ORIGINAL ARTICLESThe Relationship Between Facebook and the.docx

ORIGINAL ARTICLES
The Relationship Between Facebook and the Well-Being
of Undergraduate College Students
Maria Kalpidou, Ph.D., Dan Costin, M.A., and Jessica Morris,
B.A.
Abstract
We investigated how Facebook use and attitudes relate to self-
esteem and college adjustment, and expected to
find a positive relationship between Facebook and social
adjustment, and a negative relationship between
Facebook, self-esteem, and emotional adjustment. We examined
these relationships in first-year and upper-class
students and expected to find differences between the groups.
Seventy undergraduate students completed
Facebook measures (time, number of friends, emotional and
social connection to Facebook), the Rosenberg Self-
Esteem Scale, and the Student Adaptation to College Scale.
First-year students had a stronger emotional con-
nection to and spent more time on Facebook while they reported
fewer friends than upper-class students did.
The groups did not differ in the adjustment scores. The number
of Facebook friends potentially hinders academic
adjustment, and spending a lot of time on Facebook is related to
low self-esteem. The number of Facebook
friends was negatively associated with emotional and academic
adjustment among first-year students but
positively related to social adjustment and attachment to
institution among upper-class students. The results

suggest that the relationship becomes positive later in college
life when students use Facebook effectively to
connect socially with their peers. Lastly, the number of
Facebook friends and not the time spent on Facebook
predicted college adjustment, suggesting the value of studying
further the notion of Facebook friends.
Introduction
In recent years, online social-networking sites haveachieved
notable popularity among college students. The
creation of Facebook, in 2004, has revolutionized social be-
haviors and networking practices among college students.
Facebook allows a user to create a profile, display personal
information, upload pictures, access other users’ profiles, ac-
cumulate online friends, and interact with those friends
through messages, gifts, and other applications. In the litera-
ture, the average amount of time spent on Facebook ranges
from 30 minutes1 to over 2 hours daily.2,3 While it appears that
Facebook is the preferred approach to networking among
college students, there has been little research on its rela-
tionship with psychological well-being.
Past research has extensively examined the effects of gen-
eral Internet use on social well-being. Initial studies con-
cluded that greater Internet use led to a decline in family
communication, and local and distant network size.4 Based
on the results of the HomeNet project,4 participants who
spent a significant amount of time on the Internet reported
higher levels of loneliness and a greater number of daily
stresses than people who did not use the Internet as much.
Moreover, greater Internet use has been associated with a
higher likelihood of depression. However, in a follow-up
study, Kraut et al. reported that the negative effects dissi-
pated, and the researchers pointed instead to the effects of

personality traits. Introverted individuals using the Inter-
net experienced decreased community involvement and in-
creased loneliness, while extroverts using the Internet
showed increased community involvement and decreased
loneliness.5
The relationship between Internet use and loneliness was
examined by other researchers too. Moody6 reported that
high levels of Internet use (i.e., time) were associated with low
levels of social loneliness (i.e., more social networking) and
higher levels of emotional loneliness (i.e., lack of intimate
relationships), suggesting that online interactions fail to sat-
isfy one’s need for emotional connections in social inter-
actions. More recently, Ceyhan and Ceyhan7 reported that
loneliness and depression predicted problematic use of the
Internet, as measured by a scale designed by the authors. To
explain the link between loneliness and Internet use, Caplan8
explored the mediating effect of social anxiety. Indeed,
Caplan supported that social anxiety confounded the rela-
tionship between Internet use and loneliness and was directly
related to negative effects from Internet use.8 Finally, another
variable that seems to moderate the effects of the Internet is
This research was presented as a poster in the Annual
Convention of the American Psychological Association in
Boston, 2008.
Psychology Department, Assumption College, Worcester,
Massachusetts.
CYBERPSYCHOLOGY, BEHAVIOR, AND SOCIAL
NETWORKING
Volume 14, Number 4, 2011
ª Mary Ann Liebert, Inc.
DOI: 10.1089/cyber.2010.0061

183
how the Internet is used. Non-communicative use of the In-
ternet was shown to influence psychological well-being
negatively (i.e., loneliness, depression) because it reduced
social integration. Internet use driven by communicative use
was positively correlated with psychological well-being be-
cause of increased community and social involvement.9
The results from the above studies investigating Internet
use and its relation to well-being are somewhat contradic-
tory. The studies indicating negative effects support the
displacement hypothesis, according to which the Internet
takes time away from social activity and thus displaces so-
cial ties. This in turn hinders well-being.4 Other studies in-
dicate that the effects of the Internet vary according to
personality and Internet-use functions. In fact, the Internet
can even enhance the well-being of people who are extro-
verts or use Internet for communicative purposes. These
results support the stimulation hypothesis, based on which
the Internet enhances social interactions and thus contrib-
utes positively to well-being.10
More recently, there has been an increasing interest
in studying the use and effects of Facebook. Ellison et al.1
found that Facebook use was related to bridging, bonding,
and maintaining social capital, which refers to resources ob-
tained through relationships such as emotional satisfaction
and access to information. On average, college students had
between 150 and 200 Facebook friends and generally used the
Web site to communicate with others with whom they shared
an offline connection. This indicated that students primarily
used Facebook to maintain previously established social

capital, rather than developing new networks through online
networking. Most users named their high school in their
profile and preserved ties with old friends and acquaintances,
even as they moved into a new social setting.1
Other studies, too, have supported the notion that Face-
book is used primarily for social connections.2,3,11 For exam-
ple, Sheldon reported that students used Facebook to
maintain relationships with people they already knew.
However, participants also used Facebook out of boredom or
in response to computer-mediated communication (e.g.,
a wall posting, message, bumper sticker, etc.) initiated by
someone else. Only a small number of students used Face-
book to meet new people.3 Pempek et al. confirmed the above
findings and added that college students also used Facebook
to communicate information about their identity such as their
political and religious beliefs.11 Facebook has also been
viewed as the ‘‘social glue’’ that assists students to become
accustomed to college life.12 Finally, in a longitudinal study,
Steinfield et al. found out that the intensity of Facebook use
among college students predicted social capital a year later.13
It appears, therefore, that Facebook fulfills its role as it was
intended by its creators: to support social networks. While the
above studies provide strong support for the stimulation
hypothesis, research also shows that the ability to use Face-
book to build social connections is influenced by personality
traits. For example, Sheldon found that socially anxious in-
dividuals tended to pass more time on Facebook but reported
fewer Facebook friends.3 In contrast, extraverted individuals
had more Facebook friends and initiated more relationships
online than introverted participants did. In the same line of
research, Orr et al. examined the effects of shyness on Face-
book use among college students and confirmed Sheldon’s
findings.3 Shy individuals spent more time on Facebook and

expressed favorable attitudes toward Facebook but had few
Facebook friends.14
While personality traits potentially influence how people
use Facebook and consequently the social benefits they can
reap from that use, it is still unclear how Facebook use and
attitudes relate to psychological well-being. Ellison et al.1
found that students with low self-esteem and low life satis-
faction benefited from Facebook use, as it allowed them to
improve their social capital. Altogether the findings suggest
that Facebook users may fulfill their social needs, but it is not
clear whether they can fulfill their emotional needs. It is pos-
sible that while Facebook stimulates social interaction, it also
displaces time from establishing emotionally gratifying rela-
tionships. These results somewhat parallel the results of the
relationship between general Internet use and well-being.6–8
In this study, we investigated further the relationship
between Facebook and psychological well-being. We fo-
cused on undergraduate college students because although
Facebook is now available to other age groups, the current
literature is primarily based on studies utilizing the un-
dergraduate population. We aimed to generate findings
that would bear relevance to and expand current knowl-
edge. We examined how Facebook use and attitudes to-
ward Facebook related not only to their self-esteem but to
variables that measure social, emotional, and academic
adjustment to college, as well attachment to the institution.
Because people with low self-esteem seem to benefit from
Facebook,1 we expected to find a negative correlation be-
tween Facebook use and self-esteem, thinking that these
users have a greater motivation to use Facebook. If Face-
book use, like Internet use, is not related positively to
emotional fulfillment, then there should be a negative
correlation between Facebook variables and emotional

adjustment to college. Because there is strong evidence that
Facebook supports social networks, we expected a positive
correlation between social adjustment and Facebook vari-
ables. We did not make any prediction for the relationship
between academic adjustment, attachment to institution,
and Facebook variables. Finally, we explored whether these
relationships differed among first-year and upper-class
students. We expected to find differences among the groups
because first-year students are in the process of developing
a social network in their new environment, whereas upper-
class students should have an established social network
already. Based on the same rationale, we also expected that
the groups would be different in Facebook use and atti-
tudes. Exploring these differences would allow us to un-
derstand better how Facebook variables relate to well-being
variables in each group. In sum, we formulated the fol-
lowing research hypotheses:
There is a relationship between Facebook and well-being
variables that follows these trends:
H1a: There is a negative relationship between Facebook var-
iables, self-esteem, and emotional adjustment to college.
H1b: There is a positive relationship between Facebook var-
iables and social adjustment to college.
H1c: Facebook variables will predict different types of ad-
justment in each group.
H2: First-year and upper-class students differ in Facebook use
and attitudes.
184 KALPIDOU ET AL.

Method
Participants
Participants were 70 undergraduate college students
(Mage¼19.61). A total of 35 were first-year (Mage¼18.31) and
35 (Mage¼20.91) were upper-class students (junior and se-
nior students). The participants were recruited from multi-
discipline introductory and upper-level classes at a small,
Catholic, liberal arts institution in the Northeast. Most of the
participants were female (67%). We collected data in the
middle of the fall and spring semester, and excluded sopho-
mores because spring-semester sophomores would be too
close to fall-semester juniors, thereby decreasing the age gap
between the groups.
The majority of the participants (89.6%) reported being
Caucasian/non-Hispanic (2.9% African-American, 5.8% His-
panic, 1.4% Other). When asked to describe their socioeco-
nomic background (SES) by filling in a blank, 9.7% identified
themselves as being low class, 69.4% as middle class, 16.1% as
upper middle class, and 4.8% as upper class. Based on statis-
tical analyses, the groups of first-year and upper-class students
did not differ in any of the demographic characteristics of age,
gender, ethnic background, and SES. Students might have
been offered extra course credit for their participation.
Measures
Through self-reported measures, we assessed demo-
graphic information (age, gender, SES, ethnicity, year in col-
lege), Facebook usage and attitudes, and psychological well-
being (i.e., self-esteem and adjustment to college).
Facebook measures. We used three measures of Face-

book usage from Ellison et al. The Facebook Intensity Scale
(FIS)1 measures time spent on Facebook (1¼ ‘‘less than 10
minutes,’’ 2¼ ‘‘10–30 minutes,’’ 3¼ ‘‘31–60 minutes,’’ 4¼
‘‘1–2
hours,’’ 5¼ ‘‘2–3 hours,’’ 6¼ ‘‘more than 3 hours’’), number of
Facebook friends (1¼ ‘‘10 or fewer,’’ 2¼ ‘‘11–50’’, 3¼ ‘‘51–
100,’’ 4¼ ‘‘101–150,’’ 5¼ ‘‘151–200,’’ 6¼ ‘‘201–250,’’ 7¼
‘‘251–
300,’’ 8¼ ‘‘301–400,’’ 9¼ ‘‘more than 400’’), and includes six
statements that measure participants’ attitudes toward Face-
book (e.g., ‘‘I am proud to tell people I am on Facebook’’).
These statements were rated on a 5-point scale (1¼ ‘‘strongly
disagree,’’ 5¼ ‘‘strongly agree’’). Ellison et al. standardized
the first two items before averaging the scores to create a
Facebook Intensity score. Because, we were interested in
finding group differences in Facebook friends and time spent
on Facebook, we treated these variables separately. However,
we averaged the scores from the six attitudinal items that
reflect an emotional connection to Facebook (e.g., ‘‘I am
proud to tell people I am on Facebook’’) and created the
variable ‘‘emotional connection’’ (a¼0.89). The second mea-
sure we used from Ellison et al. is a 5-statement scale that
accesses how Facebook is used to make new connections or to
maintain existing offline connections (e.g., ‘‘I use Facebook to
check out someone I have met socially’’). The statements were
rated on a 5-point scale (1¼ ‘‘strongly disagree,’’ 5¼ ‘‘strongly
agree’’). We averaged these items and created the variable
‘‘social connection’’ to Facebook (a¼0.70).
Finally, using Ellison et al.’s scale of Elements in Profile as a
model, we created a list of available profile features and
asked the participants to check all of the elements they used
to create their profile. Ellison et al. used only the salient fea-
tures such as relationship status. Because we were interested
in differences between the groups and wanted to explore

more areas in which we could find such differences, we used
all available profile features. Unlike Ellison et al, we did not
ask for the participants’ perceptions of who viewed their
profile because we did not view this variable relevant to our
study. Finally, as part of the Facebook measures, we asked
how many friends the participants had offline and specifi-
cally on campus.
Rosenberg’s Self-Esteem Scale. We used the Rosenberg
Self-Esteem Scale to measure self-esteem.15 This Likert-type
scale consists of 10 items (e.g., ‘‘I feel that I am a person of
worth, at least on an equal plane with others’’). The items
were rated on a 4-point scale. Rosenberg assigned the value of
0 as the lowest rating and then summed the scores. Because
we used average scores in all of our measures, we needed to
avoid 0 values and we therefore assigned the value of 1 as the
lowest rating (i.e., 1¼ ‘‘strongly disagree,’’ 2¼ ‘‘disagree,’’
3¼ ‘‘agree,’’ 4¼ ‘‘strongly agree’’). The ratings of five items
were reversed so that higher scores reflected high self-esteem
in all statements (e.g., ‘‘All in all, I am inclined to feel that I
am
a failure’’). The Rosenberg scale has been used frequently in
research, and has high reliability and test–retest correlations
ranging from 0.82 to 0.88.14 The Cronbach’s alpha in this
study was 0.80.
Student Adaptation to College Questionnaire. We used
the Student Adaptation to College Questionnaire (SACQ) to
measure adjustment to college.16 This is a 67-item inventory
that is divided into four subscales: academic adjustment,
social adjustment, personal-emotional adjustment, and in-
stitutional attachment. The academic adjustment subscale
measures a student’s ability to cope with the educational
demands of college (e.g., ‘‘I have been keeping up to date on
my academic work’’). The social adjustment subscale refers to
one’s capacity to cope with societal demands (e.g., ‘‘I feel that

I fit in well as part of the college environment’’). The personal-
emotional subscale quantifies a general sense of how a stu-
dent feels physically and psychologically (e.g., ‘‘I have been
feeling tense or nervous lately’’). The attachment subscale
refers to a student’s satisfaction with the institution attended
(e.g., ‘‘I wish I were at another college or university’’). The
participants responded to each item on a 9-point scale, rang-
ing from ‘‘applies very closely to me’’ to ‘‘does not apply to
me
at all.’’ There were 34 negatively focused items, with point
values ranging from 1 to 9, and 33 positively keyed items with
point values ranging from 9 to 1. Scores were tallied com-
prehensively and by subscale, with higher scores indicating
better levels of adjustment. The scale has been used in coun-
seling as a diagnostic tool, as well as in basic research with
high reliability and validity.15
Procedure
We collected data in the middle of the fall and spring se-
mesters for a period of 2 weeks. Participants met in a quiet
classroom at 7:00 PM and individually received the ques-
tionnaire packet. There were no more than 10 participants at a
time in the room. Participants were given as much time as
was necessary to complete all questions.
FACEBOOK AND WELL-BEING 185
Results
Descriptive analyses indicated that the average user spent
60–120 minutes on Facebook every day and reported having
200–250 Facebook friends. Users tended to complete all of the
available options to create a Facebook profile. The most

popular features included items that describe users’ rela-
tionship status (first year [FY]: 82.9%; upper class [UC]:
82.9%), educational information (FY: 94.3%; UC: 82.9%), in-
terests (FY: 71.4%; UC: 80%), favorite music (FY: 71.4%; UC:
62.9%), and activities (FY:71.4% ; UC: 80%), as well as per-
sonal pictures (FY: 91.4%; UC: 88.6%). Few participants re-
ported their phone number (FY: 14.3%; UC: 20) or home
address (FY: 5.7%; UC: 2.9%), or uploaded personal videos on
Facebook (FY: 17.1%; UC: 11.4%). Other least favorable items
were the ones that describe political (FY: 17.1%; UC: 28.6%)
and religious views (FY: 20%; UC: 22.9%). The rest of the
results are organized in relation to the research hypotheses.
Hypotheses 1a–c
We expected a relationship between Facebook variables
(Facebook time, number of Facebook friends, emotional
connection, and social connection) and well-being as mea-
sured by self-esteem and college adjustment variables. In
order to address the research hypotheses, we conducted
correlational analyses between the variables of interest. In
support of H1a, we found a negative correlation between
minutes spent on Facebook and self-esteem, r(70)¼�0.26,
p < 0.05, suggesting that spending a lot of time on Facebook is
associated with low self-esteem (f 2¼0.07). There was also a
negative correlation between number of Facebook friends
and academic college adjustment, r(70)¼�0.27, p < 0.05, in-
dicating that those with many Facebook friends had low ac-
ademic adjustment scores (f 2¼0.11). Finally, none of the
correlations between emotional and social connection to Fa-
cebook and well-being variables were significant. We were
not able to support H1b, according to which we expected a
positive relationship between the Facebook variables and
social adjustment in college.
Next, we conducted correlational analyses between Face-

book and well-being variables in each age group beginning
with the first-year group. As shown in Table 1, there were
significant negative correlations between the number of Fa-
cebook friends and emotional, r(35)¼�0.35, p < 0.05,
f 2¼0.14, and academic adjustment, r(35)¼�0.36, p < 0.05,
f 2¼0.15, suggesting that first-year students with many
Facebook friends did not fare well personally (H1a) and ac-
ademically. The negative correlation between the number of
Facebook friends and total college adjustment approached
significance, r(35)¼�0.32, p¼0.056. For the upper-class
students, there were significant positive correlations between
having many Facebook friends and social adjustment,
r(35)¼0.52, p < 0.001, f 2¼0.37, and attachment with the in-
stitution, r(35)¼0.37, p < 0.05, f 2¼0.15. Upper-class students
who reported having many friends on Facebook appeared to
be well-adjusted socially (H1b) and strongly connected with
their college. The negative correlation between self-esteem
and time spent on Facebook approached significance,
r(35)¼�0.31, p¼0.07.
Interestingly, time spent on Facebook was not correlated
with any of the well-being variables for first-year and upper-
class students. To support further the predictive value of
Facebook friends as compared to time spent on Facebook, we
conducted stepwise multiple regression analyses with both of
these variables as the independent factors. The dependent
variables were the adjustment variables that correlated with
the independent variables. As shown in Table 2 and 3, only
Facebook Friends was a significant predictor. The number of
Facebook friends explained 12% of the variance in emotional
adjustment and 13% of the variance in academic adjustment
of first-year students. Similarly, the number of Facebook
friends predicted 14% of the variance in attachment to insti-
tution and 28.6% of the variance in social adjustment of the
upper-class students. These results clearly demonstrate that

Facebook predicts different types of adjustment in the two
groups (H1c).
Next, we examined how the emotional and social connec-
tion to Facebook was related to well-being in each group.
There was a negative correlation between emotional con-
nection and self-esteem for the upper-class students,
r(35)¼�0.39, p < 0.05, f 2¼0.18, indicating that those with a
strong emotional connection to Facebook tended to report
lower self-esteem (H1a). In addition, there was a significant
positive correlation between the social connection to Face-
book and emotional, r(35)¼0.42, p < 0.05, f 2¼0.21, and total
adjustment to college, r(33)¼0.34, p < 0.05, f 2¼0.13. Upper-
class students who used Facebook to connect socially with
other people also had higher emotional adjustment scores, as
well as total adjustment scores (Table 4) None of the rela-
tionships were significant in the first-year group.
Finally, we addressed whether the groups differed in ad-
justment scores, to rule out the possibility that the different
relationship between Facebook and well-being variables in
the groups was driven primarily by differences in adjustment
Table 1. Correlations Between Facebook Use
and Well-Being Variables (n
FY
¼35, n
UC
¼35)
Facebook friends Facebook time
FY UC FY UC

Self-esteem �0.29 �0.04 �0.09 �0.31
Emotional adjustment �0.35* 0.03 �0.06 �0.02
Academic adjustment �0.36* �0.15 �0.04 0.07
Social adjustment �0.19 0.52*** �0.10 0.24
Attachment of institution �0.15 0.37* �0.17 0.17
Total adjustment �0.32 0.10 �0.11 0.08
FY, first-year students; UC, upper-class students. *p < 0.05;
***p < 0.001.
Table 2. Facebook Variables Predicting College
Adjustment of First-Year Students (n¼35)
Emotional
adjustment
Academic
adjustment
Variable B SE B b B SE B b
Facebook
friends
�0.172 0.08 �0.35* �0.14 0.5 �0.36*
Facebook
time
0.006 0.14 0.007 0.02 0.11 0.03
*p < 0.05.
186 KALPIDOU ET AL.

scores. We therefore compared the groups in self-esteem and
college adjustment variables using a multivariate analysis of
variance, and although the overall test was significant, F(63,
6)¼2.60, p < 0.05, none of the univariate tests yielded sig-
nificant results.
Hypothesis 2
We explored any differences between first-year and upper-
class students in Facebook profiles, use, and attitudes toward
Facebook. The two groups were very similar in the infor-
mation they provided in their profiles. Analyses of variance
showed that the groups were not different in the number of
offline friends on campus, F(68, 1)¼0.54, p > 0.05, MFY¼32,
MUC¼31, but first-year students reported having signifi-
cantly more friends from home, F(68, 1)¼6.60, p < 0.05,
MFY¼41, MUC¼23. Using a one-way analysis of variance,
we then compared the groups in terms of Facebook be-
haviors. Results indicate that first-year students reported
spending significantly more time on Facebook, F(68,
1)¼17.58, p < 0.001, f 2¼0.25, MFY¼4, MUC¼2.7, than up-
per-class students did. On the other hand, upper-class stu-
dents reported having significantly more friends on
Facebook, F(68, 1)¼5.51, p < 0.005, f 2¼0.08, than first-class
students did, MFY¼4.5, MUC¼5.5. Finally, we compared the
groups in terms of their emotional and social connection to
Facebook using a MANOVA. The Wilks’s L test was signif-
icant, F(67, 2)¼10.12, p < 0.001. First-year students reported
a stronger emotional connection to Facebook, MFY¼3.69,
than upper-class students did, MUP¼2.8, F(69, 1)¼14.15,
p < 0.001, f 2¼0.25. The groups were not different in their
scores of social connection to Facebook, MFY¼3.5;
MUP¼3.28.
Discussion

Our findings strongly support a relationship between Fa-
cebook variables and psychological well-being. This is true for
each one of our groups, as well as for the whole sample. When
the groups were combined, spending a lot of time on Facebook
was negatively related to self-esteem, thus supporting our
hypothesis. This finding is driven primarily by the correlation
in the upper-class sample that reached significance (Table 1).
Furthermore, upper-class students with an emotional connec-
tion to Facebook also reported low self-esteem. Ellison et al.
found that students with low self-esteem benefit from using
Facebook because they expand their social capital.1 Our find-
ings indirectly support this interpretation. Our upper-class
students whose emotional connection to Facebook was related
to low self-esteem also reported that social connection to Fa-
cebook was positively associated with high scores of emotional
and total adjustment in college. Future research engaging a
greater sample and path analysis would shed light onto the
directionality of these relationships.
The number of Facebook friends was also related to low
academic adjustment in college when both groups were
considered although this relationship was significant only in
the first-year group alone. In addition, first-year students
with many Facebook friends reported experiencing lower
emotional adjustment in college, a finding that is consistent
with the hypothesis that Facebook use, like Internet use, does
not fulfill emotional needs. The construct of emotional ad-
justment reflects the student’s ability to balance stresses re-
lated to college life and maintaining a sense of doing well. It is
possible that first-year students seek out friends on Facebook
as a coping strategy to relieve the stress of college adjustment.
Consistent with this explanation is our finding that first-year
students reported a stronger emotional connection to Face-
book than upper-class students did. Furthermore, difficul-
ties with emotional adjustment seem to spill over to academic

adjustment, as these constructs were highly correlated,
r(35)¼0.57.* Again, a path analysis using a bigger sample
would be more appropriate in determining the directionality
of these relationships.
Having a lot of Facebook friends was positively related to
both social adjustment and attachment with the institution for
upper-class students, thus offering support to the hypothesis
that Facebook strengthens social adjustment by improving
social networks. Social adjustment refers to having a feeling
of fitting in with the college community and being satisfied
with established social connections and the social activities
offered on campus. Our findings suggest that Facebook is a
valuable venue not only for creating new and maintaining old
relationships,* but also for being informed about social events
that occur on campus. We also believe that the relationship
between social college adjustment and Facebook underlines
the relationship between Facebook and a general satisfaction
with the institution. Our findings imply that colleges could
use Facebook to their benefit by creating opportunities to
connect their students with each other and with campus life
activities.
The findings thus far reveal two trends. The first trend
implied by our findings is that the relationship between
Table 3. Facebook Variables Predicting College
Adjustment of Upper-Class Students (n¼35)
Social adjustment Attachment to institution
Variable B SE B b B SE B b
Facebook
friends

0.29 0.09 0.49* 0.19 0.09 0.35*
Facebook
time
0.07 0.11 0.10 0.04 0.12 0.07
*p < 0.05.
Table 4. Correlations Between Emotional
and Social Connection to Facebook
and Well-Being (n
fy
¼35, n
uc
¼35)
Emotional
connection
Social
connection
FY UC FY UC
Self-esteem 0.09 �0.39* �0.08 �0.05
Emotional adjustment �0.03 0.03 �0.12 0.42*
Academic adjustment �0.06 �0.06 �0.13 0.19
Social adjustment 0.03 0.10 �0.25 0.19
Attachment of institution �0.02 0.16 �0.21 0.23
Total adjustment 0.01 0.08 �0.20 0.34*
FY, first-year students; UC, upper-class students. *p < 0.05.
*Results available upon request.

Facebook and college adjustment becomes positive later in
college life, although the cross-sectional nature of the study
would limit such generalization. This trend is consistent with
our hypothesis that Facebook variables would predict dif-
ferent adjustment variables in each group. The first-year
students who had a lot of Facebook friends experienced lower
academic and emotional adjustment, while upper-class stu-
dents with many Facebook friends reported high social ad-
justment and attachment to the institution. This difference
cannot be attributed to possible greater adjustment difficulty
of the first-year group, as there were no differences in college
adjustment scores between the two groups. The two groups
were also not different in the types of information they pro-
vided in their profiles. We have evidence instead to believe
that upper-class students use Facebook more effectively than
first-year students do. We found positive correlations be-
tween the social connection with Facebook and emotional
and total college adjustment. How exactly they use Facebook
and the factors leading to more effective use of Facebook is a
subject of future research. The findings currently support the
value of examining age differences in Facebook effects on
well-being.
Second, while the amount of time spent on Facebook did
not correlate with any of the adjustment variables, the
number of Facebook friends did. The participants in this
study reported spending 60–120 minutes on Facebook every
day. This is higher than the 10–30 minutes that Ellison et al.1
reported, but consistent with more recent studies.2,3 Al-
though one would expect that investing time in Facebook

limits the time one has to socialize and study, the current
results suggest that it is what you do while on Facebook that
really matters. Studies strongly support that the primary
motive to use Facebook is to keep in touch with old friends
and make new ones.1,3,17 We think that it is the notion of
a Facebook friend that underlines the predictive value of
number of Facebook friends when it comes to college ad-
justment.
A few studies have examined the relationship between
number of Facebook friends and other psychological char-
acteristics. Researchers agree that the meaning of a Facebook
friend is uncertain. Parks estimated that people maintain
about 10–20 close relationships using traditional communi-
cation means. This number is phenomenally higher on virtual
social networks. Our participants listed an average of 200 to
250 friends, but this number might have been even higher if
participants reported the actual number of friends instead of
a choosing a range of number of friends.18 Tong et al. found a
curvilinear relationship between number of friends and social
attractiveness, with the greatest rating of social attractiveness
reported when the profile owner listed 300 friends. More than
300 friends was related to low social attractiveness and high
introversion of the profile owner.19 The same research team
also reported that the physical attractiveness of Facebook
friends boosted the profile owner’s physical attractiveness
and social desirability.20 Finally, Buffardi and Campbell
supported a link between narcissism and increased social
activity on Facebook (e.g., number of friends, groups, and
wall posts), whether narcissism was self-reported or was
rated by profile viewers.21 In conclusion, there is tentative
evidence to suggest that the personality characteristics of
the profile owners may relate to the number of friends and
mediate the relationship with college adjustment.
Limitations and future research directions

The interpretation of the findings warrantees caution be-
cause of the small sample size and the uneven representation
of gender. It is unknown how gender might have influenced
the results. Similar to our findings,* previous researchers
have not reported gender differences in the use of Facebook.
There is some evidence of gender differences in perceived
physical attractiveness of the owner based on comments
posted on profiles by friends.20 A bigger sample would allow
advanced statistical analyses such as path analysis. However,
the modest to good effect sizes we found for the major results
adds confidence to our interpretation. Finally, the differences
in the two groups might have been influenced by the history
of exposure to Facebook. Although we did not ask partici-
pants to report the number of years that they have been
Facebook users, we estimate that the groups had similar
histories. Facebook was made available to first-year students
when they were in high school, whereas our upper-class
participants had access to Facebook in the first year in college.
Despite these shortcomings, the results make significant
contributions. Spending a lot of time on Facebook relates to
low self-esteem, a finding that parallels the relationship be-
tween Internet use and self-esteem. However, the increased
number of friends may be a better predictor of well-being
than time spent on Facebook, regardless of whether the re-
lationship is positive or negative. Moreover, the relationship
between Facebook and well-being appears to become positive
over the college years, possibly because upper-class students
use Facebook to connect socially with their peers and par-
ticipate in college life. Future research should also examine
developmental factors such as stronger self-concept and
greater experience in personal relationships that could pos-
sibly lead to more effective use of Facebook of upper-class
students. Another factor that is worth examining is how be-
ing a first-generation student influences Facebook use. It is

possible that first-generation students with limited informa-
tion about college life rely more on social-networking sites
such as Facebook to help them adjust in college. Finally, fu-
ture research should investigate the notion of Facebook
friends, personality traits of profile owners, as well as the
content of the profiles using path analyses to clarify further
the effects of Facebook on college adjustment.
Disclosure Statement
No competing financial interests exist.
References
1. Ellison NB, Steinfield C, Lampe, C. The benefits of
Facebook
‘‘friends’’: Social capital and college students’ use of online
social network sites. Journal of Computer-Mediated Com-
munication 2007; 12:1143–68.
2. Raacke J, Bonds-Raacke J. MySpace and Facebook: Applying
the uses and gratifications theory to exploring friend-
networking sites. CyberPsychology & Behavior 2008; 11:169–
74.
3. Sheldon P. The relationship between unwillingness to com-
municate and students’ Facebook use. Journal of Media
Psychology 2008; 20:67–75.
*Results available upon request.
188 KALPIDOU ET AL.
4. Kraut R, Patterson M, Lundmark V, et al. Internet paradox:

A social technology that reduces social involvement and
psychological well-being? American Psychologist 1998;
53:1017–31.
5. Kraut R, Kiesler S, Boneva, B., et al. Internet paradox re-
visited. Journal of Social Issues, Special issue: Consequences
of the Internet for self and society: Is social life being trans-
formed? 2002; 58:49–74.
6. Moody E. Internet use and its relationship to loneliness.
CyberPsychology & Behavior 2001; 4:393–401.
7. Ceyhan A, Ceyhan E. Loneliness, depression, and com-
puter self-efficacy as predictors of problematic Internet Use.
CyberPsychology & Behavior 2007; 11:699–701.
8. Caplan S. Relations among loneliness, social anxiety, and
problematic Internet use. CyberPsychology & Behavior 2007;
10:234–42.
9. Weiser EB. The functions of Internet use and their social and
psychological consequences. CyberPsychology & Behavior
2001; 4:723–43.
10. Valkenburg P, Jochen P. Online communication and ado-
lescent well-being: Testing the stimulation versus the dis-
placement hypothesis. Journal of Computer-Mediated
Communication 2007; 12:1169–82.
11. Pempek T, Yermolayeva Y, Carvert S. College students’ so-
cial networking experiences on Facebook. Journal of Applied
Developmental Psychology 2009; 30:227–38.
12. Madge C, Meek J, Wellens J, et al. Facebook, social inte-
gration and informal learning at university: ‘‘It is more for
socializing and talking to friends about work than for ac-

tually doing work.’’ Learning, Media & Technology 2009;
34:141–55.
13. Steinfield C, Ellison NB, Lampe C. Social capital, self-
esteem,
and use of online social network sites: A longitudinal anal-
ysis. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology 2008;
29:434–45.
14. Orr E, Sisic M, Ross C, et al. The influence of shyness on
the use of Facebook in an undergraduate sample. Cyber-
Psychology & Behavior 2009; 12:337–9.
15. Rosenberg M. (1965) Society and the adolescent self-image.
Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
16. Baker RW, Siryk B. (1998) Student adaptation to college
question-
naire manual. Los Angeles, CA: Western Psychological
Services.
17. Zhao S, Grasmuck S, Martin J. (2008) Identity construction
on Facebook: Digital empowerment in anchored relation-
ships. Computers in Human Behavior 2008; 24:1816–36.
18. Parks MR. (2007) Personal networks and personal
relationships.
Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
19. Tong ST, Van Der Heide B, Langwell L, et al. Too much of
a
good thing? The relationship between number of friends and
interpersonal impressions on Facebook. Journal of Computer-
Mediated Communication 2008; 13:531–49.

20. Walther J, Van Der Heide B, Kim S, et al. The role of
friends
appearance and behavior on evaluations of individuals on
Facebook: Are we known by the company we keep? Human
Communication Research 2008; 34:28–49.
21. Buffardi LE, Campbell WK. Narcissism and social net-
working Web sites. Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin
2008; 34:1303–14.
Address correspondence to:
Maria Kalpidou, Ph.D.
Psychology Department
Assumption College
500 Salisbury St.
Worcester, MA 01609
E-mail: [email protected]
Copyright of CyberPsychology, Behavior & Social Networking
is the property of Mary Ann Liebert, Inc. and
its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or
posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's
express written permission. However, users may print,
download, or email articles for individual use.

THE TIPPING POINT I
BY WOODY DRIGGS AND ROB HOLLAND
Putting Customers Before Politics
COOs struggle to navigate a siloed culture
TO TRULY ADDRESS
BUSINESS
CHALLENGES,
ORGANIZATIONS NEED
TO VIEW CUSTOMER
OPERATIONS AS
A WHOLE.
T
H E C H I E F operating officer of a global
HR and payroll services provider threw up
her hands in despair. Month after month, she
received reports indicating that more than half
of the company's sales orders had errors. Sometimes it
was bad customer data; other times, the service options
offered to the customer had been bundled or priced incor-
rectly. For every error, the salesperson would return to the
customer to redo the order. This was incredibly inefficient
and eroded customers' confi-
dence in the company, some-
times to the point of canceling
orders altogether.
The COO had twice attempted

to implement a technology solu-
tion that would reduce the error
rate. Both times, the effort failed
because the business allowed
for inconsistent processes. Sales
processes and IT infrastructure
were slightly different from one business unit to the next,
and business unit leaders jostled to prioritize pet projects
over what was in the best interest of the organization as
a whole.
Navigating a culture built on silos, and challenging fief-
doms that ultimately hamper productivity and profitable
growth is an experience many COOs face. The key is to
involve the right stakeholders and eliminate the politics
by focusing on what is of most value to the organization.
To truly address business challenges, organizations
need to view customer operations as a whole.
An integrated customer operations approach
requires representation from across the func-
tional silos. By fostering collaboration among
sales, operations, legal, finance, internal audit,
and marketing, organizations can make deci-
sions knowing the compromises that both the
front and back office need to make.
With the right stakeholders involved, the
next key element is getting them focused on
the right issues. Using an outside-in perspec-
tive, focusing directly on customer experience through
the use of personas and scenarios, is particularly help-
ful. Personas capture what both internal and external
customers care about most and the key issues that the
organization must resolve. Scenarios establish a common

understanding of the capabilities needed to optimize an
end-to-end process or transaction.
Once the organization knows what the customer wants
and which processes to focus on, it needs to enable them.
Business input can result in hundreds, or even thousands, of
requirements. Perhaps it's too expensive, takes too long, or
is unnecessary. Instead, organizations can use a value-driver
model to determine which requirements have high value
(e.g., reduce cost, improve performance) and prioritize
them based on which v̂ ill have the
most impact on the organizafion's
bottom line. This approach offers
an objective view of how to enact
the transformation—and succeed.
An integrated customer oper-
ations approach also requires a
change management component.
This includes using iterative pilot
programs that gather relevant
stakeholders in conference rooms
and solicit their input. Identifying gaps earlier in the program
makes them easier and less expensive to address. At the same
time, early and frequent stakeholder involvement wül drive
greater adoption as the improvement effort moves forward.
In the case of the HR and payi-oU services organization,
by using an integrated customer operations approach, the
COO was able to successfully implement a scenario-based,
value-driven, technology-enabled process transformation
that resulted in lasting change throughout the organiza-
tion. The new fully automated sales order processes fun-

damentally changed the organization's relationship with
its customers. Customers had greater confidence in the
organization, resulting in an increase in sales.
An integrated customer operations approach gives orga-
nizations the framework they need to create a culture that
makes transformation programs feasible. By making the
effort objective, while still making affected stakeholders
feel as if they are an integral part of the outcome, organi-
zations can design and implement programs that optimize
operations, reduce costs, improve productivity, make the
most of IT investments, and ultimately drive value that
directly and positively affects the bottom line. (R?
Woody Driggs is the global advisory customer leader for Ernst
& Young He is a
principal in the company's Advisory Services Performance
Improvement practice
and is based in Washington, f)C. Rob Holland is a principal in
Ernst & Young's
Advisory Services Customer practice and is based in Houston.
www.destinationCRM.com CUSTOMER RELATIONSHIP
MANAGEMENT | JANUARY 2014 S
Copyright of CRM Magazine is the property of Information
Today Inc. and its content may
not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv
without the copyright holder's
express written permission. However, users may print,
download, or email articles for
individual use.

ORG 6600, Culture of Learning Organizations 1
Course Learning Outcomes for Unit I
Upon completion of this unit, students should be able to:
1. Analyze cultural influence between the social system and
individuals within that social system.
2. Compare and contrast cultures that have nesting relationships
(e.g., macrocultures, subcultures,
microcultures).
Reading Assignment
Chapter 1:
The Concept of Organizational Culture: Why Bother?
Chapter 2:
The Three Levels of Culture
Chapter 4:
Macrocultures, Subcultures, and Microcultures
In order to access the resource below, you must first log into
the myWaldorf Student Portal and access the
Business Source Complete database within the Waldorf Online
Library.

Driggs, W., & Holland, R. (2014). Putting customers before
politics: COOs struggle to navigate a siloed
culture. Customer Relationship Management, 18(1), 5.
Unit Lesson
What Is a Learning Organization?
Chris Argyris and Donald Schön (1996) described a learning
organization as an organization with the
“ability to see things in new ways, gain new understandings,
and produce new patterns of behavior—all
on a continuing basis and in a way that engages the organization
as a whole” (p. xix). Essentially,
learning organizations are those that are able to adjust their
ways of thinking and behavior in order to
learn and change (Friesenborg, 2015).
In this course, you will learn skills for leading people at the
team or organization level to adapt the ways
they think and behave in a learning organization. The skill to
lead change is a critical skill for leaders in
any occupation or industry, both now and as we move into the
future. Despite its importance, though, the
process for becoming a learning organization remains largely
misunderstood (Friesenborg, 2015).
Learning organizations are envied. They are not common. This
course is devoted to equipping you with
the knowledge and skills to lead your organization’s culture
toward becoming a learning organization.
In this unit, we will discuss the culture within organizations.

The organization’s culture is what determines
whether the organization has thought-behavior patterns that are
dysfunctional or healthy. The
organization’s culture determines whether it is a dysfunctional
organization or a learning organization
(Argyris & Schön, 1996; Friesenborg, 2015). Culture is
important within the organization or any other
social system (Schein, 2010).
UNIT I STUDY GUIDE
Culture
UNIT x STUDY GUIDE
Title
Culture: Patterns for Thinking and Behaving
What comes to mind when you think of culture? Does music,
film, or fashion come to mind? How about
customs, traditions, and foods? Yes, culture is expressed
through these means, but culture is also
expressed in ways that are less tangible. Culture shapes the way
you think and behave.
Influencing the way you think, culture shapes your deeply-held,
underlying assumptions. These

underlying assumptions create the lens for how you see the
world around you. You use these underlying
assumptions as you judge yourself, other people, and your
environment. Your underlying assumptions
are influenced by what the culture considers desirable and what
the culture considers undesirable
(Adams & Markus, 2004; Hofstede & Hofstede, 2005;
Kitayama, Duffy, & Uchida, 2007; Schein, 2010).
Taken one step further, culture also influences the ways people
behave. Each culture has a set of
norms, parameters for behaviors that are considered acceptable
(Adams & Markus, 2004; Friesenborg,
2015; Hofstede & Hofstede, 2005; Kitayama et al., 2007;
Schein, 2010). At your organization, would it be
acceptable for you to disagree with leaders? Do people talk
through conflict? Do people use passive-
aggressive tactics? Are there divisions or silos between
employees and managers or between
departments? All of these questions point to the organization’s
cultural norms for behavior (Argyris &
Schön, 1996; Friesenborg, 2015).
The ways that people think and behave are influenced not only
by the organization culture but also by
the larger macroculture (e.g., the American culture), which, in
turn, shapes the social systems that are
nested within that macroculture (Hofstede & Hofstede, 2005;
Schein, 2010). Different levels of culture
are nested within each other. As an analogy, think of the
Russian wooden nesting dolls. You twist open
the middle of the large, oval-shaped, wooden doll and a slightly
smaller wooden doll is found inside.
Then, twist open the middle of that doll and, again, a slightly
smaller wooden doll is nested inside.
Culture is a lot like those Russian wooden nesting dolls. A

macroculture may contain microcultures and
subcultures. For example, one wooden nesting doll may
represent the American culture, which contains
the American corporate culture, which, in turn, contains the
culture for a specific corporation. As another
example, the wooden nesting doll may represent the American
culture, which may contain the culture of
American families, which, in turn, includes the culture of the
specific family in which you were raised.
Each social system has a culture. While these examples focused
on American culture, other cultures
throughout the world also have the nesting feature.
Cultural Influence of the Social System and the Individual
Learning begins at birth. Learning does not come from books
alone; it is also acquired through culture.
This is called acculturation. From a very young age, you begin
to learn norms for thinking and behaving
(Conbere & Heorhiadi, 2006; Hofstede & Hofstede, 2005).
Look at the socio-cultural learning model (Friesenborg, 2015)
and imagine an individual within an
organization. That organization emanates ways of thinking and
assumptions about what is culturally
desired. The organization also emanates the behavioral norms,
the range of behaviors that are
acceptable within the organization (Hofstede & Hofstede,
2005). Culture has a tendency to perpetuate
itself and to resist change unless the strength of one or more
individuals exerts enough influence on the
culture as it flows between them and the social system.
In this way, individuals do have the capacity to influence
culture, particularly within small- and
intermediate-sized social systems, such as teams, families, and

organizations (Adams & Markus, 2004;
Friesenborg, 2015; Kitayama et al., 2007). Think of revered
company presidents, for example. The
organization not only influenced those individual leaders, but
they also influenced the organization
culture where they worked.
UNIT x STUDY GUIDE
Title
As indicated in the model above, the word organization may be
substituted with the name of any social
system, showing how culture flows between the individual and
any social system. In addition to
organizations, examples of other social systems include
American society as a whole, an athletic team, a
class at school, the school as a whole, a professional
association, a church, and a family (Friesenborg,
2015).
Take a closer look at the socio-cultural learning model as it
applies to American society as the social
system. In this case, substitute American society in place of
organization on the left side of the model.
American society influences individuals who live within the
culture, but individuals also have varying

levels of influence and may shape American culture. Famous
individuals, such as revered American
presidents, civil rights leaders, and famous musicians and
actors, have influenced American society.
These are all positive examples, but powerful individuals with
toxic characteristics can also infect the
social system through their influence on the culture as culture
flows between the individual and the social
system (Friesenborg, 2015).
In this way, you as the leader can help shape the culture to lead
change. You are the individual, and
while the organization influences the ways you think and
behave, you have the opportunity to mutually
influence the culture that flows between you and the
organization (Friesenborg, 2015).
Moving Forward
In this unit, we have just scratched the surface of culture.
Throughout this course, you will learn how to
detect and influence culture. For me, this learning was life-
changing, transforming the way I lead in
teams and organizations, while also transforming the way I
approach relationships as a spouse, parent,
and friend. I hope you find this learning to be equally impactful
in your life.
References
Adams, G., & Markus, H. R. (2004). Toward a conception of
culture suitable for a social psychology of
culture. In M. Schaller & C. S. Crandall (Eds.), The

psychological foundations of culture
(pp. 335–360). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Argyris, C., & Schön, D. A. (1996). Organizational learning II:
Theory, method, and practice.
Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
Conbere, J. P., & Heorhiadi, A. (2006). Cultural influences and
conflict in organizational change in new
entrepreneurial organizations in Ukraine. International Journal
of Conflict Management, 17(3),
226-241.
O
rg
a
n
iz
a
ti
o
n
(o
r
a

n
y
s
o
c
ia
l
s
y
s
te
m
)
In
d
iv
id
u
a
l
Culture
(Implicit & Explicit)
Flowing Patterns of
Meaning & Practice

© Laura Friesenborg, 2012
Socio-Cultural Learning Model
(Friesenborg, 2015, p. 15)
UNIT x STUDY GUIDE
Title
Friesenborg, L. (2015). The culture of learning organizations:
Understanding Argyris’ theory through a
socio-cognitive systems learning model. Forest City, IA:
Brennan-Mitchell.
Hofstede, G., & Hofstede, G. J. (2005). Cultures and
organizations: Software of the mind (2nd ed.).
New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Kitayama, S., Duffy, S., & Uchida, Y. (2007). Self as cultural
mode of being. In S. Kitayama & D. Cohen
(Eds.), Handbook of cultural psychology (pp. 136-174). New
York, NY: The Guilford Press.
Schein, E. H. (2010). Organizational culture and leadership (4th

ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Suggested Reading
Waldorf’s Academic Integrity Policy:
The Waldorf University Academic Integrity Policy is critical to
your success as a graduate student. Read the
policy, which is available in Waldorf’s Online Programs
Catalog at the following link:
http://www.waldorf.edu/Download-Information. For quick
access to this policy after clicking the link, either: (a)
view the Table of Contents under the “Academic Information”
heading or (b) simultaneously click the “Control”
key and the “F” key on your keyboard for the “find” feature,
and type “Academic Integrity Policy.”
A book that is integrated throughout this course:
Friesenborg, L. (2015). The culture of learning organizations:
Understanding Argyris’ theory through a
socio-cognitive systems learning model. Forest City, IA:
Brennan-Mitchell.
APA Manual:
It is recommended that you to purchase the most current edition
of the Publication Manual of the American
Psychological Association (APA), as it will be used in courses
throughout your master’s degree program.

Database search & APA resources:
Introduction to the Waldorf Online Library
http://waldorf.libguides.com/wol
Purdue OWL
https://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/section/2/10/
Specifically, the excellent APA PowerPoint located at:
https://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/560/17/
Waldorf Library Tutorial #1:
The following video presents the Basics of Database Searching
(begin watching at time-stamp 1 min., 40
secs.; 57-minute recorded webinar).
https://columbiasouthern.adobeconnect.com/_a1174888831/p4c0
i44tcvl/?launcher=false&fcsContent=true&p
bMode=normal
Waldorf Library Tutorial #2:
The following materials address Concerning Citations: APA,
Academic Integrity, and Resources. The first
presentation is a Prezi, which you can navigate through at your
own pace. The second presentation is a
recorded webinar you can watch.
Prezi – Additional Supporting Material (to accompany the
following webinar):
http://prezi.com/okeeu7ihygx6/concerning-citations-apa-and-
academic-integrity/
Recorded webinar (begin watching at time-stamp 1 min., 33
secs.; 57-minute recorded webinar):
https://columbiasouthern.adobeconnect.com/_a1174888831/p69
hpik2cy4/?launcher=false&fcsContent=true&

pbMode=normal
http://www.waldorf.edu/Download-Information
http://waldorf.libguides.com/wol
https://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/section/2/10/
https://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/560/17/
i44tcvl/?launcher=false&fcsContent=true&pbMode=normal
i44tcvl/?launcher=false&fcsContent=true&pbMode=normal
http://prezi.com/okeeu7ihygx6/concerning-citations-apa-and-
academic-integrity/
hpik2cy4/?launcher=false&fcsContent=true&pbMode=normal
hpik2cy4/?launcher=false&fcsContent=true&pbMode=normal

ORIGINAL ARTICLESThe Relationship Between Facebook and the.docx

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Similar to ORIGINAL ARTICLESThe Relationship Between Facebook and the.docx

Similar to ORIGINAL ARTICLESThe Relationship Between Facebook and the.docx (20)

More from gerardkortney

More from gerardkortney (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

ORIGINAL ARTICLESThe Relationship Between Facebook and the.docx