Over the past year, there have been a few studies on Facebook that attempt, from various approaches, to determine whether or not “Facebook is good for you.” In some cases, the studies have looked at whether FB has effects on workplace productivity or university grades. Some commentary I’ve read on this topic seem like they could be true about any leisure activity. In Don Tapscott’s book Grown Up Digital (if memory serves), he makes the point that Boomers might deride the time their younger co-workers spend on social networking and Web, ignoring the fact that long lunches, going out for coffee break etc may well have come to the same.
As with others, I’m skeptical about these claims about the negative effects of Facebook (and also the positive effects). In terms of research, I wonder if there is something distinctive about Facebook that makes it different from other things. Is spending an hour on Facebook significantly different (in terms of possible effects on workplace productivity and university grades) from spending an hour talking on the phone with a friend or reading a novel? All these studies seem to consider Facebook in isolation, apart from other behaviours. That stikes me as likely to produce distortions in the data.
Let’s look at the recent workplace study first. Researchers at the University of Melbourne (April 2, 2009) found that “Workplace Internet Leisure Browsing (WLIB)” may lead to productivity gains. As the study’s author, Dr. Brent Coker puts it: ““People who do surf the Internet for fun at work – within a reasonable limit of less than 20% of their total time in the office – are more productive by about 9% than those who don’t.” However, this only holds true for “moderate” users: addicted users don’t show any productivity gains. Alas, this summary doesn’t define the difference its terms very well (perhaps I’m asking too much of a press release?). The explanation for the small productivity benefit seems to due to resting: “The attraction of WILB, according to Dr Coker, can be attributed to people’s imperfect concentration. “People need to zone out for a bit to get back their concentration. Think back to when you were in class listening to a lecture – after about 20 minutes your concentration probably went right down, yet after a break your concentration was restored.” This study, while far from conclusive, should serve to prompt debate about the wisdom of blocking access to such services. In 2008, AT&T also released a study on the benefits of social networking tools (which they define in an unusually broad way, including intranets and forums). I wonder if there are other companies that have researched this in their own organizations?
Now, let’s turn to the academic study. The study was conducted using a sample of 219 students at Ohio State University, a mix of graduate and undergraduate students (here is a summary of the study recently presented at an education conference). Based on the summaries, it doesn’t look like this study used any controls so there is likely to be a fair bit of noise in the results. One odd claim made in the study relates to Facebook usage between various majors: “Science, technology, engineering, math (STEM) and business majors were more likely to use Facebook than were students majoring in the humanities and social sciences.” Let’s say this is true – what does that mean? I might conjecture that science and engineering students are more in need of release (it is not uncommon for engineers to have +30 hours of class/lab time while a humanities student might have half that) or maybe they’re more social? Or perhaps they only feel they can be social when it is mediated through digital technology? More questions for future researchers to consider.
Don Tapscott has blogged about this Facebook & education question, as has Stephen Abram; both their entries are worth reading. I think both are correct to be optimistic about the benefits of the Internet and social networking.
Where do I stand? I think that social tools should not be blocked. Students and staff need to be responsible for what they do. If staff use such Facebook or take a coffee break, that’s fine and should even be encouraged. As for studies like this, I don’t think they amount to much, except for raising questions.
Related posts: