The development of Internet use for communication among undergraduate students: A multilevel analysis

Asia Pacific Education Review

Volumn 12, Issue 2, 2011, Pages 215-226

  Huang, Chiungjung ^a  

^a NATIONAL CHANGHUA UNIVERSITY OF EDUCATION   (Taiwan)

Author keywords

Chat; Email; Hierarchical linear model; Instant messaging; Intercepts and slopes as outcomes model; Longitudinal design; Unconditional model

Indexed keywords

EID: 79955858677     PISSN: 15981037     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s12564-010-9127-8     Document Type: Article

References (45)

1. Amiel, T., & Sargent, S. L. (2004). Individual differences in internet usage motives. Computers in Human Behavior, 20, 711-726.
2. Anastasi, A., & Urbina, S. (1997). Psychological testing (7th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.
3. Anolli, L., Villani, D., & Riva, G. (2005). Personality of people using chat: An on-line research. CyberPsychology and Behavior, 8, 89-95.
4. Arnett, J. (2000). Emerging adulthood: A theory of development from the late teens through the twenties. American Psychologist, 55, 469-480.
5. Baron, N. S. (2004). See you online: Gender issues in college student use of instant messaging. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 23, 397-423.
6. Boneva, B., Kraut, R., & Frohlich, D. (2001). Using email for personal relationships: The difference gender makes. American Behavioral Scientist, 45, 530-549.
7. Brenner, V. (1997). Psychology of computer use: XLVII. Parameters of internet use, abuse and addiction: The first 90 days of the internet usage survey. Psychological Reports, 80, 879-882.
8. Caplan, S. E. (2003). Preference for online social interaction: A theory of problematic internet use and psychosocial well-being. Communication Research, 30, 625-648.
9. Copher, J. I., Kanfer, A. G., & Walker, M. B. (2002). Everyday communication patterns of heavy and light emails users. In B. Wellman & C. Haythornthwaite (Eds.), The internet in everyday life (pp. 263-288). Malden, MA: Blackwell.
10. Graphics, Visualization and Usability Center. (1997a). GVU's 6th WWW user survey. Atlanta, GA: Georgia Tech Research Corporation. Retrieved January 2, 2005, from http://www. gatech. edu/user-surveys/survey-10-1996/.
11. Graphics, Visualization and Usability Center. (1997b). GVU's 7th WWW user survey. Atlanta, GA: Georgia Tech Research Corporation. Retrieved January 2, 2005, from http://www. gatech. edu/user-surveys/survey-1997-04/.
12. Graphics, Visualization and Usability Center. (1998). GVU's 8th WWW user survey. Atlanta, GA: Georgia Tech Research Corporation. Retrieved January 2, 2005, from http://www. gatech. edu/user-surveys/survey-1997-10/.
13. GVU's WWW User Surveys. (1998). Chat groups. Retrieved January 2, 2005, from http://www-static. cc. gatech. edu/gvu/user_surveys/survey-1998-10/graphs/use/q110. htm.
14. Haworth, B. (1999). An analysis of the determinants of student email use. Journal of Education for Business, 75, 55-59.
15. Hu, Y., Smith, V., & Westbrook, N. (2004). Friendships through IM: Examining the relationship between instant messaging and intimacy. Journal of Computer-Mediate Communication, 10(1).
16. Jackson, L. A., Ervin, K. S., Gardner, P. D., & Schmitt, N. (2001). Gender and the internet: Women communicating and men searching. Sex Roles, 44, 363-379.
17. Jones, S. (2002). The Internet goes to college: How students are living in the future with today's technology. ERIC Document ED 472669.
18. Katz, J. E., & Rice, R. E. (2002). Syntopia: Access, civic involvement, and social interaction on the Net. In B. Wellman & C. Haythornthwaite (Eds.), The internet in everyday life (pp. 114-138). Malden, MA: Blackwell.
19. Kraut, R., Patterson, M., Lundmark, V., Kiesler, S., Mukopadhyay, T., & Scherlis, W. (1998). Internet paradox: A social technology that reduces social involvement and psychological well-being? American Psychologist, 53, 1017-1031.
20. Kraut, R., Scherlis, W., Mukhopadhyay, T., Manning, J., & Kiesler, S. (1996). The HomeNet field trial of residential Internet services. Communications of the ACM, 39, 55-63.
21. Kuenki, J. J. (1999-2000). Trends in college students' computer use and ownership. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 28, 21-31.
22. Lanthier, R. P., & Windham, R. C. (2004). Internet use and college adjustment: The moderating role of gender. Computers in Human Behavior, 20, 591-606.
23. Lenhart, A., Rainie, L., & Lewis, O. (2000). Tracking online life: How women use the internet to cultivate relationships with family and friends. Retrieved June 10, 2005, from http://www. pewinternet. org/pdfs/Report1. pdf.
24. 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. Retrieved August 13, 2006, from http://www. pewinternet. org/pdfs/PIP_Teens_Report. pdf.
25. Morahan-Martin, J. (1998). Males, females, and the internet. In J. Gackenbach (Ed.), Psychology and the internet (pp. 169-197). San Diego: Academic Press.
26. Morahan-Martin, J., & Schumacher, P. (2003). Loneliness and social uses of the internet. Computers and Human Behavior, 19, 659-671.
27. Nie, N. H. (2001). Sociability, interpersonal relations, and the internet. American Behaviorist Scientist, 45, 420-435.
28. Nie, N. H., & Erbring, L. (2002). Internet and society: A preliminary report. IT & Society, 1, 275-283.
29. Nie, N. H., Hillygus, D. S., & Erbring, L. (2002). Internet use, interpersonal relations, and sociability. In B. Wellman & C. Haythornthwaite (Eds.), The internet in everyday life (pp. 215-243). Malden, MA: Blackwell.
30. Odell, P. M., Korgen, K. O., Schumacher, P., & Delucchi, M. (2000). Internet use among female and male college students. CyberPsychology and Behavior, 5, 855-862.
31. Ono, H., & Zavodny, M. (2003). Gender and the internet. Social Science Quarterly, 84, 111-121.
32. Peris, R., Gimeno, M. A., Pinazo, D., Ortet, G., Carrero, V., Sanchiz, M., et al. (2002). Online chat rooms: Virtual spaces of interaction for socially oriented people. CyberPsychology and Behavior, 5, 43-51.
33. Pitkow, J. E., & Kehoe, C. M. (1996). Emerging trends in the www user population. Communications of the ACM, 39, 106-108.
34. Raudenbush, S., Bryk, A., Cheong, Y. F., & du Toit, M. (2004). HLM 6: Hierarchical linear and nonlinear modeling. Lincolnwood, IL: Scientific Software International.
35. Raudenbush, S. W., & Bryk, A. (2002). Hierarchical linear models: Application and data analysis methods. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
36. Robinson, J. P., Kestnbaum, M., Neustadtl, A., & Alvarez, A. S. (2002). The internet and other uses of time. In B. Wellman & C. Haythornthwaite (Eds.), The internet in everyday life (pp. 244-262). Malden, MA: Blackwell.
37. Rollman, J. B., Krug, K., & Parente, F. (2000). The chat room phenomenon: Reciprocal communication in cyberspace. CyberPsychology and Behavior, 3, 161-166.
38. Savichi, V., & Kelley, M. (2000). Computer mediated communication: Gender and group composition. CyberPsychology and Behavior, 5, 817-826.
39. Sherman, R., End, C., Kraan, E., Cole, A., Campbell, J., Birchmeier, Z., et al. (2000). The internet gender gap among college students: Forgotten but not gone? CyberPsychology and Behavior, 3, 885-894.
40. Shklovski, I, Kraut, R., & Rainie, L. (2004). The internet and social participation: Contrasting cross-sectional and longitudinal analyses. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 10(1).
41. Sierpe, E. (2005). Gender distinctiveness, communicative competence, and the problem of gender adjustments in computer-mediated communication. Computers in Human Behaviors, 21, 127-145.
42. The Harris Poll # 40. (2005). May 12, 2005, Almost three-quarters of all US adults (An estimated 163 million) go online. Retrieved July 23, 2006, from http://www. harrisinteractive. com/harris_poll/index. asp?PID=569.
43. UCLA Center for Communication Policy. (2000). The UCLA Internet report: "Surveying the digital future." Retrieved August 12, 2006, from http://www. ccp. ucla. edu.
44. Valkenburg, P. M., & Peter, J. (2007). Online communication and adolescent well-being: Testing the stimulation versus the displacement hypothesis. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 12, 1169-1182.
45. Wasserman, I. M., & Richmond-Abbott, M. (2005). Gender and the internet: Causes of variation in access, level, and scope of use. Social Science Quarterly, 86, 252-270.