Users in social networking sites, such as Facebook, are increasingly receiving friend requests from strangers. This study examines the effects of the Big Five personality traits (Neurotics vs. Extroversion vs. Openness vs. Conscientiousness vs. Agreeableness) and strangers’ gender in affecting Facebook users’ decisions to accept (or ignore) the stranger’s friend request. Results showed that gender of the stranger and the personality match between participant and stranger jointly affect the decision to accept the stranger as friend on Facebook. Most of the participants accepted the stranger’s friend request based on textual cues that were displayed in the friend request message. This finding supported Social Information Processing theory, suggesting that impression formation of the stranger was not constrained to the lack of nonverbal cues online. Moreover, participants were more likely to accept the stranger’s friend request when the participant’s and stranger’s personalities matched. This effect was more pronounced when the stranger was a female. Participants accepted female stranger’s friend request due to the inflated perception of stereotypical female characteristics, which supports the Hyperpersonal Perspective.
The Internet is one of the fastest growing technologies that have changed the dynamics of interpersonal communication [
Sophos, an IT security firm, created a fake Facebook user named “Freddi” to test and see how many members would accept this stranger as a friend. “Out of 200 members, 87 accepted ‘Freddi’ as friends and 82 provided ‘Freddi’ private information about themselves” ( [
What influences users to accept strangers as friends in online social networking sites when they do not even talk to strangers in face-to-face (FtF) situations? Specifically, this study aims to 1) examine the effect of different personalities in strangers on Facebook users’ decision to accept the stranger’s friend requests and 2) analyze the relationship between personality traits and gender of strangers in affecting Facebook users’ choices to accept friend requests from strangers. We first reviewed the literature on factors that influence people’s decision to accept stranger as friend on social networking sites, then we conducted an experiment to empirically test the hypotheses. After that, we reported the results and discussed its implication theoretically and practically.
Online social networking sites allow individuals to connect and communicate with people whom they may or may not know. People can engage in online conversations with other individuals through random chat rooms or by accepting friend requests from other people. Numerous social networks such as Friendster, MySpace, and Multiply have emerged within the last few decades.
The most prominent social networking site that has influenced relationship development in the virtual environment is Facebook [
According to Lampe, Ellison, and Steinfield ( [
Besides searching for common friends, users may also search for strangers or individuals who appear in their suggested social network. Since CMC is often anonymous, strangers or individuals who appear in users’ suggested social networks may be people with fake identities. Baym ( [
Although Facebook can be a convenient way to connect with other people, it may also bring about harmful consequences if users do not set privacy boundaries in revealing personal information on their profile pages. Researchers [
The need to create a sense of presence and form identities online has also encouraged people to establish an online “self” to maintain their connection with other users [
When Facebook users receive a friend request, they will typically see the photo image and/or message of the solicitor. The request will also contain functions for users to accept, decline, or send a message to the solicitor. One of the theories that may explain the bizarre notion of accepting strangers’ friend requests is Social Information Processing (SIP) theory. Walther ( [
People adapt to the linguistic codes and use it as a channel to form impressions of other users through messages that are displayed in their information without the presence of physical nonverbal cues [
The asynchronous effect of Facebook’s friend requests provides sufficient time and linguistic cues for individuals to form impressions of the solicitor. Messages in Facebook’s friend requests provide the most salient information where impression is directly derived by users, which affects users’ decision to accept or ignore the solicitation. Although text cues travel slower than oral speech in CMC, Walther [
According to Chester and Bretherton [
Adkins and Brashers [
Most research [
RQ1: What factors prompt users to accept strangers’ friend requests in Facebook?
McCrae and Costa [
Throughout the years, researchers [
RQ2: How does each personality trait in the Big Five category influence participants’ decisions to accept strangers’ friend requests in Facebook?
Researchers [
Extraversion is a trait that involves positive emotions of enjoying and seeking pleasurable activities [
H1: Participants will accept friend requests from strangers displaying Extraversion traits more than Neuroticism traits.
Individuals who are Agreeable tend to compromise in favor of others to maintain a harmonious relationship [
H2: Participants are more likely to accept friend requests from strangers displaying Agreeableness traits than Extraversion traits.
Individuals who have high levels of Conscientiousness trait tend to be more organized, careful, and disciplined [
Although researchers [
H3: Participants are more likely to accept friend requests from strangers displaying Openness trait than Conscientious trait.
Researchers [
RQ3: How does the stranger’s gender influence participants’ decisions to accept the stranger’s friend request?
H4: Female participants are more likely to accept friend request from strangers with Neurotic trait than male participants.
A 2 (gender of the stranger: male vs. female) × 5 (stranger’s personality: Neuroticism vs. Extraversion vs. Openness vs. Conscientiousness vs. Agreeableness) factorial design was conducted to assess the effects of gender and personality traits of the strangers on Facebook users through friend requests.
Participants (N = 235) were recruited from a Southwestern university in exchange for extra credit in communication courses. Participants were required to have a Facebook account that is set up for all users to search and add them as friends. Forty-three percent of the participants were male. The sample of participants consisted of 55% Caucasian, 18% African American, 14% Hispanic, 10% Asian American, and 3% from other ethnicities. Participants’ ages ranged from 18 to 52 (M = 20.78, SD = 4.01).
Prior to the study, participants were required to provide the researcher with their email addresses that they used to log into their Facebook accounts. The researcher validated each participant’s eligibility to participate in the study by searching for the participants in Facebook through their email addresses. Upon arrival at the computer lab, participants signed in and were given a case ID. The researcher then assigned participants to an available computer station in the lab. After signing informed consent form, participants first answered a 25-item online personality questionnaire. The researcher sent out “friend” requests while participants were reading the informed consent form and completing the personality questionnaires. Each participant was randomly assigned to receive one of the ten versions of friend request mock-ups from Facebook strangers named Tyler (male) or Nancy (female).
After participants have completed the online personality questionnaire, they were instructed to log onto their Facebook accounts. First, participants were directed to check their wall postings. Then, participants were asked to check for friend requests and respond to the latest friend request from either Tyler or Nancy. Upon completion of the task, participants were asked to complete several online questionnaires about the stranger and provide their demographic information.
Ten sets of Facebook mock-up were included as stimuli for this study. Each version reflected a friend request, which included a photo of the stranger (male or female versions) and a message that portrayed one of the Big Five traits.
Photo of The Stimuli: Since physical attraction was not the focus of this study, the strangers’ attractiveness were kept constant and acquired from a photo-rating Website (i.e. hotornot.com). The male and female versions of stimuli presented neutral photo images. The photo-rating website is opened for the public to view photo images of individuals who were rated on a scale of 1 to 10 by their social network or users of the website. The photo images that fell between the neutral ratings of 5 or 6 were obtained.
Message: Messages that reflected the Big Five traits were created. The message for Neuroticism trait displayed a desperate individual with mood swings and in need of a friend. The message for Extraversion trait reflected an individual’s love for socializing, outdoor activities, and excitement. For the Openness trait, the message depicted a creative individual who loved art and adapted to new situations quickly. The message in Agreeableness trait reflected an individual who loved people for who they were and tried to reciprocate the liking of others to conform. The message for Conscientiousness trait reflected a person who was well-planned, organized, and appreciated structure. Messages for each trait remained the same for both male and female versions of the stimuli.
Big Five Traits. In this study, participants were asked to rate their personalities based on the 25-items of Big Five traits from the IPIP scale. Cronbach’s Alpha for Neuroticism, Extraversion, Agreeableness, and Conscientiousness were α = 0.77, α = 0.84, α = 0.71, and α = 0.82, respectively. The researcher then computed index scores for participants’ self-reported personality traits and picked the highest score that each participant belonged in the Big 5 traits as participant’s personality trait. Sixteen percent of the participants belonged to Extraversion, 31% were Openness, 40% were Agreeableness, and 14% were Conscientiousness. No participants fell into the category of Neuroticism.
The validity of the stranger’s “friend” solicitation that contained the Big Five traits was tested using IPIP scale in a pilot test. Eight two students from two communication classes were given screen shots of the stimuli. Students rated a 25-item scale for one of the ten stimuli that they received. The 5-point Likert scale ranged from 1 (accurate) and 5 (inaccurate) in the IPIP scoring. Each trait consisted of 5 items that described the characteristics of the specific trait.
First, the reliability check was conducted on the 25-items assessing the perception of strangers’ messages according to each of the Big Five traits. The scale measuring Neuroticism achieved Cronbach’s α = 0.88, Extraversion achieved α = 0.90, Openness achieved α = 0.72, Agreeableness achieved α = 0.86, and Conscientiousness achieved α = 0.83. Since all the scales were reliable, the index scores for each trait were computed taking the mean score of the items.
A series of paired sample t-tests were conducted to compare the mean differences between the targeted trait of participant’s perception of the stranger and the other trait perception of the stranger that scored the closest to the targeted
Condition | N | Neuroticism | Extraversion | Openness | Agreeableness | Conscientiousness |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
M SD | M SD | M SD | M SD | M SD | ||
Neurotic stranger | 17 | 2.26 0.55 | 4.20 0.68 | 3.19 0.66 | 3.08 0.91 | 3.27 0.70 |
Extrovert stranger | 13 | 4.00 0.72 | 2.31 0.77 | 3.12 0.44 | 2.66 0.59 | 3.06 0.59 |
Openness stranger | 17 | 3.65 0.93 | 3.00 1.14 | 2.34 0.89 | 2.60 1.03 | 2.90 0.57 |
Agreeableness stranger | 16 | 3.41 1.04 | 3.11 0.96 | 2.94 0.50 | 2.21 0.65 | 3.00 0.56 |
Conscientiousness stranger | 16 | 3.00 0.81 | 3.26 0.68 | 3.24 0.69 | 3.03 0.66 | 2.00 0.84 |
trait. Successful manipulation check showed that students who received the “friend” message from the stranger who displayed Neuroticism trait rated that stranger as significantly lower on Neuroticism than any other trait (since 1 was accurate and 5 was inaccurate in the scale). Students who received the “friend” message from Neurotic stranger, 2.26 was the mean score for their rating of the stranger on Neuroticism, and the other trait that was closest to the mean score of Neuroticism was Agreeableness (M = 3.08, SD = 0.91). Paired-sample t-test showed that this mean difference between these two perceptions was significant t(16) = −2.91, p = 0.01. This means that participants who received the friend request from Neurotic stranger did perceive that stranger as Neurotic, rather than any other traits. Similarly, for students who received “friend” message from strangers who were Extraverted provided 2.31 as the mean score for their Extraversion perception and Agreeableness was the closest rating to Extraversion (M = 2.66, SD = 0.60). Paired sample t-test showed that mean difference between perceptions of Extraversion vs. Agreeableness was significant, t(12) = −2.22, p = 0.05. Students who received “friend” message from Openness strangers provided the mean score of 2.34, and Agreeableness was the closest rating to Openness (M = 2.56, SD = 1.03). Paired-sample t-test showed that the mean difference between these two perceptions was significant, t(16) = −2.06, p = 0.05. Students who received “friend” message from strangers who were Agreeable provided the mean score of 2.21 for their Agreeableness perception, and Openness was the closest rating to Agreeableness (M = 2.94, SD = 0.65). Paired sample t-test showed that this mean difference between these two perceptions was significant, t(15) = −3.43, p < 0.01. Students who received “friend” message from strangers with Conscientiousness trait provided the mean score of 2.00, and Neuroticism was the closest rating (M = 3.00, SD = 0.81). Paired-sample t-test showed that these two different perceptions was significant, t(15) = −3.96, p < 0.01.
Overall, 70% participants accepted the stranger’s friend request while 30% ignored the stranger’s friend request. Since the dependent variable, participant’s response to the friend request (either accept or ignore), was dichotomous, logistic regression was used to test the hypotheses, controlling participants’ number of friends.
H1 predicted that participants will accept friend requests from strangers with Extraversion trait more than strangers with Neuroticism trait. Logistic regression showed participants significantly were more likely to accept strangers with Extraversion trait than Neuroticism trait (p = 0.05). The odds ratio, Exp(B), for participants who accepted strangers with Extraversion trait was 0.36. This indicates when the stranger’s trait changed from Extraversion to Neuroticism, the estimated odds of accepting the stranger’s friend request multiply by 0.36. Participants were more likely to accept Extravert stranger’s friend request than Neurotic stranger. H1 was supported (see
H2 stated that participants are more likely to accept friend requests from strangers with Agreeableness trait than strangers with Extraversion trait. As shown in
H3 predicted that participants are more likely to accept friend requests from strangers with Openness trait than Conscientious trait. This prediction was not supported. There was no significant difference between participants’ likelihood to accept strangers with Openness and Conscientiousness trait (p = 0.65).
H4 stated that female participants are more likely to accept friend request from strangers with Neurotic trait than male participants. This prediction was supported as shown in
Variable (Stranger’s trait) | n | B | S.E. | Sig(p) | Exp(B) | Nagelkerke R Square (R2) |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Extraversion vs. Neuroticism | 90 | −1.02 | 0.53 | 0.05 | 0.36 | 0.07 |
Extraversion vs. Agreeableness | 89 | −0.12 | 0.46 | 0.80 | 1.13 | 0.02 |
Openness vs. Conscientiousness | 91 | −0.22 | 0.48 | 0.65 | 1.24 | 0.11 |
Openness vs. Neuroticism | 91 | −1.01 | 0.52 | 0.05 | 0.36 | 0.09 |
Extraversion vs. Conscientiousness | 90 | −0.37 | 0.48 | 0.44 | 1.44 | 0.07 |
Variable | B | S.E. | Sig(p) | Exp(B) |
---|---|---|---|---|
Gender (female vs. male) | −2.40 | 1.15 | 0.04 | 0.09 |
Constant | −0.85 | 0.49 | 0.08 | 0.43 |
Note. Nagelkerke R Square, R2 = 0.23.
Additional analyses were conducted to test the effects of other traits in affecting participants’ likelihood to accept the stranger’s friend request. The result was significant in participants’ likelihood to accept strangers with Openness than Neuroticism trait (p = 0.05). As shown in
In order o explore all possible factors that affected participants’ decisions to accept the stranger’s friend request, the main effects of the following variables: gender of the stranger, gender of the participant, participant’s personality, stranger’s personality, whether participant and stranger have a personality match, were entered into logistic regression as independent variables, as well as all the possible interaction effects among those variables. Interaction terms that were not significant were dropped. Results showed the main effect of whether participant’s personality matched with the stranger’s personality was significant (p = 0.05). The odds ratio for participant’s personality that matched with the stranger’s personality is 0.28. This indicates that when participants’ trait changed from match to not match with the stranger’s trait, the estimated odds of accepting the stranger’s friend request multiply by 0.28. That is, the estimated odds of acceptance actually decreased. Participants were more likely to accept the stranger’s friend request when their personality matched with the stranger’s personality (
Results also indicated a significant interaction effect between whether participant and stranger have a personality match and stranger’s gender on affecting participant’s decision to accept the stranger’s friend request when their personalities matched (p = 0.01). The odds ratio for personality match and stranger’s gender is 9.36. This indicates when participant and stranger had a personality match if stranger’s gender changed from male to female. The estimated odds of accepting the friend request multiply by 9.36. Participants were more likely to accept the stranger’s friend request when their personality matched with the stranger’s personality and the stranger was a female, compared to when the personality matched and the stranger was a male. These results answered RQ1 which asked what factors prompt users to accept strangers’ friend requests in Facebook.
Results showed no significant effect of stranger’s Big Five traits in influencing participants’ decisions to accept or ignore the stranger’s friend request (p = 0.29). This result answered RQ2, which addressed how each personality trait in the Big Five category influences participants’ decisions to accept strangers’ friend requests in Facebook.
Main Effect | B | S.E. | Sig(p) | Exp(B) |
---|---|---|---|---|
Stranger’s gender | −0.26 | 0.40 | 0.52 | 0.77 |
Participant-stranger personality match | −1.28 | 0.65 | 0.05 | 0.28 |
Participant’s personality | 0.62 | |||
Stranger’s personality | 0.29 | |||
Participant’s gender | −0.70 | 0.37 | 0.06 | 0.50 |
Number of friends | 0.00 | 0.00 | 0.07 | 1.00 |
Interaction effect: personality match by stranger’s gender | 2.24 | 0.88 | 0.01 | 9.36 |
Note. Nagelkerke R Square, R2 = 0.16.
Research Question 3 explored the effects of stranger’s gender in affecting participants’ decisions to accept the stranger’s friend request. Results (see
The focus of this study is to examine the effects of gender and Big Five traits on Facebook users’ decisions to accept or decline strangers’ friend requests. Results showed that in general, users were more likely to accept rather than ignore the stranger’s friend request. Researchers [
Besides deriving information through other cues that are available online, users engaged in impression formation in order to make decisions in the friend requests. Perceived similarity and attraction can be contributing factors in influencing online users’ impression formation of other individuals in CMC [
An interesting finding in this study was the interaction effect between gender and the participant-stranger personality match, even after controlling for the number of friends. Participants were more likely to accept female than male stranger’s friend request when their personalities matched with the stranger’s personality, regardless of the number of friends that participants had in their Facebook contacts. One possible reason may be caused by the idealized and stereotypical perceptions that participants have formed toward female strangers. Users may have been influenced by the hyperpersonal effect or their inflated perception of female stranger’s characteristics according to social norms.
Findings in this study were consistent with SIP theory, which posits that online users will adopt other forms of medium to form impressions of others in CMC [
Impression formation and impression management played a role in affecting participants’ responses to the stranger’s friend request. In this study, the researcher intentionally created messages that portrayed Neurotic and Extravert strangers to examine the connection between participants’ impression formation on the stranger and the likelihood of accepting the stranger’s friend request. Participants were more likely to accept strangers with Extraversion trait as friends compared to strangers with Neuroticism traits. Participants responded to the stranger’s friend request without knowing if their personalities matched with the stranger’s personality. Participants were given ample time to respond to the stranger’s friend request, which provided them the opportunity to form impressions based on the selective self-presentation of the stranger through a message and photo. Past research [
Another reason for declining the Neurotic stranger’s friend request may be because Neurotic individuals are often associated with loneliness, social anxiety, and lack social networks [
Online users’ perceptions may be more inflated when give sufficient time in CMC [
In addition, the asynchronous format of this study may have been another contributing factor that enhanced participant’s hyperpersonal effect on female stranger’s friend request. When users have more time to contemplate on the stranger’s friend request, the impression that they form toward the stranger become more developed [
The findings of this study also showed that users were more willing to accept the stranger’s friend request when users’ personalities matched with the stranger’s personality. In this study, the perceived similarity of personalities in CMC may be the reason that attracted participants to accept the stranger’s friend request. Individuals tend to find others who are similar with themselves and the absence of cues can increase individuals’ perceived similarity of other people to themselves, which creates a bonding effect between the two individuals who may not know one another [
The results of this study were consistent with McCarthy’s [
This study presents several limitations and directions for future research. First, participants were required to be physically present in the computer laboratory to complete the experiment. This artificial lab setting may influence participants’ response to the friend request. Future research could assess the likelihood of Facebook users’ decisions to accept or ignore strangers’ friend requests by sending random friend requests through the social network and allowing participants to respond in their comfort settings.
Second, this study only seeks to examine the effects of stranger’s personality trait and gender in affecting Facebook users’ decisions to accept or ignore random friend requests. Other factors such as stranger’s physical attractiveness, and users’ differential inclination level of self-disclosure may have affected their decisions to accept the stranger as a friend. Future research could examine the effects of personality traits on users’ privacy management to determine the factors that influence them to self-disclose in social networking sites (i.e. self-disclosing private information by accepting strangers as friends).
Besides self-disclosure and privacy levels, the number of mutual friends may be another factor that motivates users to accept strangers as friends. Users’ perceptions or interpretations of strangers may differ depending on the mutual network in the stranger’s profile. Thus, researchers could also examine the effects of mutual friends on users’ decisions to self-disclose through social networking sites.
Lastly, culture shapes participants’ perceptions on privacy and impression formation of the stranger. This study was conducted in a Southwestern university, where the sample consisted of college students. Since Facebook is becoming more prevalent across other countries and throughout different age groups, future research could examine the effects of stranger’s solicitation in cross-cultural dimensions and on different age groups to determine the influence of culture and age on individuals’ perceptions of stranger’s solicitation.
The goal of this study was to examine the effects of personality traits and gender of the stranger on Facebook user’s decision to accept or decline the stranger’s friend request. We found the gender of the stranger and the personality match between participant and stranger jointly affect the decision to accept the stranger as friend on Facebook. In general, participants were more likely to accept than ignore the stranger’s friend request. Participants were more likely to accept the stranger’s friend request when participant’s personality matched with the stranger’s personality. Additionally, participants were also more likely to accept female stranger’s friend request when their personalities matched. Strangers with personality traits of Openness, Agreeableness, and Conscientiousness did not have significant effects on participants’ decisions to accept the stranger’s friend request. Future research should continue to examine other aspects of social networking sites in CMC and further explore the effects of impression formation, as well as privacy management through strangers’ solicitations in the online environment.
The authors declare no conflicts of interest regarding the publication of this paper.
Leow, S. and Wang, Z.M. (2019) You Don’t Know Me But Can I Be Your Friend? Accepting Strangers as Friends in Facebook. Social Networking, 8, 52-73. https://doi.org/10.4236/sn.2019.81004