Cited by 4,793Impact of Technology on AdolescentsTechnology Use by Older AdultsChild Development and Digital Technology

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 51 of the 53 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Internet paradox: A social technology that reduces social involvement and psychological well-being?

Kraut, Robert, Patterson, Michael, Lundmark, Vicki, Kiesler, Sara, Mukophadhyay, Tridas, Scherlis, William·1998·American Psychologist

Abstract

The Internet could change the lives of average citizens as much as did the telephone in the early part of the 20th century and television in the 1950s and 1960s. Researchers and social critics are debating whether the Internet is improving or harming participation in community life and social relationships. This research examined the social and psychological impact of the Internet on 169 people in 73 households during their first 1 to 2 years on-line. We used longitudinal data to examine the effects of the Internet on social involvement and psychological well-being. In this sample, the Internet was used extensively for communication. Nonetheless, greater use of the Internet was associated with declines in participants' communication with family members in the household, declines in the size of their social circle, and increases in their depression and loneliness. These findings have implications for research, for public policy and for the design of technology.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/0003-066x.53.9.1017

Cites

51 of 51 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Verification

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.

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?

Citations

Cites

Show all 53 references

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 601–700 of 1,034

Metadata

Authors
Kraut, R., Patterson, M., Lundmark, V., Kiesler, S., Mukophadhyay, T., & Scherlis, W.
Affiliations
Carnegie Mellon University (US)
Venue
American Psychologist
Published
1998
Volume
53
Issue
9
Pages
1017-1031
ISSN
  • 0003-066X (ISSN-L)
  • 1935-990X
OpenAlex
W2147050295
Cited by
4,793
References
53
Citations by year
2026: 170 · 2025: 172 · 2024: 195 · 2023: 216 · 2022: 216 · 2021: 218 · 2020: 214 · 2019: 190 · 2018: 164 · 2017: 199 · 2016: 180 · 2015: 250 · 2014: 222 · 2013: 219 · 2012: 217
FWCI
340.40
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • American Psychologist (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Impact of Technology on Adolescents
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Geriatrics and Gerontology › Technology Use by Older Adults
  • Social Sciences › Education › Child Development and Digital Technology
Keywords
internet use, social engagement, psychological well-being, depression, loneliness, family communication, social networks, interpersonal relationships, technology and society, online communication
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Child, Family Health, Female, Humans, Longitudinal Studies, Male, Mental Health, Pennsylvania, Social Isolation, Linear Models, Internet

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