The DOI matches its Crossref record; 8 of the 8 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Internet Paradox Revisited
Open accessAbstract
Kraut et al. (1998) reported negative effects of using the Internet on social involvement and psychological well‐being among new Internet users in 1995–96. We called the effects a “paradox” because participants used the Internet heavily for communication, which generally has positive effects. A 3‐year follow‐up of 208 of these respondents found that negative effects dissipated. We also report findings from a longitudinal survey in 1998–99 of 406 new computer and television purchasers. This sample generally experienced positive effects of using the Internet on communication, social involvement, and well‐being. However, consistent with a “rich get richer” model, using the Internet predicted better outcomes for extraverts and those with more social support but worse outcomes for introverts and those with less support.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
The CES-D Scale: A Self-Report Depression Scale for Research in the General Population
Radloff, L. S. (1977) · Applied Psychological Measurement · doi:10.1177/014662167700100306 · Cited by 53,267
Stress, social support, and the buffering hypothesis
Cohen, S., & Wills, T. A. (1985) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.98.2.310 · Cited by 18,093
Subjective well-being: Three decades of progress.
Diener, E., Suh, E. M., Lucas, R. E., & Smith, H. L. (1999) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.125.2.276 · Cited by 12,910
The Revised UCLA Loneliness Scale: concurrent and discriminant validity evidence
Russell, D., Peplau, L. A., & Cutrona, C. E. (1980) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.39.3.472 · Cited by 5,173
Internet paradox: A social technology that reduces social involvement and psychological well-being?
Kraut, R., Patterson, M., Lundmark, V., Kiesler, S., Mukophadhyay, T., & Scherlis, W. (1998) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/0003-066x.53.9.1017 · Cited by 4,793
Self-citationMeasuring the Functional Components of Social Support
Cohen, S., Mermelstein, R., Kamarck, T., & Hoberman, H. M. (1985) · Social Support: Theory, Research and Applications · doi:10.1007/978-94-009-5115-0_5 · Cited by 2,296 · cited 1×
“We used self-report measures to assess demographic characteristics of the participants, and measures from the original HomeNet study, including perceived social support (Cohen et al., 1984), size of local and distant social circles, and time talking with other family members.”
MethodDevelopment and validation of a scale for measuring state self-esteem.
Heatherton, T. F., & Polivy, J. (1991) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037/0022-3514.60.6.895 · Cited by 2,007 · cited 1×
“We added measures of self-esteem (Heatherton & Polivy, 1991), positive and negative affect (Watson, Clark, & Tellegen, 1988), perceived time pressure (adapted from Kraut & Attewell, 1997) and physical health (subscale from the SF-36; Ware, Snow, Kosinski, & Gandek, 1993).”
MethodGroup support interventions for women with breast cancer: Who benefits from what?
Helgeson, V. S., Cohen, S., Schulz, R., & Yasko, J. (2000) · Health Psychology · doi:10.1037/0278-6133.19.2.107 · Cited by 341
Self-citation
Cited by
Ellison, N. B., Steinfield, C., & Lampe, C. (2007) · Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication · doi:10.1111/j.1083-6101.2007.00367.x · Cited by 9,939
Gosling, S. D., Vazire, S., Srivastava, S., & John, O. P. (2004) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/0003-066x.59.2.93 · Cited by 2,932
The Wealth of Networks: How Social Production Transforms Markets and Freedom
(2006) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.44-0999 · Cited by 1,903
Social capital, self-esteem, and use of online social network sites: A longitudinal analysis.
Steinfield, C., Ellison, N. B., & Lampe, C. (2008) · Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology · doi:10.1016/j.appdev.2008.07.002 · Cited by 1,919
Personality and motivations associated with Facebook use
Ross, C., Orr, E. S., Sisic, M., Arseneault, J. M., Simmering, M. G., & Orr, R. R. (2009) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2008.12.024 · Cited by 1,728
Metadata
- Authors
- Kraut, R., Kiesler, S., Boneva, B., Cummings, J., Helgeson, V., & Crawford, A.
- Venue
- Journal of Social Issues
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2002-01
- Volume
- 58
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 49-74
- ISSN
- 0022-4537 (ISSN-L)
- 1540-4560
- OpenAlex
- W2062866147
- Cited by
- 2,202
- References
- 8
- FWCI
- 217.39
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Internet Paradox Revisited. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/1540-4560.00248
- The paper
- Kraut, R., Kiesler, S., Boneva, B., Cummings, J., Helgeson, V., & Crawford, A. (2002). Internet Paradox Revisited. Journal of Social Issues. https://doi.org/10.1111/1540-4560.00248
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.
