Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 46

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 92 of the 92 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Exploring uses and gratifications and psychological outcomes of engagement with Instagram Stories

Lu, Jia-Dai (Evelyn), Lin, Jhih-Syuan (Elaine)·2022·Computers in Human Behavior Reports
DOI 10.1016/j.chbr.2022.100198
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

The current research examines why and how Generation Z and Millennials engage with Instagram Stories and how user engagement is associated with emotions and psychological dependency. The two-step approach reveals a new configuration of gratifications for using Instagram Stories: exploration, self-enhancement, perceived functionality, entertainment, social sharing, relationship building, novelty, and surveillance. Users are likely to engage in content consumption for entertainment, exploration, and perceived functionality; in contribution activities for relationship building and social sharing; and in content creation for meeting needs pertaining to relationship building, self-enhancement, social sharing, and novelty. The findings highlight that contribution and creation activities are likely to result in positive emotions, while creation alone predicts negative emotions. Although users are more likely to experience positive than negative emotions when engaging with Instagram Stories, the effect of engagement on psychological dependency is greater through increased negative emotions. Implications and directions for future research are discussed.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.chbr.2022.100198

Cites

92 of 92 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Lorenz, 2019, The Instagram Aesthetic Is Over: The look made famous by the platform just doesn't resonate anymore, The Atlantic
  2. Macmillan, 2017, Why Instagram Is the Worst Social Media for Mental Health, Time
  3. Wells, 2021, Facebook knows Instagram is toxic for teen girls, company documents show, The Wall Street Journal

Cited by

See all 46

Metadata

Authors
Lu, J.-D. (., & Lin, J.-S. (.
Venue
Computers in Human Behavior Reports
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2022-05
Volume
6
Pages
100198
ISSN
2451-9588
DOI
10.1016/j.chbr.2022.100198
Cited by
46
References
92
Language
en
Licence
Funders
Ministry of Science and Technology, Taiwan (108-2410-H-004 -183 -MY2)

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.