See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/223527465

Social Networking Site or Social Surveillance Site? Understanding the Use of

Interpersonal Electronic Surveillance in Romantic Relationships

Article  in  Computers in Human Behavior · March 2011

DOI: 10.1016/j.chb.2010.08.014 · Source: DBLP

CITATIONS READS

179 5,373

1 author:

Robert Tokunaga

38 PUBLICATIONS   2,347 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Robert Tokunaga on 26 February 2018.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Computers in Human Behavior 27 (2011) 705–713

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Computers in Human Behavior

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/comphumbeh

Social networking site or social surveillance site? Understanding the use

of interpersonal electronic surveillance in romantic relationships
Robert S. Tokunaga ⇑
Department of Communication, University of Arizona, Communication Building #25 Room 211, P.O. Box 210025, Tucson, AZ 85721-0025, USA

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Social network sites (SNSs) are commonly used to maintain existing relationships and form connections
Available online 4 November 2010 with new contacts. Recently, concerns of have been expressed over the way these Web-based technolo-
gies are used. Estimates suggest that people are increasingly using SNSs for engaging in the surveillance
Keywords: of others. Given the relatively high rates of prevalence, it can be argued that SNSs have been reinvented
Social network sites into a tool for interpersonal surveillance along with their social networking capabilities. This article
Surveillance expands on the concept of interpersonal electronic surveillance and applies it in the specific context of
Romantic relationships
romantic partners’ use of SNSs. The relationships between surveillance over SNSs and demographic, rela-
Internet
Measurement development
tional, and Internet use and efficacy variables are studied. The findings reveal that interpersonal surveil-
lance over SNSs is influenced by age, the time individuals spend on their partners’ profiles, the integration
of SNSs into daily routines, and Internet self-efficacy.
Ó 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction enticing outlets to exercise surveillance. Many of these characteris-

tics, in concert with the potential for anonymity available over the
The metaphor of the panopticon, developed by philosopher Internet, allow individuals to lurk in an environment that reduces
Jeremy Bentham and later explicated by Foucault (1977), is often the threat of being discovered.
applied to the Internet culture (Katz & Rice, 2002; Lyon, 1993; The discovery of personal information published on the Internet
Spears & Lea, 1994). The panopticon is a theoretical prison struc- may not have serious negative social implications because the link
ture where prisoners can be observed from a central location at between personal information and identity is often destroyed, in
all times without their knowledge. In the information panopticon, part, by exercising the use of anonymous screen names (Rains &
Zuboff (1988) proposes that observers who engage in the surveil- Scott, 2007; Scott, 2004) and falsified information (Donath, 1999;
lance of others are able to be observed as well. Internet users are Turkle, 1995). People may have access to personal information on-
unknowingly subjected to the surveillance of Big and Little Brother line but often do not know with whom the information is associ-
each day (D’Urso, 2006). Big Brother is a concept referring to gov- ated. Social network sites (SNSs) bridge the gap between identity
ernmental agencies who observe not only patterns of Internet use and personal information typically generated by the anonymous
but also the content of online communication (Palen & Dourish, characteristics of Internet-based communication. SNSs, which are
2003). Little Brother is a comparatively newer phenomenon in Internet-based services that allow people to create and maintain
which organizations and individual Internet users engage in sur- personal profiles on which they can place personal information,
veillance to gain awareness about the Internet-related behaviors negotiate friendships with others in a bounded system, and view
of others. friends’ profiles (boyd & Ellison, 2008), are ideal forums for those
There are several characteristics of Internet-supported technolo- who wish to exercise surveillance over others.
gies that encourage surveillance behaviors. The potential recorda- Privacy settings on SNSs can be controlled to maintain public or
bility and archival of Internet messages, for instance, can be used semi-public profiles (boyd & Ellison, 2008). Public profiles are able
to gain information about the online and offline behaviors of others. to be seen by any registered users while semi-public profiles can
Additionally, the public or semi-public nature of messages ex- only be viewed by proximal contacts. Users are able to create de-
changed through open forums on the World Wide Web, including tailed profiles commonly containing their name, age, birthday,
bulletin boards, chat rooms, and websites (e.g., computer-mediated hometown, sexual preference, and contact information (Tong,
support groups), may make certain Internet-based technologies Van Der Heide, Langwell, & Walther, 2008). Additional information
placed on profiles may include previous academic or work experi-
⇑ Tel.: +1 520 626 3062; fax: +1 520 621 5504. ence, a list of groups of which one is a member, and extensive
E-mail address: [email protected] photo galleries. Despite the wealth of personal information that

0747-5632/$ - see front matter Ó 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.chb.2010.08.014
706 R.S. Tokunaga / Computers in Human Behavior 27 (2011) 705–713

can be accessed by others on these websites, a content analysis of operationalized as a continuous construct where the surveillance
MySpace profiles finds most users do not enact strict privacy set- strategies occur in various magnitudes.
tings (Jones, Millermaier, Goya-Martinez, & Schuler, 2008). Similar Individuals employ surveillance strategies through communica-
patterns of disregard are found on Facebook, where an overwhelm- tion technologies for a number of reasons. Surveillance is used as a
ing number of students share sensitive information through their way to ‘‘monitor the world around us’’ (Shoemaker, 1996, p. 32)
public profiles with minimal concern for privacy (Stutzman, and has both cultural and biological origins. People rely on surveil-
2006; Tufekci, 2008). lance to examine their immediate environment for deviant behav-
The popularity of SNSs and the way they are used promote iors, people, or events having the potential to cause them harm.
greater access to personal information (boyd & Ellison, 2008) and Partners involved in romantic relationships exercise surveillance
bring currency to concerns about interpersonal surveillance and as a relational maintenance strategy in response to threats of ex-
Internet privacy. SNSs are founded on the premise of surveillance tra-dyadic rivals (Guerrero & Afifi, 1998). Surveillance can also be
where individuals not only are allowed but expected to ‘‘track used in early or intermediate stages of a new relationship to obtain
other members of their community’’ (Lampe, Ellison, & Steinfield, more information about the other. Marx (2004) acknowledges that
2006, p. 167). In a study of Facebook users, Joinson (2008) finds contemporary surveillance involves the collection of ‘‘data’’ or
that, after keeping in touch with friends, social surveillance is the information from individuals and moves away from the traditional
second most commonly reported motive coming to mind when view of surveillance as the close observation of suspected others.
generating thoughts about SNSs. Students are considerably more
likely to use these websites for social surveillance than developing
new contacts and network connections (Lampe et al., 2006). Recent 3. Interpersonal electronic surveillance over social network
evidence suggests that interpersonal surveillance over SNSs is a sites
fairly common practice. Over 60% of college students use Facebook
profiles to check up on their significant others, see what others are The accessibility to personal information provided by Internet-
doing on the Internet, and check people out (Stern & Taylor, 2007). supported technologies has ushered in new concerns about privacy
Although SNSs continue to provide forums for individuals to de- for Internet users. Web blogs, for instance, allow people to articu-
velop and maintain connections with others, these Web-based ser- late their thoughts and express personal information to a mass
vices have slowly evolved into a conduit for interpersonal audience with minimal effort (Huffaker, 2004). Information pub-
electronic surveillance. Nevertheless, there is fairly little empirical lished on public or semi-public profiles is made available to large
research beyond simple prevalence estimates despite the growing audiences of individuals who have strong, weak, or no affiliation
use of SNSs for surveillance functions. Furthermore, previous re- to a profile owner on SNSs (boyd & Ellison, 2008). By using Web-
search on interpersonal electronic surveillance has not explicated based services such as SNSs, there is a presumption that people
this phenomenon, and there is an absence of a reliable and valid must submit to a certain level of surveillance from others
measure for operationalizing this construct. To this end, the objec- (Albrechtslund, 2008).
tives of this investigation are to expand on the concept of interper- The amount of people using SNSs continues to grow each year.
sonal electronic surveillance and provide a tenable context in In June, 2008, the number of unique visitors across the world ex-
which this form of surveillance may take place. panded to 580 million, a 25% increase in comparison to the preced-
ing year (comScore, 2008). The use of SNSs is linked to numerous
psychosocial benefits, including high self-esteem and healthy
2. What is interpersonal electronic surveillance? internal well-being (Valkenburg, Peter, & Shouten, 2006), life satis-
faction, trust, and civic engagement (Valenzuela, Park, & Kee,
Interpersonal electronic surveillance (IES) is characterized as 2009), and enriching interpersonal experiences (boyd & Ellison,
surreptitious strategies individuals use over communication tech- 2008). Individuals commonly use SNSs as a way to maintain con-
nologies to gain awareness of another user’s offline and/or online nections during turning points in their lives (Ellison, Steinfield, &
behaviors. IES is characterized as a mindful and goal-oriented Lampe, 2007; Lampe et al., 2006). College students use these web-
behavior in which contacts of all sorts, including close friends, sites to stay in touch with high school friends and maintain contact
romantic partners, business associates, or family members, can with long distance romantic partners.
be placed under surveillance. Internet-based content such as mes- Participating on SNSs is an important way to remain a central
sage exchanges, newly-formed contacts or relationships, informa- part of romantic partners’ daily lives. Individuals can casually
tion about future or attended social gatherings, and personal examine their romantic partner’s profiles to gather information,
status updates are sought by people who engage in IES. The per- employing surreptitious forms of surveillance. A wealth of infor-
sonal information is accessed using profiles on SNSs, bulletin mation is available on SNSs through status updates (i.e., informa-
boards, personal webpages, online diaries, keystroke loggers, and tion regularly updated on one’s current condition), news feeds
other electronic devices. (i.e., automatically generated updates about one’s recent online
IES is a general term related to concepts such as horizontal activity), and messages exchanged over message boards. These
surveillance (Albrechtslund, 2008), peer-to-peer monitoring message boards, commonly referred to as the Wall, Comments,
(Andrejevic, 2005), social surveillance (Marx, 2004; Steinfield, or Testimonials on various SNSs, are sections dedicated to mes-
Ellison, & Lampe, 2008), social searching (Lampe et al., 2006), sages authored by friends (boyd, 2008; Walther, Van Der Heide,
and other forms of electronic monitoring and surveillance that Kim, Westerman, & Tong, 2008).
occur on an individual level. The electronic monitoring or surveil- The benefits of using SNSs are considered alongside emerging
lance used by organizations or governmental agencies is conceptu- reports of relational problems that occur with their use (Muise,
ally similar to IES in that both seek to gain information about Christofides, & Desmarais, 2009; Phillips, 2009). For instance, Face-
others through electronic devices. Apart from this similarity, IES di- book surveillance between couples is related to partner jealousy
verges from these vertical forms of electronic surveillance based on (Phillips, 2009). Phillips explains that IES is often precipitated by
the specific objectives for collecting information, the asymmetrical interpersonal jealousy arising from third parties. The interpersonal
surveillance between the ‘‘observer’’ and the ‘‘observed,’’ the hier- jealousy provokes people to employ IES strategies through their
archical relationship disparities, and the influence of the gathered partners’ profiles. The time romantic couples spend on Facebook,
information (i.e., the potential for regulatory oversight). IES is presumably to exercise surveillance over their partner’s profiles,
R.S. Tokunaga / Computers in Human Behavior 27 (2011) 705–713 707

is related to interpersonal jealousy and distrust (Muise et al., the time individuals spend on SNSs does not necessarily imply they
2009). are using those minutes or hours to exercise surveillance over oth-
Surveillance occurring over SNSs is characterized by both its sal- ers. Instead, the time could conceivably be spent maintaining one’s
utary and problematic nature on relationships. Scholars who argue own profile or responding to friends’ messages. Additionally, sin-
that surveillance is an important tool provided by SNSs believe it fos- gle-item measures, as opposed to summated scales, are rarely ever
ters healthy interpersonal relationships by allowing people to stay able to the capture the universe of a construct and are subject to
involved and keep in touch with members of their social community issues of reliability.
(Lampe et al., 2006). Others are concerned about the manner in Other attempts to measure surveillance over SNSs have been
which messages are exchanged on SNSs given loose privacy settings directed at vertical or hierarchical surveillance. Fuchs (2009)
and surveillance behaviors. Rosenblum (2007) discusses how sur- developed an eight-item measure to evaluate surveillance by orga-
veillance of recorded messages, in concert with the disinhibiting nizations over SNSs as opposed to the interpersonal surveillance of
nature of SNSs, can lead to relational problems between friends. interest in this project. Examples of items in the scale include
‘‘platforms such as studiVZ, Facebook or MySpace store data about
me only as long as I do not delete my account’’ and ‘‘firms have a
4. Favorable characteristics of social network sites to
strong interest in gathering personal data of Internet users.’’
interpersonal electronic surveillance
Lampe et al. (2006) provides the most comprehensive and face-
valid items measuring IES. Three items in their scale are relevant
Four characteristics of SNSs—accessibility, multimediation,
indicators of one’s surveillance behaviors using SNSs (i.e., ‘‘check
recordability and archival, and geographical distance—conspire to
out a Facebook profile of someone I met socially,’’ ‘‘get information
form an ideal forum for exercising surveillance. Accessibility is the
about people that live in my dorm, fraternity, or sorority,’’ and ‘‘get
extent to which individuals or groups can obtain a diverse range of
information about people in my classes’’). In using this scale, how-
information in a relatively simple manner (Zhu & He, 2002). The
ever, the scope of the items limits the conclusions that can be
public nature of communication and availability of personal infor-
drawn about IES. It is presumed that people are searching for infor-
mation on SNSs underscore the high level of accessibility any entity
mation about a specific target, not generalized members within
has to others’ information. Multimediation refers to the convergence
one’s network of offline friends. Adapting the three items to reflect
of various media, including pictures, videos, and text, into one med-
a single target would reduce the measure to one item, which, as
ium (Walther, Gay, & Hancock, 2005). SNSs have powerful multime-
stated, fails to capture the entirety of the IES construct.
dia capabilities in the form of text-based communication that
The limitations of previous measures represent the need for a
appears beside pictures and videos. The consortium of messages
valid and reliable measure of this construct. The remaining part
delivered through multimedia over SNSs is prized by those who seek
of this report provides information about the reliability and valid-
to engage in IES. Further, records of archived messages, pictures, and
ity of a 15-item measurement tool that applies IES to the context of
videos exchanged between contacts may encourage surveillance
SNSs. Because characteristics of SNSs make surveillance readily
over SNSs. Messages appearing on walls are removed only in rare cir-
accessible (Joinson, 2008), these websites provide an ideal back-
cumstances (Walther et al., 2008), and photos in which individuals
drop for testing IES. Additionally, the scale was tested among
are identified are infrequently deleted. This makes it possible to re-
romantic partners, making it possible to incorporate relevant rela-
trieve a complete log of communication exchanges from the birth of
tional constructs such as partner infidelity and geographical prox-
one’s profile. Finally, the absence in need for geographical proximity
imity. The relationships between IES and demographic (i.e., gender
can lower the barriers of being caught. The negative connotation
and age), relational (i.e., prior infidelity and geographical proxim-
associated with surveillance (Lyon, 2001) may prompt individuals
ity), and Internet use and efficacy (i.e., time spent on partners’
to use SNSs for surveillance functions because these websites pro-
profile, integration of SNSs into daily routines, and Internet
vide the opportunity to lurk anonymously (boyd, 2008).
self-efficacy) variables are discussed in the following section.

5. Shortcomings in previous operationalizations of

interpersonal electronic surveillance 6. Potential factors influencing the use of interpersonal
electronic surveillance over social network sites
The way IES has been operationalized in previous research lim-
its the conclusions that can be reached about this phenomenon. 6.1. Demographic variables
Phillips (2009), for instance, used a measure of online obsessive
relational intrusion (ORI; Spitzberg & Hoobler, 2002) as a proxy Not much is known about whether demography influences sur-
for IES. The two relational behaviors share some conceptual over- veillance behaviors in face-to-face or Internet-based contexts.
lap, particularly in the domain of what Spitzberg and Hoobler Some evidence suggests that females spend more of their youth
(2002) refer to as invasion strategies. Nevertheless, the presumed and adolescence engaging in the surveillance of self and others
relationship between the ‘‘observer’’ and ‘‘observed’’ is a notewor- than males. Their motivation for exercising surveillance is to dis-
thy difference between the two behaviors. In online ORI, the ob- cover sexuality and femininity (Renold, 2000). In online contexts,
sessed pursues closeness while targets desire autonomy. People females tend to spend larger amounts of time on SNSs when com-
who employ IES strategies share an existing relationship with the pared to male users (e.g., Hargittai, 2007; Muise et al., 2009). This
observed in most cases (Lampe et al., 2006). IES can also only occur does not imply, however, that females use this time to survey oth-
once for it to be considered an instance of surveillance while ers’ profiles. Instead, they may devote more time to catching up
behaviors must be repeated for the collection of events to be la- with friends or maintaining their profiles. In addition to gender,
beled obsessive. Finally, there is a level of presumption that online it is not clear whether younger or older people engage in more sur-
ORI is a negative activity ranging from pestering to menacing veillance over SNSs. Curiosity of others, which manifests primarily
behaviors, which is not made with IES. Measures of online ORI at younger ages, may compel individuals to employ face-to-face
are thus inappropriate for evaluating IES that exists over SNSs. and Internet-based surveillance strategies than older individuals.
Muise et al. (2009) used a single item to address and discuss However, there is only modest evidence regarding gender or age
surveillance over SNSs. The time romantic partners spend on SNSs differences in surveillance behaviors to make predictions about
is considered a marker of their IES. However, it can be argued that their relationships with surveillance over SNSs.
708 R.S. Tokunaga / Computers in Human Behavior 27 (2011) 705–713

RQ1: Are there gender differences in the engagement of inter- technologies replace behaviors normally carried out in face-to-face
personal electronic surveillance over social network sites? settings. Placing romantic partners under surveillance is a common
RQ2: What is the relationship between age and interpersonal maintenance strategy used in many relationships (Guerrero & Afifi,
electronic surveillance over social network sites? 1998). Because of the conveniences afforded by SNSs for engaging
in surveillance, individuals who have integrated these technologies
6.2. Relationship variables into their lives may carry out surveillance strategies otherwise nat-
urally occurring in offline contexts.
Interpersonal jealousy has been discussed as both a motivating
factor in and outcome of IES (Muise et al., 2009; Phillips, 2009). H4: The integration of social network sites into daily routines is
Suspicious jealousy arises when romantic partners perceive a threat positively associated with interpersonal electronic surveillance
to the relationship from an external source (Hupka, 1991; Parrott, over social network sites.
1991). There are certain circumstances that elicit feelings of
interpersonal threat, such as partner infidelity (Buunk & Dijkstra, There may be some risks of being caught with the surreptitious
2004), which exacerbate emotions of jealousy. The ensuing jealousy engagement of surveillance over SNSs. The result of being discov-
manifests as a need for reducing uncertainty by gathering informa- ered surveying close others’ personal information can range from
tion about the external threat. In the case where people have mild distrust to dissolution. People who perform surveillance must
experienced infidelity with their current partner, surveillance can thus have confidence in their ability to execute surveillance with-
be used to verify that the infidelity is not ongoing. out exposing their behaviors to romantic partners or others. Inter-
net self-efficacy, which refers to the self-assurance in one’s use of
H1: People who have previously experienced infidelity with Internet-supported technologies (Eastin & LaRose, 2000), is likely
their current partner are more likely to use interpersonal elec- to be associated with IES because being discovered performing sur-
tronic surveillance over social network sites than partners veillance is such a large risk. As Internet self-efficacy grows, people
who have not experienced infidelity. are more likely to exercise IES as a result of their increasing confi-
dence in the ability to escape being exposed.
Individuals who move away from their romantic partners often
have a need to maintain a place in their lives, which is a concern for H5: Internet self-efficacy is positively associated with interper-
college students (Van Horn et al., 1997). Surveillance over SNSs can sonal electronic surveillance over social network sites.
be an enticing method to become aware of the offline and online
behaviors of partners. Romantic partners who are geographically 7. Method
distributed (i.e., involved in long distance romantic relationships)
engage in the surveillance of the others’ profiles as a way to stay 7.1. Participants and procedures
connected in their lives. IES may be employed to become aware
of information about partners’ newly-formed contacts, communi- Participants were recruited for the study in one of two ways.
cation with established friends, or events they are attending Undergraduate students from a large Southwest university re-
among a host of other activities. Because they are able to survey ceived extra credit for their participation. Participants must have
their partners in a physical setting, individuals who reside in the met the following four requirements at the time of recruitment
same geographical region do not need to rely on IES. to participate: they must be at least 18 years of age, they must
be currently involved in a romantic relationship, they must ac-
H2: Long distance partners employ greater interpersonal elec- tively manage a profile on SNSs, and their romantic partner has
tronic surveillance over social network sites than partners an active profile as part of the same social network (e.g., Facebook,
involved in geographically-close relationships. MySpace, etc.). Undergraduate students were also asked to provide
non-university adult referrals who may participate on their behalf.
6.3. Internet use variables The referrals were sought to increase the overall representative-
ness of the sample. The recruitment yielded a sample of 126 partic-
The time individuals spend on each others’ profiles is a loose ipants of which 35 (27.8%) were males and 91 (72.2%) were
indicator of the amount of surveillance in which they are engaging. females. The mean age of the participants was 23.3 years
It is important to note that these two constructs are conceptually (SD = 7.3, range = 18–56). Thirty participants were non-university
similar but not interchangeable. Partners can dedicate their time adults and 96 were from the university student sample1.
spent on SNSs almost exclusively toward exercising surveillance Participants were instructed to complete an Internet-based
over the other. In contrast, cases exist where close friends and questionnaire, which included items related to surveillance over
romantic partners attend to each others’ profiles without surveil- SNSs, demographic information, relational information, and Inter-
lance taking place because there is no intention to become aware net use and efficacy information. Participants had moderate
of partners’ offline or online activities. Instead, these partners amounts of exposure to the Internet in that they spent an average
may spend time authoring or responding to messages posted on of 3.5 h (SD = 2.3) using the Internet each day. Respondents’ expe-
the message board. The length of time spent on others’ profiles, rience with Internet use was extensive; they had been using the
however, increases the likelihood of surveillance engagement. Internet for an average of 9 years and 11 months (SD = 3.0 months).
Most of the romantic relationships were of heterosexual orienta-
H3: The amount of time spent on a partner’s social network site tion 95.2% (n = 120) and 3.2% (n = 4) of partners were involved in
profile is positively related to interpersonal electronic surveil- homosexual relationships. Two respondents did not choose to an-
lance over social network sites. swer the sexual orientation question. Fourteen participants experi-
enced infidelity with their current partner while 122 participants
SNSs play a critical role in the lives of many by making it simple reported their partners have been faithful thus far. Finally, 91
to develop new contacts and maintain existing relationships (Elli-
son et al., 2007). These websites can be integrated into one’s life in 1
A t test was conducted to see whether the two groups differed on the final
the same way regularly checking e-mails has evolved. For individ- outcome measure (i.e., the surveillance scale). The t test was nonsignificant, providing
uals with highly integrated routines for SNSs, these Web-based evidence that the samples could be collapsed into a larger sample.
R.S. Tokunaga / Computers in Human Behavior 27 (2011) 705–713 709

participants were living in the same geographical proximity as the proposed ISS. A 15-item scale was initially created following
their romantic partners and the remaining 35 individuals were in- an extensive literature search, interviews with experienced users
volved in long distance relationships. Data used in this study were of SNSs, and adaptations to offline and online surveillance scale
part of a larger project on interpersonal surveillance over SNSs. items. A principal-axis exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was
initially conducted on the 15 items of the ISS to evaluate its
properties. The initial extraction yielded two factors with eigen-
7.2. Measures
values over 1.0. However, the noticeable differences between the
eigenvalues for the two factors (i.e., 10.1 and 1.2) indicated scale
IES Scale for SNSs (ISS). The ISS was created for this project in re-
unidimensionality. Two items (i.e., items 11 and 15), which
sponse to the absence of a reliable and valid operational measure
cross-loaded onto two factors, were removed from the analysis.
for the IES construct. The proposed measure includes 15 items
The second principal-axis EFA yielded one factor with an eigen-
gathered through a search of relevant literature, through informal
value of over 1.0, which accounted for 68.1% of the total-item
interviews with experienced users of SNSs, and from adaptations of
variance.
items in offline and online surveillance measures. The items are
A confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was then used to verify the
presented in Tables 1 and 2 along with their factor loadings. The
unidimensionality of the single-factor structure. The variance for
scale is based on a 7-point Likert scale with larger numbers indi-
the unidimensional factor was fixed at 1.0 to solve for issues re-
cating greater use of IES in the relationship. A procedure for trim-
lated to scale indeterminacy (see Hatcher, 1994). The initial mea-
ming the scale to achieve internal consistency is discussed in the
surement model indicated modest fit, v2(65) = 240.4, p < .05,
next section. The final scale was based on 12 items, which had
CFI = .89, SRMR = .05. The normalized residuals of the 13 items
acceptable reliability (Cronbach’s a = .97).
were examined for any standardized error exceeding 2.0. The path
Integration of SNSs. The degree to which individuals’ integrate
of one item (i.e., item 7), which had a normalized residual exceed-
SNSs into their lives was evaluated using a modified version of Elli-
ing 2.0, was fixed to zero. The trimming of the scale resulted in a
son et al.’s (2007) Facebook intensity scale. The modification in-
significant reduction in model chi-square and overall improvement
volved changing the word ‘‘Facebook’’ to ‘‘social networking
of the measurement model’s fit, v2(54) = 192.5, p < .05, CFI = .90,
sites.’’ The items assessed the extent to which SNSs have become
SRMR = .04. Fig. 1 provides the standardized path estimates for
ritualized in people’s daily routines (e.g., ‘‘social networking sites
each item.
are part of my everyday activity’’). The scale, which was based on
a 7-point Likert scale with higher numbers indicating greater inte-
8.2. Demography, relationship, and Internet use
gration, was reliable (Cronbach’s a = .94)
Internet self-efficacy. Eastin and LaRose (2000) developed a scale
It was important to provide preliminary data on factors influ-
that evaluates Internet self-efficacy or the belief in one’s ability to
encing individuals’ decisions to exercise IES over SNSs to under-
execute a series of procedures online to acquire something from
stand this phenomenon. The research questions and hypotheses
the Internet or accomplish an Internet-based task. The eight-item
proposed in this investigation explored demographic, relationship,
measure (e.g., ‘‘I feel confident using the Internet to gather data’’)
and Internet-use predictors of IES. The IES variable was regressed
takes Internet hardware and software into consideration. The
on the seven predictors and three control variables—total hours
Internet self-efficacy scale, which is based on a 7-point scale, was
spent online each day, minutes spent on one’s own profile, and
reliable (Cronbach’s a = .93).
Internet experience. The linear combination of the predictors had
Demographic and relational questions. Information related to
an overall effect on IES, R = .72, R2 = .52, R2adj ¼ :47, F(10, 110) =
demography (i.e., age and gender) and the relationship (i.e., prior
10.72, p < .001.
partner infidelity and geographical distance) was collected using
The results for RQ1 revealed that there were no gender differ-
a series of one-item measures (e.g., ‘‘To your knowledge, has your
ences between males (M = 3.57, SD = 1.55) and females (M = 4.03,
current romantic partner ever cheated on you’’).
SD = 1.70), b = .08, t = 0.95, ns, in the level of IES performed
through SNSs. An independent samples t test also confirmed there
8. Results were no gender differences, t(124) = 1.39, ns. In contrast, the re-
sults for RQ2 showed that age was negatively related to IES,
8.1. Psychometric properties of the ISS b = .23, t = 2.95, p < .01. Younger adults are more likely to em-
ploy surveillance strategies using SNSs than older adults.
In recognizing the absence of a measure for reliably and val- H1 predicted that prior infidelity by a current partner promotes
idly evaluating IES over SNSs, one contribution of this project is IES behaviors. The results did not substantiate a relationship

Table 1
Items and factor loadings for the initial interpersonal electronic surveillance scale for social network sites.

No. Item Factor 1 Factor 2

1. I visit my partner’s social networking site page often .81 .14
2. When visiting my partner’s social networking site page, I read the new posts of his/her friends .76 .04
3. I often spend time looking through my partner’s social networking site pictures .82 .18
4. I pay particularly close attention to news feeds that concern my partner .82 .17
5. I notice when my partner updates his/her social networking site page .81 .24
6. I am generally aware of the relationships between my partner and his/her social networking site friends .81 .15
7. If there are messages on my partner’s wall I don’t understand, I try to investigate it through others’ social networking sites .77 .07
8. I try to read comments my partner posts on mutual friends’ walls .86 .04
9. I am generally aware of my partner’s social networking site activities .84 .03
10. I peruse my partner’s social networking site page to see what s/he’s up to .89 .06
11. I see the friends my partner keeps on his social networking site page .72 .41
12. I know when my partner hasn’t updated his/her social networking site page in a while .85 .12
13. I try to monitor my partner’s behaviors through his/her social networking page .80 .28
14. I explore my partner’s social networking page to see if there is anything new or exciting .88 .04
15. I know more about my partners’ everyday life by looking at his/her social networking site page .70 .49
710 R.S. Tokunaga / Computers in Human Behavior 27 (2011) 705–713

Table 2
Items and factor loadings for the trimmed interpersonal electronic surveillance scale for social network sites.

No. Item M SD Factor 1

1. I visit my partner’s social networking site page often 3.91 2.07 .82
2. When visiting my partner’s social networking site page, I read the new posts of his/her friends 4.75 2.00 .78
3. I often spend time looking through my partner’s social networking site pictures 4.12 2.01 .82
4. I pay particularly close attention to news feeds that concern my partner 4.02 2.04 .83
5. I notice when my partner updates his/her social networking site page 4.36 1.94 .82
6. I am generally aware of the relationships between my partner and his/her social networking site friends 4.17 1.92 .81
7. If there are messages on my partner’s wall I don’t understand, I try to investigate it through others’ social networking sites 3.48 2.01 .77
8. I try to read comments my partner posts on mutual friends’ walls 3.84 2.03 .87
9. I am generally aware of my partner’s social networking site activities 3.90 1.89 .85
10. I peruse my partner’s social networking site page to see what s/he’s up to 3.87 2.00 .90
12. I know when my partner hasn’t updated his/her social networking site page in a while 3.60 2.05 .83
13. I try to monitor my partner’s behaviors through his/her social networking page 2.87 1.91 .73
14. I explore my partner’s social networking page to see if there is anything new or exciting 3.83 2.03 .88

Interpersonal Electronic
Surveillance over SNSs

.81 .78 .84 .83 .82 .81 .84 .90 .84 .84 .73 .89

V1 V2 V3 V4 V5 V6 V8 V9 V10 V12 V13 V14

E1 E2 E3 E4 E5 E6 E7 E8 E9 E10 E11 E12

Fig. 1. Illustration of the measurement model for the interpersonal electronic surveillance scale for social network sites.

between previous partner infidelity and surveillance, b = .12, t = considerable public concerns (D’Urso, 2006). Public fears of privacy
1.72, ns. A follow-up t test also confirmed no differences between invasions and information theft have made people weary of the
partners who have encountered infidelity in their current relation- technologies they use. Newer forms of interpersonal surveillance
ship (M = 4.46, SD = 1.64) and people who have not (M = 3.83, supported through Internet-based communication technologies
SD = 1.67) in the extent to which they exercise IES over SNSs, have added an additional element of uncertainty to Internet users.
t(124) = 1.33, ns. The results also did not support H2 in that long This peer-or-peer or horizontal surveillance implies that ordinary
distance partners report the same level of IES behaviors than geo- citizens, as opposed to large organizations or agencies, have the
graphically close partners, b = .04, t = 0.51, ns. In short, factors re- power and ability to exercise surveillance over anyone. The broad
lated to the relationship were not strong predictors of people’s objectives of the present investigation were to explicate this newer
decisions to place their romantic partner under surveillance using surveillance and apply the concept to romantic partners who use
SNSs. SNSs. The latter goal was undertaken by exploring the relation-
In testing H3, the result revealed that the amount of time spent ships between IES and several demographic, relational, and Inter-
on a partner’s profile was proportional to their use of IES, b = .24, net use and efficacy variables.
t = 2.46, p < .05, which provides initial convergent validity of the The proposed measure of IES was developed using an ‘‘arm-
ISS. H4 was predicated on the idea that people who integrate SNSs chair’’ approach to scale development in which items from offline
into their daily routines are more likely to place their partners un- and online instruments relevant to partner surveillance were
der surveillance than those who perceive less integration. The re- adapted, experienced users of SNSs were consulted, and a review
sults supported the relationship, b = .54, t = 6.36, p < .001, of existing literature on IES stimulated item generation. Although
indicating that people who acknowledge SNSs as an important part this approach is less systematic than other scale development
of their daily activities are more likely to exercise IES. Finally, H6 methods, this procedure led to a unidimensional scale of IES that
proposed that confidence in one’s Internet skills is likely to pro- demonstrated internal consistency. In operationalizing the IES con-
mote IES behaviors. The findings indicated a significant relation- struct, the items focus on the awareness gained of romantic part-
ship between Internet self-efficacy and IES; however, the ners’ offline and online behaviors by using information available
relationship was in the opposite direction than anticipated, on SNSs. An important contribution made by this project is this
b = .21, t = 2.73, p < .01. Table 3 displays the results of the multi- proposed measure of IES applied to SNSs. This measure is an initial
ple regression using IES as the criterion variable and the seven step in providing a foundation for future programmatic research
demographic, relationship, and Internet use variables as predictors. on interpersonal surveillance that emerges in Internet-based
A complete zero-order correlation matrix of these variables is of- technologies.
fered in Table 4. The circumstances related to a relationship, such as geographical
proximity between romantic partners and prior partner infidelities,
9. Discussion have no association with IES behaviors. These findings are at odds
with recent evidence, which suggests that IES is employed as a re-
The vertical forms of electronic monitoring and surveillance sponse to jealousy from third-party rivals. Long distance romantic
used by governmental agencies and organizations has generated partners and partners who have experienced infidelity in their
R.S. Tokunaga / Computers in Human Behavior 27 (2011) 705–713 711

Table 3 marked at the onset of relationships (Emmers & Canary, 1996), can
Multiple regression for predictors of interpersonal electronic surveillance over social compel individuals to participate in the surveillance of their part-
network sites.
ners. This can also explain why younger people are more likely
Interpersonal electronic surveillance to exercise IES than older people; younger individuals imply
b t involvement in shorter relationships. No gender differences exist
Independent variables
in the pursuit of information obtained through IES; females en-
Demographic variables gaged in slightly greater surveillance over SNSs than males but
Gender .08 0.95 not to discernable degrees.
Age .23** 2.95 Internet efficacy and use variables provide important insights
Relationship variables
into conditions motivating partners to engage in surveillance over
Infidelity experience .12 1.72
Geographical distance .04 0.51 SNSs. The amount of time spent on a partner’s profile is an indica-
Internet-use related variables tor of one’s level of surveillance. It may be that the longer individ-
Mins/day spent on partner’s profile .24* 2.46 uals spend on a profile, the more enticed they are to gain access to
Integration of SNSs .54*** 6.36
information about their partners’ offline and online behaviors.
Internet self-efficacy .21** 2.73
Alternatively, the length of time may be a natural indication of sur-
Control variables
veillance; it takes longer to gain awareness of partners’ behaviors
Mins/day spent on own profile .07 0.61
Hours/day on Internet .05 0.65
than to post a message onto their message boards or place an iden-
Internet experience .09 1.15 tification marker on a picture or video and move on.
As participation on SNSs becomes embedded into daily rou-
Note. For the gender variable, male was coded 0 and female was coded 1. For the
infidelity experience variable, infidelity experienced was coded 0 and infidelity not
tines, people are more likely to place their romantic partners under
experienced was coded 1. For the geographical distance variable, geographically- surveillance using these websites. The convenience of acquiring
close relationships were coded 0 and long distance relationships were coded 1. sought information, in concert with the potential anonymity in-
*
p < .05. volved with online lurking, can motivate a need to enact surveil-
**
p < .01.
*** lance. Surveillance is made easy on SNSs from the regularity of
p < .001.
status updates, news feeds, and open message exchanges. The
abundance of rich information reduces the need for extensive
relationships are expected to be interpersonally jealous and suspi- searching or formal investigations. People who are concerned
cious (Buss, 1994; Buss & Schmitt, 1993; Buss & Shackelford, about the maintenance of their relationship and have access to
1997; Dainton & Aylor, 2001). Because jealousy is deemed a motivat- information at their disposals naturally move surveillance from
ing factor in interpersonal surveillance behaviors (Phillips, 2009), offline to online contexts. In contrast, it may be argued that people
there was a level of presumption that geographical distance and who were efficacious at finding information about their partners
prior infidelity, in turn, influenced IES as well. The lack of findings through surveillance over SNSs were likely to integrate these social
may rest in the initial assumption made about the experience of media into their daily routines.
jealousy between long distance partners and those who have Less capable Internet users appear to seek information about
experienced infidelity. These partners may have found a way to their partners through SNSs. Because of the desirable qualities re-
move beyond or cope with the relational events and no longer expe- lated to surveillance, romantic partners gravitate to these websites
rience jealousy. Accordingly, there may be a faulty presumption despite their inexperience. It may be possible that the perception
these individuals have lingering or residual jealousy. The findings of surveillance as easy and safe on SNSs creates new users of these
could also imply that interpersonal surveillance over SNSs may not Web-based technologies. Relational partners who are Internet sav-
be used for mitigating jealousy or insecurity in relationships. vy may turn to more sophisticated means of technological surveil-
Previous research and theorizing on interpersonal surveillance lance beyond SNSs. IES over SNSs can thus be characterized as an
has characterized these behaviors negatively. IES has been dis- elementary method of surveillance performed by Internet novices,
cussed in relation to cyberstalking (Phillips, 2009) and indicted but this is not to imply it is the only way to survey others or that
as a cause of deleterious relational problems (Muise et al., 2009). only novices participate in IES.
The results may shed light on an alternative characterization of
personal surveillance through electronic technologies not yet seri-
ously considered. Although the desire to gain awareness of roman- 9.1. Adapted views of technologies among romantic partners
tic partners’ behaviors surreptitiously conjures negative images,
IES may be interpreted as an information-seeking and gaining In light of the results from this project, IES may be considered as
strategy used in healthy relationships. Partners access information an information-seeking and gaining strategy among romantic part-
available through Internet-supported technologies to reduce some ners. This characterization moves away from the negative under-
of the uncertainty in their relationships. This uncertainty, which is tones associated with surveillance in relationships. Instead,

Table 4
Zero-order correlation matrix of all variables in the study.

Variable 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
1. IES over SNSs –
2. Min/day on partner’s profile .28** –
3. Age .40** .11 –
4. Gender .12 .02 .11 –
5. Partner infidelity .12 .06 .00 .06 –
6. Geographical distance .11 .00 .19* .05 .06 –
7. Integration of SNSs .58** .12 .31** .23* .02 .06 –
8. Internet self-efficacy .10 .07 .07 .19* .12 .11 .14 –
*
p < .05.
**
p < .01.
712 R.S. Tokunaga / Computers in Human Behavior 27 (2011) 705–713

partner who are unfamiliar with others use SNSs to gain access to References
personal information related to their offline and online behaviors.
Interpersonal trust and relational security can be developed to Andrejevic, M. (2005). The work of watching one another: Lateral surveillance, risk,
and governance. Surveillance & Society, 2(4), 479–497. Available from: http://
the extent that trusting behaviors are exhibited through one’s pro- www.surveillance-and-society.org/articles2(4)/lateral.pdf Retrieved 01.09.10.
file. IES occurs in many forms with SNSs offering one of several Albrechtslund, A. (2008). Online social networking as participatory surveillance.
platforms for individuals to enact surveillance behaviors in their First Monday, 13(3), article 6. Available from: http://firstmonday.org/htbin/
cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/2142/1949 Retrieved 01.09.10.
relationships. Because of the relative ease in locating information boyd, d. (2008). Why youth (heart) social network sites: The role of networked
about others on SNSs, it is the forum novice or inexperienced Inter- publics in teenage social life. In D. Buckingham (Ed.), Youth, identity, and digital
net users turn to for surveillance functions. media (pp. 119–142). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
boyd, D. M., & Ellison, N. B. (2008). Social network sites: Definition, history, and
IES reflects a ‘‘reinvention’’ of SNSs described by Rice and Rogers
scholarship. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 13, 210–230.
(1980). These websites have slowly developed into a device used Buunk, B. P., & Dijkstra, P. (2004). Gender differences in rival characteristics that
for informatics in conjunction with their primary objective for so- evoke jealousy in response to emotional versus sexual infidelity. Personal
cial networking. In this adaptive view, SNSs are identified as infor- Relationships, 11, 395–408.
Buss, D. M. (1994). The evolution of desire: Strategies of human mating. New York:
mation managers capable of personal data storage for retrieval Basic Books.
from any friend or contact, which is facilitated by the social net- Buss, D. M., & Schmitt, D. P. (1993). Sexual strategies theory: An evolutionary
working functions. IES is therefore closely related to Marx’s perspective on human mating. Psychological Review, 100, 204–232.
Buss, D. M., & Shackelford, T. K. (1997). Susceptibility to infidelity in the first year of
(2004) conception of social surveillance, which is discussed as marriage. Journal of Research in Personality, 31, 193–221.
the ‘‘scrutiny through the use of technical means to extract or cre- comScore. (2008). Social networking explodes worldwide as sites increase their focus
ate personal or group data, whether from individuals or contexts’’ on cultural relevance. Available from: http://www.comscore.com/press/
release.asp?press=2396 Retrieved 01.09.10.
(p. 276). Dainton, M., & Aylor, B. (2001). A relational uncertainty analysis of jealousy, trust,
and maintenance in long-distance versus geographically close relationships.
10. Limitations and future directions for research Communication Quarterly, 49, 172–188.
Donath, J. S. (1999). Identity and deception in the virtual community. In M. A. Smith
& P. Kollock (Eds.), Communities in cyberspace (pp. 29–59). New York: Routledge.
The results from the present investigation must be considered D’Urso, S. C. (2006). Who’s watching us at work? Toward a structural–perceptual
with the limitations of this project. Considering that a large contri- model of electronic monitoring and surveillance in organizations.
Communication Theory, 16, 281–303.
bution of this project is the proposed measure, it is important to Eastin, M. S., & LaRose, R. (2000). Internet self-efficacy and the psychology of the
discuss some of the limitations with scale development. First, as digital divide. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 6(1). Available
previously discussed, an armchair approach to item development from: http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol6/issue1/eastin.html Retrieved 01.09.10.
Ellison, N. B., Steinfield, C., & Lampe, C. (2007). The benefits of Facebook ‘‘friends:’’
was used, which generates a pool of items from brainstorming,
Social capital and college students’ use of online social network sites. Journal of
consulting established interpersonal surveillance measures, and Computer-Mediated Communication, 12(4), article 1. Available from: http://
discussions with experienced users of SNSs. Although this ap- jcmc.indiana.edu/vol12/issue4/ellison.html Retrieved 01.09.10.
proach is desirable for scale development in relatively untapped Emmers, T. M., & Canary, D. J. (1996). The effect of uncertainty reducing strategies
on young couples’ relational repair and intimacy. Communication Quarterly, 44,
domains of research, it lacks the systematic orientation of other 166–182.
more empirical processes. In the more systematic approach to Foucault, M. (1977). Discipline and punish: The birth of prison (A. Sheridan, Trans.).
scale development, a multistage process is used for item genera- New York: Pantheon.
Fuchs, C. (2009). Social networking sites and the surveillance society: A critical case
tion, including identification of relevant constructs and measures, study of the usage of studiVZ, Facebook, and MySpace by students in Salzburg in the
an item pool expansion assisted by expert review and brainstorm- context of electronic surveillance. Salzburg/Vienna, Austria: Forschungsgruppe.
ing, and item revision and then reduction. Future studies may con- Guerrero, L. K., & Afifi, W. A. (1998). Communicative responses to jealousy as a
function of self-esteem and relationship maintenance goals: A test of Bryson’s
sider the more systematic approach for scale development when dual motivation model. Communication Reports, 11, 111–122.
composing a broader IES measure. Hargittai, E. (2007). Whose space? Differences among users and non-users of social
Second, the procedure for verifying the factor dimensionality of network sites. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 13(1), article 14.
Available from: http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol13/issue1/hargittai.html Retrieved
the interpersonal surveillance scale used in this investigation in- 01.09.10.
volved exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses. Although it Hatcher, L. (1994). A step-by-step approach to using SAS for factor analysis and
is desirable to use confirmatory factor analysis in collaboration structural equation modeling. Cary, NC: SAS Institute, Inc.
Huffaker, D. (2004). Gender similarities and differences in online identity and language
with exploratory factor analysis to verify the factor structure of a
use among teenage bloggers. Washington, DC: Georgetown University.
scale, this project used the same data to both explore and confirm Hupka, R. (1991). The motive for arousal of romantic jealousy: Its cultural origins. In
factor dimensionality. One issue with this procedure is that it can P. Salovey (Ed.), The psychology of jealousy and envy (pp. 3–28). New York:
capitalize on the chance characteristics of the data set. As such, fu- Guilford Press.
Joinson, A. N. (2008). ‘Looking at,’ ‘looking up’ or ‘keeping up with’ people? Motives
ture investigations should explore issues of factorial invariance of and uses of Facebook. In Proceeding of the twenty-sixth annual SIGCHI conference
the IES measure. on Human factors in computing system, Italy (pp. 1027–1036).
Jones, S., Millermaier, S., Goya-Martinez, M., & Schuler, J. (2008). Whose space is
MySpace? A content analysis of MySpace profiles. First Monday, 13(9). Available
11. Conclusion from: http://firstmonday.org/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view
Article./2202/2024 Retrieved 01.09.10.
Katz, J. E., & Rice, R. E. (2002). Social consequences of Internet use: Access, involvement,
Recent concerns have been raised about interpersonal surveil- and interaction. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
lance that takes place on Internet-supported technologies, which Lampe, C., Ellison, N. B., & Steinfield, C. (2006). A Face(book) in the crowd: Social
has been reflected in scholarly research. This research tries to ex- searching vs. social browsing. In Proceedings of CSCW-2006 (pp. 167–170). New
York: ACM Press.
plain the actors involved in electronic surveillance and provide Lyon, D. (1993). An electronic panopticon? A sociological critique of surveillance
prevalence estimates for its occurrence. Given the relatively high theory. The Sociological Review, 41, 653–678.
prevalence rates of individuals who report participating in surveil- Lyon, D. (2001). Surveillance society: Monitoring everyday life. Buckingham, UK: Open
University.
lance over SNSs, a shift may be seen in the indifference that chil-
Marx, G. T. (2004). Surveillance and society. In G. Ritzer (Ed.), Encyclopedia of social
dren, adolescents, and adults ostensibly have for issues of theory (pp. 275–280). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Internet trust and privacy. SNSs have arguably changed how their Muise, A., Christofides, E., & Desmarais, S. (2009). More information than you ever
users communicate and view communication technologies. This wanted: Does Facebook bring out the green-eyed monster of jealousy?
CyberPsychology & Behavior, 12, 441–444.
novel ‘‘reinvention’’ of SNSs may not only change the way people Palen, L., & Dourish, P. (2003). Unpacking ‘‘privacy’’ for a networked world. Proceedings
communicate but how they think about communication as well. of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, USA, 129–136.
R.S. Tokunaga / Computers in Human Behavior 27 (2011) 705–713 713

Parrott, W. G. (1991). The emotional experiences of envy and jealousy. In P. Salovey Stutzman, F. (2006). An evaluation of identity-sharing behavior in social network
(Ed.), The psychology of jealousy and envy (pp. 252–267). New York: Guilford communities. International Digital and Media Arts Journal, 3, 10–18.
Press. Tong, S. T., Van Der Heide, B., Langwell, L., & Walther, J. B. (2008). Too much of a
Phillips, M. (2009, February). MySpace or yours?: Social networking sites surveillance good thing? The relationship between number of friends and interpersonal
in romantic relationships. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Western impressions on Facebook. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 13,
States Communication Association, Mesa, AZ. 531–549.
Rains, S. A., & Scott, C. R. (2007). To identify or not to identify: A theoretical model of Tufekci, Z. (2008). Can you see me now? Audience and disclosure regulation in
receiver responses to anonymous communication. Communication Theory, 17, online social network sites. Bulletin of Science, Technology, and Society, 28, 20–36.
61–91. Turkle, S. (1995). Life on the screen: Identity in the age of the Internet. New York:
Renold, E. (2000). ‘Coming out’: Gender, (hetero)sexuality and the primary school. Simon & Schuster.
Gender and Education, 12, 309–326. Valenzuela, S., Park, N., & Kee, K. F. (2009). Is there social capital in a social network
Rice, R. E., & Rogers, E. M. (1980). Reinvention in the innovation process. Knowledge: site?: Facebook use and college students’ life satisfaction, trust, and
Creation, Diffusion, Utilization, 1, 499–514. participation. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 14, 875–901.
Rosenblum, D. (2007). What anyone can know: The privacy risks of social Valkenburg, P. M., Peter, J., & Shouten, A. P. (2006). Friend networking sites and their
networking sites. IEEE Security and Privacy, May/June, 40–49. relationship to adolescents’ well-being and social self-esteem. CyberPsychology
Scott, C. R. (2004). Benefits and drawbacks of anonymous online communication: & Behavior, 9, 584–590.
Legal challenges and communicative recommendations. In S. Drucker (Ed.). Van Horn, K. R., Arnone, A., Nesbitt, K., Desilets, L., Sears, T., Griffin, M., et al. (1997).
Free speech yearbook (Vol. 41, pp. 127–141). Washington, DC: National Physical distance and interpersonal characteristics in college students’ romantic
Communication Association. relationships. Personal Relationships, 4, 25–34.
Shoemaker, P. J. (1996). Hardwired for news: Using biological and cultural evolution Walther, J. B., Van Der Heide, B., Kim, S.-Y., Westerman, D., & Tong, S. (2008). The
to explain the surveillance function. Journal of Communication, 46, 32–47. role of friends’ appearance and behavior on evaluations of individuals on
Spears, R., & Lea, M. (1994). Panacea or panopticon? The hidden power in computer- Facebook: Are we known by the company we keep? Human Communication
mediated communication. Communication Research, 21, 427–459. Research, 34, 28–49.
Spitzberg, B. H., & Hoobler, G. D. (2002). Cyberstalking and the technologies of Walther, J. B., Gay, G., & Hancock, J. T. (2005). How do communication and technology
interpersonal terrorism. New Media & Society, 4, 71–92. researchers study the Internet? Journal of Communication, 55, 632–657.
Stern, L. A., & Taylor, K. (2007). Social networking on Facebook. Journal of the Zhu, J. J. H., & He, Z. (2002). Information accessibility, user sophistication, and source
Communication, Speech & Theatre Association of North Dakota, 20, 9–20. credibility: The impact of the internet on value orientations in mainland China.
Steinfield, C., Ellison, N. B., & Lampe, C. (2008). Social capital, self-esteem, and use of Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 7(2), article 1. Available from:
online social network sites: A longitudinal analysis. Journal of Applied http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol7/issue2/china.html Retrieved 01.09.10.
Developmental Psychology, 29, 434–445. Zuboff, S. (1988). In the age of the smart machine. New York: Basic Books.

View publication stats