Individual Differences Research www. idr-journal.

com
2014, Vol. 12, No. 4-B, pp. 198-208 ISSN: 1541-745X
2014 Individual Differences Association, Inc.

Preference for Online Communication and Its

Association with Perceived Social Skills

Sun-Mee Kang & Martha J. Munoz

California State University at Northridge

*Sun-Mee Kang; Department o f Psychology; California State University; 18111 Nordhoff Street;
Northridge, CA 91330-8255. skang@csun.edu (email).

ABSTRACT - A rapid advance in communication technology during the past two decades has
provided new options for communication. The current study was conducted to explore whether
individuals who prefer online communication would be perceived less socially skillful in a social
situation than people who prefer face-to-face interaction. Participants (N = 68) recruited from a
community were divided in two groups based on their preferred channel of communication -
online or face-to-face. After completing questionnaires in an individual setting, participants were
engaged in an unanticipated social interaction with a confederate for 5 minutes. This social
interaction was recorded with a hidden camera. Social skills and nonverbal social behaviors
displayed during the interaction were rated by independent judges. The results showed that the
participants who chose online communication were perceived as less socially skillful.

During the past two decades, rapid growth in internet use has been observed around
the world. In the United States alone, the percentage of internet users increased from
9.24% in 1995 to 78.24% in 2011 (World Bank, 2012). The steep increase in the number
o f internet users can be partially attributed to the array o f convenient services that the
internet provides for fulfilling central human needs including communication,
information acquisition, entertainment, and shopping. Among the available services,
communication with others has been identified as one o f the main reasons for internet use
(Bargh & McKenna, 2004; Mesch, 2009).
Technological advancements offer a number o f novel ways to communicate with
others including online chat/instant messaging, email, text messages, and social network
sites (e.g., Facebook/MySpace), above and beyond existing channels o f communication
such as face-to-face contact, phone calls, and conventional mail. Given the plethora o f
social communication channels available, people often need to choose one channel over
the others to communicate with others. Although a number o f factors such as the content
o f the communication, the nature o f the relationships involved, and geographic distances
may influence the choice o f communication channels (Mesch, 2009), the focus o f the
current study was on the psychological factors associated with preference for online
communication. W hy do some people prefer online communication over face-to-face
interaction when communicating with their friends? The current study was conducted to
address these questions.

198
 Kang... /Individual Differences Research, 2014, Vol. 12, No. 4-B, pp. 198-208

Diminished Nonverbal Cues in Online Communication

The rapid growth of internet use has drawn considerable attention from researchers in
social and behavioral sciences seeking to understand its impact on various aspects of
social and personal life. A literature review revealed that the majority of previous studies
have focused on psychosocial factors associated with internet use (in terms of its
frequency and/or duration) or on internet addiction (Amichai-Hamburger & Vinitzky,
2010; Armstrong, Phillips, & Saling, 2000; Caplan, 2002; Caplan, 2003; Caplan, 2005;
Guo, Tan, Turner, & Xu, 2008; Kraut, Kiesler, Boneva, Cummings, Helgeson, &
Crawford, 2002; Kraut, Patterson, Lundmark, Kiesler, Mukophadhyay, & Scherlis, 1998;
Lee, Leung, Lo, Xiong, & Wu, 2011; Moody, 2001; Odaci & Kalkan, 2010; Pierce, 2009;
van den Eijnden, Meerkerk, Vermulst, Spijkerman, & Engels, 2008). However, very few
studies have addressed the individual differences in channel preference between
individuals (Joinson, 2004; Mesch, 2009; Pierce, 2009).
To examine the individual differences in channel preferences, the major differences
between online communication and face-to-face interaction need to be understood first.
McKenna and Bargh (2000) have proposed several domains in which online
communication may differ from face-to-face interaction. They include diminished
nonverbal cues, relative anonymity, decreased importance of physical appearance,
attenuation of physical distance, and enhanced control over the time and pace of
interaction (Bargh & McKenna, 2004; Walther, 1996).
Among these domains, diminished nonverbal cues appear to be particularly relevant
to the individual differences in channel preferences. Online communication channels
seem to have limited power to convey nonverbal information and are devoid of natural
nonverbal and expressive cues (Caplan, 2003; McKenna & Bargh, 2000; Okdie,
Guadagno, Bemieri, Geers, & Mclamey-Vesotski, 2011). Although online
communication has its own ways of expressing emotions - for example, through
emoticons (simple graphical icons representing individual emotions; Huang, Yen, &
Zhang, 2008), these nonverbal expressions may not capture the richness of nonverbal
expression exchanged in face-to-face interaction.

Lack o f Social Skills and the Preference for Online Communication

Individuals with poor social skills may be attracted to online communication partly
because they do not need to deal with the rich nonverbal cues that are normally present
during face-to-face social interactions. With diminished nonverbal cues, online social
communication is possibly much simpler and easier to handle. According to Walther
(1996), online communication also increases individuals ability to edit their social
behavior and present themselves selectively. Social skill is defined as ones ability to
interact with others in an appropriate way (Segrin & Givertz, 2003). This skill requires
the ability to offer complex, strategic self-presentations in response to wide variety of
verbal and nonverbal cues and social contexts (Caplan, 2005).
Online communication channels may offer a safe place for individuals with poor
social skills to engage in social interactions without worrying too much about the social
skills required for face-to-face interactions (Pierce, 2009). Furthermore, given the relative
anonymity provided by online communication (McKenna & Bargh, 2000), individuals
with poor social skills may have an opportunity to develop and present online selves

199
 Kang.../IndividualDifferences Research, 2014, Vol. 12, No. 4-B, pp. 198-208

(Subrahmanyam, Reich, Waechter, & Espinoza, 2008, p. 421) that replace their real
selves. Thus, we can expect individuals with low social skill to be more likely than others
to be attracted to online communication.

Main Purpose o f the Current Study

The main purpose of the current study was to explore whether the individuals with
poor social skills prefer online communication over face-to-face interaction. It was
hypothesized that those individuals who prefer online communication would be perceived
less socially skillful in a social situation than people who prefer face-to-face interaction.
Caplan (2003) defined the preference for online communication as a cognitive
individual-difference construct characterized by beliefs that one is safer, more
efficacious, more confident, and more comfortable with online interpersonal interactions
and relationships than with traditional face-to-face activities (p. 629) and measured the
concept with a set of questions. Since his definition is very complex by including not
only preference but also reasons for the preference, we decided to limit our definition to
channel choice only and measured the concept by simply asking the participants
preferred communication channel.

Method
Participants
The current study was part of a larger research project conducted at a public
university to explore the factors contributing to social adaptation among the adults
residing the greater Los Angeles area. The volunteers for the project were recruited
through online and print advertisement and received monetary compensation for their
participation. Due to the time constrains, about a half of the volunteers (68 people) from
the research project were randomly selected for the current study. The 68 participants
were between 23 and 64 years of age (M = 40.02, SD = 11.51), and a half of them were
women (50%). The participants ethnicity consisted of 16.2% African American, 33.8%
Asian American, 29.4% Caucasian, and 20.6% Hispanic. More details of their
demographic information including education, marital status, and income are presented in
Table 1.

Materials
Preference fo r Online Communication. A questionnaire was developed to collect
information on the participants preferred way of communication with friends and
demographic information. The preference for communication channels was measured by
asking What is your preferable way to communicate with your friends? with 6 choices
to choose from: email, Facebook or MySpace comments/messages, Instant Messenger,
letters, talk to them face-to face, or telephone calls.
Social Skill. In order to measure differences in social skill among the participants, two
different measures were used: (1) Judges ratings of overall social skill based on a 5-
minute interaction with a stranger and (2) nonverbal social behaviors displayed during the
interaction.
Judges' Ratings o f Overall Social Skill. The participants 5-minute interaction video
clips (see the Procedure below for the details of how we obtained the clips) were

200
 Kang... /IndividualDifferences Research, 2014, Vol. 12, No. 4-B, pp. 198-208

Table 1
Demographic Information between
Online Groups vs. Face-to-Face Groups
Online Face-to-Face
Mean Age (SD) 39.42 (11.19) 40.51 (11.91)
Number of Women (%) 14 (45.2) 20 (54.1)
Ethnic Composition
African American (%) 3 (9.7) 8 (21.6)
Asian American (%) 12 (38.7) ii (29.7)
Caucasian (%) 8 (25.8) 12 (32.4)
Hispanic (%) 8 (25.8) 6 (16.2)
Education
Some High School (%) 0 (0.0) 2 (5.4)
High School (%) 1 (3.2) 3 (8.1)
Some College (%) 10 (32.3) 14 (37.8)
BA/BS (%) 16 (51.6) 18 (48.1)
MA/MS/MBA (%) 3 (9.7) 0 (0.0)
Professional Degree (%) 1 (3.2) 0 (0.0)
Marital Status
Single (%) 16 (51.6) 23 (62.2)
Married (%) 12 (38.7) 8 (21.6)
Separated (%) 1 (3.2) 1 (2.7)
Divorced (%) 1 (3.2) 5 (13.5)
Widowed (%) 1 (3.2) 0 (0.0)
Income
Below $10,000 (%) 2 (6.5) 0 (0.0)
$10,000-$24,999 (%) 5 (16.1) 9 (24.3)
$25,000 - $39,999 (%) 5 (16.1) 6 (16.2)
$40,000 - $49,999 (%) 3 (9.7) 0 (0.0)
$50,000 - $74,999 (%) 7 (22.6) 12 (32.4)
$75,000 - $99,999 (%) 4 (12.9) 4 (10.8)
$100,000 - $124,999 (%) 2 (6.5) 3 (8.1)
$125,000-S149,000 (%) 0 (0.0) 1 (2.7)
$150,000 or above (%) 2 (6.5) 0 (0.0)
No response (%) 1 (3.2) 2 (5.4)
Generation Status
1sl generation (%) 9 (29.0) 7 (18.9)
2nd generation (%) 11 (35.5) 13 (35.1)
3rd generation (%) 3 (9.7) 2 (5.4)
4th generation (%) 1 (3.2) 5 (13.5)
5th generation (%) 7 (22.6) 10 (27.0)

evaluated by two graduate students in the masters program in Psychology. They rated
the video clips independently after they attended intensive group training sessions led by
the first author. The judges were trained to evaluate the social skills on the following 4
dimensions selected from a literature review. They are: (1) friendliness (e.g., showing
interest in the conversation and trying to please the confederate; Graziano, Jensen-
Campbell, & Hair, 1996; Jensen-Campbell & Graziano, 2001), (2) skill in maintaining
conversation (e.g., asking questions that require more than yes or no answers and trying
to say things that would interest the confederate; Buhrmester, Furman, Wittenberg, &
Reis, 1988; Buss & Craik, 1981), (3) engagement in conversation (e.g., engaging in

201
 Kang... / Individual Differences Research, 2014, Vol. 12, No. 4-B, pp. 198-208

conversation with the confederate rather than remaining silent; Spitzberg & Hurt, 1987),
and (4) expressiveness (e.g., expressing emotions verbally and nonverbally; Butler,
Egloff, Wilhelm, Smith, Erickson, & Gross, 2003; Spitzberg & Hurt, 1987). The judges
rated each dimensions using a 7-point rating scale that ranged from strongly disagree (1)
to strongly agree (7). The inter-rater reliabilities for the four domains between the two
judges were in the acceptable range; .74 for friendliness, .75 for skills at maintaining
conversation, .70 for engagement in conversation, and .80 for expressiveness. The rating
scores on the 4 domains were combined and averaged across the two judges to generate
the index for judges ratings of overall perceived social skills in this study, named
Judges Ratings (JR).
Ratings o f Nonverbal Social Behaviors. Since the JR was largely based on the judges
subjective judgment, an additional measure was used to assess perceived social skills
from a different angle. The frequencies or durations of nonverbal behaviors associated
with social skills were evaluated by another group of judges (Bemieri, Gillis, Davis, &
Grahe, 1996; Hall & Bemieri, 2001; Rime, 1982). One masters student in Psychology
and one post-graduate student were trained and served as the raters. Each judge was
asked to count the frequency of nods, smiles, and hand gestures independently. Gaze, one
of the common nonverbal indicators of social skills, was not included in this study due to
the mounting height of the hidden camera (because of the structural constrains of the
experimental room, the hidden camera was set up above eye level). They also
independently measured the duration of mouth movement as a proxy measure of talk
time. Due to the limited time and resource, the entire clips were not decoded in this study.
Instead, two 1-minute long segments (i.e., the first and the last 1-minute segments of the
clip) were extracted from each 5-minute video clip to capture the changes in frequencies
or durations of nonverbal behaviors as the participant and the confederate got acquainted
over time. In order to control any impact of the verbal contents on judges ratings, the
judges reviewed all the clips without audio. The inter-rater reliabilities for the nonverbal
indicators between the two judges were satisfactory; .82 for nods, .83 for smiles, .97 for
hand gestures, and .88 for mouth movement.
Since the four indicators of the nonverbal social behaviors were recorded using two
different measurement units (i.e., frequency and duration), the judges ratings were
converted into z scores, so that all four indicators of nonverbal social behaviors could be
compared to one another. From these ratings of nonverbal social behaviors, three
indicators of nonverbal social skill were generated: (1) the averaged z scores on the four
domains across the two judges over the first and last 1-minute of social interaction called
the Nonverbal Social Behaviors - Overall (NVSBO); (2) the averaged z scores based on
the first 1-minute named the Nonverbal Social Behavior - First minute (NVSB1); and (3)
the averaged z scores during the last 1-minute called the Nonverbal Social Behavior -
Last minute (NVSB2).

Procedure
After filling out a questionnaire packet in an individual session, each participant was
informed that she/he needed to complete the second task with another participant (who
was a trained confederate), and was taken to a different room that was equipped with a
hidden camera. To control the confounding effects due to ethnicity and gender on social

202
 Kang... / Individual Differences Research, 2014, Vol. 12, No. 4-B, pp. 198-208

interactions with strangers (Wong, Day, Maxwell, & Meara, 1995), each participant was
paired with a confederate who was the same sex and the same ethnicity as the participant.
It was also made sure that the participant and trained confederate were strangers to each
other. In the interaction room, the participant was always assigned to a seat facing the
hidden camera.
The stranger-encounter situation was set up by adopting the procedures described by
Ickes and his colleagues (Ickes, Bissonnette, Garcia, & Stinson, 1990) and Wong and her
colleagues (Wong, Day, Maxwell, & Meara, 1995). On the pretense of needing to obtain
task materials, the experimenter left the room, leaving the pair alone for five minutes.
The interaction between the participant and the confederate was recorded by a hidden
video camera. The participant was the only one whose face and body was being recorded
by the hidden camera.
The total of the 16 undergraduate and post-graduate students (two confederates per
each ethnic group and each gender; Mean age = 24.56 with SD = 5.95) were recruited for
this study. Due to the unequal ethnic compositions of the participants and availabilities of
the confederates, the number of experimental sessions that each confederate served
ranged from 2 to 10 sessions. To ensure the consistency of the behaviors across the 16
confederates, they were trained through intensive group and individual sessions led by
the first author over one month period before the study. They were instructed to sit in a
relaxed position, to make eye contact with the participant, and to maintain a pleasant
facial expression. Confederates were also taught not to initiate a conversation unless the
participant was silent for 5 to 7 seconds. A clock behind the participant allowed
confederates to monitor the time. Confederates were trained to provide only brief
responses to participants questions to make the participant lead the conversation. Their
practice sessions were videotaped and reviewed by the first author and the confederates
together to resolve any inconsistency of the behaviors across the confederates.
Exactly 5 minutes after leaving, the experimenter returned to the room, asked the
confederate to leave the room, stopped the camera, and debriefed the participant
concerning the true purpose of the study. After disclosing the true purpose of the study,
the experimenter asked the participants permission to use the video tape to analyze the
participants behaviors and to have her or his social skills rated by a group of independent
judges. If the participant did not want her/his tape to be used, it was erased right away. A
manipulation check was also conducted by the experimenter during the debriefing
session. A questionnaire was given to the participant followed by an interview. Through
this check, only data ensuring that the participant was not aware of the hidden camera,
the true identity of the confederate, and the main hypothesis of the study, were included
in the final data analyses.

Results
The 68 participants were divided into two groups based on their responses concerning
their preferred way of communicating with friends. While 37 participants chose talking in
a face-to-face setting (hereafter named Face-to-Face group), the remaining 31
participants selected one of the online communication channels (called Online group):
19 participants (27.9%) chose email, 8 participants (11.8%) social network sites, and 4
participants (5.9%) instant messenger. No one chose either letters or telephones as their

203
 Kang... / Individual Differences Research, 2014, Vol. 12, No. 4-B, pp. 198-208

preferred way of communication. Before testing the main hypothesis, the demographic
background o f the Online and Face-to-Face groups was thoroughly examined.
As shown in Table 1, the two groups did not differ in their mean age, 1(66) = .70, p =
.699, gender ratio, x*(l, 68) = .53, p = .465, ethnic composition, ^ ( 3 , 68) = 2.90, p =
.408, level of education, ^ (5 , 68) = 7.31, p = .198, marital status, / ( 4 , 68) = 5.23, p =
.264, annual family income, ^(9,68) = 10.63, p = .301, or generation status, / 2(4,68) =
3.31, p = . 507.
The means and standard deviations of the major variables for testing the hypothesis
are presented in Table 2. To assure that there were no confounding effects due to the
confederates on perceived social skills, a series of data analyses were conducted before
testing the main hypothesis. The results confirmed that there were no significant effects
of the confederates (confounds due to confederates individuality, gender, and ethnicity)
on the major outcome variables.

Table 2
Descriptive Statistics o f the Major Variables by
____________ Online Groups vs. Face-To-Face Groups____________
Online Face-to-Face
M (SD) M (SD)
Social Skills_________________________________
Judges Ratings on Overall Social Skill (JR) 3.83 (.80) 4.24 (.76)
Nonverbal Social Behavior-Overall (NVSBO)4 -.14 (.56) .12 (.46)
NVSB during the First 1 minute (NVSB1)C -.16 (.63) .14 (.46)
________ NVSB daring the Last 1 minute (NVSB2) -.08 (.52) .07 (.42)
Note. a indicates the significant mean difference between the two groups, t (66) =
-2.15, p = .035; indicates the significant mean difference, t (66) = -2.11 ,p = .039; c
indicates the significant mean difference, t (66) = -2.23, p = .027.

The main hypothesis was tested next. The Online and Face-to-Face groups showed
significant differences in the Judges Ratings (JR), ((66) = -2.15, p = .035, implying that
the Online group was rated less socially skillful than the Face-to-Face group.
Furthermore, the overall nonverbal social behaviors (NVSBO) supported the judges
ratings by showing that there was a statistically significant difference in the frequencies
and durations of nonverbal social behaviors displayed, ((66) = -2.11 ,p = .039.
A further analysis was conducted to investigate whether the significant difference in
the averaged nonverbal social behaviors was present in both the first and last 1-minute
segments. The results of the further analyses revealed that the overall significant
difference in the averaged nonverbal social behaviors (NVSBO) was mainly rooted in the
differences in the nonverbal social behaviors expressed during the first 1-minute segment
(NVSB1), ((66) = -2.27, p = .027, but not the differences during the last 1-minute
segment (NVSB2), ((66) = -1.27, p = .209.
The two measures of social skills were highly associated with each other. The JR
were substantially correlated with the NVSBO, r = .60, p < .001 and the NVSB1, r = .56,
p < .001, but modestly correlated with the NVSB2, r = .39, p = .001. Interestingly, the
association between the NVSB1 and NVSB2 was only modest, r = .29, p = .016.

204
 Kang... /Individual Differences Research, 2014, Vol. 12, No. 4-B, pp. 198-208

Discussion
The current study was conducted to examine whether individuals who prefer online
communication would be perceived less socially skilled than individuals who prefer face-
to-face interaction. Sixty-eight adults recruited from the community were divided into
two groups based on their preferred channel of communication-online or face-to-face.
The results showed that although the two groups did not differ in their demographic
background, they were different when social skill was ascertained through behavioral
measures. When the social interactions between the participants and their gender- and
ethnicity-matched confederates were evaluated by independent judges, the individuals
who preferred online communication were rated less socially skillful. To explore the
differences further, nonverbal social behaviors displayed during the first 1-minute and the
last 1-minute of the social interaction were closely examined. The results of the
nonverbal social behaviors corroborated the judges ratings on overall social skills: The
individuals who preferred online communication displayed less nonverbal social behavior
than the people who preferred face-to-face interaction.
Furthermore, the results from the nonverbal behaviors during the first and last 1-
minute of the social interactions revealed that the difference in the nonverbal social
behaviors between the two groups was more pronounced during the first 1-minute period.
The Online group displayed significantly less nonverbal social behaviors compared to the
Face-to-Face group. Interestingly, this group difference dissipated in the last 1-minute of
the social interactions, implying that the individuals in the Online group take some time
to be socially interactive in the stranger-encounter situation. Compared to the individuals
in the Online group, the people in the Face-to-Face group seems to be able to readily
engage in social interactions.
This first-1-minute readiness for social interaction may influence the judges ratings
on overall social skills more than the last-l-minute readiness, by showing that the former
was more substantially correlated with the judges ratings than the latter. This pattern of
intercorrelations among the measures of social skills seems to imply that the first-1-
minute readiness of social interaction may play some important role in perceived social
skill.

Significance and Limitations

Some of the merits of the current study were that the associations between channel
preference and perceived social skill were demonstrated with a community sample and
the behavioral measures of social skills were employed. These features of the current
study add valuable information to the existing literature, which is mainly focused on
college students and self-report measures of social skill.
The results from the current study, however, should be interpreted with caution due to
its limitations. First, the current study was conducted with a relatively modest sample
size, mainly due to the high cost of the procedure employed in the current study (i.e., one-
on-one social interactions between the participants and their gender- and ethnicity-
matched confederates in the stranger-encounter situation).
Secondly, the social skills of the participants were evaluated based solely on verbal
and nonverbal social behaviors displayed in a stranger-encounter situation. Whether these

205
 Kang... / Individual Differences Research, 2014, Vol. 12, No. 4-B, pp. 198-208

social skills can be generalized into other social situations is another question to be
empirically tested.
Lastly, when the preference for communication channel was assessed in the current
study, it was limited to communication with friends. If the wording of the question is
changed by including communication with family, acquaintances, colleagues, and/or
strangers, the participants preference for communication channel would have been
different. Related to this issue, we did not ask a question of why they preferred a specific
channel over others. If this question had been included, it could have provided valuable
information for understanding their choice.

Closing Remarks
The current study showed that the individuals who preferred online communication
with friends were perceived to be less socially skillful in a stranger-encounter situation-
especially during the first 1-minute of the social interaction. This incompetence seemed
to disappear by the end of the social interaction, since there was no group difference
between the Online and Face-to-Face groups. This pattern of outcome implies that the
individuals who prefer online communication need more time to be ready for social
interactions. This slow-warmer hypothesis can be tested in future studies with
methodologically more rigorous designs.

Author Note
This research was funded by a grant from the National Institute of Mental Health to
the first author (Award Number SC2MH0874660) and also supported in part by the NIH
Support Research Initiative for Scientific Enhancement program (R25 063787-09A1).
We thank Kathy Espino-Perez, Jessica Gonzalez, and Jomarie Taban for their assistance
with data collection and coding.________________________________________________

References
Amichai-Hamburger, Y., & Vinitzky, G. (2010). Social network use and personality.
Computers in Human Behavior, 26, 1289-1295.
Armstrong, L., Phillips, J. G., & Saling, L. L. (2000). Potential determinants of heavier
Internet usage. International Journal o f Human-Computer Studies, 53, 537-550.
Bargh, J. A., & McKenna, K. A. (2004). The Internet and social life. Annual Review o f
Psychology, 55, 573-590.
Bemieri, F. J., Gillis, J. S., Davis, J. M., & Grahe, J. E. (1996). Dyad rapport and the
accuracy of its judgment across situations: A lens model analysis. Journal o f
Personality and Social Psychology, 71, 110-129.
Buhrmester, D., Furman, W., Wittenberg, M. T., & Reis, H. T. (1988). Five domains of
interpersonal competence in peer relationships. Journal o f Personality and Social
Psychology, 55, 991-1008.
Buss, D. M., & Craik, K. H. (1981). The act frequency analysis of interpersonal
dispositions: Aloofness, gregariousness, dominance and submissiveness. Journal o f
Personality, 49, 175-192.

206
 Kang.../IndividualDifferences Research, 2014, Vol. 12, No. 4-B, pp. 198-208

Butler, E. A., Egloff, B., Wilhelm, F. H., Smith, N. C., Erickson, E. A., & Gross, J. J.
(2003). The social consequences of expressive suppression. Emotion, 3, 48-67.
Caplan, S. E. (2002). Problematic Internet use and psychosocial well-being: Development
of a theory-based cognitive-behavioral measurement instrument. Computers in
Human Behavior, 18, 553-575.
Caplan, S. E. (2003). Preference for online social interaction: A theory of problematic
Internet use and psychosocial well-being. Communication Research, 30, 625-648.
Caplan, S. E. (2005). A social skill account of problematic Internet use. Journal o f
Communication, 55, 721-736.
Graziano, W. G., Jensen-Campbell, L. A., & Hair, E. (1996). Perceiving interpersonal
conflict and reacting to it: The case for agreeableness. Journal o f Personality and
Social Psychology, 70, 820-835.
Guo, Z., Tan, F. B., Turner, T., & Xu, H. (2008). An exploratory investigation into
instant messaging preferences in two distinct cultures. IEEE Transactions on
Professional Communication, 51, 396-415.
Hall, J. A., & Bemieri, F. J. (2001). Interpersonal sensitivity: Theory and measurement.
Mahwah, NJ, US: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
Huang, A. H., Yen, D. C., & Zhang, X. (2008). Exploring the potential effects of
emoticons. Information and Management, 45, 466-473.
Ickes, W., Bissonnette, V., Garcia, S., & Stinson, L. L. (1990). Implementing and using
the dyadic interaction paradigm. In C. Hendrick, M. S. Clark (Eds.), Research
methods in personality and social psychology (pp. 16-44). Thousand Oaks, CA US:
Sage Publications, Inc.
Jensen-Campbell, L. A., & Graziano, W. G. (2001). Agreeableness as a moderator of
interpersonal conflict. Journal o f Personality, 69, 323-362.
Joinson, A. N. (2004). Self-esteem, interpersonal risk, and reference for e-mail to face-to-
face communication. Cyberpsychology and Behavior, 7, 472-478.
Kraut, R., Kiesler, S., Boneva, B., Cummings, J. N., Helgeson, V., & Crawford, A. M.
(2002). Internet paradox revisited. Journal o f Social Issues, 5 8 ,49-74.
Kraut, R., Patterson, M., Lundmark, V., Kiesler, S., Mukophadhyay, T., & Scherlis, W.
(1998). Internet paradox: A social technology that reduces social involvement and
psychological well-being? American Psychologist, 53, 1017-1031.
Lee, P. N., Leung, L., Lo, V., Xiong, C., & Wu, T. (2011). Internet communication
versus face-to-face interaction in quality o f life. Social Indicators Research, 100, 375-
389.
McKenna, K. A., & Bargh, J. A. (2000). Plan 9 from cyberspace: The implications of the
Internet for personality and social psychology. Personality and Social Psychology
Review, 4, 57-75.
Mesch, G. S. (2009). Social context and communication channels choice among
adolescents. Computers in Human Behavior, 25, 244-251.
Moody, E. J. (2001). Internet use and its relationship to loneliness. Cyberpsychology and
Behavior, 4, 393-401.
Odaci, H., & Kalkan, M. (2010). Problematic Internet use, loneliness and dating anxiety
among young adult university students. Computers and Education, 55, 1091-1097.

207
 Kang... / Individual Differences Research, 2014, Vol. 12, No. 4-B, pp. 198-208

Okdie, B. M., Guadagno, R. E., Bemieri, F. J., Geers, A. L., & Mclamey-Vesotski, A. R.
(2011). Getting to know you: Face-to-face versus online interactions. Computers in
Human Behavior, 27, 153-159.
Pierce, T. (2009). Social anxiety and technology: Face-to-face communication versus
technological communication among teens. Computers in Human Behavior, 25, 1367-
1372.
Rime, B. (1982). The elimination of visible behaviour from social interactions: Effects on
verbal, nonverbal and interpersonal variables. European Journal o f Social
Psychology, 12, 113-129.
Segrin, C., & Givertz, M. (2003). Methods of social skills training and development. In J.
O. Greene, B. R. Burleson (Eds.), Handbook o f communication and social interaction
skills (pp. 135-176). Mahwah, NJ US: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
Spitzberg, B. H., & Hurt, H. (1987). The measurement of interpersonal skills in
instructional contexts. Communication Education, 36, 28-45.
Subrahmanyam, K., Reich, S. M., Waechter, N., & Espinoza, G. (2008). Online and
offline social networks: Use of social networking sites by emerging adults. Journal o f
Applied Developmental Psychology, 2 9 ,420-433.
van den Eijnden, R. M., Meerkerk, G., Vermulst, A. A., Spijkerman, R., & Engels, R. E.
(2008). Online communication, compulsive internet use, and psychosocial well-being
among adolescents: A longitudinal study. Developmental Psychology, 44, 655-665.
Walther, J. B. (1996). Computer-mediated communication: Impersonal, interpersonal,
and hyperpersonal interaction. Communication Research, 23, 3-43.
Wong, C. T., Day, J. D., Maxwell, S. E., & Meara, N. M. (1995). A multitrait-
multimethod study of academic and social intelligence in college students. Journal o f
Educational Psychology, 87, 117-133.
World Bank. (2012). World Bank Data: Internet users (per 100 people). Retrieved from
http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/IT.NET.USER.P2.

208
Copyright of Individual Differences Research is the property of Individual Differences
Research and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv
without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print,
download, or email articles for individual use.