ROLE OF CULTURE IN SELF REPRESENTATION ON FACEBOOK

Valerie KOTOVA, Nadezhda UNESIKHINA and Dorin TOMA1

Institute of Information Systems, Humboldt-University of Berlin IT Security and Privacy Seminar, WS 2011/2012

Abstract. In the era of expanding SNS popularity, self-presentation finds new ways of development. Online self-presentation, reflecting the modern tendencies, has much to do with traditional presenting of self, still possessing some distinct features, which are a rich soil for social and psychological researches. One of the basic elements determining the image of online self is the cultural background. The current study investigates visual components of online self-representation, across 3 different countries USA, Germany and Russia. The core of the sample consists of students, as they are the part of modern society the most integrated into online life. The results indicate that country trends and style of education make people behave according to certain patterns. The findings of the present study demonstrate a partial correlation with earlier models. However, some of the findings can be considered as innovative. Keywords: Profile pictures, self-representation, Facebook

1. Introduction
Just 25 years ago society didn't have a clue what internet is and what possibilities it can provide. Since that time the world has faced a rapid process of internet explosion onto the computers worldwide whose results we observe nowadays the daily routine from mailing and shopping to conducting businesses has been revolutionized forever. Recent years are noticeable for introducing the brand new principles of computer-mediated communication (CMC) which enabled social network sites (SNS) to grow significantly serving as all-in-one platforms for the activities, previously diluted among several services and websites and now brought together. Decreasing popularity of e-mailing along with rocketing number of SNS users allows to assume that modern society prefers multimodal design of communication available due to social networks diffusion.
1

valeriekotova@gmail.com, nunesikhina@gmail.com, darren.toma@gmail.com

Facebook is known to be one of the most wide-spread SNS nowadays. Being rated as the second most popular website in the internet2, it was originally designed to provide space to users for creating, storing and accumulating of information about themselves along with developing friends network in frames of the site. An important feature of Facebook as an SNS is possibility for online self-presentation which could serve as an arena for social scientists researches. Self- presentation can be seen as a combination of verbal and nonverbal messages provided by user to build an image of self in the digital space. Basically users implement some strategies to substitute face-to-face interaction by online self-presentation. The result of such strategies depends to a considerable degree on cultural background of the user. According to previous researches in psychological sciences people do not understand who they are in a universal manner, out of the cultural context. The self is basically constructed through the system of social and cultural factors thus it is essential to investigate how culture influences self-perception and presentation. The photographs displayed in the personal pages are considered as one of the basic elements of self-presentation being a visual reflection of social values and intentions of a user. In this paper, we focus on analysis of the cross-cultural differences in visual self-presentation through the analysis of SNS users profile pictures, as the latest are considered to be one of the most noticeable part of the personal page. Thus in frames of the research comparison of visual self-presentation strategies between US, German and Russian students will be provided. Significance of the study is based on Facebooks growing popularity which has created a rich soil for extensive sociological and psychological research. The study can provide an insight in self-presentation aspects and its online features, employing the elements of impression management which is essential in development of online profiles. Taking into consideration no users of after-graduate and school age, the paper is supposed to cover the basic target audience of the SNS students, not only because they use SNS more often then other users categories, but also because SNS are more fully integrated into their lives. However the study is not concerned with only student culture, it employs investigation of its intersection with technology, cross-country culture and impression management. The results of the study can contribute to better understanding of the theories concerning development of identity, communication in frames of new technologies and online behavior. Moreover the findings of the research can be considered as original an innovative, since the investigation deals with comparison between Russian, German an US users, never accomplished before.
2

http://www.alexa.com/topsites

The research consists of three parts first, theoretical background is provided for the terms and methodologies employed; then, the investigated and developed research methods and techniques are applied to the derived cross-cultural sample (USA, Germany and Russia). The last part is represented by explanation of intuition behind the received results. 1.1 Theoretical background Self-presentation is the process by which people convey to others that they are a certain kind of person or possess certain characteristics3. In the process of self-presentation people usually try to influence the perception of their image. This term can be seen as a synonym to impression management goal-directed conscious or unconscious process in which people attempt to influence the perceptions of other people about a person, object or event; they do so by regulating and controlling information in social interaction4. Self-presentation executes several social functions forming and maintaining relationships5, it plays role in identity development and integrating it in self-concepts6, it also affects self-esteem and well-being and serves as basement to relationships development7. Self-construal is the term employed to explain the logics behind the decision making when choosing the ways of self-representing and to classify the patterns. The self-construal is a constellation of thoughts, feelings, and actions, concerning ones relationship with others, and the self as distinct from others8. It also affects what people believe about the relationship between the self and others, and especially the degree to which they see themselves separated from others or as connected with others9. Two types of self-construal can be defined independent and interdependent. Independent self-construal implies that an individual positions him/herself as a unique entity by reference to ones own internal repertoire of thoughts, feelings, and action, rather than by reference to the thoughts, feelings, and actions of others10. Independent self-construal is
3 Leary M.R., Tchividijian L.R., and Kraxberger B.E. Self-presentation can be hazardous to your health: Impression management and health risk. Health Psychology 4 Piwinger & Ebert, 2001 5 Rubin & Shenker, 1978 6 Schlenker, 1986 7 Derlega et al., 1993 8 Singelis, 1994 9 Markus, Kitayama, 1991 10 Markus, Kitayama, 1991

negatively linked to use of indirect messages, is positively linked to preciseness, openness and expression of feelings to define and structure the self and is associated with greater self-reliance, low concern for in-groups and greater distance from in-groups11. Interdependent self-construal means that an individual presents himself as interrelated entity and exposes his/her behavior as determined, contingent on, and, to a large extent organized by what the actor perceives to be the thoughts, feelings, and actions of others in the relationship12. It is negatively linked to positive attitudes toward silence, positively linked to greater sensitivity toward others feelings, emphasizes the needs and goals of the in-group over those of the self, encourages cooperation among in-group members and fosters strong emotional affinity with the ingroup13. Self-construal of an individual depends to a considerable degree on his/her cultural background, so that it is essential to examine significant differences in self-construals of different cultures. Western societies are usually referred to as independent societies, while Eastern ones mainly possess characteristics of interdependency. An interesting and relevant research in the area of cross-cultural differences was accomplished by Hofstede in 1980 in the paper Culture's consequences: International differences in work-related values. In his paper Hofstede develops 5 dimensions of cultural variability: Individualism/Collectivism, Power Distance, Masculinity/Femininity, Uncertainty Avoidance, Long-term Orientation. Individualism / collectivism: Describes the degree to which culture relies on or has loyalty to the self or the group. The main factors determining the degree of individualism/collectivism are: Economic development (rich cultures are likely to be more individualistic and the opposite is true); Climate (cold-climate cultures have higher individualistic values). Hofstede has revealed a strong negative correlation between individualism/collectivism values and values of power distance indices. Thus the cultures with high power distance values are more collectivistic and group-oriented and the cultures with low power distance values are more individualistic.

11 Gudykunst et al., 1996 12 Markus, Kitayama, 1991 13 Gudykunst et al., 1996

Power distance This measure reflects the peoples beliefs about the degree to which the inequality of power allocation and the decisions of those who possess the power should be accepted by members of society (frictionless or challenged). Thus, the members of high power distance communities are likely to feel much more comfortable with unequally distributed power and large status differences than those from low power distance cultures. The factors determining the power distance values: Climate (cultures located in high-latitude climate (cold/moderate climate) are likely to have low values of power distance, tropical climate is typically associated with high power distance values); Population (larger population usually underlies greater power distance values); Distribution of wealth (positive correlation between wealth and power allocation). The consequences of high or low power distance can be detected in family customs, relations between young and elderly, organizational practices and language systems. Feminity/masculinity (alternatively achievement-nurturance) This measure mainly reflects the expected gender roles in culture basing on such indicators like assertiveness, achievement, acquisition of wealth, caring of others, quality of life, social support. According to Hofstede, cultures with high masculinity are more associated with male behavior and have very distinct understanding of male and female roles in society. Low masculinity cultures believe more in life-quality values such as helping others, sympathy and empathy, they also prefer equality between male and female and more ambiguity associated with gender roles. Determining factors: climate (cultures with high masculinity are usually found in warmer climate closer to the equator, and the opposite true concerning low masculinity cultures) Uncertainty avoidance It refers to the estimation of cultures acceptance of uncertain and ambiguous situations and preference of structuring. Cultures with high levels of uncertainty avoidance prefer rules and structures, while cultures with low levels of uncertainty avoidance feel comfortable taking risks and facing the unknown. Factors determining: no clear predictors of the level, but generally high uncertainty avoidance cultures are those in the beginning of their way to modernization, while those who have already reached some certain level of development and are more stable are thought to have low uncertainty avoidance values.

Long-term orientation (alternatively - Confucian dynamism) Cultures with higher long term orientation values pay more attention to the future. They encourage pragmatic values oriented towards future gains such as saving, ability for adaptation and persistence. In short term oriented cultures profits of present are valued higher, and societies are oriented towards traditions, steadiness, and social obligations. The five dimensions were analyzed through a sample of 53 countries and the indices for each country were developed normalized to values 0 to 100. The dimensions developed and estimated for the countries considered in the present research are as follows: Table 1.1: Hofstedes Five Dimensions (values) USA Germany Individualism/collectivism 40 90 Power distance 40 35 Masculinity/feminity 62 66 Uncertainty avoidance 46 65 Long-term orientation 29 31 Russia 35 90 37 70 NA

In the era of globalization the findings of the model are a great tool for general cross-cultural understanding, they help to know how to behave with people from different countries, what to expect from them. Concerning the present study the derived dimensions help to understand the facets of selfperception of individuals from different cultures, thus providing the basement for analysis and comparison of self-presentation strategies. The mentioned above issues also reveal numerous possibilities to apply the intercultural theory to analyzing of the differences in online self-presenting. Online self-presentation has much to do with the general principles of offline self-presentation and impression management, but at the same time it has some distinct differences ruling peoples digital behavior and being an interesting phenomenon to study. Online communication provides opportunities for self-presentation possessing some certain attributes like reduced nonverbal cues, pace of interaction and control over time, which can definitely influence the process of self-disclosure. At the top of this relative online anonymity allows users to manipulate their images and identities in a more free way, ignoring some status boundaries and prejudices. To have a closer look at the process of self-disclosure in frames of the analyzed SNS, Facebook, the standard visualization of a users page is provided.

Figure 1.1: Facebook personal page The profile page generally contains self-description of a user (e.g. demographics), lists of his various interests and friends and a profile picture. One can see, that profile picture visually dominates the contents of a page and is the first element that a viewer catches when opening the page (the picture is placed in the upper-left corner so that accordingly to reading rules it is the starting point of page scrutinizing). Taking this into account it becomes obvious that profile picture reflects quite wide range of user's characteristics mood, intentions, feelings, values etc, that is why analyzing the patterns of choosing the picture for the starting page becomes interesting and challenging. A deep research of visual online self-presentation was accomplished in 1999 by C.M. Kane in the paper Ill see you on Myspace: selfpresentation in a social network website the author built a broad classification system for images analyses. The system included categories describing the pictures in terms of location/ number of people in the picture/ photo effects/ camera angle/ context/ eye behavior/ mouth behavior/ head tilt/ hands position/ body position/ group interactions. The goal of the research was to figure out whether self-presentation strategies are consistent with the strategies of offline presentation offered by E. Jones in his paper Interpersonal perception, 1990. The strategies identified by Jones were: ingratiation, competence (self-promotion), intimidation, supplication and exemplification. Overall, ingratiation and competence have been found to be the most commonly used strategies14. One of the purposes of Kanes study was to determine if Jones self-presentation strategies were applicable in the
14 Jones, 1990

context of a social network website. Accordingly to the results of the research, ingratiation and competence were the strategies mostly applicable by users. Scores of intimidation indicators were lower, but still appeared frequently in MySpace profiles. Supplication turned out to be least common self-presentation strategy. A more deep insight into online self-presentation with respect to cultural issue was held by Kim & Papacharissi (2003) they investigated how cultural differences are displayed online, especially in terms of previously mentioned independent and interdependent self-construals. The authors analyzed these concepts through samples of Yahoo! profiles of American and Korean users. The study revealed that digital characters were influenced by cultural differences in creating and developing online identities by means of home pages, including their visual element. Thus, Korean users exposed more of independent self-construal with all features associated, while US users exhibited more interdependent online behavior when building selves. The same specifics were revealed in research by Zhao & Jiang (2011) in their study devoted to comparative analysis in online visual self-presentation between US and Chinese users. The achieved results confirmed US users tendency to expose individualistic and independent characteristics against interdependent ones of Chinese users. In this research we are going to develop our own research model to take into account the differences between Russian, German and US cultures.

2. Sample
Various researches analyzing the SNS users behavior show that pictures and, especially, photos are an important part of self-presentation in SNS nowadays15. Self-presentation in SNS can be studied through the analysis and classification of profile pictures of its users. In order to catch the recent developments and cross-cultural differences the sample of 1500 profile pictures was derived. It is represented by respondents from three countries: Germany, Russian Federation and USA. Primarily the sample is represented by 500 students from randomly chosen 20 universities from each region (Table 2.1). The data was collected from Facebook SNS for German and American respondents and from Vkontakte SNS for Russians. The choice of SNSs for our research was based on recent statistics according to which Facebook is one of the most popular SNS among users from Germany and USA, however, there are 18 times more active SNS users on Vkontakte

15

Chen Zhao, Gonglue Jiang, Cultural Differences on Visual Self-Presentation through Social Networking Site Profile Images, Proceedings of the 2011 annual conference on Human factors in computing systems, 2011

platform comparing to Facebook from Russia 77 million16 versus 4,2 million17. Table 2.1: Random list of universities Germany Russian Federation University of Gorno-Altaisk State Bielefeld University University of Tula State University Freiburg University of Ural Academy of Public Giessen Administration University of Ural Gorkij State Halle-Wittenberg University University of Gttingen University of Tbingen Free University of Berlin University of Mnster University of Osnabrck Volgograd State University Perm State Pharmaceutical Academy Astrakhan State University Taganrog State Pedagogical Institute Moscow State University of Geodesy and Cartography Tyumen State University of Gas and Oil Tomsk Polytechnical University St. Petersburg State University of Economics and Finance Murmansk State Technical University Moscow State USA Modesto Junior College Frostburg State University Edgewood College Forest Institute of Professional Psychology Ramapo College Hampton University

1 2 3 4

5 6

7 8 9

Ursinus College Curry College Warner Pacific College

10 University of Karlsruhe 11 University of Hamburg 12 University of Flensburg 13 University of Magdeburg 14 Humboldt

16 17

Hillsdale College Westminster College, New Wilmington Pennsylvania Ball State University

College of the Redwoods Allegheny College

Vkontakte official company statistics, http://vk.com/help.php?page=about Facebook Statistics by country, Socialbakers, 2011 http://www.socialbakers.com/facebookstatistics

University of Berlin 15 University of Mainz 16 University of Marburg 17 University of Lbeck 18 University of Frankfurt am Main 19 University of Bayreuth 20 University of Bonn

University of Forestry Engineering Perm State Academy of Agriculture Yaroslavl State Pedagogical University National Research University Higher School of Economics Altai State Medical University Moscow State Automobile and Road Technical University St. Petersburg State University of Technology and Design

University of Illinois at Springfield Claremont Graduate University Seattle Pacific University Westfield State College Hastings College

Eureka College

3. Codification
In order to analyze the aspects of self-presentation of SNS users the classification of profile picture was derived after a substantial research on main tendencies and themes among selected pictures. The general information about a particular page owner was also collected, such as age, gender, number of friends and identification or name. That information was partially transformed for further analysis purposes: 1) Age 2) Gender Scale: Male = 1 Female = 2 3) Name Scale: The first and last name =1 (e.g., Alexander Jeng) Only the first name=2 ( e.g. Marcus) The nickname=3 ( e.g. Princess, Superhero) Unclear=4 (related to a situation when there is no opportunity to access whether the name is real) 4) Number of friends

The final codification structure includes 14 categories; each one was evaluated according to specially developed scale: 1) Human presence the category defines if there is a human on the picture or other object and also related to the number of people represented in the picture. Scale: Single person = 1 2 persons = 2 More than 3 persons = 3 Avatar = 4 (graphic or computer-made image, celebrities, etc.) 2) Couple / affective relationship the category allows sorting out the subgroup reflecting the notion behind the profile picture of showing of the important person in the users lives. Yes=1/ No=0 3) Children the sample was divided into two groups. The first one is represented by profile pictures with children on it and vice versa. Yes=1/ No=0 4) Travel the profile pictures were coded into two types: 1 if there are clear signs of tourism such as popular sightseeing locations, sport-related traveling, photos in airports or planes etc.; 2 otherwise. Scale: Yes=1/ No=0 5) Sport the sample was divided into two groups: 1 if a profile picture reflects engagement with sport activities through various signs, such as sport-style clothes and presence of sport attributes; 2 otherwise Yes=1/ No=0 6) Joyfulness emotions are very important for study of selfpresentation as they can help to understand human behavior in different aspects. The sample was analyzed through coding into two categories: 1- if a person on a picture is having fun, smiles, celebrates, partying, etc.; 2 otherwise. Yes=1 / No=0 7) Sexuality the selected pictures were divided into two groups: 1 if picture reflects the erotic nature of poses or showing off

Scale: Females: Naked / erotically shown body parts: focus on bottom, the whole back, breast, trained belly, body parts in bikini or underwear, sexy pose Erotic relations: holding hands, kissing, embracing between lovers, dating, romance, intense sensuality, feeling sexual, erotic behavior, lust, earthiness, indecency, attractiveness of clearly sexual nature. For both males and females. Males: show-off of muscles 2 - otherwise. Yes=1/ No=0 8) Symbols different types of hidden messages can be found in profile pictures, for example, people want to show off their wealth, power or success. The sample was separated into two types: 1 represents pictures with Cars, expensive motorcycles, laptops, mobile phones, iPod, iPad, impressive house, impressive surroundings, expensive furniture and luxurious personal belongings, credit card, expensive brands, etc. Cigarettes / Smoking References to school, university, fraternity, sorority (e.g. Harvard Grad School 2011 or ). 2 otherwise. Yes=1/ No=0 9) Sunglasses in some cultures, for example in Russian, this item can be a special sign which is used by people to show off in a very special way. Scale: Yes=1/ No=0 10) Events the derived sample can clearly be analyzed from the events point of view. There are several groups of events that are represented, such as weddings, graduations, parties, special celebrations, for example Christmas. Party / Celebration / Public Event =1 Wedding =2 Graduation=3 Otherwise=0

11) Clothing that category reflects the nonverbal side of selfpresentation18. The sample was divided into several groups according to profile owners clothes style. Casual =1 (e.g. t-shirt, normal clothing, every day clothing) Dressed-Up / Formal =2 (e.g. fancy dress, jewelry, a tie, a suit, etc, dressed for some special occasion) Bikini / Naked = 3 Sport = 4 (e.g. sport team clothes or training clothes) Other = 0 (e.g. just face, no person, style is difficult to identify) 12) Location the profile pictures were coded by the place where they were taken, therefore either indoors or outdoors. Indoors=1 Outdoors=2 Unclear =0 13) Focus - the main message of any picture is hidden in its main part that is why it is considered important to analyze whether the profile pictures are focused on a person or surrounding area mostly. Focus on the face(s) / person(s) =1 o Face(s) of the person(s) is (are) dominant in the picture, and it represents approximately 50-70% of picture or more. o Surrounding is not emphasized, e.g. photo against white wall or some inconspicuous background. o The photo is made in a way that focus is immediately placed on people, not surroundings. Focus on the face and surrounding area both =2 o Half-Self / Half-surroundings. o When it is unclear on what exactly the focus is. Focus on surroundings=3 o The person is very small o Surroundings attract the majority of attention. o One can immediately see where a person is (entertaining park, seaside or tourist place, etc.) Otherwise= 0 14) Biometry - the primarily goal of any SNS is to give an opportunity to their users to communicate and share the information with each other. However, sharing does not imply the open and clear profile image, as many SNS users prefer to put unrecognizable pictures on their pages.
18

Brian Fitch, Selection Interviews: Understanding the Psychology of First Impressions, The Police Chief, vol. LXXVII, no. 4, April 2010

Face is not fully recognizable/non-identifiable = 1 Face is clearly recognizable/ identifiable = 0

4. Statistics and Results

The average profile picture in the sample belongs to a female, her profile has the real name and she has 539 friends. Generally, there are 2 smiling persons dressed casually without sunglasses, standing outside on the profile picture and the second person is not represented by child or her partner. The quality of the picture is enough to define if it represents the profile owner. The picture focus is concentrated on the persons themselves. The photo does not show people doing sports or travelling on average. The profile image does not represent on average any erotic context; it also does not represent any symbols of wealth or power. In general it cannot be reflected if the picture belongs to any event, such as wedding or graduation. Table 4.1: Descriptive Statistics Minimum Maximum Gender Name Human presence Couple Children Biometry Clothing Location Picture Focus Travel Sport Joy Sex Symbols Sunglasses Event Friends 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 2 5 5 1 1 1 4 3 3 1 2 1 1 1 1 3 3986 Mean 1,51 1,18 1,66 0,10 0,02 0,67 1,17 1,54 1,33 0,14 0,06 0,55 0,13 0,11 0,07 0,08 538,59 Std. Deviation 0,50 0,67 1,06 0,29 0,15 0,47 0,74 0,70 0,63 0,35 0,24 0,50 0,34 0,31 0,25 0,34 448,91

The Pearson Chi-squared test was conducted to examine and analyze the relationships between categorical variables which were derived in the process

of codification of the sample. That test allows measuring the association between the row and column categories through the decomposition of the value of the 2-test statistic19. In order to conduct this technique the SPSS 18 software was used. First, the cross-country analysis was conducted in order to reflect the cultural differences. There were two hypothesizes were developed for further implication of independence test: H0: there is no statistically significant relationship between two categories examined H1: there is statistically significant relationship between two categories examined The following tables represent the main results of the Pearson Chi-squared test implication on the sample analyzed. Table 4.2: Results Germany Pearson Chi-squared Age*Children Age*Sport Friends*Children Friends*Sport Gender*Joy Gender*Symbols Gender*Biometry Name*Couple Name*Children Name * Human presence Name*Symbols Friends*Event Age*Event Age*Sex Age*Sunglasses Age*Symbols Gender*Sport 0,0000 0,0000 365,0000 656,2200 27,3980 11,5060 8,7720 13,9090 12,4620 25,6190 9,0870 595,5810 13,0000 13,0000 13,0000 13,0000 4,6480 Significance (p-test) 0,0000* 0,0000* 0,0000* 0,0000* 0,0000* 0,0010* 0,0030* 0,0030* 0,0060* 0,0120** 0,0280** 0,0290** 0,0720*** 0,0720*** 0,0720*** 0,0720*** 0,0980***

* 1% significance level; ** 5% significance level; ***10% significance level

19

Wolfgang Hrdle, Lopold Simar, Applied Multivariate Statistical Analysis, Springer, 2007, p.307

According to results of decomposition for the German users of SNS there are 17 relationships between categories were found. The majority of them are statistically significant on the 1% level. However there are also a number of variables dependencies which are significant on the 5% and 10% level. The conclusion can be made that all general information categories age, gender, number of friends and type of name have approximately equal influence on the descriptive variables derived from the sample. Table 4.3: Results Russian Federation Pearson Chi squared Gender*Biometry 12,9360 Gender*Sport Gender*Joy Gender*Sex Gender*Symbols Age*Children Gender * Human presence Age*Sunglasses Friends*Event Age*Sport Age*Biometry Friends * Human presence Name*Joy Name*Symbols Gender*Sunglasses 16,3520 21,5420 41,3210 24,8960 42,6180 19,0200 32,9370 1277,0830 27,5080 26,9870 1630,2010 7,2440 6,9800 2,8270 Significance (p-test) 0,0000* 0,0000* 0,0000* 0,0000* 0,0000* 0,0000* 0,0010* 0,0030* 0,0080* 0,0170** 0,0190** 0,0620*** 0,0650*** 0,0730*** 0,0930***

* 1% significance level; ** 5% significance level; ***10% significance level

For Russian Federations part of sample the fact, that characteristic of gender is highly significant, is distinctive. Moreover the almost every relationship which is significant on 1% level is related to gender, for instance, sex appeal, symbols presence, joyful emotions, and others. The least significant general information category is name. The American part of sample has the highest number of significant relationships between general and descriptive categories 21. The primarily important category is gender which influences 7 variables on 1% significance level and 1 variable on 10%

level. Age and number of friends play an important role too in analysis of the data collected as they are connected with 11 descriptive categories. Another conclusion that can be made in accordance to analysis of Pearson Chi-squared test implication results is that, focus of the picture group has no significant relationship with any category from general information block. Table 4.4: Results Germany Pearson squared Gender * Human presence 29,7750 Gender*Biometry Gender*Clothing Gender*Sport Gender*Joy Gender*Sex Gender*Symbols Age*Location Age*Sex Friends*Event Age*Sunglasses Friends*Sex Gender*Children Name*Joy Age * Human presence Friends*Clothing Friends*Couple Age*Biometry Friends*Location Age*Travel Name*Symbols 23,1060 24,2580 35,4890 35,4890 50,7210 40,8380 182,8200 92,6870 3679,7960 49,9180 1071,9050 6,0430 12,3420 154,8080 3992,0290 1039,6250 36,8100 2987,1960 36,0170 Chi- Significance (p-test) 0,0000* 0,0000* 0,0000* 0,0000* 0,0000* 0,0000* 0,0000* 0,0000* 0,0000* 0,0000* 0,0010* 0,0050* 0,0140** 0,0150** 0,0180** 0,0250** 0,0290** 0,0460** 0,0500*** 0,0550***

8,8010 0,0660*** * 1% significance level; ** 5% significance level; ***10% significance level

Further the whole sample was examined in order to make decomposition of all descriptive categories on the country type Germany, Russian Federation or USA. The results of running the Pearson Chi-squared test analysis are presented in table 4.5. The majority of descriptive categories 11 groups have a relationship with the country type variable. Moreover, all of them are significant at 1% level of confidence. It can mean that there are significant differences inside the descriptive categories can be found with respect to the nationality of the profile owner. Although there are many groups that have cross-countries dependences, there are 3 categories sunglasses, symbols and sports - which are not related to the information about the country of residence. Further in the paper the final results of the sample codification will be discussed along with the analysis of the most important findings. Table 4.5: General results Pearson Chi-squared Country * Human presence Country*Biometry Country*Children Country*Clothing Country*Couple Country*Event Country*Joy Country*Location Country*Picture Focus Country*Sex Country*Travel Country*Sunglasses Country*Symbols Country*Sport 268,8400 39,1910 24,0430 105,3760 27,0330 33,7080 130,9930 222,5240 139,9600 116,3070 171,2310 4,0730 3,0340 5,5530 Significance (ptest) 0,0000* 0,0000* 0,0000* 0,0000* 0,0000* 0,0000* 0,0000* 0,0000* 0,0000* 0,0000* 0,0000* 0,1300 0,2190 0,2350

* 1% significance level; ** 5% significance level; ***10% significance level

5. Country models and explanations

As a way to consolidate the statistical results received, a country profile method will be used. This will help determine the correlations and divergences with existing profiles and stereotypes, as self-representation on SNS is a form on non-verbal communication and transfer of image. 5.1 Germany According to Hofstedes 5D model, Germans are amongst the most individualistic countries in the world. Our research has determined that they are, indeed, using the most frequently profile picture that include only one person (72.2%) and that the focus of pictures is mainly on self (65.6%). This can also derive from the high masculinity coefficient, higher than the one of the USA and Russia. A society driven by competition and success will eventually have its own value system that puts more value on the achievements of the individual, not the group. And this is what we can observe in our results of the German sample, except, maybe, the symbols used. Just 9% of the coded pictures have elements directly expressing social status and wealth. We could be observing a slightly different form of social stratification, with an emphasis on the educated bourgeoisie, which has different and less visible symbols of differentiation than the ones in the USA and Russia. Germans are the most travelling nation in the world and they are keen of it, using travel photos as profile pictures more often (30.8%). The reasons behind this are very simple to explain. The proximity and ease of travel inside the EU stimulate tourism and Germans have more free time than the Americans to do it (taking a six-week vacation is not uncommon) and more money than the Russians. It was estimated that, in 2009, German spent over 80 billion Euros on travels. The presence of sunglasses is the highest of the three countries, conditioned by their practical utility while travelling. A strange observation is the fact that although German profile pictures are mainly taken outdoors, the percentage of indoor photos is the highest (43.4%). Privacy is very important in Germany and we can prove that with our results and is sustained by the relatively high uncertainty avoidance index (UAI) and the long-term orientation (LTO). German photos are the least biometric ones (61.2%) and rarely include couples (5%) and children (0.6%). This can also be related to the higher average age of marriage: 30 years for women and 33 years for men. Sunglass usage interferes with the biometry results, still the trend is clear. When it comes to clothing, we observe that, in Germany, dressing casual is a norm. About 68.2% do so. Formal clothes, bikinis, sports clothes are the

least spread among the 3 analyzed countries. An explanation could be the fact that casual clothes are used for most occasions, including parties and sport activities, like biking and hiking. Germans smile the least on their profile pictures, with only 43.8% expressing joy (somewhat similar to the Russians). Its mainly a cultural issue and well describe this in more detail when speaking about the profile of USA. 5.2 United States of America American society is based on loosely-knit interpersonal relations, being highly individualistic and masculine. Although it was expected to see more one-person photos, we observed that it was the exact opposite. Americans have the highest percentage of profile pictures with two or more persons in them (58.2%) and the least that focus on self (60.2%). Couples are often seen as form of social success, especially in US colleges and universities, where dating a prominent person is important. That can be observed in the Couples category, where Americans score the highest percentage (14.6%). Weddings are also more present. Photos with children prevail (5%), as compared with Germany and Russia, determined by the slightly bigger number of women in the American sample and by the high teen pregnancy rate. Common activities, like sport, also increase the number of pictures with more than one person in them. Americans also like to use photos in which they participate in parties (10%), explainable due to the culture of fraternities in higher education institutions. Having the lowest UAI among the three countries discussed, USA is considered to be more open and with a higher degree of acceptance. Biometry is present in most of the American photos (77.6%), exceeding Germany and Russia. Preferred location is outdoors (53.6%), that is in public places. Joy and non-verbal openness towards the society are one of the daily normal things in the US, meaning that you are an agreeable individual, ready to talk and to be heard. This is graphed in our statistics 75.8% of the analyzed photos include smiling persons, denoting happiness or having fun. Its very characteristic for group and family pictures. Sport activities for young people are a defining characteristic of the US society. Education is inter-related with physical competition, very much determined by the individualism of the country. This way, there are more sport-related pictures (7.4%) and pictures that include sportswear (6.4%). To conclude with the American country profile, the consumer factor is revealed. US are, indeed, one of the most consumer-oriented countries in the world and that, along with the individualism, leads to self-representation via brands or fashion accessories that are supposed to represent the owner. They

dress-up more often than Germans (18.6% vs.14.8%) and use more symbols than anyone else (12.4%). 5.3 Russia The Russian Federation is clearly a collectivistic country, with high PDI and low IDV. Still, there appear to be trends for younger Russians to become more and more individualistic as a response against the system and the older generations values. The analyzed profile pictures of Russian students denote a clear focus on self, the majority (70.8%) posting photos with only one person, almost as much as the very individualistic Germany (72.2%). Russian students also wish to present themselves directly, focusing on their own persona (80.2%). Self-focus can be either explained by the constant lack of travel photos, where they could illustrate backgrounds and sightseeing, or the passive individualism of the young generation. Having the lowest GDP per capita, and a unequal spread of wealth, Russians travel less, much less than the Germans and even the Americans. Although having the biggest country in the world, only 4.4% of the photos suggest a travel-oriented owner of the profile. Consumerism is booming in Russia and our results show that the profile pictures include a lot of symbols (11%). These are mainly luxury goods and expensive clothes that reflect a certain social status. Sunglasses are frequently used as a fashion accessory (6%) and are not always complementary to travel and weather, as in the case of Germany. Russian students dress-up very often and 73.4% of the photos belong to this trend. An usual thing in a feminine society, where the quality of life is seen as a form of success. Wearing casual clothes is related to home activities and not suitable for public appearances. Although Russians have the least photos that include sport activities, they wear more sports apparel than Germans. Its about the clear distinction between clothes type, but mainly that Russians like sportswear more, while Germans are more practical and have different sports activities. Smiling is sometimes seen as a form of weakness, especially if without a good reason, so students express less joy in their photos (45.4%). We cannot speak about depression and cultural temperament, as in the case of Germany. More likely that its related to the high UAI and the created beliefs that come together with it. Biometry is lower, compared to the USA, just 61%, also possibly related to the uncertainty avoidance index. Russians, in general, are very cautious about their family, with only 9% couple photos and 1.4% of photos with children. They also use the most avatars, as a form of virtual anonymity 10.4%. Eastern European cultures have the lowest median age of the first marriage, and Russia is no exception, with women getting married at the age of 23 and men at 26. With a demographic deficit of men, Russian women are

competing for the attention of their counter-parts by exposing themselves in a sexual way. 26.6% of the photos include direct sexuality or partial nudity. Even bikinis are more popular in Russia 8.4%.

6. Limitations
Our project consisted of two parts (database creation and codification), each having its own limitations and weaknesses. While gathering the sample for each country, we stumbled upon the problem of Facebook not being relevant for the Russian auditory, thus we switched to a very similar and more popular Vkontakte. Although pretty similar, it offers different privacy options and could affect the willingness to expose of its users. Vkontakte also shows a list of users, which strictly depends on their popularity (rating), while Facebook randomizes the list for each search. It was the only sound option, considering the penetration rate of Facebook in Russia. Second of all the randomization procedure, when the list of Universities was established, is basic and does not include a statistical approach or formula, which would allow us to have a fully representative sample for each country. We managed to use a backdoor, by increasing the number of universities to about 20 per country, in order to decrease the deviations. Using the gathered data for a country analysis is somehow hard, as we looked only at students, their percentage share in the total population being different. The profile picture analysis was evenly distributed among the team members, each being responsible for one single country. To increase the correlation of the results, a coding framework was elaborated, that included clear definitions for each category. The human factor was still important, particular country characteristics being analyzed, each time, from another point of view.

7. Conclusions
Self-representation on the internet is becoming more and more important, with the strong connection of SNS with real life. Defining yourself online determines how you are seen as an individual by everyone else connected to the World Wide Web. For young people, in our case students, it is crucial to develop a good image, both for now and for the future. Profile pictures are the first thing that pops up when opening a persons profile page (if privacy options are set correctly). First impressions matter and help others define your status, attractiveness, openness. Culture influences self-representation and our study has looked closer at three rather different societies, both by geographical location and behavior.

Providing background information and already consecrated studies and models of cultural norms and patterns, we have determined deviations and correlations between real-life cases and statistics and our codification of the country samples. The country model of Russia suggests a trend of individualism among young people and increased importance of physical appearance. Dressing up is a must; symbols make the owner of the photo relate to certain classes. Girls compete for male attention by posting sexy photos, partial nudity (including beach wear). Russian travel the least, still they are very open and have a majority of biometric photos. Looking too serious is something normal. Germans are the most individualistic society and very precautious. Couple photos are rare. They travel the most and are very keen of it. Still, Germans take the most indoor photos. They often wear sunglasses, but no special apparel for travel or sport, just casual clothes. There is a tendency of being practical. Symbols are not popular, neither is partial nudity. Being happy or expressing joy is rare for Germany. The American society, although being very individualistic, concentrates more on group presence. Being a part of the student fraternities, sport teams, having a girlfriend/boyfriend are a sign of social success. Americans look happier than everyone else, present their couple and/or children and have the most biometric photos. Its clearly an open society, with strong inter-personal implications. US students take pictures mainly outside, more than the Germans, although they travel less, much less. This is also because they do more sports. Consumerism reaches its peak in the US, people having lots of symbols on their profile pictures. Culture definitely affects self-representation. Country trends and style of education make people behave according to a pattern and these were the correlation points with existing models. On the other hand, individuals tend to be unique, thus breaking social patterns and represent themselves in totally different ways (just like collectivistic Russia has a highly individualistic sample). Further studies, that would look deeper into the system and relationship between users, could help describe better the cores pillars of a group and the speed of change around them.

8. References
1. Leary M.R., Tchividijian L.R and Kraxberger B.E. Self-presentation can be hazardous to your health: Impression management and health risk. Health Psychology, 1994. 2. DeAndrea David C., Allison S. Shaw and Timothy R. Levine. Online language: The role of culture in self-expression and self-construal on Facebook, 2010. 3. Bochner S. Cross-cultural differences in the self-concept: A test of Hofstedes individualism/collectivism distinction. 1994. 4. Gudykunst W. B., Matsumoto T., Ting-Toomey S., Nishida T., Kim, K. and Heyman S. The influence of cultural individualism-collectivism, self-construals, and individual values on communication styles across cultures, 1996. 5. Markus H. R. and Kitayama S. Culture and the self: Implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation, 1991. 6. Erik Wstlund and Torsten Trevor Archer. Exploring cross-cultural differences in self-concept: A meta-analysis of the self-description, 2001. 7. Goffman E. The presentation of self in everyday life, 1959. 8. Zhao and Jiang. Cultural differences on visual self-presentation through social networking site profile images, 2011. 9. Papacharissi Z. The presentation of self in virtual life: Characteristics of personal home pages, 2002. 10. Heeman K. and Papacharissi Z. Cross-cultural differences in online self-presentation: A content analysis of personal Korean and US home pages, 2003.

11. Schlenker B. Impression management: The self-concept, social identity, and interpersonal relations, 1980. 12. Piwinger M. and Ebert H. Impression Management: Wie aus Niemand Jemand wird, 2001. 13. Rubin Z. and Shenker S. Friendship, proximity, and self-disclosure, 1978. 14. Schlenker, B. Self-identification: Toward an integration of the private and public self, 1986. 15. Derlega V. J., Metts S., Petronio S. and Margulis S. T. Self-disclosure, 1993. 16. Singelis T. M. The measurement of independent and interdependent self-construals, 1994. 17. Jones E. Interpersonal perception, 1990. 18. Kane C. M. Ill see you on Myspace: Self-presentation in a social network website, 1999. 19. Walther J. B. Selective self-presentation in computer-mediated communication: Hyperpersonal dimensions of technology, language, and cognition, 2007.

Appendix Appendix 1: Country samples (values) Germany

male female NA 214 286 0 Name First + Last Only first Nickname Unclear

USA
296 198 6

Russia

Gender

445 11 12 32
Human presence

467 2 22 8

474 5 20 1

Single 2 persons 3 or more Avatar

361 56 38 45 Couple

209 139 119 21

354 81 13 52

yes no

25 475 Children

73 426

45 455

yes no

3 497

25 475

7 493

Biometry yes no Clothing Casual Dressed up / formal Bikini/naked Sport Otherwise / unclear Location Indoor Outdoor Unclear Picture focus Self Both Surroundings Otherwise Travel yes no Sport yes no 26 474 37 463 25 475 154 346 37 463 22 478 328 109 27 36 301 142 57 0 401 86 11 0 217 234 49 180 268 52 168 249 82 341 74 16 0 69 326 93 9 32 38 48 367 42 26 15 306 194 388 112 310 190

Joy yes no Sex yes no Symbols yes no Sunglasses yes no Event Party / Public. Celebration Wedding Graduation Otherwise/Unclear 23 2 0 475 50 8 2 440 15 2 3 480 42 458 27 473 30 470 45 455 62 438 55 445 34 466 32 468 133 367 219 281 379 121 227 273