chicago, IL, November 06–10, 2004, pp. 222–231. doi:10.1145/1031607.1031643

  37. Nardi BA, Schiano DJ, Gumbrecht M, Swartz L (2004) Why we blog. Commun ACM 47(12):41–46. doi:10.1145/1035134.1035163

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Norman WT (1963) Toward an adequate taxonomy of personality attributes: replicated factor structure in peer nomination personality ratings. J Abnorm Soc Psychol 66(6):574–583. doi:10.1037/h0040291

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Osgood CE, Suci GJ, Tannenbaum PH (1957) The measurement of meaning. University of Illinois Press, Chicago

    Google Scholar 

  40. Papacharissi Z (2002) The presentation of self in virtual life: characteristics of personal home pages. Journalism Mass Comm Q 79(3):643–660

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Parks MR, Floyd K (1996) Making friends in cyberspace. J Commun 46(3):80–97. doi:10.1111/j.1083-6101.1996.tb00176

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Peabody D (1967) Trait inferences: evaluative and descriptive aspects. J Pers Soc Psychol Monogr 7(4):1–18. doi:10.1037/h0025230

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Qin L, Kim Y, Hsu J, Tan X (2011) The effects of social influence on user acceptance of online social networks. Int J Hum Comput Interact 27(9):885–899. doi:10.1080/10447318.2011.555311

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Rice RE, Love G (1987) Electronic emotion: socioemotional content in a computer mediated network. Commun Res 14(1):85–108. doi:10.1177/009365087014001005

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Rosencranz HA, McNevin TE (1969) A factor analysis of attitudes toward the aged. Gerontologist 9(1):55–59

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Schau HJ, Gilly MC (2003) We are what we post? Self-presentation in personal web space. J Consum Res 30(3):385–404

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Sherman RC, End C, Kraan E, Cole A, Campbell J et al (2001) Metaperception in cyberspace. Cyberpsychol Behav 4(1):123–129. doi:10.1089/10949310151088497

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Sproull LS, Kiesler S (1986) Reducing social context cues: electronic mail in organizational communications. Manag Sci 32(11):1492–1512

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Strauss A, Corbin J (1998) Basics of qualitative research: techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory, 1st edn. Sage, CA

    Google Scholar 

  50. Sutcliffe AG, Gonzalez V, Binder J, Nevarez G (2011) Social mediating technologies: social affordances and functionalities. Int J Hum Comput Interact 27(11):1037–1065. doi:10.1080/10447318.2011.555318

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Switzer JS (2008) Impression formation in computer-mediated communication and making a good (virtual) impression. In: Zemliansky P, Amant KS (eds) Handbook of research on virtual workplaces and the new nature of business practices. Hershey, New York, pp 98–109

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  52. Tanis M, Postmes T (2003) Social cues and impression formation in CMC. J Commun 53(4):676–693

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Tong ST, Van Der Heide B, Langwell L, Walther JB (2008) Too much of a good thing? The relationship between number of friends and interpersonal impressions on Facebook. J Comput-Mediat Commun 13(3):531–549. doi:10.1111/j.1083-6101.2008.00409

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Walther JB (1992) Interpersonal effects in computer-mediated interaction: a relational perspective. Commun Res 19(1):52–90. doi:10.1177/009365092019001003

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Walther JB (1993) Impression development in computer-mediated interaction. West J Commun 57(4):381–398

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Walther JB, Carr CT, Choi SW, DeAndrea DC et al (2011) Interaction of interpersonal, peer, and media influence sources online: a research agenda for technology convergence. In: Papacharissi Z (ed) A networked self: identity, community and culture on social network sites. Routledge, New York, pp 17–38

    Google Scholar 

  57. Walther JB, Van Der Heide B, Hamel L et al (2009) Self-generated versus other-generated statements and impressions in computer-mediated communication: a test of warranting theory using Facebook. Commun Res 36(2):229–253. doi:10.1177/0093650208330251

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Yang Y, Cho BH (2002) The study of Korean brand personality scale development and validation. J Korea Psychol: Consum Advert 3(2):25–53

    Google Scholar 

  59. Yee N, Bailenson JN, Ducheneaut N (2009) The Proteus effect: implications of transformed digital self-representation on online and offline behavior. Commun Res 36(2):285–312. doi:10.1177/0093650208330254

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. Zwier S, Araujo T, Boukes M, Willemsen L (2011) Boundaries to the articulation of possible selves through social networking sites: the case of Facebook profilers’ social connectedness. Cyberpsychol Behav Soc Netw 14(10):571–576. doi:10.1089/cyber.2010.0612

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by Special Research Grant from Seoul Women’s University (2012).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Human Computer Interaction Lab, Yonsei University, Seoul, South Korea

    Jinwoo Kim

  2. School of Business Administration, Pusan National University, Pusan, South Korea

    Yoojung Choi

  3. Department of Contents Design, Seoul Women’s University, Seoul, South Korea

    Su-E Park

  4. College of Information & Communication, Seoul Women’s University, 126, Gonreung-Dong, Nowon-Gu, Seoul, 120-749, South Korea

    Su-E Park

Authors
  1. Jinwoo Kim
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Yoojung Choi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Su-E Park
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Su-E Park.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Kim, J., Choi, Y. & Park, SE. E-impression dimensions. Multimed Tools Appl 68, 281–296 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11042-012-1063-7

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11042-012-1063-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation