i

NARCISSISM PREDICTED BY SNAPCHAT SELFIE SHARNG,

FILTER USAGE, AND EDITING

____________

A Thesis

Presented

to the Faculty of

California State University Dominguez Hills

____________

In Partial Fulfillment

of the Requirements for the Degree

Master of Arts

in

Clinical Psychology

____________

by

Enya Ruth Valentin

Summer 2019

ii

THESIS: NARCISSISM PREDICTED BY SNAPCHAT SELFIE SHARING, FILTER USAGE,

AND EDITING

AUTHOR: ENYA RUTH VALENTIN

APPROVAL PAGE

APPROVED:

______________________________

L. Mark Carrier, Ph.D

Thesis Committee Chair

______________________________

Nancy Cheever, Ph.D

Committee Member

______________________________

Larry Rosen, Ph.D

Committee Member

iii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Thank you to my committee members, Dr. L. Mark Carrier, Dr. Nancy Cheever, and Dr.

Larry Rosen for their support and mentorship. Your input and guidance through this project and

the research process has been invaluable. Thank you especially to Dr. Carrier for accepting me

into the George Marsh Cognition (GMAC) Laboratory and giving me the opportunities to grow

and learn as a researcher and student.

Thank you also to my fellow lab members for their feedback and support during the

research process and practice presentations.

Finally, I’d like to thank my parents and sister for supporting me throughout my

academic career. Thank you for your support and patience as I went through this phase of my

academic career even when it didn’t make sense. Thank you also for understanding why some of

my life has been on hold.

iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS

APPROVAL PAGE ............................................................................................................................. ii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS .................................................................................................................. iii

LIST OF TABLES ................................................................................................................................v

LIST OF FIGURES ............................................................................................................................. vi

ABSTRACT ..................................................................................................................................... vii

CHAPTER 1 ........................................................................................................................................1

INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................1

BACKGROUND ..................................................................................................................................2

LITERATURE REVIEW ........................................................................................................................13

RESEARCH PURPOSE AND HYPOTHESIS.................................................................................................35

CHAPTER 2 ......................................................................................................................................37

METHOD .........................................................................................................................................37

PARTICIPANTS ................................................................................................................................37

PROCEDURE ...................................................................................................................................38

MEASURES .....................................................................................................................................39

CHAPTER 3 ......................................................................................................................................45

RESULTS .........................................................................................................................................45

PRELIMINARY ANALYSES REGARDING SAMPLE CHARACTERISTICS SNAPCHAT USAGE ...................................45

FACTOR ANALYSIS FOR THEMES OF SHARED SNAPCHAT CONTENT ............................................................68

FACTOR ANALYSIS OF FILTER USAGE ..................................................................................................72

CREATION OF SELF-ENHANCEMENT VARIABLE ......................................................................................74

HIERARCHICAL REGRESSION ..............................................................................................................74

CHAPTER 4 ......................................................................................................................................78

DISCUSSION ....................................................................................................................................78

SELFIE SHARING..............................................................................................................................81

FILTER USAGE ................................................................................................................................83

SELF-ENHANCEMENT .......................................................................................................................84

POST-HOC ANALYSIS OF SEX DIFFERENCES IN HIERARCHICHAL REGRESSION MODEL ......................................85

LIMITATIONS ..................................................................................................................................89

IMPLICATIONS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH ................................................................................................93

CHAPTER 5 ......................................................................................................................................96

CONCLUSION ..................................................................................................................................96

REFERENCES ...................................................................................................................................98

v

LIST OF TABLES

PAGE

1. Frequencies of types of Snaps participants shared on Snapchat ...............................................49

2. Frequency of saving snaps to Memories ...................................................................................51

3. Frequencies for sharing saved snaps .........................................................................................54

4. Frequencies for Daily Media Usage Scale ................................................................................57

5. Frequencies for items on the NPI-13 ........................................................................................61

6. Frequencies for items on the Online NPI-13 ............................................................................65

7. Factor loadings and communalities based on principal components analysis with

Varimax rotation for 20 items assessing the types of snaps participants shared

on Snapchat ……… ..............................................................................................................70

8. Factor loadings and communalities based on principal component analysis with

Varimax rotation for 5 items assessing the filter usage of participants on Snapchat ...........73

9. Summary of Hierarchical Regression Analysis for Variables Predicting Problematic

Narcissism ............................................................................................................................76

vi

LIST OF FIGURES

PAGE

1. Example of geofilter ...................................................................................................................4

2. Example of geofilter ...................................................................................................................5

3. Example of “Lenses” with geofilter and a filter to change the

coloration of the snap ..............................................................................................................6

4. Example of “Lenses” with geofilter and a filter to change the

coloration of the snap ..............................................................................................................7

ABSTRACT

Previous research has suggested that social media usage has some relationships with

increased levels of narcissism among individuals. However, most of this research has focused on

Facebook. Snapchat is an application that focuses on picture and video-based communication

where many users share pictures and videos with their friends often. It was hypothesized that

greater selfie sharing on Snapchat, filter usage on content shared on Snapchat, and more self-

enhancement of “snaps” by using text, emojis, and drawings, would have positive relationships

with narcissism. A survey that included items about Snapchat usage, the Narcissism Personality

Inventory 13 (NPI-13), the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale, and the Daily Media Usage Scale

(DMU) was presented to participants. Sharing content on Snapchat that was of a sexual,

romantic, or risky nature was a significant predictor of narcissism. Self-enhancement on the

content shared on Snapchat was found to significantly predict narcissism.

1

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

While social media has been a relatively new development, it has already had a strong

impact on both individuals and society. However, as increasing numbers of individuals join and

participate in social media, concerns over the negative mental health impact these outlets might

have has also increased. One of these possible concerns is narcissism. Some have claimed that

social media is responsible for increasing the rate of narcissism in the population, especially

among adolescents and young adults. While this concern has led many to research this

relationship with older social media such as Facebook, little investigation has been done on

newer social media such as Snapchat. Snapchat is a relatively new and extremely popular social

media application. Snapchat, which was released in 2011, had 55% of its 30 million users in

2013 use the application daily (Shontell, 2013). In 2017, it had 158 million daily users (Speigel,

2017). More recently, a survey from Pew Research Center found that 27% of adults in the United

States use Snapchat and that 68% of adults ages 18 to 29 used the application (“Who Uses,”

2018). Another Pew Research Center survey found 78% of 18 to 24-year-olds use Snapchat and

71% of them use the application multiple times a day (Smith & Anderson, 2018). Among

adolescents, the percentage of users was lower (69%). However, Snapchat was the third most

popular online platform behind YouTube (85%) and Instagram (72%) (Anderson & Jiang, 2018).

Despite having a high volume of users and having many unique qualities and features that

were later adapted by other social media, little research has investigated Snapchat. Despite the

high volume of users since 2013, little research currently exists on Snapchat as compared to the

numerous studies completed on Facebook. While Facebook and Snapchat have some similarities,

2

Snapchat has some unique features. These features include selecting specific friends or fellow

users to share content with, enabling editing of content via filters, and using pictures and videos

as the primary mode of communication and content sharing. Furthermore, while current research

about Facebook and other long-established social media and their relationships with mental

health have been useful, the relationships that may exist between Snapchat and mental health

should also be examined.

Background

Snapchat

Snapchat is a social media application that is largely picture and video oriented. Snapchat

allows for sharing of pictures and videos both directly with select friends or with all the user’s

friends using the “Story Feature” (described below). Individuals can also share to the story of

their local areas and Snapchat’s story. The pictures and videos can be edited prior to sharing with

friends. This editing includes “lenses,” filters, emojis/stickers, text, and doodles. Filters modify

images and videos in the application. Examples of filters can be found on Figures 1 and 2.

“Lenses” are filters that augment reality when the camera is running as well or when the photo or

video is taken. Most famously, these filters can add effects to manipulate faces or add items such

as dog-like features or flower crowns to the faces or heads that the camera detects. Examples of

lenses can be found on Figures 3 and 4. Aside from the lens filters, there are also filters that edit

the coloration of the photo; filters that indicate the location of where the photo was taken using a

smartphone’s location; filters that suggest the celebration of a holiday, local event, or promotion;

filters that indicate the time or day of the week; and a filter that indicates temperature (using the

smartphone’s location). These filters can be used on both on pictures and videos. For videos

however, there are filters that indicate the speed the user is traveling and filters that manipulate

3

the speed of the video by slowing it down or speeding it up. While dependent on how well

individuals know how to use the application, the maximum number of filters that can be used is

five. In addition to filters, individuals can also add one block of text in different fonts, unlimited

stickers including emojis, and drawings or “doodles” which the user can create by drawing with

their finger on the screen.

One of Snapchat’s signature features is ephemeral or timed and numbered viewings of

content. This can vary between 1 to 10 seconds or an unlimited amount of time. Unless the

content is shared on a Snapchat “story” the receiving friend will be limited to one view with

extra views available for purchase from Snapchat. It is this feature that has been associated with

sexting and the sharing of explicit and sensitive content using the application. One study found

that nearly 50% of users would take screenshots of the Snapchat content and others still used an

external camera to take pictures of the images on the device. Despite this, nearly 25% of the

participants had sensitive videos or images on the application (Roesner, Gill, & Kohno, 2014).

Thus, despite the ease of screenshotting or taking pictures of the content, users seem to act as if

the timed viewings provide adequate security for sharing sensitive content.

4

Figure 1. Example of a snap with a geofilter. This geofilter indicates this picture was taken in the

city of Portland.

5

Figure 2. Example of a snap with a geofilter. This snap also has a second filter to adjust the

coloration of the snap.

6

Figure 3. Example of a “Lens” with a geofilter and a filter to change the coloration of the snap.

7

Figure 4. Example of a “Lens” with a geofilter and a filter to change the coloration of the snap.

When individuals share “snaps” directly with friends, the friend who received the snap

will be notified by Snapchat. The receiving friend can then tap on the contact they received the

“snap” from, which would be at the top of their list of friends. Tapping on the contact (which

would have different colored square next to the contact’s icon that would indicate if they

received a picture or video) would show the content the friend shared for the amount of time the

sender indicated. The receiving friend can tap to go through or skip content more quickly. If

multiple snaps were sent, the receiving friend can also tap to look through the other snaps

quickly. Screenshots can be taken of the content although the application notifies the sender of

the content who screenshot it.

8

Another feature of Snapchat is that it allows users to save pictures, videos, and stories not

only to the smartphone it was being used on but also within the application so that users can

share the content later. This is known as Snapchat’s “Memories” feature and allows sharing of

content that was taken at an earlier time and may or may not have been shared previously.

Snapchat also has a “Story” feature, which allows users to share their content with all

their friends or the public. Snapchat’s “Stories” serve a similar purpose to Facebook’s posts. The

content posted on the Stories are accessible to all the user’s friends on Snapchat or the public

depending on their setting. The content shared on the user’s story can be viewed an unlimited

amount of times. Since it is not shared directly with other users, other users can choose to view

or not view the content. The content, however, lasts only for 24 hours before disappearing.

In addition to its picture sharing features, Snapchat also has a chat feature where snaps

can also be accessed. Snapchat follows the typical format of chat applications and along with

being able to send and read messages. Along with displaying the messages, the chat feature

provides access to tap on individual snaps to view them in a similar way to clicking or tapping on

a link. Snapchat also allows access to view stories of famous “Snapchatters,” celebrities, and

media outlets including Buzzfeed and National Geographic. A recent feature that Snapchat added

to its application was users sharing their locations via “Snap Map.” Depending on what users

selected on their location sharing options, users could share their locations on a map with all of

their friends, select friends, or could keep their location private.

Narcissism

Narcissism is typically understood to be loving one’s self and holding one’s self in higher

regard than others. While it can be commonly understood what a highly narcissistic individual

must be like, the criteria for having Narcissistic Personality Disorder (NPD) are more specific

9

and thorough. To qualify for a diagnosis of NPD according to the fifth edition of the Diagnostic

and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5), an individual must have a “pervasive

pattern of grandiosity,” a lack of empathy, and the need to be admired by others in different

contexts and that it begins in early adulthood (American Psychiatric Association, 2013, p. 669).

This can be specifically indicated by five or more of the following symptoms: (a) “grandiose”

self-importance; (b) preoccupation with “fantasies of unlimited success, power, brilliance,

beauty, or ideal love”; (c) a belief of being special or unique which would only allow them to be

associated with or understood by other high-ranking people; (d) a need for extensive admiration;

(e) entitlement; (f) exploitative of others; (g) a lack of empathy or lack of desire to empathize

with others; (h) envy of others or thinks that others are envious of them; and (i) arrogant

behaviors or attitudes (American Psychiatric Association, 2013, p. 669-670). The prevalence of

NPD can vary by community. The estimated rate of the disorder in the general population ranges

between 0% to 6.2%. Fifty percent to 75% of the diagnosed individuals are male (American

Psychiatric Association, 2013).

In addition to the DSM-5 criteria, some have suggested there are different subtypes of

narcissism and narcissistic personality disorder due to the different ways it can present itself.

One article acknowledges two of the most common subtypes from previous literature: grandiose

and vulnerable narcissism (Caligor, Levy, & Yeomans, 2015). Grandiose narcissism can be

characterized by a sense of entitlement, arrogance, little to no anxiety, and the desire for

attention. In contrast, vulnerable narcissism is characterized by sensitivity to criticism and the

evaluation of others, envy, and inhibition. In addition, some individuals may classify as high-

functioning due to their narcissistic traits of not only functioning but also succeeding in daily life

(Caligor et al., 2015). While the disorder can cause dysfunction, the dysfunction can manifest in

10

different ways for an individual with grandiose narcissism as opposed to an individual with

vulnerable narcissism. One such way is the responses to different distressing situations. When

presented with a scenario featuring high achievement failure, an individual with grandiose

narcissism was predicted to react with significant negative affect, but not when presented with a

high-level interpersonal threat. In contrast, vulnerable narcissism had a significant positive

relationship with negative affect when presented with a scenario that featured a high-level

interpersonal threat (Besser & Priel, 2010). Thus, while narcissism is still considered one

disorder or issue, it can have different presentations.

While there is some debate as to why, the consensus is that individuals with NPD

typically also have problematic self-esteem, often under the guise of excessively high self-

esteem. However, narcissism and self-esteem are two separate constructs. One study found that

not only were self-esteem and narcissism distinct, but the two also had different behavioral

relationships. While genuine self-esteem was found to have a positive relationship with mental

health and social relationships, narcissistic self-aggrandizement had a positive relationship with

antisocial behaviors including aggression (Tracy, Cheng, Robins, & Trzesniewski, 2009). One

study found that when compared to the general population, individuals with NPD had lower

explicit or conscious self-esteem. Individuals with NPD also had lower explicit and implicit (or

unconscious) self-esteem than individuals with Borderline Personality Disorder. Additionally,

the lower or more damaged self-esteem was among individuals with NPD, the greater exhibition

of pathological narcissism (Vater et al., 2013). There are different theories and ideas that link

problematic self-esteem with narcissism. Some have suggested the mask model, which suggests

that individuals with narcissism use the facade or “mask” of high self-esteem to hide lower self-

esteem. Others have suggested that these individuals have high self-esteem but it is conditional

11

and unstable. Yet another theory suggests that they truly do have incredibly high levels of self-

esteem. There is also the possibility that they all may be true and simply vary from person to

person (Bosson et al., 2008).

One study found that individuals can identify narcissists by how they look: flashy,

expensive clothing and a neat, high-maintenance appearance. Additionally, female narcissists

often display cleavage and wear makeup. While individuals who meet these characteristics may

not necessarily be narcissists, narcissistic individuals’ appearances reflect their personalities and

these individuals demonstrate their importance through appearance. In addition, their appearance

is a means of promoting themselves and attempting to command attention (Vazire, Naumann,

Rentfrow, & Gosling, 2008). Thus, it can sometimes be noticed who may be a narcissist based on

his or her attention-seeking appearance and exhibitionistic tendencies.

Social Media’s Relationship with Mental Health and Personality

For years, there have been concerns over how social media and technology use impact

the mental health and wellbeing of its users. As a result, several studies have examined this

relationship. One study examined how technology and media usage could predict three mood

disorders and six personality disorders (Rosen, Whaling, Rab, Carrier, & Cheever, 2013). The

three mood disorders included major depression, dysthymia, and bipolar-mania. The six

personality disorders were schizoid, narcissism, paranoid, antisocial, histrionic, compulsive, and

paranoid personality disorders. While each disorder had a different set of predictors, the most

common predictors were general Facebook use, impression management, and friendship.

Interestingly, narcissism was predicted by general Facebook use as well as impression

management and the number of friends on Facebook. In contrast, major depression was predicted

by the number of hours spent online per day. Depression also had a negative relationship with

12

the number of hours spent on the telephone and the number of Facebook friends (Rosen et al.,

2013). In addition to general usage, the content shared on social media can also have the

potential to predict for mental illness. A review found that depression and other mental illnesses

were predicted by what users share or post on online or on social media (Guntuku, Yaden, Kern,

Ungar, & Eichstaedt, 2017). What is clear is that social media usage has some relationship with

mental illness.

However, social media’s relationship is not limited to the severity of just mental illness.

Some studies have found relationships between social media usage and lower well-being. Well-

being is measured by how satisfied a person is with their lives and how they feel on a moment-

by-moment basis (Satici & Uysal, 2015). One study found that, in general, Facebook use over

time predicted negative changes in well-being (Kross et al., 2013). Some users may also be

aware of the negative psychological effects of Facebook. A study that used a focus group to

examine users’ psychological experience on Facebook found that despite making users

experience negative emotions, users were motivated to keep using Facebook because of FOMO

(Fear of Missing Out) and to perform relationship maintenance (Fox & Moreland, 2015).

However, Facebook usage may not necessarily cause or even predict well-being. One study

examined the relationship between problematic or excessive Facebook use and well-being (Satici

& Uysal, 2015). The study used life satisfaction, flourishing, subjective happiness, and

subjective vitality to measure well-being. All four were found to be significant negative

predictors of problematic Facebook use (Satici & Uysal, 2015). For some, there are benefits to be

found in taking a break from social media. One study compared the well-being of Facebook

users who took a break from Facebook for a week and those who did not (Tromholt, 2016). The

study found that those who took a break had an increase in positive emotions and life

13

satisfaction, with the greatest benefits being seen among heavy users, passive users (browse

more than share or post), and users who tend to have Facebook envy. Thus, social media appears

to have relationships not only with mental illness but also general well-being.

Social media has also become notorious for letting users present themselves on social

media in ways that may not necessarily present in real life. There are three possible version of a

self that an individual can present. “Ideal self” referred to the possible, ideal self users wished

they could be and “actual self” refers to who the users actually believed they were (Seidman,

2013). The ease of presenting an ideal self has made it easy for some users to deceive others into

believing the users were different people than they actually are. “Hidden self” or “true self” was

defined as traits that were part of the self but not usually expressed offline because they were

uncomfortable for the individual (Seidman, 2013; Tosun, 2012). The ability to share this hidden

or true self has helped some individuals gain sympathy, empathy, or solidarity for issues that

would have been difficult to express in offline contexts. The ease of sharing these different types

of self have made it easy for users to both deceive and be incredibly honest about themselves.

Literature Review

Snapchat

While limited research has been done on Snapchat, most of the research has examined

that way individuals use the application. One study compared Snapchat with other popular social

media (Twitter, Facebook, and Instagram) using the Uses and Gratification Theory (UGT)

(Alhabash & Ma, 2017). UGT basically states that individuals use media to meet their needs and

accomplish goals (Katz, Blumler, & Gurevitvh, 1973). The study found that of the four social

media, Snapchat was ranked second for the most time spent daily (Instagram was first) and

Snapchat and Instagram shared nearly the same means for intensity of use (Alhabash & Ma,

14

2017). The study also found that convenience, the number of friends, time spent daily, need for

entertainment, and self-expression were significant predictors for intensity of use when using

Snapchat. Thus, users of Snapchat seem to use this application frequently. Additionally, the

application seems to allow users to express themselves and gives the user opportunities for

entertainment. The more friends a user has on Snapchat also positively predicts how intensely

users will use the application. Another study compared different social media using UGT and

found that Snapchat users spent most of their time sharing problems, wasting time, and

improving social knowledge on the application (Phua, Jin, & Kim, 2016). These results seem to

suggest that users entertain themselves or socialize on the application. Socializing seems to be

facilitated easily on the application. In addition to intended use, the time and location of use can

be different for different social media. One study used the spatio-temporal data from Snap Map

in three different metropolitan areas: Los Angeles, Miami, and New York (Juhász & Hochmair,

2018). Researchers found that usage was concentrated in downtown and tourist areas. In regards

to temporal use, the study also found that users tend to be more active in the evening and early

night time while early morning hours tended to be the least active (Juhász & Hochmair, 2018).

The areas where users use the application the most suggest they utilize the application more

when they are in areas where they may believe the location is entertaining or attractive. In

addition, spending time in an area(s) frequented by tourists suggests that these users may be

using the application when they are at leisure. The time where the application is largely used also

seems to suggest that the application is used when users are not working, but rather at leisure.

Snapchat is typically associated with adolescents and young adults since it is considered a

newer social media application when compared to Facebook, which has been developing an

increasing number of users who are middle-aged or older adults. One study found that age was

15

negatively related to having a Snapchat account (Perkovic, Lane, & Miller, 2018). In fact, a 1-

unit increase in age resulted in a 11.1% decrease in likelihood that an individual had a Snapchat

account. In addition, the study also found that extraversion was positively related to whether an

individual had a Snapchat account (Perkovic, Lane, & Miller, 2018). Thus, most of the

applications’ users are likely to be younger in age and extraverted. However, not all young adults

and adolescents may necessarily use Snapchat. In a study that compared Snapchat users and non-

users, Snapchat users tend to be younger than non-Snapchat users (Grieve, 2017). However,

Snapchat users also tended to place greater dependence on visuals for communication, to value

social connectedness, to be more likely to engage with technology on a regular basis, to prefer

online interaction, and to be comfortable multitasking with technology (Grieve, 2017). In

general, younger individuals such as adolescents and young adults tend to have greater aptitude

for utilizing and engaging with technology, which may explain why younger individuals use

Snapchat. The opportunity to socialize and engage on social tasks on the application may also

make the application attractive to users who place a high priority on social connection and online

interactions. The level of self-expression an individual is willing to share on social media may

also reflect whether they will gravitate towards Snapchat as their primary social networking site

(SNS). When comparing Instagram and Snapchat users, Instagram users were more concerned

with expressing an idealized version of themselves and concerned with their privacy. Snapchat

users in contrast were more concerned with expressing an accurate and actual version of

themselves on an SNS (Choi & Sung, 2018). If Snapchat places a higher priority on social

connections and communication, whereas Instagram places higher priority on idealized self-

presentation, then Snapchat users will need to present themselves more authentically on

Snapchat.

16

Despite attracting users who value socialization, the application may not actually be ideal

for all facets of socializing. One study found that when compared to other communication-

related technologies, Snapchat was able to evoke more positive mood while also providing less

social support (Bayer, Ellison, Schoenebeck, & Falk, 2016). While it may allow its users to feel

positive emotions, it may not actually provide users with social support, which can be important

not only for a user but also in certain social circumstances. Despite the apparent lack of social

support, Snapchat has still been associated with social bonding. One study found that users

usually share selfies on Snapchat and add “doodles” (drawings) and short lines of text with the

pictures they share. The study also found that greater use of Snapchat was more related to social

bonding than social capital (Piwek & Joinson, 2016). Snapchat therefore appears to meet the

light-hearted needs of socializing such as bonding, but does not meet the more serious needs like

social support. It is possible that Snapchat facilitates relationships that already exist, prior to

being friends on the application. Snapchat can also be used to create group cohesion in larger

groups, particularly those who participate in major events such as protests or those who are fans

of famous individuals or popular topics. Snapchat has “Featured Stories” where different users

may share their snaps to a featured story, typically one about a major event or popular topic. One

study found that the use of selfies and quasi-selfies (pictures of self but not selfies) in this

context contributed to creating a group identity (Page, 2019). Thus, Snapchat is not only

impactful at the relational level, but also in large groups, where it can promote a sense of unity.

Snapchat also has allowed its users to have a different communication system as

compared to the chat options that many other social media offer. One study found that this

predominantly image- and video-oriented form of communication allowed for better

communication in relationships and greater self-expression. At the same time however, users

17

reported low levels of trust in the ephemeral nature of the application and projected that other

users, rather than themselves, could suffer negative effects (Wadell, 2016). Users seem to

appreciate the visual aspect of communication on Snapchat because it provides more ease of

communication that other applications. Users are aware of the risks the visual, and in particular

the ephemeral, style of communication Snapchat facilitates. However, users do not assume they

are susceptible to the risks and dangers associated with this style of communication. What users

share on private and public parts of Snapchat also differs. With snaps that were publicly shared,

users considered how sensitive the content was as well who they believed the audience would be.

The timed viewings of content on Snapchat have been believed to create a false sense of

security for users to share sensitive content. One study found that individuals claim to use a trust

system where they assume that sensitive content is not be screenshotted (Roesner, Gill, &

Kohno, 2014). Despite the ease of taking a screenshot as well taking pictures with external

cameras, Snapchat users seems satisfied with the lack of actual security measures. Perhaps

security is not the primary concern of Snapchat’s users. One study found that it was passion that

motivated Snapchat use but privacy concerns did not (Lemay, Doleck, & Bazelais, 2017). Thus,

despite the risks of using snapchat, users seem less concerned about safety and more with how

interesting or fun the application is.

Regardless of the perceived levels of privacy, some users of Snapchat have been known

to send explicit content such as nudity. However, the sex of the users may predict what kind of

behaviors the users engage in. One study found that men were more likely than women to use the

application to engage in “hookups.” Women, contrary to the researcher’s hypothesis, did not

send nude content continuously to their partners to keep them interested. Individuals who were

not in relationships or restricted in seeking relationships were linked to using the application to

18

seek hookups and sex as well as send nude snaps (Moran, Salerno, & Wade, 2018). Thus, men

and those not in monogamous relationships use the application for sexually related reasons as

compared to women. Aside from nude snaps, users may also send snaps that depict sexuality.

One study examined the way university students depicted sexuality on Snapchat by analyzing

394 screenshots of snaps. The study found that 86.6% depicted female or females only, while

13.4% displayed both female(s) and male(s). The majority (78%) were selfies (and therefore

considered consensual) and 22% of the snaps appeared nonconsensual. 40.1% of the snaps

featured nude individuals and 34.1% of the snaps showed the individual’s face. Among the

snaps, the most commonly displayed body parts were breasts (36.4%), buttocks (25.5%), and

cleavage (17.7%) (Yockey, King, Vidourek, Burbage, & Merianos, 2018). Thus, despite the

lower likelihood of women engaging in sexting or sharing sensitive media, the media largely

features women.

Perhaps because of Snapchat’s relationship with sexual content, it was found to

contribute to jealousy in relationships. One study found it could trigger jealousy in romantic

relationships (Utz, Muscanell, & Khalid, 2015). This study presented participants with jealousy-

provoking scenarios and found that Snapchat users responded with higher levels of jealousy than

Facebook users. The study also described that Snapchat was used more frequently than Facebook

when searching for a new romantic partner (Utz et al., 2015). It is possible that due to its

association with hookups and sex, especially with single people, Snapchat triggered more

jealousy with those in relationships. Jealousy, however, is not limited to romantic relationships.

Another study examined how young people thought Snapchat influenced their romantic, familial,

and platonic relationships in a focus group. The young people (who were aged 18-23) reported

that some of Snapchat’s positive attributes were its useful image-oriented content and its ability

19

to enhance relationships. However, the same young people reported that Snapchat could also be

perceived as annoying within relationships if used improperly, had the potential to encourage

deviant behavior including sexting, and could lead to jealousy in relationships (Vaterlaus,

Barnett, Roche, & Young, 2016). Thus, while Snapchat has been perceived as a useful tool for

socializing and performing relationship maintenance, it can also contribute to jealousy and other

relational issues.

Self-Presentation and Content Sharing

Self-presentation can influence what users share on social media. Some of what users

may wish to present to others on social media may have relationships with their personality. One

study focused on the type of self (ideal, actual, and hidden) individuals who used Facebook

presented based on their Big Five personality traits. “Ideal self” referred to the possible, ideal

self users wished they could be and “actual self” referred to who the users actually believed they

were. “Hidden self” was defined as traits that were part of the self but not usually expressed

offline because they were uncomfortable for the individual. The study found that individuals

with high neuroticism were positively associated with being prone to show ideal and hidden

selves. Extraversion, neuroticism, and agreeableness were all positively associated with trying to

express actual self on social media. Those who were more conscientious were associated with

more careful self-presentation online. Finally, the desire to express self mediated the relationship

between self-disclosure and neuroticism (Seidman, 2013). Thus, an individual’s personality may

determine what type of “self” is presented and how that self is presented online. However,

personality does not only have relationships with the self-presenting behaviors that users engage

with in social media. The content a person shares on social media can also be associated with

personality. Another study that used the Big Five and Facebook analyzed users’ profile content,

20

finding that individuals with different personality traits share photos and videos differently.

Greater neuroticism and extraversion predicted more photo uploads. Agreeableness predicted

more albums that the user created, video uploads, and how many likes and comments they

received on their profile photos (Eftekhar, Fullwood, & Morris, 2014). Findings seem to suggest

that individuals with different personality or psychological traits can interact and use features of

social media differently. This may be due to the different opportunities to behave and share

content on social media.

Audience may also play a role in how users present themselves on social media. One

study found that individuals’ offline networks had some overlap with their online (SNS)

networks and that some but not all of interactions on social networks were intended to strengthen

the connections with their offline networks (Subrahmayam, Reich, Waechter, & Espinoza, 2008).

In other words, the audience of many individuals’ social media may be at least partially be an

attempt to enhance the relationships they have offline. Regardless of the actual audience, the

imagined audience seems to be more influential. One study found that when users posted content

on social media, they imagined either a specific or a general audience. Regardless of what

audience they imagined, users adjusted settings that could change who could and could not view

the posts they created (Litt & Hargittai, 2015). Thus, audience, actual or perceived, can

determine what a user decides to share on social media. Similarly to audience, motivations for an

individual use to use a social media outlet is related to how accurately a person presents herself

or himself. In a study that examined which individuals were more likely to show their “true self”

on Facebook, those who were making new friends, beginning romantic relationships, or ending

romantic relationships were most likely to be authentic (Tosun, 2012). Thus, how an individual

presents themselves on social media can be influenced by both audience as well as purpose.

21

Along with audience, gender may play a role in what an individual shares on social

media. In one study, women were found to share images more often on Snapchat, have more

concerns about privacy, share more images of their children, like and comment on others’

images, apply filters to images, and organize photos in albums on social media when compared

to men. Men, in contrast, were more likely to share images to Twitter (especially in regards to

hobbies), retouch their photos, utilize applications to organize photos, and be featured alone in

their profile pictures (Thelwall & Vis, 2017). Thus women not only seem to share more images

to Snapchat, but also apply filters. In contrast, men were most likely to share their images on

Twitter and retouch their photos. Retouching photos implies heavier editing to enhance images.

It is important to note that self-presentation can be influenced by a variety of factors

rather than one factor alone. One study found that, in a sample of undergraduate students who

were also Facebook users, the participants were concerned about privacy and controlling the

information they share. However, they perceived themselves as disclosing more about

themselves than typical Facebook users. Some of the information they were likely to have shared

included birthdays, email addresses, profile pictures, pictures with friends, pictures at parties,

and pictures of themselves drinking with their friends. In addition, there was no significant

correlation between disclosure and control of information. Instead, the need for popularity

significantly predicted disclosure, while self-esteem and levels of trust predicted information

control (Christofides, Muise, & Desmarais, 2009). Thus, while the participants are concerned

over privacy issues on social media, it did not appear to stop them from sharing information.

Instead, the needs and concerns that they perceive can be solved by social media, take priority.

Another important factor is how users respond to feedback of their self-presentation. One study

presented Instagram users with scenarios of positive and negative feedback and measured their

22

emotional responses. It was found that false self-presentation (or outer, idealizing facade that is

presented to others) mediated the relationship between self-criticism and the affective response

to the negative scenarios. The study also utilized personality measures and found that those with

higher scores of dependency, self-criticism, and maladaptive personality measures responded

negatively to the negative feedback scenarios. Meanwhile, those who scored high on dependency

and efficacy responded positively to positive feedback scenarios (Jackson & Luchner, 2018).

Thus, dependency seems to play a significant role in responding to feedback.

Selfies

While selfies seem like a simple behavior, taking selfies can have a variety of

motivations. One study from India examined the sharing media and motives for taking selfies

(Shah & Tewari, 2016). Snapchat was found to be the most preferred social media or application

to share selfies. It was preferred over the following, respectively: WhatsApp, Instagram, and

Facebook. The motivations for taking selfies included convenience; control over taking the best

selfie possible (regardless of how many pictures it takes); the freedom to take selfies; the ease of

communication when compared to text alone; boasting about a newly acquired possession or

recent experience; boasting about one’s image in order to receive positive feedback; participating

in a fun, bonding social activity; and keeping a record of pleasant times (Shah & Tewari, 2016).

Therefore, there are a variety of reasons and motivations for users to take a selfie, with at least

some of those reasons being boasting. Another study from China examined the motivations

behind selfie sharing and viewing (Zhang, Bi, & Ha, 2018). The study consisted of in-depth

interviews with 16 Chinese and American students. Among American students, selfies were not

necessarily perceived to be narcissistic or the result of lower self-esteem. Among the Chinese

students, however, selfies were associated with narcissism and online impression management.

23

Overall, selfie-related behaviors were seen as a new form of communication, managing

impressions and relationships, and recording one’s life (Zhang et al., 2018). Thus, the

motivations and impression of taking selfies can vary by culture. In the case of Americans it is

not necessarily associated with narcissism. However, the importance of impression management

may also be found among American users. Another study conducted in-depth interviews with 15

women whose ages ranged from 20 to 30 years old at a university in the southern United States.

It was found that impression management along with boosting one’s self-esteem was an

important motivator for posting selfies (Pounders, Kowalczyk, & Stowers, 2016). Thus,

impression management may still play a role in selfies, at least for women. Taking selfies to

boost self-esteem also suggests that there may be a relationship between self-esteem and selfies.

While impression management seems to be an important motivator in sharing selfies, it is

also important to take into account the way individuals perceive and think about selfies. One

study found that selfies were useful in self-promotion (Diefenbach & Christoforakos, 2017).

Individuals who scored higher on self-promotion and self-disclosure felt positive while taking

selfies. Motives of self-presentation, however, were attributed to others’ selfies rather than one’s

own selfies. Interestingly, participants assumed others taking selfies had more positive feelings

while participants’ own individual selfies were seen as more ironic or authentic. Finally,

participants believed selfies had greater potential for negative consequences rather than positive

consequences (Diefenbach & Christoforakos, 2017). Selfies can meet the need or desire to

promote one’s self, even if individuals are unaware of this desire and aware of the desire in other

users. However, the goals and intent of selfies may vary by the social media on which the selfie

is shared. One study found that participants generally posted selfies to meet their own goals of

self-disclosure for entertainment as well as information storage. On Facebook, users shared

24

selfies to develop their relationships. For Twitter users, selfie sharing had a negative relationship

with the development of relationships. Finally, while older users primarily used Facebook to

share selfies, younger users preferred to share via Snapchat (Williamson, Stohlman, & Polinsky,

2017). The type of social medium an individual shared on not only can reflect the users’ needs to

entertain themselves and store information, but also can contribute to the strengthening or

weakening of relationships.

Since selfies have been seen to associated with impression management, it is natural that

photo editing can be very helpful. A South Korean study on female smartphone users found that

greater frequency in taking selfies, social media usage, and public self-consciousness were

positively associated with significantly greater social comparison against friends. This then

increased the frequency of selfie-editing. While greater frequency in taking selfies, social media

usage, and public self-consciousness were also positively and significantly associated with social

comparison against celebrities and influencers, this did not lead to a significant relationship with

selfie-editing. Interestingly, satisfaction with facial appearance had significant direct and indirect

effects on selfie editing (Choi, 2018). Photo editing is therefore closely related to an individual's

selfie habits, how much time an individual spends on social media, and social comparison.

However, the negative effect is not necessarily limited to taking selfies. Viewing selfies may also

have some relationships with self-esteem. One study found that frequently viewing selfies

predicted decreased self-esteem and life satisfaction. If an individual had a high need for

popularity, they were more likely to experience the effects of selfie viewing. In contrast, viewing

group photos increased self-esteem and life satisfaction. Selfie and group photo posting

behaviors, however, were not related to self-esteem or life satisfaction (Wang, Yang, & Haigh,

25

2017). Thus, it would appear that both taking and viewing selfies has negative relationships with

an individual’s self-esteem and perception of her or his appearance.

The relationship between selfies and perception of one’s self is not exclusive to physical

appearance; it also appears to have relationships with dissatisfaction with weight. One Australian

study examined the selfie behaviors of adolescent girls from grade 7, particularly in regards to

perception of weight and body shape, body dissatisfaction, and restraint in diet (McLean, Paxton,

Wertheim, & Masters, 2015). The study found that adolescent girls who shared selfies regularly

on social media reported having significantly higher body dissatisfaction, overvaluation of shape

and weight, restraint in diet, and internalization of the thin ideal. In addition, greater time

investment into choosing the right selfie and greater manipulation and editing of the selfies was

associated with more body dissatisfaction, dietary restraint, concern over shape and weight, and

internalization of the thin body ideal (McLean et al., 2015). Again, selfies have some relationship

with dissatisfaction with appearance. One study among female college students found a positive

relationship between the number of selfies taken and body dissatisfaction. Body Mass Index

(BMI) had a positive relationship with body dissatisfaction and a negative relationship with the

number of selfies taken. There was no correlation however between selfies posted to Instagram

and BMI or body dissatisfaction (Wagner, Aguirre Alfaro, & Bryant, 2016). Therefore, it appears

that selfies have a negative relationship with women and girls’ perception and satisfaction with

their weight and body shape.

In light of this, there appears to be some likelihood that there are gender differences in

the selfie-related behaviors. One Polish study used four narcissism subscales to attempt to predict

the likelihood of posting selfies. While women posted more selfies than men, there was not a

relationship between selfie sharing and narcissism among women. Men’s narcissism scores,

26

however, did positively predict selfie posting (Sorokowski et al., 2015). Thus there are gender

differences not only in how frequently individuals share selfies, but also in how likely they are to

be narcissistic if they frequently share selfies. Age along with gender can also strongly predict

selfie behaviors. A study from Norway examined the selfie behaviors of adolescents, young

adults, and middle-aged adults. It was found that women in general were more likely to take

individual and group selfies, post selfies, and edit the photos they shared on social media.

Adolescents were more likely to take individual and group selfies than young adults, who in turn

were more likely to take selfies than middle-aged adults. Predictive effects of age were found to

be strong in women (Dhir, Pallesen, Torsheim, & Andreassen, 2016). Thus, women and

adolescents appear to be the individuals who share more selfies than the older or male and older

male participants. And, women appear to participate more in the taking and sharing of selfies.

Narcissism and Social Media

Social media can help facilitate the behaviors of narcissistic individuals. One of these

behaviors can be social comparison. One study examined how narcissists made these

comparisons as well as how they felt about the comparisons (Krizan & Busman, 2011).

Narcissists had positive emotional responses to these comparisons and often regarded themselves

as superior to others. These social comparisons were also typically downwards which suggests

that the comparisons are made to reinforce the want to be admired as well as have a higher status

(Krizan & Busman, 2011). Thus, social media appears to facilitate a behavior individual’s with

narcissism already engage in. It is possible that social media can allow these social comparisons

with more ease due to the profiles and information that others share via social media.

Another behavior that an individual with narcissism or anyone could perform through

social media is impression management. One study conducted on undergraduate students found

27

narcissism to be a significant predictor for users on social media to use a profile picture on

Facebook that emphasized personality and the attractiveness of the individual (Kapidzic, 2013).

The findings were consistent for both men and women. The need to impress or give the

impression that one is attractive is easily met on social media by sharing pictures or media that

make the user appear attractive. Another study examined the relationships between social

networks, millennials, and narcissism. The study found that there was no relationship between

narcissism and how frequently individuals posted status updates, posted pictures of others,

checked on their SNS friends, or the amount of time they spent on an SNS. However, the study

did find that narcissism predicted why individuals were using an SNS. The reasons included

wanting to let SNS friends know what they were doing, believing that their SNS friends were

interested in whatever they were doing, having as many friends as possible, and making their

profiles on SNS project a positive image of the user (Bergman, Fearrington, Davenport, &

Bergman, 2011). Impression management is important to a narcissistic individual on social

media and appears to be one of the reasons they participate on social media. Other reasons such

as having many friends and letting others know what he or she was doing can also contribute to

the impression the user is attempting to create. Therefore, the need to manage one’s impression

or image is easily accomplished through social media.

Along with impression management, some narcissistic individuals may engage in self-

promotion. One study found that the grandiose exhibitionism subscale of the Narcissistic

Personality Inventory (NPI) predicted self-promoting behaviors on Facebook (Carpenter, 2012).

Self-promotion behaviors included posting status updates, accepting friend requests from

strangers in order to gain a larger audience, and posting pictures of themselves. Self-promotion,

similar to impression management, is an easily achievable task on social media, especially

28

Facebook. Self-promotion behaviors, however, are not exclusive to Facebook. One study from

South Korea found that individuals who had greater narcissistic characteristics were more likely

to rate their Instagram profile pictures as more physically attractive as well as engage in self-

promotion behaviors on Instagram (Moon, Lee, Lee, Choi, & Sung, 2016). These behaviors

included updating their profile pictures more often, posting selfies and self-presented photos, and

spending more time on the application than individuals who did not have greater levels of

narcissistic characteristics. In addition, the subscales of leadership/authority and grandiose

exhibitionism from the NPI had a negative relationship with the frequency of selfie posts and

profile picture evaluations and updates (Moon et al., 2016). Facebook is, therefore, not the only

social medium to facilitate self-promotion for narcissistic individuals. Ultimately, since social

media allow users to post selfies and makes otherwise less publicized actions such as connecting

or making friends more public and noticeable, social media easily meet the need for narcissistic

individuals to self-promote.

In addition to utilizing impression management and self-promotion, individuals who have

greater narcissistic characteristics also communicate on social media differently than others. One

study that focused on Facebook and Twitter use found that greater levels of narcissism had a

relationship with greater numbers of friends on Facebook and more “tweets” on Twitter that

were self-focused (McKinney, Kelly, & Duran, 2012). The narcissistic individuals

communicated more about themselves than those who were less narcissistic. Another study

examined the relationships between narcissism and behaviors on Facebook and Twitter among

college students. The researchers found that posting on Twitter had a relationship with the

Superiority aspect of narcissism. Facebook posting however had a positive relationship with the

Exhibitionistic (or flaunting) dimension of narcissism. Those with high Superiority posted more

29

on Facebook than Twitter. Finally, both sites were utilized more by users who were concerned

about their appearance and, in the case of college students, showing off (Panek, Nardis, &

Konrath, 2013). Therefore, not only are narcissistic individuals more likely to post about

themselves, but also more likely to post in general on their social media of choice. Finally,

another study found that narcissistic individuals who used less first-person singular pronouns

such as “I” or “me” were more likely to display sexy photos of themselves on Facebook and

engage in more self-promoting behaviors (DeWall, Buffardi, Bonser, & Campbell, 2011). This

type of narcissistic individual is also more likely than non-narcissistic individuals to use

aggressive and profane language when asked to write about themselves. Thus, along with

promoting themselves using photos or using aggressive language, these individuals are less

likely to use first-person singular pronouns. Therefore, the way narcissistic individuals

communicate via social media posts and how frequently they post can be characteristically

different than individuals who are not considered narcissistic.

With so many observable ways that narcissists can behave on social media, non-

narcissistic individuals have some awareness as to who is narcissistic on social media. A study

found that narcissism predicted certain tendencies on SNSs (in this case, Facebook); these

included greater self-promotion on the respective user’s Facebook profile page and greater social

activity on the online community. Individuals who were determined to be narcissistic via a self-

report inventory were also determined to be narcissistic by strangers who judged their Facebook

profile pages. The judgements made by strangers were influenced by the self-promotion features

in the user’s profile photo, the attractiveness of the profile photo, and the quality of the social

interaction (the number of wall post messages and number of friends linked to the user’s page)

(Buffardi & Campbell, 2008). Impression management, communication on posts, and self-

30

promotion are all observable behaviors on social media. Non-narcissistic users are aware of these

behavior patterns and can identify individuals who are more narcissistic on social media.

Excessive selfies have been perceived as narcissistic by society. In fact, one study found

that individuals rate social media posts with selfies as more narcissistic and socially

inappropriate than social media posts without selfies (Taylor, Hinck, & Lim, 2017). The same

study also found that social media posts with selfies were also rated as less socially attractive.

Thus, people in general associate selfies with narcissism. Along with being perceived as

narcissistic, some of the motivations for taking selfies can also be at least somewhat narcissistic.

One study found that primary motivations for taking a selfie included communication, seeking

attention, entertainment, and archiving. Of these four motivations, seeking attention,

communication, and archiving significantly predicted plans to post selfies. However, narcissism

also predicted plans and frequency to post selfies (Sung, Lee, Kim, & Choi, 2016). Therefore,

not only is narcissism associated with selfies, but the motivation for taking and posting selfies on

social media can also be narcissism.

While some have argued that selfies are the cause of narcissism and of narcissistic

attitudes in smartphone and social media users, some studies show that the relationship is more

complex than a simple cause and effect model would predict. One study found that although

taking selfies increased levels of narcissism, narcissists already took selfies more frequently than

non-narcissists (Halpern, Valenzuela, & Katz, 2016). Thus, while taking selfies may increase

narcissism, individuals with greater levels of narcissism are likely already engaging in this

behavior and taking many selfies. It is also possible that certain facets of narcissism predict selfie

sharing. Another study found that two of the three facets of narcissism, Leadership/Authority and

Grandiose Exhibitionism, could also predict increased selfie sharing. The third facet,

31

Entitlement/Exploitativeness, could not predict selfie sharing. Age did not moderate any of the

predictive effects (Weiser, 2015). The Leadership/Authority and Grandiose Exhibitionism likely

contribute to an increased need for the user to self-promote, receive more attention, and maintain

positive impressions. Posting and sharing selfies is the way a narcissistic individual can achieve

those goals. Another study found that self-esteem could moderate the relationship between

selfie-posting and narcissism (March & McBean, 2018). In this study higher grandiose-type

narcissism and lower self-esteem were found to be related to more selfie-posting. However, the

relationship between narcissism and selfie-posting was only significant when self-esteem was

average or below average. It is possible that selfie sharing is a form of impression management

that attempts to mask the lack of self-esteem the individual actually has. Thus, there are

interesting relationships between selfie sharing and narcissism.

However, selfies in general may not necessarily be related to narcissism. One study found

that neither selfies nor photos taken featuring the social media user were significantly correlated

with narcissism (grandiose, vulnerable, or non-pathological) (Barry, Reiter, Anderson,

Schoessler, & Sidoti, 2017). Self-esteem also was not significantly correlated with any themes of

selfies; these themes included physical appearance, event/activity/location/accomplishment,

affiliation with others, collage, and other/undifferentiated. More specifically, however, collage-

style selfies were found to have a significant negative correlations with non-pathological

narcissism; event selfies were found to have a significant positive correlation with grandiose

narcissism; event/activity photos that featured the user (but were not selfies) had a significant

positive correlation non-pathological narcissism; and collage-style photos were the user posed

that were not selfies were negatively correlated with non-pathological narcissism (Barry et al.,

2017). The relationship with event-related selfies and narcissism may be the results of

32

impression management for narcissists. A user being shown to attend events and activities may

be an attempt to promote one’s self and appear more sociable, affluent, or attractive.

Aside from the behaviors themselves, attitudes about selfie taking may also have

relationships with narcissism. One study found that perceived behavioral control, attitude about

selfie-posting, subjective norm (whether other people the individual cares about think about

selfies), and narcissism positively affect a user's intention to a post selfie on an SNS. Intention to

post a selfie positively affected an individual’s actual selfie posting behavior on SNSs (Kim, Lee,

Sung, & Choi, 2016). Thus, having a positive attitude about posting selfies along with

narcissism, can make a person more likely to post a selfie on social media and SNSs. Similarly,

another study found positive a relationship between millennials’ attitudes about and desire to

participate in selfie-oriented marketing, and narcissism (Fox, Bacile, Nakhata, & Weible, 2018).

Thus, the desire to participate in selfie taking, even in the context of marketing has positive

relationship with narcissism.

Positive attitudes about selfies does not require users to participate in selfie-oriented

marketing. One study found that individuals with greater levels of narcissism are more likely to

perceive posting selfies as positive (Lee & Sung, 2016). In addition, they also were more likely

to be involved in the feedback others gave to them and be aware of other user’s selfies. Thus,

narcissistic individuals are more likely to regard selfie posting positively as well be more aware

of the feedback on the post. Similarly, another study found a relationship between individuals

with greater narcissism and positive perceptions of selfies (McCain et al., 2016). Grandiose

narcissism was found to have a relationship with feeling greater positive affect when taking

selfies, taking more selfies, and posting more selfies. Grandiose narcissism was also found to

have a positive relationship with self-reporting impression management as a reason to take and

33

post selfies. Interestingly, individuals with vulnerable narcissism were more likely to experience

negative affect when taking selfies and self-esteem had no relationship with taking selfies

(McCain et al., 2016). Thus individuals with grandiose narcissism (what most people associate as

narcissistic) view and feel selfie sharing and posting positively.

Aside from selfies, some research suggests that narcissists spend more time on social

media than non-narcissists. One study found a positive correlation between narcissism and time

spent on social media. The correlation between the number of social media used and narcissism

was not significant (Sommerville, 2015). Thus, individuals with narcissism are more likely to

spend more time on social media than non-narcissistic individuals. However, time spent on

social media may be influenced by the type of narcissism an individual has. One study found that

the relationship between time spent on social media (in this case Facebook) was influenced by

the type of narcissism a narcissistic individual was. Vulnerable narcissism and grandiose

narcissism were correlated with greater Facebook use. However, when core narcissism (or the

overlapping facets of vulnerable and grandiose narcissism) was controlled, only vulnerable

narcissism was correlated with greater Facebook use and social comparison (Ozimek, Bierhodd,

& Hanke, 2018). Thus, while grandiose narcissists post and share more content on social media,

vulnerable narcissists are spending more time on social media, perhaps to perform social

comparisons. It is also possible that narcissism is not the only influential factor for how long an

individual may spend on social media. One study found that narcissism, self-esteem, and stress

could significantly predict the intensity (frequency and duration) of Facebook use in a multiple

regression model. Additionally, the study found that after using Facebook, there was a small to

medium effect of an increase in self-esteem (O’Sullivan & Hussain, 2017). Thus, it is possible

that along with narcissism, issues with stress and self-esteem contribute to how long an

34

individual spends on social media. Overall, however, there appears to be some relationship

between narcissism and time spent on social media.

Somewhat similar to long periods of time spent on social media, is social media

addiction. One study from India examined the relationship between narcissism, low self-esteem,

and social media addiction (Thiagarajan, Venkatachalam, & Sebastian, 2017). The study found

that women with social media addiction had a greater tendency to have lower self-esteem and

higher narcissism. The same relationship for men with social media addiction was not significant

(Thiagarajan et al., 2017). Thus, there appears to be some relationship between social media

addiction and narcissism, at least for women.

Individuals who are narcissistic may also present themselves on social media differently.

While relatively many studies have addressed the relationships between selfie sharing and

narcissism, few studies have addressed how frequently these photos may be edited. One study

examined how different Dark Triad traits and self-objectification could predict different ways to

use social networking sites (Fox & Rooney, 2015). The Dark Triad consists of psychopathy,

Machiavellianism, and narcissism. Self-objectification is the presentation of oneself in a sexually

objectifying manner. Narcissism and self-objectification predicted greater time spent on an SNS,

narcissism and psychopathy predicted greater sharing of selfies on an SNS, and narcissism and

self-objectification predicted for heavier editing of photos on SNS (Fox & Rooney, 2015). Since

Snaphat is highly image- and selfie-oriented, it is possible that different usages of the application

may be able to predict narcissism.

One major concern or at least recurring theme among older generations is that younger

generations are more narcissistic than previous ones. However, one study found that the

narcissists of different generations use social media but have preferences for which they prefer to

35

use (Davenport, Bergman, Bergman, & Fearrington, 2014). Narcissistic college students

preferred to use Twitter while narcissistic adults preferred to use Facebook. Thus there are

narcissistic users of different ages on social media, but they are not necessarily all on the same

social medium. Indeed, it appears that younger users who are narcissistic prefer the same social

media as their non-narcissistic counterparts. Another study also found a relationship between

older adults, narcissism, and Facebook use. Baby Boomers who had greater exploitativeness

according to the subscale of the NPI preferred to use blogs as well as Facebook to generate

content to manipulate and exploit others. This relationship however did not exist for Generation

Xers and the Net Geners (people born between 1977 and 1997) (Leung, 2013). Thus the

relationship between social media and narcissism is not exclusive to younger generations.

Instead these relationships seem to be consistent for older individuals as well.

Research Purpose and Hypothesis

Despite the quantity of research that has been produced regarding mental health or

psychological concerns and social media, the majority of these studies have either focused on

Facebook or general social media usage. Few studies had examined these relationships with

specific social media that are not Facebook despite the growing number of users in social media.

The different features and uses of social media may also influence who is attracted to specific

social media and how individuals (both with and without certain qualities) use these specific

social media. More specifically, can the frequency and number of filter usages on Snapchat

predict greater grandiose narcissism? Additionally, does the frequency of sharing selfies on

Snapchat have a relationship with narcissism, like other social media such as Facebook? On

account of previous literature, I hypothesize that (h1) greater selfie sharing will predict greater

narcissism, and that greater modification of pictures and videos sent to friends through (h2)

36

filters and (h3) other features including text, emojis/stickers, and doodles will predict greater

narcissism.

37

CHAPTER 2

METHOD

Participants

Participants were adult undergraduate students enrolled at California State University,

Dominguez Hills (CSUDH). Students were recruited via flyers and through lower-division

social-behavioral sciences and psychology classes during Fall 2017. The participants consisted of

active Snapchat users, non-active Snapchat users, and non-Snapchat users. Active Snapchat users

are defined as reporting that they are logging into and using Snapchat at least once a month.

Non-active Snapchat users are defined as logging into and using Snapchat less than once a

month. Non-Snapchat users are defined as not using Snapchat at all. No participants were

rejected from the study because of their Snapchat user status, but the study only examined and

analyzed the responses of those who identified themselves as active Snapchat users.

Data were collected from 325 respondents, 88% of which are active Snapchat users.

Thus, there were 279 participants. Participants were all CSUDH students during fall 2017.

Participants who completed took less than 7 minutes on the survey were removed from the data.

Participants who spent more than 1 hour on the survey were also removed from the data. All

participants were 18 years old and older. The average age of the participants was 21.31 (SD =

3.64). However, the ages for the participants ranged from 18 to 56 years old. In order to create a

normal age distribution, ages 30 through 56 were removed since they accounted for less than 2%

of the data and were contributing to the data’s skew. The skewness of age prior to cleaning was

4.34 (SE = .15) and the kurtosis of 32.91 (SE = .29). After removing the participants who were

aged 30 years-old or older, the skewness was 1.22 (SE = .15) and the kurtosis was .95 (SE = .29).

38

Thus, there were 274 participants. The age then ranged from 18 to 28 years old with a mean age

of 20.97 (SD = 2.39).

The sex distribution of the participants was 23.7% male and 76.3% female. The ethnic

distribution for the participants was as follows: Hispanic/Latino at 70.4%, Asian at 9.5%,

White/Caucasian at 8.0%, Other at 5.5%, Black/African American at 4.4%, Native

Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander 1.8%, and American Indian/Alaska Native .4%. The distribution

of the class standing for the participants was 10.9% Freshman, 27.0% Sophomore, 39.4%

Junior, and 22.6% Senior. The postal codes of the participants were also collected in order

examine any correlations with median income within the postal codes. The postal codes were

then converted to a median income based on the postal code. Median income data was based on

2014 data on the median incomes that resided within postal codes. The participants came from

areas where the estimated annual median household income was a mean of $51,462 (SD =

$20,119).

Procedure

A questionnaire was distributed to participants via SurveyMonkey.com. Participants were

presented with an informed consent that was approved by the Institutional Review Board (IRB)

of CSUDH. Participants were told that the purpose of the study was to examine relationships

between Snapchat usage and psychological well-being. Participants were also informed that they

needed to be at least 18 years old or older to participate. After consenting to participate in the

study, participants were asked to indicate if they were an active Snapchat user. The definition of

an active Snapchat user was also given to the participants. If the individual indicated they were

not an active Snapchat user, the survey logic skipped them past all the survey items regarding

Snapchat usage. If, however, the participant responded that they were an active Snapchat user,

39

the survey presented them with items regarding Snapchat usage. These items included time,

picture, sharing, and filter-oriented behaviors on Snapchat.

Following the items that examined Snapchat usage, participants were asked to select as

many other SNSs that they logged into and used at least once a month. The list of SNS options

included Facebook, LinkedIn, Instagram, Pinterest, Reddit, and Twitter. There also was a “None

of the Above” option. Next, participants were presented with the Daily Media Usage Scale

(Carrier, Cheever, Rosen, Benitez, & Chang, 2009). Next, participants responded to the

Narcissism Personality Inventory-13 (NPI-13) (Gentile et al., 2013). The participants were also

presented with an “Online” version of the NPI-13 which essentially were items from the NPI-13

with an added online context. Following the “online” NPI-13, the participants were presented

with the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale (Rosenberg, 1965). Lastly, the participants answered

questions regarding demographics. After answering all items and measures, the participants were

thanked for their participation and informed that the study would examine the relationships

between Snapchat usage and self-esteem and narcissism. The participants were also given

contact information if they had any questions or concerns regarding the study.

Measures

Snapchat Items

In order to assess the amount of time participants were spending on Snapchat, 6 different

items were used. The first two items examined how frequently participants used Snapchat. These

two items were on a scale of 1 to 7 (1 being less than once per month; 7 being several times per

day). The items asked how frequently users logged into and checked their Snapchat application

and how frequently they used their Snapchat application. In addition to assessing frequency of

use, participants were also presented with items asking about how much time they spent using

40

the application. One item examined how much time the participants spent on the application each

time they used the application with a 7-point scale (1 being less than 5 minutes; 7 being more

than 30 minutes). Participants were also asked how much time they spent per day using

Snapchat, checking other people’s snaps, and taking snaps on a 7-point scale (1 being less than

15 minutes; 7 being more than 60 minutes).

Participants were also asked questions about their sharing-related behaviors on Snapchat.

These items were adapted from the items regarding photo-sharing behavior from a study by Fox

and Rooney (2015) that examined Dark Triad traits including narcissism and social networking

behaviors. Participants were asked how many snaps, snaps that include themselves (including

selfies), and snaps that did not include themselves they shared in the past week. Participants

could indicate how many snaps they shared using a drop-down menu of options ranging from 0

to 100+. Participants were also asked with how many other users or friends they usually shared

their snaps, snaps that included themselves (including selfies), and snaps that did not include

themselves in the past week. Participants could indicate how many other users or friends they

typically shared their snaps with using a drop-down menu of options ranging from 0 to 100+. In

addition to items about sharing snaps, participants were also asked about whether they shared

their location on Snapchat. Specifically, participants were asked how often they shared their

location and checked their friends’ locations on Snapchat using a 5-point scale (1 being never; 5

being always).

Participants were also presented with items that examined how they modified their snaps

when using the application. The items asked how frequently the participants applied each of the

following to their snaps: text or captions, filters, emojis, and doodles. Participants could indicate

frequency by selecting an option on a 5-point scale (1 being never; 5 being always). These items

41

were adapted from a previous study on picture editing and narcissism (Fox & Rooney, 2015).

Participants were also asked to indicate how many filters they typically applied to their picture

and video snaps respectively using a dropdown menu of options ranging from 0 to 5. Currently,

Snapchat allows for a maximum of 5 filters on a snap so there was no option greater than 5.

Participants were also asked about how frequently they modified their photos with the intent of

making themselves look better. Specifically, they were asked if they used an individual filter,

multiple filters, emojis, doodles, and text respectively to improve their self-presentation.

Participants could indicate how frequently they engaged in these modifying behaviors on a 5-

point scale (1 being never; 5 being always).

In order to identify the types of pictures and videos that are shared on Snapchat,

participants were asked to indicate what kind of snaps they share on Snapchat. Participants were

provided a list of options and could select as many as applied to them. These options were as

follows: animals; being part of an information loop (or sharing information); beautiful things;

distraction or procrastination; drunk photos; events; flirting or finding new love interests; food;

funny things; joke sexting; keeping in touch with family; keeping in touch with friends; keeping

touch with past romantic partners; legally questionable activities; meeting new friends; myself;

people; seeing what people are up to; sexting; staying in touch with current romantic partner(s)

or spouse; what I’m up to; and other. These items were adapted from another study that

examined what Snapchat users were sharing on Snapchat and how it impacted relationship

jealousy (Utz et al., 2015). More items were added than were in the study by Utz et al. (2015) in

order to account for the variety of pictures and videos that are shared on Snapchat.

Finally, participants were presented with items regarding “Memories” or saved pictures

and videos from Snapchat. Participants were asked items including how often they save to

42

Memories their snaps, snaps of themselves, snaps of other people without them, and snaps

without themselves or others. Frequency was indicated with a 5-point scale (1 being Never; 5

being Always). The same scale was also used to measure how frequently participants saved

pictures with and without filters as well as how often people shared snaps, snaps of themselves,

and snaps without them that they had already saved to Memories that they did not share at the

time they took the photo.

Social Networking Site Usage

In order measure how many and which other Social Networking Sites (SNSs) participants

used in addition to or instead of Snapchat, participants were presented with a list of popular

SNSs that they might use at least once a month. This list included Facebook, Twitter, Instagram,

Tumblr, Pitnerest, and Reddit. The list included a “none of the above” option as well.

Participants could select as many SNSs that they used at least once a month.

Daily Media Usage Scale

A measure of media and technology use was administered within the survey. The Daily

Media Usage Scale measures the technology and media usage of individuals based on 12

different tasks (Carrier et al., 2009). The usage is measured by the number of hours participants

spent on each of these tasks per day on a 4-point scale (1 being 0-1 hours; 4 being 6 or more

hours). These tasks include emailing, instant messaging or chatting online, talking to other

people face to face, going online and visiting websites, talking on the telephone, texting, playing

video games, listening to music, watching television, reading a book or magazine (not for work

or school), and using a social network or application. A score for Total Tech Use was calculated

by summing the points on emailing, instant messaging or chatting online, going online and

43

visiting websites, texting, playing video games, listening to music, watching television, and

using a social network or application.

Narcissism Personality Inventory-13

The Narcissism Personality Inventory -13 (NPI-13) was used to assess levels of grandiose

narcissism within the study (Gentile et al., 2013b). Each item has the participant choose one

option from a pair of “attitudes” that most applies to them. This inventory is based on the

Narcissism Personality Inventory (NPI) (Raskin & Hall, 1979). The NPI-13 contains only 13

items while the original NPI is 40 items. The NPI-13 has been shown to have good convergent

and discriminant validity and adequate overall reliability during its creation (α = .73) and a

subsequent study comparing it against the original NPI (α = .82) (Gentile et al., 2013a). The NPI-

13 can also be broken down into three subscales: Leadership/Authority,

Grandiose/Exhibitionism, and Entitlement/Exploitativeness. The following has been reported as

the internal consistency for each of the subscales respectively; α = .66, α = .65, α =.55 (Gentile et

al., 2013a).

“Online” Narcissism Personality Inventory-13

An “online” version of the NPI-13 was created and included in the survey. This online

version contained the same number of items and essentially the same content as the NPI-13.

However, the experimenter added an online context to each of the items. For example, one of the

“attitudes” of the NPI-13 is “I like to show off my body” (Gentile et al., 2013b). On the “online”

NPI-13, this attitude becomes “I like to show off my body online.”

Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale (RSES)

In order assess self-esteem, participants were presented the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale

(RSES). The RSES is a 10-item scale with statements that participants respond to using a 4-point

44

response scale (1 being strongly agree; 4 being strongly disagree). An example of one of these

items is “I feel that I have a number of good qualities” (Rosenberg, 1965). Item 3, 5, 8, 9, and 10

are reverse-scored.

45

CHAPTER 3

RESULTS

Preliminary Analyses Regarding Sample Characteristics Snapchat Usage

The majority (63.5%) of participants log into and check their Snapchat application

several times per day. As for the rest of the participants, 18.6% check the application a few times

per day, 6.2% check at least once per day, 5.8% check a few times per week, 2.2% a few times

per month, 2.2% check at least once a month, and 1.5% check their application less than once a

month. Participants were also asked how often they used Snapchat (including send snaps, post

stories, etc.). 43.1% of participants reported using Snapchat several times per day, 22.3% a few

times per day, 10.6% at least once per day, 12.4% a few times per week, 6.2% a few times per

month, 3.6% at least once a month, and 1.8% less than once per month. The majority of the

participants also spent approximately 5 to 10 minutes at a time on the application (31.8%).

Another large portion of the participants (26.6%) spent less than 5 minutes at a time on the

application. As for the rest of the participants, 17.5% spent 10 to 15 minutes at a time, 8.4%

spent 15 to 20 minutes at a time, 4.0% spent 20 to 25 minutes at a time, 4.0% spent 25 to 30

minutes at a time, and 7.7% spent more than 30 minutes at a time on the application.

Participants were also asked to estimate how much time a day they spent using Snapchat

as well as how much time they spent using specific features on Snapchat. The majority (39.1%)

estimated that they spent less than 15 minutes per day on general Snapchat use. As for the rest of

the participants, 21.5% estimated they spend 15 to 30 minutes per day, 17.5% estimated they

spent 30 to 45 minutes per day, 7.7% estimated they spent 45 to 60 minutes per day, and 14.2%

estimated they spent more than 60 minutes per day. More specifically, 55.1% spent less than 15

46

minutes, 24.5% spent 15 to 30 minutes, 14.6% spent 30 to 45 minutes, 2.2% spent 45 to 60

minutes, and 3.6% spent more than 60 minutes per day looking at other people’s snaps, (either

sent to them directly or via the story feature). In contrast, 74.8% spent less than 15 minutes,

16.1% spent 15 to 30 minutes, 3.6% spent 30 to 45 minutes, 2.2% spent 45 to 60 minutes, and

3.3% spent more than 60 minutes taking snaps.

In addition to how much time they were spending on Snapchat, participants also were

asked how many snaps they shared and how many friends they shared their snaps with.

Specifically, participants were asked to report their answers based on their sharing behaviors on

Snapchat in the past week. Participants shared a mean 16.51 (SD = 20.73) snaps (pictures and

videos) during the previous week. Of those snaps, participants reported to sharing a mean of

10.20 (SD = 17.49) selfie snaps (selfies or pictures and/or videos that feature the user) in the

previous week. In contrast, participants reported sharing a mean 12.78 (SD = 18.82) snaps in the

previous week that did not include themselves in the snap. Participants also indicated the number

of friends they typically shared their snaps with in the previous week. In general, participants

shared their snaps with a mean of 14.63 (SD = 21.10) friends. In regards to selfies, participants

shared the snaps of themselves with a mean of 9.27 (SD = 17.16) friends. As for the snaps that

did not feature the participant, participants shared this type with a mean of 12.50 (SD = 19.08)

friends.

In addition to sharing snaps, participants were also asked to if they shared their location

on Snapchat. The majority (44.9%) reported never sharing their locations. The rest of the

participants shared their location to varying degrees. In regards to sharing their location, 23.4%

claimed to do so rarely, 19.7% some of the time, 6.9% often, and 5.1% always shared their

location. Participants also were asked how frequently they checked their friends’ shared

47

locations on Snapchat. The majority (45.6%) reported to never check it. Meanwhile, 30.3%

claimed to check it rarely, 15.7% sometimes, 5.8% often, and 2.6% always checked it.

Participants were asked how they edited and manipulated their snaps. The majority of the

participants (51.1%) reported to almost always add text or captions to their snaps. As for the rest

of the participants, 17.2% claimed to always add text, 25.2% sometimes added text, 6.2% rarely

added text, and 0.4% claimed to never add text or captions to their snaps. In regards to filters,

2.2% reported they never used filters, 8.8% said they used them rarely, 32.1% said they

sometimes used them, 40.5% reported to almost always use filters, and 16.4% claimed to always

apply filter to their snaps. Participants were also asked about the doodle or drawing feature on

Snapchat and how frequently they applied it to their snaps. 16.8% reported never, 47.4% said

they rarely used it, 27.4% reported sometimes using it, 6.6% said they almost always used it, and

1.8% claimed to always use it on their snaps. Finally, participants their frequency of emoji use

on their snaps with 3.3% never using them, 15.3% rarely using them, 36.9% sometimes using

them, 33.6% almost always using them, and 10.9% always using them. Participants were also

asked about how many filters they typically applied to their Snaps. For snaps that were pictures,

participants applied a mean of 2.67 (SD = 1.05) filters. For snaps that were videos, participants

applied a mean of 2.24 (SD = 1.11) filters.

Participants were also asked about how often they applied editing (e.g., filters, emojis,

text) to “make [themselves] look better” or improve the way they were perceived by others. In

regards to using an individual filter improving the way others perceived them, 10.9% of the

participants claimed to never do this, 19.0% rarely did this, 30.3% did this sometimes, 20.8%

often did this, and 19.0% reported to always do this. Participants were also asked if they

48

attempted to “look better” using multiple filters. 25.2% reported never doing this, 24.5% rarely,

28.1% sometimes, 12.4% often, and 9.9% always.

Participants reported the frequency of attempting to improve their image by using emojis

on their snaps with 35.0% reported never doing this, 31.4% rarely doing this, 20.4% sometimes

doing this, 8.0% often doing this, and 5.1% always doing this. Next, the majority of the

participants (53.3%) never applied to doodles or drawings to a snap to improve the way they

were perceived by others. 21.2% rarely did this, 17.9% sometimes did this, 3.6% did this often,

and 4.0% always did this. Finally, participants reported data on how frequently they used text on

their snaps with the intent of improving the way others perceive them on their snaps. 31.4%

never, 28.5% rarely, 25.5% sometimes, 8.0% often, and 6.6% always applied text for this

purpose on their snaps.

The frequencies for the types of snaps are displayed in Table 1 with food, events, and

beautiful things being the top three most shared type of snaps. Table 2 displays the frequencies if

saving different types of snaps to Memories and Table 3 displays the frequencies of sharing or

posting saved snaps.

49

Table 1

Frequencies of types of Snaps participants shared on Snapchat (N = 279)

Theme/type of snap N %

Food 228 83.2

Events 229 83.6

Beautiful things 203 74.1

Keeping in touch with friends 197 71.9

Funny things 193 70.4

Myself 190 69.3

What I’m up to 190 69.3

Animals 187 68.2

Distraction or procrastination 177 64.6

People 143 52.2

Seeing what other people are up to 143 52.2

Keeping in touch with family 112 40.9

Drunk photos 89 32.5

Staying in touch with current romantic

partner(s) or spouse

86 31.4

Meeting new friends 55 20.1

50

Table continued

Flirting or finding new love interests 55 20.1

Being part of an information loop 47 17.2

Keeping in touch with past romantic partners 41 15.0

Legally questionable activities 29 10.6

Sexting 29 10.6

Joke sexting 21 7.7

Other 14 5.1

51

Table 2

Frequency of saving snaps to Memories (N = 279)

Item N %

Saved snaps

Always 64 23.4

Often 102 37.2

Sometimes 70 25.5

Rarely 31 11.3

Never 7 2.6

Saved selfie snaps or snaps that feature user

Always 59 21.5

Often 80 29.2

Sometimes 66 24.1

Rarely 50 18.2

Never 19 6.9

Saved snaps that did not feature any people

Always 43 15.7

Often 67 24.5

Sometimes 92 33.6

52

Table continued

Rarely 52 19.0

Never 20 7.3

Saved snaps that features other people but not the user

Always 46 16.8

Often 76 27.7

Sometimes 81 29.6

Rarely 50 18.2

Never 21 7.7

Saved snaps with filters

Always 50 18.2

Often 76 27.7

Sometimes 76 27.7

Rarely 54 19.7

Never 18 6.6

Saved snaps without filters

Always 37 13.5

Often 75 27.4

Sometimes 96 35.0

53

Table continued

Rarely 52 19.0

Never 14 5.1

54

Table 3

Frequencies for sharing saved snaps

Item N %

Sharing saved snaps

Always 15 5.5

Often 46 16.8

Sometimes 88 32.1

Rarely 76 27.7

Never 49 17.9

Sharing saved snaps of yourself

Always 12 4.4

Often 35 12.8

Sometimes 77 28.1

Rarely 77 28.1

Never 73 26.6

Sharing saved snaps that did not include yourself

Always 10 3.6

Often 41 15.0

Sometimes 76 27.7

55

Table continued

Rarely 91 33.2

Never 56 20.4

Social Media Usage

The majority of the participants (72.3%) described themselves as active users of

Facebook while 27.7% were non-active users or did not use Facebook. For LinkedIn, 5.1% of

participants described themselves as active users while the majority (94.9%) either did not use

LinkedIn or were not active users. The majority of the participants (89.4%) were active

Instagram users while 10.6% either did not use Instagram or were not active users. 28.5% of the

participants were active Pinterest users while 71.5% reported that they either did not have

accounts for Pinterest or were non-active users. Only 5.1% described themselves as active Reddit

users while 94.9% were non-active users or did not use Reddit. 44.9% of participants described

themselves as active Twitter users while 55.1% described themselves as non-active users or did

not use Twitter. Only 3.3% of participants were non-active members of all social media or did

not have accounts to any other social media aside from Snapchat.

Daily Media Usage Scale

The frequencies for the Daily Media Usage Scale can be found on Table 4. Emailing,

video games, watching TV, and reading book and magazines took 1 or less of the majority of

participants’ day. Going online and visiting websites, instant messaging and participating in

online chats, talking on the phone, listening to music, talking with someone face to face, and

using a social networking site or app took 2 to 3 hours of the majority of participants’ day.

56

Texting on the phone did not have a distinct majority; instead, the responses were more evenly

distributed among the four response options.

57

Table 4

Frequencies for Daily Media Usage Scale

Item N %

Going online and visiting websites

0-1 hours 97 35.4

2-3 hours 114 41.6

4-5 hours 38 13.9

6 or more hours 25 9.1

Using email

0-1 hours 196 71.5

2-3 hours 57 20.8

4-5 hours 15 5.5

6 or more hours 6 2.2

Instant messaging or participating in online chats

0-1 hours 159 58.0

2-3 hours 65 23.7

4-5 hours 28 10.2

6 or more hours 22 8.0

58

Table continued

Talking on a telephone

0-1 hours 210 76.6

2-3 hours 47 17.2

4-5 hours 11 4.0

6 or more hours 6 2.2

Text messaging on a cell phone

0-1 hours 75 27.4

2-3 hours 74 27.0

4-5 hours 62 22.6

6 or more hours 63 23.0

Playing video games

0-1 hours 231 84.3

2-3 hours 22 8.0

4-5 hours 13 4.7

6 or more hours 8 2.9

Listening to music

0-1 hours 76 27.7

2-3 hours 82 29.9

59

Table continued

4-5 hours 71 25.9

6 or more hours 45 16.4

Watching television

0-1 hours 129 47.1

2-3 hours 91 33.2

4-5 hours 40 14.6

6 or more hours 14 5.1

Reading books or magazine (not for school or work)

0-1 hours 212 77.4

2-3 hours 46 16.8

4-5 hours 13 4.7

6 or more hours 3 1.1

Talking to someone face to face

0-1 hours 66 24.1

2-3 hours 86 31.4

4-5 hours 75 27.4

6 or more hours 47 17.2

60

Table continued

Using a social networking website or app

0-1 hours 52 19.0

2-3 hours 107 39.1

4-5 hours 70 25.5

6 or more hours 45 16.4

NPI-13

The mean NPI-13 score for the study was 3.86 (SD = 2.58). Average scores for the NPI-

13 can vary. The frequencies for each of the responses of the items in the current study can be

found on Table 5. One German paper that included three different studies and groups of

participants found mean scores for a normative population to be 3.39 (SD = 2.19), 3.55 (SD =

2.16), and 3.45 (SD = 2.36) (Brailovskaia, Bierhoff, & Margraf, 2017). Another study gathered

data on mean scores on the NPI-13 among university students in Japan, Poland, and the United

Kingdom. Their mean scores were converted from a sum score to a score between zero and one.

The converted mean NPI-13 score for Japan was 0.28 (SD = 0.19) or 3.64 (SD = 2.47) as a sum

score. Poland’s converted mean score was 0.35 (SD = 0.19) or 4.55 (SD = 2.47) as a sum score.

Finally, the United Kingdom’s converted mean score was 0.24 (SD = 0.20) or 3.12 (SD = 2.6)

(Żemojtel‐Piotrowska et al., 2018).

The NPI-13 was found to have questionable internal reliability (α = .66). The

Leadership/Authority subscale also had questionable internal reliability (α = .61). The

61

Grandiose/Exhibitionism subscale had poor internal reliability (α = .59). Finally, the

Entitlement/Exploitativeness subscale had unacceptable reliability (α = .33).

Table 5

Frequencies for items on the NPI-13 (N = 279)

Attitude pairs N %

Item 1

I find it easy to manipulate people 82 29.9

I don’t like it when I find myself

manipulating people

192 70.1

Item 2

When people compliment me I get

embarrassed

180 65.7

I know that I am a good person because

everybody keeps telling me so

94 34.3

Item 3

I like having authority over other people 88 32.1

I don’t mind following orders 186 67.9

Item 4

I insist upon getting the respect that is

due me

67 24.5

I usually get the respect I deserve 207 75.5

62

Table continued

Item 5

I don’t particularly like to show off my

body

228 83.2

I like to show off my body 46 16.8

Item 6

I have a strong will to have power 106 38.7

Power for its own sake doesn’t interest

me

168 61.3

Item 7

I expect a great deal from other people 59 21.5

I like to do things for other people 215 78.5

Item 8

My body is nothing special 177 64.6

I like to look at my body 97 35.4

Item 9

Being in authority doesn’t mean that

much to me

191 69.7

People always seem to recognize my

authority

83 30.3

63

Table continued

Item 10

I will never be satisfied until I get all

that I deserve

78 28.5

I will take my satisfactions as they come 196 71.5

Item 11

I try not to be a show off 227 82.8

I will usually show off if I get the chance 47 17.2

Item 12

I am a born leader 75 27.4

Leadership is a quality that takes a long

time

to develop

199 199

Item 13

I like to look at myself in the mirror 136 49.6

I am not particularly interested in

looking at

myself in the mirror

138 50.4

64

“Online” NPI-13

The mean score for the “online” NPI-13 was 3.76 (SD = 2.87). The responses for each of

the items was also examined and can be found on Table 6. The “Online” NPI-13 was found to

have acceptable reliability (α = .75). The Leadership/Authority subscale of the “Online” NPI-13

also had questionable internal reliability (α = .52). The Grandiose/Exhibitionism subscale had

questionable reliability (α = .65). Finally, the Entitlement/Exploitativeness subscale had

unacceptable reliability (α = .51). The correlation between NPI-13 and the “Online” NPI-13 is

large and statistically significant, r (272) = .63, p < .01, 95% CI [.54, .72]. Individuals who had

had high scores on the NPI-13 also had high scores on the “Online” NPI-13. Individuals who had

low scores on the NPI-13 also had low scores on the “Online” NPI-13.

65

Table 6

Frequencies for items on the Online NPI-13 (N = 279)

Attitude pairs N %

Item 1

I find it easy to manipulate people online 72 26.3

I don’t like it when I find myself

manipulating people online

202 73.7

Item 2

When people compliment me online I

get embarrassed

142 51.8

I know that I am a good person because

everybody keeps telling me so online

132 48.2

Item 3

I like having authority over other people

ONLINE

113 41.2

I don’t mind following orders ONLINE 161 58.8

Item 4

When I am ONLINE, I insist upon

getting the

respect that is due me

74 27.0

I usually get the respect I deserve

ONLINE

200 73.0

66

Table continued

Item 5

I don’t particularly like to show off my

body

226 82.5

I like to show off my body 48 17.5

Item 6

I have a strong desire for power

ONLINE

57 20.8

Power for its own sake doesn’t interest

me when I am ONLINE

217 79.2

Item 7

When I am ONLINE, I expect a great

deal from

other people

101 36.9

When I am ONLINE, I like to do things

for other people

173 63.1

Item 8

When I am ONLINE, I know that my

body is nothing special

217 79.2

I like to look at my body when I am

ONLINE, I like to look at my body

57 20.8

67

Table continued

Item 9

Being in authority doesn’t mean that

much to me ONLINE

209 76.3

People always seem to recognize my

authority when I am ONLINE

65 23.7

Item 10

When I am ONLINE, I will never be

satisfied until I get all that I deserve

59 21.5

When I am ONLINE, I will take my

satisfactions as they come

215 78.5

Item 11

I try not to be a show off when I am

ONLINE

191 69.7

I will usually show off if I get the chance

when I am ONLINE

83 30.3

Item 12

When I am ONLINE, I feel like I am a

born leader

71 25.9

When I am ONLINE, I think that

leadership is a quality that takes a long

time to develop

203 74.1

68

Table continued

Item 13

I like to look at myself ONLINE 98 35.8

I am not particularly interested in

looking at myself when I am ONLINE

176 64.2

Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale

The mean score on the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale was 22.48 (SD = 3.21). Scores on

this scale range from 10 to 40. One study that compared mean Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale

scores from a variety of subgroups within the United States found that across ages, ethnic

groups, genders, education levels, employment statuses, income levels, and marital statuses, the

mean score was 22.62 (SD = 5.80) (Sinclair et al., 2010). Thus, the mean score for the current

study was very close to the expected means for the United States.

Factor Analysis for Themes of Shared Snapchat Content

The types of snap variables were reduced using a factor analysis. Inter-item correlations

showed that each item was correlated .24 or higher with at least one other item. The Kaiser-

Meyer-Olkin measure of sampling adequacy was .81 and Bartlett's test of sphericity was

significant (𝛸2 (190) = 881.89 p < .001). The communalities were all above .30, further

confirming that each item shared some common variance with other items.

Given these overall indicators, a factor analysis was performed with all 20 items.

Principal component analysis with Varimax rotation was used. Initial eigenvalues indicated that

the first five factors explained 20.30%, 9.22%, 7.15%, 5.89%, and 5.42% of the variance

69

respectively. The sixth through twentieth components had eigenvalues less than 1. All of the

items had factor loadings of at least .37 on one factor. Four items, Distraction/Procrastination,

Funny Things, Keeping in Touch With Family, and Staying in Touch with Current Romantic

Partner(s) loaded into two factors. Ultimately, each item was included in the factor in which it

loaded the highest. The final factor-loading matrix for this solution is presented in Table 7.

The first factor label was derived from the names of the different yet interrelated items

that loaded into this factor. These items included items on sexuality, legally questionable

behavior, romance, and meeting new friends. Thus, this factor was labeled “Sex, Romance,

Relationships, and Risky Behaviors.” For the second factor label, all items were related to

relationships. Thus, this factor was labeled “Relationship Maintenance.” For the third factor

label, the items included snaps about the use/participant and other people. This factor was

labeled “Mundane Content,” since these types of items are typically shared on other social media

such as Facebook and Instagram. The fourth factor included Animals, Beautiful things,

Distraction/Procrastination, Events, and Funny Things. Thus, this factor was labeled “Visual

Distraction.” Finally, the fifth factor included Being Part of an Information Loop, Food, and

Keeping Touch with Family. Thus, this factor was labeled “Communication and Food.” The

inter-item reliability (Cronbach’s alpha) for Sex, Romance, Relationships, and Risky Behaviors

was acceptable, α = .72 (6 items). However, Relationship Maintenance, α = .53 (3 items);

Mundane Content, α =.53 (3 items); and Visual Distraction, α = .57 (5 items); had poor inter-

item reliability. Communication and Food had poor inter-item reliability, α =.44 (3 items). In

addition, Cronbach’s alpha could not be increased by deleting any of the items from any of the

subscales. Therefore, only Sex, Romance, Relationships, and Risky Behaviors was considered

for inclusion in the statistical model.

70

Table 7

Factor loadings and communalities based on principal components analysis with Varimax

rotation for 20 items assessing the types of snaps participants shared on Snapchat (N =

274)

Item Sex,

Romance,

Relationships,

and Risky

Behaviors

Relationship

Maintenance

Mundane

Content

Visual

Distraction

Communication

and Food

Sexting .78

Keeping in

touch with

past

romantic

partners

.70

Joke sexting .68

Flirting/Find

ing new love

interests

.62

Meeting

new friends

.56

Legally

questionable

activities

.44

Keeping in

touch with

friends

.71

71

Table continued

Seeing what

others are up

to

.63

Staying in

touch with

current

romantic

partner(s)

.46

Myself .66

People .66

What I’m up

to

.65

Animals .68

Beautiful

things

.55

Events .54

Distraction/

Procrastinati

on

.52

Funny

things

.37

Being part

of an

information

loop

.64

72

Table continued

Food .59

Keeping in

touch with

family

.51

Note. Factor loadings >.37 are suppressed and only displayed for factor in which items

loaded the highest in.

Factor Analysis of Filter Usage

The filter usage variables were reduced using a factor analysis. Inter-item correlations

showed that each variable was correlated .63 or higher with at least one other item. The Kaiser-

Meyer-Olkin measure of sampling adequacy was .71 and Bartlett’s test of sphericity was

significant (𝛸2 (10) = 619.77 p < .001). The communalities were all above .75 confirming that

each item shared some common variance with other items.

Given these overall indicators, a factor analysis was performed with all 5 items. Principal

component analysis with Varimax rotation was used. Initial eigenvalues indicated that the first

three factors explained 57.69%, 22.95%, and 8.83% of the variance respectively. The fourth and

fifth items had eigenvalues of less than .28. All of the items had factor loadings of at least .75

with one other factor. The final factor-loading matrix for this solution is presented in Table 8.

The first factor label was derived from the similarity of what the items measured. Since

the item measured the frequencies of filter usage, it was named “Frequency of Filter Usage.” The

second factor label was derived from how the two items that comprised measured filter usage by

the number of filters participants typically used per snap. Thus, it was named “Number of Filters

Used.” The inter-item reliability (Cronbach’s alpha) for Frequency of Filter Usage and Number

73

of Filters Used was good, α = .83 (3 items) and α = .85 (2 items), respectively. Additionally,

Cronbach’s alpha could not be increased by deleting any of the items from the subscales. Thus,

both of the subscales were included in the statistical model.

Table 8

Factor loadings and communalities based on principal components analysis with

Varimax rotation for 5 items assessing the filter usage of participants on Snapchat (N

= 274)

Item Frequency of Filter

Usage

Numbers of Filters

Used

Videos—Number of Filters

Applied

.92

Pictures—Number of Filters

Applied

.90

How frequently do you “snap”

and share photos of yourself on

Snapchat where you applied a

filter to make yourself look better.

.92

How frequently do you “snap”

and share photos of yourself on

Snapchat where you applied

multiple filters to make yourself

look better.

.85

How frequently do you apply

filters to your snaps?

.75

Note. Factor loadings >.75 are suppressed.

74

Creation of Self-Enhancement Variable

Three variables were combined due to their similarity. The three variables included how

frequently users applied an emojis to a “snap” to look better, how frequently users applied a

doodle to a “snap” to look better, and how frequently users applied text to a “snap” to look

better. The variable was named Self-Enhancement. Self-Enhancement was found to have poor

internal validity (α = .58).

Hierarchical Regression

A hierarchical regression was performed with narcissism (NPI-13 total score) as the

criterion variable and demographics (age, sex, ethnicity, median income, and class standing);

psychological and behavioral variables (logging on and checking the app, frequency using

checking the app, time spent per use, self-esteem, Total Technology Use, and sex, romance,

relationships, and risky behaviors); and Snapchat usage (number of selfies, frequency applying

filters, the number of filters typically applied to pictures and videos, applying an individual filter

to look better, applying multiple filters to look better, applying an emoji to look better, applying

doodles to look better, applying text to look better, and average number of friends users share

selfies) entered as groups of predictor variables in this order. In regards to ethnicity, the

categories Asian and Hispanic/Latino ethnicity were entered as their own variables. However,

Black/African American, Other, Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander, and American

Indian/Alaska Native were combined into a new variable labeled other ethnicity since each of

these groups comprised less than 6% of the participants. Thus, other ethnicity comprised 12.1%

of the participants.

75

Results are summarized in Table 9. On step 1, age, sex, other ethnicity, ethnicity: Asian,

ethnicity: Hispanic/Latino, median income, and class standing were not responsible for a

significant part of the overall variance in predicting narcissism. Specifically, none of the

variables were significant predictors of narcissism. The regression coefficient relating to

demographics to narcissism were also not significant p > .05.

On step 2, demographics and the psychological and behavioral variables were responsible

for a significant amount of overall variance in predicting narcissism, F (13, 259) = 3.43.

Specifically, the psychological variables accounted for a significant increase in explained

variance in narcissism, ∆R2 = .10. The association between self-esteem and narcissism was also

statistically significant (95% CI [-.21, -.03]) and small in effect size. The association between

Sex, Romance, Relationships, and Risky Behaviors and narcissism was also statistically

significant (95% CI [.29, .90]) and small in effect size.

On step 3, demographics, psychological and behavioral variables, and Snapchat usage

were responsible for a significant amount of overall variance in predicting narcissism, F (17,

255) = 3.69. Specifically, the Snapchat usage variables accounted for a significant increase in

variance in narcissism, p < .01, ∆R2 = .05. The association between self-esteem and narcissism

was statistically significant (95% CI [-.19, -.00], p = .05) and small in effect size. The association

between Sex, Romance, Relationships, and Risky Behaviors and narcissism was also statistically

significant (95% CI [.20, .83]) and small in effect size. Finally, the association between the Self-

Enhancement and narcissism was statistically significant (95% CI [.20, .95], and small in effect

size. In conclusion, steps 2 and 3 of the model were significant. More specifically, self-esteem

negatively predicted narcissism in steps 2 and 3 of the model. Sex, Romance, Relationships, and

76

Risky Behaviors was able to positively predict narcissism in both steps 2 and 3 of the model.

Finally, Self-Enhancement was able to positively predict narcissism in step 3 of the model.

Table 9

Summary of Hierarchical Regression Analysis for Variables Predicting Problematic

Narcissism (N = 279)

Model 1 Model 2 Model 3

Variable B SE B β B SE B β B SE B Β

Age .06 .09 .05 .11 .09 .10 .08 .09 .07

Sex -.57 .38 -.09 -.63 .37 -.10 -.70 .38 -.12

Other Ethnicity .74 .76 .09 .86 .74 .11 .80 .73 .10

Asian .43 .77 .05 .43 .73 .05 .13 .73 .02

Hispanic/

Latino

.07 .77 .05 .15 .65 .03 -.08 .65 -.01

Median

Income

.00 .00 -.04 .00 .00 -.03 .00 .00 -.04

Class Standing -.04 .24 -.01 -.15 .23 -.05 -.12 .23 -.04

Log-In

Frequency on

Snapchat

.32 .18 .17 .33 .17 .17

Time Spent on

Snapchat

-.11 .15 -.07 -.16 .15 -.1

Table continued

77

Time Spent per

Use on

Snapchat

.08 .09 .05 .02 .09 .01

Self-Esteem -.12 .05 -.15* -.09 .05 -.12*

Total

Technology

Usage

.06 .04 .09 .03 .04 .05

Sex/Romance/

Relationships/

Risky

Behaviors

.60 .16 .23*

**

.52 .16 .20**

Frequency of

Filter Usage

.04 .21 .01

Number of

Filters Used

-.13 .16 -.05

Self-

Enhancement

.57 .19 .23**

Number of

Selfie Snaps

Shared per

Week

.01 .01 .06

R2 .02 .15*

**

.20**

F for Change

in R2

.83 6.36 3.99

Note: *p < .05; **p < .01; *** p < .001

78

CHAPTER 4

DISCUSSION

The purpose of this study was to investigate how individuals with specific psychological

traits, particularly narcissism, use the popular social media application, Snapchat. The study

specifically examined if selfies and the editing or modification of snaps could predict for

narcissism. Hypothesis 1 predicted that greater selfie sharing would predict greater narcissism,

and hypotheses 2 and 3 that greater modification of pictures and videos sent to friends through

(h2) filters and (h3) other features including text, emojis/stickers, and doodles will predict for

greater narcissism. A questionnaire was used to test the hypotheses and participants were

recruited from CSUDH. The questionnaire included items regarding frequency of using

Snapchat, filter usage, modification of snaps, snap sharing, what kind of snaps they share usage

of Snap Map, and saving snaps. The questionnaire also included the DMU, NPI-13, Rosenberg

Self-Esteem Scale, and an item regarding what other social media participants used.

None of the demographics (age, sex, median income, ethnicity, and class standing) were

found to predict or significantly influence the model of narcissism. This was the case both as the

first step in the model and the other steps of the model. This supports previous research that

found age has no impact on this relationship (Weiser, 2015). However, older participants were

eliminated prior to analysis in order remove some skew in the age variable. As a result, no one

aged 30 years or older remained in the data set. The conclusions that can be made from age are

therefore limited since the participants had a limited age range (18-28).

Similar caution must be taken when looking at the results due to distribution of sex. The

majority of the participants were female (76.3%) and thus caution should be taken when

79

applying the conclusions to men. This especially is the case since previous studies have found

differences in the social media behaviors of men and women (Dhir et al., 2016; Moran et al.,

2018; Sorokowski et al., 2015; Thelwall & Vis, 2017). Within the context of narcissism, some

research has suggested sex has no impact on the relationship between narcissism and the way

individuals may behave on social media (Kapidzic, 2013). However, others have found that

social media addiction and its relationship with self-esteem and narcissism is significant only for

women (Thiagarajan et al., 2017). Another important factor to consider is that majority of

individuals diagnosed with narcissistic personality disorder are male (American Psychiatric

Association, 2013).

Surprisingly, usage frequency and time spent on Snapchat did not predict narcissism.

This seems to contradict previous findings that have suggested that time spent on social media or

SNSs positively predicts narcissism (Fox & Rooney, 2015; Ozimek et al., 2018; Sommerville,

2015). It does support other research which suggests that there is no relationship between time

spent on an SNS or social medium and narcissism (Bergman et al., 2011; Moon et al., 2016).

However, the second and third step of the model, which frequency and time spent were part of,

was significant. Perhaps time and frequency contribute to a model to predict narcissism but

perhaps they cannot predict narcissism accurately on their own or are not a significant predictor

when other variables are included in the model. Similarly to usage frequency and time, Total

Technology Use did not predict narcissism but steps 2 and 3, in which it was included was

significant. Similarly to frequency and time, it is possible that Total Technology Use cannot

significantly predict narcissism when other variables are added to the model. The technology use

that was measured included email, texting, going online and visiting websites, instant messaging

or chatting online, using a social network or application, talking to other people face to face,

80

listening to music, playing video games, watching television, talking on the telephone, and

reading a book or magazine (not for work or school). Sometimes the usage of these technologies

can predict or have relationships with certain psychological issues, disorders, or traits. For

example, one study found that hours spent texting per day predicted histrionic personality

disorder (Rosen et al., 2013). While these behaviors can predict for other issues, there does not

appear to be research suggesting that the time an individual spends on emailing for example may

be able to predict narcissism.

One of the other two variables that were added in step 2 was self-esteem. Self-esteem was

added to the model since problematic self-esteem (typically low self-esteem) is an associated

feature of narcissism. While not a symptom that can contribute to a diagnosis according to the

DSM-5, it is listed as an associated feature (American Psychiatric Association, 2013). This

therefore seems to explain why self-esteem was a significant predictor in step 2 of the model. An

important point to consider, however, is that while individuals with narcissism may have

relatively low self-esteem, not all individuals with low self-esteem may have narcissism.

Likewise, individuals with high self-esteem are not necessarily disqualified from having

narcissism (Bosson et al., 2008). Additionally, other factors may contribute, cause, or be related

to low or high self-esteem. Furthermore, while self-esteem may have been a significant predictor

in step 2 with the variables entered from step 1 and step 2, the variables entered in step 3 (the

Snapchat usage variables that tested the hypotheses) contributed to it becoming a non-significant

predictor of narcissism. It appears that a portion of the effect of self-esteem was due to correlated

Snapchat behaviors; however, the beta weight for self-esteem did not change dramatically, going

from -.15 in step 2 to -.12 in step 3. This suggests that most of the effect of self-esteem on

narcissism is independent of Snapchat behaviors.

81

Finally, Sex/Romance/Relationships/Risky Behaviors was added in step 2 of the model.

Sex/Romance/Relationships/Risky Behaviors included photos such as sexting and legally

questionable behavior. This variable was added to factor out different themes of “snaps” that are

shared on Snapchat. In addition, narcissists are known to behave in ways designed to attract

attention both in person and on social media (DeWall et al., 2011). While engaging these

behaviors may not necessarily be attention-seeking behaviors, sharing images and videos of

these things with other via social media including Snapchat can be considered attention-seeking.

These behaviors may not necessarily performed for the user but rather to capture the attention of

the user’s perceived audience. Sex/Romance/Risky Behaviors was significant in both steps of the

model and its beta weight barely changed between steps.

Selfie Sharing

With respect to H1 (greater selfie sharing will predict narcissism), selfie sharing was not

found to significantly predict narcissism. Thus, H1 was not supported. These findings seem to

contrast with research that has found a relationship with the number of selfies and narcissism

(Fox & Rooney, 2015; Halpern et al., 2016; March & McBean, 2018; Sung et al., 2016; Weiser,

2015). However, most of these studies have not examined Snapchat and sharing selfies on

Snapchat. Most instead have investigated selfie sharing on Facebook or general SNSs or social

media. One possible explanation for the differences in the relationship between the number of

shared selfies and narcissism is that the motives for taking and sharing selfies on Snapchat may

be different. One possible motive for taking selfies on Snapchat may be the ease of

communication using pictures with Snapchat. It is therefore possible that people may not be

taking selfies to self-promote or attract attention but rather facilitate communication. This may

82

then suggest that it is possible that it is not selfies alone that promote narcissism but rather the

motives and the medium of where the selfies were shared that matters.

Another possibility is that selfies alone may not necessarily predict narcissism but instead

the thematic content of the selfies being shared. Due to thoroughness of the study, many different

items were included on the survey that did not necessarily have a relationship with selfies and

Snap editing. One of these variables was the theme or type of snaps that participants sent. After

performing factor analyses on these different categories, one reliable group emerged what

became the Sex, Romance, Relationships, and Risky Behaviors variable. Once again, this

variable included flirting/finding new love interests, joke sexting, keeping in touch with past

romantic partners, legally questionable activities meeting new friends, sexting, and staying in

touch with current romantic partner. This variable was then found to positively predict

narcissism. This is consistent which previous research that found that narcissistic individuals are

more likely to show sexy photos on Facebook (DeWall et al., 2011). Some of the other types of

snaps within the Sex, Romance, Relationships, and Risky Behaviors variable, such as legally

questionable behaviors may be a way for an individual with grandiose type narcissism to attempt

to meet the need for attention (Caligor et al., 2015). While the was an option for participants to

select if they sent selfies or snaps of him or herself within the list of possible types, some of these

types may overlap. For example, it may be possible to send a legally questionable selfie or a

sexualized selfie to participate in sexting. Therefore, it is possible that the number of selfies may

not necessarily predict narcissism, but rather the type of content in snaps that users share that

predict narcissism.

83

Filter Usage

Regarding h2 (greater modification of pictures and videos sent to friends using filters),

neither the number of filters nor frequency of filter usage was found to significantly predict

narcissism. H2 was therefore, not supported. This seems to contrast with previous studies that

have found that editing and enhancing photos can have a relationship with narcissism (Fox &

Rooney, 2015). However, it is important to note that adding filters on Snapchat is different than

it is on other social media. While some filters enhance the user’s appearance and many can

attract attention, many filters do not improve the appearance of the attractiveness of the user. For

example, Snapchat’s dog face filter is attention grabbing but not necessarily enhancing to the

attractiveness of the user. This contrasts with Instagram which can change the coloration of an

image and ultimately make a photo more visually attractive and flawless. While Snapchat can

change the coloration of photos, its options are more limited. Instead, Snapchat has more filters

to showcase location, time, and date.

One other factor that may contribute to the lack of a relationship between filter usage and

narcissism is the difficulty in editing photos shared on Snapchat. First, some users may be

unaware of how to add multiple filters to their content. While these features may be intuitive or

easy for some, others might not know how to access these features. Second, Snapchat makes it

difficult to share photos that have been edited using external apps and software. For example, if

one wanted to retouch a photo taken with Snapchat (or any camera), one would have to add it to

Snapchat’s “Memories” folder on the user’s phone. The file would then be accessible for editing.

The user could then access the picture and share it. The picture would be shrunken down to

indicate to viewers that this picture was taken or edited outside of Snapchat. Thus, while heavy

editing or retouching is possible, it can be complicated and more time consuming than with other

84

social media. It also might be considered less gratifying to share this media since Snapchat

makes it clear to viewers that the media being shared was imported as opposed to created and

edited in Snapchat.

Self-Enhancement

H3 (greater modification of pictures and videos sent to friends using other features

including text, emojis/stickers, and doodles) was examined using the self-enhancement variable.

Self-enhancement showed a statistically significant, positive relationship with narcissism.

Therefore, h3 was supported. Other studies on photo editing and social media include heavy

editing using software like Adobe Photoshop (Fox & Rooney, 2015). Using a photo editing

software or app outside of Snapchat is more difficult than other social media. Additionally,

photos that are edited, saved, or even not shared shortly after being taken are easily identifiable

on Snapchat because the application shrinks the picture down. Thus, the audience would see a

much smaller image or video. The use of stickers, drawings, and text to edit photos that are

shared on social media was made more popular through Snapchat. Prior to this, text could

accompany pictures but was not typically applied directly on the photo. Snapchat requires text to

go directly on the picture or video. Similarly, no social media allowed direct editing of media to

add drawings or stickers to share on social media. This type of editing would have required

additional photo/video editing apps or software.

Perhaps one of the reasons why self-enhancement was a significant predictor is that

doodles, stickers/emojis, and text may be perceived as “additional” editing. While many users

may utilize filters to help give context to their audience (location, event, time, etc.), adding

stickers (especially emojis) seems unnecessary since the app is already picture/video-based and

allows the user to show their actual emotions to their audience. Similarly, drawings may add

85

little context for an audience and may be utilized just to attract attention from an audience. This

may be especially the case if the content being shared may be considered mundane. Text also has

questionable utility in a social medium where communication is strongly image- and video-

oriented. While it sometimes may be added, it can also be unnecessary, especially if users are

sharing multiple snaps or giving context in the audio of a video shared on Snapchat. Similarly,

adding unnecessary text may be interpreted as narcissistic as well as a predictor for narcissism

since the user may feel that adding details (especially ones that are personal or intimate)

enhances their appearance of superiority to their audience.

Post-Hoc Analysis of Sex Differences in Hierarchical Regression Model

In order to examine the role that sex played, two separate hierarchical regressions were

performed: one for female participants and the other for male participants. The hierarchical

regressions were performed with narcissism (NPI-13 score) as the criterion variable and

demographics (age, ethnicity, median income, and class standing); psychological and behavioral

variables (logging on and checking the app, frequency using checking the app, time spent per

use, self-esteem, Total Technology Use, and sex, romance, relationships, and risky behaviors);

and Snapchat usage (number of selfies, frequency applying filters, the number of filters typically

applied to pictures and videos, applying an individual filter to look better, applying multiple

filters to look better, applying an emoji to look better, applying doodles to look better, applying

text to look better, and average number of friends users share selfies) entered as groups of the

predictor variables in this order. As before, the categories Asian, Hispanic/Latino, and Other

ethnicity were entered as their own variables. The results of these post-hoc analyses suggest

differences between men and women when it comes to how Snapchat related to narcissism.

86

The hierarchical regression was performed first on the women. On step 1, age; other

ethnicity; Asian ethnicity; Hispanic/Latino ethnicity; median income; and class standing were

not responsible for a significant part of the overall variance in predicting narcissism.

Specifically, none of the variables were significant predictors of narcissism. The variance

accounted for by demographics to narcissism were also not significant, p > .05.

On step 2, demographics and the psychological variables were responsible for a

significant amount of the overall variance in predicting narcissism, F (12, 196) = 2.19, (p < .05),

R2 = .12. And, the psychological and behavioral variables accounted for a significant increase in

explained variance in narcissism, F (6, 159) = 3.67, ∆R2 = .06, (p < .01). The association

between Sex, Romance, Relationships, and Risky Behaviors and narcissism was statistically

significant (b = .46, 95% CI [.09, .82], p < .05) and small in size (β = .17).

On step 3, demographics, psychological and behavioral variables and Snapchat usage

were responsible for a significant amount of the overall variance predicting narcissism, F (16,

192) = 2.09, (p < .05), R2 = .15. However, the Snapchat usage variables did not account for a

significant increase in explained variance in narcissism, (p > .05). The association between Sex,

Romance, Relationships, and Risky Behaviors and narcissism was also statistically significant (b

= .40, 95% CI [ .02, .79], p = .04), and small in size (β = .15). The association between self-

enhancement (b = .46, 95% CI [ .04, .89], p = .03), and small in size (β = .18). In conclusion,

only step 2 of the model was significant. More specifically, Sex, Romance, Relationships, and

Risky Behaviors was able to positively predict narcissism in step 2 of the model.

Next, the hierarchical regression was performed on the men in the data. On step 1, age;

other ethnicity; Asian ethnicity; Hispanic/Latino ethnicity; median income; and class standing

were not responsible for a significant part of the overall variance in predicting narcissism. None

87

of the specific variables were significant predictors on narcissism. The variance accounted for by

demographics to narcissism were also not significant p > .05.

On step 2, demographics and the psychological and behavioral variables were responsible

for a F (12, 51) = 2.47, (p < .01), R2 = .37. Specifically, the psychological and behavioral

variables accounted for a significant increase in explained variance in narcissism, F (6, 51) =

4.51, ∆R2 = .22, (p < .01). The association between Sex, Romance, Relationships, and Risky

Behaviors and narcissism was also statistically significant (b = .91, 95% CI [.33, 1.48], p < .01)

and medium in size (β = .38). The association between Total Technology Use and narcissism

was also statistically significant (b = .15, 95% CI [.01, .30], p = .04) and small in size (β = .27).

The association between self-esteem and narcissism was also statistically significant (b = -.20,

95% CI [-.38, -.02], p = .03) and medium in size (β = -.27).

On step 3, demographics, psychological and behavioral variables and Snapchat usage

were responsible for a significant amount of the overall variance predicting narcissism, F (16,

47) = 2.43, (p < .01), R2 = .45. However, the Snapchat usage variables did not account for a

significant increase in explained variance in narcissism, (p > .05). The association between Sex,

Romance, Relationships, and Risky Behaviors and narcissism was also statistically significant, (b

= .71, 95% CI [.10, 1.32], p = .02), and small in size (β = .29). In conclusion only step 2 of the

model was significant. More specifically, Total Technology Use and self-esteem were able to

positively predict narcissism in step 2 of the model. Sex, Romance, Relationships, and Risky

Behaviors was able to positively predict narcissism in steps 2 and 3 of the model.

In both sexes, Sex, Romance, Relationships, and Risky Behaviors seems to have a

relationship with narcissism. This seems consistent with previous research that suggests that both

88

sexes of individuals who are narcissistic engage in some form of these behaviors online (DeWall

et al., 2011).

Self-Enhancement was also significant for women in the third step of the model but the

step was not significant in the men’s model. In the model that included both men and women,

Self-Enhancement was a significant predictor of narcissism. This is inconsistent with previous

literature that has found the men who are highly narcissistic edit their photos on social media

(Fox & Rooney, 2015). One possible reason for this inconsistency in the models is that there are

very few men in the sample compared to women, resulting in uncertainty in the model for men.

The study only consisted of 65 men or 23.7% of the sample. It is also possible that Self-

Enhancement is only a predictor of narcissism for women. Perhaps the inclusion of the Sex,

Romance, Relationships, and Risky Behaviors captured the self-editing for men, as maybe men

are doing their self-editing with these types of snaps.

Another interesting finding from the analyses was the relationship between Total

Technology Use and narcissism for men. This was somewhat of a surprising finding since this

relationship was not found in the model that included both men and women. However, previous

research has found a relationship between time spent on social media and narcissism

(Sommerville, 2015). While Total Technology Use includes emailing and texting, it also

includes social media. Perhaps it is possible that individuals, particularly men, engage in greater

technology usage, in addition to social media, that promotes self-enhancement than women.

However, it is difficult to draw a strong conclusion due to the low levels number of men in the

sample.

Finally, the relationship between self-esteem and narcissism was found in step 2 of the

model with only men. Self-esteem was found to be significant in the original model with both

89

men and women. This may be due to the complicated and still debated role of self-esteem for

narcissistic individuals. Another possibility is that women’s self-esteem does not predict

narcissism. Once again however, it is difficult to establish a strong conclusion since the sample

largely consisted of women and few men.

Limitations

Perhaps one of the greatest limitations of this study is the poor reliability of the NPI-13

items (α = .66). Additionally, the poor and unacceptable reliabilities of the Leadership/Authority

(α = .61), Grandiose/Exhibitionism (α = .59), and Entitlement/Exploitativeness (α = .33). In the

past, researchers found that the reliability for the NPI-13 was found to be adequate (α = .73) and

good (α = .82) (Gentile et al., 2013a). Thus, the current study’s reliability for the NPI-13 is not

entirely surprising given that other studies have not found the measure to have excellent

reliability. Another possible reason that the NPI-13 scores had poor reliabilities was the narrow

age range of the participants in the present study. In the previously mentioned study that had

adequate reliability, different samples were used which ranged in age from 18 to 60 years old

(Gentile et al., 2013a). In the current study, the participants’ ages ranged from 18 to 29 years old.

The limited age range in the current study may be responsible for the poor reliability since the

previously mentioned study had a greater range of age. Since the NPI-13 was tested on samples

that included individuals over the age of 29 years old, the items selected for the NPI-13 had the

best reliability in that sample. The sample in the current study had a narrower age range and the

items on the NPI-13 may not necessarily be the best items to measure narcissism in that specific

age range. If the current study had a greater range of age, it is possible that the reliability would

have been stronger.

90

Similarly, Self-Enhancement had poor reliability (α = .58). This is likely due to how few

items were included within this variable; this variable included text, emojis, and doodles. If this

variable consisted of more items, the reliability might increase. However, this variable was

created to examine photo editing’s relationship with narcissism. Snapchat allows users to edit

photos in specific ways and these include the items included in Self-Enhancement as well as

filter usage. Filter usage was not included within Self-Enhancement however, in order to test H2.

Perhaps a future study could examine more use a more general photo editing variable that

included filters, emojis, text, and doodles.

Another limitation of this study is the self-report nature of this study. Unlike most other

social media, Snapchat makes it difficult to access all of the content that users are sharing,

especially since the content is ephemeral. While other studies have directly examined the social

media of its participants, they typically have done so with social media such as Facebook in

which content has more permanence than in Snapchat. Due to this difficulty, the study was

conducted as a survey and relied on participants’ self-report. Self-report generally can suffer

from issues such as the participants’ ability and desire to accurately self-report. While the data

was cleaned for any suspicious responses such as participants who took an excessively long or

short period of time to complete the questionnaire, it impossible to ascertain the accuracy or

truthfulness of the participants’ responses. However, it appears that participants were honest and

responded with accuracy to the best of their abilities. In addition, participants who were not

active Snapchat users, were still eligible to take other parts of survey that did not include items

about Snapchat and were able to be compensated. Thus, there was little to no motivation to lie

about being a Snapchat user. Thus, while a certain amount of caution must be taken due to the

91

self-report nature of the study, there seems to be very little indication that participants were

intentionally dishonest or poor at self-reporting their Snapchat usage.

An additional limitation of this study is that this is correlational research and not an

experiment. While this study has been able to make predictions and examine the relationship

between narcissism and other variables, only an experiment would be able to establish causal

effects. Thus, while this study may be able to establish relationships it is unable to identify

variables as causes or direct contributors to the dependent variable of narcissism.

One other limitation of this study is when the data for this study was collected. This study

gathered data in the fall of 2017. Since then, the number of Snapchat users has greatly increased

(Speigel, 2017; Smith & Anderson, 2018). The increase in users might make it more difficult to

find significant behaviors on Snapchat that could predict narcissism. More users may share

selfies and apply many filters to them and reinforce the finding that they do not predict

narcissism. However, the increase in users would not necessarily result in an overall increase in

the percentage of users who share content that is more sensitive (as was represented by the Sex,

Romance, Relationships, and Risky Behaviors variable) and in engage in “extra” editing (as was

represented by the Self-Enhancement variable). There is the possibility that Sex, Romance,

Relationships, and Risky Behaviors may also increase in effect size, and particularly because

these risky behaviors seem less common, even among Snapchat users from 2017. Self-

enhancement may remain a significant predictor of narcissism given that using these editing

features were not commonly used among the participants in this study. It seems unlikely that

Snapchat’s new users would utilize these editing features more than the previous users,

especially if they were rarely used in the sample. Thus, while selfie sharing and filter usage may

92

continue to be unable to predict narcissism among current Snapchat users, self-enhancement may

continue to have a predictive relationship with narcissism.

Another limitation of this study was the limited age range. Prior to cleaning the data, the

age range of the participants was 18 to 56 years old. However, participants who were 30 years-

old or older were removed because they accounted for less than 2% of the responses and skewed

the data. When they were removed, the data became less skewed and reduced the possibility of

outliers influencing the statistical models. The age distribution then became 18 to 29 years old,

which is typical of undergraduate university students. This is also consistent with the age range

that typically uses Snapchat. Pew Research Center has found that 68% of adults within this age

range are Snapchat users (“Who Uses,” 2018). However, it does not take into account the other

adult users of Snapchat who do not fall within this age range. If there were more participants

who were over the age of 29 years old, the data would present a model in which age is not an

issue.

One other limitation of this study is that this study may not necessarily be applicable to

adolescents. While a considerable part of Snapchat’s user demographics are young adults (18 to

29 year olds), Snapchat is used considerably among adolescents. It is difficult to say whether the

findings in the present study could apply to adolescents. Motivations for using social media are

likely different for adolescents and adults. Adolescents may also experience more social pressure

to use and share content on Snapchat as well as other social media. It is therefore possible that

they would use Snapchat and its features more but not necessarily be more narcissistic than the

average adolescent. This is not the case with adults, as studies that have largely focused on adult

users of Snapchat find that they use the application during leisure and to pass time (Phua, Jin, &

Kim, 2016; Juhász & Hochmair, 2018). However, Self-Enhancement may be predictor of

93

narcissism among adolescents. Among many users of Snapchat, sticker or emoji usage and

adding doodles to snaps does not appear to be common. Thus, it is possible that self-

enhancement may still predict narcissism among adolescents.

Finally, another limitation of the study is the lack of generalizability. The study’s

participants were largely Hispanic/Latino and female. This was likely due in part to collecting

data from a university whose student body is largely Hispanic/Latino. Due to the study’s largely

Hispanic and female demographics, it is difficult to draw strong conclusions that can applied to

the general population. For example, while self-enhancement may predict narcissism in this

sample, this finding may not necessarily be significant with non-Hispanic/Latino individuals or

men. Thus, the findings in this study must be carefully considered within this context.

Implications for Future Research

Perhaps one of the greatest implications for future research in this study is continuing

research on Snapchat. While most studies have examined Facebook and there is beginning to be

more research about Instagram and Twitter, there is still little literature on Snapchat. While

Facebook holds the majority of SNS users, young users are less likely to create accounts or

actively use Facebook. In fact, only 51% of adolescents claim to use Facebook (Anderson &

Jiang, 2018). Instead, there has been more interest in Instagram, Twitter, YouTube, and

especially Snapchat with adolescents as was found in a Pew Research Center Survey (Anderson

& Jiang, 2018). Therefore, while there is a plethora of valuable research on Facebook usage,

much of it will have limited application on the coming generation of social media users since

their social media sites of choice are not the same.

Continuing the general research on Snapchat is also important since there increasing

social media options for users. Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, and Snapchat not only have

94

different interfaces, but also different uses. It is because of these uses that certain users will be

attracted and motivated to use specific social media sites and not to others. And of course, within

these specific sites, certain users will (or will not) engage in certain behaviors. If research on

Snapchat does not continue, then a significant opportunity to explore similar relationships as

were found with Facebook and personality and other clinical concerns is being missed and as

these are popular with younger users, behaviors of a large segment of the social media

population is being ignored. As the amount of social media users continues to increase, these

relationships may also gain more significance.

Aside from the general exploration of Snapchat, however, it would also be interesting to

examine the relationships of narcissism or self-esteem with the Story Feature on Snapchat.

“Stories” on Snapchat have a similar role to posting on other social media. Stories are snaps that

can be viewed by anyone or to every one of the user’s list of friends. While many snaps are

shared directly to specific users or friends, Stories are accessible to anyone to view if they wish

for up to 24 hours. Since posting seems to have a role of importance of for individuals with

greater narcissism, it would be interesting to examine if similar relationships exist with Stories.

More simply, however, it would be interesting to execute the same or a similar study as

the one described in the methods with a more evenly distributed and broad age range. While a

college is a good place to obtain participants who may use popular social media, their usage may

not necessarily be representative of the typical users of Snapchat. Another interesting age to

consider would be adolescence. Current adolescents have had more exposure and easier

accessibility to social media than previous generations. They also appear to have more interest in

Snapchat as compared to Facebook. Thus a study examining a portion of the population that has

more ease of access to social media than previous generations of adolescents and seems to utilize

95

social media, though not usually Facebook could provide some interesting insights into the way

adolescents use Snapchat and if the frequency or patterns of use on Snapchat can predict for

issues such as problematic self-esteem or narcissism.

96

CHAPTER 5

CONCLUSION

The usage of social media has become widespread in the United States and around the

world. As the users of smartphones have increased, it has only become easier to access the online

sites and applications that were previously limited to computers with internet access. The use of

social media is typically associated with young adults and adolescents. However, anyone may be

a social media user so long as he or she meets the requirements to join. In fact, the majority of

Millennials and Gen Xers and more than half of Baby Boomers are social media users (Jiang,

2018). Previous research has examined the relationship between social media and mental health,

personality, or wellbeing. As the usage of social media has increased, so will the concerns of its

relationship and impact on its user’s well-being and mental health. And as the usage of social

media now includes a wide range of mediums such as Twitter, Instagram, and Snapchat, research

will have to focus less on Facebook and focus on more general social media use or other popular

social mediums. This is especially the case since the number users on these platforms, while not

as large as Facebook, is still quite significant. Snapchat is one of the platforms as it reported 158

million daily users in 2017 (Spiegel, 2017).

The current study is among the few that have examined Snapchat and its relationship with

well-being or personality. While it helps to continue to examine this relationship and the usage of

Snapchat, more research needs to examine this popular medium. Overall however, this study also

manages to continue to examine the relationship between social media and personality. More

specifically, this study contributes to the ongoing examination of the relationship between social

media and narcissism. As more research continues to examine these relationships, a more

97

complete picture of this relationship can help address any issues or concerns. Addressing these

issues or concerns is and will be of increasing importance since social media has become a

significant part of modern life.

98

REFERENCES

“Who Uses Pinterest, Snapchat, YouTube, and WhatsApp.” Pew Research Center, Washington

D.C. (5 Feb. 2018) http://www.pewinternet.org/chart/who-uses-pinterest-snapchat-

youtube-and-whatsapp/

Alhabash, S., & Ma, M. (2017). A tale of four platforms: Motivations and uses of Facebook,

Twitter, Instagram, and Snapchat among college students. Social Media+ Society, 3(1),

2056305117691544.

American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders

(5th ed.). Arlington, VA: American Psychiatric Publishing.

Anderson, M., & Jiang, J. (2018, May 31). Teens, Social Media & Technology 2018. Retrieved

from http://www.pewinternet.org/2018/05/31/teens-social-media-technology-2018/

Barry, C. T., Reiter, S. R., Anderson, A. C., Schoessler, M. L., & Sidoti, C. L. (2017). “Let Me

Take Another Selfie”: Further Examination of the Relation Between Narcissism, Self-

Perception, and Instagram Posts.

Bayer, J. B., Ellison, N. B., Schoenebeck, S. Y., & Falk, E. B. (2016). Sharing the small

moments: ephemeral social interaction on Snapchat. Information, Communication &

Society, 19(7), 956-977.

Bergman, S. M., Fearrington, M. E., Davenport, S. W., & Bergman, J. Z. (2011). Millennials,

narcissism, and social networking: What narcissists do on social networking sites and

why. Personality and Individual Differences, 50(5), 706-711.

Besser, A., & Priel, B. (2010). Grandiose narcissism versus vulnerable narcissism in threatening

situations: Emotional reactions to achievement failure and interpersonal rejection.

Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 29(8), 874-902.

99

Bosson, J. K., Lakey, C. E., Campbell, W. K., Zeigler‐Hill, V., Jordan, C. H., & Kernis, M. H.

(2008). Untangling the links between narcissism and self‐esteem: A theoretical and

empirical review. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 2(3), 1415-1439.

Brailovskaia, J., Bierhoff, H. W., & Margraf, J. (2017). How to Identify Narcissism With 13

Items: Validation of the German Narcissistic Personality Inventory–13 (G-NPI-13).

Assessment, 1073191117740625.

Buffardi, L. E., & Campbell, W. K. (2008). Narcissism and social networking web sites.

Personality and social psychology bulletin, 34(10), 1303-1314.

Caligor, E., Levy, K. N., & Yeomans, F. E. (2015). Narcissistic personality disorder: diagnostic

and clinical challenges. American Journal of Psychiatry, 172(5), 415-422.

Carpenter, C. J. (2012). Narcissism on Facebook: Self-promotional and anti-social behavior.

Personality and individual differences, 52(4), 482-486.

Carrier, L. M., Cheever, N. A., Rosen, L. D., Benitez, S., & Chang, J. (2009). Daily Media

Usage Scale. Psyctests, doi:10.1037/t52911-000

Chae, J. (2017). Virtual makeover: Selfie-taking and social media use increase selfie-editing

frequency through social comparison. Computers in Human Behavior, 66, 370-376.

Choi, T. R., & Sung, Y. (2018). Instagram versus Snapchat: Self-expression and privacy concern

on social media. Telematics and Informatics, 35(8), 2289-2298.

Christofides, E., Muise, A., & Desmarais, S. (2009). Information disclosure and control on

Facebook: Are they two sides of the same coin or two different processes.

Cyberpsychology & behavior, 12(3), 341-345.

100

Davenport, S. W., Bergman, S. M., Bergman, J. Z., & Fearrington, M. E. (2014). Twitter versus

Facebook: Exploring the role of narcissism in the motives and usage of different social

media platforms. Computers in Human Behavior, 32, 212-220.

DeWall, C. N., Buffardi, L. E., Bonser, I., & Campbell, W. K. (2011). Narcissism and implicit

attention seeking: Evidence from linguistic analyses of social networking and online

presentation. Personality and Individual Differences, 51(1), 57-62.

Diefenbach, S., & Christoforakos, L. (2017). The selfie paradox: nobody seems to like them yet

everyone has reasons to take them. An exploration of psychological functions of selfies in

self-presentation. Frontiers in psychology, 8, 7.

Dhir, A., Pallesen, S., Torsheim, T., & Andreassen, C. S. (2016). Do age and gender differences

exist in selfie-related behaviours. Computers in Human Behavior, 63, 549-555.

Eftekhar, A., Fullwood, C., & Morris, N. (2014). Capturing personality from Facebook photos

and photo-related activities: How much exposure do you need. Computers in Human

Behavior, 37, 162-170.

Fox, A. K., Bacile, T. J., Nakhata, C., & Weible, A. (2018). Selfie-marketing: exploring

narcissism and self-concept in visual user-generated content on social media. Journal of

Consumer Marketing, 35(1), 11-21.

Fox, J., & Moreland, J. J. (2015). The dark side of social networking sites: An exploration of the

relational and psychological stressors associated with Facebook use and affordances.

Computers in Human Behavior, 45, 168-176.

Fox, J., & Rooney, M. C. (2015). The Dark Triad and trait self-objectification as predictors of

men’s use and self-presentation behaviors on social networking sites. Personality and

Individual Differences, 76, 161-165.

101

Gentile, B., Miller, J. D., Hoffman, B. J., Reidy, D. E., Zeichner, A., & Campbell, W. K.

(2013a). A test of two brief measures of grandiose narcissism: The Narcissistic

Personality Inventory–13 and the Narcissistic Personality Inventory-16. Psychological

assessment, 25(4), 1120.

Gentile, B., Miller, J. D., Hoffman, B. J., Reidy, D. E., Zeichner, A., & Campbell, W. K.

(2013b). Narcissistic Personality Inventory–13. Psyctests, doi:10.1037/t28884-000

Grieve, R. (2017). Unpacking the characteristics of Snapchat users: A preliminary investigation

and an agenda for future research. Computers in Human Behavior, 74, 130-138..

Guntuku, S. C., Yaden, D. B., Kern, M. L., Ungar, L. H., & Eichstaedt, J. C. (2017). Detecting

depression and mental illness on social media: an integrative review. Current Opinion in

Behavioral Sciences, 18, 43-49.

Halpern, D., Valenzuela, S., & Katz, J. E. (2016). “Selfie-ists” or “Narci-selfiers”?: A cross-

lagged panel analysis of selfie taking and narcissism. Personality and Individual

Differences, 97, 98-101.

Jackson, C. A., & Luchner, A. F. (2018). Self-presentation mediates the relationship between

Self-criticism and emotional response to Instagram feedback. Personality and Individual

Differences, 133, 1-6.

Jiang, J. (2018). Millennials stand out for their technology use, but older generations also

embrace digital life. last modified May, 2.

Juhász, L., & Hochmair, H. (2018). Analyzing the spatial and temporal dynamics of Snapchat. In

AnaLysis, Integration, Vision, Engagement (VGI-ALIVE) Workshop.

Kapidzic, S. (2013). Narcissism as a predictor of motivations behind Facebook profile picture

selection. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 16(1), 14-19.

102

Katz, E., Blumler, J. G., & Gurevitch, M. (1973). Uses and gratifications research. The public

opinion quarterly, 37(4), 509-523.

Kim, E., Lee, J. A., Sung, Y., & Choi, S. M. (2016). Predicting selfie-posting behavior on social

networking sites: An extension of theory of planned behavior. Computers in Human

Behavior, 62, 116-123.

Krizan, Z., & Bushman, B. J. (2011). Better than my loved ones: Social comparison tendencies

among narcissists. Personality and Individual Differences, 50(2), 212-216.

Kross, E., Verduyn, P., Demiralp, E., Park, J., Lee, D. S., Lin, N., ... & Ybarra, O. (2013).

Facebook use predicts declines in subjective well-being in young adults. PloS one, 8(8),

e69841.

Lee, J. A., & Sung, Y. (2016). Hide-and-seek: Narcissism and “selfie”-related behavior.

Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 19(5), 347-351.

Leung, L. (2013). Generational differences in content generation in social media: The roles of

the gratifications sought and of narcissism. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(3), 997-

1006.

Lemay, D. J., Doleck, T., & Bazelais, P. (2017). “Passion and concern for privacy” as factors

affecting snapchat use: A situated perspective on technology acceptance. Computers in

Human Behavior, 75, 264-271.

Litt, E., & Hargittai, E. (2016). The imagined audience on social network sites. Social Media+

Society, 2(1), 2056305116633482.

March, E., & McBean, T. (2018). New evidence shows self-esteem moderates the relationship

between narcissism and selfies. Personality and Individual Differences, 130, 107-111.

103

McCain, J. L., Borg, Z. G., Rothenberg, A. H., Churillo, K. M., Weiler, P., & Campbell, W. K.

(2016). Personality and selfies: Narcissism and the Dark Triad. Computers in Human

Behavior, 64, 126-133.

McKinney, B. C., Kelly, L., & Duran, R. L. (2012). Narcissism or openness: College students’

use of Facebook and Twitter. Communication Research Reports, 29(2), 108-118.

McLean, S. A., Paxton, S. J., Wertheim, E. H., & Masters, J. (2015). Photoshopping the selfie:

Self photo editing and photo investment are associated with body dissatisfaction in

adolescent girls. International Journal of Eating Disorders, 48(8), 1132-1140.

Moon, J. H., Lee, E., Lee, J. A., Choi, T. R., & Sung, Y. (2016). The role of narcissism in self-

promotion on Instagram. Personality and Individual Differences, 101, 22-25.

Moran, J. B., Salerno, K. J., & Wade, T. J. (2018). Snapchat as a new tool for sexual access: Are

there sex differences?. Personality and Individual Differences, 129, 12-16.

O'Sullivan, A., & Hussain, Z. (2017). An exploratory study of Facebook intensity and its links to

narcissism, stress, and self-esteem. Journal of Addictive Behaviors, Therapy &

Rehabilitation, 6(1).

Ozimek, P., Bierhoff, H. W., & Hanke, S. (2018). Do vulnerable narcissists profit more from

Facebook use than grandiose narcissists? An examination of narcissistic Facebook use in

the light of self-regulation and social comparison theory. Personality and Individual

Differences, 124, 168-177.

Page, R. (2019). Group selfies and Snapchat: From sociality to synthetic collectivisation.

Discourse, Context & Media, 28, 79-92.

104

Panek, E. T., Nardis, Y., & Konrath, S. (2013). Mirror or Megaphone: How relationships

between narcissism and social networking site use differ on Facebook and Twitter.

Computers in Human Behavior, 29(5), 2004-2012.

Perkovic, L., Lane, W., & Miller, K. C. (2018). Impact of Demographic Characteristics and

Personality Types on the Usage of Snapchat and its Discover Platforms. e-Journal of

Social & Behavioural Research in Business, 9(2), 1-8B.

Phua, J., Jin, S. V., & Kim, J. J. (2017). Gratifications of using Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, or

Snapchat to follow brands: The moderating effect of social comparison, trust, tie strength,

and network homophily on brand identification, brand engagement, brand commitment,

and membership intention. Telematics and Informatics, 34(1), 412-424.

Piwek, L., & Joinson, A. (2016). “What do they snapchat about?” Patterns of use in time-limited

instant messaging service. Computers in Human Behavior, 54, 358-367.

Pounders, K., Kowalczyk, C. M., & Stowers, K. (2016). Insight into the motivation of selfie

postings: impression management and self-esteem. European Journal of Marketing,

50(9/10), 1879-1892.

Raskin, R. N., & Hall, C. S. (1979). Narcissistic Personality Inventory. Psyctests,

doi:10.1037/t00001-000

Rosen, L. D., Whaling, K., Rab, S., Carrier, L. M., & Cheever, N. A. (2013). Is Facebook

creating “iDisorders”? The link between clinical symptoms of psychiatric disorders and

technology use, attitudes and anxiety. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(3), 1243-1254.

Roesner, F., Gill, B. T., & Kohno, T. (2014, March). Sex, lies, or kittens? Investigating the use of

Snapchat’s self-destructing messages. In International Conference on Financial

Cryptography and Data Security (pp. 64-76). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.

105

Rosenberg, M. (1965). Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale. Psyctests, doi:10.1037/t01038-000

Satici, S. A., & Uysal, R. (2015). Well-being and problematic Facebook use. Computers in

Human Behavior, 49, 185-190.

Seidman, G. (2013). Self-presentation and belonging on Facebook: How personality influences

social media use and motivations. Personality and Individual Differences, 54(3), 402-

407.

Shah, R., & Tewari, R. (2016). Demystifying ‘selfie’: a rampant social media activity. Behaviour

& Information Technology, 35(10), 864-871.

Sinclair, S. J., Blais, M. A., Gansler, D. A., Sandberg, E., Bistis, K., & LoCicero, A. (2010).

Psychometric properties of the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale: Overall and across

demographic groups living within the United States. Evaluation & the health

professions, 33(1), 56-80.

Smith, A., & Anderson, M. (2018, March 1). Social Media Use in 2018. Retrieved from

http://www.pewinternet.org/2018/03/01/social-media-use-in-2018/

Somerville, T. A. (2015). The effect of social media use on narcissistic behavior. Journal of

Undergraduate Research, 25.

Sorokowski, P., Sorokowska, A., Oleszkiewicz, A., Frackowiak, T., Huk, A., & Pisanski, K.

(2015). Selfie posting behaviors are associated with narcissism among men. Personality

and Individual Differences, 85, 123-127.

Spiegel, E. (2017, Feb. 2). Form S-1 registration statement under the securities act of 1933 Snap

Inc.. Retrieved from

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1564408/000119312517029199/d270216ds1.ht

m#rom270216_2

106

Subrahmanyam, K., Reich, S. M., Waechter, N., & Espinoza, G. (2008). Online and offline

social networks: Use of social networking sites by emerging adults. Journal of applied

developmental psychology, 29(6), 420-433.

Sung, Y., Lee, J. A., Kim, E., & Choi, S. M. (2016). Why we post selfies: Understanding

motivations for posting pictures of oneself. Personality and Individual Differences, 97,

260-265.

Taylor, S. H., Hinck, A. S., & Lim, H. (2017). An experimental test of how selfies change social

judgments on Facebook. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 20(10),

610-614.

Thelwall, M., & Vis, F. (2017). Gender and image sharing on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram,

Snapchat and WhatsApp in the UK: Hobbying alone or filtering for friends?. Aslib

Journal of Information Management, 69(6), 702-720.

Thiagarajan, S., Venkatachalam, Y., & Sebastian, M. K. (2017). What’s Feeding Your Monster:

A Look at Narcissistic Tendency and Low Self-Esteem as Driving Forces behind the

Growth of Social Media Dependency. International Journal of Indian Psychology, 4(3).

Tosun, L. P. (2012). Motives for Facebook use and expressing “true self” on the Internet.

Computers in Human Behavior, 28(4), 1510-1517.

Tracy, J. L., Cheng, J. T., Robins, R. W., & Trzesniewski, K. H. (2009). Authentic and hubristic

pride: The affective core of self-esteem and narcissism. Self and identity, 8(2-3), 196-213.

Tromholt, M. (2016). The Facebook experiment: Quitting Facebook leads to higher levels of

well-being. Cyberpsychology, behavior, and social networking, 19(11), 661-666.

107

Utz, S., Muscanell, N., & Khalid, C. (2015). Snapchat elicits more jealousy than Facebook: A

comparison of Snapchat and Facebook use. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social

Networking, 18(3), 141-146.

Vater, A., Ritter, K., Schröder-Abé, M., Schütz, A., Lammers, C. H., Bosson, J. K., & Roepke, S.

(2013). When grandiosity and vulnerability collide: Implicit and explicit self-esteem in

patients with narcissistic personality disorder. Journal of Behavior Therapy and

Experimental Psychiatry, 44(1), 37-47.

Vaterlaus, J. M., Barnett, K., Roche, C., & Young, J. A. (2016). “Snapchat is more personal”: An

exploratory study on Snapchat behaviors and young adult interpersonal relationships.

Computers in Human Behavior, 62, 594-601.

Vazire, S., Naumann, L. P., Rentfrow, P. J., & Gosling, S. D. (2008). Portrait of a narcissist:

Manifestations of narcissism in physical appearance. Journal of Research in Personality,

42(6), 1439-1447.

Waddell, T. F. (2016). The allure of privacy or the desire for self-expression? Identifying users'

gratifications for ephemeral, photograph-based communication. Cyberpsychology,

Behavior, and Social Networking, 19(7), 441-445.

Wagner, C. N., Aguirre Alfaro, E., & Bryant, E. M. (2016). The relationship between Instagram

selfies and body image in young adult women. First Monday, 21(9).

Wang, R., Yang, F., & Haigh, M. M. (2017). Let me take a selfie: Exploring the psychological

effects of posting and viewing selfies and groupies on social media. Telematics and

Informatics, 34(4), 274-283.

Weiser, E. B. (2015). # Me: Narcissism and its facets as predictors of selfie-posting frequency.

Personality and Individual Differences, 86, 477-481.

108

Williamson, P., Stohlman, T., & Polinsky, H. (2017). Me, my selfie and I: A survey of self-

disclosure motivations on social media. IAFOR Journal of Cultural Studies, 2(2), 78-89.

Yockey, R. A., King, K. A., Vidourek, R., Burbage, M., & Merianos, A. (2018). The Depiction

of Sexuality Among University Students on Snapchat. Sexuality & Culture, 1-10.

Żemojtel‐Piotrowska, M., Piotrowski, J., Rogoza, R., Baran, T., Hitokoto, H., & Maltby, J.

(2018). Cross‐cultural invariance of NPI‐13: Entitlement as culturally specific, leadership

and grandiosity as culturally universal. International Journal of Psychology.

Zhang, F. R., Bi, N. C., & Ha, L. (2018). Motivations and Positive Effects of Taking, Viewing,

and Posting Different Types of Selfies on Social Media: A Cross-National Comparison.

In Selfies as a Mode of Social Media and Work Space Research (pp. 51-73). IGI Global.