Advertisement

Happiness on Instagram – Content Analysis and Engagement Based on Attention Theory

  • Qiuwen LiEmail author
  • Young Ae Kim
Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 968)

Abstract

Instagram, a popular social networking platform, was ranked the number five most popular app by downloads in the first quarter of 2018 [1]. Instagram allows users to share happenings in their lives with other users by posting images and video content. Anyone with an Instagram account can also like and comment on others’ posts. Social media generates attention-seeking behavior and obsessions with getting more likes and positive comments. According to psychologist John Robert Anderson, attention is the behavioral and cognitive process of selectively concentrating on specific information while editing out non-essential information [2]. Which photography posts get more likes and comments? How frequently do people feel truly happy when they use hashtag #happy and/or #happiness on Instagram? How often do people give sincere comments on Instagram posts? In this research, we conducted a content analysis of photography posts tagged with the hashtag #happy and/or #happiness. We downloaded the 200 most recent posts from individual accounts between January 9–20, 2019 from age ranges 10 to 55 years old. 91% of posts were from young adults or millennials (18–35 years old) and only 2% of posts were from adolescent and 7% of posts were from middle-aged adults. The study examined different value of life in happiness on Instagram and user engagement based with different types of photography posts on Attention Theory. The study found that the physical appearance (36%) was considered to be the aspect of happiness that is 15% more than happiness from the relationship and 27% more than happiness from the achievement regardless of biological sex. In addition, the study suggests that females post comments 2.3 times more than males and females click like 1.7 times more than males. Regardless of biological sex, both males and females received significantly larger numbers of insincere comments (85.7%) than sincere comments (13.1%) on their posts.

Keywords

Social media Attention theory Hashtag Happiness Photography posts 

References

  1. 1.
    Nelson, R.: The top mobile apps, games, and publishers of Q1 2018: Sensor Tower’s Data Digest (2018). https://sensortower.com/blog/top-apps-games-publishers-q1-2018
  2. 2.
    Anderson, J.R.: Cognitive Psychology and its Implications. Macmillan, LondonGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Leading countries based on number of Instagram users as of October 2018 (2005). https://www.statista.com/statistics/578364/countries-with-most-instagram-users/
  4. 4.
    Distribution of Instagram users worldwide as of October 2018, by age and gender. https://www.statista.com/statistics/248769/age-distribution-of-worldwide-instagram-users/
  5. 5.
    People spend almost as much time on Instagram as they do on Facebook (2018). https://www.recode.net/2018/6/25/17501224/instagram-facebook-snapchat-time-spent-growth-data
  6. 6.
    Shively, K.: Simply measured Q3 2014 Instagram study (2014)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Top 100 HasTags on Instagram. https://top-hashtags.com/instagram/
  8. 8.
    Anderson, J.R.: Cognitive Psychology and its Implications. Macmillan, London (2005)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Harvey-Jenner. C.: The psychology of a like: how social media is really affect ing your brain (2017). https://www.cosmopolitan.com/uk/reports/a9931660/psychology-social-media-likes-mental-health-issues/
  10. 10.
    Bakhshi, S., Shamma, D.A., Gilbert, E.: Faces engage us: photos with faces attract more likes and comments on instagram. In: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 965–974. ACM (2014)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Asch, S.E.: Forming impressions of personality. J. Abnorm. Soc. Psychol. 41(3), 258 (1946)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hewitt, J.P., Shulman, D.: Self and Society: A Symbolic Interactionist Social Psychology. Allyn and Bacon, Boston (1979)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Surma, J.: Social exchange in online social networks. The reciprocity phenomenon on Facebook. Comput. Commun. 73, 342–346 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    McPherson, M., Smith-Lovin, L., Cook, J.M.: Birds of a feather: homophily in social networks. Annu. Rev. Sociol. 27(1), 415–444 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Lenhart, A., Duggan, M., Perrin, A., Stepler, R., Rainie, H., Parker, K.: Teens, social media & technology overview 2015, pp. 04–09. Pew Research Center, Internet & American Life Project (2015)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hutt, R.: What do young people value? (2016). https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2016/01/what-do-young-people-value/
  17. 17.
    Alton, L.: Phone Calls, Texts or Email? Here’s how millennials prefer to communicate (2017). https://www.forbes.com/sites/larryalton/2017/05/11/how-do-millennials-prefer-to-communicate/
  18. 18.
    Silva, C.: The Millennial Obsession With Self-Care (2017).https://www.npr.org/2017/06/04/531051473/the-millennial-obsession-with-self-care
  19. 19.
    Millennial in Adulthood: Detached from Institutions, Networked with Friends (2014). http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2014/03/07/millennials-in-adulthood/
  20. 20.
    Li, Q., Kim, Y.A.: Analysis of facial emotion recognition technology and its effectiveness in human interaction. In: International Conference on Applied Human Factors and Ergonomics, pp. 217–226. Springer, Cham (2018)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Kim, Y.A.: Emotional evidence: influences on happiness from the frequent positive visual exposure. In: International Conference on Applied Human Factors and Ergonomicsm, pp. 227–237. Springer, Cham (2018)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of ArtUniversity of South DakotaVermillionUSA
  2. 2.School of DesignSouth Dakota State UniversityBrookingsUSA

Personalised recommendations