Sehen Sie sich das Profil von Sarah Diefenbach im größten Business-Netzwerk der Welt an. Im Profil von Sarah Diefenbach sind 5 Jobs angegeben. Sarah Diefenbach is professor for market and consumer psychology at the Ludwig-Maximilians University of Munich (Germany) with a focus on the field of. Online-Vortrag Prof. Dr. Sarah Diefenbach: Digitale Etikette – die Suche nach neuen Normen für das Miteinander in einer.
BR-NavigationSarah Diefenbach (* in Darmstadt) ist eine deutsche Psychologin und Publizistin. Seit ist sie Professorin für Wirtschaftspsychologie an der. Welche sozialen Konflikte entstehen durch Smartphones und Co.? Wirtschaftspsychologin Sarah Diefenbach von der. Sarah Diefenbach ist Professorin für Wirtschaftspsychologie. Vor dem Ruf an die LMU war sie in interdisziplinären Arbeitsgruppen (Psychologie, Gestaltung.
Sarah Diefenbach Short Vita VideoTeaser - Webinar \ The Smartphone as a Pacifier and its Consequences: Young adults' smartphone usage in moments of solitude and correlations to self-reflection. Sarah Diefenbach. Diefenbach, Sarah, Hassenzahl, Marc (): Give me a reason: hedonic product choice and justification. In: Proceedings of ACM CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems April , Sarah Diefenbach was born circa , to Andreas Diefenbach and Anna Barbara Diefenbach. Andreas was born on March 13 , in Waltersdorf, Bavari, Germany. Anna was born on August 21 , in Germany. Sarah had 4 siblings: Barbara Diefenbach and 3 other siblings. Sarah lived in , at address, New York. An Exploration of Psychological Functions of Selfies in Self-Presentation. Mensch und Computer Workshopband. Buch erstellen Als PDF herunterladen Incredible Hulk. View the profiles of people named Sarah Diefenbach. Join Facebook to connect with Sarah Diefenbach and others you may know. Facebook gives people the. Sarah Diefenbach Paweł W. Woźniak Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics). Sarah Diefenbach The analysis of tasks and workflows is a longstanding tradition in Human-Computer Interaction (HCI). In many cases, it provides a crucial basis for the usable design of interactive. Sarah Diefenbach is professor for market and consumer psychology at the Ludwig-Maximilians University of Munich (Germany) with a focus on the field of interactive technology. View phone numbers, addresses, public records, background check reports and possible arrest records for Sarah Diefenbach. Whitepages people search is the most trusted directory.
Diefenbach sind das Konsumentenerleben im Bereich interaktiver Produkte und die Betrachtung von Mensch-Technik-Interaktion aus einer psychologischen Perspektive.
Dies umfasst beispielsweise folgende Themen:. Akademische Lehrtätigkeit seit in den Bereichen Wirtschafts- und Konsumentenpsychologie, Psychologische Produktgestaltung und Mensch-Technik-Interaktion an verschiedenen Universitäten LMU München, JMU Würzburg, Folkwang UdK Essen, TU Darmstadt, Universität Koblenz-Landau.
Weitere Informationen. Diefenbach hat mehrere Bücher, z. Diefenbach, S. Digitale Depression: Wie neue Medien unser Glücksempfinden verändern. München: MVG.
München: Riva. Wieso zwei halbe Stück Kuchen dicker machen als ein ganzes. Psychologische Denkfallen entlarven und überwinden.
München: mvg. Diefenbach insbesondere in der Durchführung des jährlichen Branchenreports. Links und Funktionen www.
Sprachumschaltung English. Navigationspfad Startseite Team Professoren Prof. Sarah Diefenbach. Hauptnavigation Aktuelles Team Lehrstuhlinhaber Sekretariat Professoren Prof.
Sarah Diefenbach Prof. Sarah Diefenbach Professorin für Wirtschaftspsychologie. Kurzprofil Sarah Diefenbach ist Professorin für Wirtschaftspsychologie.
Forschungsschwerpunkte Schwerpunkte der Forschung von Prof. Dies umfasst beispielsweise folgende Themen: Effekte von Technik auf Wohlbefinden und soziale Interaktion Social Robots User Experience Evaluation und Gestaltung Psychologie der Selbstverbesserung und motivationale Produkte Hedonische und utilitaristische Produktattribute Ästhetik der Interaktion Intuitive Interaktion Lehre Akademische Lehrtätigkeit seit in den Bereichen Wirtschafts- und Konsumentenpsychologie, Psychologische Produktgestaltung und Mensch-Technik-Interaktion an verschiedenen Universitäten LMU München, JMU Würzburg, Folkwang UdK Essen, TU Darmstadt, Universität Koblenz-Landau.
Gefördert von BMBF, Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung. Psychologie in dernutzerzentrierten Produktgestaltung. Mensch — Technik — Interaktion — Erlebnis.
In: F. Brodbeck, E. Positive Computing — a powerful partnership between positive psychology and interactive technology.
A discussion of potential and challenges. Journal of Positive Psychology and Wellbeing, 2 1 , Understanding Aesthetic Interaction as fit between interaction attributes and experiential qualities.
New Ideas in Psychology. Combining model-based analysis with phenomenological insight: a case study on hedonic product quality.
Qualitative Psychology. The Selfie Paradox: Nobody Seems to Like Them Yet Everyone Has Reasons to Take Them. An Exploration of Psychological Functions of Selfies in Self-Presentation.
Communication Styles of Interactive Tools for Self-Improvement. Psychology of Well-Being, 6 1 , Designing for well-being: A case study of keeping small secrets.
The Journal of Positive Psychology, An experience perspective on intuitive interaction: central components and the special effect of domain transfer distance.
Interacting with Computers, 27 3 , Experience-oriented and product-oriented evaluation: psychological need fulfillment, positive affect, and product perception.
International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction , 31 8 , Designing with Image Schemas: Resolving the Tension Between Innovation, Inclusion, and Intuitive Use.
International Journal of Design , 9 2 , The 'Hedonic' in Human-Computer Interaction — History, Contributions, and Future Research Directions.
Proceedings of the DIS Conference on Designing Interactive Systems pp. Without taking it seriously or really having a passion for it themselves, they might rather experience selfies as a kind of social obligation, which they secretly hope to stop being popular.
If, however, everybody thinks like this yet does not act on it, the observable result is that everybody will further engage in selfies and further contribute to their popularity.
This would mean having a mass of people establishing a culture that only few seem fully committed to. In this case, a possible implication could be needing to find ways to free people from taking selfies, since it essentially is an activity that only few can profit from and many see as negative.
An alternative line of interpretation could be that many people actually enjoy taking selfies and profit from it as a way of self-presentation, but downplay this in their reports.
People may profit more from self-presentational benefits but construct more favorable motives for their own selfie behavior, in benefit of social demands and their own positive self-view.
In this line of interpretation an implication could be that, we need to be aware that selfies are a welcome opportunity to act out self-presentational needs and people even find ways of justification with other hypothetical motivations.
In this case, the observed selfie bias may actually fulfill a psychological function. In a way, one may act narcissistic without feeling narcissistic.
A first parallel refers to attribution biases. Self-presentational motivations may be associated with narcissism and regarded as less reputable, and therefore attributed to others rather than to oneself.
For oneself, one prefers relations to be more reputable character traits such as self-irony or authenticity.
It showed that the types of attributions people made for online behavior depended on the perspective of the person providing the explanation: People explained their own online behavior more favorably than the online behavior of both friends and acquaintances.
In short, selfie-takers may protect their self-esteem through claiming socially desirable reasons to take selfies for oneself, instead of less reputable reasons e.
Also the fundamental attribution error, i. While for oneself, one claims that selfies provide authentic insight into real life situations, for others, the inner wish for self-presentation is assigned as more relevant.
Altogether, the general tendency for self-serving attributions appears as a more obvious factor than the failure to account for situational influences when explaining the behavior of others.
Another relevant factor may be the disregard of bidirectional influences in self-presentational behavior. For example, typical selfie poses, often a bit showy and narcissistic, just become the established way of how to present one self in a selfie and meet our expectations of what a typical selfie looks like.
This bias has already been described in other contexts. For example, Baumeister et al. They then concluded that people may fail to make adequate interpretive adjustments when their self-presentations alter the behavior of others.
Though surely not exhausting, the above parallels to popular biases in previous research may help to understand the general importance to understand social media — as inherently social environment — through the lens of social psychology.
The present study has several limitations to be addressed in future research. First, the present discussion is only one way of interpretation of correlational results and the overall pattern of findings.
This needs to be advanced by quasi experimental studies in the future that will allow more accurate interpretations and possibly causal attributions.
For example, the described selfie bias is, as most of the described biases in psychology, at first a mere description of systematic shifts between judgments, attributions, or behavior from one context to the other.
An interesting question for future research would be to gain deeper insight into underlying processes and the relations between these two findings: 1 is there a conscious process underlying?
Do people consciously downplay the self-presentational potential of selfies? Do they feel ashamed of their self-presentational needs and try to make up more justified reasons for taking selfies?
Or 2 does the observed selfie bias reflect a lack of capability for self-reflection? Are people not aware of what really attracts them about selfies and may presume other motives for posting selfies than they may actually have?
Could the unclear motivation of selfies, open to multiple interpretations, even be a cause for their popularity? Of course, also positions in between are plausible.
Future studies could help to get a deeper understanding of the revealed selfie bias and related mechanisms. Second, our study is based on self-reports and did not include objective data of taking and receiving selfies.
We chose this approach due to our main interest in self-reflection and, thus, a lightweight approach to studying the subject.
Hence, we aimed to avoid any additional pressure of justification, which might be induced by the study of hard usage data.
Along with this, it has to be noted that according to self-reports, our sample was not an overly active sample of selfie-takers, and ambitious selfie-takers with frequencies of several times a week or more often formed the minority.
Despite this limitation, the found effects are notable, and may be even stronger in a more selfie-focused sample. This, however, has to be validated in future studies, including a higher proportion of heavy selfie takers.
In addition, the inclusion of objective usage data could help to advance the present findings and get a more differentiated picture of single phenomena, e.
Moreover, methods such as experience sampling Hektner et al. Data may be easily collected via smartphone, i.
Third, our findings are limited to a European sample, and studying potential intercultural differences for the experience and acceptance of selfies could be an interesting subject for further research.
For example, research could contrast individualistic versus collectivistic cultures regarding their selfie culture.
One could intuitively assume that selfies, as a highly individual-centered type of photograph may be more accepted in individualistic cultures.
On the other hand, especially in many mainly collectivistic Asian countries, placing a high value on interdependence and developing identity through relationship, selfies seem to be quite popular.
It may be that there is another form of interpretation of selfies between different cultures. In our study, most of the participants refused the relation between selfies and relatedness to others and highlighted self-presentation as the most relevant factor.
Other cultures may have a different view, and, for example, focus on the collective activity of taking selfies together or posting selfies as an act of creating contact and highlighting togetherness.
First hints in that direction can be found in the study by Sung et al. Forth, future research could examine individual differences that are relevant for the use of self-presentation strategies, and thus, may affect the individual attractiveness of selfies as a self-presentational tool as well.
Given that, people with high autonomy orientation generally make less use of self-presentation strategies Lewis and Neighbors, , a high autonomy orientation may also diminish the interest in selfies or other forms of self-presentation in social media.
Finally, our study of relations between selfies and habitual self-presentation strategies was limited to a particular set of self-presentation strategies.
Aiming for a parsimonious research design, which focused on those strategies we assumed as most fitting or non-fitting for selfies.
However, future research could include further self-presentation strategies. This could also include the study of relations to different motivations behind self-presentation.
As the present study showed, self-presentation may be a central factor for the attractiveness of selfies but at the same time is downplayed in self-reports.
While many people are contributing to the success of selfies, only few declare true commitment. In the end, however, the combination of these two factors, an opportunity for self-presentation without an obvious revelation of self-presentational needs, may also be part of the secret of their success.
What we here called the selfie paradox and selfie bias could also be a key factor for their popularity. Forming a lightweight possibility for self-presentation, that allows people to strategically adjust and experiment with the impression they make on others, but still in a playful and somewhat ambiguous manner, that is even interpreted as self-irony at least by the selfie-takers themselves.
Clever experimental studies will surely shed further light on the exact motivations behind selfies. Others, and possibly even oneself, can never have full and final insight into what motivates taking a selfie, and this might actually be what attracts people.
In this sense, the present research also adds to a deeper understanding of success factors for social media in general.
In the end it might be all about fulfilling basic human needs here: popularity, self-expression in a way that feels good for people, does not reveal too much about deeper motivations and allows them to keep a positive self-view and image to others.
An ethics committee approval was not requested. Participants were free to stop participation at any time. SD and LC designed and conducted the research.
SD analyzed the data and drafted the manuscript, LC critically revised the manuscript. Both authors approved the final version of the manuscript for submission.
Part of this research has been funded by the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research BMBF , project Kommunikado FKZ: 01ISD.
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Barry, C. Media Cult. CrossRef Full Text Google Scholar. Baumeister, R. A self-presentational view of social phenomena. Cognitive processes during deliberate self-presentation: how self-presenters alter and misinterpret the behavior of their interaction partners.
Beauducel, A. Simulation study on fit indexes in CFA based on data with slightly distorted simple structure.
Bennett, S. A Brief History of the Selfie. Google Scholar. Best, P. Online communication, social media and adolescent wellbeing: a systematic narrative review.
Youth Serv. Self-presentation styles, privacy, and loneliness as predictors of Facebook use in young people. Brandt, R. Brivio, E.
Self presentation in blogs and social networks. Health Technol. Bühner, M. Einführung in die Test-und Fragebogenkonstruktion.
Hallbergmoos: Pearson Deutschland GmbH. Carpenter, C. Narcissism on Facebook: self-promotional and anti-social behavior. PubMed Abstract CrossRef Full Text Google Scholar.
Christoforakos, L. Hassenzahl , Marc, Diefenbach , Sarah, Goritz , Anja : Needs, affect, and interactive products - Facets of user experience.
Diefenbach , Sarah, Hassenzahl , Marc : Give me a reason: hedonic product choice and justification. In: Proceedings of ACM CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems April , ,.
Brau , Henning, Diefenbach , Sarah, Hassenzahl , Marc, Koller , Franz, Peissner , Matthias, Rose , Kerstin eds.
Mensch and Computer , Usability Professionals Track September , , Lübkeck, Germany.