Technology, Relationships, and Problems: A Research Synthesis
Abstract
The advances in technology alter the ways we interact with each other. For some, the use of technology can facilitate a relationship; for others, technology can complicate aspects of a relationship. The purpose of this research synthesis is to summarize current research exploring the ways in which technology impacts relationships negatively. Eight studies were reviewed across the following areas: preoperational definitions, sample, methodology, control of extraneous variables, causal influence, generalizability, validity of statistical findings, and conclusions. Implications for authors, researchers, and therapists working with couples and families struggling with technology issues are discussed.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Up to two-thirds of those who go online for sexual purposes engage in offline sexual intercourse with their online partner.
“Up to 30% of internet users go online for sexual purposes, and up to two-thirds of them engage in offline sexual intercourse with their online partner [86].”
From Love and Infidelity: Causes and Consequences (2023) · cites this paper as [86]
Up to 30% of internet users go online for sexual purposes.
“Up to 30% of internet users go online for sexual purposes, and up to two-thirds of them engage in offline sexual intercourse with their online partner [86].”
From Love and Infidelity: Causes and Consequences (2023) · cites this paper as [86]
Cites
Boies, S. C., Cooper, A., & Osborne, C. S. (2004) · CyberPsychology & Behavior · doi:10.1089/109493104323024474 · Cited by 63 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Infidelity in romantic relationships
Fincham, F. D., & May, R. W. (2017) · Current Opinion in Psychology · doi:10.1016/j.copsyc.2016.03.008 · Cited by 291 · see citing works
Love and Infidelity: Causes and Consequences
Rokach, A., & Chan, S. H. (2023) · International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health · doi:10.3390/ijerph20053904 · Cited by 77 · see citing works
“purposes, and up to two-thirds of them engage in offline sexual intercourse with their online partner [86].”
BackgroundThe aftershocks of infidelity: a review of infidelity-based attachment trauma
Warach, B., & Josephs, L. (2021) · Sexual and Relationship Therapy · doi:10.1080/14681994.2019.1577961 · Cited by 73 · see citing works
- Authors
- Hertlein, K. M., & Webster, M.
- Affiliations
- University of Nevada, Las Vegas (US)
- University of Nevada, Reno (US)
- Corresponding author
- Hertlein, Katherine M.
- Venue
- Journal of Marital and Family Therapy
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2008-10
- Volume
- 34
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 445-460
- ISSN
- 0194-472X (ISSN-L)
- 1752-0606
- OpenAlex
- W2133245180
- Cited by
- 67
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2026: 12 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 5 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 2
- FWCI
- 0.22
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Marital and Family Therapy (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Attachment and Relationship Dynamics
- Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Impact of Technology on Adolescents
- Social Sciences › Education › Child Development and Digital Technology
- Keywords
- interpersonal relationships, couples, family relationships, negative effects of technology, relationship problems, digital technology use
- MeSH terms
- Attitude of Health Personnel, Female, Humans, Interpersonal Relations, Life Style, Male, Professional-Patient Relations, Research Design, Sexual Behavior, United States, Evidence-Based Medicine, Couples Therapy, Internet, Empirical Research
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review