Cultural difference in motivations for using social network sites:
A comparative study of American and Korean college students
Yoojung Kim a,⇑
, Dongyoung Sohn b,1
, Sejung Marina Choi a,2
a
Department of Advertising, The University of Texas at Austin, 1 University Station A1200, Austin, TX 78712, United States
b
Department of Media & Communication, Hanyang University, 17 Haengdang-dong, Seongdong-gu, Seoul, 133-791, Korea
a r t i c l e i n f o
Article history:
Available online 22 September 2010
Keywords:
Social network sites
Culture
Uses-and-gratifications
a b s t r a c t
While the explosive growth of social network sites is a common phenomenon across many countries, the
ways people use them and their reasons for doing so may differ depending on their social and cultural
milieu, for fundamental values are divergent from culture to culture. This study is an attempt to examine
how cultural contexts shape the use of communication technology by examining the motives for and patterns
of using social network sites among college students in the US and Korea. The findings of this study
suggest that the major motives for using social network sites – seeking friends, social support, entertainment,
information, and convenience – are similar between the two countries, though the weights placed
on these motives are different. Reflecting the unique social nature of the medium, Korean college students
put more weight on obtaining social support from existing social relationships, while American students
place relatively greater emphasis on seeking entertainment. Additionally, American college
students’ networks in an online social venue are far larger than their Korean counterparts, which may
reflect the cultural difference between the two countries regarding developing and managing social
relationships.
Ó 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction
As a new venue for relationship formation and maintenance,
SNSs have attracted numerous users around the globe. For example,
Facebook and MySpace, which both originated in the US,
served more than 117 million and 55 million US visitors, respectively,
in 2009, and they continue to gain popularity throughout
the world (Eldon, 2010). The rapid growth of SNSs on a global scale
has been concurrent with the development of many SNSs that cater
to their local audiences. For example, Cyworld, a Korea-based SNS,
enjoys 23 million members in 2009 (Goh, 2009) – more than a
third of the entire Korean population – while Japan’s Mixi has
26.8 million members in 2010 (Advertising Age, 2010). Underlying
this ever-increasing popularity of SNSs is the fact that this social
medium enables its users to connect to others within their social
and geographic proximity, as well as beyond it. SNSs provide a convenient
way not only to manage existing social relationships, but
also to build new relationships with many others, including even
total strangers.
The unique social nature and mounting popularity of SNSs has
led academic scholars to investigate why people use SNSs – the
motivations underlying the use of social media (Brandtzæg &
Heim, 2009; Jung, Youn, & McClung, 2007; Raacke & Bonds-Raacke,
2008). One of the theoretical approaches to understanding motives
for using new media is the uses-and-gratifications perspective,
which explains the way people adopt and use communication
media as a function of their psychological needs and the gratifications
they seek (Katz, Blumler, & Gurevitch, 1974; Lin, 1999; Rubin,
1994). While several studies have explored the motives for using
SNSs from the uses-and-gratifications perspective (Brandtzæg &
Heim, 2009; Jung et al., 2007; Raacke & Bonds-Raacke, 2008), most
of them have focused on a single country (e.g., the US, Korea, or
Norway), which limits the validity and applicability of their findings
in cross-cultural contexts.
The global expansion of SNSs seems to mirror the inherent desire
people all have in common – the desire to relate to others,
which transcends geographical, social, and cultural borders (Levitt,
1983; Park & Jun, 2003). This commonality, however, often overshadows
the fact that computer-mediated communication does
not occur in a cultural void, but depends on a social and cultural
milieu wherein individuals acquire the fundamental values and
norms that shape their social behaviors (de Mooij, 1998; Halavais,
2000; Recabarren, Nussbaum, & Leiva, 2008). Accordingly, the
motivations underlying the use of SNSs and social interaction via
0747-5632/$ - see front matter Ó 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.chb.2010.08.015
⇑ Corresponding author. Tel.: +1 814 404 7041; fax: +1 512 471 7018.
E-mail addresses: yoojungk@mail.utexas.edu (Y. Kim), sohn.42@osu.edu (D.
Sohn), marina@mail.utexas.edu (S.M. Choi).
1
Tel.: +1 614 247 1691; fax: +1 614 292 2055.
2
Tel.: +1 512 471 3359; fax: +1 512 471 7018.
Computers in Human Behavior 27 (2011) 365–372
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Computers in Human Behavior
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/comphumbeh
SNSs may differ across cultures, for mediated communication in
SNSs also reflects the dominant values and codes of the culture
from which users originate (Boyd, 2008). For instance, Kim and
Yun (2007), based on in-depth interviews with Cyworld users, suggested
that the social relationships and parlance that Koreans
maintain in a SNS mirror the governing interpersonal norms and
communication styles specific to Korea’s collectivistic and highcontext
culture. Similarly, other studies found cultural differences
in the growing forms of computer-mediated communication on
SNSs, namely deceptive behavior in SNSs between the US and Korea
(Lewis & George, 2008) and SNS architectural structures between
Facebook and Mixi (Fogg & Iizawa, 2008). Lewis and
George (2008) identified the differences of Koreans and Americans
in terms of propensity and topics of deception in both face-to-face
and computer-mediated-communication on SNSs – Cyworld and
MySpace. In general, Koreans were more apt to employ deception
than Americans and Koreans tended to lie about their job, salary,
and physical appearance, whereas Americans were apt to lie about
where they lived, age, and interests (Lewis & George, 2008). In
addition, Fogg and Iizawa (2008) compared the SNS architecture
and interface between Facebook and Mixi. While both sites have
the same goal of persuading users to create personal profiles, inviting
friends, respond to others, and return to site often, their services
are designed differently: Facebook interface is designed for
users to take quick action by providing direct and assertive notifications
to users, whereas Mixi’s approach is subtle and indirect,
which leads longer time to achieve similar results than those of
Facebook (Fogg & Iizawa, 2008).
The purpose of this study, therefore, is to showcase the role of
culture in computer-mediated communication by exploring and
comparing the motives for and ways of using SNSs among college
students between two different cultural contexts: the United
States and Korea. Both countries are technologically advanced,
with the widespread adoption of the Internet and SNSs, but they
exhibit a sharp contrast in cultural orientations. Over 74% of the
US population (252 million) and 77% of the Korean population
(36 million) use the Internet (Internet World Stats, 2009), and
approximately one third of the respective populations are unique
visitors of SNSs, which represents the number of unduplicated visitors
to the site in a specified time frame (Joffee & Yeom, 2006; Ostrow,
2007). In addition, these two countries are diametrically
different in key cultural dimensions such as individualism/collectivism
and high/low context (Cho, Up, Gentry, Jun, & Kropp,
1999; Gudykunst & Nishida, 1986; Hall, 1976; Hofstede, 1984;
Taylor, Miracle, & Wilson, 1997).
2. Theoretical background and research questions
2.1. Motives for using SNSs
In examining new media adoption and use, uses-and-gratifications
perspective provides a useful conceptual framework (for a
brief summary of the uses-and-gratification studies, see Roy,
2009). The key premise of use-and-gratifications perspective is
that individuals’ media use is motivated by a set of psychological
needs. Based on its fundamental assumption that people are active
and goal directed in their media uses, the uses-and-gratifications
perspective explains that people purposefully select certain media
and content for consumption in order to satisfy their psychological
needs (Katz et al., 1974).
As the Internet has become integrated into the fabric of everyday
life, many researchers have applied the uses-and-gratifications
approach to the Internet context and how they differ from the motives
for traditional media (Ko, Cho, & Roberts, 2005; Korgaonkar &
Wolin, 1999; Lin, 1999; Papacharissi & Rubin, 2000; Rodgers &
Sheldon, 2002; Roy, 2009; Ruggiero, 2000; Stafford, Stafford, &
Schkade, 2004). Although some differences are observed across
specific Internet applications, the basic motivations underlying
the use of the Internet are generally similar, including information,
convenience, entertainment, and social interaction (Ko et al., 2005;
Papacharissi & Rubin, 2000). That is, people use Internet technologies
to access information, obtain leisure, and communicate with
others in a convenient manner. In addition to the motives for using
the Internet in general, research on virtual communities lends
additional insight into the potential motives of SNS users, because
the network of private blogs found in SNSs can be regarded as a
form of virtual community (Sohn & Leckenby, 2007; Wellman,
2001).
Studies have indicated that people join a virtual community primarily
for seeking information, social support, friendship, and recreation,
and among these social support and friendship are the
most central motives (Ridings and Gefen, 2004). Similarly, people
may use SNSs to obtain information, social/emotional support,
and a sense of belonging, encouragement and companionship not
only from existing social relationships, but also from newly developed
relationships based on similar interests, tastes and goals
(Wellman & Gulia, 1999). In this sense, the motivations for using
the Internet and virtual community identified by prior research
are largely applicable to SNSs.
To understand how and why individuals use SNSs, several
researchers have explored motives for using SNSs based on the
uses-and-gratifications framework. For example, Raacke and
Bonds-Raacke (2008) examined individuals’ uses-and-gratifications
for popular SNSs in the US, and found that the main reasons
for using Facebook and MySpace were to meet ‘‘friends” and to
seek ‘‘information”. Likewise, Jung et al. (2007) identified six reasons
for using Cyworld in Korea: entertainment, self-expression,
professional advancement, passing time, communication with
family and friends, and trends. Recently, Brandtzæg and Heim
(2009) suggested four primary motives for using the four most
popular SNSs (i.e., Underskog, Nettby, HamarUngdom, and Biip)
in Norway: information, entertainment, social interaction, and personal
identity. Among these motives, social interaction was found
to be the most important reason for using SNSs (Brandtzæg &
Heim, 2009). Although the findings from these studies illuminate
the key motives for using SNSs, most of them have focused on
the context of a single country, and little is known about the applicability
and generalizability of the findings to other cultural
contexts.
2.2. Dimensions of cross-cultural differences
As individuals internalize the norms, rules, and values in a society,
they come to share perceptions of their social environments,
which results in an almost automatic processing of what behaviors
are desirable or should be avoided (Hofstede, 1984). We often refer
to this shared perception of social environment as culture, which
shapes the way individuals behave, interact, and build relationships
with others (Gudykunst et al., 1996; Hofstede, 2001). The
role of culture in communication has been frequently studied
through the comparison of two prototype cultures – individualism
vs. collectivism (Aaker & Maheswaran, 1997; Hofstede, 1980; Moon
& Franke, 2000; Srite & Karahanna, 2006). Collectivistic cultures,
characterized by family integrity, in-group membership, and
strong solidarity, place emphasis on interdependence among people.
Conversely, individuals consider themselves to be independent
(Triandis, 2001) in individualistic cultures where self-reliance,
competition, distance from in-groups, and hedonism are valued
(Mills & Clark, 1982). Asian cultures such as China and Korea,
which have a Confucian background, exhibit higher levels of
collectivism, while individualism is more commonly observed in
Western cultures such as the US (Cho et al., 1999; Hofstede, 1984).
366 Y. Kim et al. / Computers in Human Behavior 27 (2011) 365–372
The difference in value orientation between the two prototype
cultures (i.e., individualism vs. collectivism) influences individuals’
communication styles (Gudykunst & Nishida, 1986; Gudykunst &
Ting-Toomey, 1988). According to Hall (1976), communication
styles can be classified into two types, based on how much knowledge
individuals participating in interactions are presumed to
share: high-context vs. low-context communication. High-context
communication tends to be implicit, indirect, and abstract, as
‘‘most of the information is already either in the physical context
or internalized in the person while very little is in the coded, explicit,
transmitted part of the message,” (Hall, 1976, p. 91). In contrast,
low-context communication is dependent mostly on the
information being expressed in an explicit and direct way. Previous
research suggests that low-context communication is predominant
in individualistic cultures, while high-context communication occurs
in collectivistic cultures (Gudykunst & Ting-Toomey, 1988;
Gudykunst et al., 1996).
The contrast between these two prototypical cultures is manifested
especially in the way individuals develop and manage social
relationships. In a collectivistic culture, people tend to attach value
to group identity, with a strong tendency to build lifetime relationships
(de Mooij, 1998; Parks & Floyd, 1996), whereas an individualistic
culture highlights independence, resulting in fragmented
and short-term relationships among one another (Hall, 1976;
Taylor et al., 1994). This cultural difference in building and managing
social relationships may also differentiate how individuals perceive
and use social media. A recent study of Internet users in the
US and Hong Kong reported that respondents from Hong Kong, a
collectivistic culture, tended to view the Internet as a means of social
interaction, whereas Americans, from an individualistic culture,
were more likely to use the Internet as a device for seeking
and gaining information (Chau, Cole, Massey, Montoya-Weiss, &
O’Keefe, 2002). Along this line, individuals in different cultural contexts
may utilize SNSs with different motives, reflecting their prevalent
cultural values.
It is also conceivable that the motives for using communication
media, which are largely shaped by cultural contexts, influence the
patterns of using the media (i.e., amount of use and duration of
use) and attitudes toward the site (Garramone, Harris, & Anderson,
1986; Papacharissi & Rubin, 2000). Researchers in computer-mediated
communications have found that patterns of media use (i.e.,
amount of use) are linked to more positive attitudes towards computers
and higher levels of learning (Perse, Buron, Kovner, Lears, &
Sen, 1992), as well as to personal identity satisfaction (Garramone
et al., 1986). Papacharissi and Rubin (2000), for example, have
found that those who used the Internet to fulfill the need for interpersonal
relationships tended to use the Internet the most. Other
studies have looked into the differences in usage patterns among
heavy and light Internet users based on the set of gratifications obtained
(Kargaonkar & Wolin, 1999; Roy, 2009). While past research
into Internet uses-and-gratifications has found a relationship between
motives and behavioral outcomes, little is known about this
relationship in the context of SNSs across cultures. Given the notion
that different motives based on different cultures may result
in different patterns of using SNSs (i.e., amount of use and number
of friends) and attitudes toward SNSs, the two main research questions
of this study are as follows:
Research Question 1: Are there differences in the identified
motives for using SNSs between American and Korean college
students?
Research Question 2: Are there differences in the relationships
of the identified motives for using SNSs to the usage patterns
(i.e., amount of use and number of friends) and to attitudes
toward SNSs between American and Korean college
students?
3. Research method
3.1. Sample and procedure
Our study sample (N = 589) consisted of American and Korean
undergraduate students who registered at large universities in
their respective countries. A total of 349 undergraduate students
enrolled in campus-wide elective classes and introductory advertising
classes at a large southwestern university in the US, and
240 undergraduates enrolled in campus-wide electives or introductory
communication classes at five different universities located
in metropolitan areas in Korea participated in the study.
American respondents’ ages ranged from 18 to 24 years, with an
average age of 20, and Korean participants were 23 years old on
average, ranging from 18 to 28. Among the American respondents,
263 (75.1%) were female and 87 (24.9%) were male, whereas 131
(54.6%) males and 109 (45.4%) females comprised the Korean sample.
Over 60% of the American participants were Caucasians (217),
followed by Asian-Americans (46, 13%), Hispanic-Americans (45,
12.9%), African-Americans (13, 3.7%), international (12, 3.4%), multi-national
(7, 2%), and other (9, 2.6%), whereas the Korean sample
was ethnically homogeneous.
3.2. Measures
The self-administered survey was originally created in English.
It was translated to Korean and then back-translated into English
by two Korean bilingual individuals to assure comparability. The
questionnaire consisted of four primary sections. In the first section,
the use of SNSs was measured. First, respondents were asked
to select a SNS that they visit most frequently from a top SNS list
(Nielson//NetRatings, 2006). Next, two measures were used to
examine the extent to which respondents used the SNS of their
choice: (1) amount of use per day (i.e., how many hours per day
on average they use the SNS) and (2) duration of use (i.e., how long
they have used the SNS). Lastly, the numbers of contacts in the
‘friends’ list in various categories (i.e., family, close friends,
acquaintances, and strangers) were obtained.
The second part of the questionnaire assessed the participant’s
overall attitude toward the SNS and the motives for using the SNS
that respondents reported visiting on a regular basis. Attitude toward
the SNS was assessed through items developed by Yoon,
Cropp, and Cameron (2002). This portion included three items
using a seven-point, semetic differential scale ranging from ‘‘unfavorable”
to ‘‘favorable”, ‘‘bad” to ‘‘good”, and ‘‘negative to
‘‘positive”. Motives for using the SNS were examined via a fivepoint,
Likert-type scale, with 1 being ‘‘Strongly Disagree” and 5
being ‘‘Strongly Agree.” All of the specific items were borrowed
from prior literature, including Papacharissi and Rubin’s (2000)
and Ko et al. (2005) Internet use motives, Ridings and Gefen’s
(2004) virtual community use motives, and Yoon et al. (2002)
Internet portal use motives. Based on the researchers’ discretion,
only items that were deemed applicable to SNSs were selected
and modified to fit within the context of this study, resulting in a
total of 20 items (see Table 1 for the specific measures). The last
part of the questionnaire contained demographic questions about
age, gender, race, and school classification.
4. Results
4.1. Preliminary results: use of SNSs
Prior to examining the research questions, descriptive information
on SNS usage among survey respondents from the US and Korea
was obtained. Consistent with other recent reports (see Eldon,
Y. Kim et al. / Computers in Human Behavior 27 (2011) 365–372 367
Table 1
Principal component analysis results of social network site use motivations.
U.S. Components Korea Components
‘‘I use social network sites to...” M SD 1 2 3 4 5 M SD 1 2 3 4 5
Component 1:Seeking Friends
Meet new people. 2.74 1.34 0.93 0.02 À0.10 0.06 0.05 2.93 1.2 À0.01 0.11 0.05 À0.78 0.03
Find others like me. 2.79 1.28 0.87 À0.10 À0.04 0.12 À0.01 2.80 1.1 0.04 À0.03 À 0.13 À0.90 0.03
Talk with people with the same interests and 3.07 1.23 0.86 0.02 0.11 0.01 0.02 3.20 1.1 0.06 0.03 0.16 À0.73 À0.05
Hang out with people I enjoy. 3.32 1.2 0.70 0.11 0.13 À0.14 0.13 3.69 0.9
Component 2: Seeking Convenience
Use it anytime, anywhere. 4.05 0.96 0.00 0.84 0.04 À0.09 À0.12 3.84 1.0 0.06 0.09 0.08 À0.11 À0.72
Use it conveniently. 3.93 0.95 0.09 0.80 0.03 0.11 0.13 3.79 0.9 0.14 0.29 0.05 0.08 À0.66
Use it easily. 4.10 0.89 À0.03 0.80 À0.01 À0.11 À0.23 3.93 0.9 0.18 0.05 0.11 À0.00 À0.78
Get what I want for less effort. 3.24 1.23 À0.04 0.52 À0.01 0.44 0.03 3.33 1.0
Component 3: Seeking Social Support
Let out my emotions easily to others who will 2.45 1.25 À0.03 À0.00 0.95 0.03 0.04 3.15 1.1 0.00 À0.04 0.90 0.04 À0.05
Express my anger to others who will sympathize 2.30 1.21 À0.01 À0.06 0.93 0.03 0.04 2.99 1.1 À0.06 À0.02 0.90 À0.03 À0.10
Talk out my problems and get advice. 2.46 1.23 À0.03 À0.01 0.81 0.09 À0.04 2.72 1.0 0.15 0.35 0.54 À0.01 0.38
Let others know I care about their feelings. 3.07 1.24 0.10 0.10 0.72 À0.09 À0.09 3.39 1.1 0.05 À0.20 0.53 À0.30 À0.22
Component 4: Seeking Information
Learn about unknown things. 3.37 1.12 À 0.01 0.04 À 0.04 0.74 À0.24 2.92 1.1 À0.01 0.88 À0.02 À0.10 À0.13
Do research. 2.34 1.17 0.00 À 0.04 0.12 0.73 0.14 3.30 1.1 À0.14 0.65 À0.04 À0.12 À0.36
Learn about useful things. 2.88 1.10 0.16 0.07 0.09 0.71 À0.04 3.08 1.0 0.02 0.83 À0.09 À0.13 À0.09
Get new ideas. 2.76 1.06 0.12 0.00 0.05 0.67 À0.12 2.93 1.0 0.05 0.78 0.07 0.13 À0.03
Component 5: Seeking Entertainment
Forget about work or other things. 4.02 1.05 À0.06 0.07 À0.02 0.05 À0.9 3.10 1.2 0.76 0.03 0.10 À0.13 0.14
Relax. 3.77 1.07 0.02 0.09 À0.00 0.02 À0.8 3.35 1.1 0.88 À0.05 À0.09 0.04 0.00
Feel excited. 3.29 1.19 0.15 À0.08 0.13 0.07 À0.7 3.53 1.0 0.79 0.07 À0.02 À0.08 À0.09
To pass the time. 4.52 0.86 3.87 1.0 0.65 À0.06 0.00 0.06 À0.28
Eigen value 6.8 2.6 1.7 1.6 1.0 5.3 2.5 2.0 1.3 1.3
% of Variance 35.8 13.5 8.8 8.4 5.3 29.4 13.9 11.0 7.4 7.1
Cumulative % 35.8 49.2 58.1 66.4 72 29.4 43.3 54.3 61.7 68.9
368Y.Kimetal./ComputersinHumanBehavior27(2011)365–372
2010), Facebook ranked as the most popular SNS that American
participants used most frequently (83.4%), followed by Myspace
(9.7%), YouTube (4.3%), and others (2.6%). Consistent with the findings
from previous research (Kim & Yun, 2007), the most frequently
reported SNS among Korean participants was Cyworld
(89.6%), followed by NateOn (3.8%), Daum Planet (3.3%), and others
(3.3%). While the mentioned SNSs differ in their architecture and
interface, all share the ‘‘structural similarities” of ‘‘profiles, friends,
and comments” (Boyd, 2008, p. 123), and the two most reported
platforms, Facebook and Cyworld, are considered fairly comparable
(see Kim and Yun (2007) for more information on Cyworld’s
architecture).
American and Korean respondents showed a similar pattern of
daily use of the SNS of their choice: on average, American respondents
reported using their favorite SNS for 1.5 h, and Korean
respondents used their SNS for 1 h and 40 min per day. As for
the duration of SNS usage, Korean respondents have used their
SNS over 3 years, whereas their American counterparts reported
having used their site for about 2 years on average. While there
was an 1-year difference of duration of SNSs usage between Korean
and American respondents, this usage pattern seems to be similar,
reflecting on the earlier launch dates of Cyworld in 2001 than those
of Facebook in 2004 (Boyd & Ellison, 2007; Kim & Yun, 2007). A
notable difference between American and Korean respondents,
however, was found in the number of connections included in their
‘‘friends” list: American respondents reported having an average
number of 412 social connections (SD = 364), whereas their Korean
counterparts had an average of 81 contacts (SD = 69).
To examine this pattern further, the proportion of socially close
others (e.g., family and close friends) in respondents’ networks in
the SNSs (i.e., the number of socially close others in a network/
the total number of members in a network) were calculated and
compared between the two countries. While families and close
friends accounted for less than a quarter of American respondents’
social networks (23.7%), the proportion of socially close others in
Korean respondents’ online social networks reached 70.4%, and
this difference was statistically significant (F(1584) = 5.14,
p < .05). This implies that Americans may be more inclusive in their
network building, because individualistic and low-context cultures
highlight more casual, instrumental relationships among one another
(Hall, 1976), whereas their Korean counterparts may be more
exclusive in their network building, for collectivistic and high-context
cultures lead to force people being deeply involved with each
other with high levels of social bonds and commitment (Parks &
Floyd, 1996).
4.2. Motives for using SNSs
In examining the first research question, a factor analysis with
direct oblimin rotation (d = 0), the most popular among nonorthogonal
rotation methods, was performed to determine what
underlying structure exists for the motives for using SNSs and
how they differ across the two cultures. The reason why we used
the non-orthogonal rotation is because orthogonal rotation methods,
such as varimax rotation, produce factors with an assumption
of no correlation among them, which is quite unrealistic in that the
psychological motives underlying the use of communication media
are correlated in most cases (Fabrigar, Wegener, MacCallum, &
Strahan, 1999).
With the US sample, the factor analysis produced a five-factor
solution, which was evaluated using the following criteria: eigenvalue
(greater than 1.0) and the number of items (at least three
items meeting a 60/40 loading criterion). The five factors explained
71.71% of the variance. As shown in Table 1, the first factor, labeled
‘‘seeking friends,” accounted for 35.77% of variance after rotation,
and its four items formed a reliable scale as assessed by Cronbach’s
alpha (a = .92). The second factor, ‘‘seeking convenience,” consisted
of four items and accounted for 13.46% of variance (a = .81). The
third factor, labeled ‘‘seeking social support,” explained 8.83% of
variance, and the scale with four items was found to be reliable
(a = .89). The fourth factor, ‘‘seeking information,” included four
items (a = .79) and explained 8.40% of variance. Finally, the fifth
factor, ‘‘seeking entertainment,” with three items accounted for
5.27% of variance (a = .81).
We analyzed the Korean data using the same procedure as described
in the US analysis. A similar five-factor solution was obtained,
which explained approximately 68.86% of the total
variance. The first factor, labeled ‘‘seeking entertainment,” accounted
for 29.41% of variance after rotation, and its four items
formed a reliable scale as assessed by Cronbach’s alpha (a = .77).
The second factor, ‘‘seeking information,” consisted of four items
and accounted for 13.89% of variance (a = .84). The third factor,
‘‘seeking social support,” explained 11.00% of variance (a = .79),
and the fourth factor, ‘‘seeking friends,” explained 7.44% of variance
(a = .80). Finally, the fifth factor, ‘‘seeking convenience,” with
three items accounted for 7.12% of variance (a = .79). Results of the
factor analysis for the US and Korean results are reported in Table 1.
Given the acceptable reliabilities, the five motivation indices were
created by averaging the corresponding items for subsequent
analyses.
In examining how motives for using SNSs differ between the
two cultures, a multivariate analysis of covariance (MANCOVA)
procedure with the five motives for using SNSs as the dependent
variables was conducted. Since the US respondents’ gender distribution
was severely skewed (three quarters of the respondents
were female), gender was employed as a covariate in this analysis.
As shown in Table 2, the MANCOVA results indicate that cultural
contexts significantly differentiate the use motivations for social
networks (Wilks’ K = .85, F(5, 582) = 20.55, p < .001), with the effects
of gender (Wilks’ K = .96, F(5, 582) = 5.33, p < .001) being controlled.
Specifically, Korean participants rated significantly higher
motivations for using SNSs to seek social support (MKorean = 3.01
vs. MAmerican = 2.55, F(1, 586) = 40.32, p < .000) and information
(MKorean = 3.08 vs. MAmerican = 2.82, F(1, 586) = 10.81, p < .001),
while American respondents had greater motivation for seeking
entertainment (MAmerican = 3.88 vs. MKorean = 3.50, F(1, 586) =
27.09, p < .000). For the motivation for convenience (MAmerican =
3.80; MKorean = 3.76, F(1, 586) = .36, p = ns) and friendship
(MAmerican = 3.00; MKorean = 3.13, F(1, 586) = 2.49, p = ns), however,
no significant differences between the two countries were found,
suggesting that American and Korean respondents showed similar
levels of motivation to seek convenience and friendship through
SNSs. The results of the MANCOVA analysis for the US and Korea
are reported in Table 3.
In examining the second research question, as shown in Table 4,
multiple regressions were conducted to see if there were any differences
in the relationships between the identified motives for
using SNSs and the behavioral and attitudinal outcomes in the
US and Korea. For the behavioral outcome of using SNSs, the
amount of SNS use per day and the number of friends in subjects’
social networks were examined. In predicting the amount of daily
SNS use, seeking social support (ß = .13, p < .05), and seeking information
(ß = .15, p < .05) motivations were significant predictors in
Table 2
MANCOVA results: multivariate tests.
Wilks’ K F
Gender .96 5.33***
Nationality .85 20.55***
***
Significant at p < .001.
Y. Kim et al. / Computers in Human Behavior 27 (2011) 365–372 369
the US. However, no significant predictors for the amount of SNS
use per day were found for Korean participants. Therefore, American
SNS users who sought to fulfill the needs of social support and
information tended to use SNSs the most, while there was no significant
difference in the amount of time spent using SNSs based
on the needs of Korean SNS users.
In addition, the motivations for seeking social support (ß = À.12,
p < .05), seeking information (ß = .14, p < .05), and seeking entertainment
(ß = .17, p < .05) were significant predictors of the number
of friends in SNSs in the US, whereas the motivation for
seeking friends (ß = .16, p < .05) was the only significant predictor
in Korea. This means that American SNS users with a need for social
support tend to have smaller number of friends, while those
who have needs for information and entertainment from using
SNSs have more friends in their networks. However, in Korea, those
who have a need to seek new friends in using SNSs have the largest
friend networks.
For the attitudinal outcome of using SNSs, the motivations of
convenience (ß = .14, p < .01), entertainment (ß = .26, p < .01), and
friendship (ß = .09, p < .05) were significant predictors in the US.
In Korea, seeking convenience (ß = .30, p < .01) and social support
(ß = .14, p < .05) were significant predictors for attitude toward
SNSs. In other words, American SNS users who seek convenience,
entertainment, and new friendship seem to have a more positive
attitude toward SNSs, while Korean SNS users who seek convenience
and social support appear to have a more positive attitude
toward SNSs.
5. Discussion
The purpose of this study was to explore the motives behind
using SNSs among college students in the US and Korea and investigate
the differences in SNS use motives and usage behavior between
the two countries. In this study, five motivations – seeking
friends, social support, information, entertainment, and convenience
– were identified as primary reasons for using SNSs among
college students in both countries. Although the explained variances
by the individual motivations differed slightly between the
two countries, the overall pattern appeared to be very similar, with
five identical motivations. One of the primary reasons for using
SNSs was ‘‘seeking friends,” which suggests that college students
in both countries actively seek to make new friends and connect
with others with common interests in the cyber milieu. Obtaining
‘‘social support” from close connections was another important
motive for networking via such sites. Another notable motivation,
‘‘information,” suggests that SNS users rely on social relationships
as useful resources for information. Next, the ‘‘entertainment”
motivation indicates that college students utilize SNSs for pleasure
that might come from exchanging information, experience, or music
or video clips with their social ties. Lastly, the ‘‘convenience”
motivation suggests another important aspect of SNSs in understanding
what makes an online social venue attractive. Perhaps
due to the convenient access to a variety of communicative capabilities
facilitating social connections as well as other Internet
activities, college students turn to such sites as a personal hub on
the Internet.
Although the motives identified across the two countries were
identical, the patterns of SNS usage were found to be remarkably
different. More specifically, American students’ online social networks
were found to be almost five times larger on average than
Korean counterparts, but American and Korean students spent almost
the same amount of time on average (1.5 h for American students
vs. 1 h and 40 min for Korean students) on their respective
SNSs. Developing and managing social networks involves the
investment of resources like time and efforts, which is proportional
to the size of the networks: the more people in a network, the more
resources are required to maintain the network as a whole. Since
the resources individuals can spend are not limitless, the increase
Table 3
MANCOVA results: adjusted means and standard errors.
Motivations US (N = 349) Korea (N = 240) F
M SE M SE
Seeking friends 3.00 .05 3.13 .06 2.49
Seeking social support 2.55 .05 3.01 .07 40.32***
Seeking information 2.82 .05 3.08 .06 10.81**
Seeking entertainment 3.88 .05 3.50 .06 27.09***
Seeking convenience 3.80 .04 3.76 .05 .36
**
Significant at p < .01.
***
Significant at p < .001.
Table 4
Multiple regression analyses for predicting usage pattern.
U. S. Korea
b t R2
F b t R2
F
Amount of Use 0.11 8.78***
0.01 0.55
Seeking Friends À0.01 À0.12 À0.06 À0.73
Seeking Social Support 0.13 2.18*
0.05 0.70
Seeking Information 0.15 2.37*
À0.12 À0.22
Seeking Entertainment 0.12 1.87 À0.02 À0.20
Seeking Convenience 0.06 0.95 0.11 1.33
Number of Friends 0.04 3.72**
0.07 3.50**
Seeking Friends À0.06 À0.92 0.16 2.14*
Seeking Social Support À0.12 À2.00*
0.08 1.01
Seeking Information 0.14 2.04*
0.05 0.65
Seeking Entertainment 0.17 2.54*
À0.00 À0.04
Seeking Convenience 0.04 0.52 0.07 0.84
Attitude toward the SNS 0.26 23.51***
0.24 14.95***
Seeking Friends 0.09 2.55*
0.00 0.01
Seeking Social Support 0.04 1.24 0.14 2.46*
Seeking Information À0.07 À1.50 0.03 0.60
Seeking Entertainment 0.26 5.55**
0.10 1.82
Seeking Convenience 0.14 2.92**
0.30 4.50**
*
Significant at p < .05
**
Significant at p < .01.
***
Significant at p < .001.
370 Y. Kim et al. / Computers in Human Behavior 27 (2011) 365–372
of network size naturally reduces the amount of resources one can
spend to manage a relationship with each person in the network.
The huge difference in the size of networks between American
and Korean students might, therefore, result from the different
ways they value relationships: American students may tend to
use SNSs primarily for casual relationships (e.g., finding new
friends with similar interests) with less efforts to maintain (at least
in the online environment), while Korean students may tend to use
SNSs for obtaining social support from existing social relationships
(e.g., families and close friends), requiring deeper involvement and
commitment.
This notion seems supported by additional findings of this
study: socially close others (e.g., families and close friends) were
only a minor part of American respondents’ online social networks,
while they reached 70% of Korean respondents’ networks. Also, the
MANCOVA results indicate that the entertainment motivation was
rated significantly higher for American students compared to Korean
students, while seeking information and social support were
rated higher among Korean students than their American counterparts.
No statistically significant differences between the two
groups were found with regard to the motives for seeking friends
and convenience.
Further insight was provided by the regression results. Some of
the identified motives for using SNSs appeared to be significant
predictors of behavioral and attitudinal outcomes of SNSs, and different
patterns were found between the US and Korea. The multiple
regression analysis identified two significant predictors –
seeking social support and information motives – of the amount
of SNS use only in the US. This means that American college students
who want to fulfill social support and information needs
tended to use SNSs the most, while they were not intrigued by
seeking friends, entertainment, and convenience in terms of
amount of SNS use. In addition, seeking social support, information,
and entertainment motivations predicted the total number
of friends in SNSs in the US, while the motivation of seeking friends
was the only significant predictor of the number of friends in Korea.
This suggests that American students often have more friends
in their SNSs to get social support, information, and entertainment,
while Korean students have more friends in their networks to fulfill
the need of seeking new friends. Finally, the motivations of convenience,
entertainment, and seeking friends in the US and
convenience and social support in Korea predicted the overall positive
attitude toward the SNSs. These findings highlight the cultural
differences in attitude toward SNSs based on the motives of
social relationship. While SNS users in individualistic, low-context
cultures (i.e., the US) have more of a positive of attitude toward
SNSs when they seek new friends in a fun and convenient way,
users in collectivistic, high-context cultures (i.e., Korea) have a
favorable attitude toward the SNSs in seeking social support via a
convenient tool.
In sum, the results imply that American students tend to focus
more on entertaining themselves by making new friends through
SNSs, while Korean students tend to focus more on existing relationships
with socially close others from whom they can acquire
useful information and social support. To illuminate this difference
further, future research should examine explicitly the strategies
individuals adopt to develop and manage their online social networks,
and whether they differ across cultural contexts.
6. Implications and limitations
The findings of this study shed light on how culture plays a role
in shaping college students’ motives for using SNSs, which in turn
influence their patterns of using them. Theoretically, this study expands
uses-and-gratification perspectives to the new media – SNSs,
in a cross-cultural context – the United States and Korea. The results
confirmed the influence of culture on American and Korean college
students’ different use motivations of SNSs and usage behavior
patterns. Practically, the findings of this research suggest that SNS
marketers should apply culture-specific strategies to attract more
users. Specifically, marketers of SNSs are required to develop more
entertainment features to attract consumers in individualistic cultures,
while in collectivistic cultures, they may need to incorporate
features that facilitate the exchange of social support via existing
social relationships.
The results from this study also create new directions for future
research. Future research should be directed to look at other cultures
with diverse samples (e.g., teens, young adults not enrolled
in college, or older adults), leading to new insights on the cultural
impact of uses-and-gratification in SNSs on other age groups. Additional
research should explore motivations and behavior for using
other emerging types of social media, such as microblogging sites
(e.g., Twitter) and video sharing sites (e.g., YouTube). While they
are all considered to be social media, there would be some similarities
and differences among Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube. Thus,
investigating different types of social media motives and usage
behavior would provide a better understanding of the uses-andgratification
in new forms of media. In addition, investigating potential
antecedents of SNS motives might be important future research
topics. With the interconnectivity of individual’s motives
to use media and their demographic, social, and psychological
characteristics (Palmgreen, 1984; Rosengren, 1974), uses-andgratification
research has sought to understand how certain social
and psychological factors influence new media use motives (Papacharissi
& Rubin, 2000). Therefore, including demographic information
(e.g., sex, ethnicity, age, education, and income), social
context (e.g., group membership and social position), and psychological
variables (e.g., personality traits) in the uses-and-gratification
framework would extend current study by advancing our
knowledge on the motives of SNS use.
While the present study contributes to the emerging body of literature
on SNS uses-and-gratifications and cross-cultural research,
this study is not without limitations. While a recent industry report
indicates that far more females use SNSs (Anderson Analytics,
2008; quantcast, 2009), and the gender differences were controlled
in the statistical analyses of this study, the unbalanced gender ratio
of the US sample, with a heavy proportion of females, might limit
the generalizability of the findings in this study. Thus, a more balanced
sample should be employed in future studies. Another concern
that merits future research is that little practical importance
found in the relationships between the motives for using SNSs
and usage patterns of the sites due to the coefficients with small
effect size. A plausible explanation might be lack of accuracy in
measuring the self-reported, memory-based measures of network
size (i.e., number of friends) and amount of time to use SNSs. Thus,
additional content analysis of ‘friends’ lists and usage patterns of
the sites may offer more accurate information that supplements
the survey data. A related issue is measurement of cultural orientation.
This study did not measure the level of cultural orientation
of participants, but assumed the existence of cultural differences
between the samples of the two countries. Thus, in a future study,
it would be valuable to actually measure the respondents’ level of
cultural orientations, comparing the two countries to verify the
real differences. Lastly, identifying additional motivations to use
SNSs may yield valuable insight into the uses-and-gratification research.
For example, along with social connectivity, user’s self-presentation
and impression management are unique characteristics
of SNSs by creating and providing user-generated contents (Boyd
& Ellison, 2007). Thus, it may be worthwhile to investigate opinion/content-giving
types of motivations of using SNSs in the future
research.
Y. Kim et al. / Computers in Human Behavior 27 (2011) 365–372 371
References
Aaker, J. L., & Maheswaran, D. (1997). The effect of cultural orientation on
persuasion. Journal of Consumer Research, 24(2), 315–328.
Advertising Age (2010). Profiling the Facebook of the World. http://adage.coverleaf.
com/advertisingage/20100614?pg=10#pg10. Accessed 11.07.10.
Anderson Analytics (2008). Blogging increasing in popularity among generation Y.
http://www.andersonanalytics.com/index.php?mact=News,cntnt01,detail,0&
cntnt01articleid=56 &cntnt01origid=47 &cntnt01detailtemplate=newsdetail.tpl
&cntnt01dateformat=%25m.%25d.%25Y&cntnt01returnid=46. Accessed 15.07.
10.
Boyd, D. M. (2008). Why youth (heart) social network sites: The role of networked
publics in teenage social life. In D. Buckingham (Ed.), Youth, identity, and digital
media (pp. 119–142). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Boyd, D. M., & Ellison, N. B. (2007). Social network sites: Definition, history, and
scholarship. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 13(1). http://
jcmc.indiana.edu/vol13/issue1/boyd.ellison.html. Accessed 15.07.10.
Brandtzæg, P. B., & Heim, J. (2009). Why people use social networking sites. Lecture
Notes in Computer Science, 5621, 143–152.
Chau, P. Y. K., Cole, M., Massey, A. P., Montoya-Weiss, M., & O’Keefe, R. M. (2002).
Cultural differences in the online behavior of consumers. Communications of the
ACM, 45(10), 138–143.
Cho, B., Up, K., Gentry, J. W., Jun, S., & Kropp, F. (1999). Cultural values reflected in
theme and execution: A comparative study of US and Korean television
commercials. Journal of Advertising, 28(4), 59–73.
de Mooij, M. (1998). Global marketing and advertising: Understanding cultural
paradoxes. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Eldon, E. (2010). ComScore, Quantcast, Compete, Nielsen show a strong December
for Facebook traffic in the US January 22nd, 2010. http://www.insidefacebook.
com/2010/01/22/comscore-quantcast-compete-show-a-strong-december-forfacebook-traffic-in-the-us/.
Accessed 10.01.10.
Fabrigar, L. R., Wegener, D. T., MacCallum, R. C., & Strahan, E. J. (1999). Evaluating
the use of exploratory factor analysis in psychological research. Psychological
Methods, 4(3), 272–299.
Fogg, B. J., & Iizawa, D. (2008). Online persuasion in Facebook and Mixi: A crosscultural
comparison. In H. Oinas-Kukkonen et al. (Eds.), Persuasive 2008. LNCS,
5033 (pp. 35–46). Heidelberg: Springer.
Garramone, G., Harris, A., & Anderson, R. (1986). Uses of political bulletin boards.
Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media, 30(3), 325–339.
Goh, B. (2009). Asian social networking sites profit from virtual money. Reuters.
http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE58800D20090909. Accessed 11.07.10.
Gudykunst, W. B., Matsumoto, Y., Ting-Toomey, S., Nishida, T., Kim, K., & Heyman, S.
(1996). The influence of cultural individualism-collectivism, self Construals, and
individual values on communication styles across cultures. Human
Communication Research, 22(4), 510–543.
Gudykunst, W. B., & Nishida, T. (1986). Attributional confidence in low- and highcontext
cultures. Human Communication Research, 12(4), 525–549.
Gudykunst, W. B., & Ting-Toomey, S. (1988). Culture and interpersonal communication.
Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Halavais, A. (2000). National borders on the world wide web. New Media and Society,
1(3), 7–28.
Hall, E. T. (1976). Beyond culture. Gardon City, NY: Doubleday and Company.
Hofstede, G. (1980). Culture’s consequences. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Hofstede, G. H. (1984). Culture’s consequences: International differences in workrelated
values. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Hofstede, G. (2001). Culture’s consequences: International differences in work related
values. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications Inc..
Internet World Stats (2009). South Korea – Broadband market – Overview and
statistics synopsis. http://www.budde.com.au/Research/South-Korea-BroadbandMarket-Overview-Statistics.html.
Accessed 10.01.10.
Joffee, B., & Yeom, T. (2006). Inside Cyworld: Best practices from South Korea’s
leading online community. http://www.plus8star.com/Inside_Cyworld_Sample.
pdf. Accessed 18.03.10.
Jung, T., Youn, H., & McClung, S. (2007). Motivations and self-presentation strategies
on Korean-based ‘‘Cyworld” weblog format personal homepages.
CyberPsychology and Behavior, 10(1), 24–31.
Katz, E., Blumler, J. G., & Gurevitch, M. (1974). Utilization of mass communication by
the individual. In J. G. Blumer & E. Katz (Eds.), The uses of mass communications:
Current perspectives on gratifications research (pp. 19–32). Beverly Hills, CA:
Sage.
Kim, K. H., & Yun, H. (2007). Cying for me, cying for us: Relational dialectics in a
Korean social network site. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication.
http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol13/issue1/kim.yun.html. Accessed 15.10.08.
Ko, H., Cho, C., & Roberts, M. S. (2005). Internet uses and gratifications. Journal of
Advertising, 34(2), 57–70.
Korgaonkar, P. K., & Wolin, L. D. (1999). A multivariate analysis of web usage. Journal
of Advertising Research, 39(2), 53–68.
Levitt, T. (1983). After the sale is over. Harvard Business Review, 61, 87–93.
Lewis, C. C., & George, J. F. (2008). Cross-cultural deception in social networking
sites and face-to-face communication. Computers in Human Behavior, 24(6),
2945–2964.
Lin, C. A. (1999). Online-service adoption likelihood. Journal of Advertising Research,
39(2), 79–89.
Mills, J., & Clark, M. S. (1982). Exchange and communal relationships. In L. Wheeler
(Ed.), Review of personality and social psychology (pp. 91–127). Beverly Hills, CA:
Sage.
Moon, Y. S., & Franke, G. R. (2000). Cultural influences on agency practitioners’
ethical perceptions: A comparison of Korea and the US. Journal of Advertising,
29(1), 51–65.
Nielson//NetRatings (2006). Social Networking Sites grow 47 percent, year over
year, reaching 45 percent of web users, according to Nielsen//Netratings. http://
www.nielsen-netratings.com. Accessed 15.10.08.
Ostrow, A. (2007). Number of social networking users has doubled since 2007. http://
mashable.com/2009/07/28/social-networking-users-us. Accessed 1.03.10.
Palmgreen, P. (1984). Uses and gratifications: A theoretical perspective. In R. N.
Bostrom (Ed.), Communication yearbook 8 (pp. 20–55). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Papacharissi, Z., & Rubin, A. M. (2000). Predictors of Internet use. Journal of
Broadcasting and Electronic Media, 44(2), 175–196.
Park, C., & Jun, J. (2003). A cross-cultural comparison of Internet buying behavior:
Effects of Internet usage, perceived risks, and innovativeness. International
Marketing Review, 20(5), 534–553.
Parks, M. R., & Floyd, K. (1996). Making friends in cyberspace. Journal of
Communication, 46(1), 80–97.
Perse, E. M., Buron, P. I., Kovner, E. S., Lears, M. E., & Sen, R. J. (1992). Predicting
computer-mediated communication in a college. Communication Research
Reports, 9, 161–170.
quantcast (2009). http://www.quantcast.com. Accessed 1.04.10.
Raacke, J., & Bonds-Raacke, J. (2008). MySpace and Facebook: Applying the uses and
gratifications theory to exploring friend-networking sites. CyberPsychology and
Behavior, 11(2), 169–174.
Recabarren, M., Nussbaum, M., & Leiva, C. (2008). Cultural divide and the Internet.
Computers in Human Behavior, 24(6), 2917–2926.
Ridings, C. M., & Gefen, D. (2004). Virtual community attraction: Why people hang
out online. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 10(1). http://
jcmc.indiana.edu/vol10/issue1/ridings_gefen.html. Accessed 15.10.09.
Rodgers, S., & Sheldon, K. M. (2002). An improved way to characterize Internet
users. Journal of Advertising Research, 42(5), 85–94.
Rosengren, K. E. (1974). Uses and gratifications: A paradigm outlined. In J. G.
Blumler & E. Katz (Eds.), The uses of mass communications: Current perspectives
on gratifications research (pp. 269–286). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
Roy, S. K. (2009). Internet uses and gratifications: A survey in the Indian context.
Computers in Human Behavior, 25(4), 878–886.
Rubin, A. M. (1994). Media uses and effects: A uses-and-gratifications perspective.
In J. Bryant & D. Zillimann (Eds.), Media effects: Advances in theory and research
(pp. 417–436). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Ruggiero, T. E. (2000). Uses and gratifications theory in the 21st century. Mass
Communication and Society, 3(1), 3–37.
Sohn, D., & Leckenby, J. D. (2007). A structural solution to communication dilemmas
in a virtual community. Journal of Communication, 57(3), 435–449.
Srite, M., & Karahanna, E. (2006). The role of espoused national cultural values in
technology acceptance. MIS Quarterly, 30(3), 679–704.
Stafford, T. F., Stafford, M. P., & Schkade, L. L. (2004). Determining uses and
gratifications for the Internet. Decision Sciences, 35(2), 259–289.
Taylor, C. R., Miracle, G. E., & Wilson, R. D. (1997). The impact of information level on
the effectiveness of US and Korean television commercials. Journal of
Advertising, 26(1), 1–18.
Triandis, H. C. (2001). Individualism and collectivism: Past, present, and future. In D.
Matsumoto (Ed.), The handbook of culture and psychology (pp. 35–50). New York,
NY: Oxford University Press.
Wellman, B. (2001). Physical place and cyber-place: The rise of networked
Individualism. International Journal for Urban and Regional Research, 25(2),
227–252.
Wellman, B., & Gulia, M. (1999). Net surfers don’t ride alone. In B. Wellman (Ed.),
Networks in the global village (pp. 72–86). Boulder, CO: Westview.
Yoon, D., Cropp, F., & Cameron, G. (2002). Building relationship with portal users:
The interplay of motivation and relational factors. Journal of Interactive
Advertising. http://www.jiad.org/article25. Accessed 10.07.10.
372 Y. Kim et al. / Computers in Human Behavior 27 (2011) 365–372