Advertisement

The Big Meaning of Small Messages: The Use of WhatsApp in Intergenerational Family Communication

  • Sakari Taipale
  • Manuela Farinosi
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 10926)

Abstract

This study explores the use of WhatsApp instant messenger in extended families in two countries, Finland and Italy, that represent different family and communication cultures. Qualitative research material was collected in 2014/2015 from families consisting of three or more generations and living either in the same or different households. A directed approach to qualitative content analysis was applied in the analysis of the research data. The results of the study show that WhatsApp is considered to facilitate family interaction across generations. The success of WhatsApp in the family context accounts for two main factors: first, for the possibility to reach the whole family at once; and secondly, for its capacity to promote “phatic communion” via small messages. While utilizing various communicative modalities of WhatsApp (text and voice messages, photos, videos), family members take into account others’ preferences and communication skills.

Keywords

Extended family WhatsApp Instant messaging One-to-many communication Phatic communion Reach Intergenerational relations 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This research has received project funding from the Academy of Finland (no. 265986), and it was carried out within the Academy of Finland’s Centre of Excellence in Research on Ageing and Care (CoE AgeCare).

References

  1. 1.
    O’Hara, K., Massimi, M., Richard, H., Rubens, S., Morris, J.: Everyday dwelling with WhatsApp. In: Proceedings of the 17th ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work & Social Computing, pp. 1131–1143. New York, ACM (2014)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Litwak, E.: Occupational mobility and extended family cohesion. Am. Sociol. Rev. 25, 9–21 (1960)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Taipale, S., Petrovčič, A., Dolničar, V.: Intergenerational solidarity and ICT usage: Empirical insights from Finnish and Slovenian families. In: Taipale, S., Wilska, T.-A., Gilleard, C. (eds.) Digital Technologies and Generational Identity: ICT Usage Across the Life Course, pp. 69–86. Routledge, London (2018)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Malinowski, B.: The problem of meaning in primitive languages. In: Ogden, C.K., Richards, I.A. (eds.) The Meaning of Meaning, pp. 435–496. Routledge, London (1923/1994)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
  6. 6.
    Audience Project. Insights: Social media and Apps in the Nordics. https://www.audienceproject.com/wp-content/uploads/social_media_and_apps_nordics.pdf
  7. 7.
  8. 8.
    Cosenza, V.: Utenti delle app di messaggistica in Italia. Vincos Blog, 10 July 2017. http://vincos.it/2017/07/10/utenti-delle-app-di-messaggistica-in-italia/
  9. 9.
    Stern, C.: Messaging will be Facebook’s ‘next major wave of innovation and financial windfall’. Business Insider, 24 June 2015. http://www.businessinsider.com/facebooks-next-big-profit-driver-is-messaging-2015-6?r=US&IR=T&IR=T
  10. 10.
    Lenhart, A., Rainie, L., Lewis, O.: Teenage life online: the rise of the instant-message generation and the Internet’s impact on friendships and family relationships (2001). http://www.pewinternet.org/2001/06/21/teenage-life-online/
  11. 11.
    Nardi, B.A., Whittaker, S., Bradner, E.: Interaction and outeraction: instant messaging in action. In: Proceedings of the 2000 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work, pp. 79–88. ACM, New York (2000)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Grinter, R.E., Palen, L.: Instant messaging in teen life. In: Proceedings of the 2002 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work, pp. 21–30. ACM, New York (2002)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Bouhnik, D., Deshen, M.: WhatsApp goes to school: mobile instant messaging between teachers and students. J. Inf. Technol. Educ. Res. 13, 217–231 (2014)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Johnston, M.J., King, D., Arora, S., Behar, N., Athanasiou, T., Sevdalis, N., Darzi, A.: Smartphones let surgeons know WhatsApp: an analysis of communication in emergency surgical teams. Am. J. Surg. 209, 45–51 (2015).  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjsurg.2014.08.030CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Nag, W., Ling, R., Jakobsen, M.H.: Keep out! Join in! Cross-generation communication on the mobile internet in Norway. J. Child. Media 10, 411–425 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Church, K., de Oliveira, R.: What’s up with WhatsApp? Comparing mobile instant messaging behaviors with traditional SMS. In: Proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction with Mobile Devices and Services, pp. 352–361. ACM, New York.  https://doi.org/10.1145/2493190.2493225
  17. 17.
    Ling, R., Baron, N.S.: Text messaging and IM: linguistic comparison of American college data. J. Lang. Soc. Psychol. 26, 291–298 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Baron, N.S.: Always On: Language in an Online and Mobile World. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2007)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Ling, R.: Children, youth, and mobile communication. J. Child. Media 1, 60–67 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Ribak, R.: Remote control, umbilical cord and beyond: The mobile phone as a transitional object. Br. J. Dev. Psychol. 27, 183–196 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Horst, H.A.: The blessings and burdens of communication: cell phones in Jamaican transnational social fields. Glob. Netw. 6, 143–159 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Wilding, R.: ‘Virtual’ intimacies? Families communicating across transnational contexts. Glob. Netw. 6, 125–142 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Madianou, M., Miller, D.: Mobile phone parenting: reconfiguring relationships between Filipina migrant mothers and their left-behind children. New Media Soc. 13, 457–470 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Rainie, L., Wellman, B.: Networked: The New Social Operating System. MIT Press, Cambridge (2012)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Lim, S.S. (ed.): Mobile Communication and the Family. Springer, Dordrecht (2016).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-7441-3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Rosales, A., Fernández-Ardèvol, M.: Beyond WhatsApp: older people and smartphones. Revista Română de Comunicare şi Relaţii Publice 18, 27–47 (2016)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Siibak, A., Tamme, V.: “Who introduced granny to Facebook?”: An exploration of everyday family interactions in web-based communication environments. Northern Lights Film Media Stud. Yearbook 11, 71–89 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Fortunati, L., Taipale, S.: Mobile communication: Media effects. In: Rössler, P., Hoffner, C.A., van Zoonen, L. (eds.) International Encyclopedia of Media Effects, pp. 1241–1252. Wiley, New York (2017)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Chen, W., Boase, J., Wellman, B.: The global villagers: comparing internet users and uses around the world. In: Wellman, B., Haythornthwaite, C. (eds.) The Internet in Everyday Life, pp. 74–113. Blackwell, Malden (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Quan-Haase, A., Wellman, B., Witte, J.C., Hampton, K.N.: Capitalizing on the net: social contact, civic engagement, and sense of community. In: Wellman, B., Haythornthwaite, C. (eds.) The Internet in Everyday Life, pp. 291–324. Blackwell, Malden (2002)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Baym, N.K.: Personal Connections in the Digital Age, 2nd edn. Polity, Cambridge (2015)Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Marwick, A.E., Boyd, D.: I tweet honestly, I tweet passionately: Twitter users, context collapse, and the imagined audience. New Media Soc. 13, 114–133 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Graham, A.: Personal connections in the digital age. Consumption Markets Cult. 20, 293–296 (2017).  https://doi.org/10.1080/10253866.2015.1135538CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Granovetter, M.S.: The strength of weak ties. Am. J. Sociol. 78, 1360–1380 (1973)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Johns, N.A.: The social logics of sharing. Commun. Rev. 16, 113–131 (2013).  https://doi.org/10.1080/10714421.2013.807119CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Wittel, A.: Toward a network sociality. Theory Cult. Soc. 18, 51–76 (2001).  https://doi.org/10.1177/026327601018006003CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Miller, V.: New media, networking and phatic culture. Convergence 14, 387–400 (2008).  https://doi.org/10.1177/1354856508094659CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Hänninen, R., Taipale, S., Korhonen, A.: Refamilisation in the broadband society: the effect of ICTs in family solidarity in Finland (forthcoming)Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Hsieh, H.F., Shannon, S.E.: Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qual. Health Res. 15, 1277–1288 (2005).  https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732305276687CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Fortunati, L., Taipale, S., de Luca, F.: What happened to body-to-body sociability? Soc. Sci. Res. 42, 893–905 (2013).  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssresearch.2012.12.006CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Social Sciences and PhilosophyUniversity of JyvaskylaJyvaskylaFinland
  2. 2.Department of Humanities and Cultural HeritageUniversity of UdineUdineItaly

Personalised recommendations