The Relationship between Online Social Networking and Offline Social Participation among People with Disability in Lithuania

Abstract

People with disabilities are one of the targeted groups that have social participation restrictions due to the disabling barriers that exist in real world physical and social environments. Growing evidence from analyses of online social network site usage suggests that these sites could complement to and enhance people's networks of relationships present in the offline world by providing a platform for active communication between friends, acquaintances and other people in a network. However, it is important to know how people with disabilities self-assess online social networking as a means to overcome restrictions for social participation. The research objectives focused on the relationship between online social networking and offline social participation among people with motor, visual and hearing disabilities. The study aims to investigate the evaluation of the usefulness of social activity in OSN, types, frequency and motives of online social networks activity among people with disabilities and how it is related to their disability forms and the level of offline social participation restriction. For the purposes of the study a national representative survey of people with disabilities (18 years and older) who use social network sites, was conducted by Baltic Surveys Ltd, in June-July, 2014. Results of the statistical analysis showed that that evaluation of OSN as a facilitator of social involvement is quite high, but is only weakly positively correlated to offline participation. There are positive correlation between offline participation restrictions and motives to expand one's social network and to seek out people with similar disabilities. However, in Lithuania people with disabilities have a relatively not very high use of OSN as facilitate d opportunities to compensate their offline participation restriction and to enhance their social capital.

Digital inclusion of people with disabilities: a qualitative study of intra-disability diversity in the digital realm

“…Such critical accounts stress the gap in policy commitment to promoting universal access for PwD and that a lack of access to technology is a 'denial of opportunities' or 'inability to control one's environment' that can be interpreted both politically and materially (Easton 2014, 277;Sourbati 2012, 574). From a different perspective, others have questioned the extent to which online participation and activities pave the way for increased social capital and inclusion compared to offline participation (e.g., Viluckiene 2015), while some consider digital participation a potential risk to offline socialization, due to creating technological dependencies and a spatial narrowing of social connections (Chib and Jiang 2014).…”

The utilisation of social media among users with hearing loss: an analysis of Facebook communities

“…Facebook was reported to be the most frequently visited type of social media among D/HH users [11,12]. On Facebook, D/HH users meet most frequently for the purpose of maintaining offline friendships and creating new connections [13]. As far as their activities are concerned, they like the content of other users, post comments and share the content with other users most frequently [11].…”

Facebook usage and quality of life of individuals with visual impairments

“…In the present study, a questionnaire, which consisted of scales and items that have already been used to evaluate social network site usage in the existing literature, was employed to measure Facebook usage (Dienlin et al, 2017; Hayes et al, 2015; S. Y. Lee, 2014; Nabi et al, 2013; Shpigelman & Gill, 2014; Utz & Breuer, 2017; Viluckiene & Ruškus, 2017). Quality of life can neither be easily defined nor measured (Schalock et al, 2002; Smart, 2001).…”

“…Finally, a 20-item subscale (Q13–Q32) measured the frequency of Facebook activity. The scale was based on the adaptation of Viluckiene and Ruškus (2017) of a scale developed by Burke et al (2010). The items measured the frequency of various Facebook activities such as “Receiving comments,” “Commenting on posts of others,” “Updating personal profile,” and “Sharing information” on a 5-point Likert-type scale (0 = never , 1 = once a month , 2 = once a week , 3 = a few times a week , and 4 = daily ).…”