skip to main content
10.1145/2675133.2675152acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagescscwConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Disclosure, Stress, and Support During Gender Transition on Facebook

Published:28 February 2015Publication History

ABSTRACT

Social computing technologies, such as social networking sites (SNSs), often privilege people who fit within expected, static categories. Thus, users embarking on major identity changes, such as gender transition, often encounter stress when using SNSs to interact with their online social networks. To address this problem and reflect on the design of SNSs and other social computing systems, we present the results of a comprehensive online survey of transgender and gender non-conforming SNS users. Our findings indicate that although Facebook can be a stressful place for gender transition due to difficulties of transition disclosure, support from one's Facebook network can help to mitigate some of this stress. We examine Facebook both as a site of stress and as a site of support. Better understanding the relationships between stress, disclosure, and support on SNSs for these particular users can inform technology design that will benefit people who struggle with navigating a wide range of major identity changes online.

References

  1. Acquisti, A. and Gross, R. Imagined communities: Awareness, information sharing, and privacy on the Facebook. In Privacy Enhancing Technologies. Springer, 2006, 36--58. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Baumer, E. P. S., Adams, P., Khovanskaya, V. D., et al. Limiting, leaving, and (re)lapsing: An exploration of Facebook non-use practices and experiences. Proceedings of CHI (2013). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Baumer, E. P. S., Ames, M. G., Brubaker, J. R., Burrell, J., and Dourish, P. Refusing, limiting, departing: Why we should study technology non-use. Proceedings of CHI Extended Abstracts (2014). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Bivens, R. The Gender Binary Will Not Be Deprogrammed: Ten Years of Coding Gender on Facebook. Social Science Research Network, 2014.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Bowker, G. C. and Star, S. L. Sorting Things Out: Classification and Its Consequences. MIT Press, 1999. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. boyd, d. m. Friendster and publicly articulated social networking. Proceedings of CHI (2004). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. boyd, d. m. and Ellison, N. B. Social network sites: Definition, history, and scholarship. J of Computer-Mediated Communication 13, 1 (2007), 210--230.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Brubaker, J. R., Ananny, M., and Crawford, K. Departing glances: A sociotechnical account of "leaving" Grindr. New Media & Society, (2014).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Brubaker, J. R. and Hayes, G. R. Select * from user: Infrastructure and socio-technical representation. Proceedings of CSCW (2011). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. Bruckman, A. S. Gender swapping on the Internet. Proceedings of INET (1993).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Burke, M. and Kraut, R. Using Facebook after losing a job: Differential benefits of strong and weak ties. Proceedings of CSCW (2013). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. Clarkson, N. "A Letter From Your Surgeon": Negotiating State Authority in University Administration. Cultural Studies Assoc. Conf. (2013).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Cohen, S., Kamarck, T., and Mermelstein, R. A global measure of perceived stress. Journal of Health and Social Behavior 24, 4 (1983), 385--396.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  14. Deutsch, M. B., Green, J., Keatley, J., Mayer, G., Hastings, J., and Hall, A. M. Electronic medical records and the transgender patient: Recommendations from the World Professional Association for Transgender Health EMR Working Group. J of the American Medical Informatics Assoc. 20, 4 (2013), 700--703.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. DiMicco, J. M. and Millen, D. R. Identity management: Multiple presentations of self in Facebook. Proceedings of GROUP (2007). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. Dimond, J. P., Fiesler, C., and Bruckman, A. S. Domestic violence and information communication technologies. Interacting with Computers 23, 5 (2011), 413--421. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. Donath, J. S. Identity and Deception in the Virtual Community. In Communities in Cyberspace. Routledge, 1998.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Duggan, M. and Smith, A. Social Media Update 2013. Pew Research Center's Internet & Amer. Life Project. www.pewinternet.org/2013/12/30/social-media-update-2013/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. Ellison, N. B., Steinfield, C., and Lampe, C. The benefits of Facebook "friends:" Social capital and college students' use of online social network sites. J of Computer-Mediated Comm. 12, 4 (2007), 1143--1168.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  20. Evans, M., Donelle, L., and Hume-Loveland, L. Social support and online postpartum depression discussion groups: A content analysis. Patient Education and Counseling 87, 3 (2012), 405--410.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  21. Facebook Diversity. Facebook.com, 2014. www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=567587973337709.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. Factor, R. J. and Rothblum, E. D. A study of transgender adults and their non-transgender siblings on demographic characteristics, social support, and experiences of violence. Journal of LGBT Health Research 3, 3 (2008), 11--30.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. Farnham, S. D. and Churchill, E. F. Faceted identity, faceted lives: Social and technical issues with being yourself online. Proceedings of CSCW (2011). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. Ferraro, R. Facebook introduces custom gender field to allow users to more accurately reflect who they are. GLAAD, 2014. http://www.glaad.org/blog/facebook-introduces-custom-gender-field-allow-users-more-accurately-reflect-who-they-are.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. George, L. K. Sociological perspectives on life transitions. Annual Review of Sociology 19, 1 (1993), 353--373.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  26. Goffman, E. Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. Doubleday Anchor Books, New York, NY, 1959.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. Grant, J. M., Mottet, L. A., Tanis, J. D., Harrison, J., Herman, J. L., and Kiesling, M. Injustice at Every Turn: A Report of the National Transgender Discrimination Survey. National Center for Transgender Equality and National Gay and Lesbian Task Force, 2011.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. Gross, B. M. and Churchill, E. F. Addressing constraints: Multiple usernames task spillage and notions of identity. Proc. CHI Ext. Abstracts (2007). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  29. Hendricks, M. L. and Testa, R. J. A conceptual framework for clinical work with transgender and gender nonconforming clients: An adaptation of the Minority Stress Model. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice 43, 5 (2012), 460--467.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  30. Jankovic, C. and Haimson, O. L. Transdisciplining the Problem: Addressing Administrative Violence in University Information Systems. Cultural Studies Association Conference (2013).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. Kannabiran, G. Themself: Critical analysis of gender in Facebook. CHI workshop paper (2011).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. Lampinen, A., Tamminen, S., and Oulasvirta, A. All my people right here, right now: Management of group co-presence on a social networking site. Proceedings of GROUP (2009). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  33. Lovibond, S. H. and Lovibond, P. F. Manual for the Depression Anxiety Stress Scales (2nd ed.). Psychology Foundation, 1995.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  34. Marwick, A. E. and boyd, d. m. I tweet honestly, I tweet passionately: Twitter users, context collapse, and the imagined audience. New Media & Society 13, 1 (2011), 114--133.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  35. Marwick, A. E. I'm more than just a Friendster profile: Identity, authenticity, and power in social networking services. Association for Internet Researchers (2005).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  36. Massimi, M., Dimond, J. P., and Le Dantec, C. A. Finding a new normal: The role of technology in life disruptions. Proceedings of CSCW (2012). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  37. Norval, C., Arnott, J. L., Hine, N. A., and Hanson, V. L. Purposeful social media as support platform: Communication frameworks for older adults requiring care. Proceedings of PervasiveHealth (2011).Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  38. Sas, C. and Whittaker, S. Design for forgetting: Disposing of digital possessions after a breakup. Proceedings of CHI (2013). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  39. Smith, M. E., Nguyen, D. T., Lai, C., Leshed, G., and Baumer, E. P. S. Going to college and staying connected: Communication between college freshmen and their parents. Proceedings of CSCW (2012). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  40. Stutzman, F., Capra, R., and Thompson, J. Factors mediating disclosure in social network sites. Computers in Human Behavior 27, 1 (2011), 590--598. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  41. Stutzman, F. D. Networked Information Behavior in Life Transition. 2011. http://gradworks.umi.com/34/56/3456300.html.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  42. Suchman, L. Do categories have politics? Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW) 2, 3 (1993), 177--190.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  43. Tamir, M., John, O. P., Srivastava, S., and Gross, J. J. Implicit theories of emotion: Affective and social outcomes across a major life transition. J of Personality and Social Psychology 92, 4 (2007), 731--744.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  44. Turkle, S. Cyberspace and Identity. Contemporary Sociology 28, 6 (1999), 643--648.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  45. Van House, N. A. Feminist HCI meets Facebook: Performativity and social networking sites. Interacting with Computers 23, 5 (2011), 422--429. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  46. Wang, Y., Leon, P. G., Acquisti, A., Cranor, L. F., Forget, A., and Sadeh, N. A field trial of privacy nudges for Facebook. Proceedings of CHI (2014). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  47. Wang, Y., Norcie, G., Komanduri, S., Acquisti, A., Leon, P. G., and Cranor, L. F. "I regretted the minute I pressed share": A qualitative study of regrets on Facebook. Proceedings of SOUPS (2011). Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Disclosure, Stress, and Support During Gender Transition on Facebook

        Recommendations

        Comments

        Login options

        Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

        Sign in
        • Published in

          cover image ACM Conferences
          CSCW '15: Proceedings of the 18th ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work & Social Computing
          February 2015
          1956 pages
          ISBN:9781450329224
          DOI:10.1145/2675133

          Copyright © 2015 ACM

          Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

          Publisher

          Association for Computing Machinery

          New York, NY, United States

          Publication History

          • Published: 28 February 2015

          Permissions

          Request permissions about this article.

          Request Permissions

          Check for updates

          Qualifiers

          • research-article

          Acceptance Rates

          CSCW '15 Paper Acceptance Rate161of575submissions,28%Overall Acceptance Rate2,235of8,521submissions,26%

          Upcoming Conference

          CSCW '24

        PDF Format

        View or Download as a PDF file.

        PDF

        eReader

        View online with eReader.

        eReader