CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 59Impact of Technology on AdolescentsDigital Communication and LanguageAttachment and Relationship Dynamics

Put the phone down: testing a complement-interfere model of computer-mediated communication in the context of face-to-face interactions

Kushlev, Kostadin, Heintzelman, Samantha J.·2018·Social Psychological and Personality Science
DOI 10.1177/1948550617722199
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

If there ever was a key to happiness, this key would open a door that leads straight to a rich social life. And in the era of smartphones, this key to social connection is in our pockets anytime and anywhere. Or is it? Using the experience sampling method (ESM), we explore the use of computer-mediated communication (CMC) in the context of face-to-face (FtF) social interactions, testing two competing hypotheses: (1) a complementarity hypothesis stating that more channels of communication should be associated with higher well-being and (2) an interference hypothesis stating that FtF interactions could be impoverished by adding computer-mediated channels of communication. We surveyed 174 millennials ( M age = 19.28; range: 17–22) 5 times a day over a period of a week (4,508 episodes). When participants reported a mix of CMC and FtF socializing in the same episode, they felt worse and less connected than when solely interacting FtF.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/1948550617722199

Cites

39 of 39 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

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?

  • Although phone-mediated communication predicts lower well-being outcomes when people are concurrently socializing face-to-face, it has little effect on well-being when people are alone.

    “Indeed, although phone-mediated communication, such as text messaging, predicts lower well-being outcomes when people are concurrently socializing face-to-face, phone-mediated communication has little effect on well-being when people are alone [40].”

    From The effects of smartphones on well-being: theoretical integration and research agenda (2020) · cites this paper as [40]

  • Phone use during social interaction can reduce feelings of social connection.

    “Phone use during social interaction can reduce feelings of social connection [41,42 ,43,44], the perceived quality of the interaction [45,46], enjoyment gained from the interaction [47 ], and even frequency of smiling at others [48].”

    From Two social lives: how differences between online and offline interaction influence social outcomes (2020) · cites this paper as [44]

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Kushlev, K., & Heintzelman, S. J.
Affiliations
University of Virginia (US)
Corresponding author
Kushlev, Kostadin
ORCID
Venue
Social Psychological and Personality Science
Publisher
SAGE Publications
Published
2017-07-31
Volume
9
Issue
6
Pages
702-710
ISSN
  • 1948-5506 (ISSN-L)
  • 1948-5514
DOI
10.1177/1948550617722199
OpenAlex
W2739533680
Cited by
59
References
39
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 22 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 1
FWCI
21.70
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
journals.sagepub.com/page/policies/text-and-data-mining-license (tdm)
Locations
Social Psychological and Personality Science (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Impact of Technology on Adolescents
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Digital Communication and Language
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Attachment and Relationship Dynamics
Keywords
smartphone use, computer-mediated communication, face-to-face interaction, social connectedness, well-being, complementarity hypothesis, interference hypothesis, millennials, social media, happiness

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