The Role of Social Network Sites in Romantic Relationships: Effects on Jealousy and Relationship Happiness

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.

§ The Role of Social Network Sites in Romantic Relationships: Effects on Jealousy and Relationship Happiness > Abstract

It may state two separate claims as one.

A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.

§ The Role of Social Network Sites in Romantic Relationships: Effects on Jealousy and Relationship Happiness > Descriptive analysis Table 1 displays the means and standard deviations as well as the intercorrelations between the measures.Respondents stated to be more likely to experience SNS relationship happiness 64.1 14.6 3.9 6.8 7.8 1.9 1.0 (M = 4.73, SD = 1.32) than SNS jealousy (M = 2.83, SD = 1.19), t(80) = -12.14,p < .001.Note that the scales did not assess the likelihood of events (e.g., partner posts a comment on the wall of an ex), but the likelihood to experience happiness or jealousy when the partner showed a specific behavior.Low self-esteem individuals reported to experience more SNS jealousy (M = 3.07, SD = 1.13) than high-self-esteem individuals (M = 2.56, SD = 1.21), t(79) = 1.94, p < .05,one-tailed.Low-and highself-esteem individuals did not differ in SNS relationship happiness (Ms = 4.70, SD = 1.26, vs. 4.75, SD = 1.41, ns).The scores on monitoring behavior indicate that about half of the participants reported that they engage in monitoring behavior at least every now and then.Nevertheless, as Table 2 shows, 70-80% of all respondents reported that they never or almost never searched their partners bags, or secretly read the text messages or e-mails they sent to somebody else.Only 10 to 17% had scores of 5 or higher.In contrast, the scores for SNS monitoring behavior were much higher (see Table 3).Table 3 shows that on the first three items about SNS monitoring, 30 to 35% of the respondents had an answer score of 5 or higher.Roughly 35% of the respondents reported that they were likely to visit their partners profile regularly.30% reported that they would check their partner's profile if they were suspicious, and another 30% reported that they were likely to monitor the profile of the partner on a regular basis.Only the item ''add your partner's friends to your SNS to keep tabs on your partner'' received similar rejection rates as the items of the monitoring behavior scale.These descriptive results provide an answer to RQ1.They indicate that monitoring the partner on a SNS might be more common and apparently socially more accepted than monitoring the partner offline.Hypotheses testing SNS jealousy.The first four hypotheses predicted that SNS jealousy would be related to trait jealousy (H1), monitoring behavior (H2), SNS use, especially use for grooming (H3), and need for popularity (H4).H6 expected a negative relationship with relationship satisfaction.To test the hypotheses these variables were simultaneously entered as predictors in a regression analysis, in which we also controlled for gender.The model explained 57% of the variance of SNS jealousy, F(9,71) = 12.82, p < .001.Trait jealousy was a marginally significant predictor of SNS jealousy, β = .16,p = .06.Monitoring behavior, β = .40,p < .01,and need for popularity, β = .33,p < .01,significantly predicted SNS jealousy, whereas the different types of SNS use (profile maintenance and grooming) and relationship satisfaction failed to reach significance, all ts < 1.61.The results support H1, H2, and H4. To examine the moderating role of self-esteem, separate regressions with SNS jealousy as dependent variable were calculated for low-and high-self-esteem subjects.In the first block, trait jealousy, monitoring behavior, relationship satisfaction, and gender were included as predictors.In the second block, frequency of login, SNS intensity, SNS use for profile maintenance, and SNS use for grooming were entered, and finally need for popularity was entered in the third block.Blockwise entering of the variables allowed us to detect whether the indicators of SNS use and need for popularity explained additional variance over and above the relationship variables and gender.

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.

§ The Role of Social Network Sites in Romantic Relationships: Effects on Jealousy and Relationship Happiness > Descriptive analysis Table 1 displays the means and standard deviations as well as the intercorrelations between the measures.Respondents stated to be more likely to experience SNS relationship happiness 64.1 14.6 3.9 6.8 7.8 1.9 1.0 (M = 4.73, SD = 1.32) than SNS jealousy (M = 2.83, SD = 1.19), t(80) = -12.14,p < .001.Note that the scales did not assess the likelihood of events (e.g., partner posts a comment on the wall of an ex), but the likelihood to experience happiness or jealousy when the partner showed a specific behavior.Low self-esteem individuals reported to experience more SNS jealousy (M = 3.07, SD = 1.13) than high-self-esteem individuals (M = 2.56, SD = 1.21), t(79) = 1.94, p < .05,one-tailed.Low-and highself-esteem individuals did not differ in SNS relationship happiness (Ms = 4.70, SD = 1.26, vs. 4.75, SD = 1.41, ns).The scores on monitoring behavior indicate that about half of the participants reported that they engage in monitoring behavior at least every now and then.Nevertheless, as Table 2 shows, 70-80% of all respondents reported that they never or almost never searched their partners bags, or secretly read the text messages or e-mails they sent to somebody else.Only 10 to 17% had scores of 5 or higher.In contrast, the scores for SNS monitoring behavior were much higher (see Table 3).Table 3 shows that on the first three items about SNS monitoring, 30 to 35% of the respondents had an answer score of 5 or higher.Roughly 35% of the respondents reported that they were likely to visit their partners profile regularly.30% reported that they would check their partner's profile if they were suspicious, and another 30% reported that they were likely to monitor the profile of the partner on a regular basis.Only the item ''add your partner's friends to your SNS to keep tabs on your partner'' received similar rejection rates as the items of the monitoring behavior scale.These descriptive results provide an answer to RQ1.They indicate that monitoring the partner on a SNS might be more common and apparently socially more accepted than monitoring the partner offline.Hypotheses testing SNS jealousy.The first four hypotheses predicted that SNS jealousy would be related to trait jealousy (H1), monitoring behavior (H2), SNS use, especially use for grooming (H3), and need for popularity (H4).H6 expected a negative relationship with relationship satisfaction.To test the hypotheses these variables were simultaneously entered as predictors in a regression analysis, in which we also controlled for gender.The model explained 57% of the variance of SNS jealousy, F(9,71) = 12.82, p < .001.Trait jealousy was a marginally significant predictor of SNS jealousy, β = .16,p = .06.Monitoring behavior, β = .40,p < .01,and need for popularity, β = .33,p < .01,significantly predicted SNS jealousy, whereas the different types of SNS use (profile maintenance and grooming) and relationship satisfaction failed to reach significance, all ts < 1.61.The results support H1, H2, and H4. To examine the moderating role of self-esteem, separate regressions with SNS jealousy as dependent variable were calculated for low-and high-self-esteem subjects.In the first block, trait jealousy, monitoring behavior, relationship satisfaction, and gender were included as predictors.In the second block, frequency of login, SNS intensity, SNS use for profile maintenance, and SNS use for grooming were entered, and finally need for popularity was entered in the third block.Blockwise entering of the variables allowed us to detect whether the indicators of SNS use and need for popularity explained additional variance over and above the relationship variables and gender.

It may state two separate claims as one.

A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.

§ The Role of Social Network Sites in Romantic Relationships: Effects on Jealousy and Relationship Happiness > Descriptive analysis Table 1 displays the means and standard deviations as well as the intercorrelations between the measures.Respondents stated to be more likely to experience SNS relationship happiness 64.1 14.6 3.9 6.8 7.8 1.9 1.0 (M = 4.73, SD = 1.32) than SNS jealousy (M = 2.83, SD = 1.19), t(80) = -12.14,p < .001.Note that the scales did not assess the likelihood of events (e.g., partner posts a comment on the wall of an ex), but the likelihood to experience happiness or jealousy when the partner showed a specific behavior.Low self-esteem individuals reported to experience more SNS jealousy (M = 3.07, SD = 1.13) than high-self-esteem individuals (M = 2.56, SD = 1.21), t(79) = 1.94, p < .05,one-tailed.Low-and highself-esteem individuals did not differ in SNS relationship happiness (Ms = 4.70, SD = 1.26, vs. 4.75, SD = 1.41, ns).The scores on monitoring behavior indicate that about half of the participants reported that they engage in monitoring behavior at least every now and then.Nevertheless, as Table 2 shows, 70-80% of all respondents reported that they never or almost never searched their partners bags, or secretly read the text messages or e-mails they sent to somebody else.Only 10 to 17% had scores of 5 or higher.In contrast, the scores for SNS monitoring behavior were much higher (see Table 3).Table 3 shows that on the first three items about SNS monitoring, 30 to 35% of the respondents had an answer score of 5 or higher.Roughly 35% of the respondents reported that they were likely to visit their partners profile regularly.30% reported that they would check their partner's profile if they were suspicious, and another 30% reported that they were likely to monitor the profile of the partner on a regular basis.Only the item ''add your partner's friends to your SNS to keep tabs on your partner'' received similar rejection rates as the items of the monitoring behavior scale.These descriptive results provide an answer to RQ1.They indicate that monitoring the partner on a SNS might be more common and apparently socially more accepted than monitoring the partner offline.Hypotheses testing SNS jealousy.The first four hypotheses predicted that SNS jealousy would be related to trait jealousy (H1), monitoring behavior (H2), SNS use, especially use for grooming (H3), and need for popularity (H4).H6 expected a negative relationship with relationship satisfaction.To test the hypotheses these variables were simultaneously entered as predictors in a regression analysis, in which we also controlled for gender.The model explained 57% of the variance of SNS jealousy, F(9,71) = 12.82, p < .001.Trait jealousy was a marginally significant predictor of SNS jealousy, β = .16,p = .06.Monitoring behavior, β = .40,p < .01,and need for popularity, β = .33,p < .01,significantly predicted SNS jealousy, whereas the different types of SNS use (profile maintenance and grooming) and relationship satisfaction failed to reach significance, all ts < 1.61.The results support H1, H2, and H4. To examine the moderating role of self-esteem, separate regressions with SNS jealousy as dependent variable were calculated for low-and high-self-esteem subjects.In the first block, trait jealousy, monitoring behavior, relationship satisfaction, and gender were included as predictors.In the second block, frequency of login, SNS intensity, SNS use for profile maintenance, and SNS use for grooming were entered, and finally need for popularity was entered in the third block.Blockwise entering of the variables allowed us to detect whether the indicators of SNS use and need for popularity explained additional variance over and above the relationship variables and gender.

It may state two separate claims as one.

A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.

§ The Role of Social Network Sites in Romantic Relationships: Effects on Jealousy and Relationship Happiness > Descriptive analysis Table 1 displays the means and standard deviations as well as the intercorrelations between the measures.Respondents stated to be more likely to experience SNS relationship happiness 64.1 14.6 3.9 6.8 7.8 1.9 1.0 (M = 4.73, SD = 1.32) than SNS jealousy (M = 2.83, SD = 1.19), t(80) = -12.14,p < .001.Note that the scales did not assess the likelihood of events (e.g., partner posts a comment on the wall of an ex), but the likelihood to experience happiness or jealousy when the partner showed a specific behavior.Low self-esteem individuals reported to experience more SNS jealousy (M = 3.07, SD = 1.13) than high-self-esteem individuals (M = 2.56, SD = 1.21), t(79) = 1.94, p < .05,one-tailed.Low-and highself-esteem individuals did not differ in SNS relationship happiness (Ms = 4.70, SD = 1.26, vs. 4.75, SD = 1.41, ns).The scores on monitoring behavior indicate that about half of the participants reported that they engage in monitoring behavior at least every now and then.Nevertheless, as Table 2 shows, 70-80% of all respondents reported that they never or almost never searched their partners bags, or secretly read the text messages or e-mails they sent to somebody else.Only 10 to 17% had scores of 5 or higher.In contrast, the scores for SNS monitoring behavior were much higher (see Table 3).Table 3 shows that on the first three items about SNS monitoring, 30 to 35% of the respondents had an answer score of 5 or higher.Roughly 35% of the respondents reported that they were likely to visit their partners profile regularly.30% reported that they would check their partner's profile if they were suspicious, and another 30% reported that they were likely to monitor the profile of the partner on a regular basis.Only the item ''add your partner's friends to your SNS to keep tabs on your partner'' received similar rejection rates as the items of the monitoring behavior scale.These descriptive results provide an answer to RQ1.They indicate that monitoring the partner on a SNS might be more common and apparently socially more accepted than monitoring the partner offline.Hypotheses testing SNS jealousy.The first four hypotheses predicted that SNS jealousy would be related to trait jealousy (H1), monitoring behavior (H2), SNS use, especially use for grooming (H3), and need for popularity (H4).H6 expected a negative relationship with relationship satisfaction.To test the hypotheses these variables were simultaneously entered as predictors in a regression analysis, in which we also controlled for gender.The model explained 57% of the variance of SNS jealousy, F(9,71) = 12.82, p < .001.Trait jealousy was a marginally significant predictor of SNS jealousy, β = .16,p = .06.Monitoring behavior, β = .40,p < .01,and need for popularity, β = .33,p < .01,significantly predicted SNS jealousy, whereas the different types of SNS use (profile maintenance and grooming) and relationship satisfaction failed to reach significance, all ts < 1.61.The results support H1, H2, and H4. To examine the moderating role of self-esteem, separate regressions with SNS jealousy as dependent variable were calculated for low-and high-self-esteem subjects.In the first block, trait jealousy, monitoring behavior, relationship satisfaction, and gender were included as predictors.In the second block, frequency of login, SNS intensity, SNS use for profile maintenance, and SNS use for grooming were entered, and finally need for popularity was entered in the third block.Blockwise entering of the variables allowed us to detect whether the indicators of SNS use and need for popularity explained additional variance over and above the relationship variables and gender.

It may state two separate claims as one.

A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.

§ The Role of Social Network Sites in Romantic Relationships: Effects on Jealousy and Relationship Happiness > Descriptive analysis Table 1 displays the means and standard deviations as well as the intercorrelations between the measures.Respondents stated to be more likely to experience SNS relationship happiness 64.1 14.6 3.9 6.8 7.8 1.9 1.0 (M = 4.73, SD = 1.32) than SNS jealousy (M = 2.83, SD = 1.19), t(80) = -12.14,p < .001.Note that the scales did not assess the likelihood of events (e.g., partner posts a comment on the wall of an ex), but the likelihood to experience happiness or jealousy when the partner showed a specific behavior.Low self-esteem individuals reported to experience more SNS jealousy (M = 3.07, SD = 1.13) than high-self-esteem individuals (M = 2.56, SD = 1.21), t(79) = 1.94, p < .05,one-tailed.Low-and highself-esteem individuals did not differ in SNS relationship happiness (Ms = 4.70, SD = 1.26, vs. 4.75, SD = 1.41, ns).The scores on monitoring behavior indicate that about half of the participants reported that they engage in monitoring behavior at least every now and then.Nevertheless, as Table 2 shows, 70-80% of all respondents reported that they never or almost never searched their partners bags, or secretly read the text messages or e-mails they sent to somebody else.Only 10 to 17% had scores of 5 or higher.In contrast, the scores for SNS monitoring behavior were much higher (see Table 3).Table 3 shows that on the first three items about SNS monitoring, 30 to 35% of the respondents had an answer score of 5 or higher.Roughly 35% of the respondents reported that they were likely to visit their partners profile regularly.30% reported that they would check their partner's profile if they were suspicious, and another 30% reported that they were likely to monitor the profile of the partner on a regular basis.Only the item ''add your partner's friends to your SNS to keep tabs on your partner'' received similar rejection rates as the items of the monitoring behavior scale.These descriptive results provide an answer to RQ1.They indicate that monitoring the partner on a SNS might be more common and apparently socially more accepted than monitoring the partner offline.Hypotheses testing SNS jealousy.The first four hypotheses predicted that SNS jealousy would be related to trait jealousy (H1), monitoring behavior (H2), SNS use, especially use for grooming (H3), and need for popularity (H4).H6 expected a negative relationship with relationship satisfaction.To test the hypotheses these variables were simultaneously entered as predictors in a regression analysis, in which we also controlled for gender.The model explained 57% of the variance of SNS jealousy, F(9,71) = 12.82, p < .001.Trait jealousy was a marginally significant predictor of SNS jealousy, β = .16,p = .06.Monitoring behavior, β = .40,p < .01,and need for popularity, β = .33,p < .01,significantly predicted SNS jealousy, whereas the different types of SNS use (profile maintenance and grooming) and relationship satisfaction failed to reach significance, all ts < 1.61.The results support H1, H2, and H4. To examine the moderating role of self-esteem, separate regressions with SNS jealousy as dependent variable were calculated for low-and high-self-esteem subjects.In the first block, trait jealousy, monitoring behavior, relationship satisfaction, and gender were included as predictors.In the second block, frequency of login, SNS intensity, SNS use for profile maintenance, and SNS use for grooming were entered, and finally need for popularity was entered in the third block.Blockwise entering of the variables allowed us to detect whether the indicators of SNS use and need for popularity explained additional variance over and above the relationship variables and gender.

It may state two separate claims as one.

A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.

§ The Role of Social Network Sites in Romantic Relationships: Effects on Jealousy and Relationship Happiness > Descriptive analysis Table 1 displays the means and standard deviations as well as the intercorrelations between the measures.Respondents stated to be more likely to experience SNS relationship happiness 64.1 14.6 3.9 6.8 7.8 1.9 1.0 (M = 4.73, SD = 1.32) than SNS jealousy (M = 2.83, SD = 1.19), t(80) = -12.14,p < .001.Note that the scales did not assess the likelihood of events (e.g., partner posts a comment on the wall of an ex), but the likelihood to experience happiness or jealousy when the partner showed a specific behavior.Low self-esteem individuals reported to experience more SNS jealousy (M = 3.07, SD = 1.13) than high-self-esteem individuals (M = 2.56, SD = 1.21), t(79) = 1.94, p < .05,one-tailed.Low-and highself-esteem individuals did not differ in SNS relationship happiness (Ms = 4.70, SD = 1.26, vs. 4.75, SD = 1.41, ns).The scores on monitoring behavior indicate that about half of the participants reported that they engage in monitoring behavior at least every now and then.Nevertheless, as Table 2 shows, 70-80% of all respondents reported that they never or almost never searched their partners bags, or secretly read the text messages or e-mails they sent to somebody else.Only 10 to 17% had scores of 5 or higher.In contrast, the scores for SNS monitoring behavior were much higher (see Table 3).Table 3 shows that on the first three items about SNS monitoring, 30 to 35% of the respondents had an answer score of 5 or higher.Roughly 35% of the respondents reported that they were likely to visit their partners profile regularly.30% reported that they would check their partner's profile if they were suspicious, and another 30% reported that they were likely to monitor the profile of the partner on a regular basis.Only the item ''add your partner's friends to your SNS to keep tabs on your partner'' received similar rejection rates as the items of the monitoring behavior scale.These descriptive results provide an answer to RQ1.They indicate that monitoring the partner on a SNS might be more common and apparently socially more accepted than monitoring the partner offline.Hypotheses testing SNS jealousy.The first four hypotheses predicted that SNS jealousy would be related to trait jealousy (H1), monitoring behavior (H2), SNS use, especially use for grooming (H3), and need for popularity (H4).H6 expected a negative relationship with relationship satisfaction.To test the hypotheses these variables were simultaneously entered as predictors in a regression analysis, in which we also controlled for gender.The model explained 57% of the variance of SNS jealousy, F(9,71) = 12.82, p < .001.Trait jealousy was a marginally significant predictor of SNS jealousy, β = .16,p = .06.Monitoring behavior, β = .40,p < .01,and need for popularity, β = .33,p < .01,significantly predicted SNS jealousy, whereas the different types of SNS use (profile maintenance and grooming) and relationship satisfaction failed to reach significance, all ts < 1.61.The results support H1, H2, and H4. To examine the moderating role of self-esteem, separate regressions with SNS jealousy as dependent variable were calculated for low-and high-self-esteem subjects.In the first block, trait jealousy, monitoring behavior, relationship satisfaction, and gender were included as predictors.In the second block, frequency of login, SNS intensity, SNS use for profile maintenance, and SNS use for grooming were entered, and finally need for popularity was entered in the third block.Blockwise entering of the variables allowed us to detect whether the indicators of SNS use and need for popularity explained additional variance over and above the relationship variables and gender.

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.

§ The Role of Social Network Sites in Romantic Relationships: Effects on Jealousy and Relationship Happiness > Strengths and limitations

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.

§ The Role of Social Network Sites in Romantic Relationships: Effects on Jealousy and Relationship Happiness > Descriptive analysis Table 1 displays the means and standard deviations as well as the intercorrelations between the measures.Respondents stated to be more likely to experience SNS relationship happiness 64.1 14.6 3.9 6.8 7.8 1.9 1.0 (M = 4.73, SD = 1.32) than SNS jealousy (M = 2.83, SD = 1.19), t(80) = -12.14,p < .001.Note that the scales did not assess the likelihood of events (e.g., partner posts a comment on the wall of an ex), but the likelihood to experience happiness or jealousy when the partner showed a specific behavior.Low self-esteem individuals reported to experience more SNS jealousy (M = 3.07, SD = 1.13) than high-self-esteem individuals (M = 2.56, SD = 1.21), t(79) = 1.94, p < .05,one-tailed.Low-and highself-esteem individuals did not differ in SNS relationship happiness (Ms = 4.70, SD = 1.26, vs. 4.75, SD = 1.41, ns).The scores on monitoring behavior indicate that about half of the participants reported that they engage in monitoring behavior at least every now and then.Nevertheless, as Table 2 shows, 70-80% of all respondents reported that they never or almost never searched their partners bags, or secretly read the text messages or e-mails they sent to somebody else.Only 10 to 17% had scores of 5 or higher.In contrast, the scores for SNS monitoring behavior were much higher (see Table 3).Table 3 shows that on the first three items about SNS monitoring, 30 to 35% of the respondents had an answer score of 5 or higher.Roughly 35% of the respondents reported that they were likely to visit their partners profile regularly.30% reported that they would check their partner's profile if they were suspicious, and another 30% reported that they were likely to monitor the profile of the partner on a regular basis.Only the item ''add your partner's friends to your SNS to keep tabs on your partner'' received similar rejection rates as the items of the monitoring behavior scale.These descriptive results provide an answer to RQ1.They indicate that monitoring the partner on a SNS might be more common and apparently socially more accepted than monitoring the partner offline.Hypotheses testing SNS jealousy.The first four hypotheses predicted that SNS jealousy would be related to trait jealousy (H1), monitoring behavior (H2), SNS use, especially use for grooming (H3), and need for popularity (H4).H6 expected a negative relationship with relationship satisfaction.To test the hypotheses these variables were simultaneously entered as predictors in a regression analysis, in which we also controlled for gender.The model explained 57% of the variance of SNS jealousy, F(9,71) = 12.82, p < .001.Trait jealousy was a marginally significant predictor of SNS jealousy, β = .16,p = .06.Monitoring behavior, β = .40,p < .01,and need for popularity, β = .33,p < .01,significantly predicted SNS jealousy, whereas the different types of SNS use (profile maintenance and grooming) and relationship satisfaction failed to reach significance, all ts < 1.61.The results support H1, H2, and H4. To examine the moderating role of self-esteem, separate regressions with SNS jealousy as dependent variable were calculated for low-and high-self-esteem subjects.In the first block, trait jealousy, monitoring behavior, relationship satisfaction, and gender were included as predictors.In the second block, frequency of login, SNS intensity, SNS use for profile maintenance, and SNS use for grooming were entered, and finally need for popularity was entered in the third block.Blockwise entering of the variables allowed us to detect whether the indicators of SNS use and need for popularity explained additional variance over and above the relationship variables and gender.

It may state two separate claims as one.

A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.

§ The Role of Social Network Sites in Romantic Relationships: Effects on Jealousy and Relationship Happiness > Descriptive analysis Table 1 displays the means and standard deviations as well as the intercorrelations between the measures.Respondents stated to be more likely to experience SNS relationship happiness 64.1 14.6 3.9 6.8 7.8 1.9 1.0 (M = 4.73, SD = 1.32) than SNS jealousy (M = 2.83, SD = 1.19), t(80) = -12.14,p < .001.Note that the scales did not assess the likelihood of events (e.g., partner posts a comment on the wall of an ex), but the likelihood to experience happiness or jealousy when the partner showed a specific behavior.Low self-esteem individuals reported to experience more SNS jealousy (M = 3.07, SD = 1.13) than high-self-esteem individuals (M = 2.56, SD = 1.21), t(79) = 1.94, p < .05,one-tailed.Low-and highself-esteem individuals did not differ in SNS relationship happiness (Ms = 4.70, SD = 1.26, vs. 4.75, SD = 1.41, ns).The scores on monitoring behavior indicate that about half of the participants reported that they engage in monitoring behavior at least every now and then.Nevertheless, as Table 2 shows, 70-80% of all respondents reported that they never or almost never searched their partners bags, or secretly read the text messages or e-mails they sent to somebody else.Only 10 to 17% had scores of 5 or higher.In contrast, the scores for SNS monitoring behavior were much higher (see Table 3).Table 3 shows that on the first three items about SNS monitoring, 30 to 35% of the respondents had an answer score of 5 or higher.Roughly 35% of the respondents reported that they were likely to visit their partners profile regularly.30% reported that they would check their partner's profile if they were suspicious, and another 30% reported that they were likely to monitor the profile of the partner on a regular basis.Only the item ''add your partner's friends to your SNS to keep tabs on your partner'' received similar rejection rates as the items of the monitoring behavior scale.These descriptive results provide an answer to RQ1.They indicate that monitoring the partner on a SNS might be more common and apparently socially more accepted than monitoring the partner offline.Hypotheses testing SNS jealousy.The first four hypotheses predicted that SNS jealousy would be related to trait jealousy (H1), monitoring behavior (H2), SNS use, especially use for grooming (H3), and need for popularity (H4).H6 expected a negative relationship with relationship satisfaction.To test the hypotheses these variables were simultaneously entered as predictors in a regression analysis, in which we also controlled for gender.The model explained 57% of the variance of SNS jealousy, F(9,71) = 12.82, p < .001.Trait jealousy was a marginally significant predictor of SNS jealousy, β = .16,p = .06.Monitoring behavior, β = .40,p < .01,and need for popularity, β = .33,p < .01,significantly predicted SNS jealousy, whereas the different types of SNS use (profile maintenance and grooming) and relationship satisfaction failed to reach significance, all ts < 1.61.The results support H1, H2, and H4. To examine the moderating role of self-esteem, separate regressions with SNS jealousy as dependent variable were calculated for low-and high-self-esteem subjects.In the first block, trait jealousy, monitoring behavior, relationship satisfaction, and gender were included as predictors.In the second block, frequency of login, SNS intensity, SNS use for profile maintenance, and SNS use for grooming were entered, and finally need for popularity was entered in the third block.Blockwise entering of the variables allowed us to detect whether the indicators of SNS use and need for popularity explained additional variance over and above the relationship variables and gender.

It may state two separate claims as one.

A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.

§ The Role of Social Network Sites in Romantic Relationships: Effects on Jealousy and Relationship Happiness > Strengths and limitations

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.

§ The Role of Social Network Sites in Romantic Relationships: Effects on Jealousy and Relationship Happiness > SNS relationship happiness.

It may state two separate claims as one.

A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.

§ The Role of Social Network Sites in Romantic Relationships: Effects on Jealousy and Relationship Happiness > Descriptive analysis Table 1 displays the means and standard deviations as well as the intercorrelations between the measures.Respondents stated to be more likely to experience SNS relationship happiness 64.1 14.6 3.9 6.8 7.8 1.9 1.0 (M = 4.73, SD = 1.32) than SNS jealousy (M = 2.83, SD = 1.19), t(80) = -12.14,p < .001.Note that the scales did not assess the likelihood of events (e.g., partner posts a comment on the wall of an ex), but the likelihood to experience happiness or jealousy when the partner showed a specific behavior.Low self-esteem individuals reported to experience more SNS jealousy (M = 3.07, SD = 1.13) than high-self-esteem individuals (M = 2.56, SD = 1.21), t(79) = 1.94, p < .05,one-tailed.Low-and highself-esteem individuals did not differ in SNS relationship happiness (Ms = 4.70, SD = 1.26, vs. 4.75, SD = 1.41, ns).The scores on monitoring behavior indicate that about half of the participants reported that they engage in monitoring behavior at least every now and then.Nevertheless, as Table 2 shows, 70-80% of all respondents reported that they never or almost never searched their partners bags, or secretly read the text messages or e-mails they sent to somebody else.Only 10 to 17% had scores of 5 or higher.In contrast, the scores for SNS monitoring behavior were much higher (see Table 3).Table 3 shows that on the first three items about SNS monitoring, 30 to 35% of the respondents had an answer score of 5 or higher.Roughly 35% of the respondents reported that they were likely to visit their partners profile regularly.30% reported that they would check their partner's profile if they were suspicious, and another 30% reported that they were likely to monitor the profile of the partner on a regular basis.Only the item ''add your partner's friends to your SNS to keep tabs on your partner'' received similar rejection rates as the items of the monitoring behavior scale.These descriptive results provide an answer to RQ1.They indicate that monitoring the partner on a SNS might be more common and apparently socially more accepted than monitoring the partner offline.Hypotheses testing SNS jealousy.The first four hypotheses predicted that SNS jealousy would be related to trait jealousy (H1), monitoring behavior (H2), SNS use, especially use for grooming (H3), and need for popularity (H4).H6 expected a negative relationship with relationship satisfaction.To test the hypotheses these variables were simultaneously entered as predictors in a regression analysis, in which we also controlled for gender.The model explained 57% of the variance of SNS jealousy, F(9,71) = 12.82, p < .001.Trait jealousy was a marginally significant predictor of SNS jealousy, β = .16,p = .06.Monitoring behavior, β = .40,p < .01,and need for popularity, β = .33,p < .01,significantly predicted SNS jealousy, whereas the different types of SNS use (profile maintenance and grooming) and relationship satisfaction failed to reach significance, all ts < 1.61.The results support H1, H2, and H4. To examine the moderating role of self-esteem, separate regressions with SNS jealousy as dependent variable were calculated for low-and high-self-esteem subjects.In the first block, trait jealousy, monitoring behavior, relationship satisfaction, and gender were included as predictors.In the second block, frequency of login, SNS intensity, SNS use for profile maintenance, and SNS use for grooming were entered, and finally need for popularity was entered in the third block.Blockwise entering of the variables allowed us to detect whether the indicators of SNS use and need for popularity explained additional variance over and above the relationship variables and gender.

It may state two separate claims as one.

A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.

§ The Role of Social Network Sites in Romantic Relationships: Effects on Jealousy and Relationship Happiness > SNS relationship happiness.

It may state two separate claims as one.

A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.

§ The Role of Social Network Sites in Romantic Relationships: Effects on Jealousy and Relationship Happiness > Descriptive analysis Table 1 displays the means and standard deviations as well as the intercorrelations between the measures.Respondents stated to be more likely to experience SNS relationship happiness 64.1 14.6 3.9 6.8 7.8 1.9 1.0 (M = 4.73, SD = 1.32) than SNS jealousy (M = 2.83, SD = 1.19), t(80) = -12.14,p < .001.Note that the scales did not assess the likelihood of events (e.g., partner posts a comment on the wall of an ex), but the likelihood to experience happiness or jealousy when the partner showed a specific behavior.Low self-esteem individuals reported to experience more SNS jealousy (M = 3.07, SD = 1.13) than high-self-esteem individuals (M = 2.56, SD = 1.21), t(79) = 1.94, p < .05,one-tailed.Low-and highself-esteem individuals did not differ in SNS relationship happiness (Ms = 4.70, SD = 1.26, vs. 4.75, SD = 1.41, ns).The scores on monitoring behavior indicate that about half of the participants reported that they engage in monitoring behavior at least every now and then.Nevertheless, as Table 2 shows, 70-80% of all respondents reported that they never or almost never searched their partners bags, or secretly read the text messages or e-mails they sent to somebody else.Only 10 to 17% had scores of 5 or higher.In contrast, the scores for SNS monitoring behavior were much higher (see Table 3).Table 3 shows that on the first three items about SNS monitoring, 30 to 35% of the respondents had an answer score of 5 or higher.Roughly 35% of the respondents reported that they were likely to visit their partners profile regularly.30% reported that they would check their partner's profile if they were suspicious, and another 30% reported that they were likely to monitor the profile of the partner on a regular basis.Only the item ''add your partner's friends to your SNS to keep tabs on your partner'' received similar rejection rates as the items of the monitoring behavior scale.These descriptive results provide an answer to RQ1.They indicate that monitoring the partner on a SNS might be more common and apparently socially more accepted than monitoring the partner offline.Hypotheses testing SNS jealousy.The first four hypotheses predicted that SNS jealousy would be related to trait jealousy (H1), monitoring behavior (H2), SNS use, especially use for grooming (H3), and need for popularity (H4).H6 expected a negative relationship with relationship satisfaction.To test the hypotheses these variables were simultaneously entered as predictors in a regression analysis, in which we also controlled for gender.The model explained 57% of the variance of SNS jealousy, F(9,71) = 12.82, p < .001.Trait jealousy was a marginally significant predictor of SNS jealousy, β = .16,p = .06.Monitoring behavior, β = .40,p < .01,and need for popularity, β = .33,p < .01,significantly predicted SNS jealousy, whereas the different types of SNS use (profile maintenance and grooming) and relationship satisfaction failed to reach significance, all ts < 1.61.The results support H1, H2, and H4. To examine the moderating role of self-esteem, separate regressions with SNS jealousy as dependent variable were calculated for low-and high-self-esteem subjects.In the first block, trait jealousy, monitoring behavior, relationship satisfaction, and gender were included as predictors.In the second block, frequency of login, SNS intensity, SNS use for profile maintenance, and SNS use for grooming were entered, and finally need for popularity was entered in the third block.Blockwise entering of the variables allowed us to detect whether the indicators of SNS use and need for popularity explained additional variance over and above the relationship variables and gender.

It may state two separate claims as one.

A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.

§ The Role of Social Network Sites in Romantic Relationships: Effects on Jealousy and Relationship Happiness > Descriptive analysis Table 1 displays the means and standard deviations as well as the intercorrelations between the measures.Respondents stated to be more likely to experience SNS relationship happiness 64.1 14.6 3.9 6.8 7.8 1.9 1.0 (M = 4.73, SD = 1.32) than SNS jealousy (M = 2.83, SD = 1.19), t(80) = -12.14,p < .001.Note that the scales did not assess the likelihood of events (e.g., partner posts a comment on the wall of an ex), but the likelihood to experience happiness or jealousy when the partner showed a specific behavior.Low self-esteem individuals reported to experience more SNS jealousy (M = 3.07, SD = 1.13) than high-self-esteem individuals (M = 2.56, SD = 1.21), t(79) = 1.94, p < .05,one-tailed.Low-and highself-esteem individuals did not differ in SNS relationship happiness (Ms = 4.70, SD = 1.26, vs. 4.75, SD = 1.41, ns).The scores on monitoring behavior indicate that about half of the participants reported that they engage in monitoring behavior at least every now and then.Nevertheless, as Table 2 shows, 70-80% of all respondents reported that they never or almost never searched their partners bags, or secretly read the text messages or e-mails they sent to somebody else.Only 10 to 17% had scores of 5 or higher.In contrast, the scores for SNS monitoring behavior were much higher (see Table 3).Table 3 shows that on the first three items about SNS monitoring, 30 to 35% of the respondents had an answer score of 5 or higher.Roughly 35% of the respondents reported that they were likely to visit their partners profile regularly.30% reported that they would check their partner's profile if they were suspicious, and another 30% reported that they were likely to monitor the profile of the partner on a regular basis.Only the item ''add your partner's friends to your SNS to keep tabs on your partner'' received similar rejection rates as the items of the monitoring behavior scale.These descriptive results provide an answer to RQ1.They indicate that monitoring the partner on a SNS might be more common and apparently socially more accepted than monitoring the partner offline.Hypotheses testing SNS jealousy.The first four hypotheses predicted that SNS jealousy would be related to trait jealousy (H1), monitoring behavior (H2), SNS use, especially use for grooming (H3), and need for popularity (H4).H6 expected a negative relationship with relationship satisfaction.To test the hypotheses these variables were simultaneously entered as predictors in a regression analysis, in which we also controlled for gender.The model explained 57% of the variance of SNS jealousy, F(9,71) = 12.82, p < .001.Trait jealousy was a marginally significant predictor of SNS jealousy, β = .16,p = .06.Monitoring behavior, β = .40,p < .01,and need for popularity, β = .33,p < .01,significantly predicted SNS jealousy, whereas the different types of SNS use (profile maintenance and grooming) and relationship satisfaction failed to reach significance, all ts < 1.61.The results support H1, H2, and H4. To examine the moderating role of self-esteem, separate regressions with SNS jealousy as dependent variable were calculated for low-and high-self-esteem subjects.In the first block, trait jealousy, monitoring behavior, relationship satisfaction, and gender were included as predictors.In the second block, frequency of login, SNS intensity, SNS use for profile maintenance, and SNS use for grooming were entered, and finally need for popularity was entered in the third block.Blockwise entering of the variables allowed us to detect whether the indicators of SNS use and need for popularity explained additional variance over and above the relationship variables and gender.

The quote only partly states this claim.

A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.

§ The Role of Social Network Sites in Romantic Relationships: Effects on Jealousy and Relationship Happiness > Discussion

It may state two separate claims as one.

A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.

§ The Role of Social Network Sites in Romantic Relationships: Effects on Jealousy and Relationship Happiness > Discussion

It may state two separate claims as one.

A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.

§ The Role of Social Network Sites in Romantic Relationships: Effects on Jealousy and Relationship Happiness > SNS jealousy.

It may state two separate claims as one.

A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.

§ The Role of Social Network Sites in Romantic Relationships: Effects on Jealousy and Relationship Happiness > Descriptive analysis Table 1 displays the means and standard deviations as well as the intercorrelations between the measures.Respondents stated to be more likely to experience SNS relationship happiness 64.1 14.6 3.9 6.8 7.8 1.9 1.0 (M = 4.73, SD = 1.32) than SNS jealousy (M = 2.83, SD = 1.19), t(80) = -12.14,p < .001.Note that the scales did not assess the likelihood of events (e.g., partner posts a comment on the wall of an ex), but the likelihood to experience happiness or jealousy when the partner showed a specific behavior.Low self-esteem individuals reported to experience more SNS jealousy (M = 3.07, SD = 1.13) than high-self-esteem individuals (M = 2.56, SD = 1.21), t(79) = 1.94, p < .05,one-tailed.Low-and highself-esteem individuals did not differ in SNS relationship happiness (Ms = 4.70, SD = 1.26, vs. 4.75, SD = 1.41, ns).The scores on monitoring behavior indicate that about half of the participants reported that they engage in monitoring behavior at least every now and then.Nevertheless, as Table 2 shows, 70-80% of all respondents reported that they never or almost never searched their partners bags, or secretly read the text messages or e-mails they sent to somebody else.Only 10 to 17% had scores of 5 or higher.In contrast, the scores for SNS monitoring behavior were much higher (see Table 3).Table 3 shows that on the first three items about SNS monitoring, 30 to 35% of the respondents had an answer score of 5 or higher.Roughly 35% of the respondents reported that they were likely to visit their partners profile regularly.30% reported that they would check their partner's profile if they were suspicious, and another 30% reported that they were likely to monitor the profile of the partner on a regular basis.Only the item ''add your partner's friends to your SNS to keep tabs on your partner'' received similar rejection rates as the items of the monitoring behavior scale.These descriptive results provide an answer to RQ1.They indicate that monitoring the partner on a SNS might be more common and apparently socially more accepted than monitoring the partner offline.Hypotheses testing SNS jealousy.The first four hypotheses predicted that SNS jealousy would be related to trait jealousy (H1), monitoring behavior (H2), SNS use, especially use for grooming (H3), and need for popularity (H4).H6 expected a negative relationship with relationship satisfaction.To test the hypotheses these variables were simultaneously entered as predictors in a regression analysis, in which we also controlled for gender.The model explained 57% of the variance of SNS jealousy, F(9,71) = 12.82, p < .001.Trait jealousy was a marginally significant predictor of SNS jealousy, β = .16,p = .06.Monitoring behavior, β = .40,p < .01,and need for popularity, β = .33,p < .01,significantly predicted SNS jealousy, whereas the different types of SNS use (profile maintenance and grooming) and relationship satisfaction failed to reach significance, all ts < 1.61.The results support H1, H2, and H4. To examine the moderating role of self-esteem, separate regressions with SNS jealousy as dependent variable were calculated for low-and high-self-esteem subjects.In the first block, trait jealousy, monitoring behavior, relationship satisfaction, and gender were included as predictors.In the second block, frequency of login, SNS intensity, SNS use for profile maintenance, and SNS use for grooming were entered, and finally need for popularity was entered in the third block.Blockwise entering of the variables allowed us to detect whether the indicators of SNS use and need for popularity explained additional variance over and above the relationship variables and gender.

It may state two separate claims as one.

A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.

§ The Role of Social Network Sites in Romantic Relationships: Effects on Jealousy and Relationship Happiness > SNS relationship happiness.

It may state two separate claims as one.

A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.

§ The Role of Social Network Sites in Romantic Relationships: Effects on Jealousy and Relationship Happiness > Descriptive analysis Table 1 displays the means and standard deviations as well as the intercorrelations between the measures.Respondents stated to be more likely to experience SNS relationship happiness 64.1 14.6 3.9 6.8 7.8 1.9 1.0 (M = 4.73, SD = 1.32) than SNS jealousy (M = 2.83, SD = 1.19), t(80) = -12.14,p < .001.Note that the scales did not assess the likelihood of events (e.g., partner posts a comment on the wall of an ex), but the likelihood to experience happiness or jealousy when the partner showed a specific behavior.Low self-esteem individuals reported to experience more SNS jealousy (M = 3.07, SD = 1.13) than high-self-esteem individuals (M = 2.56, SD = 1.21), t(79) = 1.94, p < .05,one-tailed.Low-and highself-esteem individuals did not differ in SNS relationship happiness (Ms = 4.70, SD = 1.26, vs. 4.75, SD = 1.41, ns).The scores on monitoring behavior indicate that about half of the participants reported that they engage in monitoring behavior at least every now and then.Nevertheless, as Table 2 shows, 70-80% of all respondents reported that they never or almost never searched their partners bags, or secretly read the text messages or e-mails they sent to somebody else.Only 10 to 17% had scores of 5 or higher.In contrast, the scores for SNS monitoring behavior were much higher (see Table 3).Table 3 shows that on the first three items about SNS monitoring, 30 to 35% of the respondents had an answer score of 5 or higher.Roughly 35% of the respondents reported that they were likely to visit their partners profile regularly.30% reported that they would check their partner's profile if they were suspicious, and another 30% reported that they were likely to monitor the profile of the partner on a regular basis.Only the item ''add your partner's friends to your SNS to keep tabs on your partner'' received similar rejection rates as the items of the monitoring behavior scale.These descriptive results provide an answer to RQ1.They indicate that monitoring the partner on a SNS might be more common and apparently socially more accepted than monitoring the partner offline.Hypotheses testing SNS jealousy.The first four hypotheses predicted that SNS jealousy would be related to trait jealousy (H1), monitoring behavior (H2), SNS use, especially use for grooming (H3), and need for popularity (H4).H6 expected a negative relationship with relationship satisfaction.To test the hypotheses these variables were simultaneously entered as predictors in a regression analysis, in which we also controlled for gender.The model explained 57% of the variance of SNS jealousy, F(9,71) = 12.82, p < .001.Trait jealousy was a marginally significant predictor of SNS jealousy, β = .16,p = .06.Monitoring behavior, β = .40,p < .01,and need for popularity, β = .33,p < .01,significantly predicted SNS jealousy, whereas the different types of SNS use (profile maintenance and grooming) and relationship satisfaction failed to reach significance, all ts < 1.61.The results support H1, H2, and H4. To examine the moderating role of self-esteem, separate regressions with SNS jealousy as dependent variable were calculated for low-and high-self-esteem subjects.In the first block, trait jealousy, monitoring behavior, relationship satisfaction, and gender were included as predictors.In the second block, frequency of login, SNS intensity, SNS use for profile maintenance, and SNS use for grooming were entered, and finally need for popularity was entered in the third block.Blockwise entering of the variables allowed us to detect whether the indicators of SNS use and need for popularity explained additional variance over and above the relationship variables and gender.

It may state two separate claims as one.

A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.

§ The Role of Social Network Sites in Romantic Relationships: Effects on Jealousy and Relationship Happiness > Descriptive analysis Table 1 displays the means and standard deviations as well as the intercorrelations between the measures.Respondents stated to be more likely to experience SNS relationship happiness 64.1 14.6 3.9 6.8 7.8 1.9 1.0 (M = 4.73, SD = 1.32) than SNS jealousy (M = 2.83, SD = 1.19), t(80) = -12.14,p < .001.Note that the scales did not assess the likelihood of events (e.g., partner posts a comment on the wall of an ex), but the likelihood to experience happiness or jealousy when the partner showed a specific behavior.Low self-esteem individuals reported to experience more SNS jealousy (M = 3.07, SD = 1.13) than high-self-esteem individuals (M = 2.56, SD = 1.21), t(79) = 1.94, p < .05,one-tailed.Low-and highself-esteem individuals did not differ in SNS relationship happiness (Ms = 4.70, SD = 1.26, vs. 4.75, SD = 1.41, ns).The scores on monitoring behavior indicate that about half of the participants reported that they engage in monitoring behavior at least every now and then.Nevertheless, as Table 2 shows, 70-80% of all respondents reported that they never or almost never searched their partners bags, or secretly read the text messages or e-mails they sent to somebody else.Only 10 to 17% had scores of 5 or higher.In contrast, the scores for SNS monitoring behavior were much higher (see Table 3).Table 3 shows that on the first three items about SNS monitoring, 30 to 35% of the respondents had an answer score of 5 or higher.Roughly 35% of the respondents reported that they were likely to visit their partners profile regularly.30% reported that they would check their partner's profile if they were suspicious, and another 30% reported that they were likely to monitor the profile of the partner on a regular basis.Only the item ''add your partner's friends to your SNS to keep tabs on your partner'' received similar rejection rates as the items of the monitoring behavior scale.These descriptive results provide an answer to RQ1.They indicate that monitoring the partner on a SNS might be more common and apparently socially more accepted than monitoring the partner offline.Hypotheses testing SNS jealousy.The first four hypotheses predicted that SNS jealousy would be related to trait jealousy (H1), monitoring behavior (H2), SNS use, especially use for grooming (H3), and need for popularity (H4).H6 expected a negative relationship with relationship satisfaction.To test the hypotheses these variables were simultaneously entered as predictors in a regression analysis, in which we also controlled for gender.The model explained 57% of the variance of SNS jealousy, F(9,71) = 12.82, p < .001.Trait jealousy was a marginally significant predictor of SNS jealousy, β = .16,p = .06.Monitoring behavior, β = .40,p < .01,and need for popularity, β = .33,p < .01,significantly predicted SNS jealousy, whereas the different types of SNS use (profile maintenance and grooming) and relationship satisfaction failed to reach significance, all ts < 1.61.The results support H1, H2, and H4. To examine the moderating role of self-esteem, separate regressions with SNS jealousy as dependent variable were calculated for low-and high-self-esteem subjects.In the first block, trait jealousy, monitoring behavior, relationship satisfaction, and gender were included as predictors.In the second block, frequency of login, SNS intensity, SNS use for profile maintenance, and SNS use for grooming were entered, and finally need for popularity was entered in the third block.Blockwise entering of the variables allowed us to detect whether the indicators of SNS use and need for popularity explained additional variance over and above the relationship variables and gender.

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.

§ The Role of Social Network Sites in Romantic Relationships: Effects on Jealousy and Relationship Happiness > SNS jealousy.

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.

§ The Role of Social Network Sites in Romantic Relationships: Effects on Jealousy and Relationship Happiness > Strengths and limitations

It may state two separate claims as one.

A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.

§ The Role of Social Network Sites in Romantic Relationships: Effects on Jealousy and Relationship Happiness > Theoretical contributions

It may state two separate claims as one.

A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.

§ The Role of Social Network Sites in Romantic Relationships: Effects on Jealousy and Relationship Happiness > Descriptive analysis Table 1 displays the means and standard deviations as well as the intercorrelations between the measures.Respondents stated to be more likely to experience SNS relationship happiness 64.1 14.6 3.9 6.8 7.8 1.9 1.0 (M = 4.73, SD = 1.32) than SNS jealousy (M = 2.83, SD = 1.19), t(80) = -12.14,p < .001.Note that the scales did not assess the likelihood of events (e.g., partner posts a comment on the wall of an ex), but the likelihood to experience happiness or jealousy when the partner showed a specific behavior.Low self-esteem individuals reported to experience more SNS jealousy (M = 3.07, SD = 1.13) than high-self-esteem individuals (M = 2.56, SD = 1.21), t(79) = 1.94, p < .05,one-tailed.Low-and highself-esteem individuals did not differ in SNS relationship happiness (Ms = 4.70, SD = 1.26, vs. 4.75, SD = 1.41, ns).The scores on monitoring behavior indicate that about half of the participants reported that they engage in monitoring behavior at least every now and then.Nevertheless, as Table 2 shows, 70-80% of all respondents reported that they never or almost never searched their partners bags, or secretly read the text messages or e-mails they sent to somebody else.Only 10 to 17% had scores of 5 or higher.In contrast, the scores for SNS monitoring behavior were much higher (see Table 3).Table 3 shows that on the first three items about SNS monitoring, 30 to 35% of the respondents had an answer score of 5 or higher.Roughly 35% of the respondents reported that they were likely to visit their partners profile regularly.30% reported that they would check their partner's profile if they were suspicious, and another 30% reported that they were likely to monitor the profile of the partner on a regular basis.Only the item ''add your partner's friends to your SNS to keep tabs on your partner'' received similar rejection rates as the items of the monitoring behavior scale.These descriptive results provide an answer to RQ1.They indicate that monitoring the partner on a SNS might be more common and apparently socially more accepted than monitoring the partner offline.Hypotheses testing SNS jealousy.The first four hypotheses predicted that SNS jealousy would be related to trait jealousy (H1), monitoring behavior (H2), SNS use, especially use for grooming (H3), and need for popularity (H4).H6 expected a negative relationship with relationship satisfaction.To test the hypotheses these variables were simultaneously entered as predictors in a regression analysis, in which we also controlled for gender.The model explained 57% of the variance of SNS jealousy, F(9,71) = 12.82, p < .001.Trait jealousy was a marginally significant predictor of SNS jealousy, β = .16,p = .06.Monitoring behavior, β = .40,p < .01,and need for popularity, β = .33,p < .01,significantly predicted SNS jealousy, whereas the different types of SNS use (profile maintenance and grooming) and relationship satisfaction failed to reach significance, all ts < 1.61.The results support H1, H2, and H4. To examine the moderating role of self-esteem, separate regressions with SNS jealousy as dependent variable were calculated for low-and high-self-esteem subjects.In the first block, trait jealousy, monitoring behavior, relationship satisfaction, and gender were included as predictors.In the second block, frequency of login, SNS intensity, SNS use for profile maintenance, and SNS use for grooming were entered, and finally need for popularity was entered in the third block.Blockwise entering of the variables allowed us to detect whether the indicators of SNS use and need for popularity explained additional variance over and above the relationship variables and gender.

It may state two separate claims as one.

A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.

§ The Role of Social Network Sites in Romantic Relationships: Effects on Jealousy and Relationship Happiness > Descriptive analysis Table 1 displays the means and standard deviations as well as the intercorrelations between the measures.Respondents stated to be more likely to experience SNS relationship happiness 64.1 14.6 3.9 6.8 7.8 1.9 1.0 (M = 4.73, SD = 1.32) than SNS jealousy (M = 2.83, SD = 1.19), t(80) = -12.14,p < .001.Note that the scales did not assess the likelihood of events (e.g., partner posts a comment on the wall of an ex), but the likelihood to experience happiness or jealousy when the partner showed a specific behavior.Low self-esteem individuals reported to experience more SNS jealousy (M = 3.07, SD = 1.13) than high-self-esteem individuals (M = 2.56, SD = 1.21), t(79) = 1.94, p < .05,one-tailed.Low-and highself-esteem individuals did not differ in SNS relationship happiness (Ms = 4.70, SD = 1.26, vs. 4.75, SD = 1.41, ns).The scores on monitoring behavior indicate that about half of the participants reported that they engage in monitoring behavior at least every now and then.Nevertheless, as Table 2 shows, 70-80% of all respondents reported that they never or almost never searched their partners bags, or secretly read the text messages or e-mails they sent to somebody else.Only 10 to 17% had scores of 5 or higher.In contrast, the scores for SNS monitoring behavior were much higher (see Table 3).Table 3 shows that on the first three items about SNS monitoring, 30 to 35% of the respondents had an answer score of 5 or higher.Roughly 35% of the respondents reported that they were likely to visit their partners profile regularly.30% reported that they would check their partner's profile if they were suspicious, and another 30% reported that they were likely to monitor the profile of the partner on a regular basis.Only the item ''add your partner's friends to your SNS to keep tabs on your partner'' received similar rejection rates as the items of the monitoring behavior scale.These descriptive results provide an answer to RQ1.They indicate that monitoring the partner on a SNS might be more common and apparently socially more accepted than monitoring the partner offline.Hypotheses testing SNS jealousy.The first four hypotheses predicted that SNS jealousy would be related to trait jealousy (H1), monitoring behavior (H2), SNS use, especially use for grooming (H3), and need for popularity (H4).H6 expected a negative relationship with relationship satisfaction.To test the hypotheses these variables were simultaneously entered as predictors in a regression analysis, in which we also controlled for gender.The model explained 57% of the variance of SNS jealousy, F(9,71) = 12.82, p < .001.Trait jealousy was a marginally significant predictor of SNS jealousy, β = .16,p = .06.Monitoring behavior, β = .40,p < .01,and need for popularity, β = .33,p < .01,significantly predicted SNS jealousy, whereas the different types of SNS use (profile maintenance and grooming) and relationship satisfaction failed to reach significance, all ts < 1.61.The results support H1, H2, and H4. To examine the moderating role of self-esteem, separate regressions with SNS jealousy as dependent variable were calculated for low-and high-self-esteem subjects.In the first block, trait jealousy, monitoring behavior, relationship satisfaction, and gender were included as predictors.In the second block, frequency of login, SNS intensity, SNS use for profile maintenance, and SNS use for grooming were entered, and finally need for popularity was entered in the third block.Blockwise entering of the variables allowed us to detect whether the indicators of SNS use and need for popularity explained additional variance over and above the relationship variables and gender.

It may state two separate claims as one.

§ The Role of Social Network Sites in Romantic Relationships: Effects on Jealousy and Relationship Happiness > Jealousy

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.

§ The Role of Social Network Sites in Romantic Relationships: Effects on Jealousy and Relationship Happiness > SNS use and jealousy

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

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.

§ The Role of Social Network Sites in Romantic Relationships: Effects on Jealousy and Relationship Happiness > Introduction Seeing that the romantic partner leaves comments on the Facebook wall of an attractive member of the opposite sex can induce jealousy (Muise, Christofides, & Desmarais, 2009).But if the partner publicly displays his or her affection on a social network site (SNS), can this also increase relationship happiness?And to what extent are these effects moderated by self-esteem?These are the central questions of this paper.SNS have become part of everyday life for many people.Research has mainly focused on self-presentation, privacy settings, or the consequences of SNS use for bridging and bonding capital (Buffardi & Campbell, 2008;Ellison, Steinfield, & Lampe, 2007;Krämer & Winter, 2008;Siibak, 2009;Steinfield, Ellison, & Lampe, 2008;Utz & Krämer, 2009).Up till now, relatively little research has focused on the effects of SNS on romantic relationships.Muise et al. (2009) brought the attention to a negative effect Facebook use might have: increasing jealousy.The access to the partner's profile provides people with information they did not have before SNS came up; Muise et al. ( 2009) showed that people can become jealous if they see their partner interacting with potential romantic partners on Facebook.Although Facebook jealousy was mainly determined by trait jealousy, there was an additional effect of time spent on Facebook, indicating that SNS increase feelings of jealousy.The present paper builds on this research and extends it in several ways.First, the focus is not only on negative effects of SNS use on romantic relationships, but also on positive effects.Second, the paper focuses on the moderating role of self-esteem and examines the role of need for popularity.

Probably not a substantial claim.

§ The Role of Social Network Sites in Romantic Relationships: Effects on Jealousy and Relationship Happiness > SNS use and jealousy

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

§ The Role of Social Network Sites in Romantic Relationships: Effects on Jealousy and Relationship Happiness > SNS use and jealousy

Probably not a substantial claim.

§ The Role of Social Network Sites in Romantic Relationships: Effects on Jealousy and Relationship Happiness > SNS and romantic relationships: What is new?

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.

§ The Role of Social Network Sites in Romantic Relationships: Effects on Jealousy and Relationship Happiness > SNS use and jealousy

Probably not a substantial claim.

§ The Role of Social Network Sites in Romantic Relationships: Effects on Jealousy and Relationship Happiness > SNS use and jealousy

Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.

§ The Role of Social Network Sites in Romantic Relationships: Effects on Jealousy and Relationship Happiness > SNS and romantic relationships: What is new?

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.

§ The Role of Social Network Sites in Romantic Relationships: Effects on Jealousy and Relationship Happiness > SNS and romantic relationships: What is new?

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

§ The Role of Social Network Sites in Romantic Relationships: Effects on Jealousy and Relationship Happiness > Introduction Seeing that the romantic partner leaves comments on the Facebook wall of an attractive member of the opposite sex can induce jealousy (Muise, Christofides, & Desmarais, 2009).But if the partner publicly displays his or her affection on a social network site (SNS), can this also increase relationship happiness?And to what extent are these effects moderated by self-esteem?These are the central questions of this paper.SNS have become part of everyday life for many people.Research has mainly focused on self-presentation, privacy settings, or the consequences of SNS use for bridging and bonding capital (Buffardi & Campbell, 2008;Ellison, Steinfield, & Lampe, 2007;Krämer & Winter, 2008;Siibak, 2009;Steinfield, Ellison, & Lampe, 2008;Utz & Krämer, 2009).Up till now, relatively little research has focused on the effects of SNS on romantic relationships.Muise et al. (2009) brought the attention to a negative effect Facebook use might have: increasing jealousy.The access to the partner's profile provides people with information they did not have before SNS came up; Muise et al. ( 2009) showed that people can become jealous if they see their partner interacting with potential romantic partners on Facebook.Although Facebook jealousy was mainly determined by trait jealousy, there was an additional effect of time spent on Facebook, indicating that SNS increase feelings of jealousy.The present paper builds on this research and extends it in several ways.First, the focus is not only on negative effects of SNS use on romantic relationships, but also on positive effects.Second, the paper focuses on the moderating role of self-esteem and examines the role of need for popularity.

Probably not a substantial claim.

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.

§ The Role of Social Network Sites in Romantic Relationships: Effects on Jealousy and Relationship Happiness > Jealousy

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. 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.

§ The Role of Social Network Sites in Romantic Relationships: Effects on Jealousy and Relationship Happiness > SNS and romantic relationships: What is new?

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.

§ The Role of Social Network Sites in Romantic Relationships: Effects on Jealousy and Relationship Happiness > Jealousy

Probably not a substantial claim.

§ The Role of Social Network Sites in Romantic Relationships: Effects on Jealousy and Relationship Happiness > Introduction Seeing that the romantic partner leaves comments on the Facebook wall of an attractive member of the opposite sex can induce jealousy (Muise, Christofides, & Desmarais, 2009).But if the partner publicly displays his or her affection on a social network site (SNS), can this also increase relationship happiness?And to what extent are these effects moderated by self-esteem?These are the central questions of this paper.SNS have become part of everyday life for many people.Research has mainly focused on self-presentation, privacy settings, or the consequences of SNS use for bridging and bonding capital (Buffardi & Campbell, 2008;Ellison, Steinfield, & Lampe, 2007;Krämer & Winter, 2008;Siibak, 2009;Steinfield, Ellison, & Lampe, 2008;Utz & Krämer, 2009).Up till now, relatively little research has focused on the effects of SNS on romantic relationships.Muise et al. (2009) brought the attention to a negative effect Facebook use might have: increasing jealousy.The access to the partner's profile provides people with information they did not have before SNS came up; Muise et al. ( 2009) showed that people can become jealous if they see their partner interacting with potential romantic partners on Facebook.Although Facebook jealousy was mainly determined by trait jealousy, there was an additional effect of time spent on Facebook, indicating that SNS increase feelings of jealousy.The present paper builds on this research and extends it in several ways.First, the focus is not only on negative effects of SNS use on romantic relationships, but also on positive effects.Second, the paper focuses on the moderating role of self-esteem and examines the role of need for popularity.

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

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.

§ The Role of Social Network Sites in Romantic Relationships: Effects on Jealousy and Relationship Happiness > SNS and romantic relationships: What is new?

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no 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.

§ The Role of Social Network Sites in Romantic Relationships: Effects on Jealousy and Relationship Happiness > SNS and romantic relationships: What is new?

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.

§ The Role of Social Network Sites in Romantic Relationships: Effects on Jealousy and Relationship Happiness > SNS use and jealousy

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. 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.

§ The Role of Social Network Sites in Romantic Relationships: Effects on Jealousy and Relationship Happiness > Abstract

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.

§ The Role of Social Network Sites in Romantic Relationships: Effects on Jealousy and Relationship Happiness > SNS and romantic relationships: What is new?

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.

§ The Role of Social Network Sites in Romantic Relationships: Effects on Jealousy and Relationship Happiness > Abstract

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.

§ The Role of Social Network Sites in Romantic Relationships: Effects on Jealousy and Relationship Happiness > SNS and romantic relationships: What is new?

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

§ The Role of Social Network Sites in Romantic Relationships: Effects on Jealousy and Relationship Happiness > SNS use and jealousy

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.

§ The Role of Social Network Sites in Romantic Relationships: Effects on Jealousy and Relationship Happiness > Introduction Seeing that the romantic partner leaves comments on the Facebook wall of an attractive member of the opposite sex can induce jealousy (Muise, Christofides, & Desmarais, 2009).But if the partner publicly displays his or her affection on a social network site (SNS), can this also increase relationship happiness?And to what extent are these effects moderated by self-esteem?These are the central questions of this paper.SNS have become part of everyday life for many people.Research has mainly focused on self-presentation, privacy settings, or the consequences of SNS use for bridging and bonding capital (Buffardi & Campbell, 2008;Ellison, Steinfield, & Lampe, 2007;Krämer & Winter, 2008;Siibak, 2009;Steinfield, Ellison, & Lampe, 2008;Utz & Krämer, 2009).Up till now, relatively little research has focused on the effects of SNS on romantic relationships.Muise et al. (2009) brought the attention to a negative effect Facebook use might have: increasing jealousy.The access to the partner's profile provides people with information they did not have before SNS came up; Muise et al. ( 2009) showed that people can become jealous if they see their partner interacting with potential romantic partners on Facebook.Although Facebook jealousy was mainly determined by trait jealousy, there was an additional effect of time spent on Facebook, indicating that SNS increase feelings of jealousy.The present paper builds on this research and extends it in several ways.First, the focus is not only on negative effects of SNS use on romantic relationships, but also on positive effects.Second, the paper focuses on the moderating role of self-esteem and examines the role of need for popularity.

Probably not a substantial claim. 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.

§ The Role of Social Network Sites in Romantic Relationships: Effects on Jealousy and Relationship Happiness > SNS and romantic relationships: What is new?

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.

§ The Role of Social Network Sites in Romantic Relationships: Effects on Jealousy and Relationship Happiness > Abstract

The quote only partly states this claim.

§ The Role of Social Network Sites in Romantic Relationships: Effects on Jealousy and Relationship Happiness > SNS and romantic relationships: What is new?

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

§ The Role of Social Network Sites in Romantic Relationships: Effects on Jealousy and Relationship Happiness > Monitoring behavior.

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.

§ The Role of Social Network Sites in Romantic Relationships: Effects on Jealousy and Relationship Happiness > Descriptive analysis Table 1 displays the means and standard deviations as well as the intercorrelations between the measures.Respondents stated to be more likely to experience SNS relationship happiness 64.1 14.6 3.9 6.8 7.8 1.9 1.0 (M = 4.73, SD = 1.32) than SNS jealousy (M = 2.83, SD = 1.19), t(80) = -12.14,p < .001.Note that the scales did not assess the likelihood of events (e.g., partner posts a comment on the wall of an ex), but the likelihood to experience happiness or jealousy when the partner showed a specific behavior.Low self-esteem individuals reported to experience more SNS jealousy (M = 3.07, SD = 1.13) than high-self-esteem individuals (M = 2.56, SD = 1.21), t(79) = 1.94, p < .05,one-tailed.Low-and highself-esteem individuals did not differ in SNS relationship happiness (Ms = 4.70, SD = 1.26, vs. 4.75, SD = 1.41, ns).The scores on monitoring behavior indicate that about half of the participants reported that they engage in monitoring behavior at least every now and then.Nevertheless, as Table 2 shows, 70-80% of all respondents reported that they never or almost never searched their partners bags, or secretly read the text messages or e-mails they sent to somebody else.Only 10 to 17% had scores of 5 or higher.In contrast, the scores for SNS monitoring behavior were much higher (see Table 3).Table 3 shows that on the first three items about SNS monitoring, 30 to 35% of the respondents had an answer score of 5 or higher.Roughly 35% of the respondents reported that they were likely to visit their partners profile regularly.30% reported that they would check their partner's profile if they were suspicious, and another 30% reported that they were likely to monitor the profile of the partner on a regular basis.Only the item ''add your partner's friends to your SNS to keep tabs on your partner'' received similar rejection rates as the items of the monitoring behavior scale.These descriptive results provide an answer to RQ1.They indicate that monitoring the partner on a SNS might be more common and apparently socially more accepted than monitoring the partner offline.Hypotheses testing SNS jealousy.The first four hypotheses predicted that SNS jealousy would be related to trait jealousy (H1), monitoring behavior (H2), SNS use, especially use for grooming (H3), and need for popularity (H4).H6 expected a negative relationship with relationship satisfaction.To test the hypotheses these variables were simultaneously entered as predictors in a regression analysis, in which we also controlled for gender.The model explained 57% of the variance of SNS jealousy, F(9,71) = 12.82, p < .001.Trait jealousy was a marginally significant predictor of SNS jealousy, β = .16,p = .06.Monitoring behavior, β = .40,p < .01,and need for popularity, β = .33,p < .01,significantly predicted SNS jealousy, whereas the different types of SNS use (profile maintenance and grooming) and relationship satisfaction failed to reach significance, all ts < 1.61.The results support H1, H2, and H4. To examine the moderating role of self-esteem, separate regressions with SNS jealousy as dependent variable were calculated for low-and high-self-esteem subjects.In the first block, trait jealousy, monitoring behavior, relationship satisfaction, and gender were included as predictors.In the second block, frequency of login, SNS intensity, SNS use for profile maintenance, and SNS use for grooming were entered, and finally need for popularity was entered in the third block.Blockwise entering of the variables allowed us to detect whether the indicators of SNS use and need for popularity explained additional variance over and above the relationship variables and gender.

It may state two separate claims as one.

A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.

§ The Role of Social Network Sites in Romantic Relationships: Effects on Jealousy and Relationship Happiness > SNS use and relationship happiness

Probably not a substantial claim.

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.

§ The Role of Social Network Sites in Romantic Relationships: Effects on Jealousy and Relationship Happiness > Descriptive analysis Table 1 displays the means and standard deviations as well as the intercorrelations between the measures.Respondents stated to be more likely to experience SNS relationship happiness 64.1 14.6 3.9 6.8 7.8 1.9 1.0 (M = 4.73, SD = 1.32) than SNS jealousy (M = 2.83, SD = 1.19), t(80) = -12.14,p < .001.Note that the scales did not assess the likelihood of events (e.g., partner posts a comment on the wall of an ex), but the likelihood to experience happiness or jealousy when the partner showed a specific behavior.Low self-esteem individuals reported to experience more SNS jealousy (M = 3.07, SD = 1.13) than high-self-esteem individuals (M = 2.56, SD = 1.21), t(79) = 1.94, p < .05,one-tailed.Low-and highself-esteem individuals did not differ in SNS relationship happiness (Ms = 4.70, SD = 1.26, vs. 4.75, SD = 1.41, ns).The scores on monitoring behavior indicate that about half of the participants reported that they engage in monitoring behavior at least every now and then.Nevertheless, as Table 2 shows, 70-80% of all respondents reported that they never or almost never searched their partners bags, or secretly read the text messages or e-mails they sent to somebody else.Only 10 to 17% had scores of 5 or higher.In contrast, the scores for SNS monitoring behavior were much higher (see Table 3).Table 3 shows that on the first three items about SNS monitoring, 30 to 35% of the respondents had an answer score of 5 or higher.Roughly 35% of the respondents reported that they were likely to visit their partners profile regularly.30% reported that they would check their partner's profile if they were suspicious, and another 30% reported that they were likely to monitor the profile of the partner on a regular basis.Only the item ''add your partner's friends to your SNS to keep tabs on your partner'' received similar rejection rates as the items of the monitoring behavior scale.These descriptive results provide an answer to RQ1.They indicate that monitoring the partner on a SNS might be more common and apparently socially more accepted than monitoring the partner offline.Hypotheses testing SNS jealousy.The first four hypotheses predicted that SNS jealousy would be related to trait jealousy (H1), monitoring behavior (H2), SNS use, especially use for grooming (H3), and need for popularity (H4).H6 expected a negative relationship with relationship satisfaction.To test the hypotheses these variables were simultaneously entered as predictors in a regression analysis, in which we also controlled for gender.The model explained 57% of the variance of SNS jealousy, F(9,71) = 12.82, p < .001.Trait jealousy was a marginally significant predictor of SNS jealousy, β = .16,p = .06.Monitoring behavior, β = .40,p < .01,and need for popularity, β = .33,p < .01,significantly predicted SNS jealousy, whereas the different types of SNS use (profile maintenance and grooming) and relationship satisfaction failed to reach significance, all ts < 1.61.The results support H1, H2, and H4. To examine the moderating role of self-esteem, separate regressions with SNS jealousy as dependent variable were calculated for low-and high-self-esteem subjects.In the first block, trait jealousy, monitoring behavior, relationship satisfaction, and gender were included as predictors.In the second block, frequency of login, SNS intensity, SNS use for profile maintenance, and SNS use for grooming were entered, and finally need for popularity was entered in the third block.Blockwise entering of the variables allowed us to detect whether the indicators of SNS use and need for popularity explained additional variance over and above the relationship variables and gender.

It may state two separate claims as one.

§ The Role of Social Network Sites in Romantic Relationships: Effects on Jealousy and Relationship Happiness > SNS use and relationship happiness

Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.

A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.

§ The Role of Social Network Sites in Romantic Relationships: Effects on Jealousy and Relationship Happiness > SNS use and relationship happiness

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

§ The Role of Social Network Sites in Romantic Relationships: Effects on Jealousy and Relationship Happiness > SNS use and relationship happiness

Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.

§ The Role of Social Network Sites in Romantic Relationships: Effects on Jealousy and Relationship Happiness > SNS monitoring behavior.

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

§ The Role of Social Network Sites in Romantic Relationships: Effects on Jealousy and Relationship Happiness > SNS monitoring behavior.

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.

§ The Role of Social Network Sites in Romantic Relationships: Effects on Jealousy and Relationship Happiness > SNS jealousy.

Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.

A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.

§ The Role of Social Network Sites in Romantic Relationships: Effects on Jealousy and Relationship Happiness > SNS use and relationship happiness

It may state two separate claims as one.

What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.

§ The Role of Social Network Sites in Romantic Relationships: Effects on Jealousy and Relationship Happiness > SNS monitoring behavior.

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.

§ The Role of Social Network Sites in Romantic Relationships: Effects on Jealousy and Relationship Happiness > SNS use for profile maintenance and grooming.

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.

§ The Role of Social Network Sites in Romantic Relationships: Effects on Jealousy and Relationship Happiness > SNS use.

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

§ The Role of Social Network Sites in Romantic Relationships: Effects on Jealousy and Relationship Happiness > SNS jealousy.

Probably not a substantial claim.

§ The Role of Social Network Sites in Romantic Relationships: Effects on Jealousy and Relationship Happiness > Theoretical contributions

Probably not a substantial claim.

§ The Role of Social Network Sites in Romantic Relationships: Effects on Jealousy and Relationship Happiness > SNS relationship happiness.

It may state two separate claims as one.

§ The Role of Social Network Sites in Romantic Relationships: Effects on Jealousy and Relationship Happiness > SNS jealousy.

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.

§ The Role of Social Network Sites in Romantic Relationships: Effects on Jealousy and Relationship Happiness > Theoretical contributions

Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.

What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.

§ The Role of Social Network Sites in Romantic Relationships: Effects on Jealousy and Relationship Happiness > Strengths and limitations

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.

§ The Role of Social Network Sites in Romantic Relationships: Effects on Jealousy and Relationship Happiness > SNS jealousy.

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.

§ The Role of Social Network Sites in Romantic Relationships: Effects on Jealousy and Relationship Happiness > Theoretical contributions

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.

§ The Role of Social Network Sites in Romantic Relationships: Effects on Jealousy and Relationship Happiness > Strengths and limitations

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.

What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.

§ The Role of Social Network Sites in Romantic Relationships: Effects on Jealousy and Relationship Happiness > Strengths and limitations

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.

§ The Role of Social Network Sites in Romantic Relationships: Effects on Jealousy and Relationship Happiness > SNS jealousy.

It may state two separate claims as one.

• AssumptionRests on an assumption: Trait jealousy is a relatively stable personality characteristic that is not related to a specific partner.

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.

§ The Role of Social Network Sites in Romantic Relationships: Effects on Jealousy and Relationship Happiness > SNS relationship happiness.

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.

§ The Role of Social Network Sites in Romantic Relationships: Effects on Jealousy and Relationship Happiness > Strengths and limitations

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.

A claim is checked only against the cited paper’s full text, never its abstract, and none is available for its sources.

§ The Role of Social Network Sites in Romantic Relationships: Effects on Jealousy and Relationship Happiness > Theoretical contributions

Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.

§ The Role of Social Network Sites in Romantic Relationships: Effects on Jealousy and Relationship Happiness > Strengths and limitations

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.

§ The Role of Social Network Sites in Romantic Relationships: Effects on Jealousy and Relationship Happiness > SNS relationship happiness.

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.

§ The Role of Social Network Sites in Romantic Relationships: Effects on Jealousy and Relationship Happiness > Descriptive analysis Table 1 displays the means and standard deviations as well as the intercorrelations between the measures.Respondents stated to be more likely to experience SNS relationship happiness 64.1 14.6 3.9 6.8 7.8 1.9 1.0 (M = 4.73, SD = 1.32) than SNS jealousy (M = 2.83, SD = 1.19), t(80) = -12.14,p < .001.Note that the scales did not assess the likelihood of events (e.g., partner posts a comment on the wall of an ex), but the likelihood to experience happiness or jealousy when the partner showed a specific behavior.Low self-esteem individuals reported to experience more SNS jealousy (M = 3.07, SD = 1.13) than high-self-esteem individuals (M = 2.56, SD = 1.21), t(79) = 1.94, p < .05,one-tailed.Low-and highself-esteem individuals did not differ in SNS relationship happiness (Ms = 4.70, SD = 1.26, vs. 4.75, SD = 1.41, ns).The scores on monitoring behavior indicate that about half of the participants reported that they engage in monitoring behavior at least every now and then.Nevertheless, as Table 2 shows, 70-80% of all respondents reported that they never or almost never searched their partners bags, or secretly read the text messages or e-mails they sent to somebody else.Only 10 to 17% had scores of 5 or higher.In contrast, the scores for SNS monitoring behavior were much higher (see Table 3).Table 3 shows that on the first three items about SNS monitoring, 30 to 35% of the respondents had an answer score of 5 or higher.Roughly 35% of the respondents reported that they were likely to visit their partners profile regularly.30% reported that they would check their partner's profile if they were suspicious, and another 30% reported that they were likely to monitor the profile of the partner on a regular basis.Only the item ''add your partner's friends to your SNS to keep tabs on your partner'' received similar rejection rates as the items of the monitoring behavior scale.These descriptive results provide an answer to RQ1.They indicate that monitoring the partner on a SNS might be more common and apparently socially more accepted than monitoring the partner offline.Hypotheses testing SNS jealousy.The first four hypotheses predicted that SNS jealousy would be related to trait jealousy (H1), monitoring behavior (H2), SNS use, especially use for grooming (H3), and need for popularity (H4).H6 expected a negative relationship with relationship satisfaction.To test the hypotheses these variables were simultaneously entered as predictors in a regression analysis, in which we also controlled for gender.The model explained 57% of the variance of SNS jealousy, F(9,71) = 12.82, p < .001.Trait jealousy was a marginally significant predictor of SNS jealousy, β = .16,p = .06.Monitoring behavior, β = .40,p < .01,and need for popularity, β = .33,p < .01,significantly predicted SNS jealousy, whereas the different types of SNS use (profile maintenance and grooming) and relationship satisfaction failed to reach significance, all ts < 1.61.The results support H1, H2, and H4. To examine the moderating role of self-esteem, separate regressions with SNS jealousy as dependent variable were calculated for low-and high-self-esteem subjects.In the first block, trait jealousy, monitoring behavior, relationship satisfaction, and gender were included as predictors.In the second block, frequency of login, SNS intensity, SNS use for profile maintenance, and SNS use for grooming were entered, and finally need for popularity was entered in the third block.Blockwise entering of the variables allowed us to detect whether the indicators of SNS use and need for popularity explained additional variance over and above the relationship variables and gender.

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.

§ The Role of Social Network Sites in Romantic Relationships: Effects on Jealousy and Relationship Happiness > SNS relationship happiness.

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.

§ The Role of Social Network Sites in Romantic Relationships: Effects on Jealousy and Relationship Happiness > Strengths and limitations

Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.

What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.

§ The Role of Social Network Sites in Romantic Relationships: Effects on Jealousy and Relationship Happiness > Strengths and limitations

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.

§ The Role of Social Network Sites in Romantic Relationships: Effects on Jealousy and Relationship Happiness > SNS relationship happiness.

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.

§ The Role of Social Network Sites in Romantic Relationships: Effects on Jealousy and Relationship Happiness > Strengths and limitations

It may state two separate claims as one.