Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 126

THE USE OF SOCIAL MEDIA IN MARKETING COMMUNICATION: STUDENTS USE OF FACEBOOK TO OBTAIN INFORMATION FOR SELECTION OF UNIVERSITY

BY: TOYA BAHADUR KARKI Student Number: s1011155 Dissertation Module Code: ILPPMB470

Word Count: 17,913

Presented as part of the requirement for the award of the MBA Degree in Business Administration within the Postgraduate Modular Scheme at University of Gloucestershire

December 2010

DECLARATIONS

This Dissertation is a product of my own work and is not the result of anything done in collaboration. I agree that this Dissertation may be available for reference and photocopying, at the discretion of the University.

................................................. Toya Bahadur Karki

Word Count: 17,913 (excludes appendices, references and direct quotes)

ii

ABSTRACT

For academician looking to use Facebook as a learning tool and admission department at universities who are trying to include Facebook in their integrated marketing communication strategies, university students perception on academic use of Facebook and Facebook as information source in university selection process become significantly important. This study examined university students Facebook use, different motives, Facebook as a medium to obtain information in university selection process, information consider important in making university selection decision and student ratings on information or activities commonly available at universities Facebook page. A survey methodology was used and a self-administered questionnaire was sent to the respondents via e-mail to collect the primary data. A survey with 83 students was conducted at a medium-size Asian universities branch campus located at central London. The study found Facebook is a daily activity but not addiction. Students participated in survey, majority (79.67%) of them are logging in a daily basis but nearly two-third (60.20 %) said that they spend 30 minutes or less a day in Facebook. The study revealed that majority of students using Facebook to keep in touch with their friends (86.70 %), find and connect with their old friends (81.90 %), time pass (63.90 %) and keep in touch with their family (59 %). A small proportion said to use for academic purpose such as connect with lectures to discuss about tutorial (18.60 %). University web site (86.20 %) found most preferred medium among students to obtain information. More than one-third (38 %) of students regarded Facebook as important information source. However, only 13.58 % of those surveyed used Facebook to select their current university. Courses and academics (91.20%), course fee (81.50%) and infrastructure and facilities (81.20%) were found most important information students consider to make university selection decision. In commonly available information in universities Facebook page, student rated most important to discussion about courses and academics (84.80%), news, key activities, application deadline and procedure (77.50%) and communication with current students and faculties (73.80%) respectively.
iii

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I would like to thank Dr. Brian Terry, my advisor, for his untiring support, invaluable guidance, timely feedback, precise comment & suggestion. This dissertation work would never be completed at current form without his help. I am grateful to research workshop team at University of Gloucestershire especially Bob Greenwood, Jocelyne Fleming, Malcolm Eva, and Sarah Maddock for providing invaluable information and basic foundation for this research work. I owe special thanks to Helen Barnes for her continuous support and timely information whenever requested. I am also thankful to learning centre staff for providing SPSS software on time. My parents D.B. Karki and Krishna Karki deserve special gratitude for their continuous encouragement from miles apart, without them I wouldnt be where I am today. There is no word to express how much they mean to me. To my wife Dipa, thank you for being with me. I would never have completed this project without your love, support and encouragement. I would also like to thank Limkokwing University Management for permission to use students e-mail for survey. I owe sincere gratitude to my lecturers Paul Gilliam, Dr. Chandra B. Ramasurrun, Gerald Navaratne for their advice. I am thankful to my colleagues at the Limkokwing University Amol Gurung, Karveen Puddoo, Josika Chhetri and Risky for their encouragement, humour and support. My special thanks to Denise Freeman, Daniel Vidal, Lions, Zoe, Daniel C, Dr. Max, Rubina, Samar, Sonia, Prabha, Mansi, Angela, Siumui, Mehrdad for encouraging students to complete survey questionnaire on time. Last but not least, I would like to thank all the respondents who completed and sent survey questionnaire to me on time.

iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS
CONTENT PAGE

DECLARATIONS ...................................................................................................... ii ABSTRACT ............................................................................................................. iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ........................................................................................ iv TABLE OF CONTENTS ............................................................................................ v TABLE OF FIGURES ............................................................................................ viii CHAPTER - I ........................................................................................................... 1 1. INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................. 1 1.1 Background .................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Statement of Purpose ..................................................................................... 4 1.3 Research Questions ....................................................................................... 5 1.4 Dissertation Structure ..................................................................................... 5 CHAPTER - II .......................................................................................................... 7 2. REVIEW OF LITERATURE.................................................................................. 7 2.1 Social Media................................................................................................... 7 2.2 Characteristic of Social Media ........................................................................ 9 2.3 Common Forms of Social Media ...................................................................10 2.4 The Use of Social Media in Marketing Communication ..................................12 2.5 The Facebook ...............................................................................................17 2.6 Popularity of Facebook among Universities Students ....................................18 2.7 Students Motives for Facebook Use ..............................................................20 2.8 Students Use of Facebook in Selection of Universities ..................................23 CHAPTER - III ........................................................................................................26 3. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ...........................................................................26 3.1 Research Philosophies /Type of Dissertation ................................................26 3.2 Purpose of Research.....................................................................................28 3.3 Research Strategy.........................................................................................28 3.4 Research Method ..........................................................................................30 3.5 Participants/Sample ......................................................................................31 3.6 Measurement ................................................................................................32 3.6.1 Demographics.........................................................................................32 3.6.2 Facebook Use and Motives .....................................................................33 3.6.3 Use of Universities Facebook Page to Obtain Information......................33 3.6.4 Information Use in University Selection Process .....................................34 v

3.7 Procedures ....................................................................................................34 3.8 Data Analysis ................................................................................................36 3.9 Limitations of the Data and Methods of Analysis ...........................................36 CHAPTER - IV ........................................................................................................37 4. RESEARCH FINDINGS AND ANALYSIS ...........................................................37 4.1 Respondents Demographics ........................................................................37 4.1.1Gender.....................................................................................................37 4.1.2 Respondents Age Group ........................................................................38 4.1.3 Respondents Education Level ................................................................38 4.1.4 Respondents Study Year .......................................................................39 4.1.5 Respondents Academic Specialisation...................................................40 4.2 Facebook Use ...............................................................................................40 4.2.1 Length of having a Facebook Account ....................................................41 4.2.2 Main Influencer to Join Facebook ...........................................................42 4.2.3 Frequency of Logging into Facebook Account ........................................43 4.2.4 Daily Time Spent in Facebook ................................................................44 4.2.5 Number of Facebook Friends ..................................................................45 4.3 Motives for Facebook Use .............................................................................45 4.3.1 Keep in Touch with Friends.....................................................................46 4.3.2 Keep in Touch with Family ......................................................................46 4.3.3 Find and Connect with Old Friends .........................................................47 4.3.4 Share Likes and Dislikes about Music, Movie, Event with Friends ..........48 4.3.5 Connect and Communicate with Someone when Feel Lonely .................49 4.3.6 Share Problems, Happiness and Sad Moment with Friends....................49 4.3.7 Stay in Touch with Important News and Issues .......................................50 4.3.8 Organise Events, Make Plans and Participate in Causes with Friends ....51 4.3.9 Express Opinion, Share Ideas and Creativity ..........................................51 4.3.10 Discuss Class Works, Assignments and Catch-up Missed Lessons ......52 4.3.11 Meet New People..................................................................................53 4.3.12 Make New Friends ................................................................................53 4.3.13 Know More about Newly Meet Friends in Campus ................................54 4.3.14 Meet Someone with Similar Interests ....................................................55 4.3.15 Flirt with Someone ................................................................................56 4.3.16 Looking Friendship with Opposite Sex ..................................................57 4.3.17 Spend Leisure Time ..............................................................................57 4.3.18 Play Virtual Games with Friends ...........................................................58 vi

4.3.19 Pass Time When Bored ........................................................................59 4.3.20 Connect with Lecturer to Discuss about Tutorials .................................60 4.4 Facebook as a Medium in University Selection Process ................................61 4.4.1 Familiarity with Universities Facebook Page ..........................................61 4.4.2 Have You Ever Visited Universities Facebook Page ..............................62 4.4.3 Media Preference to Obtain Information in University Selection ..............63 4.4.4 Students Opinion on Universities Facebook Use in Recruitment ...........64 4.4.5 Used of Facebook in Current University Selection ..................................65 4.4.6 Future use of Universities Facebook Page to Obtain Information ...........66 4.5 Information use in University Selection Process ............................................67 4.6 Students Ratings on Information Available in Universities Facebook Page ..69 4.7 Motives to Use Facebook in Respondents Own words .................................70 4.8 Information Students like to see in Universities Facebook Page ...................72 CHAPTER V ........................................................................................................73 5. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION ....................................................................73 5.1 Facebook Found as an Important Daily Activity but not Addiction..................74 5.2 Majority Use Facebook to Keep in Touch with Friends and Family ................75 5.3 University Website is Very Important Medium to Obtain Information .............77 5.4 Courses, Fee and Facilities are Important in University Selection Decision ...79 5.5 Limitations of the Study and Future Research ...............................................80 REFLECTIVE STATEMENT ...................................................................................81 REFERENCES .......................................................................................................86 APPENDICES ........................................................................................................93 APPENDIX A: TEST OF RELAIBILITY ON MOTIVES OF FACEBOOK USE ......93 APPENDIX B: FREQUENCY TABLES ................................................................93 APPENDIX C: SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE .....................................................113

vii

TABLE OF FIGURES
FIGURE PAGE

FIGURE 1 Respondents Gender ..................................................................................... 37 FIGURE 2 Respondents Age Group ............................................................................... 38 FIGURE 3 Respondents Current Level of Study ........................................................... 39 FIGURE 4 Respondents Current year of Study............................................................. 39 FIGURE 5 Respondents Academic Specialisation ....................................................... 40 FIGURE 6 Length of Facebook Account ......................................................................... 41 FIGURE 7 Influencers to Join Facebook ......................................................................... 42 FIGURE 8 Frequency of Log into Facebook Account ................................................... 43 FIGURE 9 Daily Time spent in Facebook ....................................................................... 44 FIGURE 10 Number of Facebook Friends ...................................................................... 45 FIGURE 11 Keep in Touch with Friends ......................................................................... 46 FIGURE 12 Keep in Touch with Family ........................................................................... 47 FIGURE 13 Find and Connect with Old Friends ............................................................ 48 FIGURE 14 Share Likes and Dislikes with Friends ...................................................... 48 FIGURE 15 Connect and Communicate with Someone when Feel Lonely ............... 49 FIGURE 16 Share Problems, Happiness and Sad Moment with Friends ................. 50 FIGURE 17 Stay in Touch with Important News and Issues ........................................ 50 FIGURE 18 Organise Events, Make Plans and Participate in Causes with Friends 51 FIGURE 19 Express Opinion, Share Ideas and Creativity ........................................... 52 FIGURE 20 Discuss Class Work, Assignments and Catch-up Missed Lesson with Friends .................................................................................................................................. 52 FIGURE 21 Meet New People .......................................................................................... 53 FIGURE 22 Make New Friends ........................................................................................ 54 FIGURE 23 Know More About Newly Meet Friends in Campus.................................. 55 FIGURE 24 Meet Someone with Similar Interests ......................................................... 56 FIGURE 25 Flirt with Someone ......................................................................................... 56 FIGURE 26 Looking Friendships with Opposite Sex ..................................................... 57 FIGURE 27 Spend Leisure Time ...................................................................................... 58 FIGURE 28 Play Virtual Games with Friends ................................................................. 59 FIGURE 29 Pass Time When Bored................................................................................ 60 FIGURE 30 Connect with Lecturer to Discuss about Tutorials .................................... 61 FIGURE 31 Familiarity with University Facebook Pages .............................................. 62 FIGURE 32 Have You Ever Visited University Facebook Pages ................................ 62 FIGURE 33 Media Preference to Obtain Information in University Selection ............ 64 FIGURE 34 Students Opinion on Universities Facebook Use in Recruitment......... 65 FIGURE 35 Use of Facebook in Current University Selection ..................................... 66 FIGURE 36 Future Use of Universities Facebook Page in University Selection....... 66 FIGURE 37 Information Consider Important in University Selection .......................... 68 FIGURE 38 Students Rating on Information Available at Universities Facebook Page ...................................................................................................................................... 70 FIGURE 39 Motives to use Facebook ............................................................................. 76

viii

CHAPTER - I 1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background

Communication is no more a luxury for more than a billion populations around the world. According to latest report from International Telecommunication Union (ITU) worlds internet population is set to surpass 2 billion this year. The number of people with access to the Web at home is also projected to increase from 1.4 billion in 2009 to almost 1.6 billion in 2010 (Thia, 2010, p. 1). Innovation in high-speed and low cost broadband has credited as a catalyst for growth of global internet population. ITU also report that by the end of 2010, 71 percent of the population in developed countries will be online compared to 21 percent in developing countries. The technological novelty and use of web 2.0 technologies, which is also referred as second generation web-based application that assist to collaboration and sharing between users, make easier for people

intermingle in online communities, directly exchange information with one another and create content online. Web 2.0 is more than a technology that provides platforms to create communities, collaboration, co-creation and connections (Xarchos & Charland, 2008). New Web 2.0 platforms include technologies such as blogging, wikis, social networking sites (SNS) such as Facebook, MySpace, video sharing sites such as YouTube, photo sharing sites such as Flicker, micro blogging site such as Twitter, professional networking sites such as LinkedIn (Xarchos & Charland, 2008). These online technologies and tools people use to communicate, collaborate, connect and engage are collectively referred as social media (Scott, 2010 ).

Social media consists of activities, which involves socialising and networking online through words, pictures and videos. Social media is redefining the way people relate to each other as humans and how people as humans relate to organisations that serve them (Reuben, 2008). Its about dialogue - two way communication bringing people together to discover and share information (Solis, 2008). Social media means new opportunities to create and communicate with people that care (LeFever, 2008). A French consultant, Fred Cavazza categorises various forms of social media tools available into ten in his Social Media Landscape: publication tools, sharing tools, discussion tools, social networks, micropublication tools, social aggregation tools, livecast, virtual worlds, social gaming and massively multiplayer online gaming (MMO) (Cavazza, 2008). These online media tools are recent developments and growing very speedily. Social networking is one of the very popular features of social media that enables individual in communities to share ideas, interests and meet people with similar ideas and interests (Reuben, 2008). Social networks include social networking websites like Facebook, MySpace, Xanga, hi5, Bebo and Live Journal. These social network sites allured millions of people who are socialising with other people on the internet. These SNS platforms give easy access to, convenience to connect and communicate with their family, friends and others. Individual can constantly and instantly fulfil their various media needs and wants. In the past, these needs and wants have been fulfilled through traditional mass media like newspaper & magazine, television, radio and films or face-to-face human interaction. SNS are very popular because of its unique features interactivity, social networking, collaboration, sharing, information and freedom of expression (Urista et. al., 2009). Today, Facebook is the number one social networking site. Facebook has reached almost eight percent of world population with 500 million users worldwide (Smith, 2010). Facebook is third popular online brand after Google and MSN. More than half (54 percent) worlds internet population visits Facebook and spend 6 hours per person every month (Nielson Survey,
2

2010). Facebook was initially launched in 2004 only for Harvard students as an online directory, and then it was expanded to other Ivy League universities at the end of spring 2004. In 2005, it was opened to any university students and high school students, and now anyone over 13 years of age can join to Facebook (Cassidy, 2006; Mayer & Puller, 2007; Boyd & Ellison, 2007; Reuben, 2008). Individual can create personalised profiles in Facebook, post comment into others profile, update status anytime, add links or share news, movies, pictures, videos etc with friends or network member, upload photos, create personal blog & news, express views etc. Recently, Facebook permits user to download photos, contents from their profile. Facebook also improvised its privacy features after huge criticism from authority. Users can decide what to make public or what not. Individual can connect with friends, family, colleagues, friends at university and people around the world who are in Facebook. Facebook is very popular among university students. Sheldon (2008) survey showed that 93% of college students had a Facebook account. Most of them used it on daily basis, spending on average 47 minutes a day on the site. A lot has been written about the risk of students being addicted to, and spend too much time on Facebook, but little has studied about personal characteristics of users. Thus, studying about universities students Facebook use is important not only because of their growing presence on Facebook but also because it provide the opportunities to find out different behaviour and different purpose of using Facebook. With the growing popularity of Facebook among university students lot of research was done about students gratifications to use Facebook. Most of the previous research found that students use Facebook for time pass, friendship, flirt and find new friends (please see chapter two for details). The majority of research works was done on or before 2008, when the Facebook was its infancy and there were not much application as it now. Little, if any, research found about students use of Facebook to fulfil their academic need.
3

There continues to be a gap in what are the university students motives to use Facebook due to growing presence and popularity of Facebook over time. This signifies the further research on students different motives to use Facebook. This study further aimed to examine university students perception on university Facebook page as a recruitment tool. What information or activities they would like to see in universities Facebook page. In the context of growing number of universities using Facebook to reach their prospective students for recruitment, it is significant to understand university students perception on it. There has no specific research work found in this front. 1.2 Statement of Purpose

This study has three main research objectives. The first research objective of this paper is to examine the university students Facebook use, their different motives for using it. The second research objectives of this study is to find out students familiarity about universities Facebook page, their preference on Facebook as source of information over other traditional means in university selection decision. Third and final research objective is to know about important information students use in making final university selection and what information they most likely wants to see in universities Facebook Page. Thus, this study aimed to; Identify different motives to use Facebook among university students, Find out students use of universities Facebook page to obtain information in university selection process, and Identify important information for students in their university selection decision and information and activities students would like on universities Facebook page.

1.3 Research Questions

This study addressed the following research questions. 1) What are the motives of university students for Facebook use? 2) Are university students using Facebook as an information source to facilitate their university selection process? If not now, do they use it in future? 3) What information students consider important to make university selection decision? 4) What information or activities students expect from universities Facebook page to decide which university to attend? 1.4 Dissertation Structure

This research work has structured into five chapters. First chapter provides a brief background information on research topic and rationale for this study (section 1.1) followed by research purpose (section1.2), research questions (section 1.3) and dissertation structure (section 1.4) respectively. In second chapter, researcher has provided with in-depth review of available literatures on proposed research topic and findings of previous study relevant with the topic, which was the foundation to put research problem of this study into academic and theoretical context. That has been organised into different sub-section under following headings; social media (section 2.1), characteristic of social media (section 2.2), common forms of social media (section 2.3), the use of social media in marketing communication (section 2.4), the Facebook (section 2.5), popularity of Facebook among university students (section 2.6), students motives for Facebook use (section 2.7), and students use of Facebook in selection of universities (section 2.8). Chapter three has provided with details discussion about the research methodology applied to carry out this research work to meet the stated
5

research objectives. This chapter has organised under following headings; research philosophies/type of dissertation (section 3.1), purpose of research (section 3.2), research strategy (section 3.3), research method (section 3.4), participants/sample (section 3.5), measurement (section 3.6), procedures (section 3.7), data analysis (section 3.8) and limitation of the data and method of analysis (section 3.9). Chapter four has been presented with findings and analysis of primary data collected from sample using survey methodology. The findings of the study has been presented into following sections; respondents demographic (section 4.1), Facebook use (section 4.2), motives for Facebook use (section 4.3), universities Facebook page as medium in university selection process (section 4.4), information use in university selection process (section 4.5), students rating on information available on universities Facebook page (section 4.6), and findings of open-ended questions. Chapter five covered the discussion on findings of survey, conclusion, limitations of the study and recommendation for future study. Finally, this dissertation report has concluded with reflective statement.

CHAPTER - II 2. REVIEW OF LITERATURE

2.1 Social Media This new era of technological innovation make historic changes in the way people communicate their feelings, share opinion, participate in conversation, share information and interact to each other to become a part of community of friends and like-minded people (Scott, 2010 ). The emergence of low-cost and highly accessible communication tools has changed the broadcasting and expression of opinion among people across different online platforms. In past, those were limited to people who have access to mass media and strong financial resources, and now anyone with an internet connection has the ability to share their ideas, messages and opinions with mass audience (Karjaluota, 2008). The technologies and tools people use to communicate online are referred to collectively as social media (Scott, 2010 ). Social media is not understood in terms of the different technologies and tools but, rather how those technologies and tools allow you to communicate directly with people or intended recipient. The term social media represents media that users can easily participate in, contribute to (Karjaluota, 2008), communicate with and congregate to have fun with friends and community (Scott, 2010 ). Social Media is an emerging phenomenon of recent times. Social media is a group of new kinds of online media embodied participation, openness, conversation, community and connectedness as unique characteristics (Mayfield, 2008). Boyd (2008) refers social media is an umbrella term that refers to the set of tools, services, and applications that allow people to interact with others using network technologies. Social media encompasses groupware, online communities, peer to-peer and media-sharing technologies, and networked gaming.
7

Mayfield (2008) explain social media is all about being human like sharing ideas, cooperating and collaborating to create art, thinking and commerce, vigorous debate and discourse, finding people who might be good friends, allies and lovers, which our species has built since several civilisation (p.7). He further adds social media is becoming popular so quickly, not because its great shiny, speedy new technology, but because it lets us be ourselves. People can find information, inspiration, communities and collaborators faster than ever before. New ideas, services, business models and technologies emerge and evolve at fast speed in social media. According to Scott (2010) social media; ....provides the way people share ideas, content, thoughts and relationships online. Social Media differ from so-called mainstream media in that anyone can create, comment on, and add to social media content. Social media can take the form of text, audio, video, images, and communities (p. 38). Social media is also known as user generated media (Mangold & Faulds, 2009). User creates a network among friends, families, celebrities, and those who share common characteristics etc. that has built strong user base among different social media forms. It is becoming popular day by day due to its unique characteristics such as socialising, participating, freedom of expression, engaging, interactivity and easily accessible at fraction of cost. The main important features of social media is to keep in touch with friend, communicate with friend and share memories of good and bad experience through notes, post, blogs, video sharing and photo sharing etc. Social media is sometimes referred to as social software or social computing or computer-mediated communication (Boyd, 2008). In next section, social medias characteristic has explained.

2.2 Characteristic of Social Media The power of social media is rooted in its ability to connect people across time and space. The way these tools are used alters plethora of practices, including communication, collaboration, information dissemination, and social organisation (Benkler, 2006; Castells, 1996; Rheingold, 2002). Social media has affected how people interact with one another and, thus, it has the potential to alter how society is organised though they are simply the messengers, social media tools are revered for their potential to connect people( (Shriky, 2008; Tapscott & Williams, 2006; Weinberger, 2008). Social media provides power to communicate one to literally hundreds or thousands of other people quickly and with relatively little effort. Participation and making connections are common characteristics among social media platforms. Part of this is informed by the notion of a flat community, in which all parties engage in open dialogue. Influence and credibility are prized in this arena, as the users reputation can often be a key motivator for one to remain active in the dialogue (Karjaluota, 2008). Some of the common characteristics of Social Media identified by Mayfield (2008, p. 5) are: Participation, social media encourages contributions and feedback from everyone who is interested. It blurs the line between media and audience. Openness, most social media services are open to feedback and participation. They encourage voting, comments and the sharing information. There are rarely any barriers to accessing and making use of contentpassword protected content is frowned on. Conversation, whereas traditional media is about broadcast and in contrast social media is better seen as a two way conversation.

Community, social media allows communities to form quickly and communicate effectively. Communities share common interests, such as a love of photography, a political issue or a favourite TV show. Connectedness, most kinds of social media thrive on their connectedness, making use of links to other sites, resources and people. 2.3 Common Forms of Social Media There are various tools and format are in practice in the forms of social media. The commonly used or basic forms of social media (Karjaluota, 2008; Mayfield, 2008; Scott, 2010 ; Mangold & Faulds, 2009) are; Social Networking Sites (SNS) are virtual communities that allow users to build personal profile, connect with friends, and cultivate a community of friends and to share information, content and communication. Some appeal to broad groups (i.e. Facebook) whereas others are built around particular niches and demographics (i.e. LinkedIn). The common SNS are Facebook, MySpace, Bebo, LinkedIn, Faceparty etc. Blogs are personal web sites written by somebody who is passionate about a topic, which provide a means to share that passion with the world and to foster an active community of readers who provide comments on the feature posts. Perhaps it is the best known form of social media, blogs are online journals, with entries appearing with most recent first. Blogs are vary widely in nature, but tend to be popular as they often provide an unvarnished, insider perspective on a particular topic. For example, user sponsored blogs (unofficial Apple Weblog, Cnet.com) and company sponsored websites/blogs (Apple.com, P&Gs Vocalpoint). Content Communities are sites that allow users to post and share content. Such communities exist around anything from videos and photos to stories and links. Some of these sites include voting functions that allow the community to determine the relevance of content. Sites like YouTube,
10

Flicker, Vimeo and Jamendo.com greatly simplify the process of sharing and commenting on Photos, Videos and Music. Other examples are content sharing combined with assistance Piczo.com and general intellectual property sharing sites Creative Commons. Forums are areas in which multiple users can create topics and then comment on these topics. They are commonly used as resources for those interested in particular topic. It is a place for online discussion, often around specific topics and interests. Forums came about before term social media and are a powerful element of online communities. It is also known as chat rooms and message boards, with the main feature being that anyone can start a discussion thread. Wikis are communitygenerated documents and databases. These websites allow people to add content to or edit the information on them, acting as a communal document or database. The best known wiki is Wikipedia, the online encyclopaedia which has over 2 million English languages articles. Virtual Worlds represent one of the most novel areas on the web, in which users can engage in immersive worlds. Some of these spaces closely mirror real-world notions such as community and economics. Second Life is an example of virtual worlds. Micro blogging are social networking combined with bite-sized blogging, where small amounts of content updates are distributed online and through the mobile phone network. Twitter is well known form of micro blogging. Social Bookmarking sites like digg, del.icio.us, Newsvine, Mixxit, Reddit allows users to recommend online news stories, music, videos and content to others and vote on what is interesting. Many other forms of social media exist are news aggregators, podcasts (Apple iTunes), mash-ups, company sponsored cause/help sites (Doves Campaign for Real Beauty, click2quit.com), invitation only social networks
11

(ASmallWorld.net), commerce communities (eBay, Amazon.com, Craigs List, IStockphoto, Threadless.com), news delivery sites (current TV), educational materials sharing (MIT OpenCoourseWare, MERLOT), open source software communities (Mozillas spreadfirefox.com, Linux.org) , windows Live, Google community and Yahoo. 2.4 The Use of Social Media in Marketing Communication Communication has become more challenging due to rapid changes in technologies, multiple communication channels and consumers constantly changing preferences and media use for obtaining information. Effectiveness of communication will largely depends on understanding of consumers buying behaviour, indentifying their information need and provides them with the right information, in right time at right place. It is enormously important to make sure the appropriate media is used (Ennew, 1993). Selection of a medium is relative with the customer preference with that particular medium. In an interview by (www.marketingprof.com), a marketing guru, Philip Kotler says; ....major challenge today is getting people attention. Consumers are pressed for times and many worked hard to avoid advertising messages. The main challenge is to find new way to capture attention and position a brand in consumers mind..... (200517). Multiple communication channels pose a challenge to marketers to select a right medium to reach their target consumers. Traditional marketing communication media are loosing thier importance and are being challenged by new media. The internet has replaced traditional media such as radio, newspaper, magzine and the TV as the preferred medium for advertising (Selek, 2010). TV advertising is loosing its effectiveness because of growing advertising clutter, the increeasing number of channels and reduced watching of television by certain group of people (Kotler, 2005).

12

Social Media presence in marketing communication is increasing rapidly. Social media is becoming a part of the marketing strategies of organisations irrespective of shape, size, volume and purposes. Marketers are trying to make it as a part of the Integrated Marketing Communications (IMC) and element of their marketing mix (Mangold & Faulds, 2009; Li & Bernoff, 2008). IMC is a guiding principles, marketers has been practising since its identification as a marketing tools to communicate with their target market. IMC is arguably the best tools, as of now, use to coordinate and control varying elements of the promotional mix- advertising, personal selling, public relations, publicity, direct marketing, and sales promotion to develop customer focused integrated message and to achieve different organisational goals (Boone & Kurtz, 2007). Social media is changing the landscape of marketing communication. Growing use and popularity of social media tools like Facebook, LinkedIn, MySpace, Twitter, Flicker, Digg, Del.icio.us, Foursquare and others have compelled organisations use of social media as an integrated marketing communication tool. Consumers are making conversation on these platforms. Facebook alone has 500 million users worldwide, which accounts nearly 8% of world population and collectively, users spend more than 700 billion minutes a month in Facebook (Smith, 2010). The possibility of exposure to mass audience and high engagement are propelling organisations to use social media to communicate to their target consumers. Fortunes 500 companies have been using social media as one of the most important tool in their marketing strategy (Barnes & Mattson, 2008). Increase in advertising spending on social media shows preference of marketers in social media against traditional media as a marketing communication tool.The growing popularity of internet business such as google and social networking sites (SNS) like Facebook have increased the use of social media in advertising. Advertising spending in the social networking area is estimated to be $865 million, with a projected value of $2 billion by 2011, or almost 8.5% of total online spending (eMarketer, 2006 as
13

cited in Gangadharbatla, 2008). Facebooks 525 million revenue from advertising in 2009 (Smith, 2010) shows the magnitude of growing popularity of scoial media as a marketing communication tool. Marketers are shifting their marketing spending from traditional means of communication to digital ones, focusing on search, dispaly ads and social networking. Marketers who believe that most important way to improve communication effectiveness is to shift investment from traditional channels to digital channels are increasing. Another noticable changes is to shift advertising spending from awerness and brand building to promotional marketing (Ramsey & Douglas, 2010). According to a 2009 survey, conducted by the Association of National Advertisers (ANA) and Marketing Management Analytics (MMA), most marketers said that they plan to increase their budgets for interactive marketing by pulling funds out of traditional media. Survey shows that U.S. companies moved total of $60 billion from traditional media into online marketing in 2009 itself, which represents a major shift from traditional marketing to digital marketing in an effort to increase marketing effectiveness. Research shows that after the corporate website, the most effective way to communicate with prospects is through social media. As many as 80% of U.S. companies are using social media in their marketing efforts, either placing ads on sites, monitoring sites for chatter about their brands, or engaging directly through sites like Facebook. For most marketers two prime objectives for using social media are enhancing brand awareness and deepening realationships with consumers. Many others use social media to expand to new audiences and acquire new customers (StrongMail, 2009). Social Media enables customer to talk to one another, which is an extention of traditional word-of-mouth communication (Mangold & Faulds, 2009). The role of social media giving customer to communicate to one another is unique from traditional marketing communication. In his book The New Influencers, Gillin (2007) says that Conventional marketing wisdoms has long held that a dissatisfied customer tells ten people. But that is out of date. In the new age
14

of social media he or she has the tools to tell [billions] (p.4) consumers in few hours. The Internet has become a mass media vehicle for consumer-sponsored communications. It now represents the number one source of media for consumers at work and the number two source of media at home (Rashtchy, Kessler, Bieber, Shindler, & Tzeng, 2007). Consumers are turning away from the traditional sources of advertising: radio, television, magazines, and newspapers. Consumers also consistently demand more control over their media consumption. They require on-demand and immediate access to information at their own convenience (Rashtchy et al., 2007; Vollmer & Precourt, 2008). Social media is perceived by consumers as a more trustworthy source of information regarding products and services than corporate-sponsored communications transmitted via the traditional elements of the promotion mix (Foux, 2006). There are varying levels of trust and credibility among marketing channels: pretty low for ads, more so for traditional media and even lower for brand websites. Social media leverage the trust that users have with one another. This is well proven fact in marketing that most effective influencers in buying decisions are friends and family. Social media has been providing consumer different platforms to communicate easily with friends and family quickly and effectively. Recommendations from friends and acquaintances, particularly those people we think are most like ourselves, garner the highest trust. Almost three-fourths of customers consult product reviews before making a purchase, and more than half have made a purchase based on consumer reviews. They create transparency and establish trust to prospects (Ramsey & Douglas, 2010). Marketers use several methods to improve consumer retention. Social media is becoming an important part of consumer retention and is giving companies new ways to tap into consumer mindset. A survey conducted by King Fish Media (2009) shows that 72% of US marketing managers, who participated

15

in the survey, believes that social media is the most effective way to communicate with current consumers. Social media leave behind the old model of one- to- one communication and enable communication from one to many or many- to- many. Social media such as blogs, tweets, wikis, and social networks are all about speeding up and enriching communication. Social media tools bring the advantages of flatter, more democratic and presumably more effective communication networks (Hawn, 2009). The advent of social media challenge traditional type of intrusive and one way communication. Social media offer multi dimensional communication among marketers to consumers, consumers to consumers and consumers to marketers. Social media is a great tool for listening to consumers and improving products and services using feedback and suggestion from consumers. Understanding the speed and breadth of response to a consumer issue is crucial in social media (Econsultancy, 2009). Mangold and Faulds (2009) argue that social media is a hybrid element of the promotion mix because it combines characteristics of traditional IMC tools (companies talking to consumers) with a highly magnified form of wordof-mouth (customers talking to one another) wherby marketing managers cannot control the content and frequency of such information (p.359). Consumers ability to communicate with one another limits the amount of control companies have over the content and dissemination of information. In the era of social media, consumers have greater access to information and great command over media consumption than ever before (Vollmer & Precourt, 2008). In the era of social media, marketing managers control over the content, timing, and frequency of information is being severely eroded. In the new communication paradigm, information about products and services also originates in the marketplace. This information is based on the experiences of individual consumers and is channelled through the traditional promotion mix. The traditional communication paradigm, which relied on the classic
16

promotional mix to craft IMC strategies, must give way to a new paradigm that includes all forms of social media as potential tools in designing and implementing IMC strategies. Contemporary marketers cannot ignore the phenomenon of social media because it has rapidly become the de facto modus operandi for consumers who are disseminating information on products and services (Mangold & Faulds, 2009). In this section researcher tried to gain insights about social media from available literatures and its uses in marketing communication. In following section researcher has reviewed of existing literatures on social networking site Facebook, students motives to use it and use of Facebook in selection of universities. 2.5 The Facebook Facebook is the very popular social networking site (SNS), which gives user an opportunity to create personal profile (include general information like education background, work background, and favourite interest), build a friend networks who have Facebook account, upload and share photos, put comment, show liking or agreeableness on any subjects, issues, comments, products and brands through like button, write notes and create news and many more. Facebook members can also join virtual groups based on common interests, see what classes they have in common, and learn about others hobbies, interests, tastes, and romantic relationship statuses through the profiles (Ellision, Steinfield, & Lampe, 2007). It also has an option to add specific applications to further personalise ones profile (Rosmarin, 2007). People mostly use it to make friends, networking with friends, share links and videos, and learn more about the people they meet (Reuben, 2008). A Harvard undergraduate student and a programmer Mr. Mark Zuckerberg along with his friend Eduardo was set up Facebook.com in February 2004 at Harvard University dorm as an online student directory for only Harvard students (Cassidy, 2006; Mayer & Puller, 2007; Boyd & Ellison, 2007). To join a user had to have a Harvard.edu email address. Facebook extended
17

beyond Harvard to other Ivy League school in spring 2004. In fall 2004 Facebook.com had added websites to several hundred of colleges and university, then later expanded to any university students having an university e-mail and now anyone over age 13 with an valid e-mail account can join Facebook (Reuben, 2008). Mr. Zuckerberg, who set up Facebook at his early 20 (now 26), has grown it into a business worth an estimated 15 billion (Smith, 2010). Facebook has now become habitual and a part of everyday life for 500 million users worldwide. Facebook has reached almost eight percent of world population with meteoric rise of its users from 150 millions in January 2009 to 500 million in 2010 (Smith, 2010). Today, Facebook is the number one SNS beating MySpace, LinkedIn, Foursquare etc. Facebook is third popular online brand after Google and MSN respectively. According to Nielsen survey (April, 2010) 54% worlds internet population visiting Facebook and spends 6 hours per person every month. On average user create 90 pieces of content every month, 30 billion pieces of content (web links, news, blogs etc) are shared each month, more than 3 billion pictures are uploaded every month, there are more than 60 million status updates a day and have an average of 130 friends (Smith, 2010). Collectively, users spend more than 700 billion minutes a month on Facebook. Alex Burmaster, of research agency Nielsen Online said: Facebook has become a phenomenon of our time, its become almost like a mobile phone, [and] people cant imagine their lives without it (as cited in Smith, 2010 p.1). 2.6 Popularity of Facebook among Universities Students Origin of Facebook is directly associated with university students. Facebook was set up by a university student as an online student directory. Initially, it was restricted to users with a harvard.edu email address and was confined to universities students and staffs. It was officially open to non-academic and non-US based users in September 2006 (Joinson, 2008; Reuben, 2008).
18

Facebook has become a number one choice among universities students. According to Pew Research Centers survey nearly three quarters (73 percent) of online teens and an equal number (72 percent) of young adults use social networking sites. The survey also reveals that among adults 18 and older Facebook is most preferred choice; 73% have profile on Facebook, 48% own profile on MySpace and 14% use LinkedIn (Lenhart, Purcell, Smith, & Zickuhr, 2010). According to previous survey by Pew Center 50% of young adult social network users had profile in MySpace, 22% had profile on Facebook and only 6% had a profile on LinkedIn (Lenhart, 2009). The recent survey also shows that among adult profile owners with high school degree or less, 64% have a profile on MySpace, 63% have profile on Facebook and just 3% have LinkedIn profile. Adults with at least some college experience, 78% have profile on Facebook, where 41% have a profile on my space and 19% have a LinkedIn profile (Lenhart, et al., 2010). It shows the greater presence and growing popularity of Facebook among colleges and universities students. There is growing concern about universities students excessive use of Facebook. Sheldon (2008) states that 93% student had a Facebook account, on average they spent 47 minutes a day on Facebook and in overall 81% student logged into Facebook on a daily basis. Social networking sites are widely thought to have changed students communication pattern because many college/university students lives have an online component (Zywica & Danowski, 2008). There is hard debate going on about the risk of students being addicted to, and spending too much time on Facebook. Those who argue about negative impact and against on students excessive use of Facebook are demanding control on students from using Facebook. Facebook has been met with criticism by educators, with suggestions that students spend too much time on Facebook and find it addictive (Bugeja, 2006). Others, who believe control is not the right options, are suggesting attract and encourage students for its academic and positive use. Some studies have shown advantages of
19

Facebook use for undergraduate students to assist and adjust to university life, especially those experiencing low self-esteem (Ellision, et al., 2007). Lloyd, Dean and Cooper (2007) concluded that students can benefit and suffer from using technology [Facebook]. Positive effects of technology [Facebook] are knowledge acquisition, socialisation and entertainment. However, negative effects include that students tend to be less healthy and passive in off-line activities when their sole purpose is for entertainment, which has a direct effect on their academic success, personal relationships, and wellness. 2.7 Students Motives for Facebook Use People use media to gratify their various communication needs and wants. Uses and gratification is viewed as a psychological communication perspective which focuses on how individual use mass media and other forms of communication to fulfil their needs and wants (Sheldon, 2008; Rubin, 2002). According to the uses and gratification perspective, media use is determined by a group of key elements including peoples needs and motives to communicate, the psychological and social environment, the mass media, functional alternative to media use, communication behaviour, and the consequences of such behaviour (Rubin, 1994, p. 419). McQuail, Blumler and Brown (1972) classified mostly found needs and gratifications in four categories; diversion (escape from problems, emotional release), personal relationship (social utility of information in conversation, substitute of the media for companionship), personal Identity (value reinforcement, self understanding), and information (as cited in Sheldon, 2008, p.68). These classifications were, basically, developed for audiovisual media use and researchers extendend it for internet use and developed different motivational scales for internet use over time. According to Morris and Ogan (1996) internet fulfills interpersonal and mediated needs. Needs traditionally
20

fulfilled by media are social interaction, time pass, habit, information and entertainment (Flaherty, Pearce, & Rubin, 1998). Media fulfilled interpersonal needs such as companionship, maintenance of relationship, problem-solving and persuation (Flanagin & Metzger, 2001). LaRose, Mastro and Eastin (2001) found that the expectation of enjoyable activities online predicted the amount of online consumption. Song, LaRose, Eastin and Lin (2004) identified finding media virtual

community as a new gratification that strengthen comunication with people met on internet. This definition contrast with relationship maintenance focused to maintain relationship with existing acquaintances (Song et al., 2004). Uses and gratification research has usually focused on how media are used to satisfy cognitive and affective needs relating personal needs and entertainment needs (Rubin, 2002), which includes need for personal identity, escapism, and self presentation. Researchers found various gratifications of internet and SNS uses such as acquisition of information, ability to engage in interpersonal communication and socialisation (Stafford & Gonier, 2004, p. 110); interpersonal utility functions such as relationship building, social maintenance and social recognition (Leung, 2007, p. 205); interpersonal relations, information, and entertainment (Ho Cho, 2006, p. 341); infromation, interpersonal communication, and entertainment (Matsuba, 2006, p. 278). There has lot of research done about students motives in using Facebook. Majority of the previous research found friending, time pass, flirt and find new friends are the students prime motives to use Facebook. According to Coley (2006) most students use Facebook for fun to organise parties, and to find dates. They use it to find people with similar interest, peer who are in same class, and with whom they feel a sense of community and connectedness and its become habit to those who are already in online. Urista, Dong, and Day, (2009) in their study what motivates young adults to use SNS (MySpace and Facebook) found that individual use SNS to fulfill their needs
21

and

wants,

which

includes

efficient

communication,

convenient

communication, curosity about others, popularity and relationship formation and reinforcement. Ellision, et al., (2007) suggest that Facebook is mostly used to maintain or reinforce existing offline relationships, as opposed to establishing new ones online. There is usually some common offline activity among individuals with friends one another, such as a shared class or extra curricular acitivity. Lampe, Ellison, and Steinfield (2006) found that Facebook users engage in searching for people with whom they have an offline connection more than they browse for new people to meet. Sheldon (2008) conducted a survey of 172 students and found that large porportion of students use Facebook to maintain relationship with people they already know, majority of students also visit Facebook for time pass like when feel bored or get wall post update notification, significant porportion of students use Facebook for entertainment purposes and a small porportion use Facebook to develop new relationship. According to Pew Internet & American Life Project survey (2009) teens and adults use Facebook to stay in touch with friends (97 percent), make plans with friends (62 percent), make new friends (52 percent), organize with others for an event, issue or cause (56 percent), and flirt (22 percent) (Lenhart, 2009). 2,251 subjects were participated in the survey. Research on Facebook is starting to emerge along with its popularity. The applications and utilities of Facebook is also constantly being developed. Most of the previous studies about motives to use Facebook was done before 2008, when Facebook was just started to emerge and not much popular as now and not much applications. The researcher found limited predictors have been used to study students motive for Facebook use. In this paper researcher try to find out university students motives of using Facebook by new predictors.

22

2.8 Students Use of Facebook in Selection of Universities Oklahoma State Universitys (2010) study highlights a typical lifestyle of a todays student. On average each day students sleep for 7 hours, spend 1.5 hours watching TV, spend 3.5 hours online, listen to music for 2.5 hours, talk on a cell phone for 2 hours, spend 3 hours in class, spend 2 hours eating, go to work for 2 hours and study for 3 hours. This totals 26.5 hours a day, nearly half of that involve technology. Students read 8 books a year, surf to 2,300 websites, look at 1,200 Facebook profiles, and write 42 pages for class and over 500 pages of email. This shows the importance of use of technology to reach out to and serve students better (Mollet, Kraft, & Segura, 2008). Facebook is more attractive among universities students. 85 % students at 4year universities in U.S. have Facebook profile (Qualman, 2007). Reubens (2008) study of 148 colleges and universities about what social media tools they are using most to reach perspective students, found that 53.79% reported having official Facebook page and 20% of them have developed custom application for Facebook. This also shows the students growing presence in Facebook and colleges and universities striving to reach prospective students using Facebook for recruitment. Colleges and universities are creating profile for an official presence on Facebook. Facebook is one of the more popular tools they are using to keep in touch with recent alumni (Reuben, 2008). A survey of 2000 accredited four-year US colleges about embracing social media in college admission found that 29% using SNS and 51% think Its a very important in their future strategy for student recruitment. Similarly, 21% are using SNS for evaluating potential students for admission (Barnes & Mattson, 2007). Noel-Levitz suggest (2007) that SNS can be a great resource for recruitment effort and will be beneficial to sell university programme. However, universities must focus their effort on strengthening the experience perspective students may get on official web site. Compared to 2007, more enrolment teams are using the web, e-mail and a variety of online tools in 2009 (Noel-Levitz, 2009).

23

College students are using social networking site such as Facebook, with embedded content of video, art and music to build connections between ideas and people anywhere in the world. In examining students technological behaviours in term of higher education, Facebook may provide the opportunities for both students and universities to harness WEB2.0 technologies to connect them to create two-way communication zones with less geographical barriers and get information to make choice of institutions ( (Eijkman, 2009). Hossler and Gallagher (1987) considers college and university choice as a three stage process, including 1) predispositions, where a student develops an interest in continuing his or her education; 2) search , where a student gathers information on the attributes and values that characterise alternatives among institutions; and 3) choice, where a student decides which institution to attend (p. 210). College and university web sites are found key information source to perspectives students deciding where to apply, and making a final decision on which institution to attend (University of Rhode Island, 2010). A report from the recruiting firm James Tower and the National Research Center for College and University Admissions (2006) found that 56% of perspective college student respondents preferred web to print. Another report on College Search and the Millennial Generation, discovered that (84 percent) said they used colleges web sites, personal recommendation (75 percent), campus visit (64 percent), and college view books (64 percent) (Ashburn, 2007). Hoeflich (2002) reported that 70% of graduate students surveyed rated the Web as important or very important in their program selection process followed by contact with faculty members (57 percent), department literature (48 percent) and graduate school fair (6 percent) (Poock & Lefond, 2003).

24

A survey by consulting firm Noel-Levitz (2009) found that students mostly value information or activities such as discussions about courses and academics; discussions about student activities and extracurricular options; insight into school culture and diversity; communication with current students and faculty; communication with prospective students from universities social network site. Randall Munroe developed a Venn-diagram [given below] illustrating difference in information requisite of a student and information available in universities web page. This may representative to other medium as well.

Source: Randall Munroe, available at http://www.hiceshcool.com [Retrieved on 15 September 2010]

25

CHAPTER - III 3. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

3.1 Research Philosophies /Type of Dissertation A research philosophy is an individual perspective to see, analyse and understand the phenomenon. It is related to the development of knowledge in a particular field and nature of that knowledge. It is likely to view the relationship between knowledge and the process by which it is developed (Saunders, Lewis, & Thornhill, 2007). Saunders et al., (2007) elicit three major ways of thinking about research philosophy: epistemology, ontology and axiology (p.121). Epistemology refers to acceptable knowledge in a field of study, which entails three different epistemological positions: positivism, realism and interpretivism (Saunders, et al., 2007). Positivism refers to a social reality which can be observed and the end results or output can be generalised as in the physical and natural sciences (Remenyi, Williams, Money, & Swartz, 2007). The positivist approach, aim of discerning the statistical regularities of behaviour, is directed toward counting the occurrences and measuring the extent of the behaviours studied. In contrast, Interpretivist approach aims to understand the social world from the view point of the social actors within it, detailed description of the actors cognitive and symbolic actions relates meanings associated with observable behaviours (Wildermuth, 1993). Interpretive perspective is highly applicable in business and management research such as the field of marketing, human resource management and organisation behaviour (Saunders, et al., 2007 ). This perspective raises the question of generalisability of research, which is not of crucial importance in a ever changing world of business organisation. Todays circumstances may not apply tomorrow (Saunders et al., 2007).

26

Whereas, realism is another epistomological position which demands a scientific approach to the development of knowledge. Researchers used to catagorise of their view into two forms of realism i.e. direct realism and critical realism. Critical realist argues that as a researcher its only possible to understand what is going on in the social world if you understand the social structures that have given rise to the phenomena that see is what you get (Saunders et al., 2007). In other hand, ontological philosophical position views social phenomenon as entities and deals with nature of reality. Ontological philosophy subcatagorises into two branch i.e. objectivism and subjectivisim. Objectivist portrays the position that social entities exist in reality, which is independent from social actors concerned with their existence. In contrast, subjectivist believes that social phenomenon are created from the perceptions and consequent actions of those social actors concerned with their existence (Saunders et al., 2007). Objective research seperates the researcher from the object of the research. The objective researcher focuses on the object in an effort to understand objective reality. However, subjective research puts the researcher into the context of a situation to understand it. The division between subject and object is blurred with the object becoming an active participant in the knowing process (Oslon, 1995). A third branch of research philosophy is axiology that studies about judgment about value. It is the process of social enquiry where the role of researhcers own values play in all stages of the research process. It is crucial for research results to be credible. Heron (1996) argues that our values are the guiding reason of all human action. He further argues that researchers demonstrate axiological skill by being able to articulate their values as a basis for making judgements about what research they are conducting and how they go about doing it (as Cited in Saunders et al., 2007). you are trying to understand (Bhaskar, 1989). However, direct relaism emphasies on what you

27

Saunders et al., (2007) argues that it is diffcult to decide which philosophy is better. He adds that they are better at doing different things. In his words better depends on the research questions researchers are trying to answer. The truth is hardly we could find any piece of research work, which falls completly into one philosophical realm. Most often it is not unusal to find the research work done by using mixture between philoshopies. This dissertation is more closely relates with objectivist philoshopical stance, in business and management research this is well known as objectivist paradigm, which concerned with nature of reality where research is external and results are facts. This disseration has conducted from objectivist position and results are simply counts of frequencies of behaviour studied. 3.2 Purpose of Research There are different purposes of doing research. These are catagorised into exploratory studies, descriptive and explanotary. Exploratory studies aims to understand the phenomenon in depth and use qualitative data. Its mostly used to explore new insights and understanding about particular problem. This type of research needs more time and advanced knowledge in researcher. In the other hand, explanatory studies aims to find the relationship between or among variables. This mainly focus to establish casual relationship between variables (Saunders et al., 2007). Third is descriptive studies. The aim of descriptive research is to portray an accurate profile of persons, events or situations (Robson, 2002, p. 59).The purpose of this dissertation is also a descriptive research. Researcher attempted to describe the students use of Facebook, motives of Facebook use, use of Facebook to obtain information in selection of universities and their opinion about important information to make university selection decision. 3.3 Research Strategy Research strategy is a plan of action or methodological design to conduct a research that enables researcher to answer research questions and achieve
28

research objectives. There are multiple research strategies a researcher can employ. Each strategy can be used for exploratory, descriptive and explanatory research (Yin, 2003). Some startegies clearly align to deductive approach and others to inductive approach. However, Saunders et al., (2007) mention that often allocating strategies to one approach or the other is unduly simplistic. They emphasise that no research strategy inherently superior or inferior to any other. They highlight that choice of strategy must be guided by research questions to answer and objectives to achieve, the extent of existing knowledge, the amount of time and other resources a researcher has available, as well as phlisophical underpinings of particular research project. The mainly practices research strategies are experiment, survey, case study, action research, grounded theory, ethnography and archival research. It is wrong to think any strategies as mutually exclusive. One strategies can be a part of other (Saunders et al., 2007). In this dissertation survey strategy has been used to answer the research questions. Survey or research behaviours is of an attempt to determine of people opinions, (Greener, charecteristics large group

2008).Researcher believes that survey startegy best fit to answer the research questions and meet research objectives of this research and also practical due to the time and resources availbale to the researcher . Survey is most popular and common strategy in business and management research. Its generally linked with deductive approach. Survey is mostly used in exploratory and descriptive research. Survey allows researchers to collect large amount of data from sizeable population in less resources and less time compare to other strategies. Survey generally done using questionnaire administered to sample, which enable to collect standardised data allowing easy comparision. Survey strategy is comparatively easy to explain and understand (Saunders et al., 2007). Survey allows researcher to collect quantitative data and that can be analysed quantitatively using descriptive and infrential statistics. Survey strategy will give researcher more control over the research process and
29

possible to generate findings that is representative of the whole population when use representative sample and data are collected at lower cost than collecting data of whole population. The limitation of survey strategy is data collected using survey are unlikely to be as wide-ranging as data collected from other startegies (Saunders et al., 2007). 3.4 Research Method Research method refers to techniques and procedures use to collect primary data. These are divided into two i.e. quantitative techniques and qualitative techniques. As name suggest quantitative techniques are used to collect quantitative data which is expressed in numbers, figures and values and qualitative techniques are used to collect qualitative data and that cant be expressed in numbers and figures. Oslon (1995) points out two problems in relative merits of qualitative and quantitative research methods and these are (1) lack of coherent definitions, and 2) the focus of most discussions on methods instead of on the basic assumptions of these two positions. He further explain that the second problem is at the root of the confusion and the first is a manifestation of it. In his understanding specific methods, particularly data gathering methods, are not essentially linked with one set of assumptions as opposed to another. The debate of quantitative versus qualitative is irrelevant because in most research studies have subjective elements than is generally recognised (Oslon, 1995). In business and management research, its more likely to find both quantitative and qualitative strategies, looking at observable objective facts where they might seen to exist, through the use and manipiulation of numbers and looking also at the perception of those envolved with these facts. In practical sense, its good to use the best of both worlds to investigate the messy reality of people and organisation (Greener, 2008). In this research, quantitative method has been used to collect primary data. Primary data are appropriate and match with the research objectives.
30

Primary data gives fresh and up to date information about research topic and validates conclusions. This is also less costly compare to get secondary data, which mostly collected for commercial reasons for example data available with consulting and marketing research firms. Easy access to valid number of student samples also made suitable to use primary data collection method for this research. Primary data were collected using structured internet mediated questionnaire. Questionnaire enables researcher to ask each respondent to answer the same set of questions and also provides an efficient way of collecting responses from a large sample (Saunders et al., 2007). The questionnaire is one of the most widely used data collection techniques within survey strategy. Compared to structured questionnaire, other primary data collection methods like observation, in-depth interview and focus group discussion would require ample time and more advanced research knowledge to get precise information that meet research objectives and validate conclusion. The advantages of structured questionnaire such as easy to reach large sample, high possibility of selecting right sample, very low data contamination, and reasonable response rate made suitable to use primary questionnaire technique to collect data for this study (Sunders et al., 2007). 3.5 Participants/Sample Convenience samples of 120 students were selected to participate in the survey. They were studying in foundation, undergraduate and postgraduate programme at a medium-size private Asian universities branch campus located at central London. Participants were those students who enrolled in different programme since February 2008 until September 2010. A survey questionnaire was sent via e-mail. Students e-mail addresses were collected from universitys student service office with permission from authorised officer at the university. From total of 120 e-mails sent, 18 (15%) e-mails were unsuccessful delivery due to error in their e-mail addresses. Out of 102 successful emails, nearly 90% (92) students returned completed survey questionnaires. Out of 92 returned survey questionnaires only 90% (N = 83) participants had a Facebook account and nearly 10 % (9) didnt have the
31

account. Those participants who didnt have a Facebook account were excluded from further analysis. Of those who had an account, 72.3 % (n= 60) were male and 27.7% (n=23) were female. The 59% (n=49) participants were fall under age group of 2024, and 24.1% (n= 20) participants belongs to age group 25- 29. Out of valid sample (N = 83), 44.6% (n=37) were from undergraduate, 21.7% (n=18) were from foundation and other 33.7% (n= 28) were from postgraduate programme. 36.1% (n=30) were studying in first year, whereas 37.3% (n=31) were in second year and 26.5% (n=22) were in final year of their study i.e. third year. Majority of participants specialisation were business and MBA, each accounted 26.5% (n=22) of total sample (N=83) and remaining participants specialisation were 24.1 % (n=20) information technology, 14.5% (n=12) communication & broadcasting and 8.4% (n=7) design & innovation. As per information provided by universitys student service office, participants represent 39 Nationalities. 3.6 Measurement The survey measured the basic demographics of students, familiarity about Facebook, Facebook use, motives of Facebook use, familiarity about universities Facebook page, media preference to obtain information in university selection, their information preference or information requirement in university selection and also asked them to rate the information available in universities Facebook page as their preference. The two open-ended questions were asked to list their motives of Facebook use and information they would like to see in Facebook account. 3.6.1 Demographics Students were asked to indicate their gender, specify their age group, mention their current level and year of study and were also asked to mention their academic specialisation.

32

3.6.2 Facebook Use and Motives Facebook use was measured by duration of Facebook use, frequency of logging into account, time spent per day when they logged. They were also asked to mention about influencer to join Facebook and also asked number of friends they have in Facebook network. 20 items were used to measure students motives for Facebook use. 18 items were compiled from previous studies on Facebook use, motives of internet use, motives of using different communication medium and studies related to Facebook etc. (McQuail, et al., 1972: Rubin , 1994; Morris & Ogan, 1996; Flaherty et al, 1998; Flanagin & Metzger 2001; LaRose et al., 2001; Rubin, 2002; Song et al., 2004; Stafford & Gonier, 2004; Ho Cho, 2006; Matsuba, 2006; Coley, 2006; Lamp et al., 2006; Leung, 2007; Ellison et al., 2007; Sheldon, 2008; Urista et al., 2009; Pew Internet Survey, 2009). 2 items to measure academic use of Facebook were added. However, 18 items collected and complied from previous studies were modified and re-phrased to match with current study. Items were measured with a 4-point Likert scale, with 1 = strongly agree and 4 = strongly disagree and even number were used in scale to eliminate neutral opinion. The mean score of all the items for motives for Facebook use was 2.47 (SD=1.05, Cronbachs =.881and alpha based on standardised item = .877) and inter-item correlation was (r = .264) and variance (v =.027) (See Appendix A). 3.6.3 Use of Universities Facebook Page to Obtain Information Students use of universities Facebook pages to obtain information in their university selection process were measured asking their familiarity about universities Facebook account, whether they visited it before or not, their like or dislike about universities growing use of Facebook in recruitment, were asked their use of Facebook to select their current university and those who responded did not were asked about possibility to use in future.

33

Students were asked to rate their media preference to obtain information in their university selection process. 9 media were listed to measure media preference. Media rating were measured with a 5-point Likert scale, with 1 = very important and 5 = not important. 3.6.4 Information Use in University Selection Process Students information need and importance of different type of information in university selection process were measured by asking students to rate different information in scale of 1 to 5. List of information were compiled from different sources, generally used in marketing of education programme, like universitys web pages, prospectus, information brochures, advertisement and Facebook pages of different universities. Information were measured with a 5-point Likert scale, with 1 = very important and 5 = not important. Students were also provided with list of information available on universities Facebook pages and asked to rate their preference of use in university selection process in a 5-point Likert scale. Information were measured with a 5-point Likert scale, with 1 = indicating very important and 5 = indicating not important. 3.7 Procedures 120 students sample were selected using convenience sampling from the branch campus of a medium-size private Asian university located at central London. Students enrolled since February 2008 until September 2010 in foundation, undergraduate and postgraduate programmes were included for survey. For ethical consideration, prior to survey the researcher applied for permission to use students e-mail and request students to participate in the survey and permission granted from the university to use students e-mail and conduct survey with students. A self-administered internet-mediated questionnaire was design to collect respondents demographic and data related to research objectives. Before
34

sent questionnaire to real participants, a pilot study was conducted with 15 samples. They were researchers friends, academic and administrative staff from the university and not included in real survey. Pilot study was conducted to find out the internal consistency of the questionnaire, reliability and validity of questionnaire to collect the data to meet research objectives. Pilot study was also helpful to find out level of difficulty to complete the questionnaire as well as confusion, if any. After review of answers and feedback from pilot survey, questionnaire were re-written and rephrased to minimise the difficulty and possible high response rate. Participants were asked to complete self-administered questionnaire on their Facebook use. Questionnaire contained multiple choice questions including two open-ended questions where participants were asked to list their motives for Facebook use and information they wanted to see on university Facebook page. Participation was voluntary and no incentives offered to complete the survey. In average, survey took 10 minutes to complete. Students who never had a Facebook account were instructed in question to stop answering further after question no. 7. The question no. 7 asked to answer in yes or no on whether they had have a Facebook account or not. Those who didnt have a Facebook account were excluded from further analysis. Researcher collected 120 prospective participants e-mail from the universitys student service office. On 12 October 2010, students were sent a self-administered questionnaire with covering e-mail. In e-mail, researchers brief background, purpose of survey and research topic was given. In the covering letter, anonymity of the respondent were assured and further assurance was given that data will solely be used to meet research objectives and discarded upon completion of project. Within first week 28 completed surveys were return and a follow up e-mail sent in week two and also attached a questionnaire for reference and another 35 questionnaires were return from first follow up. Second follow up e-mail sent in week third and again questionnaire was attached. After two follow-ups, 92 participants were returned completed survey questionnaires.

35

3.8 Data Analysis SPSS 16.0 (Statistical Packages for the social sciences) software was used to analyse the raw data collected from the survey. All questions were coded to fit SPSS system requirement. Variables were defined as Nominal, Ordinal and Scale form as per nature of individual question and analysis required. Then data were entered into SPSS. Simple descriptive statistics and frequency analyses were used to analyse and present the survey data into readable form. Descriptive statistics is very useful to summarising and presenting the data into tables, charts, graphs and other diagrammatic form that enable pattern and relationships to be discerned (Hussey & Hussey, 1997, p. 189). Data presented into graphical form is very good for communicating general points, attractive and appealing for general reader and relationship can be seen more clearly and it is easy to compare sets of data as well. 3.9 Limitations of the Data and Methods of Analysis This is an opinion survey and opinion variables only enable to record how respondents feel about their Facebook use and possible use of Facebook in their university selection process and their agreement and disagreement in given statement. Self-administered questionnaire were used to collect data for descriptive purposes. Main purpose of the study was to describe the students characteristics about their Facebook use. This study didnt look into the association and inferential analysis between or among variables. This study only presents the research findings in percentage with graphical presentation. It is simply the count of occurrence and count of opinion in particular statement. While using the findings of the study one must take note of limitations and disadvantages of quantitative techniques, survey design, self-administered questionnaire as well as descriptive statistics.

36

CHAPTER - IV 4. RESEARCH FINDINGS AND ANALYSIS

In this chapter, the survey results and analysis have been presented for each survey questions. The survey questions have categorised and presented under different headings. The pie-charts and bar diagrams has been used to present the survey data. This chapter has six sub sections. The responses have been presented under headings like respondents demographics, Facebook uses, respondents motives for Facebook use, respondents use of Facebook to obtain information for university selection, information use in university selection process and final section has been presented with five important motives to use Facebook as well as five important information respondents like to see in university Facebook page, which were collected using two open-ended questions. 4.1 Respondents Demographics 4.1.1Gender The majority (72.29 percent) of respondents, who returned completed survey and have a Facebook account (those didnt have a Facebook account were excluded from analysis), were male. The female participants were in small proportion (27.71 percent) (see Figure 1).

FIGURE 1 Respondents Gender

37

4.1.2 Respondents Age Group More than half (59.04 percent) of respondents were from age group 20-24. Similarly, 24.01% respondents were from the age group 25-29 followed by 30 or over (12.05 percent) and 15-19 age groups (4.82 percent) respectively (see Figure 2).

FIGURE 2 Respondents Age Group

4.1.3 Respondents Education Level Nearly half (44.58 percent) of respondents were studying in undergraduate level, where as 33.73% in their postgraduate level followed by foundation 21.69% (see Figure3).

38

FIGURE 3 Respondents Current Level of Study

4.1.4 Respondents Study Year Figure (4) shows that 37.35 % of students surveyed were in their second year of study and 36.51% were studying in first year followed by students in their final year (26.51 percent).

FIGURE 4 Respondents Current year of Study

39

4.1.5 Respondents Academic Specialisation It can be seen from figure (5) that more than half (53.02 percent) of students have their specialisation in business and MBA each accounted 26.51%. The information technology was another major specialisation among respondents (24.01percent) followed by communication and broadcasting (14.46 percent) and design and innovation (8.43 percent) respectively.

FIGURE 5 Respondents Academic Specialisation

4.2 Facebook Use This section has presented with responses of student surveyed on their Facebook use. Respondents were asked to respond about the length of having a Facebook account, influencer to join Facebook, how often they log into Facebook, daily time spent into Facebook and number of Facebook friends. Survey results has presented below in separate headings.

40

4.2.1 Length of having a Facebook Account

Respondents were asked since how long they have had a Facebook account. It can be seen from Figure (6) that more than one-third (38.55 percent) have had a Facebook account since 3 years or more. Nearly onethird (32.53 percent) said they have been using it since two years. However, 16.87 % respondents have had their account from less than a year and 12.05 % had it since one year.

FIGURE 6 Length of Facebook Account

41

4.2.2 Main Influencer to Join Facebook Students were asked to mention who influence them to join Facebook network. Almost two-third (66.27 percent) said friends are the main influencer to join Facebook. Surprisingly, very few (8.43 percent) has influenced by their Family members. However, 21.69% said no one influence them to join into network. Of those surveyed, very small proportion (3.6 percent) said to be influenced by others than friends and family (see Figure 7).

FIGURE 7 Influencers to Join Facebook

42

4.2.3 Frequency of Logging into Facebook Account In response to the question how often you log into your Facebook account, nearly thirty six percent revealed that they log several times a day. Whereas, 13.25 % of those surveyed log two times a day and 28.92 % log into Facebook once a day. In contrast, 15.66% said they log only once a week and small proportion (3.61 percent) said to log once a month. However, cumulatively nearly 81 percent of participants log into account once a day or more (see Figure 8).

FIGURE 8 Frequency of Log into Facebook Account

43

4.2.4 Daily Time Spent in Facebook The researcher asked respondents about their daily time spend in Facebook. As a surprise, solid proportion (38.55 percent) of students reported that they spend 15 minutes or less daily in Facebook. In contrast, less than one fifth (16.87 percent) said that they spend 2 hours or more in a day. In the other hand, 10.84% of students said that they spend one hour a day. Collectively, more than half (60.24 percent) of those surveyed are spending 30 minutes or less in Facebook (see Figure 9).

FIGURE 9 Daily Time spent in Facebook

44

4.2.5 Number of Facebook Friends Students were asked how many friends they have in their Facebook network. It is interesting to see from Figure (10) that nearly one-third (30.12 percent) have 250 or more friends in Facebook. While, 15.66% of the respondents have less than 50 friends and same proportion of the respondents (15.66 percent) said that they have 50 to 99 Facebook friends. Cumulatively, 38.55% of the respondents have 100 to 249 friends in their Facebook network.

FIGURE 10 Number of Facebook Friends

4.3 Motives for Facebook Use The researcher asked respondents to give their opinion in statement listed to measure motives for Facebook use at scale of 1 to 4. 1 indicates strong agreement with the given statements, whereas 4 indicate strong disagreement. Two middle scales were, agree (2) and disagree (3). 20 different possible user motives for Facebook use were given. The survey results has presented below.

45

4.3.1 Keep in Touch with Friends Figure (11) reports that nearly two-third (63.86 percent) of those surveyed strongly agree to use Facebook to keep in touch with friends. In other hand, small proportion (13.25 percent) disagrees of using Facebook to keep in touch with their friends. There is very solid agreement (86.75 percent) that they use Facebook to keep in touch with their friends.

FIGURE 11 Keep in Touch with Friends

4.3.2 Keep in Touch with Family It can be seen from Figure (12) that one third (33.73 percent) of the respondents strongly agree that they use Facebook to keep in touch with family, while 28.92% of the respondents disagree with them. Similarly, a quarter (25.30 percent) of those surveyed agrees that to keep in touch with family is one of the motives to use Facebook. However, 12.05% of the respondents strongly disagree with them.

46

FIGURE 12 Keep in Touch with Family

4.3.3 Find and Connect with Old Friends Half (50.60 percent) of the respondents surveyed strongly agree with the statement I use Facebook to find and connect with old friends, while small proportion (6.02 percent) strongly disagree with the statement (see Figure 13). There is very solid (81.93 percent) agreement that Facebook help them to find and connect with old friends and this is one of the motives for them to use Facebook.

47

FIGURE 13 Find and Connect with Old Friends

4.3.4 Share Likes and Dislikes about Music, Movie, Event with Friends The survey shows that more than half (51.89 percent) of students use Facebook to share likes and dislikes about music, movie, event etc with their friends. However, solid number of respondents (48.10 percent) said that this is not a motive for them for using Facebook (see Figure 14).

FIGURE 14 Share Likes and Dislikes with Friends

48

4.3.5 Connect and Communicate with Someone when Feel Lonely Figure (15) shows that half (51.90 percent) of students surveyed said they use Facebook to connect and communicate with someone when they feel lonely. At the same time, nearly half (48.20 percent) of the respondents do not use Facebook for this motive.

FIGURE 15 Connect and Communicate with Someone when Feel Lonely

4.3.6 Share Problems, Happiness and Sad Moment with Friends Nearly twenty nine percent of respondents strongly agree with the statement that I use Facebook to share problems, happiness and sad moment with friends and more than one-fifth (22.89 percent) also agree that they use Facebook for this motive. In contrary, 21.69% of the respondents strongly disagree with the statement and more than a quarter (26.51 percent) of respondents agrees that this is not a motive for them to use Facebook (see Figure 16).

49

FIGURE 16 Share Problems, Happiness and Sad Moment with Friends

4.3.7 Stay in Touch with Important News and Issues Figure (17) shows that significant proportion (56.63 percent) of students surveyed said that they use Facebook to stay in touch with important news and issues. In contrast, solid proportion (43.38 percent) disagrees and said that this is not a motive to them for using Facebook.

FIGURE 17 Stay in Touch with Important News and Issues

50

4.3.8 Organise Events, Make Plans and Participate in Causes with Friends More than half (55.56 percent) of those surveyed said that they use Facebook to organise events, make plans and participate in causes with friends. In other hand, close to half (44.34 percent) disagree to use Facebook for above motive (see Figure 18).

FIGURE 18 Organise Events, Make Plans and Participate in Causes with Friends

4.3.9 Express Opinion, Share Ideas and Creativity Figure (19) shows, more than half (59.04 percent) of participants said that they use Facebook to express their opinion and share ideas and creativity to public. In contrary, solid number (41.97 percent) of respondents disagree to use Facebook for this motive.

51

FIGURE 19 Express Opinion, Share Ideas and Creativity

4.3.10 Discuss Class Works, Assignments and Catch-up Missed Lessons It is clearly seen from Figure (20) that 40.96% of students surveyed use Facebook to discuss class works, assignments and catch-up missed lessons with friends. However, more than half (59.04 percent) students disagree to use Facebook for this purpose.

FIGURE 20 Discuss Class Work, Assignments and Catch-up Missed Lesson with Friends

52

4.3.11 Meet New People It can be seen from Figure (21) that half (50.61 percent) agreed that they use Facebook to meet with new people. In other hand, almost equal proportion (49.40 percent) of students surveyed disagrees to use Facebook to meet new people.

FIGURE 21 Meet New People

4.3.12 Make New Friends Thirty percent of the respondents strongly agree with the statement that I use Facebook to make new friends and 18.07% also agree with the statement. However, nearly 28% strongly think that this is not a motive for them to use Facebook and this view is fairly supported by other 24.10% of the respondents (see Figure 22).

53

FIGURE 22 Make New Friends

4.3.13 Know More about Newly Meet Friends in Campus It can be clearly seen from Figure (23) that 19.28% of the respondents strongly agreed that they use Facebook is to know more about newly meet friends in campus and 30.12% of the respondents agree with the statement. However, this is not a motive to use Facebook for 27.71% and they strongly disagree with the statement. Similarly, 22.89% of the respondents also disagree with the statement.

54

FIGURE 23 Know More About Newly Meet Friends in Campus

4.3.14 Meet Someone with Similar Interests A small proportion (14.46 percent) of the respondents from survey strongly agreed to use Facebook to meet someone with similar interests and 33.73% agreed that they use it for similar purpose. However, more than a quarter (26.51 percent) of those surveyed strongly disagrees to use Facebook to meet someone with similar interest and nearly same proportion (25.30 percent) agrees with them that this is not a motive to use Facebook (see Figure 24).

55

FIGURE 24 Meet Someone with Similar Interests

4.3.15 Flirt with Someone It is very interesting to see from figure (25) that majority (77.11percent) of the respondents disagree of using Facebook to flirt with someone. One-fifth (22.89 percent) of students surveyed agreed with the statement that I use Facebook to flirt someone.

FIGURE 25 Flirt with Someone

56

4.3.16 Looking Friendship with Opposite Sex Nearly half (45.78 percent) of the respondents strongly disagree of using Facebook in pursuit of friendship with opposite sex. However, for 14.46% of the respondents it is one of the motives to use Facebook and 18.07% also agree with it. But, 21.69% of the respondents disagree and not using Facebook to make friendship with opposite sex (see Figure 26).

FIGURE 26 Looking Friendships with Opposite Sex

4.3.17 Spend Leisure Time It can be seen from figure (27) that twenty four percent of the respondents are using Facebook to spend leisure time and 32.53% of the respondents agree that this is one of the motives to use Facebook. However, nearly twenty two percent strongly disagree with it and same proportions (21.69 percent) agree that this is not a motive to use Facebook.

57

FIGURE 27 Spend Leisure Time

4.3.18 Play Virtual Games with Friends Among students surveyed, more than one third (37.35 percent) strongly disagree with the statement, I use Facebook to play virtual game with friends and 28.92% of those surveyed also disagree with the statement. Only, 16.87% of students surveyed are using Facebook to play virtual games and same proportions (16.87 percent) agree that to play virtual games with friends is one of the motives to use Facebook (see Figure 28).

58

FIGURE 28 Play Virtual Games with Friends

4.3.19 Pass Time When Bored Nearly thirty three percent respondents strongly agree that they use Facebook to pass time when they feel bored and almost equal proportions of respondents (31.33 percent) agree on that. In contrast, thirteen percent strongly disagree to use Facebook for this motive and 22.89% of the respondents also agree that this is not a motive to use Facebook (see Figure 29).

59

FIGURE 29 Pass Time When Bored

4.3.20 Connect with Lecturer to Discuss about Tutorials The respondents were asked about their academic use of Facebook. It is surprising to see that more than half (51.22 percent) strongly disagree to use Facebook to connect with lecturer to discuss about tutorials and 29.27% of the respondents also agree that this is not a motive to use Facebook. A small proportion (9.76 percent) of students surveyed strongly agrees to use Facebook to connect with lecturer to discuss about tutorials and same proportion (9.76 percent) agrees with them (see Figure 30).

60

FIGURE 30 Connect with Lecturer to Discuss about Tutorials

4.4 Facebook as a Medium in University Selection Process In this section, researcher has presented the survey results on students use of universities Facebook page to obtain information about the university they wish to attend. The main purpose of this particular section of the research is to find out possibility of Facebook page as a medium of information for students. It has been measured using questionnaire on familiarity of students about universities Facebook page, whether they visited it before or not, media preference to obtain information, did they use it to select current university etc. The survey results have been presented below. 4.4.1 Familiarity with Universities Facebook Page It can be seen from Figure (31) that more than half (51.85 percent) of students who participated in survey are familiar with universities Facebook page. In contrary, nearly half (48.15 percent) said they are not familiar with it.

61

FIGURE 31 Familiarity with University Facebook Pages

4.4.2 Have You Ever Visited Universities Facebook Page The researcher has asked students about their visit to universities Facebook page before. From those who participated in survey, good proportion (43.21 percent) said that they have visited it before. However, more than half (56.79 percent) of those surveyed never visited it before (see Figure 32).

FIGURE 32 Have You Ever Visited University Facebook Pages

62

4.4.3 Media Preference to Obtain Information in University Selection The researcher asked participants to rate their media preference to obtain information in their university selection process into scale of 1 to 5. Scale value has assigned as 1 indicating very important and 5 indicating not important. Other value of the scale are 2 represent important, 3 somehow important and 4 indicates less important of medium to obtain information. It can be seen from Figure (33) that majority (72.80 percent) of the respondents rated university web site as very important medium to obtain information in university selection process followed by university view books and prospectus (54.30 percent), open house and campus Visit (48.10 percent), education fairs (42.50 percent), and personal recommendations (35 percent). However, traditional means of communication like newspaper & magazine, television and radio are viewed as least prefer medium to obtain information in university selection process. The percentage of respondents who view these medium as very important are newspaper and magazines (26.20 percent), television (13.80 percent) and radio (12.50 percent) respectively (refer appendix B for details). The survey finding is also not encouraging for universities Facebook page as a medium to obtain information in university selection process. Only 20% of the respondents rated it as very important medium to obtain information. However, Facebook left behind traditional medium like television and radio as very important medium to obtain information slightly behind with newspaper and magazines. But, equal proportions (16.20 percent) of the respondents rated Facebook as not important whereas 22.50% rated radio as not important followed by television 13.80%. Nearly one third (30 percent) rated Facebook as somehow important as information source and similarly 18.80% of the students surveyed think Facebook as important medium to obtain information.

63

Results clearly shows that university web site is the most preferred medium to obtain information closely followed in respective order by view books and prospectus, open house and campus visit, education fairs and personal referral. Its also important to note that universities Facebook page are also emerging as a medium to obtain information in university selection process and students are well exposed on to it to find information.
100%

Percentage of Respondents

90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 72.8 54.3 48.1 42.5

35

26.2

20

13.8

12.5

Type of Media Very Important Important Somehow Important Less Important Not Important

FIGURE 33 Media Preference to Obtain Information in University Selection

4.4.4 Students Opinion on Universities Facebook Use in Recruitment Students were asked their opinion about universities growing use of Facebook page in student recruitment. It can be seen from Figure (34) that more than half (53.09 percent) of respondents like the universities growing use of their Facebook page as recruitment tool. Only small proportion (11.11 percent) of the respondents did not prefer it. More than one third (35.09 percent) of the respondents have no particular view on it and said they dont know about it.
64

FIGURE 34 Students Opinion on Universities Facebook Use in Recruitment

4.4.5 Used of Facebook in Current University Selection It is very interesting to see that among students surveyed only small proportions (13.58 percent) had used their current university Facebook page to select the university. Majority (86.42 percent) of the respondents didnt use it (see figure 4.35). The students participated in the survey were joined the current university from February 2008 until September 2010. This period is assumed as a golden time for Facebook in terms of popularity, use for different purposes and number of new applications (see Figure 35).

65

FIGURE 35 Use of Facebook in Current University Selection

4.4.6 Future use of Universities Facebook Page to Obtain Information Students were asked that will they use universities Facebook page in future to obtain information. Only 17.50% of the respondents are said that yes they will use it in future. However, majority (72.50 percent) of the respondents are not sure and expressed the possibility of using it in future. A small proportion (10 percent) said that they wont use it (see Figure 36).

FIGURE 36 Future Use of Universities Facebook Page in University Selection

66

4.5 Information use in University Selection Process This section has presented with survey findings on important information use in university selection process. Thirteen information items were compiled from previous studies, university web site specially dedicated to prospective students, marketing materials used in student recruitment and university view books and prospectus. These thirteen items were presented to respondents for rating. 5-points Likert scale has been used to rate each item, where 1 indicate very important and 5 indicate not important and other value scale are important (2), somehow important (3) and less important (4) respectively. The items were presented as not mutually exclusive. It can be seen from figure (37) that majority (83.80 percent) of the respondents rated course and academics as very important information they use in university selection process followed by course fee (72.80 percent), universities infrastructure and facilities (60 percent), application requirements, deadline and procedure (55 percent), faculties information (54.30 percent), university location (46.90 percent), students and faculties works (46.20 percent), research and innovation (41.20 percent), alumni success stories and career prospectus (40.5 percent), university lifestyle (36.20 percent), students testimonials (36.20 percent), students activities and extra-curricular options (35 percent) and university fact sheet (28.80 percent).

67

100% Percentage of Respondents 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 83.8 72.8 60 55 54.3 46.9 46.2 41.2 40.5 36.2 36.2 35

28.8

Very Important

Important

Somehow Important

Less Important

Not Important

FIGURE 37 Information Consider Important in University Selection

It is very interesting to note that except four information items, i.e. alumni success stories and career prospects (10.10 percent), students activities and extra-curricular options (10 percent), university fact sheet (7.50 percent) and university lifestyle (6.2 percent), all others items have been rated as not important by less than 5% of the respondents. The survey finding shows that the top five information students mostly use in their university selection process are courses and academics, course fee, university infrastructure and facilities, faculties information and application requirements, deadline and procedures respectively. However, it is very surprising to note that only 40.5% of respondents think research and innovation as important information to make their university selection decision.

68

4.6 Students Ratings on Information Available in Universities Facebook Page In this section survey results on students rating of information available on universities Facebook page and their preference has been presented. Eight different information items commonly available in universities Facebook page were presented to the respondents and asked them to rate into 5-points Likert scale, which they want to see in universities Facebook page and think important in university selection process. The value scale used at 5-points Likert scale are very important (1), important (2), somehow important (3), less important (4) and not important (5). It can be seen from Figure (38) that more than half (58.80 percent) of respondents rated news on key activities, application requirements, deadline and procedures as very important information followed by discussion about courses and academics (58.20 percent), communication with current students and faculties (52.50 percent), communication with prospective students (45 percent), discussion about students activities and extracurricular options (43 percent), students and staffs work like prizes, honour and projects (36.70 percent), insight into university culture, diversity and life style (33.80 percent) and stories and experiences of current students (32.90 percent). This finding congruent with two mostly highlighted and prominent features of social media tools like Facebook, which are conversation and multidimensional communication. The almost half of the respondents rated communication with current students and faculties and communication with prospective students as very important information they want to see universities Facebook page. in

69

100% 90% 80% Percentage of Respondents 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 58.8 58.2 52.5 45 43 36.7 33.8 32.9

Very Important

Important

Somehow Important

Less Important

Not Important

FIGURE 38 Students Rating on Information Available at Universities Facebook Page

4.7 Motives to Use Facebook in Respondents Own words The researcher asked an open-ended question to the participants to list five most important motives, which motivates them to use Facebook. The very interesting and important themes have emerged and different predictors for Facebook use has identified. The individual respondents different motives to use Facebook can be broadly cover into following i.e. Friendship, connectedness, entertainment, communication, information, socialising and networking, time pass, knowledge sharing, learn new things and keep up to date from new happenings around the world. One respondent wrote I like sharing links, news, videos and songs more than anything else. Another said I dont like chatting but do keep in touch with few close friends. One respondent mentioned I like to be into todays world and Facebook help me to globalise myself. Other highlighted that since the internet connection is
70

fast, its fun to use Facebook as I dont need to wait. Facebook is an alternative for other communication medium and one respondent illustrated that its backup when I cant connect with friend by phone or e-mail. Facebook eliminates the geographical distances among relationships and one respondent illustrated that I can connect to anywhere in the world wherever my friends are logged in and other pointed out I can see the pictures of old friends to whom I have not been touched for years. One respondent wrote I use to keep in touch with friends in distance. Another stressed that I use to keep in touch and communicate regularly with family back home in India. Facebook is also important for them to keep update about their favourite activities, a respondent epitomised I use to keep updated with my favourite bands. Some of them also using for their loved one, one respondent wrote I use it for my Girlfriend. Another elucidated I frequently keep in touch with my boyfriend back home because it is easy, free and useful to strengthen our relationship. Some of the very interesting motives of Facebook use listed by respondents are; share something about life, professional networking, get help from friend in college works, I use to learn different language, watch funny videos, see interesting comments, know about others leisure activities, see different things going on group I joined and pages I liked, get updates from friends I havent seen for long time, share jokes, stories and other news, discover others cultures, find out parties with friends, sharing images and videos, share opinion about real life issues, interesting or funny links for laugh, use of Facebook application, its very interactive and reviving, having chit-chats and enjoying, getting recent news and issues about friends, get some useful information for study, when I am extremely bored and nothing to do, I use to refresh myself, to update about the mood of the day, to know how my friends are feeling that particular day, to know about latest happening in world in users view, looking at the recent pictures of my family and relatives, sometimes watching other peoples activities are quite interesting, comment on friends pictures and reply to friends etc.

71

4.8 Information Students like to see in Universities Facebook Page Respondents were asked an open-ended question to lists five most important information they wish to see in universities Facebook page, which they think will facilitate them in university selection process. The most of respondents listed course and academic, course fee, university location, universities infrastructure and facilities, university lifestyle, faculties information, communication with current students, student testimonials and application requirements as very important information that facilitates them in university selection process and wants to see these information in Facebook page. One respondent listed most important information as discussion on relative topics about the universities among members and add application to the page that engage users with videos, reviews and pictures of university. Some respondents also listed following information as important and they wish to see these in universities Facebook page that are student population; universities rules and guidelines; communication with current students; career prospect; leisure activities; photos of facilities; FAQ area; photos of activities; share problem with lecturers; university ranking; research and innovation; stories of successful students; universitys progress; university calendar ; students experiences; student activities; social life in campus; university resources; university accreditation; extracurricular activities; faculties innovation; universitys success stories; transportation; accommodation; stories and experiences of inspired graduates; universitys culture; facilities for students such as design/photography/painting studios; lecturers reputation; student comments on university facilities; complete and true information; university-industry link; practical aspect of university education; discussion forums; reminders of events; reminders of submissions; university's sustainability program; contacts of current students; online game between students or teachers; past performance etc.

72

CHAPTER V 5. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

This study has aimed to achieve three research objectives. First objective of the study was to find out students motives to use Facebook. The rationale behind this objective was to confirm the validity of different predicators developed by previous researcher in Facebook use over time. Most of the previous research work in this area was done on or before 2008 and Facebook was an emerging phenomenon at that time not much application were developed and popular as it now. With the growing popularity of Facebook, different applications have been developed and users may fulfil and satisfy their different media needs through the use of Facebook. Besides that the researcher tried to get opinion of university students about their academic use of Facebook and two new predicators were used. Second, this study aimed to find out university students familiarity about universities growing use of Facebook in student recruitment, their perception about it and students use of Facebook as a medium to obtain information to facilitate their university selection process. The precise objective of the researcher was to find out the possibility of Facebook to be a part of integrated marketing communication strategy in marketing of university programme and student recruitment. Third and final objective of this research was to find out what are the most important information student consider in their university selection process and what are their opinion on commonly available information at universities Facebook page. The researcher believes that latter two objectives are less researched and researcher also didnt find specific research in this area. The findings of this study on these two research questions will be a basis for future research.

73

The primary data collection method was used to achieve stated research objectives. This method is very useful to get fresh view, up to date information and new idea in particular subject under research. A survey was administered with 120 students, who were studying in foundation, undergraduate and postgraduate level at a medium size Asian universitys branch campus located at central London. 92 students were participated in the survey by returning complete survey questionnaire. Of the sample surveyed, 90% of students had a Facebook account and 10% did not have the account. Those samples that didnt have an account were excluded from further analysis. Therefore, the findings of the survey was based on the valid sample of (N= 83) students. The discussion on the survey results and conclusion has been presented next under different headings. 5.1 Facebook Found as an Important Daily Activity but not Addiction This study found Facebook as an important daily activity to significant proportion of students. 38.55% of students reported to log into Facebook several times a day. Overall, 79.67% of students logged into Facebook on a daily basis. This finding corroborate with Sheldons (2008) study, which was found that 81% students logged on a daily basis. Since few years back Facebook has become a common phenomenon among university students. 38.55% of students have had a Facebook accounts since 3 years or more. Majority (83.23 percent) of students had a Facebook account from one year or more, only 16.87% of students had an account from less than a year. According to this survey, largest proportion (66.27 percent) of students joined Facebook due to their friends; they were the prime influencer to join it. Majority (60.20 percent) of students in this survey reported that they spent 30 minutes or less a day on Facebook. Significant proportion (38.55 percent) spent 15 minutes or less on Facebook a day. Only, 27.71% of students reported of spending 1 hour or more a day in Facebook. The average time spent found in this study is 17minutes less from previous study. Sheldon (2008) study of 172 students sample found that, on average, students spent 47 minutes a day on Facebook.
74

Facebook has been met with huge criticism by educators and parents in past as they believe that students are spending too much time on Facebook and addictive on it (Bugeja, 2006). The finding of this study is inconsistent with that perception. The majority (60.20 percent) of students participated in survey were spending 30 minutes or less a day, which is 2% of total 26.5 hours a day typical lifestyle of a todays student identified in Oklahoma State Universitys study (Mollet, et al., 2008). It can be concluded that students are not addictive with Facebook and their daily time spending on Facebook has been reduced significantly. It can also relate with a law of diminishing utility a very popular economics theory. However, it point out that the reduce level of engagement on Facebook. This result may suffice to say that students do not have many things to do in Facebook. This is not a good sign to marketer who are trying hard to include this social media tool in their IMC strategies (Mangold & Faulds, 2009; Li & Bernoff, 2008). 5.2 Majority Use Facebook to Keep in Touch with Friends and Family The survey found that most important motive to use Facebook is to connect with their friends. A sample surveyed in this study found Facebook as a great tool for friendship. Figure (39) below gives the summary of findings of the survey on different motives of Facebook use among students.

75

120 Percentage of Respondents 100 80 60 25.3 31.3 40 63.9 20 0 50.6 33.7 32.5 30.1 30.1 29.1 28.9 28.9 24.1 24.1 22.9 19.3 18.1 28.9 22.8 21.7 22.9 32.5 32.5

22.9 31.3

28.9

30.1 16.9

29.5 33.7

18.1 30.1

9.8 14.5 16.9 16 14.5 14.5 10.8 9.8 8.4

Strongly Agree

Agree

Disagree

Strongly Disagree

FIGURE 39 Motives to use Facebook

The largest proportion (86.70 percent) of students uses Facebook to keep in touch with friends. A larger proportion (81.90 percent) of students motive is to find and connect with old friends. A significant number of students (59 percent) also use Facebook to keep in touch with their family. A slightly higher proportion (63.90 percent) of students motive to use Facebook is to time pass when bored. Students in the survey agreed with most of the predictors used in the survey that motivate them to use Facebook. 40% of students surveyed agree on each statement as a motive to use Facebook apart from play virtual games with friends (33.80 percent), looking friendship with opposite sex (32.60 percent), flirt with someone (22.90 percent) and connect with lecturers to discuss about tutorials (18.60 percent).

76

A small proportion of students show their strong agreement that they use Facebook for academic purpose like discuss class work, and catch up missed lesson with friends and connect with lecturer to discuss about tutorials. However, one-third (30.10 percent) of respondents agreed that they use Facebook to discuss class work and catch up missed lessons with friends. The findings of this study support many conclusions that have been drawn in previously reviewed literature (Flaherty et al., 1998; LaRose et al., 2001; Song et al., 2004; Ho Cho, 2006; Matsuba 2006; Coley, 2006; Ellison et al., 2007; Leung, 2007; Lenhart; 2009). The findings of this study is consistent with Urista et al., (2009) that SNS are simple means for restabilising contacts with old acquaintances and able to reconnect, socialise with friends and classmates from the past. This study also support findings of Sheldon (2008) that students use Facebook to maintain relationship, pass time when bored and entertainment reasons. However, this study is inconsistent with her another finding that a small number of students use Facebook to develop new relationship. This study found that significant number of student has been using Facebook to build new relationship like meet new people (50.60 percent), make new friends (48.20 percent) and know more about newly meet friends in campus (49.40 percent). 5.3 University Website is Very Important Medium to Obtain Information The second objective of this research was to find out universities Facebook page as a medium to obtain information in university selection process among students. The survey found that half (51.85 percent) of students surveyed shows their familiarity with universities Facebook page but only less than half (43.21 percent) visited it before. Participants of the survey were asked to rate their media preference while obtaining information in their university selection process. Most (86.2 percent) of the students find university web site is an important medium to obtain information in university selection process. Top five important media
77

students use in university selection process after university website are college view books and prospectus (84 percent), education fairs (70 percent), open house and campus visit (69.10 percent), and personal recommendation (63.80 percent) respectively. Facebook is found as less preferred medium among students that use to obtain information similar to traditional media like newspaper & magazine, television and radio. Only thirty eight percent of students think Facebook as an important medium use in university selection process just ahead from radio in the list. The results indicate that Facebook has a long way to go to become a most prefer medium among students. However, the students participated in the survey are found very positive about universities using their Facebook in student recruitment. More than half (53.09 percent) of students like it and only small proportion (11.11 percent) didnt like the idea. But, most (86.42 percent) of students didnt use their university Facebook page in selection of their current university. The good news for universities who are heavily using it as recruitment tool is that majority of students (72.50 percent) show the possibility to use it in future. The survey results of this study substantiate the findings of the University of Rhode Island (2010) study that university web site are found key information source to perspective students in making final decision in their university selection process. The findings of this study also support Ashburn (2007) findings that 84% of sample said they use university web sites as prefer medium followed by personal recommendation (75 percent), campus visit (64 percent) and college view books (64 percent). However, the order of importance as prefer medium for latter three are reversed in this study i.e. college view books and prospectus (84 percent), open house and campus visit (69.10 percent), and personal recommendation (63.80 percent) respectively. The findings of this study support the conclusion of Noel-Levitz (2007) that Facebook [SNS in their study] can be a great resource for recruitment effort and will be beneficial but universities must focus effort on strengthening the experience of perspective students may get on official university web site.
78

5.4 Courses, Fee and Facilities are Important in University Selection Decision The third objectives of this study was to find out the important information students use to make their university selection decision and their ratings on commonly available information or activities in universities Facebook page. The all thirteen information items used in survey are viewed as important by nearly half of the students participated in the survey. The top five information respondents think important to make final university selection decision are; courses and academics (91.20 percent), course fee (81.50 percent), universities infrastructure and facilities (81.20 percent), faculties information (76.50 percent) and application requirements, procedures and deadlines (76. 20 percent). It may conclude that courses student are looking for, fees for that particular course, infrastructure and facilities and faculties strength to deliver the course as well as requirements and procedures to enrol into that course including deadline are most important information that student consider making final decision in their university selection. Results clearly show that student view discussion about course and academics in universities Facebook page as an important activities. Majority (84.80 percent) rated discussion about courses and academics as important followed by news, key activity, application procedures and deadlines (77.50 percent), communication with current students and faculties (73.80 percent), communication with prospective students (73.80 percent), discussion about student activities and extracurricular options (70.90 percent), insight into university culture, diversity and everyday life (72.50 percent), stories and experiences of current students and alumni (72.50 percent) and students and staff work prizes, honours and projects (63.30 percent). The majority of students important ratings to communication with current students and faculties, communication with prospective students, discussion about student activities and extracurricular options and stories and
79

experiences of current students and alumni support the value of social media characteristics such as conversation, two way communication, transparency, authenticity and word of mouth to success in these media tool. The survey findings support the findings of previous survey by a consulting firm NoelLevitz (2009). 5.5 Limitations of the Study and Future Research There a few limitations of the study that should be noted. The first limitation of this study involves the lack of time and resources available to fully examine the topic. Second, this study applied survey methodology, which limits data collection from wider-range and qualitative aspects of study is limited. Third, this study used the convenience sample of students that limits the generality of the findings. Fourth, the majority of participants were male and future study would benefit from the inclusion of more female participants. It should be noted that this particular study only surveyed students from a medium-sized Asian universitys branch campus with small sample of 83 students. Future studies should include other predictors for Facebook use, more diverse predicators to measure academic use of Facebook. Future research should focus across a broader range of university students and large sample. Future studies should also use the qualitative methods like focus group discussion that gives the reasons for particular behaviour and action.

80

REFLECTIVE STATEMENT

The whole dissertation process was a very exciting and at times, a very challenging experience, especially for the independent learner. I have been through several mental and psychological ups and downs during the process. In the preliminary phases, I even thought to give up and spent many sleepless and restless night researching, reading and writing, and starting all over again. Since, it continued from one phase to the next, I was able to take baby steps and gradually began to find and see a bigger picture-the learning process was very unique, as within each stage, I was an unmasking more and more, and found it to be fulfilling. In completion of this dissertation, I discovered that I had become rather resourceful and had acquired new skills and knowledge from my research. Most importantly, my dissertation-writing had evolved to become a self assessment that brought my own personal strengths and weaknesses to light. When I completed my one year post graduate diploma at Limkokwing University of Creative Technology in July 2010, I started to panic about what to research, and what the process would entail had many questions and various ideas and suggestions while searching for a solution to my questions. Most of the time, I ended up with vague ideas and notions, which made me more stressed. However, I have been fascinated with one of the pillars of integrated marketing strategy i.e. promotion since I chose business and management for my higher education. After a month of serious brain storming, the studying of different literatures and consultation with my lecturers, I made up my mind to do something in media. However, I was still not explicitly clear about exactly what I was going to do in media. I attended the Research Workshop organised by the University of Gloucestershire in August 2, 2010. After completion of the administrative procedures, I went to the workshop room along with 24 other students. Mr. Bob Greenwood had come to provide a briefing about what research is all about, what should be done and what shouldnt and how students need to proceed with it. When he finished his lecture for the day, I left the room with
81

some relief - not because I obtained the answer for my questions but knowing that the confusion in my mind was natural, and normal to every novice student researcher. The workshop was scheduled into two sessions. The first session was in August 2 &3 and was aimed to provide theoretical knowledge to us about what research is, what dissertation writing is, How to choose a viable research topic? What are the characteristics of good topic? , and what are the research philosophies, approaches and strategies? On the other hand, the second session was aimed at guiding us to prepare a viable research proposal, theoretical knowledge on different primary data collection method, quantitative and qualitative research and guidance to build up final dissertation and its contents. I found both sessions very important and learned about the different aspects to research. The person delivering the lectures was very knowledgeable and an expert in their respective fields. After this session, I acquired good knowledge about research, different methods of carrying out research, and the kinds of common problems students encounter in their research. It was a great opportunity as a beginner to learn various aspect of research. However, personally I felt that the second session could have been more fruitful if more time was allocated for one to one discussions with expert regarding our topics, research problems, questions and objectives. I also think the class size was large, which limits individual discussion. Not everyone could submit draft proposals on the final day of the session though it was expected. I drafted a proposal but I could not finalise it because I did not get the opportunity to discuss it with tutor. I came back with answers for many questions that were in my mind, valuable information about research but was still unsure about the research topic, specific research objectives and questions. After a week of the research workshop, I was given Dr. Brian Terry to supervise my dissertation. He asked me to submit a research proposal by September 30, 2010. I had submitted a research proposal in the role of social media in marketing communication: consumer attitudes towards social
82

media advertising. I was not sure about the outcomes of proposal. After few days, my supervisor replied. He accepted my proposal and also gave some encouraging comments on the structure of the proposal. Further, he was convinced about the validity of the research topic. However, he put forward serious comments on the research objectives, the preliminary review of literature and the methodology I planned to adopt. He was not convinced of the research on that breadth (based on research objectives and questions) in the limited time available. He sent me some specific literature and advised me to relate my research topic into specific sectors and asked to limit research objective into three. The areas he put in border line was core of the research. Again I had a dilemma, but his constructive feedback encouraged me and restored my confidence. I spent three days reading all the literature he sent me. I was pressured to submit a revised topic and research objectives within a week. However, it became clearer and I began to understand why he asked me to limit the research objectives. I submitted the revised topic as, the use of social media in marketing communication: students use of Facebook to obtain information in selection of university. My supervisor was then convinced about my revised topic and research objectives and gave permission to go ahead. Up to this point, I learned two important things. First, I approached everyone looking for a specific answer, and later realised that nobody had my answer as that was not their problem. As a learner and researcher it was up to me to find what interested me, what I wanted to find out and what resources I had to work with. The people I had initially approached were only guides to facilitate my learning process. Second, I learned that constructive feedback and precise guidance really helps a researcher reach their goals, instead of discouraging comments and highlighting only negatives aspects. The revised topic made my remaining work a lot clearer and specific. I felt very comfortable to outline the topic I was covering into my review of literature. I found it very easy to search, review and summarise the idea from available literature based on sections instead of searching for literature as a whole. That is, divided whole chapter into various small sections that made my job much easier. I found this section as a backbone for the whole
83

research process. I invested considerable time investigating various literatures, synthesizing and extracting the main idea from it. I learned various skills in this process. I learned to use the Ms- Office auto referencing function, which saved my time and energy from manual referencing. I obtained in depth information and knowledge about social media. After a review of the literature, I obtained clearer insight into different theories, different uses of social media and scope and breadth of social media. I have corrected some of my pre-conception about social media during review of literature. I learned to summarise and paraphrase ideas of others into my own and build up my writing skills considerably. I found this section most important in refining and being more specific, helping me to meet research objectives. After a review of the literature, I was able to limit my research objective into three i.e. to find out student academic use of Facebook; to find out student use of Facebook as medium to obtain information in university selection process and to identify information they expect from universities Facebook page. I struggled to choose the right research philosophies for my research. I want to be honest, in that I am still not completely knowledgeable on research philosophies. I would like to continue studying this aspect if time prevails. I found lot of contradictory views, opinions and literature from different writers on this topic. I found survey methods to be very appropriate for an opinion survey and very effective for a beginner like me with limited time and resources. I got very interesting experience during the data collection. Being a previous student, I easily obtained permission from university management to access student e-mail for survey. I was aware of the response rate of survey questionnaires and the time taken to respond to them. I assume that because I was sending question to students they would know the importance of time constraints for another student and would send me questionnaires immediately. Instead I had to follow-up using various methods such as two email reminders, asked lecturers to remind them and took three weeks to collect 90 questionnaires. My good grasp of statistics and existing knowledge of quantitative methods was very useful in data collection and analysis. I used frequency analysis to
84

present research findings, which become much easier due to my good knowledge with Ms-Excel. In the data analysis process, I learned to use very useful statistical software called SPSS. This skill can be used for various future research projects and will provide me a competitive edge over peers. I was pleased to find very interesting results from my research. The research found social media as an emerging alternative media tool among students, it also found them to be very positive about universities Facebook and considerably using it for academic purposes but is still has a long way to go before becoming the leading tool of integrated marketing strategy for institutions. The findings of my research provide a basis for future research across a broad range of universities students population. Overall, I found the process to be very fulfilling and important for gaining knowledge into a specific subject. Time management, self discipline and focus into specific goals are just some of the many skills and traits I have newly acquired. Reflecting growth and positive change, I am proud to say that these new found experiences will remain as part of my identity for life. Most crucial to note however, and I cannot stress this enough, is that timely feedback, precise and constructive comments as well as specific and articulate guidance from supervisors are of dire importance, to the timely and successful completion of all good dissertation projects.

85

REFERENCES

Ashburn, E. (2007). Prospective students rely on campus visits and web sites to learn about colleges, report says. The Chronicle of Higher Education , 53 (38), A45. Barnes, N. G., & Mattson, E. (2008). Social media in the Inc 500: The first longitudnal study. Retrieved September 25, 2010, from http://www1.umassd.edu/cmr/studiesresearch/blogstudy3.cfm Barnes, N., & Mattson, E. (2007). The game has changed: College admissions outpace corporations in embracing social media. Retrieved September 18, 2010, from http://www.umassd.edu/cmr/studiesresearch/blogstudy3.cfm Benkler, Y. (2006). The Wealth of networks: How social productions transforms market and freedom. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. Bhaskar, R. (1989). Reclaming reality: A critical introduction to contemporary philoshophy. London: Verso. Boone, L. E., & Kurtz, D. L. (2007). Contemporary marketing (13th ed.). Ohio: Thomson/South-Western. Boyd, D. M. (2008, Fall). Taken out of context : American teen sociality in networked publics. California: s.n. Boyd, D., & Ellison, N. (2007). Social network sites:Definition, history, and scholorship. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication , 13 (1), article 11. Bugeja, M. (2006). Facing the facebook. Chronicle of Higher Education , 52 (21), C1. Cassidy, J. (2006). Me media: How hanging out on the internet become big business. The New Worker , 82 (13), 50. Castells, M. (1996). The rise of the network society. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell. Cavazza, F. (2008, June 9). Social media landscape. Retrieved September 15, 2010, from http://www.fredcavazza.net/2008/06/09/socialmedia-landscape/ Coley, T. (2006). Student and cyber communities. Unpublished manuscript, University of South Carolina, South Carolina.
86

Econsultancy. (2009, June). Social media and online brand monitoring trends briefing. London. s.n. Eijkman, H. (2009). Using web 2.0 to decolonise transcultural learning zones in higher education. Campus-Wide Information Systems , 26 (3), 240-255. Ellision, N. B., Steinfield, C., & Lampe, C. (2007). The benefits of facebook "friends": Social capital and college students' use of online social network sites. Journal of Computer- Mediated Communication , 12, 1143-1168. Ennew, C. T. (1993). The marketing blueprint. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers. Flaherty, L. M., Pearce, K., & Rubin, R. B. (1998). Internet and face-to-face communication: Not functional alternatives. Communication Quarterly , 46, 250-268. Flanagin, A. J., & Metzger, M. J. (2001). Internet use in the contemporatry media environment. Human Communication Research , 27, 153181. Foux, G. (2006, May 8). Consumer -generated media: Get your customers involved. Brand Strategy , pp. 38-39. Gangadharbatla, H. (2008). Facebook me: Collective self -steem, need to belong, and internet self-efficacy as predictors for the iGeneration's attitudes toward social networking sites. Journal of Interactive Advertising , 8 (2), 5-15. Gillin, P. (2007). The new influencers:A marketer's guide to the new social media. California: Quill Driver Books. Greener, D. S. (2008). Business research methods. s.l: Ventus Publishing. Hawn, C. (2009, March-April). Take two asprin and tweet me in the morning: How twitter, facebook, and other social media are reshaping health care. Health Affairs , 28 (2), pp. 361-368. Heron, J. (1996). Co-operative inquiry: Research into the Human Condition. In M. Saunders, P. Lewis, & A. Thornhill, Research methods for business students (pp. 110-111). Harlow: Pearson Education Limited. Ho Cho, S. (2006). Effects of motivations and gender on adolcents' selfdisclouser in online chatting. Cyber Psychology & Behavior , 10 (3), 339-455.

87

Hoeflich, S. (2002). Sources of information in the institutional choice of graduate students. In M. C. Poock, & D. Lefond, Characteristics of effective graduate school web sites: Implications for the recruitment of graduate students (Vol. 78, pp. 15-19). College and University. Hossler, D., & Gallagher, K. S. (1987). Studying student college choice: A three -phase model and the implications for policymakers. College and University , 62, 207-221. Hussey, J., & Hussey, R. (1997). Business research. Hampshire: Palgrave. Joinson, A. N. (2008). Looking at, loooking up or keeping up withPeople?: motives and uses of Facebook. In: Proceeedings of ACM CHI2008 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems April 5-10, 2008. (pp. 1027-1036).Florence: ACM CHI. Karjaluota, E. (2008, March 1). A premier in social media:Examining the phenomenon, its relevance, promise and risks. Vancouver. s.n. King Fish Media. (2009). Survey on marketing, media and measurement. Massachusetts: Author Kotler, P. (2005, July 12). Advertising vs. PR. 17. (www.marketingprofs.com, Interviewer). Retrieved September 18, 2010, from http://www.marketingprofs.com Lampe, C., Ellison, N., & Steinfield, C. (2006). A Face(book) in the crowd: Social searching vs. social browsing. Proceedings of CSCW (pp. 167-170). New York: ACM Press. LaRose, R., Mastro, D., & Eastin, M. S. (2001). Understanding internet usage: A social-cognitive approach to uses and gratifications. Social Science Computer Review , 19, 395-414. LeFever, L. S. (2008, May 28). Video: Social media in plain English. Retrieved August 20, 2010, from http://www.commoncraft.com/socialmedia Lenhart, A. (2009). Adults and social network websites. Pew Research Center. Washington D.C.: Pew Internet & American Life Project. Lenhart, A., Purcell, K., Smith, A., & Zickuhr, K. (2010). Social media & mobile internet use among teens and young adults. Pew Research Center. Washington D.C.: Pew Internet and American Life Project. Leung, L. (2007). Stressful life events, motives for internet use, and social support among digital kids. Cyber Psychology & Behaviot , 10 (2), 204-211.
88

Li, C., & Bernoff, J. (2008). Groundswell:Winning in a world transformed by social technologies. Boston: Harvard Business Press. Lloyd, J., Dean, L. A., & Cooper, D. L. (2007). ). Students' technology use and its effects on peer relationships, academic involvement, and healthy lifestyles. NASPA Journal , 44 (3), Art. 6. Mangold, W. G., & Faulds, J. D. (2009). Social Media: The new hybrid element of the promotion mix. Business Horizons , 52 (4), 357-365. Matsuba, K. (2006). Searching for self and relationship online. Cyber Psychology & Behavior , 9 (3), 275-284. Mayer, A., & Puller, S. L. (2007, August). The old boy (and Girl) network:Social network formation on university campuses. Unpublished manuscript, Texas. Mayfield, A. (2008, August 1). iCrossing. Retrieved August 20, 2010, from http:// www.iCrossing.com/ebooks Mollet, A., Kraft, K., & Segura, C. (2008). Stduentaffairs.com: Virtual case study competition 2008. Unpublished manuscript, Oklahoma State University, Oklahoma. Morris, M., & Ogan, C. (1996). The internet as mass medium. Journal of Communication , 46, 39-50. Noel-Levitz. (2009). E-expectations report: Scrolling toward enrollment. Retrieved September 22, 2010, from Noel-Levitz White Paper: http://www.montcliar.edu/admissions/apply.html Noel-Levitz. (2009). Student recruitment practices and strategies at four-year and two-year institutions. Retrieved September 22, 2010, from Noel-Levitz Report on Student Recruitment Trends: http://www.noellevitz.com/Recruitingbenchmarks Noel-Levitz, I. (2007). E-expectations class of 2007 report: Building an erecruitment network. s.I.: Noel-Levitz Oslon, H. (1995, May 8). Quantitative "versus" qualitative research : The wrong question. (D. Ward, Ed.) Retrieved October 5, 2010, from http://www.ualberta.ca/dept/slis/cais/olson.html Poock, M. C., & Lefond, D. (2003). Characteristics of effective graduate school web sites: Implications for the recruitment of graduate students. College and University , 78 (3), 15-19.

89

Qualman, E. (2007). Social search engine face-off: Facebook vs. MySpace. Retrieved September 23, 2010, from http://searchenginewatch.com/showPage.html?page=3627975 Ramsey, G., & Douglas, A. (2010). Getting and keeping customers through digital marketing strategies : Webcast Guide. California: Adobe Systems Incorporated. Rashtchy, F., Kessler, A. M., Bieber, P. J., Shindler, N. H., & Tzeng, J. C. (2007, February). The user revolution: The new advertising ecosystem and the rise of the internet as a mass medium. Minneapolis: Piper Jaffray Investment Research. Remenyi, D., Williams, B., Money, A., & Swartz, E. (2007). Doing research in business and management: An introduction to process and method. In M. Saunders, P. Lewis, & A. Thornhill, Research methods for business students (pp. 103 -121). Harlow: Pearson Education Limited. Reuben, R. (2008, August 19). The use of social media in higher education for marketing and communications: A guide for professional in higher education. Retrieved September 13, 2010, from http://doteduguru.com/id423-social-media-uses-higher-educationmarketing-communication.html Rheingold, H. (2002). Smart mobs: The next social revolution. Cambridge, MA: Perseus. Robson, C. (2002). Reald world research (2nd ed.). Oxford: Blackwell. Rosmarin, R. (2007, May 25). Facebook opens up. Retrieved September 20, 2010, from http://www.forbes.com/technology/2007/05/25/facebookmysapce-socialnetwork-tech-cx_rr_0525facebook.html Rubin, A. (1994). Media uses and effects: A uses-and-gratification perspective. In J. Bryant, & D. Zillman, Media effects: Advances in theory and research (2nd ed., pp. 417- 436). New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. Rubin, A. (2002). The uses-and gratifications perspective of media effects. In J. Bryant, & D. Zillmann, Media Effects : Advances in theory and research (2nd ed., pp. 525-548). New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. Saunders, M., Lewis, P., & Thornhill, A. (2007). Research methods for business students (4th ed.). Harlow: Pearson Education Limited.

90

Scott, D. M. (2010 ). The new rules of marketing & PR: How to use social media, blogs, news releases, online video, and viral marketing to reach buyers directly (2nd ed.). New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons Inc., Hoboken. Selek, Z. (2010, January - February). Online advertising beats traditional advertising. BN Magzine , p. 94. Sheldon, P. (2008). The relationship between unwillingness -to-communicate and students' Facebook use. Journal of Media Psychology , 20 (2), 67-75. Shriky, C. (2008). Here Comes Everybody: The power of organising without organisation. New York: Penguin. Smith, H. (2010, July 22). Palnet Facebook. Metro , p. 1. Solis, B. (2008). The Essential Guide to Social Media. s.I.: s.n. Song, I., LaRose, R., Eastin, M. S., & Lin, C. A. (2004). Internet gratifications and internet addiction: On the uses and abuses of new media. Cyberpsychology & Behavior , 7, 384-393. Stafford, T., & Gonier, D. (2004). What Americans like about being online. Communications of the ACM , 47 (11), 107-112. StrongMail. (2009, December 2). 2010 Marketing trends survey. Retrieved September 15, 2010, from www.emarketer.com Tapscott, D., & Williams, A. D. (2006). Wikinomics: How mass collaboration changes everything. New York: Portfolio. The Nielsen Company. (2010, April 15). Social networks/blogs now account for one in every four and a half minutes online. Retrieved August 3, 2010, from http://blog.nielsen.com/nielsenwire/online_mobile/socialmedia-accounts-for-22-percent-of-time-online/ Thia, T. (2010, October 20). World's Internet population to surpass 2B mark. Retrieved November 17, 2010, from http://www.zdnetasia.com/world-s-internet-population-to-surpass2b-mark-62203848.htm University of Rhode Island. (2010). Report of the admissions advisory committee. Rhode Island: University of Rhode Island. Urista, M. A., Dong, Q., & Day, K. D. (2009). Explaining why young adults use MySpace and Facebook through uses and gratification theory. Human Communication , 12 (2), 215 -230.
91

Vollmer, C., & Precourt, G. (2008). Always on: Advertising, marketing, and media in an era of consumer control. New York: McGraw-Hill. Weinberger, D. (2008). Everything Is miscellaneous: The Power of the New Digital Disorder. New York: Holt Paperbacks. Wildermuth, B. M. (1993). Post-positivist research: two examples of methodological pluralism. 63, 450-468. Xarchos, C., & Charland, M. B. (2008). Innovapost uses Web 2.0 tools to engage its employees. STRATEGIC HR REVIEW , 7 (3), 13-18. Yin, R. K. (2003). Case study research: Design and method (3rd ed.). London: Sage. Zywica, J., & Danowski, J. (2008). The faces of facebookers: Investigating social enhancement and social compensation hypotheses;Predicting Facebook and offline popularity from sociability and self-steem, and mapping the meanings of popularity with semantic networks. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication , 14, 1-34.

92

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A: TEST OF RELAIBILITY ON MOTIVES OF FACEBOOK USE


Table 1.1 Reliability Statistics Cronbach's Alpha Based on Cronbach's Alpha .881 Standardized Items .877 N of Items 20

Table 1.2 Summary Item Statistics Maximum / Mean Item Means Item Variances Inter-Item Correlations 2.475 1.118 .264 Minimum Maximum 1.506 .753 -.177 3.312 1.437 .903 Range 1.805 .684 1.080 Minimum 2.198 1.908 -5.102 Variance N of Items .191 .029 .027 20 20 20

APPENDIX B: FREQUENCY TABLES


Table 2.1 Respondent Gender Frequency Valid Male Female Total 60 23 83 Percent 72.3 27.7 100.0 Valid Percent 72.3 27.7 100.0 Cumulative Percent 72.3 100.0

Table2.2 Age Group of Respondent Frequency Valid 15-19 20-24 25-29 30 or over Total 4 49 20 10 83 Percent 4.8 59.0 24.1 12.0 100.0 Valid Percent 4.8 59.0 24.1 12.0 100.0 Cumulative Percent 4.8 63.9 88.0 100.0

93

Table 2.3 Current level of study Frequency Valid Foundation Undergraduate Postgraduate Total 18 37 28 83 Percent 21.7 44.6 33.7 100.0 Valid Percent 21.7 44.6 33.7 100.0 Cumulative Percent 21.7 66.3 100.0

Table 2.4 current year of study Cumulative Frequency Valid First year Second Year Third Year Total 30 31 22 83 Percent 36.1 37.3 26.5 100.0 Valid Percent 36.1 37.3 26.5 100.0 Percent 36.1 73.5 100.0

Table 2.5 Academic Specialisation Frequency Valid Business Information Technology Communication and Broadcasting Design & Innovation MBA Total 22 20 12 7 22 83 Percent 26.5 24.1 14.5 8.4 26.5 100.0 Valid Percent 26.5 24.1 14.5 8.4 26.5 100.0 Cumulative Percent 26.5 50.6 65.1 73.5 100.0

Table 2.6 length of having Facebook account Frequency Valid less than a year 1 year 2 years 3 years or more Total 14 10 27 32 83 Percent 16.9 12.0 32.5 38.6 100.0 Valid Percent 16.9 12.0 32.5 38.6 100.0 Cumulative Percent 16.9 28.9 61.4 100.0

94

Table 2.7 Influencer to Join in Facebook Frequency Valid Friend Family Others No one Total 55 7 3 18 83 Percent 66.3 8.4 3.6 21.7 100.0 Valid Percent 66.3 8.4 3.6 21.7 100.0 Cumulative Percent 66.3 74.7 78.3 100.0

Table 2.8 Frequency of Log into Facebook Account Frequency Valid Once a month Once a week Once a day Two times a day Several times a day Total 3 13 24 11 32 83 Percent 3.6 15.7 28.9 13.3 38.6 100.0 Valid Percent 3.6 15.7 28.9 13.3 38.6 100.0 Cumulative Percent 3.6 19.3 48.2 61.4 100.0

Tables 2.9 Time Spent in Facebook Frequency Valid 15 minutes or less 16-30 31-60 1 hour 2 hours or more Total 32 18 10 9 14 83 Percent 38.6 21.7 12.0 10.8 16.9 100.0 Valid Percent 38.6 21.7 12.0 10.8 16.9 100.0 Cumulative Percent 38.6 60.2 72.3 83.1 100.0

95

Table 2.10 Number of Facebook Friends Cumulative Frequency Valid 0-49 50-99 100-149 150-199 200-249 250 or more Total 13 13 15 7 10 25 83 Percent 15.7 15.7 18.1 8.4 12.0 30.1 100.0 Valid Percent 15.7 15.7 18.1 8.4 12.0 30.1 100.0 Percent 15.7 31.3 49.4 57.8 69.9 100.0

Table 2.11 Keep in Touch with Friends Frequency Valid Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Total 53 19 5 6 83 Percent 63.9 22.9 6.0 7.2 100.0 Valid Percent 63.9 22.9 6.0 7.2 100.0 Cumulative Percent 63.9 86.7 92.8 100.0

Table 2.12 Keep in Touch with Family Frequency Valid Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Total 28 21 24 10 83 Percent 33.7 25.3 28.9 12.0 100.0 Valid Percent 33.7 25.3 28.9 12.0 100.0 Cumulative Percent 33.7 59.0 88.0 100.0

96

Table 2.13 Find and Connect with Old Friends Frequency Valid Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Total 42 26 10 5 83 Percent 50.6 31.3 12.0 6.0 100.0 Valid Percent 50.6 31.3 12.0 6.0 100.0 Cumulative Percent 50.6 81.9 94.0 100.0

Table 2.14 Share Likes and Dislikes with Friends Frequency Valid Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Total Missing Total 9 23 18 26 12 79 4 83 Percent 27.7 21.7 31.3 14.5 95.2 4.8 100.0 Valid Percent 29.1 22.8 32.9 15.2 100.0 Cumulative Percent 29.1 51.9 84.8 100.0

Table 2.15 Connect and Communicate with someone when Feel Lonely Frequency Valid Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Total 19 24 20 20 83 Percent 22.9 28.9 24.1 24.1 100.0 Valid Percent 22.9 28.9 24.1 24.1 100.0 Cumulative Percent 22.9 51.8 75.9 100.0

Table 2.16 Share Problems, Happiness and Sad Moment with Friends Frequency Valid Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Total 24 19 22 18 83 Percent 28.9 22.9 26.5 21.7 100.0 Valid Percent 28.9 22.9 26.5 21.7 100.0 Cumulative Percent 28.9 51.8 78.3 100.0

97

Table 2.17 Stay in Touch with Important News and Issues Frequency Valid Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Total 20 27 18 18 83 Percent 24.1 32.5 21.7 21.7 100.0 Valid Percent 24.1 32.5 21.7 21.7 100.0 Cumulative Percent 24.1 56.6 78.3 100.0

Table 2.18 Organise Events, Make Plans and Participate in Causes with Friends Frequency Valid Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Total Missing Total 9 13 32 22 14 81 2 83 Percent 15.7 38.6 26.5 16.9 97.6 2.4 100.0 Valid Percent 16.0 39.5 27.2 17.3 100.0 Cumulative Percent 16.0 55.6 82.7 100.0

Table 2.19 Express Opinion, Publicly Share Personal Ideas and Creativity Frequency Valid Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Total 25 24 18 16 83 Percent 30.1 28.9 21.7 19.3 100.0 Valid Percent 30.1 28.9 21.7 19.3 100.0 Cumulative Percent 30.1 59.0 80.7 100.0

Table 2.20 Discuss Class Work, Assignments and Catch Up Missed Lesson with Friends Frequency Valid Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Total 9 25 22 27 83 Percent 10.8 30.1 26.5 32.5 100.0 Valid Percent 10.8 30.1 26.5 32.5 100.0 Cumulative Percent 10.8 41.0 67.5 100.0

98

Table 2.21 Meet New People Frequency Valid Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Total 24 18 17 24 83 Percent 28.9 21.7 20.5 28.9 100.0 Valid Percent 28.9 21.7 20.5 28.9 100.0 Cumulative Percent 28.9 50.6 71.1 100.0

Table 2.22 Make New Friends Frequency Valid Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Total 25 15 20 23 83 Percent 30.1 18.1 24.1 27.7 100.0 Valid Percent 30.1 18.1 24.1 27.7 100.0 Cumulative Percent 30.1 48.2 72.3 100.0

Table 2.23 Know more about Newly Meet Friends in Campus Frequency Valid Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Total 16 25 19 23 83 Percent 19.3 30.1 22.9 27.7 100.0 Valid Percent 19.3 30.1 22.9 27.7 100.0 Cumulative Percent 19.3 49.4 72.3 100.0

Table 2.24 Meet Someone with Similar Interests Frequency Valid Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Total 12 28 21 22 83 Percent 14.5 33.7 25.3 26.5 100.0 Valid Percent 14.5 33.7 25.3 26.5 100.0 Cumulative Percent 14.5 48.2 73.5 100.0

99

Table 2.25 Flirt with Someone Frequency Valid Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Total 7 12 13 51 83 Percent 8.4 14.5 15.7 61.4 100.0 Valid Percent 8.4 14.5 15.7 61.4 100.0 Cumulative Percent 8.4 22.9 38.6 100.0

Table 2.26 Looking Friendship with Opposite Sex Frequency Valid Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Total 12 15 18 38 83 Percent 14.5 18.1 21.7 45.8 100.0 Valid Percent 14.5 18.1 21.7 45.8 100.0 Cumulative Percent 14.5 32.5 54.2 100.0

Table 2.27 Spend Leisure Time Frequency Valid Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Total 20 27 18 18 83 Percent 24.1 32.5 21.7 21.7 100.0 Valid Percent 24.1 32.5 21.7 21.7 100.0 Cumulative Percent 24.1 56.6 78.3 100.0

Table 2.28 Play Virtual Games with Friends Frequency Valid Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Total 14 14 24 31 83 Percent 16.9 16.9 28.9 37.3 100.0 Valid Percent 16.9 16.9 28.9 37.3 100.0 Cumulative Percent 16.9 33.7 62.7 100.0

100

Table 2.29 Pass Time when Bored Frequency Valid Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Total 27 26 19 11 83 Percent 32.5 31.3 22.9 13.3 100.0 Valid Percent 32.5 31.3 22.9 13.3 100.0 Cumulative Percent 32.5 63.9 86.7 100.0

Table 2.30 Connect with Lecturers to Discuss about Tutorials Frequency Valid Strongly Agree Agree Disagree Strongly Disagree Total Missing Total 9 8 8 24 42 82 1 83 Percent 9.6 9.6 28.9 50.6 98.8 1.2 100.0 Valid Percent 9.8 9.8 29.3 51.2 100.0 Cumulative Percent 9.8 19.5 48.8 100.0

Table 2.31 Students' Opinion on Universities' Growing use of Facebook in Recruitment Frequency Valid I like it I don't like it I don't know Total Missing Total 9 43 9 29 81 2 83 Percent 51.8 10.8 34.9 97.6 2.4 100.0 Valid Percent 53.1 11.1 35.8 100.0 Cumulative Percent 53.1 64.2 100.0

Table 2.32 Familiarity with Universities Facebook Pages Frequency Valid Yes No Total Missing Total 9 42 39 81 2 83 Percent 50.6 47.0 97.6 2.4 100.0 Valid Percent 51.9 48.1 100.0 Cumulative Percent 51.9 100.0

101

Table 2.33 Have You ever visited Universities' Facebook Page Frequency Valid Yes No Total Missing Total 9 35 46 81 2 83 Percent 42.2 55.4 97.6 2.4 100.0 Valid Percent 43.2 56.8 100.0 Cumulative Percent 43.2 100.0

Table 2.34 Newspaper and Magazines Frequency Valid Very Important Important Somehow Important Less Important Not Important Total Missing Total 9 21 20 22 9 8 80 3 83 Percent 25.3 24.1 26.5 10.8 9.6 96.4 3.6 100.0 Valid Percent 26.2 25.0 27.5 11.2 10.0 100.0 Cumulative Percent 26.2 51.2 78.8 90.0 100.0

Table 2.35 Education Fairs Frequency Valid Very Important Important Somehow Important Less Important Not Important Total Missing Total 9 34 22 10 8 6 80 3 83 Percent 41.0 26.5 12.0 9.6 7.2 96.4 3.6 100.0 Valid Percent 42.5 27.5 12.5 10.0 7.5 100.0 Cumulative Percent 42.5 70.0 82.5 92.5 100.0

102

Table 2.36 Television Frequency Valid Very Important Important Somehow Important Less Important Not Important Total Missing Total 9 11 21 21 16 11 80 3 83 Percent 13.3 25.3 25.3 19.3 13.3 96.4 3.6 100.0 Valid Percent 13.8 26.2 26.2 20.0 13.8 100.0 Cumulative Percent 13.8 40.0 66.2 86.2 100.0

Table 2.37 Radio Frequency Valid Very Important Important Somehow Important Less Important Not Important Total Missing Total 9 10 15 19 18 18 80 3 83 Percent 12.0 18.1 22.9 21.7 21.7 96.4 3.6 100.0 Valid Percent 12.5 18.8 23.8 22.5 22.5 100.0 Cumulative Percent 12.5 31.2 55.0 77.5 100.0

Table 2.38 University Web Site Frequency Valid Very Important Important Somehow Important Not Important Total Missing Total 9 59 11 6 5 81 2 83 Percent 71.1 13.3 7.2 6.0 97.6 2.4 100.0 Valid Percent 72.8 13.6 7.4 6.2 100.0 Cumulative Percent 72.8 86.4 93.8 100.0

103

Table 2.39 Facebook Frequency Valid Very Important Important Somehow Important Less Important Not Important Total Missing Total 9 16 15 24 12 13 80 3 83 Percent 19.3 18.1 28.9 14.5 15.7 96.4 3.6 100.0 Valid Percent 20.0 18.8 30.0 15.0 16.2 100.0 Cumulative Percent 20.0 38.8 68.8 83.8 100.0

Table 2.40 Personal Recommendations Frequency Valid Very Important Important Somehow Important Less Important Not Important Total Missing Total 9 28 23 18 7 4 80 3 83 Percent 33.7 27.7 21.7 8.4 4.8 96.4 3.6 100.0 Valid Percent 35.0 28.8 22.5 8.8 5.0 100.0 Cumulative Percent 35.0 63.8 86.2 95.0 100.0

Table 2.41 Open House and Campus Visit Frequency Valid Very Important Important Somehow Important Less Important Not Important Total Missing Total 9 39 17 10 8 7 81 2 83 Percent 47.0 20.5 12.0 9.6 8.4 97.6 2.4 100.0 Valid Percent 48.1 21.0 12.3 9.9 8.6 100.0 Cumulative Percent 48.1 69.1 81.5 91.4 100.0

104

Table 2.42 College View Books and Prospectus Frequency Valid Very Important Important Somehow Important Less Important Not Important Total Missing Total 9 44 24 8 1 4 81 2 83 Percent 53.0 28.9 9.6 1.2 4.8 97.6 2.4 100.0 Valid Percent 54.3 29.6 9.9 1.2 4.9 100.0 Cumulative Percent 54.3 84.0 93.8 95.1 100.0

2.43 Student Used of Facebook in Selection of Current University Frequency Valid Yes No Total Missing Total 9 11 70 81 2 83 Percent 13.3 84.3 97.6 2.4 100.0 Valid Percent 13.6 86.4 100.0 Cumulative Percent 13.6 100.0

Table 2.44 Future Use of University Facebook Page in University Selection Frequency Valid Yes May be No Total Missing Total 9 14 58 8 80 3 83 Percent 16.9 69.9 9.6 96.4 3.6 100.0 Valid Percent 17.5 72.5 10.0 100.0 Cumulative Percent 17.5 90.0 100.0

105

Table 2.45 Courses and Academics Frequency Valid Very Important Important Somehow Important Less Important Not Important Total Missing Total 9 67 6 3 2 2 80 3 83 Percent 80.7 7.2 3.6 2.4 2.4 96.4 3.6 100.0 Valid Percent 83.8 7.5 3.8 2.5 2.5 100.0 Cumulative Percent 83.8 91.2 95.0 97.5 100.0

Table 2.46 Application Requirements, Deadline and Procedures Frequency Valid Very Important Important Somehow Important Less Important Not Important Total Missing Total 9 44 17 9 7 3 80 3 83 Percent 53.0 20.5 10.8 8.4 3.6 96.4 3.6 100.0 Valid Percent 55.0 21.2 11.2 8.8 3.8 100.0 Cumulative Percent 55.0 76.2 87.5 96.2 100.0

Table 2.47 Faculties' Information Frequency Valid Very Important Important Somehow Important Less Important Not Important Total Missing Total 9 44 18 12 4 3 81 2 83 Percent 53.0 21.7 14.5 4.8 3.6 97.6 2.4 100.0 Valid Percent 54.3 22.2 14.8 4.9 3.7 100.0 Cumulative Percent 54.3 76.5 91.4 96.3 100.0

106

Table 2.48 University Life Style Frequency Valid Very Important Important Somehow Important Less Important Not Important Total Missing Total 9 29 21 14 11 5 80 3 83 Percent 34.9 25.3 16.9 13.3 6.0 96.4 3.6 100.0 Valid Percent 36.2 26.2 17.5 13.8 6.2 100.0 Cumulative Percent 36.2 62.5 80.0 93.8 100.0

Table 2.49 Students and Faculties' Work Frequency Valid Very Important Important Somehow Important Less Important Not Important Total Missing Total 9 37 22 14 4 3 80 3 83 Percent 44.6 26.5 16.9 4.8 3.6 96.4 3.6 100.0 Valid Percent 46.2 27.5 17.5 5.0 3.8 100.0 Cumulative Percent 46.2 73.8 91.2 96.2 100.0

Table 2.50 Research and Innovation Frequency Valid Very Important Important Somehow Important Less Important Not Important Total Missing Total 9 33 27 11 6 3 80 3 83 Percent 39.8 32.5 13.3 7.2 3.6 96.4 3.6 100.0 Valid Percent 41.2 33.8 13.8 7.5 3.8 100.0 Cumulative Percent 41.2 75.0 88.8 96.2 100.0

107

Table 2.51 Students' Activities and Extracurricular Activities Frequency Valid Very Important Important Somehow Important Less Important Not Important Total Missing Total 9 28 25 13 6 8 80 3 83 Percent 33.7 30.1 15.7 7.2 9.6 96.4 3.6 100.0 Valid Percent 35.0 31.2 16.2 7.5 10.0 100.0 Cumulative Percent 35.0 66.2 82.5 90.0 100.0

Table 2.52 Alumni Success Stories and Career Prospect Frequency Valid Very Important Important Somehow Important Less Important Not Important Total Missing Total 9 32 21 12 6 8 79 4 83 Percent 38.6 25.3 14.5 7.2 9.6 95.2 4.8 100.0 Valid Percent 40.5 26.6 15.2 7.6 10.1 100.0 Cumulative Percent 40.5 67.1 82.3 89.9 100.0

Table 2.53 University Factsheet Frequency Valid Very Important Important Somehow Important Less Important Not Important Total Missing Total 9 23 30 18 3 6 80 3 83 Percent 27.7 36.1 21.7 3.6 7.2 96.4 3.6 100.0 Valid Percent 28.8 37.5 22.5 3.8 7.5 100.0 Cumulative Percent 28.8 66.2 88.8 92.5 100.0

108

Table 2.54 University Location Frequency Valid Very Important Important Somehow Important Less Important Not Important Total Missing Total 9 38 20 15 4 4 81 2 83 Percent 45.8 24.1 18.1 4.8 4.8 97.6 2.4 100.0 Valid Percent 46.9 24.7 18.5 4.9 4.9 100.0 Cumulative Percent 46.9 71.6 90.1 95.1 100.0

Table 2.56 University Infrastructure and Facilities Frequency Valid Very Important Important Somehow Important Less Important Not Important Total Missing Total 9 48 17 8 4 3 80 3 83 Percent 57.8 20.5 9.6 4.8 3.6 96.4 3.6 100.0 Valid Percent 60.0 21.2 10.0 5.0 3.8 100.0 Cumulative Percent 60.0 81.2 91.2 96.2 100.0

Table 2.57 Course Fee Frequency Valid Very Important Important Somehow Important Less Important Not Important Total Missing Total 9 59 7 9 3 3 81 2 83 Percent 71.1 8.4 10.8 3.6 3.6 97.6 2.4 100.0 Valid Percent 72.8 8.6 11.1 3.7 3.7 100.0 Cumulative Percent 72.8 81.5 92.6 96.3 100.0

109

Table 2.58 Students' Testimonials Frequency Valid Very Important Important Somehow Important Less Important Not Important Total Missing Total 9 29 28 12 7 4 80 3 83 Percent 34.9 33.7 14.5 8.4 4.8 96.4 3.6 100.0 Valid Percent 36.2 35.0 15.0 8.8 5.0 100.0 Cumulative Percent 36.2 71.2 86.2 95.0 100.0

2.59 News, Key Activities and Application Procedures and Deadlines Frequency Valid Very Important Important Somehow Important Less Important Total Missing Total 9 47 15 13 5 80 3 83 Percent 56.6 18.1 15.7 6.0 96.4 3.6 100.0 Valid Percent 58.8 18.8 16.2 6.2 100.0 Cumulative Percent 58.8 77.5 93.8 100.0

2.60 Discussion about Course and Academics Frequency Valid Very Important Important Somehow Important Less Important Total Missing Total 9 46 21 6 6 79 4 83 Percent 55.4 25.3 7.2 7.2 95.2 4.8 100.0 Valid Percent 58.2 26.6 7.6 7.6 100.0 Cumulative Percent 58.2 84.8 92.4 100.0

110

2.61 Discussion about Student Activities and Extracurricular Options Frequency Valid Very Important Important Somehow Important Less Important Not Important Total Missing Total 9 34 22 13 6 4 79 4 83 Percent 41.0 26.5 15.7 7.2 4.8 95.2 4.8 100.0 Valid Percent 43.0 27.8 16.5 7.6 5.1 100.0 Cumulative Percent 43.0 70.9 87.3 94.9 100.0

2.62 Students and Staffs work - Prizes, Honour , Projects etc Frequency Valid Very Important Important Somehow Important Less Important Not Important Total Missing Total 9 29 21 16 8 5 79 4 83 Percent 34.9 25.3 19.3 9.6 6.0 95.2 4.8 100.0 Valid Percent 36.7 26.6 20.3 10.1 6.3 100.0 Cumulative Percent 36.7 63.3 83.5 93.7 100.0

2.63 Insight into University Culture, Diversity and Everyday Life Frequency Valid Very Important Important Somehow Important Less Important Total Missing Total 9 27 31 13 9 80 3 83 Percent 32.5 37.3 15.7 10.8 96.4 3.6 100.0 Valid Percent 33.8 38.8 16.2 11.2 100.0 Cumulative Percent 33.8 72.5 88.8 100.0

111

2.64 Communication with Current Student and Faculty Frequency Valid Very Important Important Somehow Important Less Important Not Important Total Missing Total 9 42 17 11 9 1 80 3 83 Percent 50.6 20.5 13.3 10.8 1.2 96.4 3.6 100.0 Valid Percent 52.5 21.2 13.8 11.2 1.2 100.0 Cumulative Percent 52.5 73.8 87.5 98.8 100.0

2.65 Communication with Prospective Students Frequency Valid Very Important Important Somehow Important Less Important Not Important Total Missing Total 9 36 23 12 6 3 80 3 83 Percent 43.4 27.7 14.5 7.2 3.6 96.4 3.6 100.0 Valid Percent 45.0 28.8 15.0 7.5 3.8 100.0 Cumulative Percent 45.0 73.8 88.8 96.2 100.0

2.66 Stories and Experiences of Current Students and Alumni Frequency Valid Very Important Important Somehow Important Less Important Not Important Total Missing Total 9 26 31 9 8 5 79 4 83 Percent 31.3 37.3 10.8 9.6 6.0 95.2 4.8 100.0 Valid Percent 32.9 39.2 11.4 10.1 6.3 100.0 Cumulative Percent 32.9 72.2 83.5 93.7 100.0

112

APPENDIX C: SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE

MBA Research Project

Hello! My name is TB Karki and I am a MBA student at the University of Gloucestershire, Cheltenham. I am doing a research in the topic of The use of Social Media in Marketing Communication: Students use of Facebook to Obtain Information for Selection of Universities. I am looking for your assistance and would like to request to participate in my research project by completing a brief survey. Your participation in the survey will remain anonymous and is completely voluntary. You do not need to reveal your name. I only need your honest responses to a survey. The survey consists of multiple choice questions as well some opinion statements. To answer survey question you need to put tick in appropriate box. Please read all questions and instructions carefully to complete the survey. The survey should only take 5-10 minutes to complete. Thank you very much for completing and returning this survey. Thank you for your time and assistance. 1. Please indicate your gender. Male Female 2. Please specify your age group. 15-19 20-24 25-29 30 & above 3. Which level are you currently studying? Foundation Undergraduate Postgraduate 4. Which year you are studying? First Year Second Year Third Year

113

5. What is your specialisation? Business Information Technology Communication and Broadcasting Design & Innovation MBA 6. Are you familiar with social networking site Facebook? Yes No If yes, please go to Question no. 7 7. Do you have Facebook account? Yes No If yes, please go to Question no. 8 8. How long you have been having Facebook Account? Less than a year 1 year 2 years 3 years and more 9. Who influence you to join Facebook? Friend Family member Others No one 10. How often do you log into Facebook? Once a month Once a week Once a day 2 times a day Several times a day 11. If you log in daily, how much time do you spend in Facebook a day? 15 minutes & less 16 - 30 31 - 60 1 Hour 2 hours or more
114

12. How many friends do you have in Facebook? 0-49 50-99 100 149 149 -199 200 249 250 & more 13. The statements given below shows varying motives for Facebook use. Please indicate how strongly you agree or disagree with the each statement given below. Rate each statement on scale of one to four, with one (1) indicating strong agreement and four (4) indicating strong disagreement. 1 2 3 4 I use Facebook to keep in touch with friends. I use Facebook to keep in touch with family. I use Facebook to find and connect with old friends. I use Facebook to share likes and dislikes about movies, books, music, events etc. with friends. I use Facebook to connect and communicate with someone, when I feel lonely. I use Facebook to share my problem, happiness and sad moment with my friends. I use Facebook to stay in touch with important news and issues. I use Facebook to organise events, make plan and participate in causes with friends. Facebook helps me to express my opinion, share ideas and creativity publicly. I use Facebook to discuss class work and assignment with friends and get update about missed lesson. I use Facebook to meet new people. I use Facebook to make new friends. I use Facebook to learn more about people I newly meet in campus. I use Facebook to meet someone who has similar interests with me. I use Facebook to flirt with someone. I use Facebook to make friendship with opposite sex. I use Facebook to spend leisure time. I use Facebook to play virtual games with friends.
115

I use Facebook to pass time when bored. I use Facebook to connect with lecturer and discuss about tutorials 14. Please list of your five most important motives for Facebook Use. 1 2 3 4 5 15. Are you familiar with universities Facebook pages? Yes No

16. Have you ever visited universities Facebook pages? Yes No 17. Which medium do you think most important to obtain information about university you want to attend? Rate each medium on a scale of one to five, with one (1) indicating very important and five (5) indicating not important. 1 2 3 4 5 Newspapers/Magazines Education Fairs Television Radio University web site Facebook Personal Recommendations Open House/Campus Visit College View Books/Prospectus 18. What do you think about universities growing use of Facebook to reach prospective students for recruitment? I like it I dont like it I dont know

116

19. Did you use universities Facebook pages to obtain information before you select your current university? Yes No 20. Do you think to use of university Facebook page in future to obtain information for university selection? Yes May be No 21. What type of information you take into account to make university selection decision? Please rate information given below on a scale of one to five, with one (1) indicating very important and five (5) indicating not important. 1 2 3 4 5 Course and Academics Application requirements, deadline and procedure Faculties Information University life style Students and Faculties work Research and innovation Students activities and extracurricular activities Alumni success stories and career prospect University Factsheet University Location University Infrastructure and facilities Course fee Students testimonials 22. Below are the lists of commonly available information in Universities Facebook pages. Please rate following information on a scale of one to five, with one (1) indicating very important and five (5) indicating not important for your university selection process. 1 2 3 4 5 News items, key activities and deadlines (applications, enrolments, orientation, transition) Discussion about courses and academics Discussion about student activities and extracurricular
117

options Student and staff work like prize winners and honours projects Insight into university culture, diversity and everyday life Communication with current student and faculty Communication with perspective students Stories and experiences of current students and alumni 23. Please list five most important information, you want to see in university Facebook page, which facilitate you in your university selection process. 1 2 3 4 5

Thank You

118