SlideShare a Scribd company logo
1 of 257
A. Lab # : BSBA BIS245A-3
B. Lab 3 of 7: Database Design Using Visio and Based on Data
Requirements and Business Rules
C. Lab Overview—Scenario/Summary
TCOs:
2. Given a situation containing entities, business rules, and data
requirements, create the conceptual model of the database using
a database modeling tool.
3. Given an existing relational database schema, evaluate and
alter the database design for efficiency.
4. Given an existing database structure demonstrating efficiency
and integrity, design the physical tables.
Scenario
You have been asked to create a database model using MS Visio
Database Model
Diagram Template. The purpose of this iLab is to provide
experience designing, with limited instructions, a simple
database based on a list of data requirements and associated
business rules.
You will then complete an MS Access database based on the
model developed in
Visio, creating the necessary tables and relationships.
Upon completing this lab, you will be able to
1. create a new Visio file for database design;
2. using the data requirements and the business rules provided,
develop a conceptual model (ERD), including attribute data
types and required field
lengths; and
3. create a new MS Access database based on the ERD.
D. Deliverables
Section
Deliverable
Points
Part A
YourNameLab3.vsdx (Visio Diagram)
Part B
YourNameLab3.accdb (Access Database)
E. Lab Steps
Page 6 of 6
Preparation
1. If you are using Citrix for MS Visio and/or MS Access,
follow the login instructions located in the iLab area in Course
Home.
Lab
Part A: Create a Visio ERD from Data Requirements and
Business Rules
Step 1: Open Visio
a. Open Microsoft Office, Visio application, or
b. if you are using Citrix, click on Microsoft Office
Applications folder to start
Visio.
Step 2: Identify and Create the Entities
1. Open a new blank Database Model Diagram. If you need
assistance with this, refer to the Week 1 Lab Instructions. Be
sure that all options are set consistent to those used in previous
weeks so that you generate your model in Crow's Foot notation.
2. Save the file as YourName_Lab3.vsdx.
3. Based on the information provided below, create the
necessary entities for the Pages in Time database. If you need
assistance to create the entities, refer to iLabs from Weeks 1
and 2.
Pages in Time
Pages in Time is a small bookstore carrying a variety of books.
The owners have decided to computerize the books available
through the store so that they can determine more easily what
books are on
hand and which books need to be special ordered to meet
customer needs. Because customers do not always remember the
name of a desired book, the owners want to be able to look for
books by author or by type (genre). They also want to be able to
find the publisher’s information using the system so that they
can order books more easily.
After visiting with the owners, you have gathered the following
information on data requirements and business rules to develop
a conceptual design (ERD), prepare it for conversion to an
Access database, and then create the actual database.
DATA REQUIREMENTS
You have determined that you will need at least the following
entities to resolve the relationships that exist in the data.
CUSTOMERS
ID
Name (store data in its smallest parts)
Address (store data in its smallest parts) Phone:
E-mail Address
Preferred Contact Method
ORDERS Number
Date
Received Date
Customer Contacted (Yes or No)
BOOKS
ISBN Number
Title
Purchase Price
Year Published Fiction or Nonfiction Type (Genre)
In stock
AUTHOR
ID
Name (store data in smallest parts!) Short Biography
PUBLISHER
ID Name Address
Phone number
Contact Person Fax Number Website
Step 3: Identify and Create Attributes (fields)
NOTE: Because you are creating your diagram in Visio, it will
be easier to create the attributes prior to the relationships.
a. Refer to the data requirements from Step 2 of this iLab. If
you have not already created the attributes (fields) in your ERD,
add them at this time.
b. Be sure that you store data in its smallest parts. c. Save your
file, and continue to Step 4.
Step 4: Identify and Designate the Keys
a. Determine whether an attribute exists in each table that will
satisfy the requirements of a primary key. If no appropriate
field exists, create a field for this purpose.
b. Check the Primary Key property for the field in each table
using the Visio column properties.
Step 5: Identify the Relationships
a. Using the information below on the business rules for Pages
in Time, create the relationships between the entities created in
Step 2.
b. Notice that when many-to-many relationships exist, you will
need to create associative entities. If you are not sure of the
process to create relationships in Visio, refer to the iLabs for
Weeks 1 and 2. You created an associative entity in Week 2.
c. For any associative entities created, enter necessary fields.
You may also need to designate or create a primary key.
BUSINESS RULES
Business rules help determine the relationships between data
that should help you design the relationships between your
entities.
1. Each customer can place many orders over time, but each
order is placed by only one customer.
2. Each order may include many books, and a book may be
included on many orders.
3. Each book may have multiple authors, and each author may
have written multiple books.
4. Each book has only one publisher, but a publisher may
publish many books.
End of Part A
Part B: Create the Access Database from the ERD
Preparation
Open the Visio file created in Part A of this iLab, you will
reference this file in Part B.
Step 1: Start MS Access and Open a New Blank Database
a. Create a new Blank Database; refer to the Week 2 iLab for
more detailed instructions.
b. Save the database as YourNameLab3.
c. Note: If you are unsure how to complete any steps in this
iLab, refer to the previous week's iLabs.
Step 2: Create the Tables
a. Based on the Visio diagram from Part A, create the tables for
your database. b. Enter the field names.
Step 3: Identify the Relationships
a. Use the information from your Visio diagram to identify and
create relationships in Access.
Step 4: Determine and Specify the Data Types
NOTE: After meeting with the client and discussing the
database needs, determinations on data types and attributes have
been established. Use the following guidelines to determine data
type, primary keys for each table, and set attribute properties
such as field length and required fields as indicated. If not
indicated, use your best judgment for data types.
a. Using the information below, select the data type for each
attribute (field) in your diagram, and set the type in the attribute
properties. (Refer to the Week 2 iLab if you are not sure how to
do this. Where allowed, estimate the field length needed.)
As the data types and field lengths are not included in the data
requirements, you should make a selection based on your
knowledge of the type of data and approximation of length
required. The Visio and Access data type equivalents are shown
below.
Access Field Types:
Number
Text
Memo
Date/Time
Currency
Yes/No
AutoNumber
Hyperlink
NOTE: Be sure to save the final version of your file.
Step 7: Create the Relationships
a. Open the database relationships window.
b. Based on the Visio diagram from Part A, create the
relationships for your database.
c. Be sure to enforce referential integrity for each relationship.
Save your file.
End of Part B
Lab 3 Final Deliverables
a. YourNameLab3.vsdx (Visio Diagram)—from Lab 3 Part A
b. YourNameLab3.accdb (Access Database)—from Lab 3 Part B
Submit these files to the Week 3 iLab Dropbox.
END OF LAB
Computers in Human Behavior 29 (2013) 2490–2493
Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect
Computers in Human Behavior
j o u r n a l h o m e p a g e : w w w . e l s e v i e r . c o m / l o c
a t e / c o m p h u m b e h
Attitude moderation: A comparison of online chat and Face-to-
face
conversation
0747-5632/$ - see front matter � 2013 Published by Elsevier
Ltd.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2013.06.004
⇑ Corresponding author. Address: Department of Psychology,
University of
Toronto, 100 St. George Street, Toronto, Ontario M5S 3G3,
Canada. Tel.: +1 416
946 5275; fax: +1 416 978 4811.
E-mail address: [email protected] (M. Lipinski-Harten).
Maciek Lipinski-Harten ⇑ , Romin W. Tafarodi
Department of Psychology, University of Toronto, Canada
a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t
Article history:
Available online 28 June 2013
Keywords:
Online
Chat
Conversation
Negotiation
Agreement
Attitudes
Face-to-face conversation and online chat were compared on
their tendency to moderate attitudes
through exposure to an opposing perspective. As predicted on
the basis of the greater self-focus and
reduced presence of the other in text-based chat, strangers who
chatted online for 20 min about a divisive
social issue on which they held opposing attitudes showed less
movement toward their partner’s position
as a result than did those who spoke face-to-face for the same
length of time. The potential limitation of
text-based online communication for bridging attitude divides is
discussed.
� 2013 Published by Elsevier Ltd.
1. Introduction
Online communication allows people to share ideas and hold
each other’s attention across the widest of physical and social
divides. One feature that contributes to this democratic and cos-
mopolitan inclusivity is the absence of physical appearance as a
hindrance to egalitarian dialogue in text-based exchanges
(Joinson,
2001). This identifies online contact as a potential means of
reduc-
ing social prejudice (Amichai-Hamburger & McKenna, 2006;
Walther, 2009). Its success in this regard depends on the ability
of the medium to promote attitude change through substantive
discussion among dissimilar parties. Whether such attitude
change
occurs, however, appears to depend on the motivational context
of
the interaction. Walther, Van Der Heide, Tong, Carr, and Atkin
(2010), for example, found evidence for attitude convergence
when
one online interlocutor was motivated to establish an affinity
with
the other, but not when otherwise motivated. What remains
unclear is whether the compulsions of the online medium on the
whole tend to promote relatively more or less affinity-seeking
in
dialogical encounters with strangers than is the case in face-to-
face
conversation, specifically with respect to negotiating the chal-
lenges of initial difference or disagreement.
From a uses-and-gratifications perspective, the primary function
of informal, voluntary, and sustained online communication is
the
formation and maintenance of affinity groups. That said, there
is
good reason to believe that the medium is not as conducive as
face-to-face communication to developing affinity among
strangers.
Despite the availability of digital voice and video interfaces,
most
online communicators opt for text-only platforms (Rainie, 2011;
Shiu & Lenhart, 2004). This preference is telling. Face-to-face
and
voice encounters, real or virtual, are more taxing in that they
require close attention to physical and auditory cues (Burgoon
&
Hoobler, 2002), and provide less expressive and editorial
control.
The greater reciprocal ‘‘transparency’’ (Gilovich, Savitsky, &
Medvec, 1998) that is experienced face-to-face is associated
with
increased social accountability and risk. In contrast, purely
text-based exchanges require less scrutiny of the other, less
self-
exposure, and less sustained attention. They are ‘‘lighter’’ in
this
sense, so much so that many online communicators feel free to
multitask during conversations (Dresner & Barak, 2006). With
less
pressure to attend to the other, communicators are at liberty to
focus more on their own intentions, desires, and beliefs
(McKenna,
2007; Suler, 2004; Walther, 2007), and to reveal information in
a
self-prompted and unsolicited manner (Joinson, 2001;
Valkenburg
& Peter, 2007). With the increasing preference for synchronous
forms
of online communication such as instant messaging over
traditional
email and discussion boards, the pressure to respond quickly
further
diminishes nuanced consideration of the other and reduces
willing-
ness to engage in the time-consuming negotiation of
disagreement.
These qualities may be well-fitted to communicating with
familiar
interlocutors where there is considerable affinity and a rich
background of shared experience and common understanding.
They
are, however, less suitable for the effortful reduction of stark
differ-
ence or contention among strangers, where the value of closely
reading the shifting mental states of interlocutors is at a
premium.
This, together with the reduced ethical presence of the other in
text-based encounters, suggests that, on the whole, there is less
http://crossmark.crossref.org/dialog/?doi=10.1016/j.chb.2013.06
.004&domain=pdf
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2013.06.004
mailto:[email protected]
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2013.06.004
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/07475632
http://www.elsevier.com/locate/comphumbeh
M. Lipinski-Harten, R.W. Tafarodi / Computers in Human
Behavior 29 (2013) 2490–2493 2491
impetus for attitude convergence between disagreeing strangers
in
online communication than in face-to-face conversation. If so,
we
can expect less moderation of attitudes through online
discussion
when there is clear initial disagreement, ceteris paribus. To test
this
idea, we compared the degree of attitude moderation produced
by
online chat with that produced through face-to-face dialogue.
Where the conversing partners clearly disagreed at the outset,
we
predicted greater movement toward the partner’s position in the
latter than in the former condition. Where the conversing
partners
agreed at the outset, we expected no such difference. Nor did
we
predict attitude intensification in the case of agreeing partners,
as
the consistent attitude of a single interlocutor is unlikely to
produce
the ‘‘polarizing’’ shifts seen in group contexts where both
informa-
tional and normative influence often loom large (Isenberg,
1986).
2. Method
2.1. Participants
Participants were 142 undergraduate students (86 women and
56 men) at the University of Toronto. The mean age was 19.01
years,
with a range of 17–25. All participants reported regularly
accessing
the internet. Eighty-two percent of the sample reported at least
some regular use of online instant messaging; 90% reported at
least
some regular use of social networking websites.
Participants were recruited by phone on account of their
responses to a set of mass testing questions administered at the
start of the academic term (1–3 months prior to testing). The
crite-
rion for recruitment was clear-cut but not extreme agreement or
disagreement with any one of the following four statements:
(1) To become Canadian citizens, immigrants should be
expected
to conform to the basic values held by most Canadians.
(2) There is no sufficient justification for taking the life of
another person.
(3) The main purpose of university education should be to pre-
pare students to compete successfully in the job market.
(4) A Canadian who fails to vote in a federal election is letting
down the country.
These statements had been selected as those with which
roughly as many students agreed as disagreed in the pool from
which the participants were selected. For purposes of
recruitment,
disagreement was defined as a rating of 3 and agreement as a
rat-
ing of 8 on a scale of 1 (strongly disagree) to 10 (strongly
agree). This
strategy ensured participants with clearly ‘‘sided’’ pre-test
attitudes, but with room for conversationally-induced attitude
change in either direction. During phone recruitment, all
partici-
pants were asked to confirm the pre-test response for which
they
had been selected. Only those who did so were retained.
Participants were randomly matched into either consistent or
opposing same-sex pairs. Members of consistent pairs shared
the
same pre-test rating (3 or 8) on the attitude statement of
selection.
In opposing pairs, one member had a pre-test rating of 3 and the
other of 8 on the attitude statement. This system of pairing
effec-
tively created conversation partners who could be expected to
either agree or disagree on the issue represented by the
statement.
A total of 34 opposing and 37 consistent pairs were tested. The
gender ratio was comparable for the two types of pairs,
v2(1) = 1.20, p = .27. All participants received either course
credit
or a modest cash payment in exchange for their time.
2.2. Procedure
Members of pairs were unfamiliar to each other prior to the
study. Each pair was randomly assigned to either a face-to-face
(FTF) or online chat (OC) condition. The gender ratio was
compara-
ble in the two conditions, v2(1) = .17, p = .68. In both
conditions,
participants were read the attitude statement that had been the
basis of their selection for the study and instructed to discuss
their
thoughts and feelings on the subject with each other for 20 min.
It
was made clear that the conversation would be recorded.
Members
of the pair were not informed of each other’s attitudes on the
state-
ment they would be discussing and had no reason to anticipate
agreement or disagreement. In FTF, members of the pair were
seated across from each other in a private room for the duration
of the conversation. In OC, members of the pair were seated in
sep-
arate rooms in front of desktop computers and instructed to con-
verse in text for 20 min using Google Talk, a web-based instant
messaging application. Only Google Talk’s synchronous text-
based
capabilities were used. Participants unfamiliar with Google Talk
were given a quick tutorial prior to the conversation. Members
of
OC pairs were prevented from seeing each other before, during,
and after the conversation. In both conditions, anonymity was
pro-
tected by asking all participants to refrain from revealing or
asking
for personal names. FTF conversations were digitally recorded
and
transcribed for analysis. OC conversations were automatically
logged and downloaded.
Following the conversation, participants completed a short
questionnaire consisting of demographic items, a set of experi-
ence-related questions that are not directly relevant here, and 12
attitude statements addressing a broad range of topics, one of
which was the critical attitude statement on which members of
the pair had been selected. Participants indicated their
agreement
with the critical statement on the same 1–10 scale used in pre-
testing, thus providing a post-conversation index of attitude
change. All participants were fully debriefed on the nature and
purpose of the study before leaving the laboratory. The entire
session lasted approximately 50 min.
The variable of interest here is the degree of change from pre-
test to post-conversation on the attitude for which the
participant
had been selected. Specifically, we expected more movement to-
ward the opposite side of the attitude scale after conversation
with
an opposing partner (where, presumably, one’s views would be
challenged and moderated) in FTF than in OC. No difference
be-
tween FTF and OC was expected after conversation with a
consis-
tent partner (where, presumably, one’s views would be echoed
and thereby reinforced). To test these predictions, participants’
pre-test rated agreement with the attitude statement was sub-
tracted from their post-conversation rated agreement. For those
participants selected for a pre-test rating of 3, a positive value
for
the resulting difference represents movement toward the
opposite
side of the scale. For participants selected on account of a pre-
test
rating of 8, the sign of the difference was reversed so that a
positive
value again represents movement toward the opposite side of
the
scale. For present purposes, we will refer to this change
variable as
moderation in attitude, despite the fact that a few participants
(4.93% of the sample) moved to a position on the opposite side
of
the rating scale that was more extreme (relative to the midpoint)
that their pre-test position.
3. Results
To accommodate the influence of participants within pairs on
each other, participant-level outcome variables were analyzed
according to Kenny, Kashy, and Cook’s (2006) actor–partner
inter-
dependence model. This approach requires defining a multilevel
or
mixed model with individual participants as first-level units and
dyads as second-level units. The covariance structure reflecting
partners’ response dependencies within dyads was specified as
compound symmetric. Satterthwaite’s (1946) approximation was
2492 M. Lipinski-Harten, R.W. Tafarodi / Computers in Human
Behavior 29 (2013) 2490–2493
used to determine the degrees of freedom for mixed predictors.
Mixed model testing was conducted using the SAS statistical
pack-
age (see Campbell & Kashy, 2002). The initial model revealed
no
significant (a = .05) main or interactive effects for dyad gender,
which was therefore eliminated from the model to focus testing.
In this final model, moderation was examined as a function of
medium (FTF, OC) and partner match (consistent, opposing).
Cell
means and standard deviations are presented in Table 1.
The results revealed significant effects for medium, F(1,
67) = 5.20, p = .03, and the Medium � Match interaction, F(1,
67) = 5.56, p = .02. The former reflects a simple effect of
medium
among opposing partners, F(1, 67) = 3.87, p = .05, where those
in
the FTF condition showed more moderation (M = 1.44) than
those
in the OC condition (M = .76), as predicted, but not among
consis-
tent partners, F(1, 67) = 1.91, p = .17, where those in the FTF
and OC
conditions showed comparable levels of moderation (Ms = .32
and
1.25, respectively). If anything, the direction of the latter,
nonsig-
nificant difference indicates somewhat greater moderation in
OC
than in FTF when partners agreed at the outset, hinting at
movement away from a consistent partner in OC as a result of
the discussion. Finally, mean moderation was significantly
(p < .05) greater than zero for all groups except consistent
partners
in the FTF condition.
The fourfold pattern of means gainsays the possibility that the
greater attitude moderation in the face of an opposing FTF
partner
was due to the higher average number of words spoken than
typed
in the 20-min session (Ms = 334 and 1604, respectively).
Namely,
the degree of moderation away from a consistent partner in OC
was in fact comparable to that seen among inconsistent partners
in the FTF condition. This pattern argues against the possibility
that
not enough was typed in OC to induce the degree of attitude
change seen in FTF. Clearly, there was significant movement in
both
FTF and OC conditions, but in an opposing pattern with regard
to
partner match. Furthermore, if the absolute number of words
spo-
ken or typed by an inconsistent partner is predictive of partici-
pants’ attitude moderation, then we should see a corresponding
significant correlation in the data. This, however, was not the
case
– neither in FTF, Pearson r = .01, p = .95, nor in OC, r = .17, p
= .35.
4. Discussion
This study looked at the importance of medium for determining
the degree to which discussion with a disagreeing partner
moder-
ates a strong attitude. Specifically, we predicted that the power
of
an opposing perspective to challenge and rationally temper
one’s
initial position would be reduced in online chat as compared to
face-to-face conversation. The invisibility and inaudibility of
the
other in online chat would, we argued, reduce the felt mental
and ethical presence of one’s partner and promote greater focus
on one’s own thoughts and feelings at the expense of
understand-
ing and acknowledging the validity of the partner’s sentiments
and
position. This weaker interpersonal engagement would lead to
less
social influence in general and less attitude change in
particular.
Consistent with prediction, students matched with partners who
Table 1
Means and standard deviations for moderation as a function of
medium and attitude
pairing.
Attitude pairing
Medium Consistent Opposing
Face-to-face .32 (2.18) 1.44 (1.96)
Online chat 1.25 (2.72) .76 (1.74)
Note. Values represent degree of movement toward the opposite
end of the 1–10
attitude scale. The possible range is �2 to 7. Standard
deviations appear in
parentheses.
clearly disagreed with them on the issue under discussion
showed
greater attitude moderation after 20 min of face-to-face
conversa-
tion than after the same length of online chat. Also as expected,
this pattern held only for disagreeing partners: There was no
sig-
nificant difference in moderation across medium in the case of
partners who agreed at the outset.
The results point to the potential limitation of online chat
among strangers for producing immediate attitude change
through
rational dialogue. Insofar as participants in online chat remain
more attuned to themselves than to those who manifest as mere
text on a screen, their susceptibility to dissuasion away from
strongly held beliefs and commitments would be low. The
visual,
auditory, and physical confrontation that defines face-to-face
con-
versation forces each speaker into a deeper engagement with the
subjective world of the other, heightening the social impact of
ex-
pressed thoughts and feelings, including those that contrast with
one’s own. Ironically, the very virtues that protect online
denizens
from those they interact with and provide them with greater
free-
dom to be themselves (i.e., anonymity, invisibility, inaudibility,
physical remoteness, reduced accountability) may also shield
them
in some contexts from socially harmonizing attitude change.
Of course, the limitations of this study – its exclusive use of
stu-
dent participants who were unknown to each other, a nonnatural
context (laboratory experiment), a single, brief conversation,
and
a narrow selection of attitudes – invite caution in generalizing
beyond the distinctive configuration of features represented
here.
At the same time, the results raise legitimate concerns about the
ability of online chat to stand in for face-to-face conversation as
an equipotent means of promoting moderation and mutual
under-
standing where initial beliefs and convictions are not shared.
Future research should address just how far this limitation
extends
and how best to overcome it.
Acknowledgements
We thank Nassim Collishaw, Milena Djokic, Anders Dorbeck,
Ruijie Gu, Christine Lee, Yunjie Shi, Alex Vasilovsky, Kathy
Wang,
Jesse Beatson, and Raffles Cowan for their assistance with data
collection and coding.
References
Amichai-Hamburger, Y., & McKenna, K. Y. A. (2006). The
contact hypothesis
reconsidered: Interacting via the internet. Journal of Computer-
Mediated
Communication, 11, 825–843.
Burgoon, J., & Hoobler, G. (2002). Nonverbal signals. In M.
Knapp & J. Daly (Eds.),
Handbook of interpersonal communication (pp. 240–299).
Thousand Oaks, CA:
Sage.
Campbell, L., & Kashy, D. A. (2002). Estimating actor, partner,
and interaction effects
for dyadic data using PROC MIXED and HLM: A user-friendly
guide. Personal
Relationships, 9, 327–342.
Dresner, E., & Barak, S. (2006). Conversational multitasking in
interactive written
discourse as a communication competence. Communication
Reports, 19, 70–78.
Gilovich, T., Savitsky, K., & Medvec, V. H. (1998). The
illusion of transparency: Biased
assessments of others’ ability to read one’s emotional states.
Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 332–346.
Isenberg, D. J. (1986). Group polarization: A critical review and
meta-analysis.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50, 1141–1151.
Joinson, A. N. (2001). Self-disclosure in computer-mediated
communication: The
role of self-awareness and visual anonymity. European Journal
of Social
Psychology, 31, 177–192.
Kenny, D. A., Kashy, D. A., & Cook, W. L. (2006). Dyadic data
analysis. New York:
Guilford.
McKenna, K. Y. A. (2007). Through the internet looking glass:
Expressing and
validating the true self. In A. Joinson, K. Y. A. McKenna, T.
Postmes, & U. Reips
(Eds.), The oxford handbook of psychology (pp. 205–222). New
York: Oxford
University Press.
Rainie, L. (2011). Internet phone calls. Reported by Pew
Internet and American Life
Project.
Satterthwaite, F. W. (1946). An approximate distribution of
estimates of variance
components. Biometrics Bulletin, 2, 110–114.
Shiu, E., & Lenhart, A. (2004). How Americans use instant
messaging. Reported by
Pew Internet and American Life Project.
http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0747-5632(13)00196-9/h0005
http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0747-5632(13)00196-9/h0005
http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0747-5632(13)00196-9/h0005
http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0747-5632(13)00196-9/h0010
http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0747-5632(13)00196-9/h0010
http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0747-5632(13)00196-9/h0010
http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0747-5632(13)00196-9/h0015
http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0747-5632(13)00196-9/h0015
http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0747-5632(13)00196-9/h0015
http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0747-5632(13)00196-9/h0020
http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0747-5632(13)00196-9/h0020
http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0747-5632(13)00196-9/h0025
http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0747-5632(13)00196-9/h0025
http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0747-5632(13)00196-9/h0025
http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0747-5632(13)00196-9/h0030
http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0747-5632(13)00196-9/h0030
http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0747-5632(13)00196-9/h0035
http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0747-5632(13)00196-9/h0035
http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0747-5632(13)00196-9/h0035
http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0747-5632(13)00196-9/h0040
http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0747-5632(13)00196-9/h0040
http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0747-5632(13)00196-9/h0045
http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0747-5632(13)00196-9/h0045
http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0747-5632(13)00196-9/h0045
http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0747-5632(13)00196-9/h0045
http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0747-5632(13)00196-9/h0055
http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0747-5632(13)00196-9/h0055
M. Lipinski-Harten, R.W. Tafarodi / Computers in Human
Behavior 29 (2013) 2490–2493 2493
Suler, J. (2004). The online disinhibition effect.
CyberPsychology & Behavior, 7,
321–326.
Valkenburg, P. M., & Peter, J. (2007). Preadolescents’ and
adolescents’ online
communication and their closeness to friends. Developmental
Psychology, 43,
267–277.
Walther, J. B. (2007). Selective self-presentation in computer-
mediated
communication: Hyperpersonal dimensions of technology,
language and
cognition. Computers in Human Behaviour, 23, 2538–2557.
Walther, J. B. (2009). In point of practice: Computer-mediated
communication and
virtual groups: Applications to interethnic conflict. Journal of
Applied
Communication Research, 37, 225–238.
Walther, J. B., Van Der Heide, B., Tong, S. T., Carr, C. T., &
Atkin, C. K. (2010).
Effects of interpersonal goals on inadvertent intrapersonal
influence in
computer-mediated communication. Human Communication
Research, 36,
323–347.
http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0747-5632(13)00196-9/h0065
http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0747-5632(13)00196-9/h0065
http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0747-5632(13)00196-9/h0070
http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0747-5632(13)00196-9/h0070
http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0747-5632(13)00196-9/h0070
http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0747-5632(13)00196-9/h0075
http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0747-5632(13)00196-9/h0075
http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0747-5632(13)00196-9/h0075
http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0747-5632(13)00196-9/h0080
http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0747-5632(13)00196-9/h0080
http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0747-5632(13)00196-9/h0080
http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0747-5632(13)00196-9/h0085
http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0747-5632(13)00196-9/h0085
http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0747-5632(13)00196-9/h0085
http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0747-5632(13)00196-
9/h0085Attitude moderation: A comparison of online chat and
Face-to-face conversation1 Introduction2 Method2.1
Participants2.2 Procedure3 Results4
DiscussionAcknowledgementsReferences
Are You Feeling Lonely? The Impact of
Relationship Characteristics and Online
Social Network Features on Loneliness
SABINE MATOOK, JEFF CUMMINGS, AND HILLOL BALA
SABINE MATOOK is a senior lecturer of information systems
at the UQ Business
School, University of Queensland, Australia. She received her
Ph.D. from the
Technische Universität Dresden, Germany. Her research
interests include the IT
artifact, social media, and agile IS development. Her work has
appeared in the
European Journal of Information Systems, Information and
Management, MISQ
Executive, Decision Support Systems, Journal of Strategic
Information Systems, and
other journals. She has served or is currently serving as an
associate editor and track
chair for major information systems conferences, including the
International
Conference on Information Systems and European Conference
on Information
Systems.
JEFF CUMMINGS is an assistant professor of information
systems and operations
management in the Cameron School of Business at University of
North Carolina,
Wilmington. He received his Ph.D. from Indiana University. His
research interests
include the impacts of social media on the organization, health-
care IT, and virtual
team collaboration. His work has been published or is
forthcoming in Business
Horizons and Journal of the American Society for Information
Science and
Technology.
HILLOL BALA is an assistant professor of information systems
and Whirlpool
Corporation Faculty Fellow in the Kelley School of Business at
Indiana
University, Bloomington. He received his Ph.D. from the
University of Arkansas.
His research interests include IT-enabled business process
change and management,
IT use, adaptation and impacts, and use of IT in health care. His
work has been
published or is forthcoming in Information Systems Research,
Journal of
Management Information Systems, MIS Quarterly, Management
Science,
Production and Operations Management, Decision Sciences,
Information Society,
Communications of the ACM, MISQ Executive, and other
journals. He has served or
currently serves on the editorial boards of Information Systems
Research and
Decision Sciences, and as a track chair, an associate editor, or a
program committee
member of major information systems conferences, such as the
International
Conference on Information Systems, the Pacific Asia
Conference on Information
Systems, and others.
ABSTRACT: In contemporary society, many people move away
from their personal
networks for extended periods to reach professional and/or
educational goals. This
separation can often lead to feelings of loneliness, which can be
stressful and
sometimes debilitating for the individual. We seek to
understand how a person’s
Journal of Management Information Systems / Spring 2015,
Vol. 31, No. 4, pp. 278–310.
Copyright © Taylor & Francis Group, LLC
ISSN 0742–1222 (print) / ISSN 1557–928X (online)
DOI: 10.1080/07421222.2014.1001282
use of online social networks (OSNs)—technology-enabled
tools that assist users
with creating and maintaining their relationships—might affect
their perceptions of
loneliness. Prior research has offered mixed results about how
OSNs affect lone-
liness—reporting both positive and negative effects. We argue
in this study that a
clearer perspective can be gained by taking a closer look at how
individuals
approach their relationship management in OSNs. Building on
theoretical works
on loneliness, we develop a model to explain the effects of
relationship character-
istics (i.e., relationship orientation, self-disclosure, and
networking ability) and OSN
features (i.e., active or passive) on perceived loneliness. Our
findings show that OSN
can be linked to both more and less perceived loneliness, that
is, individuals’
relationship orientation significantly affects their feelings of
loneliness, which are
further moderated by their degree of self-disclosure within the
OSN. Furthermore,
how users engage in the OSN (either actively or passively)
influences their percep-
tions of loneliness. Practical implications regarding perceived
loneliness include
recommendations for firms to encourage mobile workers to
utilize OSNs when
separated from others, for education providers to connect with
their new students
before they arrive, and for users to utilize OSNs as a social
bridge to others they feel
close with.
KEY WORDS AND PHRASES: social media, online social
networks, loneliness, relationship
management, communal orientation, social exchange theory,
self-disclosure,
networking ability.
In recent years, individuals have become increasingly mobile,
and in doing so travel
significant distances from their homes to reside at the target
destination for an
extended period of time [30]. Consequently, individuals are
separated from the
social environments that are both familiar and comforting to
them [58]. Prior
research in sociology has suggested that this separation leads to
negative social
outcomes, including feelings of loneliness [66, 82]. It is
assumed that lonely people
desire human attachment that can be achieved through creating
new or nurturing
existing relationships [7].
Prior research has produced mixed findings regarding the
impact of technology,
especially online social networks (OSNs), on feelings of
loneliness [78]. Whereas
some studies point to a negative association between OSN use
and loneliness [31],
others show the opposite [19]. When loneliness is reduced
because OSNs engage
users in relationships with their social network contacts [31],
the technology serves
as an outlet that captivates and helps users to buffer their social
separation [60]. In
contrast, other studies have shown that OSN use increases
loneliness. Some users
who only consume information that others share have developed
feelings of envy,
emotional withdrawal, and loneliness [50]. Indeed, studies
showed that individuals’
life satisfaction and well-being decreased when using Facebook
intensively because
they compared their lives with their impressions of others in the
OSN [52]. Because
of these mixed findings, it is not clear whether OSNs alleviate
or exacerbate
perceived loneliness, and a more comprehensive and
theoretically grounded account
is needed.
IMPACT OF ONLINE SOCIAL NETWORK FEATURES ON
LONELINESS 279
The current study seeks to address this gap by focusing on the
primary purpose of
OSNs as relationship tools. OSNs are uniquely suited for
managing relationships
because users can virtually replicate their social network of
relationships [34].
However, not everybody uses the OSN in the same way nor do
they have the
same approach to how they manage their relationships. We thus
propose that (1) a
user’s OSN feature use, (2) the user’s relationship orientation
moderated by their
degree of self-disclosure, and (3) a user’s networking ability
have an impact on their
loneliness. As the overarching theory for this study, we draw on
the loneliness
literature and insights from theories of social exchange,
communication, and poli-
tical skills to develop our model, and we test the model in the
context of students’
use of OSNs. While all three theories center around human
relationships and are
core parts of human interactions, social exchange theory from
the relationship
literature enables us to theorize about relationship norms and
how benefits between
relationship partners (e.g., OSN users) are given and received.
Communication
theories are used to explain different forms of communication—
either direct or via
broadcasting—whereas the management theory on personal
influences and political
skills illuminates the OSN user’s ability to create and maintain
relationships.
This paper contributes to information systems (IS) research by
enhancing our
understanding of OSN use and the impact it has on users’
perceived loneliness.
This research expands the relationship literature by examining a
user’s approach to
relationship management in OSNs and extends theory in social
psychology, in
particular the body of knowledge of loneliness. We further add
to the theoretical
understanding of on self-disclosure in virtual settings by
proposing it as a moderator
between relationship orientation and loneliness. Finally, we
contribute to manage-
ment research by demonstrating the importance of networking
for an OSN user to
ease feelings of loneliness. This research also provides practical
insights about how
organizations, such as firms and education providers, can help
alleviate loneliness
experienced by those they are responsible for.
Background
This section presents prior research on OSNs and perceived
social loneliness that is
relevant to our study.
Online Social Networks
An OSN, such as Facebook or Google+, is a web-based
technology that allows users
to exchange social information with others who may be near or
far, including
friends, family, colleagues, and teammates [56]. Kane et al. [46,
p. 279] summarized
the unique characteristics of OSNs by describing how they
enable users to “(1) have
a unique user profile that is constructed by them, members of
their network, and the
platform; (2) access digital content through and protect it from
various search
mechanisms provided by the platform; (3) articulate a list of
other users with
280 MATOOK, CUMMINGS, AND BALA
whom they share a connection; and (4) view and traverse their
connections and those
made by others within the system.”
An OSN’s relationship management capability is enabled
through features avail-
able in most OSNs, including the ability to list contacts, share
social information
(including photos, videos, text via microblogging [79]),
send/receive private mes-
sages, social search engines, and express support to others (e.g.,
“Likes” on
Facebook) [11]. Through these features, user-generated content
is created that facil-
itates both active engagement with one’s network and passive
consumption of
content [64]. Social search engines help in finding contacts as
well as filtering
user-generated content [28].
In OSNs, self-disclosure is a common behavior [69]. Self-
disclosure is defined as
“any message about the self that a person communicates to
another” [87, p. 338]. In
OSNs, disclosed information includes personal details such as
interests, preferences,
relationship status, and habits [85]. People self-disclose to
others they like and trust,
allowing for a relationship to become more intimate [59].
Reciprocal self-disclosure
leads to a “you tell me, I tell you” behavior whereby disclosed
information increases
in depth and breadth [54, p. 170]. Indeed, research on bloggers’
online behavior has
demonstrated the importance of reciprocity for knowledge
sharing [17]. Research
has shown that self-disclosure plays an important role in
relationship growth, leading
to a closer, high-quality relationship, especially for friendships
[15]. Consequently,
OSNs are apt for relationship creation (i.e., to form new and to
revive neglected
relationships) and relationship maintenance (i.e., to nurture and
foster existing
relationships) to impact perceived loneliness [70].
Perceived Social Loneliness
Loneliness results from a perceived absence of satisfying
relationships and a deficit
in an individual’s social network [39, 66]. According to the
belongingness hypoth-
esis, human beings have “a pervasive drive to form and
maintain at least a minimum
quantity of lasting, positive, and significant interpersonal
relationships” [7, p. 497].
The loneliness literature differentiates between two types of
loneliness: emotional
and social [86]. Emotional loneliness is associated with a lack
of intimate ties and a
deficit in intimate attachments, particularly in romantic
relationships. Conversely,
social loneliness “results from the lack of a network of social
relationships in which
the person is part of a group of friends who share common
interests and activities”
[74, p. 1314]. Given that we are interested in the perceived
loneliness of people who
are geographically separated from their familiar social network,
we focus on social
loneliness.
Social loneliness is thought to be the result of social isolation
because an indivi-
dual is not able to have repeated interactions with the same
contacts [7]. The
network of lonely individuals tends to be smaller, which gives
them the impression
that they do not belong to a group [39]. Research reports that
social loneliness comes
from infrequent interactions with friends [27], as well as less
supportive behaviors
IMPACT OF ONLINE SOCIAL NETWORK FEATURES ON
LONELINESS 281
and unhelpfulness from one’s networks in times of need [80].
To compensate
for feelings of social loneliness, prior research stipulates active
relationship manage-
ment [86].
Hypothesis Development
This section presents hypotheses on the impacts of relationship
characteristics
(relationship orientation, self-disclosure and networking ability)
and OSN features
(active and passive features) on social loneliness. Our
theoretical foundation is based
on human relationships and its core focuses on human
interactions. We therefore
build on the relationship literature using social exchange theory
to theorize about
self-disclosure in relationships as well as norms and benefits
given and received
between relationship partners (e.g., OSN users). We use
communication theories to
explain different forms of communicating via OSN networks.
Furthermore, we use a
management theory on personal influences and political skills to
explain an OSN
user’s ability to proactively create and maintain interpersonal
relationships. The
research model is presented in Figure 1 at the end of the
section.
Relationship Orientation
Two social exchange theorists, Clark and Mills [21, 23], have
shown that different
norms govern a person’s behavior when creating and
maintaining a relationship.
These norms affect individuals’ orientations toward
relationships and their under-
standing of how benefits are given and received. In general,
individuals maintain
relationships only when the comparison between given and
received benefits is
perceived to be satisfactory, but individuals differ in how they
judge the extent of
Exchange Orientation
Relationship Orientation
Communal Orientation
Self-Disclosure
Social
Loneliness
Networking Ability
Passive Features
OSN Features
Active
Features
H 1a
H 4a
H 3
H 2bH 2a
H 1b
H 4b
Broadcasting
Direct
Communication
H 4c
Figure 1. Research Model
282 MATOOK, CUMMINGS, AND BALA
reciprocity required [26]. This leads to two different
orientations toward relation-
ships: an exchange orientation and a communal orientation [21].
According to Clark
and Mills, these two relationship types represent two distinct
concepts and not a
continuum that can vary in strength.
An individual with an exchange orientation is concerned with
equal reciprocity
and maintains a relationship with others only for instrumental
reasons [22]. An
exchange relationship orientation is characterized by giving
benefits “with the
expectation of receiving a comparable benefit in return or as
repayment for a benefit
received previously” [21, p. 684]. These individuals carefully
record obligations and
keep score of “give and take.” In contrast, a communal
relationship orientation is
characterized by giving benefits “in response to needs or to
demonstrate a general
concern for the other person” [21, p. 684]. A communal-
oriented individual gen-
erally has no expectations of immediate repayment of a supplied
benefit, but shows a
concern for the other’s welfare [22]. While these two types of
relationship orienta-
tion are general in nature, they can be translated into an OSN
environment. In such a
context, they manifest as different social-emotional benefits
that stem from the user-
generated content. The benefits one can give and receive in
OSNs include an initial
posting on a contact’s profile page, responding to a posting
(textual or via a “like it”
function), gift giving, sending private messages, and initiating
chats.
Communal relationship orientation: Within OSNs, we argue that
users with a
communal relationship orientation behave in such a way that
results in lower degrees
of perceived social loneliness. These users undertake OSN
activities to please others
and without expectation of immediate repay. For example, a
communal-oriented user
would post a comment on a contact’s OSN profile (i.e., give a
benefit) because he/
she sees the contact is in need or he/she cares about that contact
(e.g., when the
contact posted about a lost wallet or a canceled flight). As these
OSN postings are
undertaken without the expectation of receiving anything in
return, the communal-
oriented person might post on a contact’s profile multiple times
without receiving a
comment back. Posting continuously when a need is observed
(i.e., providing the
benefit), however, stimulates reciprocity because the receiver
may eventually return
the comment. In doing so, the interaction frequency between the
two OSN contacts
increases and the user feels more integrated in the social
network. Simply engaging
in the act of giving may also lead the communal-oriented user to
feel more
connected. For both reasons, perceptions of loneliness should
decrease, and we
thus expect that users who are more communal-oriented will
feel less lonely.
Hypothesis 1a: A user’s communal relationship orientation is
negatively asso-
ciated with perceived social loneliness.
Exchange relationship orientation: Within OSNs, we argue that
users with an
exchange-relationship orientation exhibit behaviors that result
in increased perceived
loneliness. Exchange oriented individuals expect their OSN
activity to be recipro-
cated equally and on a timely basis. For example, if the user
posts on a contact’s
profile, a returning post is soon expected. If the user gives a
virtual gift, then the
IMPACT OF ONLINE SOCIAL NETWORK FEATURES ON
LONELINESS 283
expectation is that the other returns a gift. If the gift is not
returned, the exchange-
oriented user refrains from giving a gift to this contact again
[77]. Contacts who fail
to reciprocate may even be removed from the user’s OSN
network [9]. Because of
an exchange-oriented user’s “scorekeeping,” the user knows of
the failed reciprocity,
and would stop giving benefits to contacts who do not
reciprocate. In this case, the
number of contacts with whom the user interacts becomes
smaller, resulting in the
user being more disconnected from the social network. Instead
of feeling integrated,
an exchange-oriented individual may feel isolated [16] and thus
experience social
loneliness [83]. Consequently, we would expect an OSN user
who only gives
benefits in expectation of equal and timely reciprocity to
experience a higher degree
of perceived social loneliness.
Hypothesis 1b: A user’s exchange-relationship orientation is
positively asso-
ciated with perceived social loneliness.
Self-Disclosure as a Moderating Factor
Prior research has studied the relationship between self-
disclosure and loneliness,
with ambiguous results. Some studies report that self-disclosure
affects loneliness
[53, 73], whereas other studies suggest the reverse [3, 45].
Despite mixed findings,
these studies agree that self-disclosure is important because of
its role in facilitating
the deepening of relationships. We draw on this insight to argue
that self-disclosure
could be an important moderator in our study, in that it could
alter the way in which
a user’s relationship orientation affects loneliness.
For a communal-oriented OSN user, we expect that higher self-
disclosing behavior
will reduce perceived loneliness by strengthening the
relationship between commu-
nal orientation and loneliness. When a communal-oriented OSN
user increases
disclosure of social information, more opportunities for the
user’s contacts to
reciprocate emerge. As a result, the extent of the returning self-
disclosure also
increases [34], albeit not necessarily proportional to the giving.
Because the com-
munal-oriented user is not concerned with equal reciprocity, a
lack of it would
therefore not stop the user’s future self-disclosure, that is, the
communal-oriented
user would continue disclosing social information. Indeed, as
communal-oriented
individuals are more focused on giving than on receiving, and
thus, an increase in
giving would make the user feel close to his/her network,
especially as no “scores”
are kept on how frequently the network reciprocates. Moreover,
continuing disclo-
sure will most likely result in more reciprocated self-disclosure
that will in turn
diminish the communal-oriented user’s loneliness.
Consequently, in the presence of
increased self-disclosure, the negative relationship between
communal orientation
and perceived social loneliness is strengthened.
Hypothesis 2a: Self-disclosure moderates the relationship
between communal-
relationship orientation and perceived social loneliness such
that the relation-
ship becomes stronger when there are higher levels of self-
disclosure.
284 MATOOK, CUMMINGS, AND BALA
For an exchange-oriented OSN user, we expect that a higher
degree of self-
disclosure will strengthen the relationship between exchange
orientation and lone-
liness, that is, more self-disclosing behavior for this type of
user will result in more
feelings of loneliness. An exchange-oriented OSN user expects
higher self-disclo-
sure to receive, in return, disclosed information of the same
extent (e.g., based on
novelty or interestingness, media richness or message length).
However, recipients
of disclosed information may only be a small number of OSN
contacts—those who
have proved to reciprocate. Because these OSN contacts are
already having to
reciprocate the “normal” information (e.g., postings made or
photos sent), sending
them additional information (through self-disclosure) could
result in information
overload [35, 48]. To ease this overload, these contacts may
well ignore or hide
information, further reducing reciprocity [9]. The exchange-
oriented user is likely to
feel that his/her calls are falling on increasingly deaf ears. This
effect is likely to
increase feelings of disconnectedness (i.e., reduced
belongingness) that in turn
stimulate perceptions of social loneliness [83]. Consequently, in
the presence of
higher self-disclosure, the positive relationship between
exchange orientation and
perceived social loneliness is strengthened.
Hypothesis 2b: Self-disclosure moderates the relationship
between exchange-
relationship orientation and perceived social loneliness such
that the relation-
ship becomes stronger when there are higher levels of self-
disclosure.
Networking Ability
Networking is the proactive creation and maintenance of
interpersonal relationships
with the objective of leveraging these relationships at some
point [29]. Networking
ability is defined as an individual’s “capacity to identify and
develop a diverse group
of contacts” [55, p. 691]. Building on the theory of political
skill [36], networking is
a human skill leveraged for understanding and influencing
others in professional
settings to achieve personal and organizational objectives.
Individuals with a strong
networking ability find it easy to develop friendships, alliances,
and coalitions [36].
Furthermore, these individuals master, effortlessly, the creation
and maintenance of
large and diverse networks to take advantage of the
opportunities that emerge from
these relationships. Yet, networking ability is just a personal
trait; rather, it represents
a social resource and an informational asset that stems from
having access to the
social network [10].
Networking ability is also an important factor in OSNs because
it allows users to
create a large OSN network [34]. Users skilled in networking
can also employ the
OSN’s communication features to interact with their contacts
and thereby deepen
existing relationships [42]. These contacts in the OSN can
provide social support
(e.g., expressing concern and sharing news), and contribute to
feelings of belonging
and lower feelings of social loneliness. Individuals who feel
integrated within a
social network show reduced feelings of social loneliness
because their desire for
IMPACT OF ONLINE SOCIAL NETWORK FEATURES ON
LONELINESS 285
attachment is satisfied [32]. When lacking networking ability,
the OSN user may
wait for others to initiate an OSN interaction instead of
proactively approaching
them. Missing out on interaction opportunities, a user with
lower networking ability
may feel disconnected, which is associated with feelings of
loneliness [72].
Consequently, OSN users who possess the ability to proactively
create and maintain
interpersonal relationships experience lower feelings of social
loneliness.
Hypothesis 3: Networking ability of an individual is negatively
associated with
perceived social loneliness.
Use of Active and Passive OSN Features
OSNs are used to create and consume user-generated content
[47]. Content is
produced through active engagement with a user’s contacts, for
example, in the
form of status updates or by sharing photos, videos, or links.
Communication
theorists differentiate active engagement as direct
communication (one-to-one) and
broadcasting (one-to-many) [12]. In addition, viewing user-
generated content is
referred to as “passive consumption,” also known as “social
surveillance” [45].
The rich architecture of OSNs provides features for performing
both active engage-
ment and passive consumption [11].
OSN users experience social isolation when they passively
consume user-gener-
ated content because of their lack of interaction [51].
Furthermore, passive con-
sumption restricts individuals in creating and managing
relationships [66]. The
literature has linked passive consumption to feelings of
disconnectedness and lone-
liness [4]. For instance, passive content consumption on
Facebook creates feelings of
envy that reduce a user’s life satisfaction through social
comparison between the
user and their contacts [50]. These researchers showed that
reading about the travel
and leisure experiences of OSN contacts led users to feel envy,
dissatisfaction, and
loneliness. Consequently, we propose that the use of OSN
features for observing
others (i.e., passive consumption) creates perceptions of social
loneliness because
users do not engage with their OSN network. By only using
passive OSN features,
the user misses out on interactions that could create a sense of
belonging.
Hypothesis 4a: The use of passive OSN features is positively
associated with
perceived social loneliness.
The creation of user-generated content and, as such, the active
engagement with
one’s OSN network, stimulates mutual content sharing among
OSN contacts [69].
Active engagement is achieved through the use of active OSN
features, where
repeated interactions strengthen a user’s social integration and
create a sense of
belonging [7]. The enhanced sense of social belonging is related
to feeling lower
degrees of social loneliness [31]. Active OSN features that use
either direct com-
munication or broadcasting “may have dramatically different
outcomes” on lone-
liness perceptions [12, p. 572] because of the number of
recipients, and thus the
number of potential interaction encounters.
286 MATOOK, CUMMINGS, AND BALA
In direct communication, the user communicates with one or
more recipients
whereas in broadcasting no specific recipient exists and the
content is shared with
a larger audience. This greater number of recipients provides
more opportunities for
social interactions than direct communication. Nevertheless,
actively engaging with
one’s network contacts creates a sense of belonging and it is
expected to result in
lower degrees of social loneliness.
Hypothesis 4b: The use of active OSN features that facilitate
broadcasting is
negatively associated with perceived social loneliness.
Hypothesis 4c: The use of active OSN features that facilitate
direct communica-
tion is negatively associated with perceived social loneliness.
Methodology
Participants
For the study, OSN users were recruited from a master’s
program in a business
school at a major Australian university. We invited students
from a large manage-
ment information systems (MIS) course in which 205 students
were enrolled. Prior
studies on social media have repeatedly used student samples to
test their hypothesis
[see, e.g., 49, 54]. Students are particularly appropriate sample
subjects for social
media research because they represent the typical OSN user
population based on age
and gender [56]. Our decision to use a student sample is further
supported by criteria
and recommendations put forward by Compeau et al. [24] who
posit that one can
generalize from student samples when the intended population
is clearly identified
and a rationale for the use of students is provided.
The sample of our study includes 61 percent females with an
average age of 25 years.
Participants had substantial experiences with OSNs and had an
OSN account for 5.5
years on average. Among the participants, 62 percent logged in
at least once a day and
64 percent spent at least 30 minutes a day in their OSN. On
average, participants spent
about 55 minutes per day at their OSN. The OSN sites varied
across participants, with
Facebook being the primary site used (32 percent), followed by
two Chinese OSNs,
RenRen (27 percent) and QQ (20 percent), and various other
OSNs (21 percent).
The participants were first-semester students, mainly
international students (92
percent Asian, 5 percent Australian, 1.5 percent European, and
1.5 percent South
American) who had arrived in Australia two to three weeks
prior to the data
collection. Thus, the majority of students had recently been
taken out of their
familiar environment and, therefore, the country and the
university were unfamiliar
to them. Hence, we assume that these students were
experiencing at least some level
of social loneliness. Our assumption was supported by a
research study reporting
that social loneliness is a concerning but common phenomenon
among university
students [27]. We also believe that the students used their OSN
for relationship
management and to maintain relationships with their familiar
network of people
from their home country. It should be noted that the majority of
students (66 percent)
IMPACT OF ONLINE SOCIAL NETWORK FEATURES ON
LONELINESS 287
came from China where access to Facebook is blocked. This
number corresponds
roughly to the percentage of participants who indicated that
RenRen and QQ are
their main OSNs. This is not a problem for our study, however,
because we do not
study Facebook specifically, but rather the features available in
Facebook and other
OSNs. We only refer to Facebook to introduce OSN features
because it is a well-
known OSN.
Data Collection
Participants were provided with an online questionnaire at the
beginning of the study
that included instructions to answer the questions regarding past
OSN experience.
Participants were informed that the questions concerned their
OSN usage behavior.
Specifically, they were asked to evaluate the questions in the
context of how they
currently participate in OSN.
We undertook three rounds of data collection as illustrated in
Figure 2. To facilitate the
tracking of participant responses over time, each participant was
given a unique
identification number. Participation in the study was voluntary.
Responses varied
cross the different data collection waves. Of the 205 students,
185 (20 missing
responses), 178 (27 missing responses), and 169 (36 missing
responses) students
responded to the questionnaire at T1, T2, and T3, respectively.
Only one student
dropped the course and was removed from the sample. After
deleting responses of
those who did not participate all three times, we arrived at a
final sample of 166
participants (final response rate 81 percent).
Various measures were utilized to incentivize participation to
achieve a high
response rate and to minimize dropouts, including
prenotification of the data collec-
tion, endorsement of the research project by the lecturer,
participation reward
through nonfinancial tokens, and the assurance of privacy and
anonymity for all
participants. We kept the survey length reasonably short by
collecting different
constructs at different time periods. For example, communal and
exchange orienta-
tions were collected at T3 because these two relationship
orientations are relatively
stable individual traits [21].
Figure 2. Data Collection Procedure
288 MATOOK, CUMMINGS, AND BALA
In survey research, common method bias has the potential to
inflate the data
collected [68]. As outlined in Appendix B, we followed prior
research guidelines
for procedural and statistical remedies to mitigate threats of
common method biases
[68]. Procedural remedies to address these issues included
temporal, proximate, and
methodological separation of the measurements. A temporal
separation was
achieved by collecting the independent and dependent variables
at different time
points. Proximate separation was achieved by distributing the
questions on different
pages of the online survey. A methodological separation was
achieved by mixing
different scales (Likert scale or binary) throughout the
questionnaire [68].
Our statistical remedies relate to three different statistical
analyses, such as
Harman’s single factor test, a partial correlation procedure
(e.g., marker variable
technique), and controlling for effects of an unmeasured latent
method factor (i.e.,
single-common-factor method). All three tests, as detailed in
Appendix B, produced
results that suggest no major threat of common method bias. In
particular, our
Harman’s single factor test did not reveal a single factor with
more than 50 percent
variance explained. Further, the partial correlation approach did
not indicate any
significant correlations. Finally, the single-common-factor-
method results did not
significantly load on an unobserved method factor. Overall, the
results of the
procedural and statistical remedies suggested that common
method bias was not a
major concern.
Measures of Survey Constructs and Control Variables
For the survey, we adapted existing scales from the literature
wherever possible. All
constructs were multi-item measures with fixed answer
categories. Except for the
OSN feature-related constructs, which were operationalized as
formative constructs,
all the other constructs were operationalized as reflective
constructs (see Appendix
A). For the reflective constructs, shorter scales with fewer
indicators were used. One
of the important characteristics of reflective indicators is their
substitutability [67]. In
other words, an indicator may substitute another indicator of the
same construct, and
hence allow shorter scales. In addition, prior research has
suggested that it is often
practical and psychometrically viable to include a short version
of a scale to manage
the length of a survey [8]. In the IS literature, Venkatesh et al.
[84] used short scales
to operationalize the constructs. The important consideration is
construct validity
and reliability. If a reflective construct demonstrates
psychometrically acceptable
characteristics using a short scale, it is often useful to keep the
short scale to reduce
the length of the survey. In our study, we found strong
psychometrical properties
(e.g., reliability, factor loadings, convergent validity, and
discriminant validity) for
our constructs using a short scale during the pilot study. Hence,
consistent with prior
research, we kept the short scale for operationalizing the
constructs in our study.
Perceived social loneliness: This construct was measured as a
reflective construct
via seven items of the Revised UCLA Loneliness Scale [75],
which has become the
IMPACT OF ONLINE SOCIAL NETWORK FEATURES ON
LONELINESS 289
standard scale to determine social loneliness for younger
populations [76]. The scale
ranged from 1 (never) to 5 (very often).
Relationship orientation: This was measured as two reflective,
independent con-
structs which is consistent with the way that communal and
exchange relationship
orientation are measured in the literature [21]. First, we
measured communal orien-
tation via a three-item scale based on the original communal
orientation scale [23].
Second, we measured exchange orientation via a three-item
scale based on the
revised versions of the exchange orientation scale [61]. The
scale for both subcon-
structs ranged from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree).
Networking ability: This construct was measured as a reflective
construct via four
items of the political skill inventory [36]. The scale ranged
from 1 (strongly
disagree) to 7 (strongly agree).
OSN features: This variable was measured as three separate and
independent
constructs, which is consistent with the way that prior research
distinguishes these
different forms of communication. In particular, we
differentiate the degree to which
OSN users actively create and passively consume user-
generated content that man-
ifests as different forms of communication behavior. To
determine an OSN user’s
communication behavior, we listed a number of OSN activities.
The choice of
activities translates as either active or passive OSN feature use.
We measured the
use of active OSN in the form of broadcasting and direct
communication via three
items each based on [12, 13]. We measured the use of passive
OSN features via five
item that were also based on [12, 13]. Participants indicated
their frequency of each
activity; the scale ranged from 1 (never) to 5 (every time).
These three subconstructs
were measured as formative constructs.
Self-disclosure: This was measured as a reflective construct
with a five-item sub-
scale of the self-disclosure index [59]. On a scale from 1 (no
information) to 5 (very
detailed information), the degree of information disclosed on
their OSN was rated.
Control variables: Studies have shown that the degree to which
users feel competent
to use computers in diverse situations impacts their usage
behaviors [57]. It is reason-
able to assume that how competent users feel using OSNs may
impact their perceived
social loneliness. Thus, computer self-efficacy was introduced
as a control variable. It
was measured as a reflective three-item subset of a construct
developed by Compeau
and Higgins [25]. The scale ranged from 1 (strongly disagree) to
7 (strongly agree).
We also included age, gender, and home country as control
variables.
A preliminary survey was first pilot tested for
comprehensiveness, clarity, lan-
guage usage, and face validity with a small sample of 20 OSN
users and 3
experienced researchers in information systems, as
recommended by Churchill
[20]. The pilot test identified that some questions were difficult
to understand and
subsequently, wording was changed prior to launching the main
study. For example,
we had originally phrased all questions about Facebook only
assuming that this is
the major OSN for our target participants. However, this was
not the case and we
revised the questions to “on Facebook or the social networking
site that you use the
most.” Furthermore, we provided additional instructions in our
surveys to ensure that
participants knew to answer questions in the context of their
OSN use. We also
290 MATOOK, CUMMINGS, AND BALA
revised the scales for several constructs from the traditional
Likert scale (strongly
disagree to strongly agree) to other scales that were more
appropriate for those
constructs. For example, we used a five-point extent scale (no
information to very
detailed information) to measure self-disclosure. Finally, the
networking ability scale
had the qualifier “at work.” We removed this qualifier and
adapted the items to the
context of OSN (see Appendix A).
Data Analysis and Results
Partial least squares (PLS), a component-based structural
equation modeling (SEM)
technique, was used to analyze the data. PLS provides reliable
estimates for complex
structural models when the sample size is not large, by placing
less importance on
model fit and more importance on prediction [18, 37]. Further,
PLS is considered an
appropriate data analytic approach for a research model such as
ours that has
formative construct(s) and a moderator [67]. We used SmartPLS
Version 2 as our
statistical software application to test the various PLS models
[71].
Measurement Model
The measurement model for the reflective constructs was
assessed for both reliability
and validity [5]. In order to assess reliability and validity for
the reflective constructs
in our model, we followed the guidelines suggested by Fornell
and Larcker [37],
which include internal consistency reliability, convergent
validity, and discriminant
validity. Internal consistency reliabilities (ICRs) were evaluated
using Cronbach’s
alpha to ensure that model items reliably measured the proposed
constructs. ICRs
were greater than the recommended value of .70 for all
constructs at all time periods
[62] (see Table 1). From these results, we can assume
acceptable internal consistency
of our measures.
Convergent validity was assessed using indicator loadings and
average variance
explained (AVE) (see Table 1). As suggested by Hair et al. [40]
and Bagozzi [6],
indicator loadings were examined to confirm that factor
loadings were greater than
.70 on their intended constructs with minimal (less than .30)
cross-loading on other
constructs. Indicator loadings for our model were greater than
.70 for all constructs
at all time periods (except for LONL3 being slightly below .70),
with cross-loadings
being lower than .30, suggesting convergent validity of the
structural model. In
addition to indicator loadings, AVE was also examined to
ensure that the variance
explained by the construct is higher than variance from
measurement error [37].
AVE for all constructs either met or exceeded .50, further
suggesting convergent
validity for the current model. Given these results, convergent
validity can be
assumed for the proposed model.
We assessed discriminant validity by examining the square roots
of the shared
variance between the constructs and their measures (see Table
2). The diagonal
elements are the square root of the shared variance between the
constructs and their
IMPACT OF ONLINE SOCIAL NETWORK FEATURES ON
LONELINESS 291
T
ab
le
1
.
Q
u
al
it
y
cr
it
er
ia
o
f
th
e
co
n
st
ru
ct
s
L
at
en
t
v
ar
ia
b
le
It
em
s
M
ea
n
S
D
F
ac
to
r
lo
ad
in
g
s
an
d
w
ei
g
h
ts
C
ro
n
b
ac
h
’s
al
p
h
a
C
o
m
p
o
si
te
re
li
ab
il
it
y
(I
C
R
)
A
V
E
C
o
m
m
u
n
a
l
o
ri
e
n
ta
tio
n
C
O
M
M
1
3
.3
2
.9
7
0
.7
7
**
.6
6
.8
0
.5
8
C
O
M
M
2
3
.1
6
.9
6
0
.7
4
**
C
O
M
M
3
3
.3
0
.8
7
0
.7
6
**
E
xc
h
a
n
g
e
o
ri
e
n
ta
tio
n
E
X
O
R
1
3
.0
8
.9
5
0
.8
4
**
E
X
O
R
2
2
.9
1
.8
7
0
.7
0
**
.6
4
.7
8
.5
4
E
X
O
R
3
2
.5
6
.8
4
0
.6
6
**
N
e
tw
o
rk
in
g
a
b
ili
ty
N
E
T
A
1
4
.2
4
1
.2
8
0
.7
6
**
N
E
T
A
2
4
.3
8
1
.3
2
0
.9
0
**
.8
6
.8
8
.6
6
N
E
T
A
3
4
.6
2
1
.3
4
0
.8
5
**
N
E
T
A
4
4
.6
4
1
.3
5
0
.8
5
**
P
a
ss
iv
e
O
S
N
fe
a
tu
re
s
P
A
S
F
1
3
.1
7
.9
0
0
.7
1
**
^
P
A
S
F
2
2
.5
8
.8
3
0
.7
4
**
^
—
—
—
P
A
S
F
3
2
.4
0
.8
4
0
.4
3
**
^
P
A
S
F
4
2
.5
5
1
.0
1
0
.2
2
**
^
P
A
S
F
5
2
.8
2
.9
2
0
.2
5
**
^
A
C
T
F
1
2
.5
8
.8
3
0
.9
2
**
^
A
ct
iv
e
O
S
N
fe
a
tu
re
s:
B
ro
a
d
c
a
st
in
g
A
C
T
F
2
2
.5
5
.8
4
0
.8
1
**
^
—
—
—
A
C
T
F
3
2
.3
8
.9
6
0
.6
3
**
^
292 MATOOK, CUMMINGS, AND BALA
A
ct
iv
e
O
S
N
fe
a
tu
re
s:
D
ir
e
c
t
c
o
m
m
u
n
ic
a
tio
n
A
C
T
F
4
2
.6
3
.8
6
0
.9
7
**
^
A
C
T
F
5
2
.9
0
.9
4
0
.6
1
**
^
—
—
—
A
C
T
F
6
2
.8
8
.8
1
0
.5
9
**
^
S
e
lf-
d
is
cl
o
su
re
S
E
L
D
1
2
.1
8
1
.0
5
0
.7
3
**
S
E
L
D
2
2
.8
8
1
.1
3
0
.7
4
**
.8
7
.8
8
.6
1
S
E
L
D
3
2
.5
5
1
.0
9
0
.8
1
**
S
E
L
D
4
1
.9
6
.9
7
0
.8
7
**
S
E
L
D
5
3
.0
1
1
.1
1
0
.7
2
**
P
e
rc
e
iv
e
d
so
ci
a
l
lo
n
e
lin
e
ss
L
O
N
L
1
2
.5
8
.8
8
0
.7
9
**
L
O
N
L
2
2
.2
9
.8
7
0
.8
6
**
.8
7
.9
0
.5
7
L
O
N
L
3
2
.5
6
.7
7
0
.6
9
**
L
O
N
L
4
2
.4
0
.9
2
0
.7
9
**
L
O
N
L
5
2
.6
6
.8
0
0
.7
1
**
L
O
N
L
6
2
.4
4
.8
2
0
.7
0
**
L
O
N
L
7
2
.4
6
.7
9
0
.7
4
**
C
o
m
p
u
te
r
se
lf-
e
ff
ic
a
cy
C
S
E
1
5
.4
2
1
.1
4
0
.7
9
**
C
S
E
2
5
.8
1
1
.2
1
0
.8
6
**
.8
4
.8
9
.7
4
C
S
E
3
5
.4
1
1
.3
2
0
.9
3
**
C
S
E
3
5
.4
1
1
.3
2
0
.9
3
**
N
o
te
s:
F
ac
to
r
lo
ad
in
g
s
an
d
w
ei
g
h
ts
ar
e
fr
o
m
th
e
P
L
S
an
al
y
si
s
(*
*
p
<
.0
1
;
^
th
es
e
v
al
u
es
re
p
re
se
n
t
it
em
w
ei
g
h
ts
);
IC
R
:
in
te
rn
al
co
n
si
st
en
cy
re
li
ab
il
it
y
(ρ
c
=
(Σ
λ i
)2
/
[(
Σ
λ i
)2
+
Σ
iv
ar
(ε
i)
],
w
h
er
e
λ i
is
th
e
co
m
p
o
n
en
t
lo
ad
in
g
to
an
in
d
ic
at
o
r
an
d
v
ar
(ε
i)
=
1
-λ
i2
).
IMPACT OF ONLINE SOCIAL NETWORK FEATURES ON
LONELINESS 293
T
ab
le
2
.
D
es
cr
ip
ti
v
e
S
ta
ti
st
ic
s
an
d
C
o
rr
el
at
io
n
s
M
ea
n
S
D
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
1
.
C
o
m
m
u
n
a
l
o
ri
e
n
ta
tio
n
3
.2
6
.7
0
.7
6
2
.
E
xc
h
a
n
g
e
o
ri
e
n
ta
tio
n
2
.8
5
.6
2
–
.1
4
*
.7
4
3
.
N
e
tw
o
rk
in
g
a
b
ili
ty
4
.4
7
1
.1
1
.0
7
–
.1
6
*
.8
1
4
.
S
e
lf-
d
is
cl
o
su
re
2
.5
1
.8
6
–
.1
2
*
–
.1
4
*
.2
5
**
.7
8
5
.
P
e
rc
e
iv
e
d
so
ci
a
l
lo
n
e
lin
e
ss
2
.5
2
.5
5
–
.4
3
**
*
.4
3
**
–
.3
7
**
–
.1
3
*
.7
5
6
.
C
o
m
p
u
te
r
se
lf-
e
ff
ic
a
cy
5
.5
4
1
.0
3
.1
4
*
–
.0
2
.0
7
.1
2
*
–
.2
2
**
.8
5
7
.
P
a
ss
iv
e
O
S
N
fe
a
tu
re
s
2
.7
1
.7
0
–
.3
0
**
*
.0
9
.2
2
**
–
.0
5
.4
2
**
*
–
.2
2
**
–
–
8
.
B
ro
a
d
ca
st
in
g
2
.5
1
.7
6
–
.1
4
*
.0
6
.2
4
**
.1
9
**
–
.1
8
**
–
.0
8
.2
9
**
*
–
–
9
.
D
ir
e
ct
co
m
m
u
n
ic
a
tio
n
2
.8
0
.7
3
.1
7
**
–
.1
0
.1
7
**
.3
0
**
*
–
.0
8
–
.1
1
.1
7
**
.3
4
**
*
–
–
1
0
.
G
e
n
d
e
r
.6
1
.4
9
.0
9
.0
3
–
.2
0
**
–
.1
4
*
.0
3
.0
9
–
.0
4
.0
9
.0
9
1
1
.
A
g
e
2
4
.9
1
3
.5
6
.1
7
**
–
.1
1
.0
1
.0
3
–
.0
5
–
.0
7
–
.0
4
–
.0
9
–
.1
5
1
2
.
C
o
u
n
tr
y
.7
1
.4
5
–
.0
8
.1
4
*
–
.0
8
.1
2
*
.1
7
**
.0
2
.0
4
.1
8
**
.1
0
*
p
<
0
.0
5
,
*
*
p
<
0
.0
1
,
*
*
*
p
<
0
.0
0
1
.
N
o
te
:S
q
u
a
re
ro
o
t
o
f
th
e
av
er
ag
e
v
ar
ia
n
ce
ex
tr
ac
te
d
(A
V
E
)
is
o
n
d
ia
g
o
n
al
el
em
en
ts
.
294 MATOOK, CUMMINGS, AND BALA
measures; off-diagonal elements are correlations between
constructs. For discrimi-
nant validity, diagonal elements should be larger than off-
diagonal elements [37]. We
found all diagonal elements to be higher than the correlations
across constructs,
hence supporting discriminant validity.
To determine the quality of the formative construct of OSN
features, we inspected
the item weights and their multicollinearity (see Table 1). For
all items, the weights
are significant (p < .01). We examined multicollinearity because
it can destabilize
the model [67]. The variance inflation factor (VIF) statistic was
used to determine
whether the formative measures were too highly correlated. We
did not find any
major multicollinearity issues with all VIFs below the strict
threshold of 3.3.
Structural Model: Hypotheses Testing
Following the examination of the measurement model, we then
tested the structural
model to assess the significance of the proposed hypotheses
using a bootstrap
procedure of 1,000 resamples [38]. As presented in Table 3, we
ran three structural
models to test our hypotheses: Model 1 included only the
control variable, Model 2
Table 3. Structural Model Results for Perceived Social
Loneliness
Predictors Model 1 Model 2 Model 3
Control variables
Gender (female = 1) –.12* –.03 –.06
Age .04 .06 .09
Country of origin (China = 1, other countries = 0) .19** –.11
.04
Computer self-efficacy [T1] –.17** –.09 –.09
Direct/indirect effects
Communal orientation [T3] –.34*** –.21**
Exchange orientation [T3] .22** .16**
Networking Ability [T1] –.32*** –.28***
Passive OSN features [T2] .24** .23**
Active OSN features: Broadcasting [T2] –.14* –.12*
Active OSN features: Direct communication [T2] –.05 –.04
Moderator
Self-disclosure [T1] –.09 –.03
Moderating effectsa
Communal orientation [T3] × Self-disclosure [T1] –.33***
Exchange orientation [T3] × Self-disclosure [T1] .29***
R2 .07 .44 .56
ΔR2 .37*** .12**
* p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001.
aWe included other second-order interaction terms in Model 3.
Given that these were nonsignificant
and did not change the overall model estimates substantially, we
excluded these terms from this
table for brevity and parsimony.
IMPACT OF ONLINE SOCIAL NETWORK FEATURES ON
LONELINESS 295
included the main effects (H1a/b, H3, H4a/b/c),and Model 3
(H2a/b) included both
main and interaction effects. To assess the incremental variance
explained by the
interaction terms, a comparison of the R2 between these models
was conducted using
the guidelines suggested in the literature when testing for
interaction effects [2, 18,
43]. Following these guidelines, variables at the indicator level
were mean-centered
prior to creating the interaction terms.
We hypothesized that communal orientation would have a
negative influence
(i.e., decrease) on perceived social loneliness (H1a) and
exchange orientation
would have a positive influence (i.e., increase) on perceived
social loneliness
(H1b). As per Table 3, communal orientation had a negative
influence on per-
ceived loneliness (Model 3: β = –.21, p < .01) and exchange
orientation had a
positive influence on perceived loneliness (Model 3: β = .16, p
< .01), thus
supporting H1a and H1b.
Self-disclosure was hypothesized to moderate the relationships
between communal
and exchange orientation on perceived social loneliness such
that the relation would
be stronger when self-disclosure is high (H2a and H2b). We
found support for both
hypotheses. Perusal of Figure 3 indicates that the relationship
between communal
orientation and loneliness was found to be moderated by self-
disclosure such that for
OSN users with high self-disclosure, communal orientation had
a stronger negative
effect on perceived social loneliness (Model 3: β = –.33, p <
.01). In other words,
self-disclosure and communal orientation will work in tandem
such that when both
are high, individuals will feel less lonely. Alternatively, as
shown in Figure 4,
exchange-oriented individuals displayed greater loneliness when
they exercised
high levels of self-disclosure (Model 3: β = .29, p < .01). In
other words, if an
individual with high self-disclosure is exchange-oriented, he or
she will feel even
lonelier. In the presence of both, loneliness will increase. Table
3 shows that the
addition of the interaction terms increases R2 significantly.
Overall, the interaction
model explained 56 percent of the variance in perceived social
loneliness compared
to 44 percent without the interaction terms, which is
significantly different.
Networking ability was hypothesized to negatively influence (or
decrease) per-
ceived social loneliness (H3). As per Table 3, network ability
had a significant
negative influence on perceived social loneliness in both models
(Model 3: β = –.28,
2
2.5
3
3.5
Low Communal Orientation High Communal Orientation
P
er
ce
iv
ed
S
oc
ia
l
L
on
el
in
es
s
Low Self-
disclosure
High Self-
disclosure
Figure 3. Moderating Effect of Self-Disclosure on Communal
Orientation and Loneliness
296 MATOOK, CUMMINGS, AND BALA
p < .001), suggesting that individuals who had a high degree of
proclivity to connect
with others are less likely to be lonely. Thus, H3 was supported.
OSN feature use was also hypothesized to impact perceived
social loneliness. We
hypothesized that the use of passive features would positively
influence (or increase)
loneliness (H4a). Results of Table 3 indicate that passive
features used had a
significant positive influence on feelings of loneliness (Model
3: β = .23, p < .01),
supporting H4a. The use of active features in the form of
broadcasting was hypothe-
sized to negatively influence (or decrease) loneliness (H4b). We
found that broad-
casting had a strong negative influence on loneliness (Model 3:
β = –.12, p < .05). In
addition, direct communication was hypothesized to negatively
influence (or
decrease) loneliness (H4c). However, we found no support for
active direct com-
munication on perceived social loneliness (Model 3: β = –.04,
ns.), rejecting H4c.
Table 4 summarizes the hypothesized relationships including
the path coefficients
for those relationships.
2
2.5
3
3.5
Low Exchange Orientation High Exchange Orientation
P
er
ce
iv
ed
S
oc
ia
l
L
on
el
in
es
s
Low Self-
disclosure
High Self-
disclosure
Figure 4. Moderating Effect of Self-Disclosure on Exchange
Orientation and Loneliness
Table 4. Summary of Results as per Model 3 from Table 3
Path
Path
coefficient
Supported/
rejected
H1a Communal orientation → Perceived social loneliness –
.21** Supported
H1b Exchange orientation → Perceived social loneliness .16**
Supported
H2a Self-disclosure × Communal orientation → Perceived
social loneliness
–.33*** Supported
H2b Self-disclosure × Exchange orientation → Perceived
social loneliness
.29*** Supported
H3 Network ability → Perceived social loneliness –.28***
Supported
H4a Passive OSN features → Perceived social loneliness .23**
Supported
H4b Active OSN features: Broadcasting → Perceived social
loneliness
–.12* Supported
H4c Active OSN features: Direct communication → Perceived
social loneliness
–.04 Rejected
* p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001.
IMPACT OF ONLINE SOCIAL NETWORK FEATURES ON
LONELINESS 297
Discussion
The research aimed to determine how using an OSN can impact
feelings of lone-
liness. To this end, we used the literature on loneliness as our
overarching theory to
examine the influence of relationship characteristics (i.e.,
relationship orientation
moderated by self-disclosure and networking ability) and active
versus passive OSN
features on perceived loneliness. The study shows how OSNs
can be associated with
both more and less perceived loneliness. Specifically, loneliness
increased for
individuals who were involved in passive feature use and for
those who had
exchange-relationship orientation and high degrees of self-
disclosure. However,
loneliness was reduced when a user had increased networking
ability and used
active OSN features for broadcasting and when a user with a
communal relationship
orientation had high degrees of self-disclosure. Yet, active OSN
features via direct
communication was not associated with feelings of social
loneliness. We elaborate in
the following on the theoretical and practical implications of the
study.
Theoretical Implications and Contributions
This research contributes to the literature in several ways. First,
the study contributes
to IS research on OSN use regarding an individual’s social
loneliness when sepa-
rated. Prior research has produced contradicting results on the
relationship between
OSN use and loneliness, specifically, there is disagreement
whether OSN use
reduces or increases loneliness feelings [31, 52, 78]. This study
suggests that the
relationship between OSN and loneliness depends how OSNs
are used. Many prior
works treated OSNs as monolithic without much consideration
that these platforms
offer diverse features and functionalities [63]. We extended
prior research by
examining OSNs at a feature level and differentiated between
active and passive
features of an OSN. Our findings demonstrate that loneliness is
impacted by the use
of both active and passive OSN features. Loneliness is reduced
when the active
features related to broadcasting are used, but the use of only
passive features leads to
an increased level of loneliness.
Using OSNs for broadcasting to all contacts facilitates sharing
information with
the entire network, which in turn attracts reciprocity. As such,
our study shows that
features to support mass communication within OSNs can lower
social loneliness by
creating feelings of belonging. Broadcasting is a time-efficient
approach to distribute
social information, especially when the user is busy, something
not uncommon in
today’s fast-paced society.
In contrast, our findings also show that passive content
consumption expressed
through the use of certain OSN features (e.g., reading postings)
increases loneliness.
The fact that such passive behavior is labeled “social
surveillance” strongly suggests
isolation because the user takes on an observer role, hence
monitoring others from a
distance but carefully avoiding interaction.
Finally, for direct communications, we did not find a significant
impact on lone-
liness. One explanation for the insignificant results could be the
misalignment of the
298 MATOOK, CUMMINGS, AND BALA
OSN design goals compared to its use. When directly
communicating, OSN users
commit their full attention to one person; however, the
approached OSN contact may
not be willing or able to reply, leaving the sent messages
unanswered. Given that
OSNs are designed to support a network approach, with a
broadcasting functionality
in mind, in which messages spread through the entire social
network, the private
one-to-one communication does not align with this design
purpose and may lead to
ineffective use of the technology [14]. Other systems, such as e-
mail and chat rooms,
or even the old-fashioned phone, might be better suited for one-
to-one communica-
tion. Further, directly communicating requires more effort to
reach the same number
of people compared to broadcasting, and users might feel that
the benefits of direct
communication do not outweigh the costs. Based on this
imbalance, Thibaut and
Kelley’s [81] exchange theory suggests that a user would refrain
from directly
communicating via OSNs and, as such, may not be able to ease
perceived social
loneliness. In sum, this study contributes to IS by suggesting
that theorizing about
OSNs and how they can affect social outcomes needs to
investigate this relationship
at the feature level because the different technology features
allow for different
outcomes.
Second, we contribute to the relationship literature and
especially to research on
interpersonal relationships. Prior research has indicated that
people have different
understandings of the degree of reciprocity in creating and
maintaining relationships
[21]. Our study now shows that users benefit differently from
OSNs, depending on
their relationship orientation. More importantly, a communal
orientation is a bene-
ficial characteristic because these users will naturally perform
OSN-related activities
that are associated with lower degrees of perceived social
loneliness, if any. Hence,
users with a communal orientation (e.g., where benefits are
given in response to
needs or to show general concern for a user’s OSN contacts) are
able to create a
sense of belonging that makes them feel less lonely when
compared to exchange-
oriented users. Although an exchange orientation can be
successful in professional
environments, our findings illustrate that this tit-for-tat
behavior in OSNs leads to
increased feelings of loneliness.
The third contribution relates to the identification of self-
disclosure as a moderat-
ing factor. Extensive research has examined the direct influence
of self-disclosure in
social media [54, 69]. In contrast, this study demonstrates the
interaction effects of
self-disclosure on the relationship between a user’s relationship
orientation and
loneliness. The impact on social loneliness for both exchange-
oriented and commu-
nal-oriented users becomes stronger as their self-disclosure
increases. Sharing social
information increases liking and leads to closer relationships
[49, 69], and our
findings support this for communal-oriented users. When they
increase self-disclo-
sure, improved social outcomes (such as reduced loneliness) are
the result. However,
for exchange-oriented users, increased self-disclosure does not
have such positive
effects. Indeed, for these users, their disclosing behavior may
be perceived as
excessive, and recipients experience information overload. As
hypothesized, our
findings may be an example showing that increased levels of
self-disclosure burden
the relationship between exchange orientation and loneliness.
Thus, exchange-
IMPACT OF ONLINE SOCIAL NETWORK FEATURES ON
LONELINESS 299
oriented users might fare better by not increasing their
disclosure because their
contacts may not be able to keep up with reciprocating. Yet, if
they fail to return
the information, the user may discard the contact for future
interactions. This means
that for exchange-oriented users, prior research findings that
higher self-disclosure
leads to reduced loneliness do not apply. We find a similar
theoretical association of
“less is more” in prior research on electronic word of mouth. A
study on the
optimal number of online product recommendations has shown
that after three
recommendations, wear-out effects manifest, causing future
recommendations to
be ignored, even if the recommendations are still valuable [1].
Consequently,
OSNs provide various possibilities for self-disclosure, but
increased levels of sharing
user-generated content can impose, even indirectly, detrimental
effects, namely, that
users feel more lonely.
Fourth, we contribute to the management literature on personal
influences and
political skills via networking abilities. Our results demonstrate
that within OSNs the
ability to establish interpersonal relationships is a crucial factor
as to why people feel
and likely remain lonely. In the literature on workplace
influences networking ability
was deemed as a key aspect to improving social capital that
resides in a relationship
[36]. Our study illustrates that networking abilities are also
valuable for an OSN
user because these relationships can be leveraged for creating
and maintaining
relationships resulting in feelings of belonging thereby reducing
social loneliness
perceptions.
Fifth, this research contributes to theory in social psychology,
in particular to the
body of knowledge of loneliness and the factors impacting these
feelings. Loneliness
has been extensively researched in psychology in offline
settings and exemplary in
an online context, however, this study is the first we know of
that shows which
factors affect perceived social loneliness in the technology-
mediated environment of
OSNs. Most important, our research explains loneliness from a
relationship point of
view whereas prior research to date has examined individual
characteristics (e.g.,
personality or self-esteem), which are only loosely related to
relationships. However,
the literature on loneliness stresses the qualitative and
quantitative deficits of
relationships as a key reason for a person to be in a lonely state
[66]. Hence, this
study highlights the theoretical importance of relationship
management factors to
understand social loneliness perceptions of OSN users.
Implications for Practice
A number of practical implications arise from this research for
firms and OSN users.
For firms, our findings help to highlight how they can utilize
OSNs to support their
workers. Corporate managers should be mindful of how heavy
travel demands can
disrupt workers’ personal relationships and how they can use
OSNs to reduce
feelings of loneliness. In modern workplaces, travel is often
unavoidable and
many individuals work in remote locations or in foreign
countries for an extended
period of time. Thus, firms should actively seek ways to address
the negative
300 MATOOK, CUMMINGS, AND BALA
implications of perceived social loneliness. Allowing and
endorsing the use of an
OSN can be a promising strategy. Prior research has shown that
firms often use
technology internally for networking, collaboration, and
knowledge sharing [33].
Our study points to the potential benefits a firm can gain
through the “private” use of
OSN by their employees during work times. This research
suggests that firms focus
on usage policies that encourage positive outcomes for the
employee and the firm
rather than prohibiting OSN use at work [41].
Our study participants were university students, which makes
our findings directly
relevant to education providers, many of which have large
international student
cohorts. This research suggests that a university should actively
approach its stu-
dents through an OSN while the students are still in their home
country. The
objective of the university should be to establish personal ties
with the students
and to connect with them before their arrival at the university.
In this way, the OSN
can be actively used prior to any development of social
loneliness in an unfamiliar
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx
A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx

More Related Content

Similar to A. Lab # BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx

Bis245 week 5 i lab devry university er diagram and er matrix
Bis245 week 5 i lab devry university   er diagram and er matrixBis245 week 5 i lab devry university   er diagram and er matrix
Bis245 week 5 i lab devry university er diagram and er matrixdhfghfgfjgjgfj
 
Bis245 week 5 i lab devry university er diagram and er matrix
Bis245 week 5 i lab devry university   er diagram and er matrixBis245 week 5 i lab devry university   er diagram and er matrix
Bis245 week 5 i lab devry university er diagram and er matrixdgahdazncvn
 
Bis245 week 5 i lab devry university er diagram and er matrix
Bis245 week 5 i lab devry university   er diagram and er matrixBis245 week 5 i lab devry university   er diagram and er matrix
Bis245 week 5 i lab devry university er diagram and er matrixlitmanen232
 
Bis 245 week 5 lab – er diagram and er matrix
Bis 245 week 5 lab – er diagram and er matrixBis 245 week 5 lab – er diagram and er matrix
Bis 245 week 5 lab – er diagram and er matrixsupportonlineexam11
 
Keller bis-245-week-5-lab-er-diagram-and-er-matrix-new
Keller bis-245-week-5-lab-er-diagram-and-er-matrix-newKeller bis-245-week-5-lab-er-diagram-and-er-matrix-new
Keller bis-245-week-5-lab-er-diagram-and-er-matrix-newshyaminfo102
 
Cis 111 Education Redefined - snaptutorial.com
Cis 111     Education Redefined - snaptutorial.comCis 111     Education Redefined - snaptutorial.com
Cis 111 Education Redefined - snaptutorial.comDavisMurphyC75
 
Cis 111 Success Begins / snaptutorial.com
Cis 111 Success Begins / snaptutorial.comCis 111 Success Begins / snaptutorial.com
Cis 111 Success Begins / snaptutorial.comRobinson066
 
DeVry UniversityStudent Lab ActivityBIS245 Database Essentials.docx
DeVry UniversityStudent Lab ActivityBIS245 Database Essentials.docxDeVry UniversityStudent Lab ActivityBIS245 Database Essentials.docx
DeVry UniversityStudent Lab ActivityBIS245 Database Essentials.docxduketjoy27252
 
IT 330 Final Project Guidelines and Rubric Overview .docx
IT 330 Final Project Guidelines and Rubric  Overview .docxIT 330 Final Project Guidelines and Rubric  Overview .docx
IT 330 Final Project Guidelines and Rubric Overview .docxchristiandean12115
 
Page 1 of 11 A. Lab # BSBA BIS245A-5B B.docx
  Page 1 of 11     A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-5B  B.docx  Page 1 of 11     A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-5B  B.docx
Page 1 of 11 A. Lab # BSBA BIS245A-5B B.docxjoyjonna282
 
Cis 111 Education Specialist-snaptutorial.com
Cis 111 Education Specialist-snaptutorial.comCis 111 Education Specialist-snaptutorial.com
Cis 111 Education Specialist-snaptutorial.comrobertlesew50
 
BIS 245 Redefined Education--bis245.com
BIS 245 Redefined Education--bis245.comBIS 245 Redefined Education--bis245.com
BIS 245 Redefined Education--bis245.comagathachristie204
 
Azure Data serices and databricks architecture
Azure Data serices and databricks architectureAzure Data serices and databricks architecture
Azure Data serices and databricks architectureAdventureWorld5
 
BIS 245 HOMEWORK Introduction Education--bis245homework.com
BIS 245 HOMEWORK Introduction Education--bis245homework.comBIS 245 HOMEWORK Introduction Education--bis245homework.com
BIS 245 HOMEWORK Introduction Education--bis245homework.comagathachristie256
 
BIS 245 HOMEWORK Lessons in Excellence--bis245homework.com
BIS 245 HOMEWORK Lessons in Excellence--bis245homework.comBIS 245 HOMEWORK Lessons in Excellence--bis245homework.com
BIS 245 HOMEWORK Lessons in Excellence--bis245homework.comthomashard72
 
BIS 245 HOMEWORK Become Exceptional--bis245homework.com
BIS 245 HOMEWORK Become Exceptional--bis245homework.comBIS 245 HOMEWORK Become Exceptional--bis245homework.com
BIS 245 HOMEWORK Become Exceptional--bis245homework.comKeatonJennings120
 

Similar to A. Lab # BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx (20)

Bis245 week 5 i lab devry university er diagram and er matrix
Bis245 week 5 i lab devry university   er diagram and er matrixBis245 week 5 i lab devry university   er diagram and er matrix
Bis245 week 5 i lab devry university er diagram and er matrix
 
Bis245 week 5 i lab devry university er diagram and er matrix
Bis245 week 5 i lab devry university   er diagram and er matrixBis245 week 5 i lab devry university   er diagram and er matrix
Bis245 week 5 i lab devry university er diagram and er matrix
 
Bis245 week 5 i lab devry university er diagram and er matrix
Bis245 week 5 i lab devry university   er diagram and er matrixBis245 week 5 i lab devry university   er diagram and er matrix
Bis245 week 5 i lab devry university er diagram and er matrix
 
Bis 245 week 5 lab – er diagram and er matrix
Bis 245 week 5 lab – er diagram and er matrixBis 245 week 5 lab – er diagram and er matrix
Bis 245 week 5 lab – er diagram and er matrix
 
Bis 245
Bis 245Bis 245
Bis 245
 
Keller bis-245-week-5-lab-er-diagram-and-er-matrix-new
Keller bis-245-week-5-lab-er-diagram-and-er-matrix-newKeller bis-245-week-5-lab-er-diagram-and-er-matrix-new
Keller bis-245-week-5-lab-er-diagram-and-er-matrix-new
 
Cis 111 Education Redefined - snaptutorial.com
Cis 111     Education Redefined - snaptutorial.comCis 111     Education Redefined - snaptutorial.com
Cis 111 Education Redefined - snaptutorial.com
 
Cis 111 Success Begins / snaptutorial.com
Cis 111 Success Begins / snaptutorial.comCis 111 Success Begins / snaptutorial.com
Cis 111 Success Begins / snaptutorial.com
 
DeVry UniversityStudent Lab ActivityBIS245 Database Essentials.docx
DeVry UniversityStudent Lab ActivityBIS245 Database Essentials.docxDeVry UniversityStudent Lab ActivityBIS245 Database Essentials.docx
DeVry UniversityStudent Lab ActivityBIS245 Database Essentials.docx
 
IT 330 Final Project Guidelines and Rubric Overview .docx
IT 330 Final Project Guidelines and Rubric  Overview .docxIT 330 Final Project Guidelines and Rubric  Overview .docx
IT 330 Final Project Guidelines and Rubric Overview .docx
 
Page 1 of 11 A. Lab # BSBA BIS245A-5B B.docx
  Page 1 of 11     A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-5B  B.docx  Page 1 of 11     A. Lab #  BSBA BIS245A-5B  B.docx
Page 1 of 11 A. Lab # BSBA BIS245A-5B B.docx
 
Cis 111 Education Specialist-snaptutorial.com
Cis 111 Education Specialist-snaptutorial.comCis 111 Education Specialist-snaptutorial.com
Cis 111 Education Specialist-snaptutorial.com
 
BIS 245 Redefined Education--bis245.com
BIS 245 Redefined Education--bis245.comBIS 245 Redefined Education--bis245.com
BIS 245 Redefined Education--bis245.com
 
Week 1
Week 1Week 1
Week 1
 
Azure Data serices and databricks architecture
Azure Data serices and databricks architectureAzure Data serices and databricks architecture
Azure Data serices and databricks architecture
 
slides.pptx
slides.pptxslides.pptx
slides.pptx
 
slides.pptx
slides.pptxslides.pptx
slides.pptx
 
BIS 245 HOMEWORK Introduction Education--bis245homework.com
BIS 245 HOMEWORK Introduction Education--bis245homework.comBIS 245 HOMEWORK Introduction Education--bis245homework.com
BIS 245 HOMEWORK Introduction Education--bis245homework.com
 
BIS 245 HOMEWORK Lessons in Excellence--bis245homework.com
BIS 245 HOMEWORK Lessons in Excellence--bis245homework.comBIS 245 HOMEWORK Lessons in Excellence--bis245homework.com
BIS 245 HOMEWORK Lessons in Excellence--bis245homework.com
 
BIS 245 HOMEWORK Become Exceptional--bis245homework.com
BIS 245 HOMEWORK Become Exceptional--bis245homework.comBIS 245 HOMEWORK Become Exceptional--bis245homework.com
BIS 245 HOMEWORK Become Exceptional--bis245homework.com
 

More from ransayo

Zoe is a second grader with autism spectrum disorders. Zoe’s father .docx
Zoe is a second grader with autism spectrum disorders. Zoe’s father .docxZoe is a second grader with autism spectrum disorders. Zoe’s father .docx
Zoe is a second grader with autism spectrum disorders. Zoe’s father .docxransayo
 
Zlatan Ibrahimović – Sports PsychologyOutlineIntroduction .docx
Zlatan Ibrahimović – Sports PsychologyOutlineIntroduction .docxZlatan Ibrahimović – Sports PsychologyOutlineIntroduction .docx
Zlatan Ibrahimović – Sports PsychologyOutlineIntroduction .docxransayo
 
Zia 2Do You Choose to AcceptYour mission, should you choose.docx
Zia 2Do You Choose to AcceptYour mission, should you choose.docxZia 2Do You Choose to AcceptYour mission, should you choose.docx
Zia 2Do You Choose to AcceptYour mission, should you choose.docxransayo
 
Ziyao LiIAS 3753Dr. Manata HashemiWorking Title The Edu.docx
Ziyao LiIAS 3753Dr. Manata HashemiWorking Title The Edu.docxZiyao LiIAS 3753Dr. Manata HashemiWorking Title The Edu.docx
Ziyao LiIAS 3753Dr. Manata HashemiWorking Title The Edu.docxransayo
 
Ziyan Huang (Jerry)Assignment 4Brand PositioningProfessor .docx
Ziyan Huang (Jerry)Assignment 4Brand PositioningProfessor .docxZiyan Huang (Jerry)Assignment 4Brand PositioningProfessor .docx
Ziyan Huang (Jerry)Assignment 4Brand PositioningProfessor .docxransayo
 
Zhtavius Moye04192019BUSA 4126SWOT AnalysisDr. Setliff.docx
Zhtavius Moye04192019BUSA 4126SWOT AnalysisDr. Setliff.docxZhtavius Moye04192019BUSA 4126SWOT AnalysisDr. Setliff.docx
Zhtavius Moye04192019BUSA 4126SWOT AnalysisDr. Setliff.docxransayo
 
Zichun Gao Professor Karen Accounting 1AIBM FInancial Stat.docx
Zichun Gao Professor Karen Accounting 1AIBM FInancial Stat.docxZichun Gao Professor Karen Accounting 1AIBM FInancial Stat.docx
Zichun Gao Professor Karen Accounting 1AIBM FInancial Stat.docxransayo
 
Zheng Hes Inscription This inscription was carved on a stele erec.docx
Zheng Hes Inscription This inscription was carved on a stele erec.docxZheng Hes Inscription This inscription was carved on a stele erec.docx
Zheng Hes Inscription This inscription was carved on a stele erec.docxransayo
 
Zhou 1Time and Memory in Two Portal Fantasies An Analys.docx
Zhou 1Time and Memory in Two Portal Fantasies An Analys.docxZhou 1Time and Memory in Two Portal Fantasies An Analys.docx
Zhou 1Time and Memory in Two Portal Fantasies An Analys.docxransayo
 
Zhang 1Yixiang ZhangTamara KuzmenkovEnglish 101.docx
Zhang 1Yixiang ZhangTamara KuzmenkovEnglish 101.docxZhang 1Yixiang ZhangTamara KuzmenkovEnglish 101.docx
Zhang 1Yixiang ZhangTamara KuzmenkovEnglish 101.docxransayo
 
Zhang 1Nick ZhangMr. BetheaLyric Peotry13.docx
Zhang 1Nick ZhangMr. BetheaLyric Peotry13.docxZhang 1Nick ZhangMr. BetheaLyric Peotry13.docx
Zhang 1Nick ZhangMr. BetheaLyric Peotry13.docxransayo
 
Zero trust is a security stance for networking based on not trusting.docx
Zero trust is a security stance for networking based on not trusting.docxZero trust is a security stance for networking based on not trusting.docx
Zero trust is a security stance for networking based on not trusting.docxransayo
 
Zero plagiarism4 referencesNature offers many examples of sp.docx
Zero plagiarism4 referencesNature offers many examples of sp.docxZero plagiarism4 referencesNature offers many examples of sp.docx
Zero plagiarism4 referencesNature offers many examples of sp.docxransayo
 
Zero plagiarism4 referencesLearning ObjectivesStudents w.docx
Zero plagiarism4 referencesLearning ObjectivesStudents w.docxZero plagiarism4 referencesLearning ObjectivesStudents w.docx
Zero plagiarism4 referencesLearning ObjectivesStudents w.docxransayo
 
Zero Plagiarism or receive a grade of a 0.Choose one important p.docx
Zero Plagiarism or receive a grade of a 0.Choose one important p.docxZero Plagiarism or receive a grade of a 0.Choose one important p.docx
Zero Plagiarism or receive a grade of a 0.Choose one important p.docxransayo
 
ZACHARY SHEMTOB AND DAVID LATZachary Shemtob, formerly editor in.docx
ZACHARY SHEMTOB AND DAVID LATZachary Shemtob, formerly editor in.docxZACHARY SHEMTOB AND DAVID LATZachary Shemtob, formerly editor in.docx
ZACHARY SHEMTOB AND DAVID LATZachary Shemtob, formerly editor in.docxransayo
 
zctnoFrl+.1Affid ow9iar!(al+{FJr.docx
zctnoFrl+.1Affid ow9iar!(al+{FJr.docxzctnoFrl+.1Affid ow9iar!(al+{FJr.docx
zctnoFrl+.1Affid ow9iar!(al+{FJr.docxransayo
 
Zeng Jiawen ZengChenxia Zhu English 3001-015292017Refl.docx
Zeng Jiawen ZengChenxia Zhu English 3001-015292017Refl.docxZeng Jiawen ZengChenxia Zhu English 3001-015292017Refl.docx
Zeng Jiawen ZengChenxia Zhu English 3001-015292017Refl.docxransayo
 
zClass 44.8.19§ Announcements§ Go over quiz #1.docx
zClass 44.8.19§ Announcements§ Go over quiz #1.docxzClass 44.8.19§ Announcements§ Go over quiz #1.docx
zClass 44.8.19§ Announcements§ Go over quiz #1.docxransayo
 
zClass 185.13.19§ Announcements§ Review of last .docx
zClass 185.13.19§ Announcements§ Review of last .docxzClass 185.13.19§ Announcements§ Review of last .docx
zClass 185.13.19§ Announcements§ Review of last .docxransayo
 

More from ransayo (20)

Zoe is a second grader with autism spectrum disorders. Zoe’s father .docx
Zoe is a second grader with autism spectrum disorders. Zoe’s father .docxZoe is a second grader with autism spectrum disorders. Zoe’s father .docx
Zoe is a second grader with autism spectrum disorders. Zoe’s father .docx
 
Zlatan Ibrahimović – Sports PsychologyOutlineIntroduction .docx
Zlatan Ibrahimović – Sports PsychologyOutlineIntroduction .docxZlatan Ibrahimović – Sports PsychologyOutlineIntroduction .docx
Zlatan Ibrahimović – Sports PsychologyOutlineIntroduction .docx
 
Zia 2Do You Choose to AcceptYour mission, should you choose.docx
Zia 2Do You Choose to AcceptYour mission, should you choose.docxZia 2Do You Choose to AcceptYour mission, should you choose.docx
Zia 2Do You Choose to AcceptYour mission, should you choose.docx
 
Ziyao LiIAS 3753Dr. Manata HashemiWorking Title The Edu.docx
Ziyao LiIAS 3753Dr. Manata HashemiWorking Title The Edu.docxZiyao LiIAS 3753Dr. Manata HashemiWorking Title The Edu.docx
Ziyao LiIAS 3753Dr. Manata HashemiWorking Title The Edu.docx
 
Ziyan Huang (Jerry)Assignment 4Brand PositioningProfessor .docx
Ziyan Huang (Jerry)Assignment 4Brand PositioningProfessor .docxZiyan Huang (Jerry)Assignment 4Brand PositioningProfessor .docx
Ziyan Huang (Jerry)Assignment 4Brand PositioningProfessor .docx
 
Zhtavius Moye04192019BUSA 4126SWOT AnalysisDr. Setliff.docx
Zhtavius Moye04192019BUSA 4126SWOT AnalysisDr. Setliff.docxZhtavius Moye04192019BUSA 4126SWOT AnalysisDr. Setliff.docx
Zhtavius Moye04192019BUSA 4126SWOT AnalysisDr. Setliff.docx
 
Zichun Gao Professor Karen Accounting 1AIBM FInancial Stat.docx
Zichun Gao Professor Karen Accounting 1AIBM FInancial Stat.docxZichun Gao Professor Karen Accounting 1AIBM FInancial Stat.docx
Zichun Gao Professor Karen Accounting 1AIBM FInancial Stat.docx
 
Zheng Hes Inscription This inscription was carved on a stele erec.docx
Zheng Hes Inscription This inscription was carved on a stele erec.docxZheng Hes Inscription This inscription was carved on a stele erec.docx
Zheng Hes Inscription This inscription was carved on a stele erec.docx
 
Zhou 1Time and Memory in Two Portal Fantasies An Analys.docx
Zhou 1Time and Memory in Two Portal Fantasies An Analys.docxZhou 1Time and Memory in Two Portal Fantasies An Analys.docx
Zhou 1Time and Memory in Two Portal Fantasies An Analys.docx
 
Zhang 1Yixiang ZhangTamara KuzmenkovEnglish 101.docx
Zhang 1Yixiang ZhangTamara KuzmenkovEnglish 101.docxZhang 1Yixiang ZhangTamara KuzmenkovEnglish 101.docx
Zhang 1Yixiang ZhangTamara KuzmenkovEnglish 101.docx
 
Zhang 1Nick ZhangMr. BetheaLyric Peotry13.docx
Zhang 1Nick ZhangMr. BetheaLyric Peotry13.docxZhang 1Nick ZhangMr. BetheaLyric Peotry13.docx
Zhang 1Nick ZhangMr. BetheaLyric Peotry13.docx
 
Zero trust is a security stance for networking based on not trusting.docx
Zero trust is a security stance for networking based on not trusting.docxZero trust is a security stance for networking based on not trusting.docx
Zero trust is a security stance for networking based on not trusting.docx
 
Zero plagiarism4 referencesNature offers many examples of sp.docx
Zero plagiarism4 referencesNature offers many examples of sp.docxZero plagiarism4 referencesNature offers many examples of sp.docx
Zero plagiarism4 referencesNature offers many examples of sp.docx
 
Zero plagiarism4 referencesLearning ObjectivesStudents w.docx
Zero plagiarism4 referencesLearning ObjectivesStudents w.docxZero plagiarism4 referencesLearning ObjectivesStudents w.docx
Zero plagiarism4 referencesLearning ObjectivesStudents w.docx
 
Zero Plagiarism or receive a grade of a 0.Choose one important p.docx
Zero Plagiarism or receive a grade of a 0.Choose one important p.docxZero Plagiarism or receive a grade of a 0.Choose one important p.docx
Zero Plagiarism or receive a grade of a 0.Choose one important p.docx
 
ZACHARY SHEMTOB AND DAVID LATZachary Shemtob, formerly editor in.docx
ZACHARY SHEMTOB AND DAVID LATZachary Shemtob, formerly editor in.docxZACHARY SHEMTOB AND DAVID LATZachary Shemtob, formerly editor in.docx
ZACHARY SHEMTOB AND DAVID LATZachary Shemtob, formerly editor in.docx
 
zctnoFrl+.1Affid ow9iar!(al+{FJr.docx
zctnoFrl+.1Affid ow9iar!(al+{FJr.docxzctnoFrl+.1Affid ow9iar!(al+{FJr.docx
zctnoFrl+.1Affid ow9iar!(al+{FJr.docx
 
Zeng Jiawen ZengChenxia Zhu English 3001-015292017Refl.docx
Zeng Jiawen ZengChenxia Zhu English 3001-015292017Refl.docxZeng Jiawen ZengChenxia Zhu English 3001-015292017Refl.docx
Zeng Jiawen ZengChenxia Zhu English 3001-015292017Refl.docx
 
zClass 44.8.19§ Announcements§ Go over quiz #1.docx
zClass 44.8.19§ Announcements§ Go over quiz #1.docxzClass 44.8.19§ Announcements§ Go over quiz #1.docx
zClass 44.8.19§ Announcements§ Go over quiz #1.docx
 
zClass 185.13.19§ Announcements§ Review of last .docx
zClass 185.13.19§ Announcements§ Review of last .docxzClass 185.13.19§ Announcements§ Review of last .docx
zClass 185.13.19§ Announcements§ Review of last .docx
 

Recently uploaded

Fostering Friendships - Enhancing Social Bonds in the Classroom
Fostering Friendships - Enhancing Social Bonds  in the ClassroomFostering Friendships - Enhancing Social Bonds  in the Classroom
Fostering Friendships - Enhancing Social Bonds in the ClassroomPooky Knightsmith
 
Spellings Wk 3 English CAPS CARES Please Practise
Spellings Wk 3 English CAPS CARES Please PractiseSpellings Wk 3 English CAPS CARES Please Practise
Spellings Wk 3 English CAPS CARES Please PractiseAnaAcapella
 
Python Notes for mca i year students osmania university.docx
Python Notes for mca i year students osmania university.docxPython Notes for mca i year students osmania university.docx
Python Notes for mca i year students osmania university.docxRamakrishna Reddy Bijjam
 
Basic Civil Engineering first year Notes- Chapter 4 Building.pptx
Basic Civil Engineering first year Notes- Chapter 4 Building.pptxBasic Civil Engineering first year Notes- Chapter 4 Building.pptx
Basic Civil Engineering first year Notes- Chapter 4 Building.pptxDenish Jangid
 
80 ĐỀ THI THỬ TUYỂN SINH TIẾNG ANH VÀO 10 SỞ GD – ĐT THÀNH PHỐ HỒ CHÍ MINH NĂ...
80 ĐỀ THI THỬ TUYỂN SINH TIẾNG ANH VÀO 10 SỞ GD – ĐT THÀNH PHỐ HỒ CHÍ MINH NĂ...80 ĐỀ THI THỬ TUYỂN SINH TIẾNG ANH VÀO 10 SỞ GD – ĐT THÀNH PHỐ HỒ CHÍ MINH NĂ...
80 ĐỀ THI THỬ TUYỂN SINH TIẾNG ANH VÀO 10 SỞ GD – ĐT THÀNH PHỐ HỒ CHÍ MINH NĂ...Nguyen Thanh Tu Collection
 
Key note speaker Neum_Admir Softic_ENG.pdf
Key note speaker Neum_Admir Softic_ENG.pdfKey note speaker Neum_Admir Softic_ENG.pdf
Key note speaker Neum_Admir Softic_ENG.pdfAdmir Softic
 
Accessible Digital Futures project (20/03/2024)
Accessible Digital Futures project (20/03/2024)Accessible Digital Futures project (20/03/2024)
Accessible Digital Futures project (20/03/2024)Jisc
 
TỔNG ÔN TẬP THI VÀO LỚP 10 MÔN TIẾNG ANH NĂM HỌC 2023 - 2024 CÓ ĐÁP ÁN (NGỮ Â...
TỔNG ÔN TẬP THI VÀO LỚP 10 MÔN TIẾNG ANH NĂM HỌC 2023 - 2024 CÓ ĐÁP ÁN (NGỮ Â...TỔNG ÔN TẬP THI VÀO LỚP 10 MÔN TIẾNG ANH NĂM HỌC 2023 - 2024 CÓ ĐÁP ÁN (NGỮ Â...
TỔNG ÔN TẬP THI VÀO LỚP 10 MÔN TIẾNG ANH NĂM HỌC 2023 - 2024 CÓ ĐÁP ÁN (NGỮ Â...Nguyen Thanh Tu Collection
 
Interdisciplinary_Insights_Data_Collection_Methods.pptx
Interdisciplinary_Insights_Data_Collection_Methods.pptxInterdisciplinary_Insights_Data_Collection_Methods.pptx
Interdisciplinary_Insights_Data_Collection_Methods.pptxPooja Bhuva
 
Jamworks pilot and AI at Jisc (20/03/2024)
Jamworks pilot and AI at Jisc (20/03/2024)Jamworks pilot and AI at Jisc (20/03/2024)
Jamworks pilot and AI at Jisc (20/03/2024)Jisc
 
Salient Features of India constitution especially power and functions
Salient Features of India constitution especially power and functionsSalient Features of India constitution especially power and functions
Salient Features of India constitution especially power and functionsKarakKing
 
Sociology 101 Demonstration of Learning Exhibit
Sociology 101 Demonstration of Learning ExhibitSociology 101 Demonstration of Learning Exhibit
Sociology 101 Demonstration of Learning Exhibitjbellavia9
 
Micro-Scholarship, What it is, How can it help me.pdf
Micro-Scholarship, What it is, How can it help me.pdfMicro-Scholarship, What it is, How can it help me.pdf
Micro-Scholarship, What it is, How can it help me.pdfPoh-Sun Goh
 
Graduate Outcomes Presentation Slides - English
Graduate Outcomes Presentation Slides - EnglishGraduate Outcomes Presentation Slides - English
Graduate Outcomes Presentation Slides - Englishneillewis46
 
On National Teacher Day, meet the 2024-25 Kenan Fellows
On National Teacher Day, meet the 2024-25 Kenan FellowsOn National Teacher Day, meet the 2024-25 Kenan Fellows
On National Teacher Day, meet the 2024-25 Kenan FellowsMebane Rash
 
REMIFENTANIL: An Ultra short acting opioid.pptx
REMIFENTANIL: An Ultra short acting opioid.pptxREMIFENTANIL: An Ultra short acting opioid.pptx
REMIFENTANIL: An Ultra short acting opioid.pptxDr. Ravikiran H M Gowda
 
Introduction to Nonprofit Accounting: The Basics
Introduction to Nonprofit Accounting: The BasicsIntroduction to Nonprofit Accounting: The Basics
Introduction to Nonprofit Accounting: The BasicsTechSoup
 
Wellbeing inclusion and digital dystopias.pptx
Wellbeing inclusion and digital dystopias.pptxWellbeing inclusion and digital dystopias.pptx
Wellbeing inclusion and digital dystopias.pptxJisc
 
Single or Multiple melodic lines structure
Single or Multiple melodic lines structureSingle or Multiple melodic lines structure
Single or Multiple melodic lines structuredhanjurrannsibayan2
 
UGC NET Paper 1 Mathematical Reasoning & Aptitude.pdf
UGC NET Paper 1 Mathematical Reasoning & Aptitude.pdfUGC NET Paper 1 Mathematical Reasoning & Aptitude.pdf
UGC NET Paper 1 Mathematical Reasoning & Aptitude.pdfNirmal Dwivedi
 

Recently uploaded (20)

Fostering Friendships - Enhancing Social Bonds in the Classroom
Fostering Friendships - Enhancing Social Bonds  in the ClassroomFostering Friendships - Enhancing Social Bonds  in the Classroom
Fostering Friendships - Enhancing Social Bonds in the Classroom
 
Spellings Wk 3 English CAPS CARES Please Practise
Spellings Wk 3 English CAPS CARES Please PractiseSpellings Wk 3 English CAPS CARES Please Practise
Spellings Wk 3 English CAPS CARES Please Practise
 
Python Notes for mca i year students osmania university.docx
Python Notes for mca i year students osmania university.docxPython Notes for mca i year students osmania university.docx
Python Notes for mca i year students osmania university.docx
 
Basic Civil Engineering first year Notes- Chapter 4 Building.pptx
Basic Civil Engineering first year Notes- Chapter 4 Building.pptxBasic Civil Engineering first year Notes- Chapter 4 Building.pptx
Basic Civil Engineering first year Notes- Chapter 4 Building.pptx
 
80 ĐỀ THI THỬ TUYỂN SINH TIẾNG ANH VÀO 10 SỞ GD – ĐT THÀNH PHỐ HỒ CHÍ MINH NĂ...
80 ĐỀ THI THỬ TUYỂN SINH TIẾNG ANH VÀO 10 SỞ GD – ĐT THÀNH PHỐ HỒ CHÍ MINH NĂ...80 ĐỀ THI THỬ TUYỂN SINH TIẾNG ANH VÀO 10 SỞ GD – ĐT THÀNH PHỐ HỒ CHÍ MINH NĂ...
80 ĐỀ THI THỬ TUYỂN SINH TIẾNG ANH VÀO 10 SỞ GD – ĐT THÀNH PHỐ HỒ CHÍ MINH NĂ...
 
Key note speaker Neum_Admir Softic_ENG.pdf
Key note speaker Neum_Admir Softic_ENG.pdfKey note speaker Neum_Admir Softic_ENG.pdf
Key note speaker Neum_Admir Softic_ENG.pdf
 
Accessible Digital Futures project (20/03/2024)
Accessible Digital Futures project (20/03/2024)Accessible Digital Futures project (20/03/2024)
Accessible Digital Futures project (20/03/2024)
 
TỔNG ÔN TẬP THI VÀO LỚP 10 MÔN TIẾNG ANH NĂM HỌC 2023 - 2024 CÓ ĐÁP ÁN (NGỮ Â...
TỔNG ÔN TẬP THI VÀO LỚP 10 MÔN TIẾNG ANH NĂM HỌC 2023 - 2024 CÓ ĐÁP ÁN (NGỮ Â...TỔNG ÔN TẬP THI VÀO LỚP 10 MÔN TIẾNG ANH NĂM HỌC 2023 - 2024 CÓ ĐÁP ÁN (NGỮ Â...
TỔNG ÔN TẬP THI VÀO LỚP 10 MÔN TIẾNG ANH NĂM HỌC 2023 - 2024 CÓ ĐÁP ÁN (NGỮ Â...
 
Interdisciplinary_Insights_Data_Collection_Methods.pptx
Interdisciplinary_Insights_Data_Collection_Methods.pptxInterdisciplinary_Insights_Data_Collection_Methods.pptx
Interdisciplinary_Insights_Data_Collection_Methods.pptx
 
Jamworks pilot and AI at Jisc (20/03/2024)
Jamworks pilot and AI at Jisc (20/03/2024)Jamworks pilot and AI at Jisc (20/03/2024)
Jamworks pilot and AI at Jisc (20/03/2024)
 
Salient Features of India constitution especially power and functions
Salient Features of India constitution especially power and functionsSalient Features of India constitution especially power and functions
Salient Features of India constitution especially power and functions
 
Sociology 101 Demonstration of Learning Exhibit
Sociology 101 Demonstration of Learning ExhibitSociology 101 Demonstration of Learning Exhibit
Sociology 101 Demonstration of Learning Exhibit
 
Micro-Scholarship, What it is, How can it help me.pdf
Micro-Scholarship, What it is, How can it help me.pdfMicro-Scholarship, What it is, How can it help me.pdf
Micro-Scholarship, What it is, How can it help me.pdf
 
Graduate Outcomes Presentation Slides - English
Graduate Outcomes Presentation Slides - EnglishGraduate Outcomes Presentation Slides - English
Graduate Outcomes Presentation Slides - English
 
On National Teacher Day, meet the 2024-25 Kenan Fellows
On National Teacher Day, meet the 2024-25 Kenan FellowsOn National Teacher Day, meet the 2024-25 Kenan Fellows
On National Teacher Day, meet the 2024-25 Kenan Fellows
 
REMIFENTANIL: An Ultra short acting opioid.pptx
REMIFENTANIL: An Ultra short acting opioid.pptxREMIFENTANIL: An Ultra short acting opioid.pptx
REMIFENTANIL: An Ultra short acting opioid.pptx
 
Introduction to Nonprofit Accounting: The Basics
Introduction to Nonprofit Accounting: The BasicsIntroduction to Nonprofit Accounting: The Basics
Introduction to Nonprofit Accounting: The Basics
 
Wellbeing inclusion and digital dystopias.pptx
Wellbeing inclusion and digital dystopias.pptxWellbeing inclusion and digital dystopias.pptx
Wellbeing inclusion and digital dystopias.pptx
 
Single or Multiple melodic lines structure
Single or Multiple melodic lines structureSingle or Multiple melodic lines structure
Single or Multiple melodic lines structure
 
UGC NET Paper 1 Mathematical Reasoning & Aptitude.pdf
UGC NET Paper 1 Mathematical Reasoning & Aptitude.pdfUGC NET Paper 1 Mathematical Reasoning & Aptitude.pdf
UGC NET Paper 1 Mathematical Reasoning & Aptitude.pdf
 

A. Lab # BSBA BIS245A-3B. Lab 3 of 7 Database Design Using .docx

  • 1. A. Lab # : BSBA BIS245A-3 B. Lab 3 of 7: Database Design Using Visio and Based on Data Requirements and Business Rules C. Lab Overview—Scenario/Summary TCOs: 2. Given a situation containing entities, business rules, and data requirements, create the conceptual model of the database using a database modeling tool. 3. Given an existing relational database schema, evaluate and alter the database design for efficiency. 4. Given an existing database structure demonstrating efficiency and integrity, design the physical tables. Scenario You have been asked to create a database model using MS Visio Database Model Diagram Template. The purpose of this iLab is to provide experience designing, with limited instructions, a simple database based on a list of data requirements and associated business rules. You will then complete an MS Access database based on the model developed in Visio, creating the necessary tables and relationships. Upon completing this lab, you will be able to 1. create a new Visio file for database design; 2. using the data requirements and the business rules provided, develop a conceptual model (ERD), including attribute data types and required field lengths; and
  • 2. 3. create a new MS Access database based on the ERD. D. Deliverables Section Deliverable Points Part A YourNameLab3.vsdx (Visio Diagram) Part B YourNameLab3.accdb (Access Database) E. Lab Steps Page 6 of 6 Preparation 1. If you are using Citrix for MS Visio and/or MS Access, follow the login instructions located in the iLab area in Course Home. Lab Part A: Create a Visio ERD from Data Requirements and Business Rules
  • 3. Step 1: Open Visio a. Open Microsoft Office, Visio application, or b. if you are using Citrix, click on Microsoft Office Applications folder to start Visio. Step 2: Identify and Create the Entities 1. Open a new blank Database Model Diagram. If you need assistance with this, refer to the Week 1 Lab Instructions. Be sure that all options are set consistent to those used in previous weeks so that you generate your model in Crow's Foot notation. 2. Save the file as YourName_Lab3.vsdx. 3. Based on the information provided below, create the necessary entities for the Pages in Time database. If you need assistance to create the entities, refer to iLabs from Weeks 1 and 2. Pages in Time Pages in Time is a small bookstore carrying a variety of books. The owners have decided to computerize the books available through the store so that they can determine more easily what books are on hand and which books need to be special ordered to meet customer needs. Because customers do not always remember the name of a desired book, the owners want to be able to look for books by author or by type (genre). They also want to be able to find the publisher’s information using the system so that they can order books more easily. After visiting with the owners, you have gathered the following information on data requirements and business rules to develop a conceptual design (ERD), prepare it for conversion to an Access database, and then create the actual database. DATA REQUIREMENTS
  • 4. You have determined that you will need at least the following entities to resolve the relationships that exist in the data. CUSTOMERS ID Name (store data in its smallest parts) Address (store data in its smallest parts) Phone: E-mail Address Preferred Contact Method ORDERS Number Date Received Date Customer Contacted (Yes or No) BOOKS ISBN Number Title Purchase Price Year Published Fiction or Nonfiction Type (Genre) In stock AUTHOR ID Name (store data in smallest parts!) Short Biography PUBLISHER ID Name Address Phone number Contact Person Fax Number Website Step 3: Identify and Create Attributes (fields) NOTE: Because you are creating your diagram in Visio, it will be easier to create the attributes prior to the relationships.
  • 5. a. Refer to the data requirements from Step 2 of this iLab. If you have not already created the attributes (fields) in your ERD, add them at this time. b. Be sure that you store data in its smallest parts. c. Save your file, and continue to Step 4. Step 4: Identify and Designate the Keys a. Determine whether an attribute exists in each table that will satisfy the requirements of a primary key. If no appropriate field exists, create a field for this purpose. b. Check the Primary Key property for the field in each table using the Visio column properties. Step 5: Identify the Relationships a. Using the information below on the business rules for Pages in Time, create the relationships between the entities created in Step 2. b. Notice that when many-to-many relationships exist, you will need to create associative entities. If you are not sure of the process to create relationships in Visio, refer to the iLabs for Weeks 1 and 2. You created an associative entity in Week 2. c. For any associative entities created, enter necessary fields. You may also need to designate or create a primary key. BUSINESS RULES Business rules help determine the relationships between data that should help you design the relationships between your entities. 1. Each customer can place many orders over time, but each order is placed by only one customer. 2. Each order may include many books, and a book may be included on many orders. 3. Each book may have multiple authors, and each author may have written multiple books. 4. Each book has only one publisher, but a publisher may
  • 6. publish many books. End of Part A Part B: Create the Access Database from the ERD Preparation Open the Visio file created in Part A of this iLab, you will reference this file in Part B. Step 1: Start MS Access and Open a New Blank Database a. Create a new Blank Database; refer to the Week 2 iLab for more detailed instructions. b. Save the database as YourNameLab3. c. Note: If you are unsure how to complete any steps in this iLab, refer to the previous week's iLabs. Step 2: Create the Tables a. Based on the Visio diagram from Part A, create the tables for your database. b. Enter the field names. Step 3: Identify the Relationships a. Use the information from your Visio diagram to identify and create relationships in Access. Step 4: Determine and Specify the Data Types NOTE: After meeting with the client and discussing the database needs, determinations on data types and attributes have been established. Use the following guidelines to determine data type, primary keys for each table, and set attribute properties such as field length and required fields as indicated. If not indicated, use your best judgment for data types. a. Using the information below, select the data type for each attribute (field) in your diagram, and set the type in the attribute
  • 7. properties. (Refer to the Week 2 iLab if you are not sure how to do this. Where allowed, estimate the field length needed.) As the data types and field lengths are not included in the data requirements, you should make a selection based on your knowledge of the type of data and approximation of length required. The Visio and Access data type equivalents are shown below. Access Field Types: Number Text Memo Date/Time Currency Yes/No AutoNumber Hyperlink NOTE: Be sure to save the final version of your file. Step 7: Create the Relationships a. Open the database relationships window. b. Based on the Visio diagram from Part A, create the relationships for your database. c. Be sure to enforce referential integrity for each relationship. Save your file. End of Part B Lab 3 Final Deliverables a. YourNameLab3.vsdx (Visio Diagram)—from Lab 3 Part A b. YourNameLab3.accdb (Access Database)—from Lab 3 Part B
  • 8. Submit these files to the Week 3 iLab Dropbox. END OF LAB Computers in Human Behavior 29 (2013) 2490–2493 Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect Computers in Human Behavior j o u r n a l h o m e p a g e : w w w . e l s e v i e r . c o m / l o c a t e / c o m p h u m b e h Attitude moderation: A comparison of online chat and Face-to- face conversation 0747-5632/$ - see front matter � 2013 Published by Elsevier Ltd. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2013.06.004 ⇑ Corresponding author. Address: Department of Psychology, University of Toronto, 100 St. George Street, Toronto, Ontario M5S 3G3, Canada. Tel.: +1 416 946 5275; fax: +1 416 978 4811. E-mail address: [email protected] (M. Lipinski-Harten). Maciek Lipinski-Harten ⇑ , Romin W. Tafarodi Department of Psychology, University of Toronto, Canada a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t Article history: Available online 28 June 2013 Keywords:
  • 9. Online Chat Conversation Negotiation Agreement Attitudes Face-to-face conversation and online chat were compared on their tendency to moderate attitudes through exposure to an opposing perspective. As predicted on the basis of the greater self-focus and reduced presence of the other in text-based chat, strangers who chatted online for 20 min about a divisive social issue on which they held opposing attitudes showed less movement toward their partner’s position as a result than did those who spoke face-to-face for the same length of time. The potential limitation of text-based online communication for bridging attitude divides is discussed. � 2013 Published by Elsevier Ltd. 1. Introduction Online communication allows people to share ideas and hold each other’s attention across the widest of physical and social divides. One feature that contributes to this democratic and cos- mopolitan inclusivity is the absence of physical appearance as a hindrance to egalitarian dialogue in text-based exchanges (Joinson, 2001). This identifies online contact as a potential means of reduc- ing social prejudice (Amichai-Hamburger & McKenna, 2006; Walther, 2009). Its success in this regard depends on the ability of the medium to promote attitude change through substantive discussion among dissimilar parties. Whether such attitude change occurs, however, appears to depend on the motivational context
  • 10. of the interaction. Walther, Van Der Heide, Tong, Carr, and Atkin (2010), for example, found evidence for attitude convergence when one online interlocutor was motivated to establish an affinity with the other, but not when otherwise motivated. What remains unclear is whether the compulsions of the online medium on the whole tend to promote relatively more or less affinity-seeking in dialogical encounters with strangers than is the case in face-to- face conversation, specifically with respect to negotiating the chal- lenges of initial difference or disagreement. From a uses-and-gratifications perspective, the primary function of informal, voluntary, and sustained online communication is the formation and maintenance of affinity groups. That said, there is good reason to believe that the medium is not as conducive as face-to-face communication to developing affinity among strangers. Despite the availability of digital voice and video interfaces, most online communicators opt for text-only platforms (Rainie, 2011; Shiu & Lenhart, 2004). This preference is telling. Face-to-face and voice encounters, real or virtual, are more taxing in that they require close attention to physical and auditory cues (Burgoon & Hoobler, 2002), and provide less expressive and editorial control. The greater reciprocal ‘‘transparency’’ (Gilovich, Savitsky, & Medvec, 1998) that is experienced face-to-face is associated with
  • 11. increased social accountability and risk. In contrast, purely text-based exchanges require less scrutiny of the other, less self- exposure, and less sustained attention. They are ‘‘lighter’’ in this sense, so much so that many online communicators feel free to multitask during conversations (Dresner & Barak, 2006). With less pressure to attend to the other, communicators are at liberty to focus more on their own intentions, desires, and beliefs (McKenna, 2007; Suler, 2004; Walther, 2007), and to reveal information in a self-prompted and unsolicited manner (Joinson, 2001; Valkenburg & Peter, 2007). With the increasing preference for synchronous forms of online communication such as instant messaging over traditional email and discussion boards, the pressure to respond quickly further diminishes nuanced consideration of the other and reduces willing- ness to engage in the time-consuming negotiation of disagreement. These qualities may be well-fitted to communicating with familiar interlocutors where there is considerable affinity and a rich background of shared experience and common understanding. They are, however, less suitable for the effortful reduction of stark differ- ence or contention among strangers, where the value of closely reading the shifting mental states of interlocutors is at a premium. This, together with the reduced ethical presence of the other in
  • 12. text-based encounters, suggests that, on the whole, there is less http://crossmark.crossref.org/dialog/?doi=10.1016/j.chb.2013.06 .004&domain=pdf http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2013.06.004 mailto:[email protected] http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2013.06.004 http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/07475632 http://www.elsevier.com/locate/comphumbeh M. Lipinski-Harten, R.W. Tafarodi / Computers in Human Behavior 29 (2013) 2490–2493 2491 impetus for attitude convergence between disagreeing strangers in online communication than in face-to-face conversation. If so, we can expect less moderation of attitudes through online discussion when there is clear initial disagreement, ceteris paribus. To test this idea, we compared the degree of attitude moderation produced by online chat with that produced through face-to-face dialogue. Where the conversing partners clearly disagreed at the outset, we predicted greater movement toward the partner’s position in the latter than in the former condition. Where the conversing partners agreed at the outset, we expected no such difference. Nor did we predict attitude intensification in the case of agreeing partners, as the consistent attitude of a single interlocutor is unlikely to produce the ‘‘polarizing’’ shifts seen in group contexts where both
  • 13. informa- tional and normative influence often loom large (Isenberg, 1986). 2. Method 2.1. Participants Participants were 142 undergraduate students (86 women and 56 men) at the University of Toronto. The mean age was 19.01 years, with a range of 17–25. All participants reported regularly accessing the internet. Eighty-two percent of the sample reported at least some regular use of online instant messaging; 90% reported at least some regular use of social networking websites. Participants were recruited by phone on account of their responses to a set of mass testing questions administered at the start of the academic term (1–3 months prior to testing). The crite- rion for recruitment was clear-cut but not extreme agreement or disagreement with any one of the following four statements: (1) To become Canadian citizens, immigrants should be expected to conform to the basic values held by most Canadians. (2) There is no sufficient justification for taking the life of another person. (3) The main purpose of university education should be to pre- pare students to compete successfully in the job market. (4) A Canadian who fails to vote in a federal election is letting
  • 14. down the country. These statements had been selected as those with which roughly as many students agreed as disagreed in the pool from which the participants were selected. For purposes of recruitment, disagreement was defined as a rating of 3 and agreement as a rat- ing of 8 on a scale of 1 (strongly disagree) to 10 (strongly agree). This strategy ensured participants with clearly ‘‘sided’’ pre-test attitudes, but with room for conversationally-induced attitude change in either direction. During phone recruitment, all partici- pants were asked to confirm the pre-test response for which they had been selected. Only those who did so were retained. Participants were randomly matched into either consistent or opposing same-sex pairs. Members of consistent pairs shared the same pre-test rating (3 or 8) on the attitude statement of selection. In opposing pairs, one member had a pre-test rating of 3 and the other of 8 on the attitude statement. This system of pairing effec- tively created conversation partners who could be expected to either agree or disagree on the issue represented by the statement. A total of 34 opposing and 37 consistent pairs were tested. The gender ratio was comparable for the two types of pairs, v2(1) = 1.20, p = .27. All participants received either course credit or a modest cash payment in exchange for their time. 2.2. Procedure
  • 15. Members of pairs were unfamiliar to each other prior to the study. Each pair was randomly assigned to either a face-to-face (FTF) or online chat (OC) condition. The gender ratio was compara- ble in the two conditions, v2(1) = .17, p = .68. In both conditions, participants were read the attitude statement that had been the basis of their selection for the study and instructed to discuss their thoughts and feelings on the subject with each other for 20 min. It was made clear that the conversation would be recorded. Members of the pair were not informed of each other’s attitudes on the state- ment they would be discussing and had no reason to anticipate agreement or disagreement. In FTF, members of the pair were seated across from each other in a private room for the duration of the conversation. In OC, members of the pair were seated in sep- arate rooms in front of desktop computers and instructed to con- verse in text for 20 min using Google Talk, a web-based instant messaging application. Only Google Talk’s synchronous text- based capabilities were used. Participants unfamiliar with Google Talk were given a quick tutorial prior to the conversation. Members of OC pairs were prevented from seeing each other before, during, and after the conversation. In both conditions, anonymity was pro- tected by asking all participants to refrain from revealing or asking for personal names. FTF conversations were digitally recorded and transcribed for analysis. OC conversations were automatically
  • 16. logged and downloaded. Following the conversation, participants completed a short questionnaire consisting of demographic items, a set of experi- ence-related questions that are not directly relevant here, and 12 attitude statements addressing a broad range of topics, one of which was the critical attitude statement on which members of the pair had been selected. Participants indicated their agreement with the critical statement on the same 1–10 scale used in pre- testing, thus providing a post-conversation index of attitude change. All participants were fully debriefed on the nature and purpose of the study before leaving the laboratory. The entire session lasted approximately 50 min. The variable of interest here is the degree of change from pre- test to post-conversation on the attitude for which the participant had been selected. Specifically, we expected more movement to- ward the opposite side of the attitude scale after conversation with an opposing partner (where, presumably, one’s views would be challenged and moderated) in FTF than in OC. No difference be- tween FTF and OC was expected after conversation with a consis- tent partner (where, presumably, one’s views would be echoed and thereby reinforced). To test these predictions, participants’ pre-test rated agreement with the attitude statement was sub- tracted from their post-conversation rated agreement. For those participants selected for a pre-test rating of 3, a positive value for the resulting difference represents movement toward the opposite side of the scale. For participants selected on account of a pre- test
  • 17. rating of 8, the sign of the difference was reversed so that a positive value again represents movement toward the opposite side of the scale. For present purposes, we will refer to this change variable as moderation in attitude, despite the fact that a few participants (4.93% of the sample) moved to a position on the opposite side of the rating scale that was more extreme (relative to the midpoint) that their pre-test position. 3. Results To accommodate the influence of participants within pairs on each other, participant-level outcome variables were analyzed according to Kenny, Kashy, and Cook’s (2006) actor–partner inter- dependence model. This approach requires defining a multilevel or mixed model with individual participants as first-level units and dyads as second-level units. The covariance structure reflecting partners’ response dependencies within dyads was specified as compound symmetric. Satterthwaite’s (1946) approximation was 2492 M. Lipinski-Harten, R.W. Tafarodi / Computers in Human Behavior 29 (2013) 2490–2493 used to determine the degrees of freedom for mixed predictors. Mixed model testing was conducted using the SAS statistical pack- age (see Campbell & Kashy, 2002). The initial model revealed no significant (a = .05) main or interactive effects for dyad gender, which was therefore eliminated from the model to focus testing. In this final model, moderation was examined as a function of
  • 18. medium (FTF, OC) and partner match (consistent, opposing). Cell means and standard deviations are presented in Table 1. The results revealed significant effects for medium, F(1, 67) = 5.20, p = .03, and the Medium � Match interaction, F(1, 67) = 5.56, p = .02. The former reflects a simple effect of medium among opposing partners, F(1, 67) = 3.87, p = .05, where those in the FTF condition showed more moderation (M = 1.44) than those in the OC condition (M = .76), as predicted, but not among consis- tent partners, F(1, 67) = 1.91, p = .17, where those in the FTF and OC conditions showed comparable levels of moderation (Ms = .32 and 1.25, respectively). If anything, the direction of the latter, nonsig- nificant difference indicates somewhat greater moderation in OC than in FTF when partners agreed at the outset, hinting at movement away from a consistent partner in OC as a result of the discussion. Finally, mean moderation was significantly (p < .05) greater than zero for all groups except consistent partners in the FTF condition. The fourfold pattern of means gainsays the possibility that the greater attitude moderation in the face of an opposing FTF partner was due to the higher average number of words spoken than typed in the 20-min session (Ms = 334 and 1604, respectively). Namely,
  • 19. the degree of moderation away from a consistent partner in OC was in fact comparable to that seen among inconsistent partners in the FTF condition. This pattern argues against the possibility that not enough was typed in OC to induce the degree of attitude change seen in FTF. Clearly, there was significant movement in both FTF and OC conditions, but in an opposing pattern with regard to partner match. Furthermore, if the absolute number of words spo- ken or typed by an inconsistent partner is predictive of partici- pants’ attitude moderation, then we should see a corresponding significant correlation in the data. This, however, was not the case – neither in FTF, Pearson r = .01, p = .95, nor in OC, r = .17, p = .35. 4. Discussion This study looked at the importance of medium for determining the degree to which discussion with a disagreeing partner moder- ates a strong attitude. Specifically, we predicted that the power of an opposing perspective to challenge and rationally temper one’s initial position would be reduced in online chat as compared to face-to-face conversation. The invisibility and inaudibility of the other in online chat would, we argued, reduce the felt mental and ethical presence of one’s partner and promote greater focus on one’s own thoughts and feelings at the expense of understand- ing and acknowledging the validity of the partner’s sentiments and position. This weaker interpersonal engagement would lead to
  • 20. less social influence in general and less attitude change in particular. Consistent with prediction, students matched with partners who Table 1 Means and standard deviations for moderation as a function of medium and attitude pairing. Attitude pairing Medium Consistent Opposing Face-to-face .32 (2.18) 1.44 (1.96) Online chat 1.25 (2.72) .76 (1.74) Note. Values represent degree of movement toward the opposite end of the 1–10 attitude scale. The possible range is �2 to 7. Standard deviations appear in parentheses. clearly disagreed with them on the issue under discussion showed greater attitude moderation after 20 min of face-to-face conversa- tion than after the same length of online chat. Also as expected, this pattern held only for disagreeing partners: There was no sig- nificant difference in moderation across medium in the case of partners who agreed at the outset. The results point to the potential limitation of online chat among strangers for producing immediate attitude change through rational dialogue. Insofar as participants in online chat remain more attuned to themselves than to those who manifest as mere
  • 21. text on a screen, their susceptibility to dissuasion away from strongly held beliefs and commitments would be low. The visual, auditory, and physical confrontation that defines face-to-face con- versation forces each speaker into a deeper engagement with the subjective world of the other, heightening the social impact of ex- pressed thoughts and feelings, including those that contrast with one’s own. Ironically, the very virtues that protect online denizens from those they interact with and provide them with greater free- dom to be themselves (i.e., anonymity, invisibility, inaudibility, physical remoteness, reduced accountability) may also shield them in some contexts from socially harmonizing attitude change. Of course, the limitations of this study – its exclusive use of stu- dent participants who were unknown to each other, a nonnatural context (laboratory experiment), a single, brief conversation, and a narrow selection of attitudes – invite caution in generalizing beyond the distinctive configuration of features represented here. At the same time, the results raise legitimate concerns about the ability of online chat to stand in for face-to-face conversation as an equipotent means of promoting moderation and mutual under- standing where initial beliefs and convictions are not shared. Future research should address just how far this limitation extends and how best to overcome it. Acknowledgements
  • 22. We thank Nassim Collishaw, Milena Djokic, Anders Dorbeck, Ruijie Gu, Christine Lee, Yunjie Shi, Alex Vasilovsky, Kathy Wang, Jesse Beatson, and Raffles Cowan for their assistance with data collection and coding. References Amichai-Hamburger, Y., & McKenna, K. Y. A. (2006). The contact hypothesis reconsidered: Interacting via the internet. Journal of Computer- Mediated Communication, 11, 825–843. Burgoon, J., & Hoobler, G. (2002). Nonverbal signals. In M. Knapp & J. Daly (Eds.), Handbook of interpersonal communication (pp. 240–299). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Campbell, L., & Kashy, D. A. (2002). Estimating actor, partner, and interaction effects for dyadic data using PROC MIXED and HLM: A user-friendly guide. Personal Relationships, 9, 327–342. Dresner, E., & Barak, S. (2006). Conversational multitasking in interactive written discourse as a communication competence. Communication Reports, 19, 70–78. Gilovich, T., Savitsky, K., & Medvec, V. H. (1998). The illusion of transparency: Biased assessments of others’ ability to read one’s emotional states. Journal of
  • 23. Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 332–346. Isenberg, D. J. (1986). Group polarization: A critical review and meta-analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50, 1141–1151. Joinson, A. N. (2001). Self-disclosure in computer-mediated communication: The role of self-awareness and visual anonymity. European Journal of Social Psychology, 31, 177–192. Kenny, D. A., Kashy, D. A., & Cook, W. L. (2006). Dyadic data analysis. New York: Guilford. McKenna, K. Y. A. (2007). Through the internet looking glass: Expressing and validating the true self. In A. Joinson, K. Y. A. McKenna, T. Postmes, & U. Reips (Eds.), The oxford handbook of psychology (pp. 205–222). New York: Oxford University Press. Rainie, L. (2011). Internet phone calls. Reported by Pew Internet and American Life Project. Satterthwaite, F. W. (1946). An approximate distribution of estimates of variance components. Biometrics Bulletin, 2, 110–114. Shiu, E., & Lenhart, A. (2004). How Americans use instant messaging. Reported by Pew Internet and American Life Project.
  • 24. http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0747-5632(13)00196-9/h0005 http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0747-5632(13)00196-9/h0005 http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0747-5632(13)00196-9/h0005 http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0747-5632(13)00196-9/h0010 http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0747-5632(13)00196-9/h0010 http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0747-5632(13)00196-9/h0010 http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0747-5632(13)00196-9/h0015 http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0747-5632(13)00196-9/h0015 http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0747-5632(13)00196-9/h0015 http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0747-5632(13)00196-9/h0020 http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0747-5632(13)00196-9/h0020 http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0747-5632(13)00196-9/h0025 http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0747-5632(13)00196-9/h0025 http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0747-5632(13)00196-9/h0025 http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0747-5632(13)00196-9/h0030 http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0747-5632(13)00196-9/h0030 http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0747-5632(13)00196-9/h0035 http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0747-5632(13)00196-9/h0035 http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0747-5632(13)00196-9/h0035 http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0747-5632(13)00196-9/h0040 http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0747-5632(13)00196-9/h0040 http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0747-5632(13)00196-9/h0045 http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0747-5632(13)00196-9/h0045 http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0747-5632(13)00196-9/h0045 http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0747-5632(13)00196-9/h0045 http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0747-5632(13)00196-9/h0055 http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0747-5632(13)00196-9/h0055 M. Lipinski-Harten, R.W. Tafarodi / Computers in Human Behavior 29 (2013) 2490–2493 2493 Suler, J. (2004). The online disinhibition effect. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 7, 321–326. Valkenburg, P. M., & Peter, J. (2007). Preadolescents’ and
  • 25. adolescents’ online communication and their closeness to friends. Developmental Psychology, 43, 267–277. Walther, J. B. (2007). Selective self-presentation in computer- mediated communication: Hyperpersonal dimensions of technology, language and cognition. Computers in Human Behaviour, 23, 2538–2557. Walther, J. B. (2009). In point of practice: Computer-mediated communication and virtual groups: Applications to interethnic conflict. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 37, 225–238. Walther, J. B., Van Der Heide, B., Tong, S. T., Carr, C. T., & Atkin, C. K. (2010). Effects of interpersonal goals on inadvertent intrapersonal influence in computer-mediated communication. Human Communication Research, 36, 323–347. http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0747-5632(13)00196-9/h0065 http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0747-5632(13)00196-9/h0065 http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0747-5632(13)00196-9/h0070 http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0747-5632(13)00196-9/h0070 http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0747-5632(13)00196-9/h0070 http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0747-5632(13)00196-9/h0075 http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0747-5632(13)00196-9/h0075 http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0747-5632(13)00196-9/h0075 http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0747-5632(13)00196-9/h0080 http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0747-5632(13)00196-9/h0080 http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0747-5632(13)00196-9/h0080 http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0747-5632(13)00196-9/h0085
  • 26. http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0747-5632(13)00196-9/h0085 http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0747-5632(13)00196-9/h0085 http://refhub.elsevier.com/S0747-5632(13)00196- 9/h0085Attitude moderation: A comparison of online chat and Face-to-face conversation1 Introduction2 Method2.1 Participants2.2 Procedure3 Results4 DiscussionAcknowledgementsReferences Are You Feeling Lonely? The Impact of Relationship Characteristics and Online Social Network Features on Loneliness SABINE MATOOK, JEFF CUMMINGS, AND HILLOL BALA SABINE MATOOK is a senior lecturer of information systems at the UQ Business School, University of Queensland, Australia. She received her Ph.D. from the Technische Universität Dresden, Germany. Her research interests include the IT artifact, social media, and agile IS development. Her work has appeared in the European Journal of Information Systems, Information and Management, MISQ Executive, Decision Support Systems, Journal of Strategic Information Systems, and other journals. She has served or is currently serving as an associate editor and track chair for major information systems conferences, including the International Conference on Information Systems and European Conference on Information Systems.
  • 27. JEFF CUMMINGS is an assistant professor of information systems and operations management in the Cameron School of Business at University of North Carolina, Wilmington. He received his Ph.D. from Indiana University. His research interests include the impacts of social media on the organization, health- care IT, and virtual team collaboration. His work has been published or is forthcoming in Business Horizons and Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology. HILLOL BALA is an assistant professor of information systems and Whirlpool Corporation Faculty Fellow in the Kelley School of Business at Indiana University, Bloomington. He received his Ph.D. from the University of Arkansas. His research interests include IT-enabled business process change and management, IT use, adaptation and impacts, and use of IT in health care. His work has been published or is forthcoming in Information Systems Research, Journal of Management Information Systems, MIS Quarterly, Management Science, Production and Operations Management, Decision Sciences, Information Society, Communications of the ACM, MISQ Executive, and other journals. He has served or currently serves on the editorial boards of Information Systems Research and Decision Sciences, and as a track chair, an associate editor, or a program committee
  • 28. member of major information systems conferences, such as the International Conference on Information Systems, the Pacific Asia Conference on Information Systems, and others. ABSTRACT: In contemporary society, many people move away from their personal networks for extended periods to reach professional and/or educational goals. This separation can often lead to feelings of loneliness, which can be stressful and sometimes debilitating for the individual. We seek to understand how a person’s Journal of Management Information Systems / Spring 2015, Vol. 31, No. 4, pp. 278–310. Copyright © Taylor & Francis Group, LLC ISSN 0742–1222 (print) / ISSN 1557–928X (online) DOI: 10.1080/07421222.2014.1001282 use of online social networks (OSNs)—technology-enabled tools that assist users with creating and maintaining their relationships—might affect their perceptions of loneliness. Prior research has offered mixed results about how OSNs affect lone- liness—reporting both positive and negative effects. We argue in this study that a clearer perspective can be gained by taking a closer look at how individuals
  • 29. approach their relationship management in OSNs. Building on theoretical works on loneliness, we develop a model to explain the effects of relationship character- istics (i.e., relationship orientation, self-disclosure, and networking ability) and OSN features (i.e., active or passive) on perceived loneliness. Our findings show that OSN can be linked to both more and less perceived loneliness, that is, individuals’ relationship orientation significantly affects their feelings of loneliness, which are further moderated by their degree of self-disclosure within the OSN. Furthermore, how users engage in the OSN (either actively or passively) influences their percep- tions of loneliness. Practical implications regarding perceived loneliness include recommendations for firms to encourage mobile workers to utilize OSNs when separated from others, for education providers to connect with their new students before they arrive, and for users to utilize OSNs as a social bridge to others they feel close with. KEY WORDS AND PHRASES: social media, online social networks, loneliness, relationship management, communal orientation, social exchange theory, self-disclosure, networking ability. In recent years, individuals have become increasingly mobile, and in doing so travel significant distances from their homes to reside at the target destination for an
  • 30. extended period of time [30]. Consequently, individuals are separated from the social environments that are both familiar and comforting to them [58]. Prior research in sociology has suggested that this separation leads to negative social outcomes, including feelings of loneliness [66, 82]. It is assumed that lonely people desire human attachment that can be achieved through creating new or nurturing existing relationships [7]. Prior research has produced mixed findings regarding the impact of technology, especially online social networks (OSNs), on feelings of loneliness [78]. Whereas some studies point to a negative association between OSN use and loneliness [31], others show the opposite [19]. When loneliness is reduced because OSNs engage users in relationships with their social network contacts [31], the technology serves as an outlet that captivates and helps users to buffer their social separation [60]. In contrast, other studies have shown that OSN use increases loneliness. Some users who only consume information that others share have developed feelings of envy, emotional withdrawal, and loneliness [50]. Indeed, studies showed that individuals’ life satisfaction and well-being decreased when using Facebook intensively because they compared their lives with their impressions of others in the OSN [52]. Because of these mixed findings, it is not clear whether OSNs alleviate or exacerbate
  • 31. perceived loneliness, and a more comprehensive and theoretically grounded account is needed. IMPACT OF ONLINE SOCIAL NETWORK FEATURES ON LONELINESS 279 The current study seeks to address this gap by focusing on the primary purpose of OSNs as relationship tools. OSNs are uniquely suited for managing relationships because users can virtually replicate their social network of relationships [34]. However, not everybody uses the OSN in the same way nor do they have the same approach to how they manage their relationships. We thus propose that (1) a user’s OSN feature use, (2) the user’s relationship orientation moderated by their degree of self-disclosure, and (3) a user’s networking ability have an impact on their loneliness. As the overarching theory for this study, we draw on the loneliness literature and insights from theories of social exchange, communication, and poli- tical skills to develop our model, and we test the model in the context of students’ use of OSNs. While all three theories center around human relationships and are core parts of human interactions, social exchange theory from the relationship literature enables us to theorize about relationship norms and how benefits between relationship partners (e.g., OSN users) are given and received.
  • 32. Communication theories are used to explain different forms of communication— either direct or via broadcasting—whereas the management theory on personal influences and political skills illuminates the OSN user’s ability to create and maintain relationships. This paper contributes to information systems (IS) research by enhancing our understanding of OSN use and the impact it has on users’ perceived loneliness. This research expands the relationship literature by examining a user’s approach to relationship management in OSNs and extends theory in social psychology, in particular the body of knowledge of loneliness. We further add to the theoretical understanding of on self-disclosure in virtual settings by proposing it as a moderator between relationship orientation and loneliness. Finally, we contribute to manage- ment research by demonstrating the importance of networking for an OSN user to ease feelings of loneliness. This research also provides practical insights about how organizations, such as firms and education providers, can help alleviate loneliness experienced by those they are responsible for. Background This section presents prior research on OSNs and perceived social loneliness that is relevant to our study.
  • 33. Online Social Networks An OSN, such as Facebook or Google+, is a web-based technology that allows users to exchange social information with others who may be near or far, including friends, family, colleagues, and teammates [56]. Kane et al. [46, p. 279] summarized the unique characteristics of OSNs by describing how they enable users to “(1) have a unique user profile that is constructed by them, members of their network, and the platform; (2) access digital content through and protect it from various search mechanisms provided by the platform; (3) articulate a list of other users with 280 MATOOK, CUMMINGS, AND BALA whom they share a connection; and (4) view and traverse their connections and those made by others within the system.” An OSN’s relationship management capability is enabled through features avail- able in most OSNs, including the ability to list contacts, share social information (including photos, videos, text via microblogging [79]), send/receive private mes- sages, social search engines, and express support to others (e.g., “Likes” on Facebook) [11]. Through these features, user-generated content is created that facil- itates both active engagement with one’s network and passive
  • 34. consumption of content [64]. Social search engines help in finding contacts as well as filtering user-generated content [28]. In OSNs, self-disclosure is a common behavior [69]. Self- disclosure is defined as “any message about the self that a person communicates to another” [87, p. 338]. In OSNs, disclosed information includes personal details such as interests, preferences, relationship status, and habits [85]. People self-disclose to others they like and trust, allowing for a relationship to become more intimate [59]. Reciprocal self-disclosure leads to a “you tell me, I tell you” behavior whereby disclosed information increases in depth and breadth [54, p. 170]. Indeed, research on bloggers’ online behavior has demonstrated the importance of reciprocity for knowledge sharing [17]. Research has shown that self-disclosure plays an important role in relationship growth, leading to a closer, high-quality relationship, especially for friendships [15]. Consequently, OSNs are apt for relationship creation (i.e., to form new and to revive neglected relationships) and relationship maintenance (i.e., to nurture and foster existing relationships) to impact perceived loneliness [70]. Perceived Social Loneliness Loneliness results from a perceived absence of satisfying relationships and a deficit in an individual’s social network [39, 66]. According to the
  • 35. belongingness hypoth- esis, human beings have “a pervasive drive to form and maintain at least a minimum quantity of lasting, positive, and significant interpersonal relationships” [7, p. 497]. The loneliness literature differentiates between two types of loneliness: emotional and social [86]. Emotional loneliness is associated with a lack of intimate ties and a deficit in intimate attachments, particularly in romantic relationships. Conversely, social loneliness “results from the lack of a network of social relationships in which the person is part of a group of friends who share common interests and activities” [74, p. 1314]. Given that we are interested in the perceived loneliness of people who are geographically separated from their familiar social network, we focus on social loneliness. Social loneliness is thought to be the result of social isolation because an indivi- dual is not able to have repeated interactions with the same contacts [7]. The network of lonely individuals tends to be smaller, which gives them the impression that they do not belong to a group [39]. Research reports that social loneliness comes from infrequent interactions with friends [27], as well as less supportive behaviors IMPACT OF ONLINE SOCIAL NETWORK FEATURES ON LONELINESS 281
  • 36. and unhelpfulness from one’s networks in times of need [80]. To compensate for feelings of social loneliness, prior research stipulates active relationship manage- ment [86]. Hypothesis Development This section presents hypotheses on the impacts of relationship characteristics (relationship orientation, self-disclosure and networking ability) and OSN features (active and passive features) on social loneliness. Our theoretical foundation is based on human relationships and its core focuses on human interactions. We therefore build on the relationship literature using social exchange theory to theorize about self-disclosure in relationships as well as norms and benefits given and received between relationship partners (e.g., OSN users). We use communication theories to explain different forms of communicating via OSN networks. Furthermore, we use a management theory on personal influences and political skills to explain an OSN user’s ability to proactively create and maintain interpersonal relationships. The research model is presented in Figure 1 at the end of the section. Relationship Orientation Two social exchange theorists, Clark and Mills [21, 23], have
  • 37. shown that different norms govern a person’s behavior when creating and maintaining a relationship. These norms affect individuals’ orientations toward relationships and their under- standing of how benefits are given and received. In general, individuals maintain relationships only when the comparison between given and received benefits is perceived to be satisfactory, but individuals differ in how they judge the extent of Exchange Orientation Relationship Orientation Communal Orientation Self-Disclosure Social Loneliness Networking Ability Passive Features OSN Features Active Features H 1a H 4a
  • 38. H 3 H 2bH 2a H 1b H 4b Broadcasting Direct Communication H 4c Figure 1. Research Model 282 MATOOK, CUMMINGS, AND BALA reciprocity required [26]. This leads to two different orientations toward relation- ships: an exchange orientation and a communal orientation [21]. According to Clark and Mills, these two relationship types represent two distinct concepts and not a continuum that can vary in strength. An individual with an exchange orientation is concerned with equal reciprocity and maintains a relationship with others only for instrumental reasons [22]. An exchange relationship orientation is characterized by giving benefits “with the expectation of receiving a comparable benefit in return or as repayment for a benefit
  • 39. received previously” [21, p. 684]. These individuals carefully record obligations and keep score of “give and take.” In contrast, a communal relationship orientation is characterized by giving benefits “in response to needs or to demonstrate a general concern for the other person” [21, p. 684]. A communal- oriented individual gen- erally has no expectations of immediate repayment of a supplied benefit, but shows a concern for the other’s welfare [22]. While these two types of relationship orienta- tion are general in nature, they can be translated into an OSN environment. In such a context, they manifest as different social-emotional benefits that stem from the user- generated content. The benefits one can give and receive in OSNs include an initial posting on a contact’s profile page, responding to a posting (textual or via a “like it” function), gift giving, sending private messages, and initiating chats. Communal relationship orientation: Within OSNs, we argue that users with a communal relationship orientation behave in such a way that results in lower degrees of perceived social loneliness. These users undertake OSN activities to please others and without expectation of immediate repay. For example, a communal-oriented user would post a comment on a contact’s OSN profile (i.e., give a benefit) because he/ she sees the contact is in need or he/she cares about that contact (e.g., when the contact posted about a lost wallet or a canceled flight). As these
  • 40. OSN postings are undertaken without the expectation of receiving anything in return, the communal- oriented person might post on a contact’s profile multiple times without receiving a comment back. Posting continuously when a need is observed (i.e., providing the benefit), however, stimulates reciprocity because the receiver may eventually return the comment. In doing so, the interaction frequency between the two OSN contacts increases and the user feels more integrated in the social network. Simply engaging in the act of giving may also lead the communal-oriented user to feel more connected. For both reasons, perceptions of loneliness should decrease, and we thus expect that users who are more communal-oriented will feel less lonely. Hypothesis 1a: A user’s communal relationship orientation is negatively asso- ciated with perceived social loneliness. Exchange relationship orientation: Within OSNs, we argue that users with an exchange-relationship orientation exhibit behaviors that result in increased perceived loneliness. Exchange oriented individuals expect their OSN activity to be recipro- cated equally and on a timely basis. For example, if the user posts on a contact’s profile, a returning post is soon expected. If the user gives a virtual gift, then the IMPACT OF ONLINE SOCIAL NETWORK FEATURES ON
  • 41. LONELINESS 283 expectation is that the other returns a gift. If the gift is not returned, the exchange- oriented user refrains from giving a gift to this contact again [77]. Contacts who fail to reciprocate may even be removed from the user’s OSN network [9]. Because of an exchange-oriented user’s “scorekeeping,” the user knows of the failed reciprocity, and would stop giving benefits to contacts who do not reciprocate. In this case, the number of contacts with whom the user interacts becomes smaller, resulting in the user being more disconnected from the social network. Instead of feeling integrated, an exchange-oriented individual may feel isolated [16] and thus experience social loneliness [83]. Consequently, we would expect an OSN user who only gives benefits in expectation of equal and timely reciprocity to experience a higher degree of perceived social loneliness. Hypothesis 1b: A user’s exchange-relationship orientation is positively asso- ciated with perceived social loneliness. Self-Disclosure as a Moderating Factor Prior research has studied the relationship between self- disclosure and loneliness, with ambiguous results. Some studies report that self-disclosure affects loneliness
  • 42. [53, 73], whereas other studies suggest the reverse [3, 45]. Despite mixed findings, these studies agree that self-disclosure is important because of its role in facilitating the deepening of relationships. We draw on this insight to argue that self-disclosure could be an important moderator in our study, in that it could alter the way in which a user’s relationship orientation affects loneliness. For a communal-oriented OSN user, we expect that higher self- disclosing behavior will reduce perceived loneliness by strengthening the relationship between commu- nal orientation and loneliness. When a communal-oriented OSN user increases disclosure of social information, more opportunities for the user’s contacts to reciprocate emerge. As a result, the extent of the returning self- disclosure also increases [34], albeit not necessarily proportional to the giving. Because the com- munal-oriented user is not concerned with equal reciprocity, a lack of it would therefore not stop the user’s future self-disclosure, that is, the communal-oriented user would continue disclosing social information. Indeed, as communal-oriented individuals are more focused on giving than on receiving, and thus, an increase in giving would make the user feel close to his/her network, especially as no “scores” are kept on how frequently the network reciprocates. Moreover, continuing disclo- sure will most likely result in more reciprocated self-disclosure that will in turn
  • 43. diminish the communal-oriented user’s loneliness. Consequently, in the presence of increased self-disclosure, the negative relationship between communal orientation and perceived social loneliness is strengthened. Hypothesis 2a: Self-disclosure moderates the relationship between communal- relationship orientation and perceived social loneliness such that the relation- ship becomes stronger when there are higher levels of self- disclosure. 284 MATOOK, CUMMINGS, AND BALA For an exchange-oriented OSN user, we expect that a higher degree of self- disclosure will strengthen the relationship between exchange orientation and lone- liness, that is, more self-disclosing behavior for this type of user will result in more feelings of loneliness. An exchange-oriented OSN user expects higher self-disclo- sure to receive, in return, disclosed information of the same extent (e.g., based on novelty or interestingness, media richness or message length). However, recipients of disclosed information may only be a small number of OSN contacts—those who have proved to reciprocate. Because these OSN contacts are already having to reciprocate the “normal” information (e.g., postings made or photos sent), sending them additional information (through self-disclosure) could
  • 44. result in information overload [35, 48]. To ease this overload, these contacts may well ignore or hide information, further reducing reciprocity [9]. The exchange- oriented user is likely to feel that his/her calls are falling on increasingly deaf ears. This effect is likely to increase feelings of disconnectedness (i.e., reduced belongingness) that in turn stimulate perceptions of social loneliness [83]. Consequently, in the presence of higher self-disclosure, the positive relationship between exchange orientation and perceived social loneliness is strengthened. Hypothesis 2b: Self-disclosure moderates the relationship between exchange- relationship orientation and perceived social loneliness such that the relation- ship becomes stronger when there are higher levels of self- disclosure. Networking Ability Networking is the proactive creation and maintenance of interpersonal relationships with the objective of leveraging these relationships at some point [29]. Networking ability is defined as an individual’s “capacity to identify and develop a diverse group of contacts” [55, p. 691]. Building on the theory of political skill [36], networking is a human skill leveraged for understanding and influencing others in professional settings to achieve personal and organizational objectives. Individuals with a strong
  • 45. networking ability find it easy to develop friendships, alliances, and coalitions [36]. Furthermore, these individuals master, effortlessly, the creation and maintenance of large and diverse networks to take advantage of the opportunities that emerge from these relationships. Yet, networking ability is just a personal trait; rather, it represents a social resource and an informational asset that stems from having access to the social network [10]. Networking ability is also an important factor in OSNs because it allows users to create a large OSN network [34]. Users skilled in networking can also employ the OSN’s communication features to interact with their contacts and thereby deepen existing relationships [42]. These contacts in the OSN can provide social support (e.g., expressing concern and sharing news), and contribute to feelings of belonging and lower feelings of social loneliness. Individuals who feel integrated within a social network show reduced feelings of social loneliness because their desire for IMPACT OF ONLINE SOCIAL NETWORK FEATURES ON LONELINESS 285 attachment is satisfied [32]. When lacking networking ability, the OSN user may wait for others to initiate an OSN interaction instead of proactively approaching
  • 46. them. Missing out on interaction opportunities, a user with lower networking ability may feel disconnected, which is associated with feelings of loneliness [72]. Consequently, OSN users who possess the ability to proactively create and maintain interpersonal relationships experience lower feelings of social loneliness. Hypothesis 3: Networking ability of an individual is negatively associated with perceived social loneliness. Use of Active and Passive OSN Features OSNs are used to create and consume user-generated content [47]. Content is produced through active engagement with a user’s contacts, for example, in the form of status updates or by sharing photos, videos, or links. Communication theorists differentiate active engagement as direct communication (one-to-one) and broadcasting (one-to-many) [12]. In addition, viewing user- generated content is referred to as “passive consumption,” also known as “social surveillance” [45]. The rich architecture of OSNs provides features for performing both active engage- ment and passive consumption [11]. OSN users experience social isolation when they passively consume user-gener- ated content because of their lack of interaction [51]. Furthermore, passive con- sumption restricts individuals in creating and managing
  • 47. relationships [66]. The literature has linked passive consumption to feelings of disconnectedness and lone- liness [4]. For instance, passive content consumption on Facebook creates feelings of envy that reduce a user’s life satisfaction through social comparison between the user and their contacts [50]. These researchers showed that reading about the travel and leisure experiences of OSN contacts led users to feel envy, dissatisfaction, and loneliness. Consequently, we propose that the use of OSN features for observing others (i.e., passive consumption) creates perceptions of social loneliness because users do not engage with their OSN network. By only using passive OSN features, the user misses out on interactions that could create a sense of belonging. Hypothesis 4a: The use of passive OSN features is positively associated with perceived social loneliness. The creation of user-generated content and, as such, the active engagement with one’s OSN network, stimulates mutual content sharing among OSN contacts [69]. Active engagement is achieved through the use of active OSN features, where repeated interactions strengthen a user’s social integration and create a sense of belonging [7]. The enhanced sense of social belonging is related to feeling lower degrees of social loneliness [31]. Active OSN features that use either direct com-
  • 48. munication or broadcasting “may have dramatically different outcomes” on lone- liness perceptions [12, p. 572] because of the number of recipients, and thus the number of potential interaction encounters. 286 MATOOK, CUMMINGS, AND BALA In direct communication, the user communicates with one or more recipients whereas in broadcasting no specific recipient exists and the content is shared with a larger audience. This greater number of recipients provides more opportunities for social interactions than direct communication. Nevertheless, actively engaging with one’s network contacts creates a sense of belonging and it is expected to result in lower degrees of social loneliness. Hypothesis 4b: The use of active OSN features that facilitate broadcasting is negatively associated with perceived social loneliness. Hypothesis 4c: The use of active OSN features that facilitate direct communica- tion is negatively associated with perceived social loneliness. Methodology Participants For the study, OSN users were recruited from a master’s program in a business
  • 49. school at a major Australian university. We invited students from a large manage- ment information systems (MIS) course in which 205 students were enrolled. Prior studies on social media have repeatedly used student samples to test their hypothesis [see, e.g., 49, 54]. Students are particularly appropriate sample subjects for social media research because they represent the typical OSN user population based on age and gender [56]. Our decision to use a student sample is further supported by criteria and recommendations put forward by Compeau et al. [24] who posit that one can generalize from student samples when the intended population is clearly identified and a rationale for the use of students is provided. The sample of our study includes 61 percent females with an average age of 25 years. Participants had substantial experiences with OSNs and had an OSN account for 5.5 years on average. Among the participants, 62 percent logged in at least once a day and 64 percent spent at least 30 minutes a day in their OSN. On average, participants spent about 55 minutes per day at their OSN. The OSN sites varied across participants, with Facebook being the primary site used (32 percent), followed by two Chinese OSNs, RenRen (27 percent) and QQ (20 percent), and various other OSNs (21 percent). The participants were first-semester students, mainly international students (92 percent Asian, 5 percent Australian, 1.5 percent European, and
  • 50. 1.5 percent South American) who had arrived in Australia two to three weeks prior to the data collection. Thus, the majority of students had recently been taken out of their familiar environment and, therefore, the country and the university were unfamiliar to them. Hence, we assume that these students were experiencing at least some level of social loneliness. Our assumption was supported by a research study reporting that social loneliness is a concerning but common phenomenon among university students [27]. We also believe that the students used their OSN for relationship management and to maintain relationships with their familiar network of people from their home country. It should be noted that the majority of students (66 percent) IMPACT OF ONLINE SOCIAL NETWORK FEATURES ON LONELINESS 287 came from China where access to Facebook is blocked. This number corresponds roughly to the percentage of participants who indicated that RenRen and QQ are their main OSNs. This is not a problem for our study, however, because we do not study Facebook specifically, but rather the features available in Facebook and other OSNs. We only refer to Facebook to introduce OSN features because it is a well- known OSN.
  • 51. Data Collection Participants were provided with an online questionnaire at the beginning of the study that included instructions to answer the questions regarding past OSN experience. Participants were informed that the questions concerned their OSN usage behavior. Specifically, they were asked to evaluate the questions in the context of how they currently participate in OSN. We undertook three rounds of data collection as illustrated in Figure 2. To facilitate the tracking of participant responses over time, each participant was given a unique identification number. Participation in the study was voluntary. Responses varied cross the different data collection waves. Of the 205 students, 185 (20 missing responses), 178 (27 missing responses), and 169 (36 missing responses) students responded to the questionnaire at T1, T2, and T3, respectively. Only one student dropped the course and was removed from the sample. After deleting responses of those who did not participate all three times, we arrived at a final sample of 166 participants (final response rate 81 percent). Various measures were utilized to incentivize participation to achieve a high response rate and to minimize dropouts, including prenotification of the data collec- tion, endorsement of the research project by the lecturer,
  • 52. participation reward through nonfinancial tokens, and the assurance of privacy and anonymity for all participants. We kept the survey length reasonably short by collecting different constructs at different time periods. For example, communal and exchange orienta- tions were collected at T3 because these two relationship orientations are relatively stable individual traits [21]. Figure 2. Data Collection Procedure 288 MATOOK, CUMMINGS, AND BALA In survey research, common method bias has the potential to inflate the data collected [68]. As outlined in Appendix B, we followed prior research guidelines for procedural and statistical remedies to mitigate threats of common method biases [68]. Procedural remedies to address these issues included temporal, proximate, and methodological separation of the measurements. A temporal separation was achieved by collecting the independent and dependent variables at different time points. Proximate separation was achieved by distributing the questions on different pages of the online survey. A methodological separation was achieved by mixing different scales (Likert scale or binary) throughout the questionnaire [68]. Our statistical remedies relate to three different statistical
  • 53. analyses, such as Harman’s single factor test, a partial correlation procedure (e.g., marker variable technique), and controlling for effects of an unmeasured latent method factor (i.e., single-common-factor method). All three tests, as detailed in Appendix B, produced results that suggest no major threat of common method bias. In particular, our Harman’s single factor test did not reveal a single factor with more than 50 percent variance explained. Further, the partial correlation approach did not indicate any significant correlations. Finally, the single-common-factor- method results did not significantly load on an unobserved method factor. Overall, the results of the procedural and statistical remedies suggested that common method bias was not a major concern. Measures of Survey Constructs and Control Variables For the survey, we adapted existing scales from the literature wherever possible. All constructs were multi-item measures with fixed answer categories. Except for the OSN feature-related constructs, which were operationalized as formative constructs, all the other constructs were operationalized as reflective constructs (see Appendix A). For the reflective constructs, shorter scales with fewer indicators were used. One of the important characteristics of reflective indicators is their substitutability [67]. In
  • 54. other words, an indicator may substitute another indicator of the same construct, and hence allow shorter scales. In addition, prior research has suggested that it is often practical and psychometrically viable to include a short version of a scale to manage the length of a survey [8]. In the IS literature, Venkatesh et al. [84] used short scales to operationalize the constructs. The important consideration is construct validity and reliability. If a reflective construct demonstrates psychometrically acceptable characteristics using a short scale, it is often useful to keep the short scale to reduce the length of the survey. In our study, we found strong psychometrical properties (e.g., reliability, factor loadings, convergent validity, and discriminant validity) for our constructs using a short scale during the pilot study. Hence, consistent with prior research, we kept the short scale for operationalizing the constructs in our study. Perceived social loneliness: This construct was measured as a reflective construct via seven items of the Revised UCLA Loneliness Scale [75], which has become the IMPACT OF ONLINE SOCIAL NETWORK FEATURES ON LONELINESS 289 standard scale to determine social loneliness for younger populations [76]. The scale ranged from 1 (never) to 5 (very often).
  • 55. Relationship orientation: This was measured as two reflective, independent con- structs which is consistent with the way that communal and exchange relationship orientation are measured in the literature [21]. First, we measured communal orien- tation via a three-item scale based on the original communal orientation scale [23]. Second, we measured exchange orientation via a three-item scale based on the revised versions of the exchange orientation scale [61]. The scale for both subcon- structs ranged from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree). Networking ability: This construct was measured as a reflective construct via four items of the political skill inventory [36]. The scale ranged from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree). OSN features: This variable was measured as three separate and independent constructs, which is consistent with the way that prior research distinguishes these different forms of communication. In particular, we differentiate the degree to which OSN users actively create and passively consume user- generated content that man- ifests as different forms of communication behavior. To determine an OSN user’s communication behavior, we listed a number of OSN activities. The choice of activities translates as either active or passive OSN feature use. We measured the use of active OSN in the form of broadcasting and direct
  • 56. communication via three items each based on [12, 13]. We measured the use of passive OSN features via five item that were also based on [12, 13]. Participants indicated their frequency of each activity; the scale ranged from 1 (never) to 5 (every time). These three subconstructs were measured as formative constructs. Self-disclosure: This was measured as a reflective construct with a five-item sub- scale of the self-disclosure index [59]. On a scale from 1 (no information) to 5 (very detailed information), the degree of information disclosed on their OSN was rated. Control variables: Studies have shown that the degree to which users feel competent to use computers in diverse situations impacts their usage behaviors [57]. It is reason- able to assume that how competent users feel using OSNs may impact their perceived social loneliness. Thus, computer self-efficacy was introduced as a control variable. It was measured as a reflective three-item subset of a construct developed by Compeau and Higgins [25]. The scale ranged from 1 (strongly disagree) to 7 (strongly agree). We also included age, gender, and home country as control variables. A preliminary survey was first pilot tested for comprehensiveness, clarity, lan- guage usage, and face validity with a small sample of 20 OSN users and 3 experienced researchers in information systems, as
  • 57. recommended by Churchill [20]. The pilot test identified that some questions were difficult to understand and subsequently, wording was changed prior to launching the main study. For example, we had originally phrased all questions about Facebook only assuming that this is the major OSN for our target participants. However, this was not the case and we revised the questions to “on Facebook or the social networking site that you use the most.” Furthermore, we provided additional instructions in our surveys to ensure that participants knew to answer questions in the context of their OSN use. We also 290 MATOOK, CUMMINGS, AND BALA revised the scales for several constructs from the traditional Likert scale (strongly disagree to strongly agree) to other scales that were more appropriate for those constructs. For example, we used a five-point extent scale (no information to very detailed information) to measure self-disclosure. Finally, the networking ability scale had the qualifier “at work.” We removed this qualifier and adapted the items to the context of OSN (see Appendix A). Data Analysis and Results Partial least squares (PLS), a component-based structural equation modeling (SEM)
  • 58. technique, was used to analyze the data. PLS provides reliable estimates for complex structural models when the sample size is not large, by placing less importance on model fit and more importance on prediction [18, 37]. Further, PLS is considered an appropriate data analytic approach for a research model such as ours that has formative construct(s) and a moderator [67]. We used SmartPLS Version 2 as our statistical software application to test the various PLS models [71]. Measurement Model The measurement model for the reflective constructs was assessed for both reliability and validity [5]. In order to assess reliability and validity for the reflective constructs in our model, we followed the guidelines suggested by Fornell and Larcker [37], which include internal consistency reliability, convergent validity, and discriminant validity. Internal consistency reliabilities (ICRs) were evaluated using Cronbach’s alpha to ensure that model items reliably measured the proposed constructs. ICRs were greater than the recommended value of .70 for all constructs at all time periods [62] (see Table 1). From these results, we can assume acceptable internal consistency of our measures. Convergent validity was assessed using indicator loadings and average variance explained (AVE) (see Table 1). As suggested by Hair et al. [40]
  • 59. and Bagozzi [6], indicator loadings were examined to confirm that factor loadings were greater than .70 on their intended constructs with minimal (less than .30) cross-loading on other constructs. Indicator loadings for our model were greater than .70 for all constructs at all time periods (except for LONL3 being slightly below .70), with cross-loadings being lower than .30, suggesting convergent validity of the structural model. In addition to indicator loadings, AVE was also examined to ensure that the variance explained by the construct is higher than variance from measurement error [37]. AVE for all constructs either met or exceeded .50, further suggesting convergent validity for the current model. Given these results, convergent validity can be assumed for the proposed model. We assessed discriminant validity by examining the square roots of the shared variance between the constructs and their measures (see Table 2). The diagonal elements are the square root of the shared variance between the constructs and their IMPACT OF ONLINE SOCIAL NETWORK FEATURES ON LONELINESS 291 T ab le
  • 75. F 3 2 .3 8 .9 6 0 .6 3 ** ^ 292 MATOOK, CUMMINGS, AND BALA A ct iv e O S N fe a tu re s: D ir
  • 92. at o r an d v ar (ε i) = 1 -λ i2 ). IMPACT OF ONLINE SOCIAL NETWORK FEATURES ON LONELINESS 293 T ab le 2 . D es cr ip ti v e S ta
  • 111. o n al el em en ts . 294 MATOOK, CUMMINGS, AND BALA measures; off-diagonal elements are correlations between constructs. For discrimi- nant validity, diagonal elements should be larger than off- diagonal elements [37]. We found all diagonal elements to be higher than the correlations across constructs, hence supporting discriminant validity. To determine the quality of the formative construct of OSN features, we inspected the item weights and their multicollinearity (see Table 1). For all items, the weights are significant (p < .01). We examined multicollinearity because it can destabilize the model [67]. The variance inflation factor (VIF) statistic was used to determine whether the formative measures were too highly correlated. We did not find any major multicollinearity issues with all VIFs below the strict threshold of 3.3.
  • 112. Structural Model: Hypotheses Testing Following the examination of the measurement model, we then tested the structural model to assess the significance of the proposed hypotheses using a bootstrap procedure of 1,000 resamples [38]. As presented in Table 3, we ran three structural models to test our hypotheses: Model 1 included only the control variable, Model 2 Table 3. Structural Model Results for Perceived Social Loneliness Predictors Model 1 Model 2 Model 3 Control variables Gender (female = 1) –.12* –.03 –.06 Age .04 .06 .09 Country of origin (China = 1, other countries = 0) .19** –.11 .04 Computer self-efficacy [T1] –.17** –.09 –.09 Direct/indirect effects Communal orientation [T3] –.34*** –.21** Exchange orientation [T3] .22** .16** Networking Ability [T1] –.32*** –.28*** Passive OSN features [T2] .24** .23** Active OSN features: Broadcasting [T2] –.14* –.12* Active OSN features: Direct communication [T2] –.05 –.04 Moderator Self-disclosure [T1] –.09 –.03 Moderating effectsa
  • 113. Communal orientation [T3] × Self-disclosure [T1] –.33*** Exchange orientation [T3] × Self-disclosure [T1] .29*** R2 .07 .44 .56 ΔR2 .37*** .12** * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001. aWe included other second-order interaction terms in Model 3. Given that these were nonsignificant and did not change the overall model estimates substantially, we excluded these terms from this table for brevity and parsimony. IMPACT OF ONLINE SOCIAL NETWORK FEATURES ON LONELINESS 295 included the main effects (H1a/b, H3, H4a/b/c),and Model 3 (H2a/b) included both main and interaction effects. To assess the incremental variance explained by the interaction terms, a comparison of the R2 between these models was conducted using the guidelines suggested in the literature when testing for interaction effects [2, 18, 43]. Following these guidelines, variables at the indicator level were mean-centered prior to creating the interaction terms. We hypothesized that communal orientation would have a negative influence (i.e., decrease) on perceived social loneliness (H1a) and exchange orientation would have a positive influence (i.e., increase) on perceived social loneliness (H1b). As per Table 3, communal orientation had a negative
  • 114. influence on per- ceived loneliness (Model 3: β = –.21, p < .01) and exchange orientation had a positive influence on perceived loneliness (Model 3: β = .16, p < .01), thus supporting H1a and H1b. Self-disclosure was hypothesized to moderate the relationships between communal and exchange orientation on perceived social loneliness such that the relation would be stronger when self-disclosure is high (H2a and H2b). We found support for both hypotheses. Perusal of Figure 3 indicates that the relationship between communal orientation and loneliness was found to be moderated by self- disclosure such that for OSN users with high self-disclosure, communal orientation had a stronger negative effect on perceived social loneliness (Model 3: β = –.33, p < .01). In other words, self-disclosure and communal orientation will work in tandem such that when both are high, individuals will feel less lonely. Alternatively, as shown in Figure 4, exchange-oriented individuals displayed greater loneliness when they exercised high levels of self-disclosure (Model 3: β = .29, p < .01). In other words, if an individual with high self-disclosure is exchange-oriented, he or she will feel even lonelier. In the presence of both, loneliness will increase. Table 3 shows that the addition of the interaction terms increases R2 significantly. Overall, the interaction model explained 56 percent of the variance in perceived social
  • 115. loneliness compared to 44 percent without the interaction terms, which is significantly different. Networking ability was hypothesized to negatively influence (or decrease) per- ceived social loneliness (H3). As per Table 3, network ability had a significant negative influence on perceived social loneliness in both models (Model 3: β = –.28, 2 2.5 3 3.5 Low Communal Orientation High Communal Orientation P er ce iv ed S oc ia l L
  • 116. on el in es s Low Self- disclosure High Self- disclosure Figure 3. Moderating Effect of Self-Disclosure on Communal Orientation and Loneliness 296 MATOOK, CUMMINGS, AND BALA p < .001), suggesting that individuals who had a high degree of proclivity to connect with others are less likely to be lonely. Thus, H3 was supported. OSN feature use was also hypothesized to impact perceived social loneliness. We hypothesized that the use of passive features would positively influence (or increase) loneliness (H4a). Results of Table 3 indicate that passive features used had a significant positive influence on feelings of loneliness (Model 3: β = .23, p < .01), supporting H4a. The use of active features in the form of broadcasting was hypothe- sized to negatively influence (or decrease) loneliness (H4b). We
  • 117. found that broad- casting had a strong negative influence on loneliness (Model 3: β = –.12, p < .05). In addition, direct communication was hypothesized to negatively influence (or decrease) loneliness (H4c). However, we found no support for active direct com- munication on perceived social loneliness (Model 3: β = –.04, ns.), rejecting H4c. Table 4 summarizes the hypothesized relationships including the path coefficients for those relationships. 2 2.5 3 3.5 Low Exchange Orientation High Exchange Orientation P er ce iv ed S oc ia l
  • 118. L on el in es s Low Self- disclosure High Self- disclosure Figure 4. Moderating Effect of Self-Disclosure on Exchange Orientation and Loneliness Table 4. Summary of Results as per Model 3 from Table 3 Path Path coefficient Supported/ rejected H1a Communal orientation → Perceived social loneliness – .21** Supported H1b Exchange orientation → Perceived social loneliness .16** Supported H2a Self-disclosure × Communal orientation → Perceived social loneliness –.33*** Supported
  • 119. H2b Self-disclosure × Exchange orientation → Perceived social loneliness .29*** Supported H3 Network ability → Perceived social loneliness –.28*** Supported H4a Passive OSN features → Perceived social loneliness .23** Supported H4b Active OSN features: Broadcasting → Perceived social loneliness –.12* Supported H4c Active OSN features: Direct communication → Perceived social loneliness –.04 Rejected * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001. IMPACT OF ONLINE SOCIAL NETWORK FEATURES ON LONELINESS 297 Discussion The research aimed to determine how using an OSN can impact feelings of lone- liness. To this end, we used the literature on loneliness as our overarching theory to examine the influence of relationship characteristics (i.e., relationship orientation moderated by self-disclosure and networking ability) and active
  • 120. versus passive OSN features on perceived loneliness. The study shows how OSNs can be associated with both more and less perceived loneliness. Specifically, loneliness increased for individuals who were involved in passive feature use and for those who had exchange-relationship orientation and high degrees of self- disclosure. However, loneliness was reduced when a user had increased networking ability and used active OSN features for broadcasting and when a user with a communal relationship orientation had high degrees of self-disclosure. Yet, active OSN features via direct communication was not associated with feelings of social loneliness. We elaborate in the following on the theoretical and practical implications of the study. Theoretical Implications and Contributions This research contributes to the literature in several ways. First, the study contributes to IS research on OSN use regarding an individual’s social loneliness when sepa- rated. Prior research has produced contradicting results on the relationship between OSN use and loneliness, specifically, there is disagreement whether OSN use reduces or increases loneliness feelings [31, 52, 78]. This study suggests that the relationship between OSN and loneliness depends how OSNs are used. Many prior works treated OSNs as monolithic without much consideration that these platforms
  • 121. offer diverse features and functionalities [63]. We extended prior research by examining OSNs at a feature level and differentiated between active and passive features of an OSN. Our findings demonstrate that loneliness is impacted by the use of both active and passive OSN features. Loneliness is reduced when the active features related to broadcasting are used, but the use of only passive features leads to an increased level of loneliness. Using OSNs for broadcasting to all contacts facilitates sharing information with the entire network, which in turn attracts reciprocity. As such, our study shows that features to support mass communication within OSNs can lower social loneliness by creating feelings of belonging. Broadcasting is a time-efficient approach to distribute social information, especially when the user is busy, something not uncommon in today’s fast-paced society. In contrast, our findings also show that passive content consumption expressed through the use of certain OSN features (e.g., reading postings) increases loneliness. The fact that such passive behavior is labeled “social surveillance” strongly suggests isolation because the user takes on an observer role, hence monitoring others from a distance but carefully avoiding interaction. Finally, for direct communications, we did not find a significant impact on lone-
  • 122. liness. One explanation for the insignificant results could be the misalignment of the 298 MATOOK, CUMMINGS, AND BALA OSN design goals compared to its use. When directly communicating, OSN users commit their full attention to one person; however, the approached OSN contact may not be willing or able to reply, leaving the sent messages unanswered. Given that OSNs are designed to support a network approach, with a broadcasting functionality in mind, in which messages spread through the entire social network, the private one-to-one communication does not align with this design purpose and may lead to ineffective use of the technology [14]. Other systems, such as e- mail and chat rooms, or even the old-fashioned phone, might be better suited for one- to-one communica- tion. Further, directly communicating requires more effort to reach the same number of people compared to broadcasting, and users might feel that the benefits of direct communication do not outweigh the costs. Based on this imbalance, Thibaut and Kelley’s [81] exchange theory suggests that a user would refrain from directly communicating via OSNs and, as such, may not be able to ease perceived social loneliness. In sum, this study contributes to IS by suggesting that theorizing about OSNs and how they can affect social outcomes needs to
  • 123. investigate this relationship at the feature level because the different technology features allow for different outcomes. Second, we contribute to the relationship literature and especially to research on interpersonal relationships. Prior research has indicated that people have different understandings of the degree of reciprocity in creating and maintaining relationships [21]. Our study now shows that users benefit differently from OSNs, depending on their relationship orientation. More importantly, a communal orientation is a bene- ficial characteristic because these users will naturally perform OSN-related activities that are associated with lower degrees of perceived social loneliness, if any. Hence, users with a communal orientation (e.g., where benefits are given in response to needs or to show general concern for a user’s OSN contacts) are able to create a sense of belonging that makes them feel less lonely when compared to exchange- oriented users. Although an exchange orientation can be successful in professional environments, our findings illustrate that this tit-for-tat behavior in OSNs leads to increased feelings of loneliness. The third contribution relates to the identification of self- disclosure as a moderat- ing factor. Extensive research has examined the direct influence of self-disclosure in social media [54, 69]. In contrast, this study demonstrates the
  • 124. interaction effects of self-disclosure on the relationship between a user’s relationship orientation and loneliness. The impact on social loneliness for both exchange- oriented and commu- nal-oriented users becomes stronger as their self-disclosure increases. Sharing social information increases liking and leads to closer relationships [49, 69], and our findings support this for communal-oriented users. When they increase self-disclo- sure, improved social outcomes (such as reduced loneliness) are the result. However, for exchange-oriented users, increased self-disclosure does not have such positive effects. Indeed, for these users, their disclosing behavior may be perceived as excessive, and recipients experience information overload. As hypothesized, our findings may be an example showing that increased levels of self-disclosure burden the relationship between exchange orientation and loneliness. Thus, exchange- IMPACT OF ONLINE SOCIAL NETWORK FEATURES ON LONELINESS 299 oriented users might fare better by not increasing their disclosure because their contacts may not be able to keep up with reciprocating. Yet, if they fail to return the information, the user may discard the contact for future interactions. This means that for exchange-oriented users, prior research findings that
  • 125. higher self-disclosure leads to reduced loneliness do not apply. We find a similar theoretical association of “less is more” in prior research on electronic word of mouth. A study on the optimal number of online product recommendations has shown that after three recommendations, wear-out effects manifest, causing future recommendations to be ignored, even if the recommendations are still valuable [1]. Consequently, OSNs provide various possibilities for self-disclosure, but increased levels of sharing user-generated content can impose, even indirectly, detrimental effects, namely, that users feel more lonely. Fourth, we contribute to the management literature on personal influences and political skills via networking abilities. Our results demonstrate that within OSNs the ability to establish interpersonal relationships is a crucial factor as to why people feel and likely remain lonely. In the literature on workplace influences networking ability was deemed as a key aspect to improving social capital that resides in a relationship [36]. Our study illustrates that networking abilities are also valuable for an OSN user because these relationships can be leveraged for creating and maintaining relationships resulting in feelings of belonging thereby reducing social loneliness perceptions. Fifth, this research contributes to theory in social psychology, in particular to the
  • 126. body of knowledge of loneliness and the factors impacting these feelings. Loneliness has been extensively researched in psychology in offline settings and exemplary in an online context, however, this study is the first we know of that shows which factors affect perceived social loneliness in the technology- mediated environment of OSNs. Most important, our research explains loneliness from a relationship point of view whereas prior research to date has examined individual characteristics (e.g., personality or self-esteem), which are only loosely related to relationships. However, the literature on loneliness stresses the qualitative and quantitative deficits of relationships as a key reason for a person to be in a lonely state [66]. Hence, this study highlights the theoretical importance of relationship management factors to understand social loneliness perceptions of OSN users. Implications for Practice A number of practical implications arise from this research for firms and OSN users. For firms, our findings help to highlight how they can utilize OSNs to support their workers. Corporate managers should be mindful of how heavy travel demands can disrupt workers’ personal relationships and how they can use OSNs to reduce feelings of loneliness. In modern workplaces, travel is often unavoidable and many individuals work in remote locations or in foreign
  • 127. countries for an extended period of time. Thus, firms should actively seek ways to address the negative 300 MATOOK, CUMMINGS, AND BALA implications of perceived social loneliness. Allowing and endorsing the use of an OSN can be a promising strategy. Prior research has shown that firms often use technology internally for networking, collaboration, and knowledge sharing [33]. Our study points to the potential benefits a firm can gain through the “private” use of OSN by their employees during work times. This research suggests that firms focus on usage policies that encourage positive outcomes for the employee and the firm rather than prohibiting OSN use at work [41]. Our study participants were university students, which makes our findings directly relevant to education providers, many of which have large international student cohorts. This research suggests that a university should actively approach its stu- dents through an OSN while the students are still in their home country. The objective of the university should be to establish personal ties with the students and to connect with them before their arrival at the university. In this way, the OSN can be actively used prior to any development of social loneliness in an unfamiliar