ATTENTION:
BEFORE
YOU READ THE CHAPTER ONE OF THE PROJECT TOPIC BELOW, PLEASE READ THE
INFORMATION BELOW.THANK YOU!
INFORMATION:
YOU CAN
GET THE COMPLETE PROJECT OF THE TOPIC BELOW. THE FULL PROJECT COSTS N5,000
ONLY. THE FULL INFORMATION ON HOW TO PAY AND GET THE COMPLETE PROJECT IS AT THE
BOTTOM OF THIS PAGE. OR YOU CAN CALL: 08068231953, 08168759420
INFLUENCE OF
PERSONALITY AND SOCIAL NETWORKING (E.G FACEBOOK) ON PHYSICAL INTERACTION
BACKGROUND
Uses and
gratification theory has provided a frame work for examining the satisfaction
of needs and interests through different forms of communications media (Kartz,
Blumler and Gvievitch, 1974). If two media serve similar needs then they can
act as functional alternatives. However, if they are designed to serve
different needs then they are specialized. One type of medium they be preferred
to another if it is better at fulfilling certain needs such as entertainment or
socializing (Peise and Courtright, 1993). Uses and gratifications theory has
been employed in different forms of social communications because of the
goal-directed nature of communications behaviour (Rubin and Rubin, 1985). The
motives at play, such as relaxation or the acquisition of information can be
quite different depending on the types of communication media used such as the
television or the internet (Fergusion and Peise, 2000). Studies also found out
that the motives for being using a computer mediated communication (CMC) were
different from motives for using face-to-face communication was rated higher
that the computer mediated communication (CMC) for all motives, including
social ones like inclusion and affection.
Two forms of
media may be so different that they alter social uses and social communication.
At least in terms of romantic relationships, it has been suggested that
interaction on the internet are different from face-to-face interactions. The
anonymity afforded by the internet allows relationship to proceed quickly to
intimate levels because of the limitations of other aspects of social contact
(Merkle and Richardson, 2000). In some studies, individuals have been found to
communicate less frequently and closely with internet partners than with
non-internet partners. However, the internet is rated as less useful than
face-to-face communication for maintaining social relationships.
Past
research has employed uses and gratifications theory to examine motives,
interest and attitudes behind face-to-face online communication (Ferguson and
Persie, 2000). Flahertl et al., 1998)/ the theory suggests that if individuals
find face-to-face communication and online communication useful to reach
similar goals, then they will use the two media similarly. One should expect
similar motives at work in the two forms of communication. If, however the uses
of communication over the internet were different form those of face-to-face
communication, then one could expect different motives as a factor in the two
forms of communication.
High
sociability and low shyness have been associated with increased traditional
social behaviour (Asendorpf and Wipers, 1998; Bruch et al., 1989). Past
research also indicates that high sociability would be associated with
increased internet social communication. The greater anonymity provided by the
internet suggests that, the motives maybe somewhat different in the two forms
of social communication. The internet may also help reduce social anxiety
experienced by shy individuals. This effect may led to somewhat different
patterns of use in the two media for shy individuals. If this is the case, the
motives behind traditional and internet social communication maybe somewhat
different.
THEORY OF
NEED AFFILIATION: Mcleiland (1958)
The need for
affiliation by David Mccelland (1958) he says. Describes a person’s need to
feel a sense of involvement and “belonging” within a social group; according to
Murray (1938), people with a high need for affiliation require warm
interpersonal relationships and approval from those with whom they have regular
contact. People who place high emphasis on affiliation tend to be supportive
team members, but may be less effective in leadership positions.
A research
done by Schactee (1959) shows that fear that comes form anxiety increases the
need for the person to affiliate with others who are going thorough the same
situation or that could help them through the stressful event. Individuals are
motivated to find and create a specific amount of social interactions. Each
individuals desires a different amount of a need for affiliation and they
desire an optimal balance of time to their self and time spent with others.
This particular need concerns the desire to be associated with specific people
and groups, to have a greater sense of belonging and place. It can play a role
in a variety of human interactions and in the formation of bonds and
friendships.
Theory of
social interaction: Hannah Humphrey
Social
interaction theory studies the ways that people engage with one another.
Scholars from many disciplines including anthropology, sociology, psychology,
and linguistic are interested in social interaction and the patterns that can
be found in such interactions. According to Max Weber, social behaviour has two
components. The first is the action or the behaviour itself. The second is the
meaning that the ctor attaches to is or her behaviour. That meaning Weber
refereed to as orientation, is how a person perceives his behaviour in
relationship to other people. It is that knowledge of another who is affected
that makes an action or interaction social.
Another
early contribution to social interaction theory was Geiman- American Kurt
Lewin, who developed the concept of group dynamics. Lewin was concerned with
the interaction not just between individuals but between individuals and the
groups that they belong to. The main contribution of group dynamics to later
theories is that human behaviour results from the interaction between a person
and his or her environment. Lewing wrote this theory as a mathematical
equation, making behaviour equal to the function of individuals and the
environment.
Theories of
personality
CARL JUNGS
THEORY OF INTROVERSION AND EXTROVERSION (1933)
Carl Jung
(1933). According to his theory I am introvert is s person whose interest is
generally directed inward toward his own feelings and thoughts, in constant to
an extravert, who attention is directed towards other people and the outside world.
Conversely, Jung explains that a person who is predominantly introverted tends
to orient toward the internal or subjective world, while extroversion refers to
an outgoing, social, accommodating nature that adapts easily to a given
situation, quickly make friends and often venture forth with careless
confidence into an unknown situation. He viewed introversion as signifying a
hesitating reflective, retering nature that keeps to itself, shrinks from
objects, always slightly in the defensive and prefer to hide behind mistrustful
scrutingy. (Jung, 1964). Jung explained that although a person may be
extraverted at time and introverted at some other times, he cannot be both
introverted and extraverted on the same occasion.
Eysenck:
Introversion-Extraversion (1967)
Eysenck
(1967) formulated a theory, which emphasizes introversion-Extraversion in terms
of observed behaviour tendencies and presumed underlying neurological states.
At the behaviour level, the typical extrover6t is sociable, needs to have
people to talk to and does not like reading or studying by himself (Eysenck and
Eysenck, 1968).
HOW TO GET THE FULL PROJECT WORK
PLEASE, print the following
instructions and information if you will like to order/buy our complete written
material(s).
HOW TO RECEIVE PROJECT MATERIAL(S)
After paying the appropriate amount
(#5,000) into our bank Account below, send the following information to
08068231953 or 08168759420
(1) Your project
topics
(2) Email
Address
(3) Payment
Name
(4) Teller Number
We will send your material(s) after
we receive bank alert
BANK ACCOUNTS
Account Name: AMUTAH DANIEL CHUKWUDI
Account Number: 0046579864
Bank: GTBank.
OR
Account Name: AMUTAH DANIEL CHUKWUDI
Account Number: 2023350498
Bank: UBA.
FOR MORE INFORMATION, CALL:
08068231953 or 08168759420
AFFILIATE
Comments
Post a Comment