The psychology of social media

Recently during a night out on the town I noticed a peculiar thing. A friend of mine who considers himself a social butterfly was gravitating around the room to have short, sporadic conversations with people he knew, introducing them to me as his ‘friend(s)’. I found it odd that, to my friend, these short interactions with no real emotional or experiential profundity constituted what he called a friendship. And in another example of my professional life invading my social existence I began thinking of what the implications of my thoughts were in a social media setting.

The relationships I was witnessing between my friend and the people he was introducing seemed to me to be acquaintanceships. My friendships (including the one with the friend in question) are categorised as such because of their strong emotional ties and bonds forged by shared ideology and interests. Surely the conversations he was having weren’t delving that deep in such short periods of time. After questioning my friend it quickly became apparent that the word ‘friend’ was ushering a semantic misunderstanding between us, but what I witnessed showed a common psychological trait that is highly applicable to online relationships.

Our disparate interpersonal relationships represent keystones of basic cognitive theory – theory that all businesses have to consider when building relationships with influencers online. With social media replicating real life at a significant rate, online community managers need to decide whether they’re going to be that person at the bar with lots of friends but weak interpersonal ties or the other person with less friends but strong interpersonal ties.

It’s a question of reach versus affinity, which the diagram above demonstrates very clearly. The very best online communities, such as these amazing facebook fan pages, are able to pair both factors. They combine above the line impressions with strong bonds that can perpetuate ongoing interrelationships. Not all brands have the social clout of these big name brands though, so for many other brands, psychological factors must be recognised in order to achieve success.

Psychological rationale for online relationships

According to elaboration likelihood theory, which was first espoused by R. E. Petty and J. T. Cacioppo, there are two main cognitive paths in which information is processed in the mind – the central route and the peripheral route.

Central processing – This is essentially the extent to which somebody will seriously think about and discursively reflect on an issue. Attitudes and opinions are formed by rational and logical appeals that eventuate from deep thought.

Within the context of an online relationship, central processing can be understood as the process by which one party (influencer) has reflected on what the other (brand) has to offer them. Relationships that have evoked central processing typically take a long time and a lot more effort to maintain, but the reward is a relationship characterised by loyalty, longevity and trust that is far less vulnerable to decay.

Peripheral processing – This is the notion of simple, instinctive thinking that can form a person’s perspective of an issue via emotional appeals and less cognitive processing. Peripheral processing often relies on heuristics and preconceived ideas that help to form one’s opinion on a topic or issue.

An online relationship that has taken the peripheral route involves a process whereby one party (influencer) has used existing thought patterns and prior knowledge to form an assumption about the other (brand). Although forming a relationship in this manner means that larger audiences can be reached in a far shorter period of time, it also means that relationships will have less substance, which makes brand loyalty and long-term relationships far less likely.

It might seem like obvious stuff, but community management too often neglects to consider the psychological traits of online relationships. The way in which relationships are managed should be in accordance with what they want to achieve. Hedging bets and trying to take both cognitive routes is not a sustainable option. So what does your online presence require? Quick impressions or ongoing conversation?