SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Yeni Medya / 2025 / Sayı: 19

Social comparison behaviors of Gen Z on social networking sites

Z Neslinin sosyal ağ sitelerindeki “sosyal karşılaştırma” davranışları

Fulya Akbuğa(ANKARA ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0003-0324-8952
Journal
Yeni Medya
Pages
70–86
Publication Date
2025-12-23
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The findings indicate that participants exhibit social comparison behaviors on social networking sites, primarily in the context of material possessions, career, and achievement.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Social networking sites have become one of the most fundamental communication tools of today’s information society.
📊
Key Findings & Data:While the widespread use of these platforms has several positive social implications—such as enabling individuals to come together for social and cultural purposes (Boyd, 2010), offering users opportunities to produce and exchange content (Kaplan & Haenlein, 2010), fostering participatory culture (Jenkins, 2006), and contributing to the development of social capital (Valenzuela, Park, & Kee, 2009)—the literature also frequently discusses the negative effects of intensive social network use on individuals.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The findings indicate that participants exhibit social comparison behaviors on social networking sites, primarily in the context of material possessions, career, and achievement.
🔬Design:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Scope:2010 Verileri
⚙️Variables:sosyal medya · sosyal karşılaştırma · dijital kültür

Abstract

Social networking sites have become one of the most fundamental communication tools of today’s information society. While the widespread use of these platforms has several positive social implications—such as enabling individuals to come together for social and cultural purposes (Boyd, 2010), offering users opportunities to produce and exchange content (Kaplan & Haenlein, 2010), fostering participatory culture (Jenkins, 2006), and contributing to the development of social capital (Valenzuela, Park, & Kee, 2009)—the literature also frequently discusses the negative effects of intensive social network use on individuals. This study addresses Festinger’s (1954) social comparison theory and its implications in digital environments. Semi-structured in-depth interviews were conducted with ten university students selected through purposive sampling. The participants’ social media usage habits and tendencies toward social comparison were analyzed. The findings indicate that participants exhibit social comparison behaviors on social networking sites, primarily in the context of material possessions, career, and achievement. Comparisons related to perceptions of beauty and social life follow these domains. Members of Generation Z show a greater tendency to engage in upward comparisons with individuals they perceive to be in a better position than themselves.

Özet

Sosyal ağ siteleri, günümüz enformasyon toplumunun en temel iletişim araçları arasındaki yerini almış durumdadır. Bu araçların yaygın kullanımının toplumsal anlamda; bireylerin sosyal ve kültürel amaçlar için bir araya gelmesi (Boyd, 2010), kullanıcılara içerik üretme ve değiş-tokuş olanakları sunması (Kaplan ve Haenlen, 2010), katılımcı kültürü teşvik etmesi (Jenkins, 2006), sosyal sermayenin üretilmesine katkı sağlaması (Valenzuela, Park ve Kee, 2009) gibi olumlu tarafları olmakla birlikte, literatürde sosyal ağların yoğun kullanımının bireyler üzerinde yarattığı negatif etkilerden de sıklıkla söz edilmektedir. Bu çalışmada; Festinger’ın (1954) geliştirdiği “sosyal karşılaştırma kuramı” ve bu kuramın dijital mecradaki yansımaları ele alınmaktadır. Araştırmada amaçlı örnekleme yöntemi kullanılarak seçilen on üniversite öğrencisiyle yarı yapılandırılmış derinlemesine görüşmeler gerçekleştirilmiş; katılımcıların sosyal medya kullanım alışkanlıkları ve sosyal karşılaştırma eğilimleri analiz edilmiştir.

🔖

Cite This Article

Akbuğa, F. (2025). Social comparison behaviors of Gen Z on social networking sites. Yeni Medya, Sayı: 19, 70–86. https://doi.org/10.55609/yenimedya.1755992

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (56)

  1. Bair, C. (2011). Relations among media, eating pathology, and body dissatisfaction in college women (Doctoral dissertation). Boston University.
  2. Baruh, L., & Cemalcılar, Z. (2014). It is more than personal: Development and validation of a multidimensional privacy orientation scale. Personality and Individual Differences, 70, 165-170.
  3. Bashir, U (April 3, 2025). Share of internet users who regularly use LinkedIn in the United States in 2022, by age. Statista Web Site. (Retrieved June 4th, 2025 from https://www.statista.com/statistics/228640/page-visits-of-linkedin-within-the-last-month-usa/ ).
  4. Bayköse, N. & Esin, İ. (2019). Sporda Beden İmajı ve Sosyal Medya Etkisi: Sosyal Karşılaştırma Kuramı Çerçevesinde Facebook Kullanımının Beden İmajına Etkileri Üzerine Bir Derleme. Akdeniz Spor Bilimleri Dergisi, 2(1), 67-80.
  5. Bogart, L. M., Benotsch, E. G., & Pavlovic, J. D. (2004). Feeling superior but threatened: The relation of narcissism to social comparison. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 26(1), 35–44.
  6. Boyd, D. (2010). “Social Network Sites as Networked Publics: Affordances, Dynamics and Implications”. A Networked Self, s. 47-66, Routledge.
  7. Boyd, D. (2014). It’s complicated: The social lives of networked teens. Yale University Press.
  8. Boyd, D. M. & Ellison, N. B. (2008). Social Network Sites: Definition, History, and Scholarship. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 13, s. 210-230.
  9. Buunk, A.P. & Gibbons, F, X. (2006). Social Comparison Orientation: A New Perspective on Those Who Do and Who Don’t Compare with Others. In Guimond, S. ed. Social Comparison and Social Psychology: Understanding Cognition, Intergroup Relations and Culture. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press, s. 15-32.
  10. Chou, H.-T. G. & Edge, N. (2012). "They are Happier and Having Better Lives than I am": The Impact of Using Facebook on Perceptions of Others' Lives. Cyberpsychology, Behavior and Social Networking, 15(2), s. 117–120.
  11. Comscore (June 7, 2023). What are the most visited social media platforms among Gen Z? Comscore Web Site. Retrieved November 11th, 2024 from https://www.comscore.com/lat/Prensa-y-Eventos/Blog/What-are-the-most-visited-social-media-platforms-among-Gen-Z
  12. Corcoran, K., Crusius, J. & Mussweiler, T. (2011). Social Comparisons: Motives, Standards an Mechanisms. In D. Chadee (Ed.), Theories in social psychology, s. 119–139. Wiley-Blackwell.
  13. Çakın, Ö., & Bolat, N. (2018). Sosyal medya reklamcılığı ve dijital mecra etkileşimleri. İçinde V. Çakmak & S. Çavuş (Ed.), Dijital kültür ve iletişim (s. 175–201). Konya: Literatürk Yayınları.
  14. Deloitte Global Araştırması (May 30, 2022). Deloitte Global Z ve Y Kuşağı Araştırması. Deloitte Web Site. Retrieved February 24th, 2025 from https://www.deloitte.com/tr/tr/services/consulting/research/millennialsurvey-2022.html
  15. Dimock, M. (2019). Defining generations: Where Millennials end and Generation Z begins. Pew Research Center.
  16. Dixon, S.J. (March 26, 2025). Most popular social networks worldwide as of February 2025, by number of monthly active users. Statista Web Site. https://www.statista.com/statistics/272014/global-social-networks-ranked-by-number-of-users/
  17. Dixon, S.J. (March 24, 2025). Distribution of LinkedIn users worldwide as of February 2025, by age group. Statista Web Site. Retrieved May 12th, 2025 from https://www.statista.com/statistics/273505/global-linkedin-age-group/
  18. Edwards, B. (April 12, 2023). “How Social Media Brought the Death of Truth”. Make Use of Internet Sitesi. Retrieved February 2nd, 2025 from https://www.makeuseof.com/how-social-media-brought-death-truth/
  19. EMAR (May 14, 2025) Genç Emeği Raporu. DİSK/Genel-İş Araştırma Dairesi (EMAR) Web Sitesi. Retrieved May 30th, 2025 from https://genel-is.org.tr/disk-genel-is-arastirma-dairesinden-emar-genc-emegi-raporu-her-10-gencten-6si-istihdama-katilamiyor,2,48463
  20. Fardouly, J., Willburger, B. K., & Vartanian, L. R. (2018). Instagram Use and Young Women's Body Image Concerns and Self-Objectification: Testing Mediational Pathways. New Media & Society, 20(4), s. 1380–1395
  21. Fayaz, H & Khalique, A. (2016). A Review of Sociological Impacts of Social Networking. International Journal of Engineering Applied Sciences and Technology, 2016 Vol. 1, Issue 12, s. 6-12. https://ijeast.com/papers/6-12,Tesma112,IJEAST.pdf (Erişim tarihi: 23.10.2023).
  22. Festinger, L. (1954). A Theory of Social Comparison Processes. Human Relations, 7(2), s. 117-140. Francis, T., & Hoefel, F. (2018). ‘True Gen’: Generation Z and its implications for companies. McKinsey & Company.
  23. Goethals, G., & Darley, J. (1977). Social Comparison Theory: An Attributional Approach. In J. Suls & R. L. Miller (Eds.), Social Comparison Processes: Theoretical and Empirical Perspectives (s. 259–278). Washington, DC: Hemisphere.
  24. Guest, G., Bunce, A., & Johnson, L. (2006). How many interviews are enough? An experiment with data saturation and variability. Field Methods, 18(1), 59–82. https://doi.org/10.1177/1525822X05279903
  25. Gupta, R. & Dubey, N. (2025). A Study of Cyber Crime Awareness among the Youth. International Journal of Humanities and Social Science Invention (IJHSSI), 14 (13), 97-100. https://www.ijhssi.org/papers/vol14(3)/140397100.pdf
  26. Kaplan, A. M. ve Haenlein M. (2010). Users of the World, Unite! The Challenges and Opportunities of Social Media. Business Horizons, 53(1), s. 59-68.
  27. Karatay, Z. & Koyuncu, A. A. (2024). Z Kuşağının Türkiyenin Dış Politikalarına Yönelik Yaklaşımı Üzerine Bir Alan Araştırması. İçtimaiyat, 8(2), 499-517.
  28. Kemp, S. (February 23, 2024). Digital 2024: Turkey. Datareportal Web Site. Retrieved January 10th, 2025 from https://datareportal.com/reports/digital-2024-turkey
  29. Kırıkçı, S. (2024). Siyasal İletişimin Hedef Kitlesi Olarak Z Kuşağı: Politik Aidiyetler Üzerinden Bir Değerlendirme. SDÜ İfade Dergisi, 6(1), 29-43.
  30. Koç, R. (2022). Dijitalleşen Kültür ya da Kültürün Dijitalleşmesi: Dİjital Kültür Kavramı. Motif Akademi Halkbilimi Dergisi, 15 (38), s. 500-513.
  31. Koçyiğit, M., & Koçyiğit, A. (2018). Değişen ve gelişen dijital iletişim: Yazılabilir web teknolojisi (Web 2.0). İçinde V. Çakmak & S. Çavuş (Ed.), Dijital kültür ve iletişim (s. 19–48). Konya: Literatürk Academia Yayınları.
  32. Kvale, S., & Brinkmann, S. (2009). InterViews: Learning the craft of qualitative research interviewing (2nd ed.). SAGE Publications.
  33. Lee, J.K. (2022). The Effects of Social Comparison Orientation on Psychological Well-being in Social Networking Sites: Serial Mediation of Perceived Social Support and Self-esteem. Curr Psychol. 41(9), s. 6247-6259.
  34. Leahey, T. M., Crowther, J. H., & Mickelson, K. D. (2007). The frequency, nature, and effects of naturally occurring appearance-focused social comparisons. Behavior Therapy, 38(2), 132–143. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.beth.2006.06.004
  35. Lewallen, J., & Behm-Morawitz, E. (2016). Pinterest or Thinterest?: Social Comparison and Body Image on Social Media. Social Media + Society, 2(1).
  36. Malterud, K., Siersma, V. D., & Guassora, A. D. (2016). Sample size in qualitative interview studies: Guided by information power. Qualitative Health Research, 26(13), 1753–1760. https://doi.org/10.1177/1049732315617444
  37. Myers, G. D. (2017). Sosyal Psikoloji. Ankara: Nobel Akademik Yayıncılık. Orb, A., Eisenhauer, L., & Wynaden, D. (2001). Ethics in qualitative research. Journal of Nursing Scholarship, 33(1), 93–96.
  38. Patton, M. Q. (2014). Qualitative research & evaluation methods: Integrating theory and practice (4th ed.). SAGE Publications.
  39. Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants. On the Horizon, 9(5), 1–6. van Ouytsel, J. van Gool, E., Walrave, M., Ponnet, K. & Peeters, E. (2016) Exploring the Social Networking Sites within Adolescent Romantic Relationships and Dating Experiences. Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 55, s. 76-86.
  40. Vogel, E. A., Rose, J. P., Roberts, L. R., & Eckles, K. (2014). Social Comparison, Social Media, and Self-esteem. Psychology of Popular Media Culture, 3(4), s. 206-222.
  41. Woods, H.C. & Scott, H. (2016). Sleepyteens: Social Media Use in Adolescence is Associated with Poor Sleep Quality, Anxiety, Depression and Low Esteem. Journal of Adolescence, 51, s. 41-49.
  42. Warrender, D. & Milne, R. (2020). How Use of Social Media and Social Comparison Affect Mental Health. Nursing Times, 116: 3, s. 56-59.
  43. Sampasa-Kanyinga, H., Chaput, J. P., & Hamilton, H. A. (2016). Use of Social Networking Sites and Perception and Intentions Regarding Body Weight Among Adolescents. Obesity Science y Practice, 2(1), s. 32-39.
  44. Sayın, F. (2011). Türkiye’de 1988-2010 Döneminde Eğitim ve Büyümenin Genç İşsizliğine Etkisinin Analizi, Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi SBE Dergisi, 13(4), 33-53.
  45. Schaefer, A. (2025). Sprout Social Web Site. Retrieved April 12th, 2025 from https://spro utsocial.com/insights/gen-z-social-media/#gen-z-social-media-usage
  46. Seemiller, C., & Grace, M. (2016). Generation Z goes to college. Jossey-Bass.
  47. Shi, J., Chen, Z., & Tian, M. (2019). Internet self-efficacy, the need for cognition, and sensation seeking as predictors of problematic use of social networking sites. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 381. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00381
  48. Statista (2025). Most popular social networks worldwide as of February 2025, by number of monthly active users. Statista Web Site. Retrieved March 23rd, 2025 from https://www.statista.com/statistics/272014/global-social-networks-ranked-by-number-of-users/
  49. Taddicken, M. (2014). The ‘privacy paradox’ in the social web: The impact of privacy concerns, individual characteristics, and the perceived social relevance on different forms of self‐disclosure. Journal of Computer‐Mediated Communication, 19(2), 248–273.
  50. T.C. Ulaştırma ve Altyapı Bakanlığı (2024). “ Nüfusumuzun Yüzde 86,5’i Çevrimiçi; Yüzde 93,8’i Mobil”. Ulaştırma ve Altyapı Bakanlığı İnternet Sitesi. Retrieved May 28th, 2025 from https://sgb.uab.gov.tr/haberler/nufusumuzun-yuzde-86-5-i-cevrimici-yuzde-93-8-i-mobil
  51. Tesser A. (1988). Toward a Self-evaluation Maintenance Framework of Social Behavior. In Berkowitz L. (Ed.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology (Vol. 21, s. 181–227). New York, NY: Academic. Turner, A. (2015). Generation Z: Technology and social interest. The Journal of Individual Psychology, 71(2), 103–113.
  52. Twenge, J. M. (2017). iGen: Why today’s super-connected kids are growing up less rebellious, more tolerant, less happy–and completely unprepared for adulthood. Atria Books.
  53. Valenzuela, S., Park, N. ve Kee, K. F. (2009). Is There Social Capital in A Social Network Site?: Facebook Use and College Students' Life Satisfaction, Trust, and Participation. Journal of Computer‐Mediated Communication, 14(4), s. 875-901.
  54. Vogel, E. A., Rose, J. P., Roberts, L. R., & Eckles, K. (2014). Social comparison, social media, and self-esteem. Psychology of Popular Media Culture, 3(4), 206–222. https://doi.org/10.1037/ppm0000047
  55. Yılmaz, E. & Aktürk, A. (2021). Z Kuşağı-Bir Nesli Anlamak. Palet Yayınları. Konya.
  56. Zuckerman E. W.& Jost J. T. (2001). What Makes You Think You’re So Popular?: Self-evaluation Maintenance and the Subjective Side of the “Friendship Paradox.” Social Psychology Quarterly, 64, s. 207–223.