<%BANNER%>

Clicking for Charity

MISSING IMAGE

Material Information

Title:
Clicking for Charity Exploring the Uses and Gratifications for Liking and Playing a Social Network Game for Social Good
Physical Description:
1 online resource (7 p.)
Language:
english
Creator:
Lynch, Michelle C
Publisher:
University of Florida
Place of Publication:
Gainesville, Fla.
Publication Date:

Thesis/Dissertation Information

Degree:
Master's ( M.A.M.C.)
Degree Grantor:
University of Florida
Degree Disciplines:
Mass Communication, Journalism and Communications
Committee Chair:
Coffey, Amy Jo
Committee Members:
Devane, Benjamin Mitchell
Elias, Troy

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords:
charity -- engagement -- facebook -- game -- gratification -- motivation -- sgn -- sng -- wetopia
Journalism and Communications -- Dissertations, Academic -- UF
Genre:
Mass Communication thesis, M.A.M.C.
bibliography   ( marcgt )
theses   ( marcgt )
government publication (state, provincial, terriorial, dependent)   ( marcgt )
born-digital   ( sobekcm )
Electronic Thesis or Dissertation

Notes

Abstract:
The race to understand player motivations behind the emerging social game industry is rapidly gaining pace and notoriety. Facebook has shown itself to be an emerging platform for these social network games and for what will later be defined as social good networks. The uses and gratifications approach has been used to identify motivations for both social network games and social good networks separately. However, this research surveys WeTopia (Facebook.com/WeTopiaOfficial) page members and game players, an uncommon and seldom studied population of social network game players within a social good network. A self-administered online survey asked respondents to identify motivating factors for “Liking” the WeTopia Facebook page and/or playing the WeTopia game. Results indicate entertainment as the primary motivation for both social good network page visits and social game play. As predicted, WeTopia game players and page members are best described as mature, middle-class, well-educated, white and female. Additional results highlight both page members’ and game players’ likeliness to recruit others to join the page or game as well as their likeliness to be a member of a second group for social good on Facebook. A more robust engagement measure is derived from this data and investigated for future testing. Findings such as these provide useful evidentiary value for marketing and communication professionals to use to justify targeting existing members during a membership drive, particularly those for social causes. These findings also present future research opportunities to investigate what impact incentivizing recruitment may have on member-to-member, member-to-organization and member-to-network relationships.
General Note:
In the series University of Florida Digital Collections.
General Note:
Includes vita.
Bibliography:
Includes bibliographical references.
Source of Description:
Description based on online resource; title from PDF title page.
Source of Description:
This bibliographic record is available under the Creative Commons CC0 public domain dedication. The University of Florida Libraries, as creator of this bibliographic record, has waived all rights to it worldwide under copyright law, including all related and neighboring rights, to the extent allowed by law.
Statement of Responsibility:
by Michelle C Lynch.
Thesis:
Thesis (M.A.M.C.)--University of Florida, 2013.
Local:
Adviser: Coffey, Amy Jo.
Electronic Access:
RESTRICTED TO UF STUDENTS, STAFF, FACULTY, AND ON-CAMPUS USE UNTIL 2015-08-31

Record Information

Source Institution:
UFRGP
Rights Management:
Applicable rights reserved.
Classification:
lcc - LD1780 2013
System ID:
UFE0045966:00001

MISSING IMAGE

Material Information

Title:
Clicking for Charity Exploring the Uses and Gratifications for Liking and Playing a Social Network Game for Social Good
Physical Description:
1 online resource (7 p.)
Language:
english
Creator:
Lynch, Michelle C
Publisher:
University of Florida
Place of Publication:
Gainesville, Fla.
Publication Date:

Thesis/Dissertation Information

Degree:
Master's ( M.A.M.C.)
Degree Grantor:
University of Florida
Degree Disciplines:
Mass Communication, Journalism and Communications
Committee Chair:
Coffey, Amy Jo
Committee Members:
Devane, Benjamin Mitchell
Elias, Troy

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords:
charity -- engagement -- facebook -- game -- gratification -- motivation -- sgn -- sng -- wetopia
Journalism and Communications -- Dissertations, Academic -- UF
Genre:
Mass Communication thesis, M.A.M.C.
bibliography   ( marcgt )
theses   ( marcgt )
government publication (state, provincial, terriorial, dependent)   ( marcgt )
born-digital   ( sobekcm )
Electronic Thesis or Dissertation

Notes

Abstract:
The race to understand player motivations behind the emerging social game industry is rapidly gaining pace and notoriety. Facebook has shown itself to be an emerging platform for these social network games and for what will later be defined as social good networks. The uses and gratifications approach has been used to identify motivations for both social network games and social good networks separately. However, this research surveys WeTopia (Facebook.com/WeTopiaOfficial) page members and game players, an uncommon and seldom studied population of social network game players within a social good network. A self-administered online survey asked respondents to identify motivating factors for “Liking” the WeTopia Facebook page and/or playing the WeTopia game. Results indicate entertainment as the primary motivation for both social good network page visits and social game play. As predicted, WeTopia game players and page members are best described as mature, middle-class, well-educated, white and female. Additional results highlight both page members’ and game players’ likeliness to recruit others to join the page or game as well as their likeliness to be a member of a second group for social good on Facebook. A more robust engagement measure is derived from this data and investigated for future testing. Findings such as these provide useful evidentiary value for marketing and communication professionals to use to justify targeting existing members during a membership drive, particularly those for social causes. These findings also present future research opportunities to investigate what impact incentivizing recruitment may have on member-to-member, member-to-organization and member-to-network relationships.
General Note:
In the series University of Florida Digital Collections.
General Note:
Includes vita.
Bibliography:
Includes bibliographical references.
Source of Description:
Description based on online resource; title from PDF title page.
Source of Description:
This bibliographic record is available under the Creative Commons CC0 public domain dedication. The University of Florida Libraries, as creator of this bibliographic record, has waived all rights to it worldwide under copyright law, including all related and neighboring rights, to the extent allowed by law.
Statement of Responsibility:
by Michelle C Lynch.
Thesis:
Thesis (M.A.M.C.)--University of Florida, 2013.
Local:
Adviser: Coffey, Amy Jo.
Electronic Access:
RESTRICTED TO UF STUDENTS, STAFF, FACULTY, AND ON-CAMPUS USE UNTIL 2015-08-31

Record Information

Source Institution:
UFRGP
Rights Management:
Applicable rights reserved.
Classification:
lcc - LD1780 2013
System ID:
UFE0045966:00001


This item has the following downloads:


Full Text



PAGE 1

1 CLICKING FOR CHARITY: EXPLORING THE USES AND GRATIFICATIONS FOR LIKING AND PLAYING A SOCIAL NETWORK GAME FOR SOCIAL GOOD By MICHELLE C. LYNCH A THESIS PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS IN MASS COMMUNICATION UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 2013

PAGE 2

2 2013 Michelle C. Lynch

PAGE 3

3 To Charlie Bogatescu The best friend and partner a girl could ask for Thanks for not running away when I said I wanted to go back to school. Your love, support and understanding made all the d ifference. To Sarah Lynch The best sister in the world. Thank you for always inspiring me to be a better thinker, designer and per son. To Hollis, Jabba and Slinky The best ferrets in the world. Thank you all for providing constant comic relief and unconditional love.

PAGE 4

4 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Grateful acknowledgement is given to my thesis chair, Dr. Amy Jo Coffey, for her patience and insight in guiding me through the research development and writing process. She is the mentor, instructor, and friend I aspire to be to any future students and co lleagues. My sincerest thanks and acknowledgement also go to my committee members Dr Benjamin DeVane and Dr. Troy Elias whose expertise and analysis helped to form a strong foundation f or my research A wealth of gratitude should also be given to Jody Hedge (maker of magic) for her dedication to helping lost graduate students navigate the academic system. These advisors all gave freely of their time through constructive suggestions and enlightened conversations and have challenged me to be a better scholar and researcher I owe a deep gratitude to many family, friends and colleagues who have prodded and urged me to return to school ( and complete my thesis ) for they saw what I was afraid to try and helped me find the courage to face the fear and do it anyway s. I wish to thank my parents for their encouragement and example as well as their ability to adapt and transform I hope it is an inherited quality endowed to me as well Finally, I wish to thank my partner in crime Charlie, for his willing and loyal assi stance during the preparation, distribution and editing of the survey and for his warm encouragement and gracious understanding during my many hours of self imposed isolation. To these parts, I say thank you; for in no small way you have helped me to produce the whole. E pluribus unum

PAGE 5

5 TABLE OF CONTENTS page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS .................................................................................................. 4 LIST OF TABLES ............................................................................................................ 6 LIST OF FIG URES .......................................................................................................... 7 LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS ............................................................................................. 8 ABSTRACT ..................................................................................................................... 9 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION .................................................................................................... 11 2 LITERATURE REVIEW .......................................................................................... 13 Uses and Gratifications ........................................................................................... 13 Engagement ........................................................................................................... 16 Social Network Games ........................................................................................... 20 Social Good Networks ............................................................................................ 24 The Intersection of Social Network Games and Social Good Networks Online ...... 26 About Facebook ...................................................................................................... 27 What Makes Facebook Likes Meaningful? ........................................................... 28 About WeTopia ....................................................................................................... 32 Uses and Gratifications Applied .............................................................................. 37 3 METHODOLOGY ................................................................................................... 49 Population and Sample ........................................................................................... 50 Sample Demographics ............................................................................................ 51 Measurement Instruments ...................................................................................... 52 4 RESULTS AND ANALYSIS .................................................................................... 59 5 DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION ........................................................................ 83 Discussion .............................................................................................................. 83 Engagement Measurement Approaches and Recommendations ........................... 93 Limitations ............................................................................................................... 95 Implications for Social Causes and Networks ......................................................... 96 6 APPENDIX: QUESTIONNAIRE .............................................................................. 98 7 LIST OF REFERENCES ....................................................................................... 114 8 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH ................................................................................... 120

PAGE 6

6 LIST OF TABLES Table page 2 1 Online social good networks ............................................................................... 46 2 2 Online social good games .................................................................................. 46 3 1 Targeted Group/Page List .................................................................................. 54 3 2 Independent and dependent variable list ............................................................ 55 3 3 Demographic data .............................................................................................. 56 3 4 NPI 16 Key ......................................................................................................... 57 4 1 Descriptive statistics ........................................................................................... 69 4 2 Page Like gratification levels ............................................................................ 69 4 3 Game play gratification levels ............................................................................. 71 4 4 Collapsed and ranked page Like motivations ................................................... 73 4 5 Collapsed and ranked game play motivations .................................................... 73 4 6 16item Narcissism Personality Inventory ........................................................... 74 4 7 Collapsed Facebook Engagement Measures ..................................................... 74

PAGE 7

7 LIST OF FIGURES Figur e page 2 1 How joy works in WeTopia 2013 Sojo ............................................................. 47 2 2 WeTopia game world 2013 Sojo ..................................................................... 47 2 3 WeTopia special project buildings 2013 Sojo ................................................. 48 2 4 WeTopia project information window with option to learn more 2013 Sojo ..... 48 2 5 WeTopia celebrity endorsement and ingame item branding 2013 Sojo ......... 48 4 1 Game player by gender ...................................................................................... 75 4 2 Game player gender by age ............................................................................... 75 4 3 Game player gender by race .............................................................................. 76 4 4 Game player gender by education level ............................................................. 76 4 5 Game player gender by income level ................................................................. 77 4 6 Likeliness to recruit others to Like the WeTopia Facebook page ..................... 77 4 7 Likeliness to recruit others to play the WeTopia game ....................................... 78 4 8 Length of time since first game played by game play duration ........................... 78 4 9 Page member by gender .................................................................................... 79 4 10 Page member gender by age ............................................................................. 79 4 11 Page member gender by race ............................................................................ 80 4 12 Page member gender by education level ........................................................... 80 4 13 Page member gender by income level ............................................................... 81 4 14 Duration by community building .......................................................................... 81 4 15 Game player belief that game play is like volunteering and/or donating ............. 82 4 16 Game player and page member by like liness to repost content ......................... 82

PAGE 8

8 LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS FACEBOOK PAGE A Facebook page is defined as a public profile on the social networking site Facebook Pages enable an organization or individual to post and share pic tures, information or ideas with other Facebook users. (Birnbrauer & Lynch, 2012) LIKE A L ike is defined as a way to give positive feedback and connect with things one cares about on Facebook. Someone can L ike content that friends post in order to give them feedback Others L ike a Facebook page in order to connect with that page and the members of that page. (What is the like feature?) SGN Social Good Network SNS Social Networking Site

PAGE 9

9 Abstract of Thesis Presented to the Graduate School of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts in Mass Communication CLICKING FOR CHARITY: E XPLORING THE USES AND GRATIFICATIONS FOR LIKING AND PLAYING A SOCIAL NETWORK GAME FOR SOCIAL GOOD By Michelle C. Lynch August 2013 Chair: Amy Jo Coffey Major: Mass Communication The race to understand player motivations behind the emerging social game industry is rapidly gaining pace and notoriety. Facebook has shown itself to be an emerging platform for these social network games and for what will later be defined as social good networks. The u ses and g ratifications approach has been used to identify motivations for both social network games and social good networks separately. However, this research surveys WeTopia ( F acebook.com/WeTopiaOfficial ) page members and game players an uncommon and seldom studied population of social network game players within a social good network. A self administered online survey asked respondent s to identify motivating factors for Liki ng the WeTopia Facebook page and/or playing the WeTopia game. Results indicate entertainment as the primary motivation for both social good network page visits and social game play. A s predicted, WeTopia game players and page members are best described as mature, middleclass, well educated, white and female. Additional results highlight both page members and game players likeliness to recruit others to join the page or game as well as their likeliness to be a member of a second

PAGE 10

10 group for social good on Facebook. A more robust engagement measure is derived from this data and investigated for future testing. Findings such as these provide useful evidentiary value for marketing and communication professionals to use to justify targeting existing m embers duri ng a membership drive particularly those for social causes These findings also present future research opportunities to investigate what impact incentivizing recruitment may have on member to member, member to organization and member to network relationships .

PAGE 11

11 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION The mediarich environments which we interact with today are full of variety and versatility of meaning. An individual touches and is touched by multiple media messages throughout the day and each of these has the possibility of forming a more immersive experience. The richness of these experiences may encourage audiences to form lasting bonds with their media. Some of the richest and most immersive experiences can be found in the interaction which audiences have with online games and online gaming communities From Twitter to Facebook, the s ocial influences of these digital hubs can be found in both the evolution and maintenance of the communities and groups which form within their networks. Facebook is considered the largest social network ing site (SNS) on the internet. With a reported one billion users (Grandoni, 2012) the Facebook population is larger than the population of North America (World Bank, 2010) Considering this membership statistic and Facebook's i nherent news and information posting system, the possibility of the Facebook network to influence social change could be compared to the power and influe nce of the populace (and media) of a large country The potential for Facebook, as a medium, to define culture and identity continues to grow as its membership grows. However, t his exponential growth can hide some of the more nuanced correlations between Facebooks ability to satisfy individual media needs and its ability to act as a social motivation system. The WeTopia social game and network on Facebook provide a novel environment to examine the uses and gratifications (U&G) approach in an emerging new media context. Katz (1959) a preeminent scholar in the humanistic U&G approach,

PAGE 12

12 posits that individuals actively seek out particular mass communication channels for particular uses in order to gratify distinctive needs. Through the lens of the U&G approach researcher s work together in developing an ever growing list of individualized motivations for playing, consuming or participating in and with a variety of media and mediums The game under investigation, WeTopia, is a social network game playable through an internet browser and only available on the Facebook platform. In the game, players build a virtual city and accumulate "joy points" which can be spent on donations to real world charities. These charities then make tangible differ ences in needful areas of the world. The purpose of this study is to explore the motivations which with players self identify when playing a social network game for social good and/or participating in its accompanying social good network (SGN) I n offering members a combination of informative, identity related, social and/or entertaining gratifications the WeTopia game and community is likely satisfying multiple overlapping social and personal needs at once The relative scarcity of current research on so cial good game players makes this study significant for scholars and professionals in mass communications and video game theory. This research is positioned to help build a more comprehensive understanding of social network games as well as SGNs. The resul ts of this research can be used to improve the explanatory power of the U&G approach as well as to continue the exploration of concepts like narcissism and engagement within a U&G framework.

PAGE 13

13 CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW Uses and Gratifications Everything that the human race has done and thought is concerned with the satisfaction of deeply felt needs Einstein (Theory of Cosmic Religion) The U&G approach has been used to explore the intent and consequences of media selection since the mid20th century. It is an approach that expects the media consumer to actively engage in their media selection and, after thoughtfully considering alternatives, choose a particular media channel to meet some purposeful need. In other words, it is an approach to study media use which supports the general free will of the audience. U&G is concerned with what people do with media as opposed to what media do to people and centers on: (1) the social and psychological origins of (2) needs, which generate (3) expectati ons of (4) the mass media or other sources, which lead to (5) differential patterns of media exposure (or engagement in other activities), resulting in (6) need gratifications and (7) other consequences, perhaps mostly unintended ones ( Katz, Blumler, & Gurevitch, 1973) Media scholars prior to the 1950s were not focused on individual effects models. In these early stages of media scholarship, the public concern regarding media consumption centered heavily on the effect which media would have on society. That is, the mass effect of the media. The fear of these unknown (and ostensibly global) effects produced research focused on the persuasive nature of media with little regard for the free will of the audi ence. A turning point in the mass media versus individual effects scholarly debate occurred when Katz (1959) responded to a proclamation by Berelson (1948) that the field of communication was dead. Katz refute d Ber e lsons claim by saying that it was not mass communication but persuasion that was dying. Although

PAGE 14

14 there are a few origin stories for U&G, this debate is usually heralded as the controversy that s witched mass communication research from a passive audience paradigm to an active audience philosophy (Bryant & Miron, 2004) The historical trail of t he U&G approach has identified a wide variety of concepts (or gratification classifications ) which motivate an audience to actively choose a media outlet. These concepts include learning, belonging, habit, companionship, escape from boredom, identification, arousal and relaxation (Herzog, 1944; Joinson, 200 8; Katz, 1959; Katz, Blumler, & Gurevitch, 1974) Although an almost infinite amount of individual gratifications could be discovered and studied, U&G scholar s continue to refine larger gratification categories by finding commonalities or links between subgratifications. This has produced a list of commonly cited umbrella gratification categori es with in the U&G framework including information seekin g, diversion, personal relationship building identity and surveillance (McQuail, Blumler, & Brown, 1972) Of importance to this research are the specific categories of identity, relationship building, entertainment (or diversion) and information seeking all of which will be explored in the U&G applied section of this research The emergence of computer mediated communication has also affected the breadth of gratifications studied. Having an accessible and intimate media delivery format (with the internet available in living rooms, offices and bedrooms alike) has helped with both a vailability and deliver y of media content. In addition, it has expanded the research capabilities which these new media offer Not only are websites intimate enough to reach into the homes of potential consumers or research subjects (where they are arguably most comfortable and possibly vulnerable) but, unlike contemporary

PAGE 15

15 media such as television or radio, the internet also enabl es an unprecedented layer of personalization and connectedness which may come with new gratification categorizations (i.e. connection) and research opportunities for U&G scholars (Chen, 2011) However, these new deve lopments also pose unexpected challenges as will be highlight ed in the limitations section of this research One criticism of the U&G approach is that it can be too individualistic (Elliot, 1974) and compartmentalized (i.e. applying only to the audience studied). However, this criticism may assume generalizability to a larger audience whereas this research does not The scope of generalization that this research can assume is within a population of WeTopia game players. I nstead of generalizations to a larger gaming population, this research contributes to the growing list of individual motivations categorized into those umbrella concepts which have been in development since Herzog firs t used the term gratifications (1944) to describe the driving force behind the motivation to consume media. Investigating this population adds importance to and understanding of a niche audiences needs and expectations. It contributes to the general study of the U&G approach by expanding the knowledge of media expectations specifically within SGNs and investigates the perceptions and motivations of this population (i.e. the WeTopia game players and comm unity ) within an emerging online game genre ( e g social good games). The U&G approach provides operational definitions for the motivations individuals employ when deciding to us e a particular media outlet. The psychosocial impacts of these motivations are also explored later under each gratification category

PAGE 16

16 Engagement A single definition or measure of engagement is difficult to obtain due to the subjective nature of the concept Much like a definition of love, engagement can mean different things to different people at different points in time. To some, engagement may describe the feeling of attachment to or camaraderie with a thing or group. To others engagement represents a measure of time spent interac ting with a thing or group. In many online media channels, engagement has been considered a composite of page views and unique visits often expressed through impressions. H owever, since a uniform measure of engagement has not yet been developed, this rese arch proposes the construction of a multifaceted engagement measure based on Napolis (2011) categori zation of the four most common approaches to measuring audience engagement Napo li (2011) points to the changes in mass communications toward media fragmentation and audience autonomy as re asons for the varied development s in audience engagement measures Napoli (2011) identifies four approaches which are currently employed to m easure audiences ever changing expressions through behaviors and attitude toward or abo ut a media vehicle or offering. These approaches are driven by one or more of the following: exposure data, audience appreciation or emotional response attitude (and recall) and behavioral responses. Napoli (2011) classifies the first approaches to measuring engagement as those driven by exposure data. These exposure based approaches have been the primary focus of those advertisers who have most valued audience eyeballs (Napoli, 2011) It is within these more traditional exposure driven approaches that frequency and duration are often measured because they are more readily available, easily obtained and

PAGE 17

17 systematically collected without interrupting the audience experience. Measurements using exposure based approaches presume that audiences who are exposed frequently and for longer periods of time will produce deeper engagement me asures (Napoli, 2011) However, exposure based engagement measures do not account for psycho socia l and sociocultural manifestations of audience engagement Although Napoli (2011) does not discount the value of frequency and duration measures Napoli does argue for a richer understanding of the concept of engagement to be inclusive of activities, a ttitudes and behaviors outside of these foundational exposure measures Given the profusion of new outlets for audience expression and interaction, Napoli (2011) present s alternative engagement measure ment approaches which work to capture some of the more ephemeral or emotional engagement interactions The second set of approaches to measuring audience engagement is driven by audienc e appreciation and emotional response. Among other things, appreciation and emotional response are said to be the byproducts of the previously discussed exposure measures (Napoli, 2011) Some appreciation and emotional response approaches have been measured using ne w tools and concepts, such as buzz metrics which monitor and evaluate the online chatter found in discussion groups, online networks, comments and blogs Although the impact of word of mouth has been difficult to accurately measure, the latest word of mouse interactions may allow for less intrusive tracking and monitoring of conversations and discussions that were previously difficult if not impossible to record and analyze The third set of engagement measures Napoli (2011) presents are those driven by attitude and recall These engagement measures have been prevalent in advertising

PAGE 18

18 and other media outlets which call the audience to action for either a purpose or a product. M any of the traditional r esearch methods such as interviews, surveys and f ocus groups have been used to measure audience recall and attitude. A fter exposure, audiences under investigation are commonly asked to recall a name or feature of a product or advertisement and may be asked questions about their feelings or attitude toward the advertisement, message or product as well. The measure of whether an audience is engaged through these approaches can be found in the salience of the audience members attitude as well as in the accuracy of their recall These attitude and recall measures are most often valued by those requiring quantifiable evidence of mental engagement Although Napoli (2011) classifies both attitude and recall within the sa me set of umbrella approaches, this research will present the new composite engagement measure using an attitude measure only. Here, attitude ( and recall ) investigate s the depth and permanence of engagement with an audience which may, in turn lead to the final set of approaches behavioral responses The fourth and final set of engagement measures is driven by audience behavior Traditional behavioral responses (such as product purchases) are highly sought after and not easily obtained, whic h makes them a commodity in the media marketplace Online behavioral responses may manifest themselves in the form of clicks, shares, likes and other common behaviors found in participatory culture. These measurement approaches are found at the end of Napolis (2011) audience engagement sequence and represent the culmination of all previous engagement efforts to achieve some audience action or reaction.

PAGE 19

19 Although all of the previously mentioned engagement measures have reasonable scientific support to consider them as sole engagement measures, this research focuses on using the foundational post exposure measures of frequency and duration to evaluate the research questions and hypotheses. However a newly created and more robust measure of engagement is also being tested. T aking advantage of Napolis (2011) classification of engagement measurement approaches this research proposes an amalgam of the four approaches to calcul ate an engagement score for the WeTopia audiences. Further information regarding this new engagement measure may be found in the measurement instruments section of this research. Engagement can be considered a measure of the investment which an audience has given or is willing to give media content It is a sense of being connected or emotionally involved with something. Mersey, Malthouse and Calder (2010) refer to engagement as the overall experiences of a vehicle with experience being a set of thoughts and beliefs that [consumers] have about how a [media vehicle] fits into their lives (p.41). According to Mersey et al. (2010) engagement is composed of experienc es which are composed of interactive actions such as visits, time spent and number of views. The se visits, time spent and number of views can be translated using frequency and duration estimates to pr oduce a multi dimensional measure of engagement through time investment T he experiences can then be considered reflections of the gratifications and motivations (i.e. information, identity, entertainment and community) an individual ascribes when u sing a particular media or medium over the myriad choices available.

PAGE 20

20 The question of what keeps consumers returning to a media offering is one that, like the U&G approach, presupposes exposure. That is, in order to reliably predict repeat behavior or exposure, a consumer should have some experience or point of reference prior to engaging with any media or medium As Napoli (2011) points out, It is important to recognize that basically all of the post exposure dimensions of audience behavior have been associated with one or more definitions and operationalizations of engagement (p 90). This implies that engagement can be consider ed a dimension of audience exposure, attitude and behavior which may then be used to buy, sell or produce audiences in the media marketplace It is an especially applicable dimension within new media where a persistent digital record of audiences is both economical and prevalent. Although the definition of engagement can be consider ed more complex than just loyalty and attentiveness (Napoli, 2011) a common thread among most definitions typically involves some measur e of stickiness (Napoli, 2003) where frequency of visits as well as time spent per visit become key stickiness indicators within the larger concept of engagement. Within the U&G approach of the current research, engagement can be considered an influential meta factor for the expectancy of particular gratifications to be satisfied by the selected media offering. Social Network Games Online social network games have been a recent development of social media and are positioned to be one of the most pervasive game genres to date. According to a Mashable article (O'Dell, 2010) findings from an NPD (marketing research company) study indicate that one out of every five Americans over the age of six has played an online social game at least once equating this number to nearly 60 million Americans, adults and kids alike. Social network games may be considered casual by the more

PAGE 21

21 discerning gamer H owever it is the business side of these games that really differentiate them from their casual game cousins. With an emphasis on micro transactions v irtual goods, subscriptions and sponsorships the business end of social network games behaves more like a massively multiplayer online (MMO) game (Chen, 2009) than a casual game (e.g. Tetris or Pac Man) This presents a fiscal opportunity for the game industry as the same NPD study also found that 11 percent of the respondents planned to spend money playing social network games in the future (O'Dell, 2010) Most social network games are played through an internet browser via a SNS and are within a persistent world, much like an MMO game (Yee, 2006) However, Hou (2011) cites some key components which differentiate social [network] games from other computer games (What are social games? section 1 para. 1) i ncluding being social platform based and multiplayer as well as having players use their real identity and encouraging casual gameplay. Literature on social network games is currently emerging however the social function of games has a longer history. Green and McNeese (2008) employed uses and gratifications theory to identify predictors of digital game play. Green and McNeese used secondary data from The National Center for Education Statistics to look at 15,000 students and their video game us e (2008) They found that race, gender, and the need for social gratification were all indicators of game play. In addition, they found that students who played with other people, like friends or parents, played more than those who played alone. Importantly and excitingly, females represent 55 percent of the social network game players in the United States (Information Solutions Group, 2010) and account for

PAGE 22

22 58 percent of SNS users as well (Hampton, Goulet, Rainie, & Purcell, 2011) It would not be surprising then to find that females make up the majority of the social good game players on the Facebook social network In seeking ways to best target and encourage female game players, social network games could prove to be an unexpected portal to engage with the wives, mothers, sisters and daughters of the current male dominated game marketplace. As such, we come t o our f irst research hypothesis. H1: A majority of WeTopia game players will be female. Gratifications of Social Network Games. Unlike traditional video games, the expected gratifications for social network games are considered less competitive and more social or cooperative in nature (Hou, 2011) The social nature of the games makes them inherently different from more traditional video games where competition is the driving motivation (Hou, 2011) As is often the case in social network games, posting requests for assistance and recruiting other players serves to develop cooperative relationships and foster community as well as progress the game. Branston and Bush (2010) also found evidence that users entice others to join their SG N s which leads to the next set of research hypothes e s: H 2 : WeTopia Facebook page members are more likely than unlikely to recruit others to Like the official WeTopia Faceboo k page. H 3 : WeTopia Facebook game players are more likely than unlikely to recruit others to play the WeTopia game. A survey commissioned for PopCap games also uncovered a large percentage of social network game players who form long term attachments with their games. This survey by the Information Solutions Group (2010) found that 56 percent of the respondents in both the United States and the United Kingdom have played a social

PAGE 23

23 network game for at least one year. Almost all (95 percent) of those same social network gamers play these games multiple times a week with 34 percent stating that they are passionate enough to play several times a day (Information Solutions Group, 2010) Although a majority of the players frequently play social network games, the duration of game play is more varied and harder to correlate. Approximately 33 percent of socia l network game players will spend less than one hour a week playing social network games while the majority (38 percent) will spend between one and five hours each week (Information Solutions Group, 2010) Digging deeper, each session of game play is also quite variable with the majority (62 percent) of game players staying in the game somewhere between 11 minutes and one hour (Information Solutions G roup, 2010) Specifically WeTopia players levels of engagement may increase af ter they have been exposed to the game (or SGN) and have made the active decision to invest continued time and effort. Although the definition of engagement is complex and persistently ambiguous (Napoli, 2011, p. 90) there are some prominent metrics which have been repeatedly used to measure media exposure such as frequency and duration (Napoli, 2011) It can be argued that patterns and time spent per session may not be the most robust measures of engagement, however, they are two of the most frequently used measures in engagement literature (Napoli, 2011) and are likely to be good indicators of audience commitment or loyalty over time. With this in mind, we present the following hypothesis and subhypotheses regarding engagement and social network game play. H 4 : Engagement through exposur e will be positively correlated to amount of time committed since first game played.

PAGE 24

24 H 4 a : Length of time since first game play will be positively correlated to frequency of game play sessions H 4 b : Length of time since first game play will be positively correlated to duration of game play sessions Social Good Networks An appeal of playing a social network game on Facebook can arguably be the availability of one's preexisting social network. This social capital can help a player to progress more easily and faster through an online social network game. Above and beyond game assistance is the ability of the players network to coalesce for the benefit of a cause. Branston and Bush (2010) coined the term "social good networks" t o describe those social networks created to share information and ideas in the hopes of calling to action for the benefit of some social good. Branston and Bush (2010) describe a SGN as a viable tool for building broader, long term relationships but found that these SGNs may not have a significant im pact on short term fund raising (p. 1). Interestingly, females also comprise the majority of SGN user s with the average user being "white, well educated and global" (2010) Additionally, SGN users are engaged with their network, as evidenced by the 68 percent of them who stay involved weekly (2010) In light of this research the following hypotheses will be investigated. H 5 : A majority of WeTopia Facebook page members will be female. H 6 : Engagement through exposure will be positively correlated to amount of time commi tted since first joining the WeTopia SGN H 6 a : Length of time invested in the social good network will be positively correlated to frequency of page visits H 6 b : Length of time invested in SGN will be positively correlated to duration of SGN page visit s ession

PAGE 25

25 The influence of a SGN may be capitalized on by marketing and communication professionals to cross support digital campaigns and assist in developing brands. By leveraging a single community member's social influence as well as the social influence of the larger group, the moderators and media profes sionals within SGNs can bolster the perceived credibility and engagement of their brand, campaign and/or cause Where SGNs are interested in relationship building, the trend for ePhilanthropy and online activism is aimed more towards the financial gain whi ch can be harnessed from these benevolent social connections by providing supporters with novel ways to donate. Eller (2008) looked at a close relative to SGNs by examining solidarity websites where the only action r equired of a donor is to click a button which both symbolically and literally makes a donation of food, clothing or cash to the associated cause. An example of a solidarity website would be The Hunger Site ( www.thehunger site.com ) which is similar in principle to WeTopia but lacks the twoway interaction and cumulative reward system which a social network game provides. However, n ot everyone is enthusiastic about ePhilanthropy and online activism. To some, eActivists perf orm these digital acts in order to make themselves feel important but, in reality, have little to zero social impact. Morozov (2009) is one such person who states that the problem with contemporary digital activism (or slacktivism as Morozov coins it) is that the granularity of the act makes it too easy to gratify simple altruistic needs. That is, you can donate a penny where you may otherwise donate a dollar (Morozov, 2009) Even so, c haritabl e giving through online channels has become increasingly popular over the last decade. Users interested in humanitarian causes are more

PAGE 26

26 consistently going online to search for information, engage in social fundraising, show support, find volunteer opportunities and engage in online conversations (Branston & Bush, 2010) In hindsight, this e Ph ilanthropy revolution may have actually been more of an evolution (Hart, 2001) from single minded solidarity sites seeking donations to the more sophisticated relationship building focused SGNs The Intersection of Social Network Games and Social Good Networks Online With little research on the impact of social network games and related SGNs, little is known regarding their potential as immersive, online stewards of relationship building for offline cause marketing. I nformation and data hypothesized in this research can help to justify the use of social network games and SGNs as a nontraditional but engaging marketing channel. Hart (2001) highlighted this point in an article on the early stirrings of the ePhil anthropy revolution by offering the advice that nonprofits can not only use the internet as a tool to raise money but also as a channel to cr eate and encourage relationships. Additionally, civic engagement may rise as a result of interacting with humanitarian networks and sites on the internet. Users may see others participating within the humanitarian network and begin to form a new social reality where helping the less fortunate through online sites and, in this context, games may become a socially accepted form of digital humanitarianism. However this may or may not translate into real world action, Branston and Bush (2010) found that the least popular action on a SGN is in using it to find volunteer opportunities or donate money. As WeTopia seemingly allows players to donate their time through gameplay which in turn, is used to fund real world goods, it may be the case that WeTopia players and

PAGE 27

27 communi ty members believe their playing is equivalent to volunteering and donating. This presents us with ou r first research question. RQ1 : Do WeTopia game players believe they have (a) volunteered or (b) donated to these social good causes through playing the WeTopia game? About Facebook With more than 800 million users in a given 30 day period (Ostrow, 2011; Wyld, 2012) Facebook also arguably takes the lead as the most visited SNS. Although Facebook can be viewed as a platform for managing and possibly intermixing an individuals multiple identities online, the normative influence which this social network has on the expectation and interaction with other digital or nondigital social network s is enormous. If that is not enough to warrant investigation, Facebook is also an important network in the daily lives of its members as indicated by the 52 percent of users who engage with their Facebook network every day (Hampton et al., 2011) According to a study conducted by Nielsen (2010) the world now spends 22 percent of their online time browsing sites like Facebook, Twitter or YouTube. The same study (Nielsen, 2010) also discovered that the average global citizen logs approximately 6 hours per month on Facebook which is more than any of the other sites investigated. T he psychological need for connection and social support may be at the heart of what makes Facebook so appealing to such a large audience. As Hampton et al. (2011) found, Facebook users report significantly higher levels of social support (p.35). Specifically someone who uses Fac ebook multiple times per day gets about half the boost in total support that someone receives from being married or living with a partner (Hampton et al., 2011) This is not to imply that Facebook users need mor e support but

PAGE 28

28 serves as a demonstration of the inherent support which is provided by engaging in online communities and networks like Facebook. What M akes Facebook Likes M eaningful? One aim of this research is to i dentify the common motivations that community members may have for connecting to the WeTopia Facebook page. Community membership, in this context, is quantified through a tally of the number of page likes In order to become a member of a Facebook page, one must click on the L ike button for that page. The effect of this "Like" button has no comparison in modern society. It can be both a vehicle for communication and a badge of honor. The liking of a community Facebook page serve s as an innovative relationship building tool for the page moderators as well. Through posting and sharing, a community Facebook page may influence its members to also like the information and causes it posts about. The community members who post and share the information from WeTopia onto their wal ls or timelines then become active stewards of the causes and/or disseminators of information. The social, cultural and personal needs which drive the choice to "Like" a page may also provide a snapshot into the collective psyche of that pocket of society With special regard to SGNs, r ationally and morally, the concern for a common social good is logical for a society to evolve. Motivation and gratification for performing an action, like volunteering to promote human welfare, has been explored at length i n psychology, biology, and sociology. The argument for actions in the name of the greater good has been documented as far back as the Greek philosophers Socrates, Plato and Aristotle. The unlimited agape love which friendship and community involvement ca n spur in the hearts of the compassionate represent s one possible gratification (i.e. good feelings)

PAGE 29

29 users may receive when connecting with SGNs or humanitarian communities. However there may be darker gratifications such as those found in the altruistic narcissist who does the right thing for the wrong reason. The reasons why an altruistic narcissist choos es to do good and ethical things may indeed be for self serving purposes or as a means to an end, but one could argue that every experience can be transformative regardless of motivation or gratification so the negative aspect of this personality type may be short lived Ulterior motives aside, to some it is simply the act of caring that counts and the altruistic narcissist may then be an acce pted personality trait in the interest of the greater good. What motivates a user to engage with a SGN may also be influenced by a psycho social need t o connect with others through community and establish a sense of identity If privacy settings allow friends and connections to view ones liked pages, then the user is directly linked, both fi guratively and literally, to these humanitarian communities The L ike button can then serve as a way to promote or call attention to objects which a user would like to present to their social network. By c licking the Like button, a user indicates that he/she is highly interested in the cultural object (e.g. page, post, image, video, etc) and motivated enough to express this interest Much like grade school children in the United States have grown up doing in the classroom, the L ike button allows Facebook users to play show and tell well into their adult years. The WeTopia game may be considered a cultural object in itself but a users connection with the WeTopia page may also satisfy needs outside of the game. In offering members informative, identity social and/or entertaining methods of engagement, the WeTopia Facebook page may satisfy its audiences various needs by

PAGE 30

30 engaging the audience through both passive awareness (via wall or timeline posts) and active participation (via enticement to play the game or comment ). The social nature of liking a page or liking content allows Facebook users to express their preferences and attitude for cultural objects. A surve y conducted by Papacharissi and Mendelson (2011) found a majority of the respondents (37.9%) belonged to bet ween six and 15 Facebook groups. Although labeled groups in the aforementioned study, Facebook has since rebranded and reclassified some of these groups as pages and retained those which were user community focused as groups but with no official connection implied. This is all to say that a user who likes the Facebook page of a game for social good may be simultaneously receiving identity, social, information and entertainment gratifications in addition to the warm, fuzzy feeling they get from playing the game. Additional information on the particular aspects of these gratifications will be discussed in detail later. With this in mind, we offer the following hypothesis and research question. H 7 : WeTopia Facebook page members are likely to be members of another social good page on Facebook RQ2 : How likely are WeTopia Facebook page members or game players to share social cause posts from WeTopia? The act of liking content or a page may be considered a nontraditional but quantifiable measure of repeat behavior attitude and online engagement. ChompO n (2011) an ecommerce platform, conducted an analysis of its Facebook and Twitter traffic and found that likes on Facebook are worth approximately eight dollars towards the next immediate sale. According to Facebook, people who click the L ike button are more engaged, active and connected than the average Facebook user (The value of a

PAGE 31

31 liker. September 29, 2010) In their research proposing a system of mining the power of likes in a social network, Jin, Wang, Luo, Yu and Han (2011) claim that the like has become an accurate way of estimating user interests and an effective way of sharing/ promot ing information in social media (p. 1). The choice to like a Facebook page is also a choice to subscribe to the (often frequent ) communication which the page may post. This offers a meaningful communication and relationship building stream for the organizations with Facebook pages. Posting content and news helps to form and maintain connections within a social network. These updat es can appear on an individuals Facebook news feed. This news feed is similar to an RSS (reall y simple syndication) feed in that it aggregates individual news stories from ones various friends and connections. R eading the content of ones news feed is of ten a part of everyday life for the 59% of online Americans who use at least one SNS (Hampton et al., 2011) T he communication tie to page likes was rolled out in October 2009 (Pipatsrisawat, October 19, 2009) as a purposeful decision by Facebook to give meaning to the Like button by connecting it with news and relationship building. The previous option to become a fan of a Facebook group was a onesided act essentially void of meaning. To become a fan, an individual would click the L ike button and a link would appear on their profile. However the interaction between the page and the community might have ended there if the user did not actively visit the gr oup page after becoming a fan (note that the news feed function had not yet been developed in Facebook at this point) This meant that a relationship between members and the page, as well as among members themselves, was not easily cultivated because no further

PAGE 32

32 communication was integrated into the process ; w ith the new button functionality, Facebook gave the L ike button an action and purpose. About WeTopia WeTopia is a social network game playable through an internet browser and currently only available on the Facebook platform. The WeTopia game was launched in May 2010 and released for beta on November 30, 2011. In the game, players build a virtual city and use their Facebook connecti ons to hire staff members and construct special items. Players also harvest crops and collect goodwill through houses and shops located in their game world This goodwill is the currency of WeTopia and allows players to purchase additional ingame market i tems (e.g. houses, shops, playgrounds or "joygrounds", decorations, etc.). Through building and harvesting their virtual city, players accumulate "joy points, as show n in Figure 2 1, which can be spent on donations to real world charities in order to make a real world difference. The exact joy point to dollar exchange rate is currently unpublished but it is generally accepted by the WeTopia community that someone accumulating a million joy points is at the top of the player ranking and has been playing for a longer period of time. This is evidenced in the exclusive membership groups on Facebook that joy point millionaires are invited to join. However, it is also generally accepted by the WeTopia game community that it takes many millions of joy points to fund any one campaign as becomes apparent as players donate to the same campaigns for weeks or months at a time but see only small gains toward the overall campaign goal each week These real world differences are actual donations of food and clothing (Hernandez, 2012) to various needful areas of the United States, Haiti and Africa. They are chronicled through the ingame Reel World Theater 's pictures and videos as well as on the WeTopia Facebook page.

PAGE 33

33 The aesthetic st yle of the game can be described as chibi sweet using characters with oversized heads and vibrant colors as shown in Figure 2 1 The upper portion of the game screen has various gauges and heads up displays which indicate the players current levels and meters. Above the gauges and meters are seven tabs which provide the player with links to interact communicate and/ or find addit ional information about the game, the causes and the community. The real impact tab takes players to a map which not only highlights the areas of the world that have been positively affected by WeTopia but also provides an on going tally of the type of d onations which have been given to these areas on behalf of all WeTopia players. Four of the remaining tabs are social in nature and allow the player to send gifts, invite friends, access the community message boards and review requests for assistance from other friends. The lower portion of the game screen displays all of the players neighbors (or friends in their social network whom they can target to join WeTopia) as well as links to perform additional actions such as visiting a neighbors WeTopia comm unity. Easy access buttons are located on the bottom right of the screen. These buttons give players access to edit their community layout, donate joy, buy things at the market or recall items from storage. The left side of the screen lists all of the avai lable quests which can be completed for more joy, items and/or experience points. Finally, the right side of the screen is used to highlight specific campaigns and limited time offers currently available to all game players. Both experience and joy have at tainable levels associated with them. Experience levels are based on the tasks performed in the game (harvesting and collecting) while joy levels are associated with the amount of joy given to charitable projects. Each level

PAGE 34

34 of joy is associated with a pos itive nickname (e. g. caregiver or joy champion) and players are given a reward for attaining each level. Currently, the highest level of joy attainable is level 50 but players may continue to give joy to charitable projects after reaching this level. To encourage frequent and continued giving, WeTopia also offers special project buildings as shown in Figure 2 3, for each milestone a player meets (1k, 5k, 10k, 25k and 50k) in donating joy points to a single organization. The player can track his/her joy poi nts through their joy meter which not only displays the amount of joy currently accumulated but also the amount of joy the player has donated over time. Joy points are donated virtually through the game interface by each player after they have selected whi ch charity( ie s) to support. Energy is also tracked through a meter at the top of the screen and one energy point ( which may be used to perform the action of harvesting and collecting goodwill from buildings and crops) is freely given to the player every fi ve minutes. Players may add more goodwill (increasing game currency) or energy points (extending game play) by purchasing these items in the market using Facebook credits. Facebook credits can be purchased with real money through Facebook or earned by watc hing video advertisements. Information sharing opportunities are provided both ingame and through the WeTopia Facebook page. Posts regarding the latest social good agencies to partner with WeTopia and the real world impact of the game players efforts are typically shared through the WeTopia Facebook page and reshared by page members and players using the functions built into Facebook posts. Players are able to send items and visit friends within the game, but sharing information among game players and page members is most often encouraged through the Facebook page.

PAGE 35

35 Throughout the game, players are encouraged to recruit others to join and learn more about the causes and charities that WeTopia supports. Figure 2 4 gives an example of a charity information window in WeTopia. A highlight video for each active charity is also available at the ingame theater. Each video includes the option to share this information with others in one's Facebook network which enables players to become active stewards of the social causes as well. Additional posts from the WeTopia Facebook page regarding social good achievements, news and game information may also show up in a community member's Facebook news feed. All of this works together to tell a compelling story of the good that has been or will be achieved through playing the game, informing others about the campaign and donating joy or purchasing in game items. Interestingly, the developers of WeTopia have disclosed a preference in their solicitation for charitable partners or projects which excel at storytelling through photos, videos, and social media (Sojo about.) This storytelling factor may be one of the greatest differences between humanitarian websites and SGN s. Both humanitarian websites and SGNs can bolster a continuous twoway dialog and provide a multimedia experience. However a SGN is especially good at telling the story of the relationship between its members and the charitable which is constantly being cultivated and spun i nto an ongoing and interactive story line. WeTopia is developed by Sojo Studios and operates in many of the same ways that other social network games function. Sojo Studios is a for profit, privately held company that generates revenue from advertisers and the sale of virtual goods within the game and from other digital platforms. A detailed breakdown of the companys revenue stream is not publicly available. However, WeTopia and Sojo Studios have

PAGE 36

36 publicly claimed that WeTopia gives 50 percent of its pr ofit to its nonprofit partners and no less than 20 percent of its revenue ( Ramos, 2011). As is common with the rapid pace of digital development Sojo Studios has recently ventured into a new business model where players now sign up to a larger "SojoGivingplace" community outside of Facebook. Players may still accumulate joy points in the WeTopia game on Facebook but now players can deposit their joy points for "Sojo" points at the "SojoG ivingplace." Players can then use those Sojo points to donate to charities through their SojoGivingplace account. The money collected in the "SojoGivingplace" can also come from sites and streams thus removing Facebook as an intermediary platform Althou gh the revenue model s for Sojo Studios and WeTopia are not publicly available, all of the causes and campaigns in the game are ostensibly linked to not for profit organizations helping children. The altruistic lure of helping children by playing a game is apparently appealing to humanitarian celebrities as well. Both Ellen DeGeneres (Heinz, 2011) and Justin Bieber (JustinBieber, 2011) have publicly support ed WeTopia. Ellen DeGenere s has even offered to become virtual friends with other WeTopia players. In connection with the support provided by Ellen, limited time, in game items have been created with special Ellen branding and/or meaning (Figure 2 5) WeTopia is not the first or the only game for social good (Table 22) In addition to real world philanthropic impacts like those found in WeTopia, other games for good include games which have been used to understand infectious disease control (Plenda, 2011) and ones used to restructure civic participation (Kahne, Middaugh, & Evans, 2006) A larger Games For Change movement encompasses these games for social good, all of which support the hope that games gamers and game communities can

PAGE 37

37 make positive differences in society. Researchers like Jane McGonigal believe that games can save the world (McGonigal, 2011) and others such as Ian Bogost believe in the persuasive nature of games to change the rhetoric of the players experience both inside and outside of the game environment (Bogost, 2007) The Games For Change movement highlights games which do good in the world in order to breakdown the ideological frame of games as only entertainment machines Uses and Gratifications Applied I nformation seeking: Facebook has been considered a busy and opaque social information system (Baresch, Knight, Harp & Yaschur, 2011) According to a Pew Internet and American Life Project poll (Purcell, Rainie, Mitchell, Rosenstiel, & Olmstead, 2010) people use their social networks and social technologies to filter, assess, and react to news (p 2) with 51 percent of those surveyed getting their news from another individual or organization on a SNS like Fac ebook. Users are not just interested in consuming media from multiple sources but may also share the media which they find in their SNS s news stream thus making themselves conduits for information. The role of gate keeping is shifting from the professional media organizations to peer groups via the tried and true method of wordof mouth (or word of mouse as the ca se may be) The news consumer who has accounts on Facebook and Twitter subsequently has access to a news alert system which constantly receives information and makes it easy t o pass information along. A striking 75 percent of the respondents surveyed in the Pew Internet and American Life Project poll get news forwarded through email or posts on social networking sites (p. 4) and the flow of information continues to snowball as a majority ( 5 2 percent ) will share news and information links on their wall or timeline as well (Purcell et al., 2010) These

PAGE 38

38 emergent news consumption strategies empower users to read and share information they feel is relevant, valuable, entertaining and/or insightful. In the new media landsc ape, a Facebook user has access to an anytime, anywhere, personalized news alert system. Thus the WeTopia game and its Facebook community can serve as a de facto news service for their community members. Interestingly, this appears to be the direction in which exposure to news and information is already progressing. According to a New York Times article (Stelter, 2008) t he social media generation expects multiple streams of news following them through any device that is handy and connected to the internet. In this sense the individual is increasingly relying on the serendipity of their connections to keep them informed as well as the rationalized decision s they make as to which news items to consume and engage with. They follow posts and links suggested by their network in their news feeds from friends and communities like WeTopia. As one unnamed college student in the New York Times article (Stelter, 2008) states, If the news is that important, it will find me. Based on the inherent news stream available in Facebook and the WeTopia pages direct connection with its members walls or timelines, the following hypothesis is offered: H 8 : Members of the WeTopia Facebook community for social good will report information seeking as their primary motivation for liking the page. Entertainment : According to Hou (2011) respondents played social [network] games more frequently and became more engaged in different kinds of game activiti es for the purpose of diversion (Discussion and conclusions section, para. 2) Although Hou (2011) found that diversion was a good predictor for the frequency of game play, the research also showed that diversion was not a good indicator for duration of game

PAGE 39

39 play. This could mean that an individual may play social network games, like WeTopia, as a form of entertainment, relaxation or escape from boredom but that the need for diversion may be fulfilled in a short period of time. Entertainment as motivation for media use is as old as the U&G approach itself ( Katz, 1959) and seems an especially appropriate gratification to attribute to game play. Taking the results from Hou (2011) into consideration this research hypothesizes that the frequency of game play will be positively correlated to a psychological need to play games for entertainment. H 9 : WeTopia game players will report entertainment as their primary motivation for playing the WeTopia game. H 1 0 : The frequency of game play will be positively correlated to an entertainment gratification The idea here is that i f the game were not fun, then players would likely not return to the game even if returning meant an increase in social good. Although an enter tainment motivation may be positively linked to social network activity, it is an unlikely motivation for liking a Facebook page as the entertainment value of a social good Facebook page may be limited by the seriousness of its subject matter (which in thi s case are needy children) However, the fact that the WeTopia page is connected to a social network game is reason enough to include this as a possible motivation since content regarding entertaining features of game play may also be included in news feed posts Community building: This motivation involves social interaction, community building and the development of support systems. The need for community building was

PAGE 40

40 investigated by Hou (2011) who found that social interaction predicted both frequency and duration (Discussion and conclusions section, para. 4) of game play. Social capital is the value an individual may place on the social ties of his/her network. An individual may like a Facebook page in order to increase ones social network or social support system and thus increase ones social capital. Based on the responses to t heir survey of social activity on Facebook, Papacharissi and Mendelson (2 011) found that time spent online in these social networks allows one to maintain or increase their level of social connectivity (p. 17). According to Joinson (2008) enabling Facebook users who are not c urrently linked to friends to view personal aspects of ones profile may also be a strategy to increase t he size of ones social network (p.1028). Based on this research, we propose the following hypothese s. H 1 1 : The frequency of game play will be positiv ely correlated to a community building gratification. H1 2 : The duration of game play will be positively correlated to an individuals need for community building. In playing the WeTopia game, players may be using an unconventional media channel to increase their social network, social capital and social support system. This is evidenced in the finding that a large majority (91 percent) of visitors to the Facebook c auses application (a social application integrated into Facebook which connects people with social good groups or pages ) have recruited others (Branston & Bush, 2010) to join the application network. Both bridging (inter network) and bonding (intra network) social capital have been found to be a use and benefit of increasing the size of ones social network (Putnam, 2000) Papacharissi and Mendelson (2011) also found a significant

PAGE 41

41 relationship between bridging social capital and relaxing entertainment as well as expressive information sharing in the motivation to use Facebook. Eighty six percent of the respondents in the Branst on and Bush (2010) survey indicated agreement or strong agreement that SGNs make them feel that they are part of a larger effort to i nfluence positive social change (p.9). This exchange relationship is part of a larger communal relationship which is kept active and engaging through the development of social capital and can be classified under the umbrella gratification category of community building. H 1 3 : WeTopia Facebook page members are likely to report c ommunity building as a motivation for liking the WeTopia Facebook page more so than other motivations Social identity : Social identity theory is governed by the idea that group categorization, and by extension individual social categorization, is facilit ated by ingroup and out group comparisons. This is important within the context of this study because group and individual categorization is a customary occurrence in Facebook through interaction within and between liked pages or groups. Tajfel and Turner (1986) first formally postulated social identity theory in response to research methods which they felt were too institutionalized and explicit to truly reflect the natural phenomena occurring when a group was in conflict. Specifically, Tajfel and Turner raised objections against earlier studies (Sherif, 1956) which claimed that the mere presence of ingroups and out groups caused competition and intergroup hostility. Tajfel and Turner added depth by introducing the impact of psychosocial variables and proposing that these variables were especially relevant for in group and out group members who experience implicit conflict as part of their group membership.

PAGE 42

42 According to Tajfel and Turner (1986) group members engage in a cognitive process of categorizing their membership and forming their social identity. The group membership may be viewed as a positive or a negative to the individual s social identity depending on the groups salience in the mind of the member It is this cognitive process of weighing the groups social capital against an individuals social identity that may have the most influence on the individuals behavior. Tajfel and Turner (1986) go on to say that this positive social identity is based to a large extent on favorable comparisons (p.7) and when unsatisfactory comparisons arise the individual will attempt to leave the group or make the group more positively distinctive in their mind. To achieve positive distinctiveness, the group member may have to mentally adjust their frame of reference from individual distinctiveness to collective distinctiveness and identify the group as a positive aspect of oneself (Turner, Brown, & Tajfel, 1979) As Turner (1982) later states, what matters is how we perceive and define ourselves and not how we feel about others (p.16). The blending of theories from mass media and social group psychology has encouraged the concept of social identity as a categorical unit within the U&G framework (Harwood, 1999) I denti ty within the context of U&G has been explored by uses and gratifications scholars such as Blumler as early as 1979 who went on to more directly explore the concept of social identity again in 1985. More recently, Cheung, Chiu and Lee (2011) found that social factors had the most impact as motivati ons for using a social network. Additional results found no significant relationship between social ident ity and social network membership and attributed this to the number s of commu nities the users have joined (Cheung et al., 2011)

PAGE 43

43 The careful cultivation of ones cultural objects on Facebook (i.e. lik ing a Facebook page) can directly affect social identity since s ocial identity theory posits that individuals identities are major factors in determining group membership (Hogg & Reid, 2006) Characteristically, members may be influenced by their need to self categorize their identity This would indicate that an individual may like a Facebook page in order to positively affect their social identity by categorizing themselves within a positively distinctive social group. Individuals may also project the meaning of liking a page into their personal value system. This projection of meaning may act as a reinforcement of common social values (Katz et al., 1974) such as the value of helping the disadvantaged or less fortunate and may also bend the common into new forms such as the general acceptance of online philanthropy In their study of sociability and social oriented activity on Facebook, Papacharissi and Mendelson (2011) found that these platforms promote multimediated identity driven performances that are crafted around the electronic mediati on of social circles and status (Chapter 12, para.1). According to Donath and Boyd (2004) a public display of connections is an implicit verification of identity (p. 3) signaling the reliability of ones identity to other connections in the network. Given the inherent social interaction among WeTopia game players the following research questions will be investigated. RQ3 : Will WeTopia Facebook page members report social identity as a likely motivation for liking the page? RQ4 : Will WeTopia game players report social identity as a likely motivat ion for playing the game? Narcissism : In addition to studying two personal motivations (i.e. entertainment and information seeking) and two group motivations (i.e. social identity and community

PAGE 44

44 building), narcissism was selected to represent a personal yet anti social gratification dimension. The construct of narcissism within a uses and gratifications approach is especially interesting given the altruistic narcissist s self centered motivations when interacting with a SGN or a social game. Narcissism is traditionally studied as an antisocial personality trait and for the purposes of this research can be operationalized as describing a persons belief in their grandiosity and superiority as well as their belief in their own entitlement An often cited study of personality traits co me s from Goldberg (1990) who applied an empirical method to determining an individuals personality tendencies thus producing the Big Five personality factor in ventory. H owever, the Big Five d id not cover antisocial personality traits. These antisocia l traits are more often identified as part of the dark triad (Paulhus & Williams, 2002) which includes narcissism Machiavellianism and psychopathy and whose members share a common core of disagreeableness and whose concepts are generally studied outside of prosocial personality tests. The Narcissism Personality Index (NPI) is the most widespread measure use d by nonclinical researchers (Ames, Rose, & Anderson, 2006) and the long form of the test (NPI 40) uses 40 bipolar statements to measure normal to borderline narcissistic personality traits (Raskin & Terry, 1988) A shorter test of 16 statements or the NPI 16 (Ames et al., 2006) has been vetted by previous research as being an appropriate alternative f or measuring narcissism and thus t he NPI 16 will be used in this research. However, it is not a diagnostic t ool to determine personality disorder and has been selected precisely for its validity outside of a clinical setting. This means that the NPI 16 test will not determine if the respondent has a narcissistic personality disorder but will

PAGE 45

45 instead give a measure of the respondents narcissistic personality traits or tendencies on an assumed spectrum Scoring highly on the NPI 16 is neither good nor bad and should not mark the respondent as either a good or bad person. Those who scored higher on the NPI 16 test are said to have more narcissistic personality traits than those who score lower. The validity of measuring narcissistic t raits using the NPI 40 and/or NPI 16 has been contested by some scientists and so interpreting it as any indication of a clinical measure is dubious. Interestingly, s coring high ly on the NPI 16 has been found to predict higher levels of social activity in online communities (Buffardi & Campbell, 2008) Finally, and in light of the research on narcissism, the following research question will be investigated. RQ5 : Do WeTopia game players or page members who present themselves as narcissistic on the Narcissistic Pe rsonality Inventory (NPI) reveal a preference for narcissism as a primary motivation for playing the game or liking the page?

PAGE 46

46 Table 21 Online social good networks Name Impact Launch Date URL Network for good $734 million in donations 2001 Networkforgood .org Care2 21,146,223 members 1998 Care2.com Nab u ur 29,700 registered volunteers 2001 Nab u ur.com Volunteer Match 6,524,376 volunteer referrals 1998 Volunteermatch. org Do Something 300,000 members 1993 Dosomething.org Idealist $3.6 million revenue in 2011 1995 Idealist.org One World 1.6 million webcast views 1994 Oneworld group.org Change 20 million users 2007 Change.org Razoo $125,000,000 raised 2007 Razoo.com Facebook 1 billion users 2004 Facebook.com Six Degrees $5 million in donations 2007 Sixdegrees.org Donor Rally $939,077 raised since 2010 2004 Opensourcery.com/donor rally Indiegogo $200,000 raised for Hurricane Sandy victims 2008 Indiegogo com Table 22 Online s ocial g ood g ames Name Population Release Date URL A Better World 104,971 likes 2011 Facebook.com/abetterworld Food Force 425 likes 2011 Facebook.com/foodforce Half the Sky Movement: The Game 405 likes 2013 Facebook.com/Halfthe Gam e Lemonopoly 125 likes 2012 Facebook.com/Lemonopoly Raise the Village 40,000 registered 2012 Raisethevillage.com

PAGE 47

47 Figure 2 1 How j oy works in WeTopia 2013 Sojo Figure 2 2 WeTopia game world 2013 Sojo

PAGE 48

48 Figure 2 3 WeTopia special project buildings 2013 Sojo Figure 2 4 WeTopia project i nformation window with option to learn more 2013 Sojo Figure 2 5 WeTopia celebrity endorsement and ingame item branding 2013 Sojo

PAGE 49

49 CHAPTER 3 METHODOLOGY An online survey of adult respondents ( N= 205) was conducted from January 9 to February 15, 2013, using the Qualtrics online survey tool. Members of the WeTopia Facebook page were solicited through a link posted within the comment s on the WeTopia Facebook page timeline as well as in posts on 10 additional WeTopia fan group pages. A list of the targeted pages may be found in Table 31. The comment and link contained standardized verbiage asking respondents to volunteer their time, wi th no compensation, to complete a self administered online survey. In most cases, t he ability to post on these group pages was limited to administrators and, as such, another group member may have had to post the exact verbiage on behalf of the researcher The WeTopia group pages sampled w ere approached based on both the recommendation of a senior WeTopia staff member (Rougeux, January 8, 2013. Personal communication. ) and through a key word search on Facebook of groups containing the word WeTopia. The group pages returned in the search were then separated based on membership size and all groups with 400+ members were approached. This membership size was selected in order to allow for a reasonable amount of groups to be represented. The membership size of all groups within the sample pop ulation may be found in Table 31. As a courtesy, group moderators and administrators were contacted prior to posting the survey link to the groups Facebook This was especially important in cases of closed group fan pages where only members can post and respond to content on the groups Facebook page.

PAGE 50

50 S urveys are an effective tool for U&G research which examines the individual motivations and gratifications sought in personal media use. Online surveys have become more prevalent in recent years and are particularly suited for this study due to their relative ease of access for online individuals in distant locations, the ability to reach difficult to contact participants, and the convenience of having automated data collection, (Introduction section, para.2) all of which reduces researcher time and effort Self selection bias may have occurred as a result of being a voluntary sample, but no link to causation is made in this research therefore the risks of this bias are minimal. Alth ough there may be differences between those people who chose to take the survey and those who did not, the researcher feel s that the best possible sample of a general population of WeTopia page members and players (available at this time) has been approached. Questions screened participants who have previous ly played WeTopia and/or have "Liked" the WeTopia Facebook page. Survey logic was used in order to accommodate a variety of player and nonplayer types and to reduce the time needed to complete the survey. Modified scales ( Blumler, 1979; Branston& Bush, 2010; Hou, 2011) were used to meas ure expected gratifications frequency and duration. Additional information, including a list of survey questions, can be found in Appendix A. A list of all independent and dependent variables is available in Table 32 for reference Population and Sample The target population for this research is WeTopia game players and page members 18 years of age and older and, as of February 15, 2013, the number of WeTopia game players exceeds 2.5 million (Rougeux, Januar y 8, 2013. Personal communication. ) and the number of WeTopia page members is 153,159.

PAGE 51

51 As a nonprobability indicator of the target population, a snowball sample of 205 respondents was used for data analysis. Although the research began as a purposive sample, during the course of the data collection period at least one volunteer is known to have shared the survey link to individuals ostensibly outside of the target population. Due to the uncontrollable nature of some hyperlinked surveys in online media research and given the action of this respondent this survey sample is most adequately labeled as a snowball sample. Sample Demographics A majority (71 percent) of the total 205 respondents claimed residency in the United States ( N= 145). Twelve percent resided in Canada ( N= 24) while the remainder of the respondents resided in other parts of the globe including Australia ( N= 5), United Kingdom ( N= 7), South Africa ( N= 3), Germany (N= 1), India ( N= 1), Ireland ( N= 1), Malaysia ( N= 1) Netherlands ( N= 1) and Swe den ( N= 1). Respondents ranged in age from 18 7 0 years of age with the majority, 37 percent, falling into the 4655 ( N= 75) age range. Another majority of the respondents were college educated with 33 percent ( N= 68) receiving some college education, 20 percent ( N= 41) receiving a bachelors degree, 11 percent ( N= 22) receiving an associates degree, six percent ( N= 13) receiving a masters degree and three percent ( N= 7) receiving a doctorate or professional degree. Altogether, 74 percent of the sample were college educated adult respondents ( N= 151) A dditionally, a striking majority, 85 percent, of respondents ( N= 174) marked their race as white and, a lthough ma ny ( 27 percent) preferred to not indicate their income, 16 percent of the respondents indicated that they made between $50,000 and $74,999 dollars annually with 14 percent of the respondents making less

PAGE 52

52 than $15,000 in household income. Additional demographic information may be found in Table 33 Measurement Instruments Narcissism : The Narcissism Pe rsonality Index (NPI) is the most widespread measure used by nonclinical researchers (Ames, Rose, & Anderson, 2006) T he NPI 16 (Ames et al., 2006) has been vett ed by previous research as being an appropriate alternative for measuring narcissism and is being used in its entirety within the current survey tool. Participants were asked to choose the one statement from each bipolar pair (a total of 16 statements) which they most agreed with (even if it was not a perfect fit). The pair order was randomized so that participants could not easily detect a pattern. A key for the 16 statements may be found in Table 34 Scoring was completed by computing the proportion of responses consistent with narcissism. Engagement : A new measurement instrument is also being introduced through this research Using frequency and duration of page visits (exposure), as well as page member status (attitude) and the likelihood to share or post content (appreciation and emotional response) along with the likelihood to recruit others to the page (behavioral response) this research will present a robust measure of WeTopia page members engagement le vels Although the often cited mantra of the uses and gratifications approach directly mentions engagement in reference to differential patterns of media exposure (or engagement in other activities) ( Katz, Blumler, & Gurevitch, 1973) th e connotation of engagement in this context implies a simple act of exposure. However, t he additional proposed engagement measure will add complexity beyond exposure data to create a

PAGE 53

53 richer composite scale. This scale i s calculated by reducing each mapped approach into three universal levels : low, medium and high. For example, the measure of frequency wa s reduced to low (monthly or more), medium (weekly) and high (daily). Duration was reduced to low ( 15 min utes or less ), medium ( 15 min utes to 1 hour ) and high ( m ore than 1 hour ). Likelihood of sharing or reposting information was reduced to low (unlikely), medium (neither likely n or unlikely) and high (likely). Likelihood of recruiting was reduced to low (unlikely), medium (neither likely n or unlikely) and high (likely). And, f inally, page member status was modified to fit using low (not a page member), medium (undecided), and high (page member). Restating the above into a calculable statement we have the following composite Facebook e ngage ment m easure where [ Exposure ( [ frequency + duration]/2 ) + Appreciation and Emotional Response ( l ikelihood of sharing information) + Attitude ( p age member status ) + Behavioral R esponse (l ikelihood to recruit to others) ]/4 Analysis using this proposed composite engagement measure may be f ound in the results and discussion sections of this research.

PAGE 54

54 Table 31 Targeted Group/ Page List Group URL Post Dates Group Type No. Group Members (taken February 15 ) WeTopia Official https://www.facebook.com/WeTopiaOfficial 01/09, 01/10, 01/24, 02/05, 02/07, 02/09, 02/11, 02/14, 02/15 N/A 153,159 WeTopia Meet and Greet Fan Club https://www.facebook.com/groups/Wetopiafriends/ 01/17 Open 4,063 WeTopian Warriors https://www.facebook.com/groups/wetopianwarriors/ 01/22 Closed 1,924 WeTopia Joy Givers https://www.facebook.com/groups/112837178846459/ 01/16 Open 761 WeTopia Angels of Joy https://www.facebook.com/groups/WeTopiaAngelsofJo y/ 01/22 Closed 493 WeTopia Helping Hands https://www.facebook.com/groups/300890103349657/ 01/22 Closed 445 WeTopias Joyful Millionaires https://www.facebook.com/groups/WeTopiaJoyMillionai res/ 02/06 Closed 577 WeTopia Energy Help https://www.facebook.com/groups/307954795917422/ 02/02 Open 496 Fix WeTopia For Locked Out Players! https://www.facebook.com/groups/387134384703038/ 02/05 Open 429 WeTopia Friends https://www .facebook.com/groups/170894573016385/ 02/06 Closed 518 WeTopia friends helping the world https://www.facebook.com/groups/159693474145264/ 02/06 Open 1,478

PAGE 55

55 Table 32 Independent and dependent variable l ist Variable Name Type Related Hypotheses and/or Research Questions Level Gender IV H1,5 Nominal Game p layer (status) IV H1,3,9; RQ1,2,4 Nominal Page m ember (status) IV H2,5,7,8,13; RQ2,3 Nominal Page recruiting l ikeliness DV H2 Ordinal Game r ecruiting l ikeliness DV H3 Ordinal Game p lay frequency D V H4a,4b,10,11 Interval Game p lay duration D V H4a,12 Interval Time since first game play IV H4,4b Interval Time since first liking page IV H6,6b Interval Page visit frequency D V H6a, 6b Interval Page visit duration D V H6a Interval Membership with another SGN DV H7 Nominal Page like motivation : info seeking DV H8 Ordinal Game play motivation: entertainment DV H9 H10 Ordinal Game play motivation : community building DV H11,12 Ordinal Page like motivation : community building DV H13 Ordinal Page like motivation : social identity DV RQ3 Ordinal Game play motivation : social identity DV RQ4 Ordinal Game play is like volunteering DV RQ1 Ordinal Game play is like donating DV RQ1 Ordinal Likeliness of WeTopia information repost DV RQ2 Ordinal Frequency of WeTopia information repost DV RQ2 Ordinal NPI scale DV RQ5 Nominal

PAGE 56

56 Table 33 Demographic data Variable Level N Age 51 55 47 46 50 28 56 60 26 41 45 24 61 65 17 36 40 14 No Answer 13 26 30 11 31 35 11 21 25 7 66 70 5 18 20 2 Hispanic, Latino or Spanish origin No 180 No Answer 13 Yes 7 Prefer to not say 5 Race White 174 No Answer 13 Prefer to not say 5 Two or more races 4 Some other race 3 American Indian or Alaska Native 2 Black, African American, or Negro 1 Asian Indian 1 Chinese 1 Other Asian 1 Education Level Completed Some college 68 Bachelors degree 41 High school degree / GED 32 Associate degree 22 No Answer 13 Masters degree 13 Doctoral degree 5 Prefer to not say 5 Less than high school 4 Professional degree (e.g. JD, MD) 2

PAGE 57

57 Table 3 3. Continued Variable Level N Income level Prefer to not say 55 $50,000 $74,999 33 Under $15,000 28 $35,000 $49,999 23 $15,001 $24,999 17 $75,000 $99,999 14 No Answer 13 $25,000 $34,999 12 $100,000 or more 10 Country of residence United States 145 Canada 24 No Answer 14 United Kingdom 7 Australia 5 South Africa 3 Germany 1 India 1 Ireland 1 Malaysia 1 Netherlands 1 New Zealand 1 Sweden 1 Table 34. NPI 16 Key Pair Narcissistic response Non narcissistic response 1 I know that I am good because everybody keeps telling me so. When people compliment me I sometimes get embarrassed. 2 I like to be the center of attention. I prefer to blend in with the crowd. 3 I think I am a special person. I am no better or no worse than most people. 4 I like having authority over people. I dont mind following orders. 5 I find it easy to manipulate people. I dont like it when I find myself manipulating people. 6 I insist upon getting the respect that is due me. I usually get the respect that I deserve. 7 I am apt to show off if I get the chance. I try not to be a show off. 8 I always know what I am doing. Sometimes I am not sure of what I am doing. 9 Everybody likes to hear my stories. Sometimes I tell good stories.

PAGE 58

58 Table 3 4. Continued Pair Narcissistic response Non narcissistic response 10 I expect a great deal from other people. I like to do things for other people. 11 I really like to be the center of attention. It makes me uncomfortable to be the center of attention. 12 People always seem to recognize my authority. Being an authority doesnt mean that much to me. 13 I am going to be a great person. I hope I am going to be successful. 14 I can make anybody believe anything I want them to. People sometimes believe what I tell them. 15 I am more capable than other people. There is a lot that I can learn from other people. 16 I am an extraordinary person. I am much like everybody else

PAGE 59

59 CHAPTER 4 RESULTS AND ANALYSIS This section presents the results and analysis of the study. Each hypothesis and research question has been restated for convenience. H1 : A majority of WeTopia game players will be female. A total of 189 eligible responses (i.e. those who have played the WeTopia game for at least 15 minutes) were analyzed, indicating 93.7 percent ( N= 177) of the game players were female and 6.3 percent ( N= 12) were male (Figure 4 1) These results support this hypothesis indicating that females comprise a majority of WeTopia game players H 2 : WeTopia Facebook page members are more likely than unlikely to recru it others to L ike the official WeTopia Facebook page. Descriptive statistics were used to determine if WeTopia Facebook page members were likely to recruit others to Like the official WeTopia Facebook page. A total of 193 respondents indicated that t hey have liked or will like the WeTopia Facebook page. More respondents indicated that they are somewhat likely ( 24.4 percent ) or very likely ( 23.3 percent ) to recruit others to Like the WeTopia Facebook page than were unlikely (10.9 percent) or very unlikely ( 21.2 percent). Another 20.2 percent ( N= 52) were neither likely nor unlikely to recruit others to Like the WeTopia Facebook page ( Figure 4 6 ) These results support this hypothesis indicating that WeTopia Facebook page members are more likely to recruit others to Like the official WeTopia Facebook page. H 3 : WeTopia Facebook game players are more likely than unlikely to recruit others to play the WeTopia game. Descriptive statistics were use d t o determine whether WeTopia game player s were more likely than unlikely t o recruit other s to play the WeTopia game. Of th e 186 respondents who indicated that they have played the

PAGE 60

60 WeTopia game for at least 15 minutes, 31.2 percent are somewhat likely ( N= 58) and another 31.2 percent very likely ( N= 58) to rec ruit others to play the WeTopia Facebook game. Another 20.4 percent ( N= 38) were neither likely nor unlikely, 7.5 percent were somewhat unlikely ( N= 14) and 9.7 percent were very unlikely ( N= 18) to recruit others to play the game ( Figure 4 7 ) This hypothesis was supported indicating WeTopia Facebook game players are more likely than unlikely to recruit others to play the WeTopia game. H 4 : Engagement through exposure will be positively correlated to amount of time committed since first game played B ased on the data analysis presented below, this hypothesis was partially supported. H 4 a : Length of time since first game play will be positively correlated to frequency of game play sessions. An ANOVA was conducted to determine if length of time since firs t game play correlated to the frequency of game play sessions An ANOVA was the most appropriate measure due to its examination of group differences. Respondents who indicated that they have not played the WeTopia game for at least 15 minutes were excluded from analysis. The results of the analysis were not significant with F ( 4, 186)= 1.72, p =. 148 and this hypothesis was not supported. H 4 b : Length of time since first game play will be positively correlated to duration of game play sessions An ANOVA was conducted to determine if length of time since first game play correlated to the duration of game play sessions. Respondents who indicated that they have not played the WeTopia game for at least 15 minutes were excluded from analysis. Game pla y investment period and game play duration were recoded to match directional order. A respondent who has been playing

PAGE 61

61 the game for 10 or more months (game play investment period) is represented by an eight and a respondent who has been playing the game for 3 4 weeks is represented by a four; no responses with a game play investment period less than 3 4 weeks were eligible for this analysis A respondent who plays the game for less than 10 minutes each session was coded as a two and a respondent who played t he game for one to two hours was coded as a six ; no responses were eligible with durations above 2 hours. A significant effect of time since first game play on duration of game play sessions was found with F ( 4 186)= 2. 88, p <.05 ( Figure 4 8) Additionally, r esponses indicated that 51 percent ( N=10 4 ) of game players were of the long duration type (one to two hours per session) Based on the results outlined above this hypothesis was supported. H 5 : A majority of WeTopia Facebook page members will be female. A total of 180 eligible respondents (i.e. those who like or plan to like the WeTopia Facebook page) were analyzed, indicating that 93.9 percent ( N= 169) were female and 6.1 percent ( N= 11) were male ( Figure 4 9 ) These results support this hypothesis indicatin g that females make up a majority of WeTopia page members H 6 : Engagement through exposure will be positively correlated to amount of time committed since first joining the WeTopia SGN. This hypothesis was not supported and will be explored through the two subhypotheses below. H 6 a : Length of time invested in the social good network will be positively correlated to frequency of page visits An ANOVA was conducted to determine if length of time since first liking the WeTopia Facebook page correlated to the frequency of page visits. Respondents who indicated that they were undecided, did not currently like were not members of or did not plan to like the WeTopia Facebook page were

PAGE 62

62 excluded from analysis The assumption of equal variances was not met for this analysis and the analysis was not significant with F ( 6, 189)= .916, p =. 485. T his hypothesis was not supported. H6b : Length of time invested in SGN will be positively correlated to duration of SGN page visit session. An ANOVA was conducted to determine if length of time since first liking the WeTopia Facebook page correlated to the duration of the SGN participation. Respondents who indicated that they have never visited the WeTopia Facebook page were excluded from analysis The results of the analysis were not significant with F ( 6 189) = 1. 194 p =. 311 and this hypothesis was not supported. H7 : WeTopia Facebook page members are likely to be members of another social good page on Facebook. Descriptive statistics were used to determine whether WeTopia Facebook p age members were likely to be members of another social good page on Facebook. Respondents who were not members or were undecided about membership with the WeTopia Facebook page were not included in the analysis. A total of 193 respondents were analyzed and findings reveal that 73 percent (N= 141) are members of a second group for social good. These results support this hypothesis indicating that a majority of WeTopia page members also belong to a second SGN on Facebook H8 : Members of the WeTopia Facebook community for social good will report information seeking as their primary motivation for liking the page. The Cronbachs alpha value for the five gratification categories w as calculated and results are listed in Table 42 As the Cronbachs alpha value for all gratification levels was above an appropriate level (i.e. greater than.89 ) the four levels were collapsed into a

PAGE 63

63 single category measure with those who scored nearest one being very unlikely to feel motivated to Like the page for the particular gratification and those with a score closer to 5 being more likely to feel that particular motivation for liking the WeTopia Facebook page. A table of means (Table 42) is provided for each information seeking level as well as the gr and mean for the information seeking category and all other categories Respondents who indicated that they did not like or plan to like the WeTopia Facebook page were excluded from analysis Results show entertainment as the primary motivation for liking the WeTopia page ( M= 3.1792, SD= 1.01032) and information seeking as a close secondary motivation ( M= 3.0159, SD= 1.01413). These are followed by social identity ( M= 2.7066, SD= .97550), community building ( M= 2.5303, SD= .96269) and narcissism ( M= 1.9855, SD= 1.00750) respectively (Table 44) This hypothesis was not supported. H9 : WeTopia game players will report entertainment as their primary motivation for playing the WeTopia game. Collapsed game play gratification scores, as described in hypothesis eight, were used to determine the rank order of players game play motivations (Table 43) Respondents who indicated that they had not played the WeTopia game for at least 15 minutes were excluded from analysis Results show entertainment as the primary motivation for playing the WeTopia game ( M= 3. 8700, SD= .85595 ) and social identity as a secondary motivation ( M= 2.4557, SD= .06713). These are followed by community building ( M= 2.3114, SD= .96386), information seeking ( M= 2.1686, SD= 1.01999) and narcissism ( M= 1.7057, SD= .89649) respectively (Table 4 5) This hypothesis was supported.

PAGE 64

64 H10 : The frequency of game play will be positively correlated to an entertainment gratification The collapsed game play gratification score for entertainment was calculated in hypothesis eight and reused in an ANOVA to test the effect of the entertainment gratification of game play on the frequency of game play sessions Re spondents who indicated that they had not played the WeTopia game for at least 15 minutes were excluded from analysis No significant effect was found with F ( 1 181)= 1.627, p = .204 and t his hypothesis was not supported. H11 : The frequency of game play will be positively correlated to a community building gratification. The c ollapsed game play gratification score for community building (calculated for hypothesis eight) was used to conduct this ANOVA. The ANOVA tested the frequency of game play sessions by the scaled indication of a community building gratification as motivation for game play. Respondents who indicated that they had not played the WeTopia game for at least 15 minutes were excluded from analysis. No significant effect was fo und with F ( 5 179)= 1.954, p =.088 and t his hypothesis was not supported. H12 : The duration of game play will be positively correlated to an individuals need for community building. The collapsed game play gratification score for community building (calculated in hypothesis eight) were used to conduct this ANOVA. The ANOVA tested the effect of the community building motivation for game play by the duration of game play sessions. Respondents who indicated that they had not played the WeTopia game for at least 15 minutes were excluded from analysis. A significant effect of the community building motivation on duration of game play was found where F (5,180)=4.060, p <.05. As such, this hypothesis was supported.

PAGE 65

65 H13 : WeTopia Facebook page members are likely to report community building as a motivation for liking the WeTopia Facebook page more so than other motivations. Respondents who indicated that they did not like or plan to like the WeTopia Facebook page were excluded from analysis Results show community building as a tertiary motivation ( M= 2.5303, SD= .96269) for liking the WeTopia Facebook page (Table 42) As described in the results for H8, e ntertainment w as the primary motivation for liking the WeTopia page ( M= 3.1792, SD= 1.01032) with information seeking coming in a close second for page like motiv ation ( M= 3.0159, 1.01413). The two least likely motivations were social identity ( M= 2.7066, SD= .97550) and n arcissism ( M= 1.9855, SD= 1.00750) respectively. This hypothesis was not supported. RQ1 : Do WeTopia game players believe they have (a) volunteered or (b) donated to these social good causes through playing the WeTopia game? A total of 192 responses were analyzed using descriptive statistics to determine whether WeTopia game players believed that they had volunteered or donated to social good causes through their game play. Responses revealed that (a) 43.2 percent ( N= 83) agreed and 24.5 percent ( N= 47) strongly agreed that playing the WeTopia game was just like volunteering their time to a worthy c ause ( Figure 4 15) Additionally, (b) 48.4 percent ( N= 93) agreed and 27.1 percent ( N= 52) strongly agreed that playing the WeTopia game was just like donating to a social good cause ( Figure 4 15) These results indicate that a majority of WeTopia game players believe they have volunteered their time and donated to a social good cause through their WeTopia game play

PAGE 66

66 RQ2 : How likely are WeTopia Facebook page members or game players to share social cause posts from WeTopia? Descriptive statistics were use d to determine whether WeTopia Facebook page members and/or game players were likely to share posts from WeTopia. Respondents who did not like or were undecided about liking the WeTopia Facebook page were not included. Out of 193 total respondents, 24.4 percent ( N= 47) and 23.3 percent ( N= 45) of page members were likely or very likely (respectively) to share a post from WeTopia ( Figure 4 1 6 ) Twenty three percent ( N= 45) of the qualified game players ( i.e. those who have played WeTopia for at least 15 minutes) were somewhat likely and 22.3 percent ( N= 43) were very likely to repost content from the WeTopia Facebook page ( Figure 4 1 6 ) Nearly 20 (19.79 percent ) percent ( N= 38) of the game players and 20.2 percent ( N= 39) of the page members were neither lik ely n or unlikely to repost WeTopia page content. Finally 11.4 percent ( N= 22) and 23.3 percent ( N= 45) of the game players were s omewhat unlikely or very unlikel y (respectively) to repost content and 10.9 percent and 21.2 percent of the page members were s omewhat unlikely or very unlikely (respectively) to repost content. Based on these findings about half of the WeTopia Facebook page members and Game Players are likely to repost content f rom the WeTopia Facebook page. RQ3 : Will WeTopia Facebook page members report social identity as a likely motivation for liking the page? Collapsed gratification categories calculated in hypothesis eight were used to determine Facebook page member s agreement in reporting social identity as thei r motivating factor for liking the page. Respondents who indicated that they did not like or plan to like the WeTopia Facebook page were excluded from analysis Results show entertainment was the primary motivation for

PAGE 67

67 liking the WeTopia page ( M= 3.1792, SD= 1.01032) with information seeking coming in a close second for page like motivation ( M= 3.0159, 1.01413). Community building ( M= 2.5303, SD= .96269), social identity ( M= 2.7066, SD= .97550) and narcissism ( M= 1.9855, SD= 1.00750) were found to be motivators in that order as well (Table 42) RQ4 : Will W eTopia game players report social identity as a likely motivation for playing the gam e? A total of 193 respondents were analyzed. Respondents who indicated that had not played the WeTopia game for at least 15 minutes were excluded from analysis Results show entertainment as the primary motivation for playing the WeTopia game ( M= 3.8700, SD= .85595) and social identity as a close secondary motivation ( M= 2.4557, SD= .06713) However, the mean of the social identity gratification is below three, indicating that respondents disagreed with the presumption that social identity was a motivating factor for game play. RQ5: Do WeTopia game players or page members who present themselves as narcissistic on the Narcissistic Personality Inventory (NPI) reveal a preference for narcissism as a primary motivation for playing the game or liking the page? The collapsed game play gratification score for narcissism (calculated in hypothesis eight) was used in the statistical analysis of this research question. The Cronbachs alpha value for the NPI levels ( Table 46 ) were all above .70 with the overall Cronbachs alpha = .982. This allowed for the collapsing of all 16 pairs into a single narcissism measure. Those who scored nearest 1 demonstrated a closer affinity for narcissism and those with a score closer to 0 did not Respondents who indicated that they did not like or plan to like the WeTopia Facebook page or who had not played the WeTopia game for at least 15 minutes were exclu ded from analysis An ANOVA was then used to

PAGE 68

68 compare the effect of game player (or page member) narcissistic personality inventory score on narcissism as a game play (or page Like) motivation. Results did not produce any significance with F (11,167) = .131, p =.341.The results for page member narcissism motivation score by narcissistic personality inventory score were also not significant wi th F ( 11,160) = 1.022, p =.430. Composite Facebook engagement measure: A total of 204 responses were analyzed. A composite ratio of exposure measures for engagement including duration ( M= 1.66) and frequency ( M= 2.25 ) were combined to produc e a general exposure engagement score ( M= 1.95) for the WeTopia page audience A richer composite measure was also produced using the proposed composite equation where the mean of the likelihood of sharing or reposting ( M= 2.11 capturing engagement via appreciation and emotional response ) was added to the mean of the likelihood of recruiting ( M= 2.23, capturing engagement via audienc e behavior ) which was added to both the mean of the page member status ( M= 2.92 capturing engagement via attitude) as well as the combined mean of the exposure measures ( M= 1.95) and then divided by the total number of approaches used ( N= 4) to get a composite Facebook engagement score of 2 .3 0 for WeTopia Facebook page members.

PAGE 69

69 Table 41. Descriptive s tatistics Variable Item Number of Cases Percentage Gender Female 180 87.81% Male 12 5.85% No Answer 13 6.34% Page Membership Member 193 94.15% Non Member 5 2.44% Undecided 7 3.41% Game Player Type Player 193 94.15% Non player 3 1.46% No answer 9 4.39% Table 42 Page Like g ratification l evels Variable Level N Mean S.D. Narcissism 173 1.98 55 1.0 0750 1.0 0 I Like the WeTopia Facebook PAGE because it will attract my friends to view my status and my photos. 2.10 1.214 1.0 I Like the WeTopia Facebook PAGE because I will be able to let my friends know my updates. 2.36 1.320 1.0 I Like the WeTopia Facebook PAGE because I will be more popular among friends. 1.64 .982 1.0 I Like the WeTopia Facebook PAGE because my friends will think I am very active in a charitable group. 1.84 1.112 1.0 Social Identity 173 2.70 66 .97 550 .988 I Like the WeTopia Facebook PAGE because it gives me support for my ideas. 2.57 1.330 .989 I Like the WeTopia Facebook PAGE because I will belong to the group. 2.76 1.371 .964 I Like the WeTopia Facebook PAGE because it will decrease the likelihood of being left out. 2.16 1.284 .989

PAGE 70

70 Table 4 2. Continued Variable Level N Mean S.D. Cronbachs Social Identity 173 2.7066 .97550 .988 WeTopia Facebook PAGE members are people like me. 3.33 1.157 .939 Community Building 173 2.53 03 .96 269 .981 I Like the WeTopia Facebook PAGE because I will reconnect with people Ive lost contact with. 1.83 1.059 .910 I Like the WeTopia Facebook PAGE because I will maintain relationships with people I may not get to see very often. 2.06 1.204 .957 I Like the WeTopia Facebook PAGE because I want to participate in discussions. 2.89 1.241 .957 I Like the WeTopia Facebook PAGE because it shows others encouragement. 3.35 1.242 .983 Entertainment 173 3.17 92 1.01 032 .977 I Like the WeTopia Facebook PAGE because it is entertaining. 3.36 1.230 .930 I Like the WeTopia Facebook PAGE because it is enjoyable. 3.64 1.156 .980 I Like the WeTopia Facebook PAGE because it helps me to get away from everyday worries. 2.95 1.382 .955 Reading the WeTopia Facebook PAGE is a good way of passing the time when I have nothing better to do. 2.76 1.260 .907 Information Seeking 173 3.01 59 1.01 413 .993 I Like the WeTopia Facebook PAGE because it is a new way to do research. 2.35 1.108 .944

PAGE 71

71 Table 4 2. Continued Variable Level N Mean S.D. Cronbachs Information Seeking 173 3.0159 1.01413 .993 I Like the WeTopia Facebook PAGE because it gives me a way to look for information. 3.23 1.249 .993 I Like the WeTopia Facebook PAGE because it gives me information to see what is out there. 3.15 1.285 .999 I Like the WeTopia Facebook PAGE because it provides me with information I am looking for. 3.34 1.213 .999 Table 43 Game play gratification l evels Variable Level N Mean S.D. Narcissism 175 1.7057 .89649 1.00 I play the WeTopia Facebook GAME because it will attract my friends to view my status and my photos 1.69 .934 1.00 I play the WeTopia Facebook GAME because I will be able to let my friends know my updates 1.82 1.045 1.00 I play the WeTopia Facebook GAME becaus e I will be more popular among friends 1.59 .879 1.00 I play the WeTopia Facebook GAME because my friends will think I am very active in a charitable group 1.73 .978 1.00 Social Identity 17 5 2.4557 .88804 .979 I play the WeTopia Facebook GAME because it gives me support for my ideas 2.33 1.260 .907

PAGE 72

72 Table 4 3. Continued Variable Level N Mean S.D. Cronbachs Social Identity 175 2.4557 .88804 .979 I play the WeTopia Facebook GAME because I will belong to the group 2.27 1.223 .970 I play the WeTopia Facebook GAME because it will decrease the likelihood of being left out 1.75 .985 .970 WeTopia Facebook GAME players are people like me 3.48 1.098 .938 Community Building 17 5 2.3114 .96386 .990 I play the WeTopia Facebook GAME because I will reconnect with people Ive lost contact with 1.77 .997 .958 I play the WeTopia Facebook GAME because I will maintain relationships with people I may not get to see very often 1.94 1.148 .959 I play the WeTopia Facebook GAME because I want to participate in discussions 2.27 1.205 .991 I play the WeTopia Facebook GAME because it provides encouragement to others 3.26 1.316 .990 Entertainment 17 5 3.8700 .85595 .981 I play the WeTopia Facebook GAME because it is entertaining 4.07 .941 .950 I play the WeTopia Facebook GAME because it is enjoyable 4.19 .869 .982 I play the WeTopia Facebook GAME because it helps me to get away from everyday worries 3.59 1.246 .984

PAGE 73

73 Table 4 3. Continued Variable Level N Mean S.D. Cronbachs Entertainment 175 3.8700 .85595 .981 Playing the WeTopia Facebook GAME is a good way of passing the time when I have nothing better to do 3.62 1.235 .893 Information Seeking 17 5 2.1686 1.01999 .980 I play the WeTopia Facebook GAME because it is a new way to do research 2.11 1.053 .972 I play the WeTopia Facebook GAME because it gives me a way to look for information 2.12 1.095 .973 I play the WeTopia Facebook GAME because it gives me information to see what is out there 2.23 1.157 .941 I play the WeTopia Facebook GAME because it shows me what society is like nowadays 2.22 1.144 .917 Table 44 Collapsed and ranked page Like motivation s Motivation Mean S.D. Entertainment 3.1 8 1.01 Information Seeking 3.0 2 1.01 Social Identity 2.7 1 .9 8 Community Building 2.53 .96 Narcissistic Need 1.9 9 1.0 1 N= 175; Scaled from 1 (very unlikely) to 5 (very likely). Table 45 Collapsed and ranked game play m otivations Motivation Mean S.D. Entertainment 3.87 .8 6 Social Identity 2.4 6 .8 9 Community Building 2.31 .96 Information Seeking 2.1 7 1.0 2 Narcissistic Need 1.7 1 90 N= 175; Scaled from 1 (very unlikely) to 5 (very likely).

PAGE 74

74 Table 46 16item Narcissism Personality Inventory Pair Narcissistic response Non narcissistic response Cronbachs alpha 1 I know that I am good because everybody keeps telling me so. When people compliment me I sometimes get embarrassed. .963 2 I like to be the center of attention. I prefer to blend in with the crowd. .963 3 I think I am a special person. I am no better or worse than most people. .925 4 I like having authority over people. I dont mind following orders. .923 5 I find it easy to manipulate people. I dont like it when I can find myself manipulating people. .759 6 I insist upon getting the respect that is due me. I usually get the respect that I deserve. .925 7 I am apt to show off if I get the chance. I try not to be a show off. .769 8 I always know what I am doing. Sometimes I am not sure of what I am doing. .925 9 Everybody likes to hear my stories. Sometimes I tell good stories. .758 10 I expect a great deal from other people. I like to do things for other people. .843 11 I really like to be the center of attention. It makes me uncomfortable to be the center of attention. .843 12 People always seem to recognize my authority. Being an authority doesnt mean that m uch to me. .963 13 I am going to be a great person. I hope I am going to be successful. .843 14 I can make anybody believe anything I want them to. People sometimes believe what I tell them. .963 15 I am more capable than other people. There is a lot that I can learn from other people. .922 16 I am an extraordinary person. I am much like everybody else. .923 Table 47 Collapsed Facebook Engagement Measure s Approach Mean S.D. Duration 1.66 .755 Frequency 2.25 .870 Likelihood of sharing or reposting 2.11 .899 Likelihood of recruiting 2.23 .823 Page member status 2.92 .355

PAGE 75

75 Figure 4 1 Game p layer by g ender Figure 4 2 Game player gender by age 12 177 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 Male FemaleGame PlayersGender 1820 2125 2630 3135 3640 4145 4650 5155 5660 6165 6670 Male 0 0 2 0 2 1 4 1 0 2 0 Female 2 6 9 11 12 23 24 46 25 14 5 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50Game playersAge range

PAGE 76

76 Figure 4 3 Game player gender by r ace Figure 4 4 Game player gender by education l evel White Black, African America n, or Negro America n Indian or Alaska Native Asian Indian Chinese Other Asian Some other race Two or more races Prefer to not say Male 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 Female 162 1 2 1 1 1 3 4 4 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180Game playersRace Less than high school High school degree/ GED Some College Associa te degree Bachelo rs degree Masters degree Doctora l degree Professi ona degree Prefer to not say Male 0 2 0 2 5 1 1 1 0 Female 4 30 67 20 35 12 4 1 4 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80Game playersEducation level

PAGE 77

77 Figure 4 5 Game player gender by income l evel Figure 4 6 Likeliness to recruit others to Like the WeTopia Facebook page Under $15,000 $15,001 to $24,999 $25,000 to $34,999 $35,000 to $49,999 $50,000 to $74,999 $75,000 to $99,999 $100,00 0 or more Prefer to not say Male 3 1 0 1 1 1 2 3 Female 24 16 12 22 32 13 7 510 10 20 30 40 50 60Game playersIncome level 23.3 24.4 20.2 10.9 21.2 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 Very likely Somewhat likely Neither likely nor unlikely Somewhat unlikely Very unlikely Page membersLikeliness to recruit others to "Like" page

PAGE 78

78 Figure 4 7 Likeliness to recruit others to play the WeTopia game Figure 4 8 Length of time since first game played by game play duration 31.2 31.2 20.4 7.5 9.7 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35Very likely Somewhat likely Neither likely nor unlikely Somewhat unlikely Very unlikelyGame membersLikeliness to recruit others to "Like" game 4 4.75 4.29 4.76 5.17 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 3 to 4 weeks 2 to 3 months 4 to 6 months 7 to 9 months 10 or more months Duration of game playFrequency of game play

PAGE 79

79 Figure 4 9 Page member by gender Figure 4 10. Page member gender by age 11 169 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 Male Female Page MembersGender 18 20 21 25 26 30 31 35 36 40 41 45 46 50 51 55 56 60 61 65 66 70 Male 0 0 2 0 2 1 3 1 0 2 0 Female 2 5 9 10 12 21 24 44 24 13 50 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50Page membersAge range

PAGE 80

80 Figure 4 11. Page member gender by r ace Figure 4 12. Page member g ender by education l evel White Black, African Americ an, or Negro Americ an Indian or Alaska Native Asian Indian Chines e Other Asian Some other race Two or more races Prefer to not say Male 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 Female 153 1 2 1 1 1 3 3 4 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180Page membersRace Less than high school High school degree/ GED Some College Associat e degree Bachelor s degree Masters degree Doctoral degree Professi ona degree Prefer to not say Male 0 2 0 2 4 1 1 1 0 Female 4 27 67 20 32 11 2 1 5 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80Page membersEducation level

PAGE 81

81 Figure 4 13. Page member gender by income l evel Figure 4 14. Duration by community building Under $15,000 $15,001 to $24,999 $25,000 to $34,999 $35,000 to $49,999 $50,000 to $74,999 $75,000 to $99,999 $100,000 or more Prefer to not say Male 3 1 0 1 1 1 2 3 Female 24 16 12 22 32 13 7 51 0 10 20 30 40 50 60Page membersIncome level 2.83 2.68 2.18 2.05 2.03 1.5 0 1 2 3 More than 2 hours every time. About 1 2 hours every time. About 30 minutes to 1 hour every time. About 15 minutes to 30 minutes every time. About 10 minutes to 15 minutes every time. Less than 10 minutes every time. Community building gratification meanDuration of game play

PAGE 82

82 Figure 4 1 5 Game player belief that game play is like volunteering and/or donating Figure 4 1 6 Game player and page member by likeliness to repost content Strongly disagree Disagree Neither agree nor disagree Agree Strongly agree Volunteering 7 17 38 83 47 Donating 6 9 32 93 520 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100Game playersGame play is like volunteering and/or donating Very Unlikely Somewhat Unlikely Neither likely nor unlikely Somewhat Likely Very Likely Page Members 45 22 38 45 43 Game Players 41 21 39 47 45 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50RespondentsLikeliness of reposting or sharing content

PAGE 83

83 CHAPTER 5 DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION Discussion The purpose of this study was to explore the uses and gratifications of an unusual population within the burgeoning social network games genre. Based on the previous research identified in t he literature review, these findings present both supporting as well as contradictory evidence both of which work to expand the current knowledge of social games for social good. The first hypothesis investigates whether or not a majority of WeTopia game players are female. Previous research suggested that, unlike many of the other game genres, social games attract an unusually high amount of female (as opposed to male) game players. These research findings overwhelmingly support this hypothesis with a lmost 94 percent of those surveyed self identifying their gender as female. Furthermore, a majority, 26 percent ( N= 46), of the female game players fell into the 5155 age range ( Figure 4 2) wit h 91.5 percent ( N= 162) of them identifying their race as white (Figure 4 3), 37.9 percent ( N= 67) having had some college education ( Figure 4 4) and 18.1 percent ( N= 32) claiming to earn a household income of $50,000$74,999 per year ( Figure 4 5). This prese nts the picture of a WeTopia game player as a mature, middle class, welleducated, white female. Unlike the first hypothesis which investigated game players, hypothesis five asked whether or not a majority of WeTopia page members were female. The results a lso overwhelmingly support this hypothesis with almost 94 percent of the page members identifying themselves as female. A majority, 26 percent ( N= 44), of the female page members fell into the 5155 age range ( Figure 4 10) with 90.5 percent ( N= 153) of

PAGE 84

84 them self identifying their race as white ( Figure 4 11), 39.6 percent ( N= 67) having had some college education ( Figure 4 12) and 18.9 percent ( N= 32) claiming to earn an income of $50,000$74,999 per year ( Figure 4 13). This partially supports the previous claim that a majority of the SGN users are "white, well educated and global" (2010) and aligns well with the portrait of the game player being mature, middle class, welleducated, white females as well. The second hypothesis considers whether or not WeTopia Facebook page members are likely to recruit others to Like the WeTopia Facebook page. The findings support this hypothesis with 47 percent of the sample being likely to recruit and only 32 percent of the population being unlikely to recruit. Although the purpose for recruiting cannot be determined based on the results of the current survey, it would not be a stretch to imagine that, among other reasons, these page members recruit others to Like the game page for a mixture of social and self serving reasons. Future studies could benefit from a clearer understanding of what motivates a member to recruit others to Like or become a fan of a social network page. The third hypothesis was similar to the second hypothes is in its investigation of recruitment however hypothesis three investigated game players rather than page members. Embedding access to social games within an individuals preexisting social network allows them to take advantage of their preexisting social ties to both their benef it and the benefit of WeTopia. The results indicate an even larger amount of game players (62 percent) are willing to recruit others to play the WeTopia game. This is not surprising given the nature of social game play which makes the need for additional players inherent ly if not outright rewarded. For example, a quest within a social game

PAGE 85

85 may require a player to add a number of new friends in order to complete the quest and/or receive a quest item. Thus incentivizing recruit m ent may positively affect the acceptance of recruitment as a n act of normative behavior within the group. Further research is warranted to explore the impact of incentivizing game actions which influence relationships outside of the game, such as those fos tered through recruitment and information sharing. Specifically an investigation into the possible negative returns which continuous recruitment attempts may have on the perceived social desirability of the individual, game, or application would continue to expand the understanding of the social and behavioral impacts of social games. Hypothesis four attempted to address the larger idea of player engagement within a U&G context and was found to be partially supported. In order to measure engagement, the hypothesis was split into two parts. Hypothesis four (a) investigated the frequency of gam e play and was found to be unsupported. N o trend could be found to support the idea that the longer someone has been a WeTopia p layer, the more frequently they play the game. Hypothesis four (b) investigated duration of game play and was supported. The research confirmed that length of time since first game play was positively correlated to the duration of game play sessions Based on this analysis respondents who have been playing the WeTopia game for 10 or more months ( N= 138) also tend to play the game for longer periods of time ( Figure 4 8 ). Investigating 4(a) and 4(b) together, the results reveal the image of an engaged We Topia game player as someone who may connect with the game infrequently but who, once connected or playing, will show endurance and commitment in their game

PAGE 86

86 play. This may be a loyal player who intends for each experience to be a quick visit but instead f inds t hemselves in game for over an hour. It could also reflect a strategy on behalf of the game makers who have designed the game experience (and the players game world) to grow and therefore require more time for maintenance as time pass es and as player s spend more time in game. Further research to determine the expectation of game play duration versus actual game play duration may assist in better identifying the impetus for social game player loyalty. If the player intends to play for 30 plus minutes d uring a session, then it may be the case that the players innate loyalty drives their duration of game play. On the other hand, it may also be the case that the game designers have developed a game formula which encourages an increase in game play duration and thus game player loyalty Based on these results, it would appear that the loyalty most often displayed by WeTopia game players is in their duration of gameplay versus their frequency of gameplay and more enriching experiences may continue to cultivate this existing attribute and connection Hypothesis six was similar to hypothesis four but examined SGN members instead of game players I n order to measure engagement, the hypothesis was split into two parts. Hypothesis six (a) compared the means for length of time invested in the SGN to the frequency of page visits but found no significant correlation. This indicates that veteran page membership has no impact on how often a member visits a page. However, it may also indicate a lack of engagement on the Facebook page from content other page members or the page moderators Additionally, it could be indicative of a lack of loyalty from veter an page members. Further research is warranted

PAGE 87

87 to determine reasons for the lack of increase in veteran SGN members participation over time Hypothesis six (b) compared length of time invested in the SGN to the duration of page visit sessi ons and, again, found no significance. T his would indicate veteran page members do not necessarily stay on the page for longer periods of time than newer page members. So it would appear that, unlike hypothesis fours veteran game players and their positive correlation to game play duration, veteran page membership had no impact on how long a member stayed when they visited the WeTopia Facebook page. Hypothesis seven measured whether or not WeTopia Facebook page members were likely to be members of another social good page on Facebook. Through a simple means analysis, the results indicate a large percentage (73 percent) of page members claim a second social good page membership. Considering this finding within the context of social identity presents the image of page members who like similar pages in order to make themselves and their ingroup(s) more positively distinctive. In other words, the stacking of similar group memberships may be a group members strategy for emphasizing their commitm ent to the larger group category (in this case social good causes) and thus making themselves more positively distinctive and sincere with both in groups and out groups This presents an opportunity for organizat ions interested in mining a members connect ions to reach a larger audience. As it is likely that social good page members are also likely to recruit others to join their SGNs (hypothesis two) and that these members are likely to have access to multiple social good communities social good campaigns could benefit from targeting their current members to expand t he

PAGE 88

88 reach of the group or organizations message and increase the group or organizations membership base Hypothesis eight measured w hether or not page members primary motivation for L iking the page was information seeking. Although the hypothesis was not supported, information seeking did present itself a s a close secondary motivation to the primary motivation of entertainment. Of interest is the preference of the personal gratifications (i.e. entertainment and information seeking) for motivation over the group gratifications (i.e. social identity and community building) with all four being better motivators than the antiso cial n arcissistic gratification category. Finding that entertainment was the primary motivation for liking the WeTopia Facebook page was unexpected but may be understandable when considering the large amount of comments left on the WeTopia Facebook page regarding game play and game play needs. Therefore it may be the case that the entertainment motivation driving game play (as we will see in hypothesis nine) may also e xtend to the interactions on the WeTopia Facebook page as well. P age members would therefore be entertained by information affirming the effect of their game play (e.g. news regarding a charitable group) and interactions extending the depth or duration of their game play (e.g. request for neighbors) Hypothesis nine investigated whether or not WeTopia game player s would report entertainment as their primary motivation for play ing the WeTopia game. The findings reported that m uch like page members, game players primary motivation for playing the game was entertainment This supports findings in previous research which indicate that social game play is primarily driven by a need for entertainment (Hou, 2011) The secondary motivation for game play was social identity. Information seeking came in as

PAGE 89

89 the fourth highest motivating factor indicating that game players may not be as interested in seeking out information in game or may be gratifying their motivation for information outside of the game environment Finally, narcissistic needs came in as the least motivating f a ctor for game players much like it did for page members. The tenth hypothesis looked at frequency of game play and any positive correlation it may have t o an entertainment motivation for playing the game. The results did not support this hypothesis and th ose who played the WeTopia game did not necessarily report entertainment as a motivating factor for their frequency of game play. Although previous findings point to entertainment as the primary motivating factor for game play, it would appear that this motivating factor does not influence frequency of game play behavior. This would indicate game players are frequently returning to t he game to satisfy more than just a need for entertainment. Future testing on the players expectation of game play frequency to compare against actual game play frequency may also help to tease out the influence each may have in encouraging game play freq uency and player loyalty. Social network games have enjoyed increasing popularity in recent years and this is in no small part an effect of being on a social network. The eleventh hypothesis looked at a possible positive correlation between frequency of game play and a community building gratification. This investigation was similar to hypothesis ten but examined a different gratification category. Although no significant effect was found, it is interesting to note that individuals who played the game more frequently were not necessarily looking to sat isfy a community building need. T his is contrary to Hou (2011) and may be another example of the difference in either the game players expectation of

PAGE 90

90 their game play frequency or the game developers game play strategy This difference may have also occurred due to the low rank which community building had as a motivator for game play even before considering frequency. Whereas hypothesis ten and eleven correlated frequency of game play to either an entertainment or community building motivation, hypothesis twelve examined the correlation between game play duration and the community building gratification instead. Although most respondents did not score community building as a highly motivating factor for game play (Table 45), the higher the score respondents gave for community building ( M= 2.31, SD= .96), the longer they were likely to stay in game ( M= 2.98, SD= 1.175). These game players who are more likely to seek out the WeTopia game for community building were also more likely to bank large investments of time in the game. T his may be a result of the social nature of social games Although social interaction with other players game worlds is typically encouraged in most social games the player who seeks out the game to satisfy community building needs may arguably play parts of the game which other players, who do not use the social features often, may overlook. Playing additional parts of the game may increase game play duration. Based on this analysis, respondents who were more likely to play the WeTopia game to satisfy a community building motivation were also more likely to stay in the game for over an hour ( Figure 4 14). This, again, presents an opportunity for organizations interested in mining a members connections to reach a larger audience. As was demonstrated in hypothesis six, the most loyal or core group of game players are likely to be the most connected and enduring players who (in this case) have the added potential to be influential advocates for the cause, campaign, group or game.

PAGE 91

91 The final hypothesis, hypothesis thirteen, measured whether or not WeTopia Facebook page members were likely to report community building as a motivation for liking the WeTopia F acebook page more so than other motivations. As a majority of the Facebook page members identified entertainment as their primary motivation for liking the page, this hypothesis was not supported. Evidence could not be found to support the idea that WeTopi a Facebook page members were more likely to visit the WeTopia Facebook page (and its accompanying SGN) to satisfy a community building need. The gratifications sought by WeTopia Facebook page members placed the personal motivations of entertainment and inf ormation seeking ahead of any group motivations such as community building and social identity. The precedence of personal motivations over group motivations paints the picture of a WeTopia Facebook page member as being more motivated by personal needs than group needs when visiting the page. The first research question asked whether or not WeTopia game players believe they had volunteered or donated to the social good causes through their game play. Although the results indicate general agreement that game play is like volunteering and/or donating, more agreement may be found among those who consider game play similar to donating than those who consider game play as similar to volunteering. The belief that game play is like volunteering and/or donating may have some interesting social impacts and future research is required to compare a players satisfaction with their volunteering or donating experience online to their experience off line. The second research question asked if WeTopia Facebook page members or game players were likely to share social cause posts from WeTopia. The findings indicate strong feelings on the part of game players regarding their role as

PAGE 92

92 disseminators of WeTopia information. Interestingly, more respondents indicated that they were very unlikely to repost content from WeTopia than did respondents who indicated they would be very likely to repost content. This may indicate a general hesitation on the part of WeTopi a Facebook page members to share content but may not indicate that these individuals are unwilling to share content simply because it came from WeTopia. Instead, these individuals may conform to a general rule of not (or sparingly) passing along content w ithin their social network. The third research question investigated the likelihood of the WeTopia Facebook page members to report social identity as a motivation for liking the page. Based on these findings, WeTopia Facebook page members are only likely t o report social identity as a motivation for liking the WeTopia page over narcissism and, on average, report more disagreement ( M= 2.7) than agreement with the presumption that social identity is generally a motivating factor for liking the page. The fourth research question examined game players likeliness of reporting social identity as a motivation for game play. Although social identity was assessed as a secondary motivation to entertainment, results showed the mean of the social identity gratification to lean toward disagreement. Therefore, the motivation for social identity may not necessarily be more likely than the others to motivate an individual to play the game but may instead be just less unlikely than others to motivate. Finally, the fifth rese arch question investigated whether or not those who scored high ly ( more narcissistic ) on the NPI scale were more likely to report a preference for narcissism as a primary motivation for playing the game or liking the page. Both results

PAGE 93

93 were not significant which may indicate that narcissism as a personality trait does not equate to narcissism as a gratification of media consumption. A special investigation of a proposed composite Facebook engagement measure was conducted using respondent data with a special emphasis on Facebook page engagement The proposed composite Facebook engagement measure used all four of the engagement approaches advocated by Napoli (2011) to present a more robust view of the engagement practices (and composite score) of the WeTopia audience. Comparing a general audience engagement measure of the exposure approaches only ( M= 1.95) against the more robust composite Facebook engagement measure ( M= 2.3 0) presents the picture of a WeTopia Page Member as slightly more engaged than when using just the exposure measures where the lowest engagement is a one and the highest engagement is a three. Engagement Measurement Approaches and Recommendations A comparison of the WeTopia audience's exposure engagement mean for the collapsed duration measure ( M= 1.65) against the mean of the collapsed score for frequency ( M =2.24) indicates players visit the game on a weekly basis and typically stay for 15 minutes t o one hour each time. Combining the two produces a composite exposure engagement mean ( M=1.95) useful in quantifying the replay value and longevity of the game experience but which does not fully capture the depth of the experience and so may falsely prese nt a shallow audience engagement response or, at worst, a falsely disengaged audience. To capture the depth of the game experience, additional engagement measures for appreciation and emotional response ( M=2.12) attitude ( M=2.92) and behavior ( M= 2.23) can be combined to the average of the two exposure measures to produce a richer composite engagement score ( M =2.30).

PAGE 94

94 Interestingly, duration of game play produced the weakest audience engagement levels which may indicate that the game is not fully engaging audience members to stay for longer periods of time (above 1 hour) but may still be an accurate representation of duration of game play for those who may consider social games on Facebook as closer to casual games. The highest engagement measure collected w as attitude. H owever, the measure may present a false sense of high engagement since liking the game's Facebook page (i.e. Page member status) may have been incentivized through ingame quests. The high value of this attitude measure may also be problemati c with regard to equality of variance for the proposed composite score. Future scholars may wish to include multiple questions measuring the same concept (e.g. attitude) in order to p roduce more Gaussian measures and ensure normalization of the data. Final ly, if one were to compare the exposure only composite score ( M= 1.95) to the proposed composite Facebook engagement score ( M= 2.30) one can easily see that audiences measured with exposure only data are presented as less engaged than the same audiences who may indicate a moderately high engagement level using the proposed composite score. The main difference is that the composite score presents a more robust accounting of the four approaches to audience engagement as presented by Napoli (2011) Future scholars who wish to measure engagement in the online space are encouraged to capture all four engagement approaches separately for appropriate within measure comparisons as well as to combine all m easures to produce a more robust and generalized audience engagement score, which can be then used to value the audience in the media marketplace.

PAGE 95

95 Limitations This study had several important potential limitati ons. First, Facebook enables users to interac t in multiple ways (e.g. chat, direct messaging, posts, or comments) which may or may not be controlled for including the sharing of a conversation or post. The uncontrolled nature of sharing content on a social network led this research from a purposive nonrandom sampling to a snowball sample. The data cannot, therefore, be extrapolated or generalized to a larger population owing to the limited sample size and the dataset being limited to a single network. Collecting data through an online survey also presents a host of unique limitations The accuracy of responses may be called into question. Although the IP address of each participant was kept recorded to prevent multiple logging, the condition of a person who could complete the survey more than once from different computers could not be controlled. Additionally f uture social media research would benefit from some important best practices learned during the course of this research. Although using an account tied to your personal information can serve to legitimize a researchers communication, creating a second account specifically for the research purposes would be a suggested best practice. Over the course of the data collection period, over thirty game players and/or page members requested to be added as a friend to the researchers Facebook page. In some instance, adding the individual as friend was a requirement for permi ssion to post to a group page. Although no bias to the research can be claimed bec ause of these friend requests, the separation of researcher from research was less than desirable.

PAGE 96

96 A future study investigating the aesthetic design of social network games may also provide some insight into the most effective styles to use when targeting these female game players and page members. Questions on whether the style ( or look and feel) of the media content affects the experience with each medium and the effect of aesthetics and style upon gameplay and storytelling can help inform effective design for this less understood population. Additionally, further research is warranted to investigate the effect of narrative on the engagement experience especially through recall and attitude toward the product, service or message. The addition of a reca ll measure (via game narrative engagement) would also enhance the composite Facebook engagement measure to be all inclusive of the engagement approaches which Napoli (2011) presents. However, and s pecifically related to exposure measures d o longitudinal stories (stories told over days or weeks) affect frequency and duration of game play and page visits over time? What impact might the depth of the story have on the r et urn visits? Finally, this research only addressed a strategically selected group of motivations. Further research into additional motivation metacategories as they are developed (e.g. connectedness, companionship, etc) in conjunction with or compared to the motivation categories under investiga tion in this research will continue to paint a clearer picture of both the motivations as well as the engagement manifestations which autonomous audiences (Napoli, 2011) use and produce. Implications for Social Causes and Networks Social good causes as well as SGNs could benefit from the ability to unobtrusively learn about the tastes, preferences and habits of their audiences through the intermediary of Facebook. And this relationship does not necessarily have to be one

PAGE 97

97 way. It is to the advantage of most membership groups to encourage r ecruitment a s a method of increasing group distinctiveness as well as increasing membership numbers Further research is warranted to understand the implications of incentivized rec ruitment on individual personality and social behavior especially in the context of social identity. Despite these limitations this researcher believe s that the findings uncovered in this study are both timely and relevant to both a social game player and a SGN membership population. The most loyal or core players in the WeTopia social game are not getting their engagement from frequent quick visits but from less frequent deeper (duration) visits or experiences. This is important for charities and nonprofits that purposefully encourage stewardship and connection with their members and donors as it is likely to increase those member s and donor s repeat patronage. These devoted game players in both the length of time invested as well as the depth of ti me invested, promise a deep engagement which encourages connections and present s fertile research grounds for investi gating the authenticity of those connections The emerging online social game for social good subgenre is interesting for both its entertainment appeal as well as its potential for altruistic stewardship. Through the lens of the U&G approach, this research has uncovered some valuable findings for media scholars, professionals and altruistic groups interested in knowing more about social game players as well as SGN members. These findings work toward building a more comprehensive understanding of social network games as well as SGNs and continuing the discussion of narcissism, engagement and social identity within this context

PAGE 98

98 APPENDIX : QUESTIONNAIRE Informed Consent To continue to the survey, please read through this information and make a selection at the bottom of the page. Title Uses and gratifications for playing and liking a social network game for social good on Facebook Primary Investigator Michelle Lynch Department of Telecommunication College of Journalism and Communication University of Florida Phone: 727 2594214 Email: lynchm[at]ufl.edu Introduction You are invited to participate in a study regarding your motivation to play and/or like the WeTopia game on Facebook. Please read through this informed consent carefully before you decide to participate in this study. Procedures You will sit at a computer and answer an online questionnaire usin g the Qualtrics survey system. Qualtrics has a contract with the University of Florida to provide a survey interface and storage of electronic data. Qualtrics stores electronic data from surveys in a secure off site storage facility with many layers of protection. Risks/Discomforts There are no known risks or discomforts associated with participation in this study. Benefits The data from this study will help further the understanding of what motivates individuals to play social network games and like Face book pages for social good. Participation Taking part in research is always optional. We are looking for participants who have played or currently play WeTopia and/or have Liked the WeTopia Facebook page. Only individuals who are 18 years of age or older may participate in this study. If you decide to take part in the study, the survey will take approximately 25 minutes to complete. You may withdraw your consent by closing the survey browser window at any time without penalty. Compensation You will rece ive no financial compensation for your participation in this survey and are taking this as a volunteer.

PAGE 99

99 Confidentiality Your confidentiality is important to us. We will not ask you to provide any personally identifiable information (i.e. name or email address) outside of the IP address automatically collected by the Qualtrics system. This IP address is used by Qualtrics to identify and prevent duplicate survey responses. The data collected from this survey will be stored in a Qualtrics secure database until it has been deleted by the primary investigator. Your identity will be kept confidential to the extent provided by law and will not be linked to your responses. It is highly unlikely that a security breach of the online data will result in any adverse consequence for you. Information collected through your participation may be presented at professional meetings and published in academic journals and will only be reported anonymously and in the aggregate. Questions About This Research? Please feel free to contact the primary investigator if you should have any questions about this study. The Institutional Review Board (IRB) at the University of Florida is responsible for protecting the rights and welfare of research volunteers like you. If you have ques tions about your rights as a research participant, you may contact the IRB by phone at 3522739600. YOU MAY PRINT AND KEEP A COPY OF THIS FORM FOR YOUR RECORDS. After you respond to the statement below, please click on the "next" button. STATEMENT OF CONSENT By clicking the button next to Yes, I want to participate. Take me to the survey. I certify that I am 18 years of age or older. I have read this consent and understand that I am free to ask questions via email or phone. I understand that I can also withdraw from this study at any time without penalty and I am freely volunteering to participate in this survey. No, I do not want to participate. YOU MAY ALSO CLOSE YOUR BROWSER IF YOU DO NOT WISH TO PARTICIPATE. Yes, I want to participate. Take me t o the survey. Section 1 [This section only displays i f respondent selected YES, I want to participate. Take me to the survey. ] Question 1 Are you at least 18 years old? Yes N o Section 2 [This section only displays i f respondent selected YES for Q1]

PAGE 100

100 Instructions: We are interested in your experience with the WeTopia Facebook page as well as the WeTopia game. You may notice some questions have similar wording. However, no two questions are exactly the same so please read each question carefully. For yo ur convenience we have attempted to highlight the key words ( PAGE or GAME ) within each question, where applicable. Question 2 Do you Like or plan to Like the WeTopia Facebook PAGE ? Yes No Undecided Question 3 How likely are you to recruit others to "Like" the WeTopia Facebook PAGE ? Very unlikely Somewhat unlikely Neither likely or unlikely Somewhat likely Very likely Question 4 Besides WeTopia, do you L ike another Facebook PAGE for charity or social good? Yes No Question 5 In a typical week, how often do you visit the WeTopia Facebook PAGE ? I visit every day, and I visit more than 5 times per day. I visit every day, and I visit 3 5 times per day. I visit every day, and I visit 1 2 times per day. I do NOT visit every day. I visit 5 6 times per week. I visit 4 times per week. I visit 3 times per week. I visit 2 times per week. I visit 1 times per week. I visit less than once a week, but more than once every half a month. I visit less than once every half a month, but more than once every month. I visit once every several months. I never visit the WeTopia Facebook page. Question 6 On average, how long do you spend on the WeTopia Facebook PAGE each time you visit ? More than 2 hours every time.

PAGE 101

101 About 1 2 hours every time. About 30 minutes to 1 hour every time. About 15 minutes to 30 minutes every time About 10 minutes to 15 minutes every time Less than 10 minutes every time. I never visit the WeTopia Facebook page. Question 7 How long have you L iked the WeTopia Facebook PAGE ? I am not a member of the WeTopia Facebook page ( I have not clicked the L ike button on the WeTopia Facebook page) Today was my first day 1 to 2 weeks 3 to 4 weeks 2 to 3 months 4 to 6 months 7 to 9 months 10 or more months Question 8 How likely are you to repost content from the WeTopia Facebook PAGE ? Very unlikely Somewhat unlikely Neither likely or unlikely Somewhat likely Very likely Question 9 Pl ease indicate how often you share or post content from WeTopia to your Facebook timeline/wall Daily Weekly Monthly I never share posts or content from WeTopia on my Facebook timeline/ wall Section 3 [ This section only displays i f respondent selected YES for Q2] Please take a moment to consider your experience with the WeTopia Facebook PAGE and community when responding. Section 4 [This section only displays i f respondent selected YES for Q2] H ow much do you agree or disagree with the following statements regarding your m otivation for L iking the WeTopia Facebook PAGE ? ( Five point Likert scale from

PAGE 102

102 Strongly Disagree to Strongly Agree with the neutral being Neither Agree nor Disagree.) Question 10 Narcissism I Like the WeTopia Facebook PAGE because it will attract my friends to view my status and my photos I Like the WeTopia Facebook PAGE because I will be able to let my friends know my updates I Like the WeTopia Facebook PAGE because I will be more popular among friends I Like the WeTopia Facebook PAGE because my friends will think I am very active in a chari table group. Question 11 Social Identity I Like the WeTopia Facebook PAGE because it gives me support for my ideas. I Like the WeTopia Facebook PAGE because I will belong to the group. I Like the WeTopia Facebook PAGE because it will decrease the l ikelihood of being left out WeTopia Facebook PAGE members are people like me. Question 12 Community Building I Like the WeTopia Facebook PAGE because I will reconnect with people Ive lost contact with. I Like the WeTopia Facebook PAGE because I will maintain relationships with people I may not get to see very often. I Like the WeTopia Facebook PAGE because I want to participate in discussions. I Like the WeTopia Facebook PAGE because it shows others encouragement. Question 13 Entertainment I Like the WeTopia Facebook PAGE because it is entertaining. I Like the WeTopia Facebook PAGE because it is enjoyable. I Like the WeTopia Facebook PAGE because it helps me to get away from everyday worries. Reading the WeTopia Facebook PAGE is a good way of passing the time when I have nothing better to do. Question 14 Information Seeking I Like the WeTopia Facebook PAGE because it is a new way to do research.

PAGE 103

103 I Like the WeTopia Facebook PAGE because it gives me a way to look for information. I Like the WeTopia Facebook PAGE because it gives me information to see what is out there. I Like the WeTopia Facebook PAGE because it provides me with information I am looking for. Section 5 Question 1 5 Have you played the WeTopia GAME on Facebook for at least 15 minutes? Yes No Question 1 6 How likely are you to recruit others to play the WeTopia GAME ? Very unlikely Somewhat unlikely Neither likely or unlikely Somewhat likely Very likely Question 1 7 How often do you play the WeTopia GAME ? I play every day, and I play more than 5 times per day. I play every day, and I play 3 5 times per day. I play every day, and I play 1 2 times per day. I do NOT play every day. I play 5 6 times per week. I play 4 times per week. I play 3 times per week. I play 2 times per week. I play 1 times per week. I play less than once a week, but more than once every half a month. I play less than once every half a month, but more than once every month. I play once every several months. I never play the WeTopia game. Questi on 1 8 On average, how long do you spend playing the WeTopia GAME each time? More than 2 hours every time. About 1 2 hours every time. About 30 minutes to 1 hour every time. About 15 minutes to 30 minutes every time About 10 minutes to 15 minutes every time Less than 10 minutes every time.

PAGE 104

104 I never play the WeTopia game. Question 19 How long have you been playing the WeTopia GAME ? Today was my first day 1 to 2 weeks 3 to 4 weeks 2 to 3 months 4 to 6 months 7 to 9 months 10 or more months I never play the WeTopia game Question 2 0 Do you play social network GAMES other than WeTopia on Facebook? Yes No Section 6 [This section only displays i f respondent selected YES for Q15] Question 2 1 Please indicate how strongly you agree or disagree with the following statements: (Five point Likert scale from Strongly Disagree to Strongly Agree with the neutral being Neither Agree nor Disagree. ) As a WeTopia GAME player, I feel part of a larger effort to influence positive social change. I give more money to nonprofit organizations because of my involvement with the WeTopia GAME I volunteer more time to causes for social good due to my involvement with the WeTopia GAME I am more active in my local community due to my involvement with the WeTopia GAME Playing the WeTopia GAME is just like volunteering my time to a worthy cause Playing the WeTopia GAME is just like donating to charity Section 7 [This section only displays i f respondent selected YES for Q15] Continue to consider your experience with the WeTopia GAME when responding Section 8 [This section only displays i f respondent selected YES for Q15]

PAGE 105

105 H ow much do you agree or disagree with the following statements regarding your motivation for playing the WeTopia GAME ? (Five point Likert scale from Strongly Disagree to Strongly Agree with the neutral being Neither Agree nor Disagree.) Question 22 Narcissism I play the WeTopia Facebook GAME because it will attract my friends to view my status and my photos I play the WeTopia Facebook GAME because I will be able to let my friends know my updates I play the WeTopia Facebook GAME because I will be more popular among friends I play the WeTopia Facebook GAME because my friends will think I am very active in a charitable group. Q uestion 23 Social Identity I play the WeTopia Facebook GAME because it gives me support for my ideas I play the WeTopia Facebook GAME because I will belong to the group. I play the WeTopia Facebook GAME because it will decrease the likelihood of being left out WeTopia Facebook GAME players are people like me. Question 24 Community Building I play the WeTopia Facebook GAME because I will reconnect with people Ive lost contact with. I play the WeTopia Facebook GAME because I will maintain relationships with people I may not get to see very often. I play the WeTopia Facebook GAME because I want to participate in discussions. I play the WeTopia Facebook GAME because it provides encouragement to others Question 25 Entertainment I play the W eTopia Facebook GAME because it is entertaining. I play the WeTopia Facebook GAME because it is enjoyable. I play the WeTopia Facebook GAME because it helps me to get away from everyday worries Playing the WeTopia Facebook GAME is a good way of passing the time when I have nothing better to do. Question 26 Information Seeking

PAGE 106

106 I play the WeTopia Facebook GAME because it is a new way to do research I play the WeTopia Facebook GAME because it gives me a way to look for information. I play the WeTopia Fac ebook GAME because it gives me information to see what is out there. I play the WeTopia Facebook GAME because it shows me what society is like nowadays Section 9 Question 2 7 Below is a list of 16 statements. Please choose the one statement from each pair that you most agree with (even if it is not a perfect fit). Pair 1 When people compliment me I sometimes get embarrassed. I know that I am good because everybody keeps telling me so. Pair 2 I like to be the center of attention. I prefer to blend in with the crowd. Pair 3 I am no better or no worse than most people. I think I am a special person. Pair 4 I dont mind following orders. I like having authority over people. Pair 5 I find it easy to manipulate people. I dont like it when I find m yself manipulating people. Pair 6 I usually get the respect that I deserve. I insist upon getting the respect that is due me. Pair 7 I am apt to show off if I get the chance. I try not to be a show off. Pair 8 Sometimes I am not sure of what I am doing. I always know what I am doing. Pair 9

PAGE 107

107 Sometimes I tell good stories. Everybody likes to hear my stories. Pair 10 I expect a great deal from other people. I like to do things for other people. Pair 11 It makes me uncomfortable to be the center of att ention. I really like to be the center of attention. Pair 12 People always seem to recognize my authority. Being an authority doesnt mean that much to me. Pair 13 I hope I am going to be successful. I am going to be a great person. Pair 14 I can make anybody believe anything I want them to. People sometimes believe what I tell them. Pair 15 There is a lot that I can learn from other people. I am more capable than other people. Pair 16 I am an extraordinary person. I am much like everybody else. Sec tion 10 Almost done! Please answer these last few demographic questions. Question 28 What gender do you consider yourself? Male Female Other (e g transgender intersex) Prefer to not say Question 29 What is your age range? Younger than 18 1820 2125

PAGE 108

108 2630 3135 3640 4145 4650 5155 5660 6165 6670 7175 76+ Prefer to not say Question 30 Do you consider yourself of Hispanic, Latino or Spanish origin? Yes No, not of Hispanic, Latino, or Spanish origin Prefer to not say Question 3 1 What race do you consider yourself? White Black, African American, or Negro American Indian or Alaska Native Asian Indian Chinese Filipino Japanese Korean Vietnamese Native Hawaiian Guamanian or Chamorro Samoan Other Pacific Islander Other Asian Some other race Two or more races P refer to not say Question 3 2 What is the highest level of education you have completed? Less than high school High school degree / GED Some college

PAGE 109

109 Associate degree Bachelor's degree Master's degree Doctoral degree Professional degree ( e.g. JD, MD) Prefer to not say Question 3 3 What is your current household income level? Under $15,000 $15,001 to $24,999 $25,000 to $34,999 $35,000 to $49,999 $50,000 to $74,999 $75,000 to $99,999 $100,000 or more Prefer to not say Question 3 4 What is your country of residence? Afghanistan Albania Algeria Andorra Angola Antigua and Barbuda Argentina Armenia Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bahamas Bahrain Bangladesh Barbados Belarus Belgium Belize Benin Bhutan Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Brazil

PAGE 110

110 Brunei Darussalam Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Cape Verde Central African Republic Chad Chile China Colombia Comoros Congo, Republic of the... Costa Rica Cte d'Ivoire Croatia Cuba Cyprus Czech Republic Democratic People's Republic of Korea Democratic Republic of the Congo Denmark Djibouti Dominica Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt El Salvador Equatorial Guinea Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Fiji Finland France Gabon Gambia Georgia Germany Ghana Greece Grenada

PAGE 111

111 Guatemala Guinea GuineaBissau Guyana Haiti Honduras Hong Kong (S.A.R.) Hungary Iceland India Indonesia Iran, Islamic Republic of... Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Kiribati Kuwait Kyrgyzstan Lao People's Democratic Republic Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libyan Arab Jamahiriya Liechtenstein Lithuania Luxembourg Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Maldives Mali Malta Marshall Islands Mauritania Mauritius Mexico Micronesia, Federated States of...

PAGE 112

112 Monaco Mongolia Montenegro Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nauru Ne pal Netherlands New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria North Korea Norway Oman Pakistan Palau Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Poland Portugal Qatar Republic of Korea Republic of Moldova Romania Russian Federation Rwanda Saint Kitts and Nevis Saint Lucia Saint Vincent and the Grenadines Samoa San Marino Sao Tome and Principe Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Seychelles Sierra Leone Singapore

PAGE 113

113 Slovakia Slovenia Solomon Islands Somalia South Africa South Korea Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Suriname Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syrian Arab Republic Tajikistan Thailand The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia Timor Leste Togo Tonga Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Tuvalu Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland United Republic of Tanzania United States of America Uruguay Uzbekistan Vanuatu Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of... Viet Nam Yemen Zambia Zimbabwe

PAGE 114

114 LIST OF REFERENCES Ames, D. R., Rose, P., & Anderson, C. P. (2006). The NPI 16 as a short measure of narcissism. Journal of Research in Personality, 40(4), 440450. Baresch, B., Knight, L., Harp, D., & Yaschur, C. (2011). Friends who choose your news: An analysis of content links on F acebook. ISOJ: The Official Research Jour nal of International Symposium on Online Journalism, Austin, TX, 1(2) Berelson, B. (1948). What missing the newspaper means. In P.Lazarsfeld & F.Stanton (Eds.), Commun ications Research ( pp 111129) New York: Harper Birnbrauer, K., & Lynch, M. (2012). D iabetes communities on Facebook: Does information sharing strengthen ties? ( Unpublished manuscript ) University of Florida, Gainesville, FL. Blumler, J. G. (1985). The social character of media gratifications. In K. Rosengren, L. Wenner, & P. Palmgreen (Eds.), Media Gratifica tions Research (pp 4160) Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. Bogost, I. (2007). Persuasive games: The expressive power of videogames Cambridge, MA: TheMIT Press. Branston, K., & Bush, L. (2010). The nature of online social good networks and their impact on nonprofit organisations and users. PRism, 7 (2) Bryant, J., & Miron, D. (2004). Theory and research in mass communication. Journal of Communication, 54(4), 662704. Buffardi, L. E., & Campbell, W. K. (2008). Narcissism a nd social networking web sites. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 34(10), 13031314. Chen, G. M. (2011). Tweet this: A uses and gratificat ions perspective on how active T witter use gratifies a need to connect with others. Computers in Human Behavior, 27(2), 755762. Chen, S. (2009). The social network game boom. Gamasutra. Retrieved from http://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/4009/the_social_network_game_boom.php ?page=4/ Cheung, C. M., Chiu, P., & Lee, M. K. (2011). Online social networks: Why do students use Facebook? Computers in Human Behavior, 27(4), 13371343. ChompOn. (2011). What is the value of a social action in online commerce? Retrieved from http://www.chompon.com/chompon_social_action_value.pdf

PAGE 115

115 Donath, J., & Boyd, D. (2004). Public displays of connection. BT Technology Journal, 22(4), 71 82. doi: 10.1023/B:BTTJ.0000047585.06264.cc Eller, A. (2008). Solidarity.com: Is there a link between offline behavior and online donations? CyberPsychology & Behavior, 11 (5), 611. doi: 10.1089/cpb.2007.0218 Elliot, P. (1974). Uses and gratificat ions research: A critique and a sociological alternative. In J Blumler & E. Katz (Eds.), The uses of mass communications: Current perspectives on gratifications research. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. Goldberg, L. R. (1990). An alternative description of pers onality : The bigfive factor structure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59(6), 12161229. Grandoni, D. (2012, October 4). Facebook has 1 billion users, M ark Z ukerberg announces in a status update. The Huffington Pos t Retrieved from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/04/facebook 1 billion users_n_1938675.html Green, M. E., & McNeese, M. (2008). Factors that predict digital game play Howard Journal of Communications, 19(3), 258272. doi: 10.1080/10646170802218321 Hampton, K., Goulet, L., Rainie, L., & Purcell, K. (2011). Social networking sites and our lives. Pew Internet & American Life Project. Washington DC. Retrieved from http://www.pewinternet.org/Reports/2011/Technology andsocial networks.aspx Hart, T. (2001). The ePhilanthropy revolution. Fund Raising Management, 32( 3 ) 22. Retrieved from http://go.galegroup.com/ps/i.do?id=GALE%7CA76941356&v=2.1&u=gain40375&it= r&p=AONE&sw=w Harwood, J. (1999). Age identification, social identity gratifications and television viewing. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 43(1), 123136. Heinz, E. (2011, November 30). Facebook game WeTopia allows players to donate to charity by building virtual village. The Huffington Post Retrieved from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/11/30/wetopiafacebook game charity_n_1117549.html Hernandez, B. (2012, April 11). WeTopia brings social good to Facebook gaming. Mash able. Retrieved from http://mashable.com/2012/04/11/wetopiafacebook gamecharity/ Herzog, H. (1944). What do we really know about day time serial listeners? In P Lazarsfeld, & F. Stanton (Eds.), Radio research 19421943 (pp 3 33) New York: Duel, Sloan and Pearce.

PAGE 116

116 Hogg, M. A., & Reid, S. A. (2006). Social identity, self categorization, and the communication of group norms. Communication Theory, 16(1), 7 30. doi: 10.1111/j.14682885.2006.00003.x Hou, J. (2011). Uses and gratifications of social games: Blending social networking and game play. First Monday, 16(7) Retrieved from http://firstmonday.org/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/article/viewArticle/3517/30 20 Information Solutions Group. (2010). PopCap social gaming research. Retrieved from http://www.infosolutionsgroup.com/2010_PopCap_Social_Gaming_Research_Resu lts.pdf Jin, X., Wang, C., Luo, J., Yu, X., & Han, J. (2011). LikeMiner: A system for mining the power of 'like' in social media networks. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 17th ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining San Diego, C A doi: 10.1145/2020408.2020528 Joinson, A. N. (2008). Looking at, looking up or keeping up wi th people?: Motives and use of F acebook. ACM : Proceedings of the Twenty Sixth Annual SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI '08) doi: 10.1145/1357054.1357213 JustinBieber. (2011, December 20). Proud to now be a part of #WeTopia wtp.io/GivJoy lets play this gam e and do some good 4 kids around the world #MAKEACHANGE [ Tweet ]. Message posted to https://twitter.com/justinbieber/statuses/149228985077862400 Kahne, J., Middaugh, E., & Evans, C. (2006). The civic potential of video games. (digital edition ). Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. Katz, E. (1959). Mass communications research and the study of popular culture: An editorial note on a possible future for this journal. Departmental P apers (ASC), 165. Katz, E., Blumler, J. G., & Gurevitch, M. (1974). Utilization of mass communication by the individual. In J. G. Blumler, & E. Katz (Eds.), The uses of mass communications: Current perspecti ves on gratifications research. Beverly Hills CA: Sage. Katz, E., Blumler, J. G., & Gurevitch, M. (1973). Uses and gratifications research. The Public Opinion Quarterly, 37(4), 509 523. McGonigal, J. (2011). Reality is broken : Why games make us better and how they can change the world. New York: Peng uin Press.

PAGE 117

117 McQuail, D., Blumler, J. G., & Brown, J. (1972). The television audience: A revised perspective. In P. Marris & S. Thornham (Eds.) Media studies: A reader (pp 438454). New York : New York University Press Mersey, R. D., Malthouse, E. C., & Ca lder, B. J. (2010). Engagement with online media. Journal of Media Business Studies, 7 (2), 3956. Morozov, E. (2009). From slacktivism to activism. Foreign Policy. Retrieved from http://neteffect.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2009/09/05/from_slacktivism_to_activism Napoli, P. M. (2003). Audience economics: Media institutions and the audience marketplace. Columbia University Press. Napoli, P. M. (2011). Audience evolution: New technologies and the transformation of media audiences New York: Columbia University Press. Nielsen. (2010, June 15). Social networks/blogs now account for one in every four and a half minutes online. Newswire. Retrieved from http://www.nielsen.com/us/en/newswire/2010/social media accounts for 22percent of time online.html O'Dell, J. (2010, August 23). 56 million A mericans are playing social games. Mashable. Retrieved from http://mashable.com/2010/08/23/social gamingstudy/ Ostrow, A. (2011, September 22). Facebook now has 800 million users. Mashable. Retrieved fr om http://mashable.com/2011/09/22/facebook 800million users/ Papacharissi, Z., & Mendelson, A. (2011). Toward a new(er) sociability: Uses, gratifi cations, and social captial on Facebook. In S. Papathanassopoulos (Ed.), Media perspectives for the 21st century (pp 212) London: Routledge. Paulhus, D. L., & Williams, K. M. (2002). The dark triad of personality: Narcissism, M achiavellianism, and psychopathy. Journal of Research in Person ality, 36 (6), 556563. Pipatsrisawat, K. ( 2009, October 19). Giving groups a stronger voice. [Facebook blog post]. Facebook. Retrieved from https://blog.facebook.com/blog.php?post=156031977130 Plenda, M. (2011, April 8 ). POX: Play the game, save the people. Union Leader Purcell, K., Rainie, L., Mitchell, A., Rosenstiel, T., & Olmstead, K. (2010). Understanding the participatory news consumer. Pew Internet & American Life Project. Washington DC. Retrieved from http://www.pewinternet.org/Reports/2010/OnlineNews.aspx

PAGE 118

118 Putnam, R. D. (2000). Bowling alone : The collapse and revival of A merican community New York: Simon & Schuster. Ramos, J. (2011, December 1). Can Food Force and WeTopia change the social gaming industry? [Web log]. Retrieved from http://www.gamesforchange.org/2011/12/canfoodforce andwetopia change thesocial gamingindustry/ Raskin, R., & Terry, H. (1988). A principal components analysis of the narcissistic personality inventory and further evidence of its construct validity. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54(5), 890902. Sherif, M. (1956). Experiments in group conflict. In E. Aronson (Ed.) Readings about the social animal (pp 413422) New York: Worth Publishers. Sojo about. (n.d.) Retrieved April 22, 2012 from http://www.sojostudios.com/?pg=about Stelter, B. (2008, March 27 ). Finding political news online, the young pass it on. New York Times pp. A1. T ajfel, H., & Turner, J C. (1985). The social identit y theory of intergroup behavior In S. Worchel, & W. Austin (Eds.), Psy chology of Intergroup Relations (pp 724). Chicago: Nelson Hall. Turner, J. C. (1982). Towards a cognitive rede In H. Tajfel (Ed.) Social Id entity and Intergroup Relations (pp 1540) London: Cambridge University Press. Turner, J. C., Brown, R. J., & Tajfel, H. (1979). Social comparison and group interest in ingroup favouritism. European Journal of Social Psychology, 9 (2), 187204. The value of a liker. (2010, September 29). Facebook. Retrieved from https://www.facebook.com/notes/facebook media/valueof a liker/150630338305797 What is the like feature? (n.d.) Facebook. Retrieved from https://www.facebook.com/help/200273576682757/ World Bank. (2010). World Development Indicators. [Data file]. Retrieved from http://data.worldbank.org/datacatalog/world development indicators/wdi 2010 Wyld, A. (2012, March 1). Facebook. The New York Times Retrieved from http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/business/companies/facebook_inc/index.html

PAGE 119

119 Yee, N. (2006). The demographics, motivations, and derived experiences of users of massively multi user online graphical environments. Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments, 15(3), 309329.

PAGE 120

120 BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH Michelle Christine Lynch was born in New Jersey and raised in Clearwater, Florida. A graduate from Clearwater High School in 1998, Michelle remained in Florida to complete a B.S. in public relations at the University of Florida. Michelle has continued her graduate school adventure as a Florida Gator and is a degree candi date for a Masters of Arts in Mass Communication at the University of Florida. Her academic interests include social network games, social good networks, uses and gratifications, mediated learning, Marshall McLuhan and the concept of the fragmented self. In addition to her scholarly pursuits, she has professional experience in eLearning development, instructional design and content management systems. An avid gamer and general sci fi & fantasy geek, she is dedicated to exploring the interaction users ca n have through games, gaming and the networks that surround them.