The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Why Communication Researchers Should Study the Internet: A Dialogue
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
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?
In the citing paper
“Since the advent of early forms of computer-mediated communication, scholars have suggested that digital communication differs in important ways from face-to-face communication (Newhagen and Rafaeli 1996; Thompson 1995; Walther and Parks 2002).”
From Transformation of Adolescent Peer Relations in the Social Media Context: Part 1—A Theoretical Framework and Application to Dyadic Peer Relationships (2018) · cites this paper as Newhagen and Rafaeli 1996
In the citing paper
“The unique interpersonal context of social media is characterized by a number of features that differentiate it from adolescents’ traditional interpersonal environments.”
From Transformation of Adolescent Peer Relations in the Social Media Context: Part 1—A Theoretical Framework and Application to Dyadic Peer Relationships (2018) · cites this paper as Newhagen and Rafaeli 1996
Citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Introducing COBRAs: Exploring motivations for brand-related social media use
Muntinga, D. G., Moorman, M., & Smit, E. G. (2011) · International Journal of Advertising · doi:10.2501/ija-30-1-013-046 · Cited by 1,468
Media Literacy and the Challenge of New Information and Communication Technologies
LIVINGSTONE, S. (2004) · The Communication Review · doi:10.1080/10714420490280152 · Cited by 1,115
LaRose, R., & Eastin, M. S. (2004) · Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media · doi:10.1207/s15506878jobem4803_2 · Cited by 890
“Much of the research has been carried out by followers of the uses and gratifications tradition, who anticipated the medium as an exemplar of active media selection that could further validate the core tenets of that paradigm (Morris & Ogan, 1996; Newhagen & Rafaeli, 1996; Ruggerio, 2000).”
BackgroundNesi, J., Choukas-Bradley, S., & Prinstein, M. J. (2018) · Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review · doi:10.1007/s10567-018-0261-x · Cited by 712
“Since the advent of early forms of computer-mediated communication, scholars have suggested that digital communication differs in important ways from face-to-face communication (Newhagen and Rafaeli 1996; Thompson 1995; Walther and Parks 2002).”
Li, H., Kuo, C., & Rusell, M. G. (2006) · Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication · doi:10.1111/j.1083-6101.1999.tb00336.x · Cited by 604
Metadata
- Authors
- Newhagen, J. E., & Rafaeli, S.
- Affiliations
- University of Maryland, College Park (US)
- Hebrew University of Jerusalem (IL)
- ORCID
- Rafaeli, Sheizaf
- Venue
- Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2006-06-23
- Volume
- 1
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 0-0
- ISSN
- 1083-6101 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2015140830
- Cited by
- 188
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 4 · 2013: 13 · 2012: 12
- FWCI
- 19.52
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Communication › Media and Digital Communication
- Social Sciences › Communication › News Media Framing and Political Communication
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Focus Groups and Qualitative Methods
- Keywords
- internet, communication research, computer-mediated communication, online communication, research agenda
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
