Abstract
Focusing on the low-cost nature of social media participation, previous studies have described social media as providing opportunities for nonprofit organizations to gain support for their campaigns, such as asking to click a button. However, the question remains whether and how social media participation subsequently encourages community-based (offline) participation. Extending previous studies’ focus on the actual cost of social media participation, we examine how perceived costs and benefits of social media participation motivate individuals to participate in community-based participation. Our analysis of two-way between-subjects ANCOVA demonstrated that the perceived benefits of initial social media participation, rather than its actual or perceived costs, drive individuals to identify with the issue and engage in subsequent community-based participation. This finding suggests that the meaning of social media participation does not lie in whether it allows for low-cost actions, but in how individuals perceive and appreciate the benefits from their actions and identify with the issue.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
Previous research on clicktivism tends to consider offline participation to be deeper engagement than social media participation. However, offline participation activities may vary, ranging from signing petition to sit-in protests. Some activities such as mass demonstrations take place in the offline environment, but may initiate in networking among individuals in the social media environment. Acknowledging the broad range and continuum of offline participation activities and preventing the binary distinction between offline and online participation, we use “community-based participation,” instead of the broader term, “offline participation” to refer to the offline activity, specifically in this study, the activity of folding flyers into envelopes, which follows the initial social media participation.
When individuals participate in a social media activity, which we refer to as “initial” social media participation in this paper, their participation may influence their participation in the future, which we refer to as “subsequent” participation.
References
Alberici, A. I., & Milesi, P. (2016). Online discussion, politicized identity, and collective action. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 19(1), 43–59.
Brown, R., Condor, S., Mathews, A., Wade, G., & Williams, J. (1986). Explaining intergroup differentiation in an industrial organization. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 59(4), 273–286.
Brunsting, S., & Postmes, T. (2002). Social movement participation in the digital age: Predicting offline and online collective action. Small Group Research, 33(5), 525–554.
Burger, J. M. (1999). The foot-in-the-door compliance procedure: A multiple-process analysis and review. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 3(4), 303–325.
Chan, M. (2014). Social identity gratifications of social network sites and their impact on collective action participation. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 17(3), 229–235.
Conroy, M., Feezell, J. T., & Guerrero, M. (2012). Facebook and political engagement: A study of online political group membership and offline political engagement. Computers in Human Behavior, 28(5), 1535–1546.
Digital Times. (2016). KataoTalk, mobile messenger monthly active users 95%. Retrieved October 14, 2018 from http://www.dt.co.kr/contents.html?article_no=2016102502109931033002.
Drury, J., & Reicher, S. (2005). Explaining enduring empowerment: A comparative study of collective action and psychological outcomes. European Journal of Social Psychology, 35(1), 35–58.
Festinger, L. (1954). A theory of social comparison processes. Human Relations, 7(2), 117–140.
Fishbach, A., Koo, M., & Finkelstein, S. R. (2014). Motivation resulting from completed and missing actions. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 50, 257–307.
Fishbach, A., Zhang, Y., & Koo, M. (2009). The dynamics of self-regulation. European Review of Social Psychology, 20(1), 315–344.
Garvey, A. M., & Bolton, L. T. (2017). Eco-product choice cuts both ways: How proenvironmental licensing versus reinforcement is contingent on environmental consciousness. Journal of Public Policy and Marketing, 36(2), 284–298.
Gawronski, B., & Strack, F. (Eds.). (2012). Cognitive consistency: A fundamental principle in social cognition. New York: Guilford Press.
Gneezy, A., Imas, A., Brown, A., Nelson, L. D., & Norton, M. I. (2012). Paying to be nice: Consistency and costly prosocial behavior. Management Science, 58(1), 179–187.
Guo, C., & Saxton, G. D. (2018). Speaking and being heard: How nonprofit advocacy organizations gain attention on social media. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 47(1), 5–26.
Hogg, M. A., Terry, D. J., & White, K. M. (1995). A tale of two theories: A critical comparison of identity theory with social identity theory. Social Psychology Quarterly, 58(4), 255–269.
Hornsey, M. J., Blackwood, L., Louis, W., Fielding, K., Mavor, K., Morton, T., et al. (2006). Why do people engage in collective action? Revisiting the role of perceived effectiveness. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 36(7), 1701–1722.
Ihm, J. (2017). Classifying and relating different types of online and offline volunteering. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 28(1), 400–419.
Ihm, J. (2019). Communicating without nonprofit organizations on nonprofits’ social media: Stakeholders’ autonomous networks and three types of organizational ties. New Media & Society, 21(11–12), 2648–2670.
Klandermans, B. (1997). The social psychology of protest. Oxford: Blackwell.
Klandermans, B., & Oegema, D. (1987). Potentials, networks, motivations, and barriers: Steps toward participation in social movements. American Sociological Review, 52(4), 519–531.
Kristofferson, K., White, K., & Peloza, J. (2014). The nature of slacktivism: How the social observability of an initial act of token support affects subsequent prosocial action. Journal of Consumer Research, 40(6), 1149–1166.
Lam, W. F., & Nie, L. (2019). Online or offline? Nonprofits’ choice and use of social media in Hong Kong. Voluntas. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11266-019-00128-1.
Lee, Y. H., & Hsieh, G. (2013). Does slacktivism hurt activism? The effects of moral balancing and consistency in online activism. In Proceedings of CHI 2013. New York: ACM Press.
Morozov, E. (2011). The net delusion: How not to liberate the world. London: Penguin.
Mullen, E., & Monin, B. (2016). Consistency versus licensing effects of past moral behavior. Annual Review of Psychology, 67, 363–385.
Nekmat, E., Gower, K. K., Gonzenbach, W. J., & Flanagin, A. J. (2015). Source effects in the micro-mobilization of collective action via social media. Information, Communication & Society, 18(9), 1076–1091.
Postmes, T. (2007). The psychological dimensions of collective action, online. In A. Joinson, K. McKenna, & T. Postmes (Eds.), Oxford handbook of internet psychology. New York: Oxford University Press.
Schumann, S., & Klein, O. (2015). Substitute or stepping stone? Assessing the impact of low-threshold online collective actions on community-based participation. European Journal of Social Psychology, 45(3), 308–322.
StataCorp. (2015). Stata statistical software: Release 14. College Station, TX: StataCorp LP.
Susewind, M., & Hoelzl, E. (2014). A matter of perspective: Why past moral behavior can sometimes encourage and other times discourage future moral striving. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 44(3), 201–209.
Tajfel, H. (1978). Social categorization, social identity and social comparison. In H. Tajfel (Ed.), Differentiation between social groups: Studies in the social psychology of intergroup relations. Oxford: Academic Press.
Turner, J. C., & Onorato, R. S. (1999). Social identity, personality, and the self-concept: A self-categorization perspective. In T. R. Tyler, R. M. Kramer, & O. P. John (Eds.), The psychology of the social self. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Vaccari, C., Valeriani, A., Barberá, P., Bonneau, R., Jost, J. T., Nagler, J., et al. (2015). Political expression and action on social media: Exploring the relationship between lower-and higher-threshold political activities among Twitter users in Italy. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 20(2), 221–239.
Valenzuela, S., Park, N., & Kee, K. F. (2010). Is there social capital in a social network site? Facebook use and college students’ life satisfaction, trust, and participation. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 14(4), 875–901.
van Stekelenburg, J., & Klandermans, B. (2013). The social psychology of protest. Current Sociology, 61(5–6), 886–905.
van Zomeren, M., Postmes, T., & Spears, R. (2008). Toward an integrative social identity model of collective action: A quantitative research synthesis of three socio-psychological perspectives. Psychological Bulletin, 134(4), 504–535.
van Zomeren, M., Postmes, T., & Spears, R. (2012). On conviction’s collective consequences: Integrating moral conviction with the social identity model of collective action. British Journal of Social Psychology, 51(1), 52–71.
van Zomeren, M., Saguy, T., & Schellhaas, F. M. (2013). Believing in “making a difference” to collective efforts: Participative efficacy beliefs as a unique predictor of collective action. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 16(5), 618–634.
Wilkins, D. J., Livingstone, A. G., & Levine, M. (2019). All click, no action? Online action, efficacy perceptions, and prior experience combine to affect future collective action. Computers in Human Behavior, 91, 97–105.
Zhou, H., & Pan, Q. (2016). Information, community, and action on Sina-Weibo: How Chinese philanthropic NGOs use social media. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 27(5), 2433–2457.
Zorn, T. E., Grant, S., & Henderson, A. (2013). Strengthening resource mobilization chains: Developing the social media competencies of community and voluntary organizations in New Zealand. VOLUNTAS: International Journal of Voluntary and Nonprofit Organizations, 24(3), 666–687. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11266-012-9265-1.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank Yeon Kyoung Joo, and Esther Liu for their helpful comments. This work has been supported by the 2018 Young Scholar Grant from Korean Association for Broadcasting and Telecommunication.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Appendices
Appendix 1: Social Media Message

90% of Koreans live in cities. Although we live in a city full of concrete buildings and cars, small parks in the city act as our resting places.
Urban parks have been constructed under the city management plan for the protection of urban landscape, improvement in citizen’s health and emotional life, and mitigation of urban environmental pollution. In order to make urban parks legally mandatory, Korea has regulated to protect more than 6 km2 of urban parks per resident in urban areas through “Article 4 of the Enforcement Rule on Urban Parks and Green Belt”.
However, “Sunset Regulation of Planned Urban Facilities” which will begin in June 2020, puts the city at risk of losing valuable urban parks. The city management plan designates some privately owned sites as urban parks, but if the municipality does not purchase them, the designated effect will be canceled in June 2020. Currently, 186 km2, half of the total area of the urban park (406.5 km2) is actively used as hiking trails or parks, but most of them are privately owned. If the “Sunset Regulation of Planned Urban Facilities” is implemented, the legal effect of the urban park site will be lifted and the park area will be drastically reduced. Combined with the urban parks built on the national public land, 4421 parks in 17 metropolitan cities including Seoul, will disappear.
Why did the government or local governments neglect the urban park project for the benefit of its citizens?
Because of financial problems. In Seoul, it is estimated that KRW 11.7 trillion will be required to purchase 40 km2 of 71 private lands subject to the Sunset Regulation of Planned Urban Facilities.
But it’s not too late. If you proactively take measures from now on, you can protect the urban park. 26% of long-running non-executive urban parks by region can be excluded from sunset as a public land without any infringement of private property rights. In addition, if the urban park is privately owned, the government can support the national expenses, and if it is difficult to purchase, the policy can be supplemented by paying rent to the landowners.
We have 2 years left. We need your help in enacting legislation as countermeasures against “Sunset Regulation of Planned Urban Facilities”. Please protect the lungs of the city by your power!
Link to the map with the locations of urban parks at risk: https://www.google.com/maps/d/u/0/viewer?mid=1NLNZyUAte9qAZjPULW2i1HCeyko7yZTb&ll=35.87224125991744%2C128.53525590000004&z=5.

Many people do not know about the “Sunset Regulation of Planned Urban Facilities” yet.
Korean Federation for Environmental Movement is having an online petition campaign to inform the public that urban parks may disappear in the year of 2020 and prepare the legal protections for urban parks.
Use your KakaoTalk to share the online petition link (http://www.savingparks.com) with the above message to 1 person (low-actual cost condition)/10 people (high-actual cost condition), and upload captured screenshots.
Appendix 2: Items of Variables
Perceived costs of social media participation (α = .72)
-
My acquaintances and friends will participate in this action when I share this campaign with them online (reverse coded).
-
My acquaintance and friends will have negative reactions when I share this campaign with them online.
-
I wasted significant time on this participation activity.
-
I put much energy into this participation activity.
-
I felt burdened by participating in this activity.
Perceived benefits of social media participation (α = .85)
-
This participation activity has an impact on whether the bill to protect urban parks will gain traction in the legislature.
-
This participation activity is not helpful in introducing the bill to protect urban parks (reverse coded).
-
This participation activity is helpful in shaping public opinion in favor of the bill to protect urban parks.
-
This participation activity is helpful in influencing government and policy makers.
-
This participation activity expresses the value of environmental protection.
-
This participation activity will impact environmental protection.
-
This participation activity gives me satisfaction.
Issue identification (pre: α = .87; post: α = .84)
-
Environmental protection reflects an important part of who I am.
-
Environmental protection is closely connected to me.
-
I enjoy participating in the activities that support environmental protection.
-
I am reluctant to get involved in issues related to environmental protection (reverse coded).
-
It annoys me to talk about environmental protection (reverse coded).
-
I feel sad if I cannot participate in the activities for environmental protection.
-
I think we should protect environments.
-
I have not considered participating in the activities for environmental protection (reverse coded).
-
Participating in activities to support environmental protection means something more than mere participation to me.
Community-based participation (N/A)
-
Are you willing to participate in the offline volunteering activity to fold the flyers for promoting campaign to sign an online petition? (yes/no)
-
If yes, please specify the number of flyers you can fold.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Ihm, J., Lee, S. How Perceived Costs and Benefits of Initial Social Media Participation Affect Subsequent Community-Based Participation. Voluntas 32, 1320–1331 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11266-020-00200-1
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11266-020-00200-1