Internet use and well-being among college students: Beyond frequency of use

Journal of College Student Development

Volumn 48, Issue 6, 2007, Pages 674-688

  Gordon, Cheryl F ^a   Juang, Linda P ^b   Syed, Moin ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON   (United States)

^b SAN FRANCISCO STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 37349067401     PISSN: 08975264     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1353/csd.2007.0065     Document Type: Article

References (60)

1. Amichai-Hamburger, Y., & Ben-Artzi, E. (2003). Loneliness and internet use. Computers in Human Behavior, 19, 71-80.
2. Anderson, K. J. (2001). Internet use among college students: An exploratory study. Journal of American College Health, 50(1), 21-26.
3. Bargh, J. A., & McKenna, K. Y. A. (2005). The Internet and social life. Annual Review of Psychology, 55, 573-590.
4. Birdsell, D., Muzzio, D., Krane, D., & Cottreau, A. (1998). Web users are looking more like America. Public Perspective, (April/May), 33-35.
5. Bollen, K. A. (1989). Structural equations with latent variables. New York: Wiley.
6. Bryant, F. B., & Yarnold, P. R. (1995). Principal-components analysis and exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis. In L. G. Grimm & P. R. Yarnold (Eds.), Reading and understanding multivariate statistics (pp. 99-136). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
7. Caplan, S. E. (2003). Preference for online social interaction: A theory of problematic Internet use and psychosocial well-being. Communication Research, 30(6), 625-648.
8. Cattell, R. B. (1978). The scientific use of factor analysis. New York: Plenum.
9. Chang, T., & Yeh, C. J. (2003). Using online groups to provide support to Asian American men: Racial, cultural, gender, and treatment issues. Professional Psychology: Research & Practice, 34(6), 634-643.
10. Cole, J. I. (2001). Surveying the Digital Future: The UCLA Internet report. Los Angeles: University of California, Los Angeles Center for Communication Policy.
11. Dinh, K. T., Sarason, B. R., & Sarason, I. G. (1994). Parent-child relationships in Vietnamese immigrant families. Journal of Family Psychology, 8, 471-488.
12. Eccles, J., Templeton, J., Barber, B., & Stone, M. (2003). Adolescence and emerging adulthood: The critical passage ways to adulthood. In. M. H. Bornstein, L. Davidson, C. L. M. Keyes, & K. A Moore (Eds.), Well-being: Positive development across the lifespan, (pp. 383-406). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
13. Edman, J. L., Danko, G. P., Andrade, N., McArdle, J. J., Foster, J., & Glipa, J. N. (1999). Factor structure of the CES-D (Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression Scale) among Filipino-American adolescents. Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology, 34(4), 211-215.
14. Franklin, C., Streeter, C. L., & Springer, D. W. (2001). Validity of the faces IV family assessment measure. Research on Social Work Practice, 11(5), 576-596.
15. Gross, E. F. (2004). Adolescent Internet use: What we expect, what teens report. Applied Developmental Psychology, 25, 633-649.
16. Gross, E. F., Juvonen, J., & Gable, S. L. (2002). Internet use and well-being in adolescence. Journal of Social Issues, 58(1), 75-90.
17. Horrigan, J. B. (2002). The broadband difference: How online Americans' behavior changes with high-speed Internet connections at home. Washington, DC: Pew Internet & American Life Project.
18. Hu, L.-T., & Bentler, P. M. (1995). Evaluating model fit. In R. H. Hoyle (Ed.), Structural equation modeling (pp. 76-99). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
19. Jackson, L. A. (1999). Using the Internet for training and development. In E. Kossek & R. Block (Eds.), Managing human resources in the 21st century: From core concepts to strategic choice (pp. 1-26). Cincinnati, OH: Southwestern.
20. Jackson, L. A., Ervin, K. S., Gardner, P. D., & Schmitt, N. (2001). The racial digital divide: Motivational, affective, and cognitive correlates of Internet use. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 31(10), 2019-2046.
21. Jones, S. (2002). The Internet goes to college: How students are living in the future with today's technology. Washington, DC: Pew Internet & American Life Project.
22. Kline, P. (1994). An easy guide to factor analysis. London: Routledge.
23. Kraut, R., Kiesler, S., Boneva, B., Cummings, J., Helgeson, V., & Crawford, A. (2002). Internet paradox revisited. Journal of Social Issues, 58, 49-74.
24. Kraut, R., Patterson, M., Lundmark, V, Kiesler, S., Mukopadhyay, T., & Scherlis, W. (1998). Internet paradox. American Psychologist, 53(9), 1017-1031.
25. Kraut, R., Scherlis, W., Mukhopadhyay, T., Manning, J., & Kiesler, S. (1996). The HomeNet field trial of residential Internet services. Communication of the ACM, 39, 55-63.
26. La Greca, A. M., & Lopez, N. (1998). Social anxiety among adolescents: Linkages with peer relations and friendships. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 26(2), 83-94.
27. La Greca, A. M., & Stone, W. L. (1993). Social anxiety scale for children-revised: Factor structure and concurrent validity. Journal of Clinical Child Psychology, 22(1), 17-27.
28. LaRose, R., Mastro, D., & Eastin, M. S. (2001). Understanding Internet usage: A social-cognitive approach to uses and gratifications. Social Science Computer Review, 19(4), 395-413.
29. Lenhart, A., Rainie, L., & Lewis, O. (2001). Teenage life online: The rise of the instant-message generation and the Internet's impact on friendships and family relationships. Washington, DC: Pew Internet and American Life Project.
30. Mesch, G. S. (2001). Social relationships and Internet use among adolescents in Israel. Social Science Quarterly, 82(2), 329-339.
31. Morahan-Martin, J. (1999). The relationship between loneliness and internet use and abuse. Cyberpsychology, 2(5), 431-439.
32. Morahan-Martin, J., & Schumacher, P. (2000). Incidence and correlates of pathological internet use among college students. Computers in Human Behavior, 16, 13-29.
33. Nachmias, R., Mioduser, D., & Shemla, A. (2000). Internet usage by students in an Israeli high school. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 22(1), 55-73.
34. Nezlek, J. B. (2002). Day-to-day relationships between self-awareness, daily events, and anxiety. Journal of Personality, 70(2), 249-275.
35. Niemz, K., Griffiths, M., & Banyard, P. (2005). Prevalence of pathological Internet use among university students and correlations with self-esteem, the General Health Questionnaire (GHQ), and disinhibition. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 8(6), 562-570.
36. Olivares, J., Ruiz, J. Hidalgo, M. D., Joaquín, L., García-López, L. J. Rosa, A. I., et al. (2005). Social Anxiety Scale for Adolescents (SAS-A): Psychometric properties in a Spanish-speaking population. International Journal of Clinical and Health Psychology, 5(1), 85-97.
37. Olson, D., Sprenkle, D., & Russell, E. (1979). Circumplex model of marital and family systems: Empirical studies and clinical intervention. In J. Vincent (Ed.), Advancement in family intervention, assessment, and theory (pp. 128-176). Greenwich, CT: Haworth Press.
38. Paul, E. L., & Brier, S. (2001). Friendsickness in the transition to college: Precollege predictors and college adjustment correlates. Journal of Counseling & Development, 79(1), 77-89.
39. Perreira, K. M., Deeb-Sossa, N., Harris, K. M., & Bollen, K. (2005). What are we measuring? An evaluation of the CES-D across race/ethnicity and immigrant generation. Social Forces, 83(4), 1567-1602.
40. Perry, T. T., Perry, L. A., & Hosack-Curlin, K. (1998). Internet use by university students: An interdisciplinary study on three campuses. Internet Research: Electronic Networking Applications and Policy, 8(2), 136-131.
41. Postmes, T., & Spears, R. (2002). Behavior online: Does anonymous computer communication reduce gender inequality? Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin, 28(8), 1073-1083.
42. Radloff, L. S. (1977). The CES-D scale: A self-report depression scale for research in the general. Applied Psychological Measurement, 1(3), 385-401.
43. Rodgers, S., & Sheldon, K. M. (2002). An improved way to characterize Internet users. Journal of Advertising Research, 42(5), 85-94.
44. Rubin, A. M. (2002). The uses-and-gratifications perspective of media effects. In J. Bryant & D. Zillmann (Eds.), Media effects: Advances in theory and research (2nd ed., pp. 525-548). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
45. Russell, D., Peplau, L. A., & Cutrona, C. E. (1980). The revised UCLA loneliness scale: Concurrent and discriminant validity evidence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39(3), 472-480.
46. Santor, D. A., Zuroff, D. C., Ramsay, J. O., Cervantes, P., & Palacios, J. (1995). Examining scale discriminability in the BDI and CES-D as a function of depressive severity. Psychological Assessment, 7(2), 131-139.
47. Schau, T. (2000). Internet use: Here, there, and everywhere. Occupational Outlook Quarterly (Winter), 40-47.
48. Segrin, C., & Flora, J. (2000). Poor social skills are a vulnerability factor in the development of psychosocial problems. Human Communication Research, 26(3), 489-514.
49. Shaver, P., Furman, W., & Buhrmester, D. (1985). Transition to college: Network changes, social skills, and loneliness. In S. Duck & D. Perlman (Eds.), Understanding personal relationships: An interdisciplinary approach (pp. 193-219). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
50. Shaw, L. H., & Gant, L. M. (2002). Users divided? Exploring the gender gap in Internet use. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 5(6), 517-527.
51. Shepherd, R.-M., & Edeleman, R. J. (2005). Reasons for Internet use and social anxiety. Personality and Individual Differences, 39, 949-958.
52. Steele, J. R., & Brown, J. D. (1995). Adolescent room culture: Studying media in the context of everyday life. Journal of Youth & Adolescence, 24(5), 551-576.
53. Tabachnik, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (1996). Using multivariate statistics (3rd ed.). New York: HarperCollins College Publishers.
54. Thurstone, L. L. (1947). Multiple factor analysis: A development and expansion of vectors of the mind. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
55. Turow, J. (1999). The Internet and the family: The view from the parents, the view from the press (Report Series No. 27). Philadelphia: The Annenberg Public Policy Center of the University of Pennsylvania. Retrieved February 6, 2003, from http://www.appcpenn.org/internet/family/rep27.pdf
56. Turow, J., & Nir, L. (2000). The Internet and the family 2000: The view from parents; the view from kids (Report Series No. 33). Philadelphia: The Annenberg Public Policy Center of the University of Pennsylvania. Retrieved February 6, 2003, from http://www.appcpenn.org/internet/family/finalrepordam. pdf
57. Wästlund, E., Norlander, T., & Archer, T. (2001). Internet blues revisited: Replication and extension of an Internet paradox study. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 4(3), 385-391.
58. Wallace, P. (1999). The psychology of the internet. Cambridge, U.K.: Press Syndicate of the University of Cambridge.
59. Weiser, E. (2000). Gender differences in internet use patterns and internet application preferences: A two-sample comparison. Cyberpsychology & Behavior, 3(2), 167-177.
60. Wolfradt, U., & Doll, J. (2001). Motives of adolescents to use the internet as a function of personality traits, personal, and social factors. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 24(1), 13-27.