Cited by 136Impact of Technology on AdolescentsDigital Media and PhilosophyChild Development and Digital Technology

Social networking sites and cognitive abilities: Do they make you smarter?

Alloway, Tracy Packiam, Horton, John, Alloway, Ross G., Dawson, Clare·2013·Computers & Education

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.compedu.2012.10.030

Cites

39 of 39 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Alloway, T. P., Horton, J., Alloway, R. G., & Dawson, C.
Affiliations
  • University of North Florida (US)
  • University of Edinburgh (GB)
  • University of Stirling (GB)
Corresponding author
Alloway, Tracy Packiam
Venue
Computers & Education
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2013-04
Volume
63
Pages
10-16
ISSN
0360-1315 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2088253065
Cited by
136
References
39
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 15 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 16 · 2016: 11 · 2015: 15 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 6
FWCI
31.65
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Computers & Education (publishedVersion)
  • University of North Florida Digital Commons (University of North Florida) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Impact of Technology on Adolescents
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Science Applications › Digital Media and Philosophy
  • Social Sciences › Education › Child Development and Digital Technology
Keywords
social networking sites, cognitive ability, adolescents, Facebook use, YouTube, Twitter, verbal ability, working memory, academic performance, social connectedness, time spent on social media, status updates

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