OSU Students, Their Technology and Their Personalities

Technology is used in a wide variety of ways. Whether for entertainment, cultivating information, sharing social information or completing online homework, technology has become a necessity in modern education and in many ways, social communication. The Ohio State University is no exception. I was curious to see not only what kinds of devices that students at OSU use most frequently but also why and how. My initial assumption was that, for the most part, students use technology to communicate, assist in organizing and planning and at times, to substitute for the ‘here and now’. After taking time to observe students around campus and interviewing a student in regards to these questions, I was not surprised to find that all of these assumptions seem to be true, at least generally. When cultivating this information I was able to make only one sold conclusion that would not constrain our understanding of technology use. How a student uses his or her technology, as well as the types of technology used, vary as widely as their individual personalities. This reflects their trait based behavior patterns which is largely affected by the situation, the task at hand and their state of mind. In order to support this conclusion, I will delve into some personality perspectives as well as continuously refer back to them in order to explain the wide range of technological functions. I will also reference my interviews and observations. The striking inconsistencies in technology use as well as the whys and how’s require that these suppositions allow for all aspects of this issue to be accounted for. By asserting that these differences range as widely as personality we are able to encompass all technological variety.

[The trait approach to personality] “assumes [that] behavior is determined by relatively stable traits which are the fundamental units of one’s personality. Traits predispose one to act in a certain way, regardless of the situation. This means that traits should remain consistent across situations and over time, but may vary between individuals.” (McLeod, 2014). Researches have been able to narrow personality traits into the ‘big five’ (four of which have been found to be universal) and I believe that the ways OSU students use technology is correlated to their corresponding range of dominate personality characteristics. I first began to see this pattern after coding the interview I conducted. This was my informant’s response to our discussion about technology as a social buffer.

Introverts uhm, and it doesn’t help them get out of their shell. Extraverts could use that to take pictures, show a stranger what they found or like something. It can be used for a lot of things, all kinds of possibilities, but it mainly kinda takes people away from looking around them and interacting with each other and towards… into their phone and people who aren’t even there. So I see it as a more negative than positive, but it could be used for positive.

This struck me, not because it was untrue or because I’d never observed this in social situations but because this was exactly it. Depending on your personality, you will act differently and thus a students’ use of his or her technology will have a different cause and a different effect than someone with a different personality trait. To provide further examples we must delve into the big five and see the correlations. Extraversion is the trait mentioned in the quote above. Like the other four traits, it runs on a continuum from highly extraverted through highly introverted. To summarize, this trait is observed mostly in social interactions ranging from outwardly energetic to shy and reserved. The informant brought to light a critical issue with technology, for people who are generally introverted, rather than them remaining in the social situation, they can instead withdrawal into their phones. All the while, other students higher on the scale of extraversion will remain in the social situation and even use their technology to fuel conversations. This was evident not just in my interview but from comments I overheard in my field notes while observing social situations. Such comments like, ‘get off your phone’ and ‘stop being anti-social’ were often spoken to any individuals focusing too hard on their phones.

This same assessment can be made for the other personality traits, particularly agreeableness and conscientiousness. Those high in conscientiousness, which is characterized by thoughtfulness, good impulse control and goal-directed behavior, would be less likely to be distracted by social media in class or while waiting in a study area. This was also evident in my field notes. Though some were almost entirely focused on their group studies or individual assignments, some were frequently distracted with social media. I would need to do further psychological evaluations to definitively conclude on the correlation, but I am quite confident that the personality evaluation would show a strong relationship. I also observed that laptops were the main avenue for studying and preparing for class but I was surprised to find that many students also use their phones to read important research articles and even write a paper. Leading me to conclude that personality characteristics do not necessarily correlate with the type of device used but rather what that device is used for. My informant also indicated a contrast between those who use technology for studies and those who tend to get distracted, which further support technological diversities.

it distracts from outside, and like it also… like from a few things and it depends… technology distracts and it informs and sometimes when it’s not informing, it’s a distraction.

nowadays I can type papers on my phone. So I might not be on social media but ignoring what’s going on around me because I’m doing my homework on my phone.

Agreeability also seems to have an impact. This particular trait is generally defined with attributes such as trust, altruism, kindness, affection and other prosocial behaviors. Though this is related to extraversion it remains an independent trait. To form a couple examples I will first reflect on my field notes. I witnessed a surprising amount of people trying to participate in conversation all the while seeming to be consumed by their phones, staggering the conversation or ending it all together. My informant and I both define these multitasking aspects during conversations as a very un-aggregable thing to do.

some girls when I go out with them they’ll use their phone way too much, or texting or Instagraming or taking all these pictures and I’m just like bitch I’m trying to talk to you, and they’re all like “selfie” “omg my friend just posted this” and I’m just like I don’t even wanna continue this.

I went on to ask if he thought that they did it on purpose (possibly disinterest in a situation) but he responded by saying ‘no not really’, and that when they are rude on first dates like that, it is usually just ‘a part of their nature’. Though this generalization may not always be true, it does support the theory that someone’s personality traits are determining factors when evaluating possible implications of technology use. “Always remember that behavior involves an interaction between a person's underlying personality and situational variables. The situation that a person finds himself or herself in plays a major role in how the person reacts. However, in most cases, people offer responses that are consistent with their underlying personality traits.” (Goldberg, 1981). This quote is important because though an introvert may not be consumed with his or her phone when around a few close friends they seem to be more likely to use these technologies as a social buffer. The same principle is true for conscientiousness because though a student may not normally use their laptops to write a paper before class or in the cafe, if the assignment is due tomorrow, that pressure will decrease their likelihood of social media concentration. Agreeableness and technology use also varies depending on your particular mood. My informant even said that when he doesn’t feel like communicating or interacting, he will just look at his phone (not doing anything) just to avoid the social interaction. This pattern would most likely reflect itself to be true regardless of one’s overall personality trait. This is because regardless of how agreeable you are in general, if you are in a bad mood you are less likely to feel like participating socially.

I coded my interviews based on common themes such as positive aspects, negative aspects, forms of technology, social media and school. After reviewing these codes personality patterns began to emerge and lead me to a sound conclusion that one’s own range of personality traits plays a large role in how technology is utilized across various situations. Generally speaking, the forms of technology were largely dependent on availability but a further avenue for research would be to conduct a larger survey comparing individuals with the same forms of technology and what they use for different purposes. This would solidify any conclusions of devices and personality assessments. Another follow up would be to survey more students with personality evaluations for the big five and see what kinds of correlation there might be between use, situations and impressions regarding technology use.

Bibliography

Cherry, Kendra

2016 What Are The Big 5 Personality Traits? Verywell. https://www.verywell.com/the-big-

five-personality-dimensions-2795422, accessed April 22, 2016.

Funder, David Charles.

2013 The Personality Puzzle by David C. Funder, 6th Ed. S. l.: Cram101.

Goldberg, L. R.

1981 Language and individual differences: The search for universals in personality lexicons. In

L. Wheeler (Ed.), Review of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 2. Beverly Hills, CA:

Sage.

Saul McLeod

2014 Theories Of Personality. Simply Psychology.

http://www.simplypsychology.org/personality-theories.html, accessed April 22, 2016.