Selçuk iletiŞİM

Instant Messaging Use Among University Students (81-96)
89
3.1. Gratifications of IM Use
To answer research questions 1 and 2, factor
analysis and Pearson correlation analysis was
performed. A five point scale, ranging from
strongly agree (5) to strongly disagree (1) was
used to measure the uses and gratifications
provided by the IM use. To find motivations of
IM users’ principal factor analysis with vari-
max rotation was performed. The factor analy-
sis yielded four factors with eigenvalue greater
than 1.0, explaining 46.93 percent of the total
variance. Minimum factor loadings were .45 in
factor analysis. Table 2 includes factors, items’
means, standard deviation and factor loadings.
Table 2 Factor loadings (Principal Components, Varimax Rotation) of 29 gratification items
(N = 547)
Factors and Items
M  SD Load Eig. Var.
Alpha
Factor 1: Interpersonal Interaction and Utility
2.35
0.80
7.55
15.5
.83
To let others know I am concerned about them
2.39 1.26 .680
To get away from what I’m doing
2.18 1.23 .679
To initiate romantic relationships with others
2.00 1.24 .648
To avoid going out
1.95 1.14 .647
To block out some people with whom I do not want to interact
2.32 1.26 .593
To feel involved with what’s going on with other people
2.38 1.18 .576
To see what others are up to
2.65 1.28 .572
To feel less lonely
2.56 1.29 .568
To make new friends
2.48 1.35 .564
To receive advice on personal matters
2.59 1.29 .522
Factor 2: Convenience
3.83
0.71
2.82
13.0
.80
To save money without long distance fees
3.84 1.26 .717
Because it’s fast
4.13 0.94 .652
Because it’s convenient
4.13 0.92 .652
Because it’s easier than making a phone call
3.32 1.35 .596
To talk to many people at the same time
3.90 1.10 .569
Because it’s like face-to-face conversation
3.59 1.31 .553
Because it’s simple and easy
3.64 1.19 .542
To keep in touch with friends or relatives who live far away
4.22 0.92 .536
Because it’s easier than e-mail
3.71 1.18 .489
Factor 3: Relaxation/Entertainment
3.31
0.85
1.80
11.7
.81
Because it’s entertaining
3.52 1.20 .682
To forget about school, work, or other things
3.18 1.32 .649
Because it’s fun
3.27 1.20 .622
To pass the time when I am bored
3.76 1.13 .607
To forget about other things
2.75 1.28 .603
Because it relaxes me
3.28 1.22 .590
Because I need someone to talk to or be with
3.39 1.25 .478
Factor 4: Information Seeking
3.29
0.97
1.43
6.5
.62
To get the information I am looking for
3.35 1.30 .780
To keep up with the news
2.92 1.37 .757
To pass information on to other people
3.59 1.15 .613
As  have  been  seen  on  Table  2,  first  factor  is
interpersonal interaction and utility (M = 2.35,
SD = 0.80) which had an eigenvalue of 7.55
and explained 15.56 percent of the total vari-
ance. First factor has ten items which are “to let
others know I am concerned about them”, “to
get away from what I’m doing”, “to initiate
romantic relationships with others”, “to avoid
going out”, “to block out some people with
whom I do not want to interact”, “to feel in-
volved with what’s going on with other peo-
ple”, “to see what others are up to”, “to feel
less lonely”, “to make new friends”, and I use
IM to receive advice on personal matters. The
reliability of these ten items as indicated by
Cronbach’s alpha was high at .83. Interpersonal
interaction and utility was an important motiva-
tion for university students’ use of IM.
Second factor is convenience (eigenvalue =
2.82) which explained 13.04 percent of the
variance after rotation (M = 3.83, SD = 0.71,
Cronbach’s alpha = .80). Convenience factor,

---

Selçuk İletişim, 5, 3, 2008
90
with item loadings ranging from .489 to .717,
had nine items. These items were “to save
money without long distance fees”, “because
it’s fast”, “because it’s convenient”, “because
it’s easier than making o phone call”, “to talk
to many people at the same time”, “because it’s
like face-to-face conversation”, “because it’s
simple and easy”, “to keep in touch with
friends or relatives who live far away” and
“because it’s easier than email”. The mean
scores for these items were the highest suggest-
ing convenience as a strong motive for uses
IM.
The other factor which described motivations
of IM users is “Relaxation and Entertainment”
(eigenvalue = 1.80). According to factor analy-
sis relaxation and entertainment motivation
factor is third which explained 11.74 percent of
the total variance (M = 3.31, SD = 0.85, Cron-
bach’s alpha = .81). Relaxation and entertain-
ment motivation had seven items which were
“because it’s entertaining”, “to forget about
school, work, or other things”, “because it’s
fun”, “to pass the time when I am bored”, “to
forget about other things”, “because it relaxes
me” and “because I need someone to talk to or
be with”.
Factor analysis indicated that fourth factor is
information seeking (eigenvalue = 1.43). In-
formation seeking factors (M = 3.29, SD  =
0.97) explained 6.58 percent of the variance.
This factor included three items and Cron-
bach’s alpha at .62. These items suggested that
university students used IM when had three
items which were “wanted to get the informa-
tion  I  am  looking  for”,  “to  keep  up  with  the
news”, and “wanted to pass information on to
other people”. As a whole, this study found that
the use of IM by university students was moti-
vated by instrumental reason such as interper-
sonal interaction and utility, convenience, re-
laxation and entertainment, and information
seeking.
On the other hand Pearson r correlations were
also computed among the different IM motives.
The strongest significant correlations between
interpersonal interaction/utility and relaxa-
tion/entertainment (r= .558, p< .01), conven-
ience and relaxation/entertainment (r= .555, p<
.01). On the contrary the lowest significant
correlations between information seeking and
convenience (r= .156, p< .01). Table 3 shows
the Pearson r correlations among all IM mo-
tives.
Table 3 Pearson r correlations among IM motives
Interpersonal
Int. and Utility
Convenience  Relaxation 
and
Entertainment
Information
Seeking
Interpersonal Interaction
and Utility
1
Convenience
.339**
1
Relaxation and
Entertainment
.558**
.555**
1
Information Seeking
.225**
.156**
.265**
1
Note.
**
Correlation is significant at p< .01 level (2-tailed).
3.2. Predictors of IM Use among University
Students
To get answer to research question 2 and 3, two
different multiple regression analysis were
performed. Independent variable was “time
spent on instant messaging daily” in the first
model while “time spent on each instant mes-
saging session” in the second model. On the
other hand dependent variables were the same
in both two models.  Dependent variables were
“time of instant messaging daily” and “time of
instant messaging in one session” in two dif-
ferent regression models. Before regression
analysis was performed, independent variables
were  assigned  in  four  groups  which  were  (1)
motivations of IM use (2) variables of IM using
behaviors (3) respondents’ usage of internet
practice and (4) respondents’ demographic
variables. The first group consisted of IM mo-
tivations which are “interpersonal interaction
and utility”, “convenience”, “relaxa-
tion/entertainment”, and “information seek-
ing”.

---