Different ways to craft and use social media in crafting

ABSTRACT

Social media plays an active role in modern society’s communication. This study examines hobby crafts as a leisure-time activity, and the involved role of social media. In this mixed method study, we conducted an online survey in Finnish online craft communities of practice to analyse what reason and meanings hobby crafters give to social media in their crafting. We discovered different styles of crafting in an online hobby craft context. The findings show that social media and crafts complement each other, but there are also differences between crafting styles and social media activities.

KEYWORDS:

• Crafts
• hobby crafter
• social media
• crafting style
• leisure-time

Introduction

Over recent decades, social media has become part of our everyday lives with an increase in online social interactions. Leisure time spent on the internet or social media is called cyber-, online-, virtual, or e-leisure (Arora, 2011; Nimrod & Adoni, 2012), and many use social media for keeping up relationships (Court, 2020). The way we use these cyber spaces has changed how we activate ourselves in our free time, and is linked to our personal preferences, and social and economic means (Whiting & Hannam, 2015). This study examines in the relationship of crafts and online leisure time activities. Crafts are versatile with a range of techniques and materials used in the crafting processes (Dormer, 1994). In this study we focus on craft hobbyists who craft in their leisure time and are skilled in their craft, but do not necessarily receive an income from it (Hackney, 2013; Kouhia, 2016). Hobby crafters derive different meanings on their crafts (Kouhia, 2016), which involve personal relationships with the materials at hand in the creation of meaningful artefacts (see also Risatti, 2007). For centuries, crafts have been a form of labour, but nevertheless, people still choose to craft in their leisure time (Kouhia, 2021). Finnish youth (aged under 25 years) spend most of their leisure time in sport or on social media, a third report spending time on crafting (Hakanen et al., 2019), and a little over half (51%) of the adult population (people over 15) reports crafting regularly (Statistics Finland, 2021; SVT - Suomen virallinen tilasto, 2018). Crafting in leisure time is linked to wellbeing (Pöllänen, 2015), because it brings people together and offers time off to balance stress (Sjöberg & Porko-Hudd, 2019). Relatedly, there are also indications that wellbeing might be a motivator for online crafting, especially with the social support it provides (Mayne, 2020; O’Brien, 2023; Pöllänen & Voutilainen, 2017). The aim of this study is to examine what kind of online crafting communities and platforms are in use in Finland, and why people combine virtual communities with their crafting.

Social media in online crafting

Social media is part of craft in the new millennium and has revitalised crafting (McFedries, 2007). It is used for sharing and searching for ideas, tips and know-how, but also for selling and buying patterns, instructions, tools and materials, and crafted items. Social media can be used as a marketing channel for selling and adding value to crafts, but it can also empower, for instance, independence in women (Jakob, 2012; Luckman, 2015) or provide a platform of creativity, social recognition and influencing to reach audiences and networks (Entwistle & Wissinger, 2023; Yair, 2012). Additionally, crafting online also enhances a connection between crafters and like minded people in the often solitary activity of crafting (Court, 2020; Mayne, 2016).

Even though digitality offers benefits in terms of a flexibility of time and space even in remote areas, it also challenges the sustenance of crafts in relation to time, skills, access, expense, and perception (Bryan-Kinns et al., 2020). While not everyone shares their thoughts, ideas, or crafts on social media, social media networks are multidimensional: ranging from the core of the self to network and community, and offering people to follow and people who follow (Budge, 2012). Sharing photographs online has been shown to influence subjective wellbeing by increasing a sense of autonomy and connective relationships with others, especially among older people (Pera et al., 2020). The forms of media also change. Among crafters, for instance, Etsy or blogging were trending forms, and then stabilised with platforms like Instagram gaining popularity (Luckman & Andrew, 2020; O’Brien, 2023; Vilhunen, 2018). From a business perspective, craft practitioners use social media such as X, Facebook, or Instagram as a tool for communicating with customers (Au & Anthony, 2016), even though Holmes et al. (2012) noted that crafters are not as accustomed to its use in marketing. Shultz (2015) reminds us that not long ago, crafters were isolated in their own practices and are only now getting momentum through social media, especially through the Etsy marketplace. Gauntlett (2011) sees this as a revolution to make one’s practice visible and independent from labour that ties us in one place.

According to Kouhia (2020), online crafting is not only a tool and another form of technology, but also a community of practice for creative skills. Communities of practice form for varied reasons and are scattered on diverse social media platforms (Eddington & Jarvis, 2022). These communities are self-governed, learning-based networks for knowledge sharing among practitioners from various professional backgrounds and with different goals and tasks, such as social support, knowledge sharing or sense making. The content of online craft can range from video tutorials, patterns and advice to technical support on a particular crafting process (Mayne, 2020; Orton-Johnson, 2014; Torrey et al., 2009). Holmes et al. (2014) connect these to learning and enhancing skills within the communities of practice. Nonetheless, learning is one of the most motivating reasons why people use social media (Kaplan et al., 2012), and the community can also be a platform that facilitates a social approach ‘to foster creativity with a sense of community, environmental and ethical awareness’ (Budge, 2012, p. 44).

Vilhunen et al. (2021) discovered that knit bloggers have four main reasons for blogging, ranging from seeking 1) inspiration and materialisation, 2) connection and community support, 3) encouragement, to 4) reflection and reminiscence. Vilhunen (2018) noted diverse ways of crafting in a knitting blogging context, determined by the frequency of crafting. She grouped this diversity as lifestyle knitters, knitters for need, and seasonal knitters. Lifestyle knitters knit as a lifestyle, and live and breathe knitting. Need-based knitters knit when they find a utilitarian need for knitting, for instance, making socks for chilly winter days. Seasonal knitters cast on a new knitting project occasionally, more often dictated by temporal and project-based variance. However, a similar division has not yet been established in the wider online crafting community. We aim to fill this gap by examining Finnish online crafting communities, how and why hobby crafters engage social media with their crafting.

Materials and methods

This mixed methods study examines communities of practice and online crafting phenomena in a Finnish context. The purpose of this study is to further examine online crafting communities with the following research questions:

Q1.

Do hobby crafters identify themselves as lifestyle, need-based or seasonal hobby crafters?

Q2:

In what ways are hobby crafters active in social media?

Q2.1

Are there differences between hobby crafting styles?

Q3.

What reasons and meanings do hobby crafters have for engaging social media in their crafting?

Q3.1

Are there differences between hobby crafting styles?

Q4.

What other reasons do hobby crafters have for engaging social media in their crafting?

As a convergent mixed method study (see also Creswell & Creswell, 2018), we conducted an online survey using quantitative and qualitative approaches. We analyse the data simultaneously, but separately, in order to examine the phenomena at both general and detailed levels. The integration of methods thereby occurs during the design, data collection and interpretations phases of the study (Creswell & Creswell, 2018; Nastasi et al., 2010). We see the different types of data as equally important and complimentary, and typical for convergent mixed methods designs (Creswell & Creswell, 2018), we merge the results in the discussion section and interpret them by comparison (Figure 1)

Figure 1. The mixed method design of the study (modified from Creswell & Creswell, 2018, p. 218, F.10.1).

Data collection

We gathered the data through an online survey in February-March 2021, distributed on different social media channels (see also Best & Harrison, 2009), 35 Facebook craft-related groups (e.g. woodwork, knitting, metal work, ‘sewing life’) and 105 craft blogs. Recruiting participants from craft courses or other hobby groups might have given a general view of how social media is perceived among hobby crafters. However, we were interested in the use of online crafting, and considered an online survey as purposeful for the study. Facebook is the most often used social media platform across genders and age in Finland (Statistics Finland, 2021), thus, we considered this to be the most effective way to reach participants. The participants were informed about the purpose of the study and asked for their voluntary consent to participate. They were promised anonymity throughout the research process, and any identity revealing data was removed from the analysis. The study conforms with EU (2016/679) and Finnish (1050/2018) legislation of handling personal data.

The survey included questions related to crafters’ social media use, sustainable crafts, and values (detailed in Väänänen & Vilhunen, 2024) together with background questions addressing issues such as what type of crafts they practiced, or how often they crafted (Bryman & Cramer, 2011). The survey itself was long, and 50% of the people who opened the survey left it unanswered, which is typical for surveys distributed online. We asked about the crafters’ relationship, reasons, and meanings for being on social media and crafting with 11 statements, and included an open-ended question for respondents to express additional information. The questions were formulated from a previously tested questionnaire used in a knitting blog context (Vilhunen, 2018), although here we utilised them in a broader social media context. The quantitative survey questions were measured using a 7-step Likert scale (ranging from −3 to + 3) to indicate how important particular statements were to the respondents. A positive attitude to a statement was shown with answers on a scale 1–3, from somewhat agree to totally agree (see Abbott & McKinney, 2013). In addition, the survey also asked which social media channels they used and how often they were active on social media.

Analysis

This study employs both quantitative and qualitative analysis (Nastasi et al., 2010). Before the quantitative analysis were conducted, the frequencies, percentage distributions and the normal distribution of the data were examined (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). Some of the categories of background variables were combined for analysis to avoid undercounting. Relating to our study, when the sample size is large, the assumption of a normal distribution does not need to be adhered to so closely, because the distribution of an individual variable is no longer so important (Siegel & Castellan, 1988, p. 13).

The quantitative analysis methods used in this study were cross tabulation and one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA). Cross tabulation was used to compare activity in social media with different ways of crafting (Q2-Q2.1). ANOVA was used to examine the association between reasons, and to compare the meanings for being active on social media and different ways to craft (Q3-Q3.1; see also Ross & Willson, 2017; Weiss, 2006). We used Tukey as a post hoc test when equal variances were assumed (Weiss, 2006) and a Dunnet T3 test was used when equal variances were not assumed in the ANOVA analysis (Stehlik-Barry & Babinec, 2017). The results of the cross tabulation are reported only if they were statistically significant at the level p ≤ .001. In the ANOVA and in the post hoc test for differences between groups, only results that were statistically highly significant at p ≤ .001 are reported.

We analysed the open-ended questions using thematic content analysis (Q4; see Weber, 1990). Initially, we first read and coded the data (Ryan & Bernard, 2000). The length of the qualitative responses varied from one word to several full sentences. Therefore, we focused on establishing the key codes (Weber, 1990), which were then categorised and thematised (Ryan & Bernard, 2000). After qualitative and quantitative analysis, we integrated the results by comparing the results to each other (Creswell & Creswell, 2018).

This study was conducted using a robust mixed-methods approach (Creswell & Creswell, 2018), based on published and validated methods. Previous related theories were explored before and after collecting and analysing the data, and the researchers jointly participated in formulating the design of the study and data collection. While the data analysis was conducted separately, we have interpreted and reported the results together, in order to strengthen the main triangulation methodology and avoid bias.

Results

We received altogether 929 (N) responses on our survey, with 386 entries for the two open-ended questions regarding other reasons and meanings behind being active in social media. We prepared the data for further analysis by selecting N = 877 respondents that had chosen one of the main crafting types of lifestyle, seasonal or need-based crafting. The participants’ background information revealed that the majority were female (n = 834, 95.1%; male n = 43, 4.9%), respondents were between 13–77 years old, and had been crafting for 51.66 years (mean). The craft techniques the participants mostly used were knitting (n = 685, 78.1%), crocheting (n = 390, 43.3%), sewing (n = 370, 42.2%), and fixing (n = 219, 25%). Embroidery (n = 101, 11.5%), weaving (n = 94, 10.7%), woodwork (n = 82, 9.4%), felting (n = 77, 8.8%), dyeing (n = 48, 5.5%), basketry (n = 36, 4.1%), and metal work (n = 30, 3.4%) were less popular among the participants.

Styles of crafting (Q1)

Out of all respondents (N = 929), 52 participants (6%) were unable to identify just one style of crafting (lifestyle, seasonal, need-based). They reported in the open questions that their crafting was a combination of both lifestyle related, hobby and relaxing pastime activities, or that they could not choose only one option and wanted to choose them all. We continued the analysis without these responses because we were not able to identify their crafting style on their behalf. Respondents who were able to choose (N = 877) identified themselves as lifestyle hobby crafters (n = 587, 66.9%) with a need to do something with their hands all the time, while n = 212 (24.2%) of them said their craft making was seasonal, and they need to craft only at some times of the year and might not do any crafts for the rest of the year. Additionally, 8.9% (n = 78) of the respondents crafted to satisfy a need and identified themselves as need-based hobby crafters.

Hobby crafters social media activities (Q2)

Surprisingly, only a few participants had their own social media channel reporting a craft-related blog (8.6%, n = 75), an Instagram account (17.7%, n = 155), a Facebook account that they updated (12.3%, n = 108), a YouTube channel (1.6%, n = 14), or a Pinterest account (14.5%, n = 127). However, most were a member of a craft-related Facebook group (89.3%, n = 783). The respondents also reported to be members in Ravelry (35.9%, n = 315) and other craft-related virtual communities (5.2%, n = 46), and other social media channels (3.3%, n = 29) such as Punomo.fi (a Finnish online craft community publishing learning materials, instructions and ideas related to crafts), Jodel, or WhatsApp. 8.2% (n = 72) of the respondents did not actively use social media channels. While the minority of respondents did not have a craft-related social media account, the majority (~70%) had one or two social media accounts (Table 1).

Table 1. Number of social media channels participants had.

Valid	0	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	Total
Frequency n	48	371	241	126	52	23	14	2	877
Percent	5.5	42.3	27.5	14.4	5.9	2.6	1.6	0.2	100.0

When asked how they participate in social media, the hobby crafters reported that most of them post photographs, and comment on other people’s posts, and about a third reported discussing things with others (Table 2). Fewer reported writing their own texts, such as blogs or instructions. Another popular form of participation was following others, but not sharing things actively themselves.

Table 2. Social media activities by frequency.

Question	n %	Once a day or more	About once a week	Few times a month, not weekly	Once a month or less	Not at all
How often do you discuss crafts on a social media network?	n %	77 8.8	203 23.1	168 19.2	218 24.9	211 24.1
How often do you publish craft related photographs in social media?	n %	4 0.5	88 10.0	217 24.7	408 46.5	160 18.1
How often do you publish your craft related texts in social media?	n %	4 0.5	45 5.1	111 12.7	317 36.1	400 45.6
How often do you comment on others’ publications in social media?	n %	66 7.5	204 23.3	259 29.5	245 27.9	103 11.7
How often do you share craft related articles or news in social media?	n %	2 0.2	14 1.6	75 8.6	286 32.6	500 57
How often do you follow craft related publications in social media?	n %	510 58.2	240 27.4	66 7.5	41 4.7	20 2.3

Differences in social media activity between crafting styles (Q2.1)

The crosstabulation revealed a statistical significance (p ≤ .001) between three social media statements and crafting styles (Table 3). One of these was the difference between craft-related Instagram accounts and the style of crafting. Need-based and seasonal hobby crafters were not updating a craft related Instagram account as much as the lifestyle hobby crafters. However, the majority were members of craft-related Facebook groups. Need-based hobby crafters were the least active, and a quarter of them reported not to belong to a craft-related Facebook group, while in the other groups, less than one in ten reported not belonging to a craft-related Facebook group. A third of the respondents also reported to be members in Ravelry, an online knitting and crocheting community, with lifestyle hobby crafters more often than the other crafters.

Table 3. Use of craft related social media in relation to crafting style.

			Lifestyle	Need- based	Seasonal	Total
Total		n	587	78	212	877
		%	100%	100%	100%	100%
Updating craft related Instagram account	No	n	457	72	193	722
		%	77.9%	92.3%	91.0%	82.3%
	Yes	n	130	6	19	155
		%	22.1%	7.7%	9%	17.7%
Member in a Facebook craft related group	No	n	57	19	18	94
		%	9.7%	24.4%	8.5%	10.7%
	Yes	n	530	59	194	783
		%	90.3%	75.6%	91.5%	89.3%
Member in Ravelry	No	n	340	61	161	562
		%	57.9%	78.2%	75.9%	64.1%
	Yes	n	247	17	51	783
		%	42.1%	21.8%	24.1%	35.9%

The activity in social media was cross tabulated with the style of crafting (Table 4). A statistical significance (p ≤ .001) was found between commenting on other publications and the style of crafting, which was not as popular among need-based or seasonal hobby crafters. However, the seasonal hobby crafters were more likely to be followers of social media channels, even though they did not actively comment.

Table 4. Types of social media activity in relation to crafting style.

			Lifestyle	Need- based	Seasonal	Total
Total		n	587	78	212	877
		%	100%	100%	100%	100%
Commenting on others’ publications	No	n	260	44	124	428
		%	44.3%	56.4%	58.5%	48.8%
	Yes	n	327	34	88	449
		%	55.7%	43.6%	41.%	51.2%
Following social media channels but not participating actively	No	n	309	32	81	422
		%	52.6%	41.0%	38.2%	48.1%
	Yes	n	278	46	131	455
		%	47.4%	59%	61.8%	51.9%

The respondents also indicated how often they undertook various kinds of activity in social media, and we viewed this in relation to their style of crafting. A statistical significance (p ≤ .001) was found in cross tabulation between crafting style and publishing photographs and texts. The majority were publishing photographs once a month or less. Seasonal hobby crafters published photographs the least, while lifestyle hobby crafters were the most active in publishing photographs a few times a week or month (Table 5). When asked about the frequency of publishing texts, the majority did not report publishing texts, and seasonal hobby crafters published fewer texts than lifestyle or need-based hobby crafters. The lifestyle hobby crafters were the most active of the three groups in publishing texts once a week or once a month.

Table 5. Frequency of different social media activity in relation to crafting style.

			Lifestyle	Need- based	Seasonal	Total
Total		n	587	78	212	877
		%	100%	100%	100%	100%
Frequency of publishing photographs	Few times a week or more	n	81	4	7	92
		%	13.8%	5.1%	3.3%	10.5%
	Few times a month, not weekly	n	172	14	31	217
		%	29.3%	17.9%	14.6%	24.7%
	Once a month or less	n	251	41	116	408
		%	42.8%	52.6%	54.7%	46.5%
	I do not publish photographs on social media	n	83	19	58	160
		%	14.1%	24.4%	27.4%	18.2%
Frequency of publishing texts	Few times a week or more	n	44	3	2	49
		%	7.5%	3.8%	0.9%	5.6%
	Few times a month, not weekly	n	91	7	13	111
		%	15.5%	9.0%	6.1%	12.7%
	Once a month or less	n	198	33	86	317
		%	33.7%	42.3%	40.6%	36.1%
	I do not publish texts on social media	n	254	35	111	400
		%	43.3%	44.9%	52.4%	45.6%

Reasons and meanings for social media use in crafting (Q3)

The respondents reported their main reasons for using social media in their crafting mostly because they wanted to keep in touch with friends and family, and keep up with crafting trends (Table 6). Less importance was given to the reasons of gaining readers or publicity, sharing information, organising knowledge, presenting their crafts, or keeping track of their crafting processes.

Table 6. Reasons for social media use in crafting.

Statement	Mean	s
R1. I am in social media to get readers for my publications	−1.80	1.776
R2. I am in social media to be connected to other crafters	0.82	1.901
R3. I am in social media to gain publicity	−2.18	1.522
R4. I am in social media to share craft related knowledge	−0.31	2.023
R5. I am in social media to organize craft related knowledge	−0.60	1.974
R6. I am in social media to express myself	−0.50	2.118
R7. I am in social media to present my crafts	−0.20	2.123
R8. I am in social media to connect with my family and friends	1.47	1.853
R9. I am in social media to store the crafts I have made and document different parts of the crafting process and to remind myself	−0.06	2.229
R10. I am in social media to part of a craft community	0.47	1.944
R11. I am in social media to keep in touch with different craft trends	1.20	1.777

The meanings emerging from social media use in crafting (Table 7.) that featured in the responses were following other people’s crafting, seeking knowledge about techniques and clarification on instructions and help and advice, as well as looking for ideas and models. The respondents thought that social media kept their crafting active, and they gave least importance to sales and marketing.

Table 7. Social media meanings for crafting.

Statement	Mean	s
M1. Through social media I receive information about craft techniques	2.26	1.028
M2. Through social media I find the latest craft ideas and models	1.95	1.293
M3. Through social media I receive appreciation on my crafts and crafting skills	−0.19	2.057
M4. Connections in social media give me sense of collaboration/making together	−0.23	2.033
M5. Social media keeps my crafting active	0.80	1.833
M6. I can take part in crafting for charity through social media	0.80	1.833
M7. Through social media I get feedback on my crafts	0.01	2.031
M8. Through social media I have a change to get help or ask advice in crafting	1.53	1.591
M9. Through social media I see what others are crafting	2.54	0.808
M10. Through social media I get information that I cannot get from a ready-made instruction	1.57	1.488
M11. Through social media I have an opportunity to market and sell my crafts	−1.36	1.982

The differences between hobby crafting styles (Q3.1)

The ANOVA analysis revealed differences (p ≤ .001) in how hobby crafters used social media in crafting. Differences were found between crafting styles and the reasons and meanings to use social media (Table 8). The reason of connecting with other crafters differed for seasonal and lifestyle hobby crafters. Keeping in touch with other crafters via social media was more important for lifestyle hobby crafters. A difference in sharing of craft-related information on social media was seen between lifestyle and seasonal hobby crafters, where the lifestyle hobby crafters considered sharing craft-related information to be more important. Presenting crafts in social media differed between seasonal and lifestyle hobby crafters, being more important for lifestyle hobby crafters. Being part of a craft community differentiated lifestyle hobby crafters from seasonal hobby crafters, being more important to lifestyle hobby crafters. Storing and reminding oneself of the crafts they had crafted was higher for those who crafted as a lifestyle. Social media appreciation and getting feedback on their work via social media was found to be more important for lifestyle hobby crafters than seasonal crafters.

Table 8. Reasons and meanings of social media activity for different styles of crafting.

Reason or meaning		Lifestyle	Need-based	Seasonal	Total
dt	dt1 = 2 dt2 = 874
R2.	n	587	78	212	877
	x	.99	.53	.45
	s	.76	.227	.134
	F	7.346
R4.	x	−.16	−.22	−.78
	s	.76	.228	.136
	F	7.675
R7.	x	.03	−.36	−.78
	s	.089	.229	.136
	F	11.857
R10.	x	.74	.12	−.16
	s	.78	.217	.133
	F	18.813
R9.	x	.20	−.32	−.69
	s	.096	.246	.145
	F	12.498
M7.	x	.20	−.18	−.45
	s	.085	.212	.135
	F	8.540
M3.	x	.02	−.58	−.65
	s	.86	.222	.134
	F	9.859
M6.	x	−.01	−.74	−.57
	s	.083	.202	.146
	F	8.940

The importance of social media was highest for lifestyle crafters and lowest for those who make crafts seasonally. In most of the statements, the need-based crafters emerged as falling between lifestyle and seasonal hobby crafters (Figure 2). However, no statistically significant differences were found between need-based crafters and the other styles of crafting, other than, where taking part in charity craft via social media was considered to be more important by seasonal hobby crafters than need-based crafters.

Figure 2. Reasons and meanings for social media activity for different crafting styles.

Other reasons and meanings to engage with social media as a part of crafting (Q4)

The content analysis of the open-end questions revealed details about the reasons and meanings why hobby crafters engage social media in their crafting. One respondent admitted that their social media use was ‘mindless general browsing’, however, another defended social media by stating ‘There’s far too much blame placed on social media – it’s how you use it’. Most of the participants agreed with the sentiment of this statement as we interpreted from their written expressions.

We identified four main themes that we labelled as motivation, personal development, community support, and markets. The respondents mainly stressed the reason we thematised as their motivation. This theme included categories of sparking creativity, as they were looking for ideas and inspiration for their creative works; wellbeing that was explained through passing time and coping; and everyday aesthetics that comes from admiring other people’s beautiful crafts.

I love everything to do with crafts. I do not have time to knit/crochet as much as I would like, so I also like to just watch other people’s work. It is a nice way to wind down at bedtime, for example, or to get my mind flowing during a coffee break at work, or for entertainment while waiting in line somewhere.

The theme of personal development included the categories of staying in touch with trends, which was explained through curiosity, an interest in other people’s crafts and international trends, and learning. People wanted to learn about new techniques and things in general, and as one respondent wrote: ‘[it] encourages making and trying new things. It is also nice to see that no one is perfect at crafting, we all mess up sometimes. It lowers your own threshold to show off your own work’. Another respondent wrote: ‘I am in craft FB groups to learn new techniques and get help from more experienced people and other tips’.

Most of the crafters were seeking knowledge by looking for instruction, advice, tips, and help, as well as searching for knowledge about techniques and materials. The respondents wanted to know about material properties and behaviours, and also where to purchase them. Another interesting detail revealed a connection to designing, and people were looking for information on how to use different patterns or models on different body types.

I get good tips on other people’s crafts. For example, it is nice to see pictures of colour choices beforehand, so that you do not buy colour combinations that do not quite match. Pinterest is a great place for that.

Another popular theme the respondents elaborated on was community support. This theme included the communication and connection category that was formed from the mentions in the open-end responses regarding keeping in touch with friends and family and engaging in conversations as one respondent wrote: ‘My social media life is like a diary for myself and coffee table conversations with others’. The community also lent support by sharing problems and victories, finding solutions, and helping others. These were also related to the category of a sense of belonging and community with likeminded people which essentially and conceptually links back to wellbeing.

Social media provides peer support and the opportunity to give peer support for things that may not even be fixable. In my own craft, I know my own problems, and no tip or trick has fixed them. Through social media, I get relief from the ‘pain’ by hearing that I am not alone with the same problem. And maybe one day someone will figure out how I can fix it too. Through social media, I have learned to forgive myself for the little things and tolerate mistakes. I used to always aim for perfect craftsmanship, now I accept that enough is enough.

Some saw social media as a channel to promote their sales, services, and events in the markets. The respondents also looked for information on these things, as illustrated in comments such as: ‘I want to see and read what is happening in the industry. Exhibitions and fairs are the first to go online’ or ‘Flea market groups, also for craft supplies’.

Discussion

In this discussion, we interpret and compare the results of this study, and also compare and form a synthesis with previous studies, customary to the convergent mixed methods design (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). Considering our results, we can interpret that in our survey most of the participants were lifestyle hobby crafters, the second biggest group were seasonal hobby crafters, and the minority were need-based crafters (Q1). This framework categorisation was first used in a knitting blog context (Vilhunen, 2018), and based on the results of this study, we observe that the same categories can be found in a broader online crafting context. Consequently, we propose that the framework offers a new way of viewing the diversity of online crafting communities.

We also found that crafting style relates to social media activity (Q2–2.1). Most of the participants had one to three craft-related social media accounts, and most of them posted photographs, commented on other people’s posts, and discussed things with others. The most popular form of activity in social media was following other people’s publications, discussing things in social media networks, and commenting on others’ publications (Orton-Johnson, 2014). Lifestyle hobby crafters were more active in this kind of participation, whereas seasonal hobby crafters tended to follow social media channels, but not actively participate (see also Vilhunen, 2018). This means that social media is an important part of crafting especially to lifestyle crafters, as has been noted in previous research (Court, 2020; Kouhia, 2016; Vilhunen et al., 2021), and can also be understood to enhance wellbeing (Court, 2020; Mayne, 2020; Pera et al., 2020).

The main reasons for hobby crafters to use social media in their crafting were to connect with family and friends, and to keep up with trends (Q3). Previous studies have shown that online crafting is a method for connecting with others (Luckman & Andrew, 2020; Mayne, 2016; Orton-Johnson, 2014), and offer meaning in terms of increasing subjective wellbeing when defeating solitude with social encounters, even if in a virtual community (Court, 2020; Mayne, 2020). Social media also played an active role in knowledge building and personalised help. This became apparent when the respondents said that they wanted to see what others were crafting, or they were searching for information about craft techniques and looking for the latest craft ideas and models. Personalised help was received when they looked for additional information and directly asked for help or advice in their crafting. These results are derived from both qualitative and quantitative results and are in line with previous research in both online and offline craft communities (Sjöberg & Porko-Hudd, 2019; Vilhunen et al., 2021). Therefore, social media is considered as a form of communication in crafting.

Differences in statistical significance for reasons and meanings were mostly found between lifestyle and seasonal hobby crafters (Q3.1). Notably, the reasons and meanings given for being on social media were most important to lifestyle crafters and reflected a desire to be connected to other crafters, to share craft-related knowledge, to present their crafts, to be part of a craft community, and to store and remind themselves of the crafts they have crafted. This means that not everyone uses or holds online crafting important in the same way. The works of Orton-Johnson (2014) and Court (2020) lead to the understanding that crafting online can be perceived as an extension of self and social networks, in a similar vein to the perception of crafting tools as being extensions of the hand (Yarrow & Jones, 2014). According to the results of this study, this is especially important to the lifestyle hobby crafters whose participation in online crafting is more active than the other groups.

The hobby crafters had a variety of reasons and meanings for integrating social media into their crafting (Q4). Even though respondents emphasised reasons to keeping in touch with friends and family and trends, being connected to other crafters, and being part of a community in their quantitative statements, these were further elaborated with qualitative responses on the themes of community support, personal development, motivations, and markets (Figure 3). Community support was noted in the quantitative results, yet the qualitative data specified that help was needed especially in relation to techniques, choosing materials, designing processes, or making traditional crafts (see also Vilhunen, 2018). Personal development included staying in touch with trends to spark creativity and learning in their crafting. This was demonstrated through following other people’s crafting, seeking knowledge about techniques and clarifications on instructions, and learning new things (see also Kaplan et al., 2012; Orton-Johnson, 2014). People were also looking for ideas and models, help and advice, and ways to maintain their crafting and get feedback (Eddington & Jarvis, 2022; Kouhia, 2020; Mayne, 2020; Vilhunen et al., 2021), so in their participation in online crafting, crafters seemed to not only meet their needs, but also to develop meaning (in terms of development and connection) from their activities.

Figure 3. Synthesized quantitative and qualitative results of reasons and meanings of social media in crafting. Green boxes symbolise meanings and reasons in the quantitative analysis, while blue and white boxes were thematised through content analysis.

The qualitative analysis further revealed an important connection with wellbeing through everyday aesthetics and coping (see also Mayne, 2020; Pera et al., 2020; Pöllänen & Voutilainen, 2017; Sjöberg & Porko-Hudd, 2019). Social media and online crafting are part of modern leisure time activity, and based on our study, it can also support wellbeing through communication, support, and other wellbeing aspects. From a general perspective, even though less importance was given to receiving appreciation from others (as shown in the quantitative responses), the qualitative responses revealed that crafters were happy to give appreciation and enjoy other crafters’ works (see also Creswell & Creswell, 2018). However, the markets aspect raised mixed feelings, as the respondents were not selling their products as much as previous research might lead us to understand (Jakob, 2012; Luckman, 2015), and they were mainly looking for information on where to purchase craft supplies.

Conclusions

The aim of this study was to examine Finnish online crafting communities, and to find out how and why hobby crafters engage social media with their crafting. This study examined virtual, online crafting communities, which are by nature everchanging. Our study adds to online crafting research discussions by establishing variations in the use of social media based online crafting, to help understand how and why hobby crafters engage in online crafting. The study revealed three styles of online hobby crafting. Lifestyle hobby crafters were the most active group of crafters in social media, and for them it is an important and integral part of their crafting. For seasonal hobby crafters, social media is seen as a tool and a source for inspiration, while need-based hobby crafters tend to look for instructions. Based on this study, online crafting communities are shown to be heterogenic, adaptable to new forms of media, and used for many purposes with a variety of reasons. Thus, we suggest that future studies identify the different crafting styles of participants when exploring online crafting communities.

This mixed method study, used both qualitative and qualitative data to give a general perspective of online crafting, and was able to detect variations in the use of social media enhanced craft (see Creswell & Creswell, 2018). The presence of variation can lead to a more specific understanding of crafting in leisure time in general. Hence, while not all social media activities are related to crafting itself, but it can still be a form of connecting with others, for instance prevent solitude. Online crafting can also be a repository for instructions for those seeking information and help. While not all crafting happens online, we can conclude that for lifestyle crafters online crafting is an extension of self and social community, and based on previous discussions, online crafting has well-established connection to wellbeing. In particular, the seasonal crafters’ use of online crafting was inspirational, and we can deduce that for them the everyday aesthetics may act as escapism or a balance from stress. The need-based crafters looked for more help in their crafting and finding instruction online guided them in their crafting process. But as one respondent conceptualised: ‘There’s far too much blame placed on social media – it’s how you use it’.

Ethical statement

Ethical approval from an committee was not required for this study because as a non-interventional survey study, this is not a requirement in the study country.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Katja Vilhunen

Katja Vilhunen is a visiting post-doc researcher at the University of Eastern Finland and a craft teacher in basic education. Her doctoral dissertation examined the knitting blog phenomenon. Her recent studies focus on crafts, sustainability, and hobby crafting.

Niina Väänänen

Niina Väänänen is a university lecturer of craft science at the University of Eastern Finland. Her doctoral dissertation viewed sustainable crafts on practical, theoretical, and conceptual levels. Her recent studies focus on crafts, craft education, and sustainability in crafts.