Cited by 260Impact of Technology on AdolescentsMedia and Digital CommunicationTechnology Use by Older Adults

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 60 of the 64 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Retracted: Digital Communication Media Use and Psychological Well-Being: A Meta-Analysis

Open access
Liu, Dong, Baumeister, Roy F, Yang, Chia-chen, Hu, Baijing·2019·Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication

Abstract

The puzzle of whether digital media are improving or harming psychological well-being has been plaguing researchers and the public for decades. Derived from media richness theory, this study proposed that phone calls and texting improve well-being, while use of social network sites (SNSs), instant messaging (IM), and online gaming may displace other social contacts and, thereby, impair well-being. To test this hypothesis, a meta-analysis of 124 studies was conducted. The results showed that phone calls and texting were positively correlated with well-being, whereas online gaming was negatively associated with well-being. Furthermore, the relationship between digital media use and well-being was also contingent upon the way the technology was used. A series of meta-analyses of different types of SNS use and well-being was used to elucidate this point: interaction, self-presentation, and entertainment on SNSs were associated with better well-being, whereas consuming SNSs’ content was associated with poorer well-being.

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 · 10.1093/jcmc/zmz013This paper is marked retracted.

Cites

60 of 60 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

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?

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

Show all 64 references

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Borenstein, 2014, Comprehensive meta-analysis version 3 [Computer software]
  2. Simonsohn, 2014, P-curve and effect size: Correcting for publication bias using only significant results, Perspectives on Psychological Science, 9, 666, 10.1177/1745691614553988 · DOI · Paper page

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Liu, D., Baumeister, R. F., Yang, C.-C., & Hu, B.
Affiliations
  • Renmin University of China (CN)
  • The University of Queensland (AU)
  • Oklahoma State University (US)
Corresponding author
Baumeister, Roy F
Venue
Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication
Published
2019-09-01
Volume
24
Issue
5
Pages
259-273
ISSN
1083-6101 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2979901578
Cited by
260
References
64
Citations by year
2026: 13 · 2025: 17 · 2024: 34 · 2023: 62 · 2022: 69 · 2021: 46 · 2020: 19
FWCI
8.60
Type
journal article
Language
en
Status
Retracted
Open access
Locations
Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication (publishedVersion)
Funders
Key Research Institute of Humanities and Social Sciences in Universities (16JJD860008)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Impact of Technology on Adolescents
  • Social Sciences › Communication › Media and Digital Communication
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Geriatrics and Gerontology › Technology Use by Older Adults
Keywords
digital media use, psychological well-being, media richness theory, telephone calls, text messaging, social network sites, instant messaging, online games, self-presentation, media interaction, media use, entertainment use

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