CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 348Impact of Technology on AdolescentsAttachment and Relationship DynamicsMedia and Digital Communication

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 90 of the 92 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Attitudes Toward Online Social Connection and Self-Disclosure as Predictors of Facebook Communication and Relational Closeness

Ledbetter, Andrew M., Mazer, Joseph P., DeGroot, Jocelyn M., Meyer, Kevin R., Yuping Mao, Swafford, Brian·2011·Communication Research
DOI 10.1177/0093650210365537
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

This investigation tested a theoretical model of communication behavior with specific Facebook friends, such that attitudes toward (a) online self-disclosure, and (b) online social connection, predict Facebook communication frequency and, in turn, relational closeness. Participants included both undergraduates and older adults. Results generally supported the model, with the interaction effect between self-disclosure and social connection directly predicting Facebook communication and indirectly predicting relational closeness. For both dependent variables, online social connection was a positive predictor at low and moderate levels of online self-disclosure, but high levels reduced the association to nonsignificance. One implication of these results was that high-warrant information may discourage those with social anxiety from social network site communication.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/0093650210365537

Cites

90 of 90 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 92 references

2 of the 92 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 17

  1. Acquisti, A., Proceedings of the 6th workshop on privacy enhancing technologies
  2. Burleson, B.R. & MacGeorge, E.L. (2002). Supportive communication . In M. L. Knapp & J. A. Daly (Eds.), Handbook of Interpersonal Communication (3rd ed., pp. 374-424). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
  3. 2009, Facebook.com
  4. Henry, F., 2007, Newhouse News Service
  5. Lenhart, A., 2007, Pew Internet & American Life Project
  6. Liu, H., 2007, Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 13
  7. McKenna, K.Y.A., 2002, Journal of Social Issues, 58, 659
  8. 10.1093/hcr/26.3.403 · DOI
  9. Rohlfing, M.E. ( 1995). "Doesn’t anybody stay in one place anymore?" An exploration of the under-studied phenomenon of long-distance relationships . In J. T. Wood & S. Duck (Eds.), Under-studied relationships: Off the beaten track (pp. 173-196). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
  10. Smith, A., 2008, Pew Internet & American Life Project
  11. Stern, L.A., 2007, Speech & Theater Association of North Dakota, 20, 9
  12. Tilsner, J., 2008, WalletPop
  13. Vriens, M., 2002, Marketing Research, 14, 12
  14. Walther, J.B. & Boyd, S. ( 2002). Attraction to computer-mediated social support. In C. A. Lin & D. Atkin (Eds.), Communication technology and society: Audience adoption and uses (pp. 153-188). Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.
  15. Walther, J.B. & Parks, M.R. ( 2002). Cues filtered out, cues filtered in: Computer-mediated communication and relationships. In M. L. Knapp & J. A. Daly (Eds.), Handbook of interpersonal communication (3rd ed., pp. 529-563). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
  16. Wright, K., Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Communication Association
  17. Zuckerberg, M., 2008, Thoughts on the evolution of Facebook

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 301–348 of 348

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Ledbetter, A. M., Mazer, J. P., DeGroot, J. M., Meyer, K. R., Mao, Y., & Swafford, B.
Affiliations
  • Texas Christian University (US)
  • Clemson University (US)
  • Southern Illinois University Edwardsville (US)
  • Illinois State University (US)
  • University of Alberta (CA)
  • Ohio University (US)
ORCID
Venue
Communication Research
Publisher
SAGE Publications
Published
2010-09-10
Volume
38
Issue
1
Pages
27-53
ISSN
  • 0093-6502 (ISSN-L)
  • 1552-3810
DOI
10.1177/0093650210365537
OpenAlex
W2136937406
Cited by
346
References
92
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 21 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 33 · 2021: 20 · 2020: 18 · 2019: 20 · 2018: 20 · 2017: 23 · 2016: 20 · 2015: 41 · 2014: 47 · 2013: 30 · 2012: 21
FWCI
59.09
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
journals.sagepub.com/page/policies/text-and-data-mining-license (tdm)
Locations
  • Communication Research (publishedVersion)
  • EUR Research Repository (Erasmus University Rotterdam) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Impact of Technology on Adolescents
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Attachment and Relationship Dynamics
  • Social Sciences › Communication › Media and Digital Communication
Keywords
Facebook communication, online self-disclosure, online relationships, relationship closeness, communication frequency, social network sites, social anxiety, older adults, undergraduate students

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