MethodsA literature search was perf

Methods
A literature search was performed using the academic databases ProQuest (including PsycInfo), ScienceDirect, and Web of Science. These databases were selected as they provide access to a large number of scientific peer-reviewed journal articles and theses from multiple disciplines. Two types of research studies were of interest in the current study: those relating to the uses and gratifications of Facebook, and those relating to Facebook addiction. Searches for uses and gratifications studies were performed using the terms ‘Facebook’, ‘social networking sites’, ‘social network sites’, ‘motivations’, and ‘uses and gratifications’. Searches for studies of Facebook addiction were performed using the terms ‘addiction’, ‘problematic’, ‘abuse’, ‘compulsive’, ‘excessive’, ‘social networking sites’, ‘social network sites’, and ‘Facebook’.

Uses and gratifications studies were included in the review if they measured the motivations of Facebook use in general; therefore, studies were excluded if they only focused on specific features of Facebook (i.e. a particular Facebook game). Furthermore, given that the present review was focused on the uses and gratifications of Facebook, rather than those of other SNSs, studies were excluded if they measured aggregated uses and gratifications for multiple SNSs (even if they included Facebook). According to LaRose, Mastro and Eastin (2001), “uses and gratifications researchers typically start with descriptions of common media uses, obtain ratings of the frequency or importance of those uses, and factor analyse the results to obtain gratification factors that are then correlated with media use” (p. 396). However, as this systematic review was interested in identifying all of the possible uses and gratifications of Facebook use, studies were included even if they had not reported evidence of factor analysis. In cases where factor analysis had been performed, the percentages of variance explained by each factor were recorded where available. This information was included in order to ascertain whether certain motivators of Facebook use are more important than others.

In regard to Facebook addiction literature, studies were excluded if they focused on addiction to SNSs in general (even if this included Facebook) and only provided combined results from these multiple sites in an aggregated format. As explained above, this criterion was necessary to ensure that results relating to other SNSs were excluded. For similar reasons, studies considering the role of Facebook use in relation to Internet addiction were also excluded.

Kết quả (Việt) 1:

Phương phápTìm kiếm tài liệu được thực hiện bằng cách sử dụng cơ sở dữ liệu học ProQuest (bao gồm cả PsycInfo), ScienceDirect và Web of Science. Các cơ sở dữ liệu đã được lựa chọn khi họ cung cấp truy cập đến một số lượng lớn các bài tạp chí khoa học peer-xem xét và đề tài từ nhiều lĩnh vực. Hai loại nghiên cứu đã quan tâm trong nghiên cứu: những người liên quan để sử dụng và gratifications của Facebook, và những người liên quan đến nghiện Facebook. Tìm kiếm cho các nghiên cứu sử dụng và gratifications đã được thực hiện bằng cách sử dụng các thuật ngữ 'Facebook', 'các trang web mạng xã hội', 'mạng xã hội trang web', 'động lực', và 'sử dụng và gratifications'. Tìm kiếm cho nghiên cứu về nghiện Facebook đã được thực hiện bằng cách sử dụng các cụm từ 'nghiện', 'vấn đề', 'lạm dụng', 'ép buộc', 'quá nhiều', 'các trang web mạng xã hội', 'mạng xã hội trang web', và 'Facebook'.Uses and gratifications studies were included in the review if they measured the motivations of Facebook use in general; therefore, studies were excluded if they only focused on specific features of Facebook (i.e. a particular Facebook game). Furthermore, given that the present review was focused on the uses and gratifications of Facebook, rather than those of other SNSs, studies were excluded if they measured aggregated uses and gratifications for multiple SNSs (even if they included Facebook). According to LaRose, Mastro and Eastin (2001), “uses and gratifications researchers typically start with descriptions of common media uses, obtain ratings of the frequency or importance of those uses, and factor analyse the results to obtain gratification factors that are then correlated with media use” (p. 396). However, as this systematic review was interested in identifying all of the possible uses and gratifications of Facebook use, studies were included even if they had not reported evidence of factor analysis. In cases where factor analysis had been performed, the percentages of variance explained by each factor were recorded where available. This information was included in order to ascertain whether certain motivators of Facebook use are more important than others.In regard to Facebook addiction literature, studies were excluded if they focused on addiction to SNSs in general (even if this included Facebook) and only provided combined results from these multiple sites in an aggregated format. As explained above, this criterion was necessary to ensure that results relating to other SNSs were excluded. For similar reasons, studies considering the role of Facebook use in relation to Internet addiction were also excluded.