Cited by 80Impact of Technology on AdolescentsMedia and Digital CommunicationInnovative Human-Technology Interaction

Pathways to Virality: Psychophysiological Responses Preceding Likes,Shares, Comments, and Status Updates on Facebook

Alhabash, Saleem, Almutairi, Nasser, Lou, Chen, Kim, Wonkyung·2019·Media Psychology

Abstract

Facebook use has become habitual to social network site (SNS) users, yet little is known about the psychological processes at play while using this platform. This study explored how psychophysiological responses vary as a function of liking, commenting, sharing, or posting status updates interactions on Facebook’s newsfeeds. Participants were instructed to enact common Facebook activities or viral behaviors (like, share, comment, and update a status) in brief segments, while their psychophysiological responses were recorded. Our results showcase different approaches to dealing with psychophysiological responses for undefined, uncontrolled (organic) stimuli. We contrasted Facebook organic use segments that ended with pressing on the like button to those that did not end with liking the Facebook post. In the second method of data analysis, we analyzed psychophysiological data at the participant level using the 10 sec preceding the enactment of the 4 viral behaviors. Our findings showed that, indeed, the pathways leading up to performing online behaviors are diverse, thus indicating different underlying psychological processes. Findings’ theoretical and practical implications are discussed within the broader context of understanding social media behaviors.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/15213269.2017.1416296

Cites

40 of 40 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

3 of the 43 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Alhabash, S., Almutairi, N., Lou, C., & Kim, W.
Affiliations
  • Michigan State University (US)
  • Nanyang Technological University (SG)
Corresponding author
Alhabash, Saleem
Venue
Media Psychology
Published
2018-01-11
Volume
22
Issue
2
Pages
196-216
ISSN
  • 1521-3269 (ISSN-L)
  • 1532-785X
OpenAlex
W2783172261
Cited by
80
References
43
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 24 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 1
FWCI
14.22
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Media Psychology (publishedVersion)
  • DR-NTU (Nanyang Technological University) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Department of Advertising + Public Relations (Internal Grant)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Impact of Technology on Adolescents
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Networks and Communications › Media and Digital Communication
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Innovative Human-Technology Interaction
Keywords
Facebook, social media use, psychophysiological responses, liking, sharing, commenting, status updates

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review