The DOI matches its Crossref record; 57 of the 62 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; none of the 92 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.
Two social lives: How differences between online and offline interaction influence social outcomes
Open accessAbstract
For hundreds of thousands of years, humans only communicated in person, but in just the past fifty years they have started also communicating online. Today, people communicate more online than offline. What does this shift mean for human social life? We identify four structural differences between online (versus offline) interaction: (1) fewer nonverbal cues, (2) greater anonymity, (3) more opportunity to form new social ties and bolster weak ties, and (4) wider dissemination of information. Each of these differences underlies systematic psychological and behavioral consequences. Online and offline lives often intersect; we thus further review how online engagement can (1) disrupt or (2) enhance offline interaction. This work provides a useful framework for studying the influence of technology on social life (119/120).
Overview
AI snapshot
Written from the paper’s full text.
TL;DR
This review proposes a framework organizing the psychological and behavioral consequences of online versus offline interaction around four structural differences: fewer nonverbal cues, greater anonymity, more opportunity to form and bolster ties, and wider dissemination of information. It further reviews how online engagement can either disrupt or enhance offline social connection.
Key findings
- Four structural differences between online and offline interaction each carry systematic consequences: text-based communication reduces observers' accuracy in judging communicators' thoughts and feelings and makes communicators appear less thoughtful and emotional (i.e., potentially dehumanizing), while hearing a voice uniquely humanizes.
- Anonymity licenses disinhibition and aggression, but can also inhibit connection: in a field experiment randomizing 100,000 online daters to anonymous versus non-anonymous profile viewing, anonymized users viewed more profiles but ended up with fewer matches.
- Online media expand network size (average 338 Facebook Friends) but do not appear to change the number of significant contacts, which remains around 5 intimate friends, 15 close friends, 50 general friends, and 150 acquaintances; larger networks (>40) mean less time spent with each contact.
- Wider dissemination cuts both ways: in an analysis of 126,000 stories from 2006–2017, false stories spread more widely and quickly than true ones, and machine learning models identified users' political affiliation (Democrat vs. Republican) with 85% accuracy.
Methods
- Narrative review / conceptual framework paper (Current Opinion in Psychology), not an empirical study; no primary data collection or analysis is reported.
- The authors synthesize prior findings, including cited experiments and field studies (e.g., the 100,000-dater anonymity experiment; the 126,000-story diffusion analysis; smartphone-use experiments on parental attention and navigation), to illustrate each structural difference.
- Organization is thematic: four structural differences, then a section on how online interaction disrupts or enhances offline interaction, followed by proposed future research questions.
Limitations
- The paper states no limitations; it declares only "Nothing declared" under Conflict.
- Evident from the text: this is a selective narrative review rather than a systematic one, so the cited evidence is illustrative rather than exhaustive, and the four-difference framework is proposed rather than empirically tested.
- Several claims rest on single studies or working papers (e.g., the voice/paralanguage working paper, individual field experiments), and the authors themselves flag open questions about how evolving technologies (video chat, customizable voices) may blur the online–offline distinction.
Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
65 Not checked yet · 22 Own interpretation · 5 No basis given
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Relative to offline communication, online interactions provide (1) fewer nonverbal cues, (2) greater potential for anonymity, (3) more opportunity to form new social ties and to bolster existing weak ties, and (4) wider dissemination of information.”
§ interaction influence social outcomes > Structural differences between online and offline interaction
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Relative to offline communication, online interactions provide (1) fewer nonverbal cues, (2) greater potential for anonymity, (3) more opportunity to form new social ties and to bolster existing weak ties, and (4) wider dissemination of information.”
§ interaction influence social outcomes > Structural differences between online and offline interaction
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Relative to offline communication, online interactions provide (1) fewer nonverbal cues, (2) greater potential for anonymity, (3) more opportunity to form new social ties and to bolster existing weak ties, and (4) wider dissemination of information.”
§ interaction influence social outcomes > Structural differences between online and offline interaction
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Indeed, recent research suggests that social media can serve as a catalyst for moral outrage and social conflict [16 ,17].”
§ interaction influence social outcomes > Greater anonymity online
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Online interaction allows for passive browsing, whereby one can look at others' social profiles or read their opinions without their awareness.”
§ interaction influence social outcomes > Greater anonymity online
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Directly supporting this possibility, one set of experiments demonstrates that observers are more likely to believe an ambiguous agent is a human (versus a machine) when hearing a human voice-compared to reading human-created text or seeing a human communicator [9].”
§ interaction influence social outcomes > Fewer nonverbal cues online
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [9] source
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Greater anonymity is associated with disinhibition and aggressive behavior-potentially because anonymity reduces accountability and thereby licenses bad behavior [12,13].”
§ interaction influence social outcomes > Greater anonymity online
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [12]
- Not checked yetcites [13] source
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“These experiments also provide early insight into why a person's voice is humanizing: the nonverbal variance in speech (e.g.variance in pitch, pace) is associated with judgments of communicators' mental capacities;”
§ interaction influence social outcomes > Fewer nonverbal cues online
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [9] source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“There are even circumstances under which observers may be more accurate when hearing a communicator speak than when hearing and seeing her [7].”
§ interaction influence social outcomes > Fewer nonverbal cues online
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [7] source
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“therefore, communicators with voices which lack such variance (and therefore sound machine-like) are not judged differently from communicators whose opinions are read via text.”
§ interaction influence social outcomes > Fewer nonverbal cues online
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [9] source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- It may state two separate claims as one. 20
- Probably not a substantial claim. 11
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Relative to offline communication, online interactions provide (1) fewer nonverbal cues, (2) greater potential for anonymity, (3) more opportunity to form new social ties and to bolster existing weak ties, and (4) wider dissemination of information.”
§ interaction influence social outcomes > Structural differences between online and offline interaction
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“These structural differences lead to systematic psychological and behavioral consequences that are functionally changing the landscape of social life.”
§ interaction influence social outcomes > Structural differences between online and offline interaction
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: The four structural differences identified are the primary drivers of the psychological and behavioral consequences of online interaction.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Online and offline lives often intersect; we thus further review how online engagement can (1) disrupt or (2) enhance offline interaction.”
§ interaction influence social outcomes > Abstract
plainconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Online and offline lives often intersect; we thus further review how online engagement can (1) disrupt or (2) enhance offline interaction.”
§ interaction influence social outcomes > Abstract
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Second, reading, versus hearing, ones' opinions also makes the communicator appear less mentally capable-less thoughtful and emotional [9,10 ].”
§ interaction influence social outcomes > Fewer nonverbal cues online
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“This suggests that text-based interaction may be dehumanizing, since derogating a person's mental capacities is a form of dehumanization [11].”
§ interaction influence social outcomes > Fewer nonverbal cues online
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [11]
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“One consequence of communicating via text online, therefore, is that it can reduce people's understanding of others' thoughts and feelings (compared to communicating in speech offline), provoking possible miscommunication.”
§ interaction influence social outcomes > Fewer nonverbal cues online
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In offline interactions, the size of one's audience is limited by the physical size of the room; in online interactions, there is hardly any limit to audience size.”
§ interaction influence social outcomes > Wider dissemination of content online
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“They were only influenced by the disclosure when the post was made by a celebrity, suggesting that people assumed sponsorship when a post was made by a brand, but not when made by a celebrity [32].”
§ interaction influence social outcomes > Wider dissemination of content online
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [32] source
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The sheer size of one's audience can increase the effectiveness of persuasive appeals and make crowd-sourcing feedback quicker and more efficient.”
§ interaction influence social outcomes > Wider dissemination of content online
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“They were only influenced by the disclosure when the post was made by a celebrity, suggesting that people assumed sponsorship when a post was made by a brand, but not when made by a celebrity [32].”
§ interaction influence social outcomes > Wider dissemination of content online
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [32] source
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“As a result, people may view these parasocial online connections as 'friends,' and be less guarded to persuasion attempts, thus enhancing celebrity influence [32][33][34].”
§ interaction influence social outcomes > Wider dissemination of content online
What the sources say
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Relatedly, cyberbullying and online victimization has become a public health concern [18]”
§ interaction influence social outcomes > Greater anonymity online
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [18] source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“in one analysis of 126 000 stories from 2006 to 2017, false stories spread more widely and more quickly than true stores [30 ].”
§ interaction influence social outcomes > Wider dissemination of content online
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [30] source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Sharing content online is easier and more accessible than sharing it via mass media (e.g.television, radio), allowing a greater number of people to broadcast more content to more people (e.g.posting, tweeting, and live-streaming as much and as often as they choose).”
§ interaction influence social outcomes > Wider dissemination of content online
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Online technology allows millions of people worldwide to communicate effortlessly, making it easier to expand and maintain social networks, and eliminating barriers posed by geographical distance.”
§ interaction influence social outcomes > Forming, maintaining, and strengthening ties online
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Online interaction can harm well-being and reduce sociality if it displaces in-person connections [51,52,53 ,54 ].”
§ interaction influence social outcomes > Disruption
What the sources say
plainconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“For example, machine learning models can estimate social media users' personal attributes with surprising accuracy (under one model, correctly identifying Democrat or Republican 85% of the time [35]);”
§ interaction influence social outcomes > Wider dissemination of content online
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [35] source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Although people tailor messages offline as well, the process of tailoring is larger scale and more datadriven online.”
§ interaction influence social outcomes > Wider dissemination of content online
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Despite the many differences in the structure and psychology of online and offline communication, these interactions often bleed into one another.”
§ interaction influence social outcomes > The interplay between online and offline social life
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“Ad campaigns can be designed to increase the likelihood that they are shared (i.e.go viral [37])”
§ interaction influence social outcomes > Wider dissemination of content online
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [37] source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“and firms often leverage social media to connect with consumers and increase purchase intentions [32].”
§ interaction influence social outcomes > Wider dissemination of content online
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [32] source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The consequences of digital technology can be categorized based on the structural differences between online (versus offline) platforms-fewer nonverbal cues, more anonymity, more flexible network selection, and wider audience-and the ways in which technologies harm or enhance offline connection.”
§ interaction influence social outcomes > Summary and future directions
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“For example, 57% of teenagers report having made at least one new friend online and 29% report having made more than five friends online (Lenhart, 2015).”
§ interaction influence social outcomes > Enhancement
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites Lenhart, 2015
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Among teens who play games, the vast majority report playing with others (83% in person and 75% online) and say it makes them feel more connected to others, both friends they already know and people they only know through gaming [1].”
§ interaction influence social outcomes > Enhancement
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [1]
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Third, the internet can be used as a tool to collaborate with others and organize social groups or movements (e.g.[60]).”
§ interaction influence social outcomes > Enhancement
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [60] source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The internet also provides an avenue for social interaction through multiplayer games (games in which multiple people play together in the same gaming environment).”
§ interaction influence social outcomes > Enhancement
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“The recent shift from offline to online interactions has fundamentally changed the way humans socialize and communicate, creating controversy about the impact of digital technology on well-being [63,64 ,65].”
§ interaction influence social outcomes > Summary and future directions
What the sources say
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper relies on this without support.
Online and offline interaction can be treated as distinct structural categories for comparison.
“To more clearly understand the consequences of these different interaction media, we propose four key structural differences between them.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The four structural differences identified are the primary drivers of the psychological and behavioral consequences of online interaction.
“These structural differences lead to systematic psychological and behavioral consequences that are functionally changing the landscape of social life.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Findings from the cited studies are valid and generalizable to the populations discussed.
“This paper provides a new framework for organizing the extant literature.”
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The source backs part of the claim, not all of it — or backs it for a different population, condition or comparison.
In the citing paper
“the absence of nonverbal cues that are essential in face-to-face communication may exaggerate the perceived intensity of users' outrage (Lieberman & Schroeder 2020)”
From Social Media and Morality. (2024) · cites this paper as Lieberman & Schroeder 2020
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredIn the citing paper
“Rather, phones should result in negative effects on well-being only when they displace or interfere with activities essential for well-being (e.g., sleep) and with nondigital experiences that afford a greater source of well-being than their digital counterparts [37].”
From The effects of smartphones on well-being: theoretical integration and research agenda (2020) · cites this paper as [37]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ interaction influence social outcomes > Enhancement
“Among teens who play games, the vast majority report playing with others (83% in person and 75% online) and say it makes them feel more connected to others, both friends they already know and people they only know through gaming [1].”
§ interaction influence social outcomes > References
“1. Pew Research: About a Quarter of U.S. Adults Say They Are 'Almost Constantly' Online. 2018 .”
Citations
Cites
The spread of true and false news online
Vosoughi, S., Roy, D., & Aral, S. (2018) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.aap9559 · Cited by 8,847
Social Media and Fake News in the 2016 Election
Allcott, H., & Gentzkow, M. (2017) · Journal of Economic Perspectives · doi:10.1257/jep.31.2.211 · Cited by 6,767
The online disinhibition effect
Suler, J. (2004) · CyberPsychology & Behavior · doi:10.1089/1094931041291295 · Cited by 4,375
Private traits and attributes are predictable from digital records of human behavior
Kosinski, M., Stillwell, D., & Graepel, T. (2013) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1218772110 · Cited by 2,829
Social psychological aspects of computer-mediated communication
Kiesler, S., Siegel, J., & McGuire, T. W. (1984) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/0003-066x.39.10.1123 · Cited by 2,630
Twenge, J. M., Joiner, T. E., Rogers, M. L., & Martin, G. N. (2018) · Clinical Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/2167702617723376 · Cited by 1,705
The association between adolescent well-being and digital technology use
Orben, A., & Przybylski, A. K. (2019) · Nature Human Behaviour · doi:10.1038/s41562-018-0506-1 · Cited by 1,500 · cited 1×
“The recent shift from offline to online interactions has fundamentally changed the way humans socialize and communicate, creating controversy about the impact of digital technology on well-being [63,64 ,65].”
BackgroundPassive Facebook usage undermines affective well-being: Experimental and longitudinal evidence.
Verduyn, P., Lee, D. S., Park, J., Shablack, H., Orvell, A., Bayer, J., Ybarra, O., Jonides, J., & Kross, E. (2015) · Journal of Experimental Psychology: General · doi:10.1037/xge0000057 · Cited by 988 · cited 1×
“Further, the passive use of social media, in particular (e.g. lurking behaviors; scrolling through others’ feeds without actually engaging), has been associated with increased loneliness and lowered well-being [51,52,53 ,54 ,55].”
BackgroundPsychological targeting as an effective approach to digital mass persuasion
Matz, S. C., Kosinski, M., Nave, G., & Stillwell, D. J. (2017) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1710966114 · Cited by 892
Przybylski, A. K., & Weinstein, N. (2017) · Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/0956797616678438 · Cited by 890
Research works printed but not linked: 3
- Epley N, Eyal T: Through a looking glass, darkly: using mechanisms of mind perception to identify accuracy, overconfidence, and underappreciated means for improvement. Adv Exp Soc Psychol [In press]. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0065260119300176.
- Prentice-Dunn, 1983, Deindividuation in aggression, Aggress: Theor Empir Rev, 2, 155
- Silverman, 2016, This analysis shows how viral fake election news stories outperformed real news on Facebook, BuzzFeed News, 16
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Social Media and Well-Being: Pitfalls, Progress, and Next Steps
Kross, E., Verduyn, P., Sheppes, G., Costello, C. K., Jonides, J., & Ybarra, O. (2021) · Trends in Cognitive Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.tics.2020.10.005 · Cited by 474
How social learning amplifies moral outrage expression in online social networks
Brady, W. J., McLoughlin, K., Doan, T. N., & Crockett, M. J. (2021) · Science Advances · doi:10.1126/sciadv.abe5641 · Cited by 375
Mechanisms linking social media use to adolescent mental health vulnerability
Orben, A., Meier, A., Dalgleish, T., & Blakemore, S.-J. (2024) · Nature Reviews Psychology · doi:10.1038/s44159-024-00307-y · Cited by 220
Social media usage and development of psychiatric disorders in childhood and adolescence: a review
Cataldo, I., Lepri, B., Neoh, M. J. Y., & Esposito, G. (2021) · Frontiers in Psychiatry · doi:10.3389/fpsyt.2020.508595 · Cited by 186
“Online social interaction, the blurring of lines between offline and virtual life (4, 5), and the concept of digital identity (6) have become topics of great interest in psychology and mental health fields (7).”
BackgroundEffects of voice assistant recommendations on consumer behavior
Flavián, C., Akdim, K., & Casaló, L. V. (2022) · Psychology and Marketing · doi:10.1002/mar.21765 · Cited by 154
Metadata
- Authors
- Lieberman, A., & Schroeder, J.
- Affiliations
- University of California San Diego (US)
- University of California, Berkeley (US)
- Corresponding author
- Schroeder, Juliana
- Venue
- Current Opinion in Psychology
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2020-02
- Volume
- 31
- Pages
- 16-21
- ISSN
- 2352-250X (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2955402589
- Semantic Scholar
- a12caf032505677deb5d8db8d35c7cdf7f6b1167
- Cited by
- 252
- References
- 62
- Citations by year
- 2026: 42 · 2025: 66 · 2024: 51 · 2023: 35 · 2022: 27 · 2021: 22 · 2020: 9
- FWCI
- 3.66
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- escholarship.org
- Locations
- Current Opinion in Psychology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- eScholarship (California Digital Library) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Impact of Technology on Adolescents
- Social Sciences › Linguistics and Language › Digital Communication and Language
- Social Sciences › Communication › Media and Digital Communication
- Keywords
- online interaction, offline interaction, nonverbal cues, anonymity, weak ties, information dissemination, social ties, technology and social life
- MeSH terms
- Social Interaction, Communication, Humans, Social Behavior, Social Media
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.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-08, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-08 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
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
