SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

References

  • Baym, N. K., Zhang, Y. B., & Lin, M.-C. (2002, October). The Internet in college social life. Paper presented at Internet Research 3.0, Maastrich, The Netherlands.
  • Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1989). Single-sample cross-validation indices for covariance structures. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 24(4), 445455.
  • Burt, R. S. (1983). Range. In R. S.Burt & M. J.Minor (Eds.), Applied Network Analysis (pp. 176194). Beverly Hills: Sage.
  • Cialdini, R. B. (1993). Influence: The psychology of persuasion. New York: Quill.
  • Coget, J.-F., Yamauchi, Y., & Suman, M. (2002). The Internet, social networks and loneliness. IT & Society, 1(1), 180201.
  • Cohen, S., & Hoberman, H. M. (1983). Positive events and social supports as buffers of life change stress. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 13(2), 99125.
  • Cole, J. I., Suman, M., Schramm, P., Bel, D. V., & Aquino, J. S. (2000). The UCLA internet report: Surveying the digital future. Los Angeles: UCLA Center for Communication Policy.
  • Coleman, J. S. (1988). Social capital in the creation of human capital. American Journal of Sociology, 94, S95S121.
  • Constant, D., Sproull, L., & Kiesler, S. (1996). The kindness of strangers: The usefulness of electronic weak ties for technical advice. Organization Science, 7(2), 119135.
  • Converse, P. E. (1964). The nature and belief systems in mass publics. In D.Apter (Ed.), Ideology and Discontent (pp. 206261). New York: Free Press.
  • Cooper, W. (2002). Information technology and Internet culture. Retrieved November 5, 2002, from http://www.brandeis.edu/pubs/jove/HTML/V6/iculture.html
  • Czitrom, D. (1982). Media and the american mind: From morse to mcLuhan. Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press.
  • DiMaggio, P., Hargittai, E., Neuman, W. R., & Robinson, J. P. (2001). Social implications of the Internet. Annual Review of Sociology, 27, 307337.
  • Foley, M., & Edwards, B. (1997). Editors’ introduction. American Behavioral Scientist, 40(5), 550561.
  • Friedkin, N. (1982). Information flow through strong and weak ties in inter-organizational social networks. Social Networks, 3(4), 273285.
  • Galston, W. (1999). Does the Internet strengthen community? Retrieved November 20, 2001, from http://www.puaf.umd.edu/IPPP/fall1999/internet_community.htm
  • Granovetter, M. (1973). The strength of weak ties. American Journal of Sociology, 78(6), 13601380.
  • Granovetter, M. (1974). Getting a job: A study of contacts and careers. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  • Hampton, K. N. (2003). Grieving for a lost network: Collective action in a wired suburb. The Information Society, 19(5), 417428.
  • Haythornthwaite, C. (2002). Strong, weak, and latent ties and the impact of new media. The Information Society, 18(5), 385401.
  • Hirschman, A. O. (1970). Exit, voice and loyalty: Responses to decline in firms, organizations and states. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
  • Horrigan, J. B., & Rainee, L. (2002, October 1316). Getting serious online. Paper presented at the Internet Research 3.0, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
  • Howard, P. E., Rainie, L., & Jones, S. (2001). Days and nights on the Internet: The impact of a diffusing technology. American Behavioral Scientist, 45(3), 383404.
  • Huckfeldt, R., Beck, P. A., Dalton, R. J., & Levine, J. (1995). Political environments, cohesive social groups, and the communication of public opinion. American Journal of Political Science, 39(4), 10251054.
  • John F. Kennedy School of Government. (2000). Social Capital Benchmark Survey, 2000. Cambridge, MA: John F. Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University.
  • Katz, J. E., & Rice, R. E. (2002). Social consequences of Internet use: Access, involvement, and interaction. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press.
  • Kestnbaum, M., Robinson, J. P., Neustadtl, A., & Alvarez, A. (2002). Information technology and social time displacement. IT & Society, 1(1), 2137.
  • Kiesler, S., Kraut, R., Cummings, J., Boneva, B., Helgeson, V., & Crawford, A. (2002). Internet evolution and social impact. IT & Society, 1(1), 120134.
  • Krackhardt, D. (1992). The strength of strong ties: The importance of philos in organizations. In N.Nohria & R. G.Eccles (Eds.), Networks and organizations: Structure, form, and action. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
  • Kraut, R., Kiesler, S., Boneva, B., Cummings, J., Helgegson, V., & Crawford, A. (2002). Internet paradox revisited. Journal of Social Issues, 58(1), 4974.
  • Kraut, R., Patterson, M., Lundmark, V., Kiesler, S., Mukhopadhyay, T., & Scherlis, W. (1996). Internet paradox: A social technology that reduces social involvement and psychological well-being? American Psychologist, 53(9), 10111031.
  • Levy, K. K., McConnaughey, J., Lader, W., Brodsky, A., Laousis, S., Price, L, et al. (2002). Falling through the net: Toward digital inclusion. Retrieved December 10, 2002, from http://www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome/fttn00/contents00.html
  • Mandelli, A. (2002). Bounded sociability, relationship costs and intangible resources in complex digital networks. IT & Society, 1(1), 251274.
  • Markoff, J. (2002, January 21). How lonely is the life that is lived online? The New York Times, p. C3.
  • Neustadtl, A., & Robinson, J. P. (2002). Social contact differences between Internet users and nonusers in the General Social Survey. IT & Society, 1(1), 73102.
  • Newton, K. (1997). Social capital and democracy. American Behavioral Scientist, 40(5), 575586.
  • Nie, N. H. (2001). Sociability, interpersonal relations, and the Internet: Reconciling conflicting findings. American Behavioral Scientist, 45(3), 420435.
  • Nie, N. H., & Erbring, L. (2002). Internet and society: A preliminary report. IT & Society, 1(1), 275283.
  • Nie, N. H., & Hillygus, D. S. (2002). The impact of internet use on sociability: Time-diary findings. IT & Society, 1(1), 120.
  • Norris, P. (2002). The bridging and bonding role of online communities (Editorial). Harvard International Journal of Press/Politics, 7(3), 313.
  • Pickering, J. M., & King, J. L. (1995). Hardwiring weak ties: Interorganizational computer-mediated communication, occupational communities, and organizational change. Organization Science, 6(4), 479486.
  • Pinkett, R. (2003). Community technology and community building: Early results from the Creating Community Connections Project. The Information Society, 19(5), 365379.
  • Preece, J. (1999). Empathic communities: Balancing emotional and factual communication. Interacting with Computers, 12(1), 6377.
  • Price, V., & Cappella, J. N. (2002). Online deliberation and its influence: The electronic dialogue project in campaign 2000. IT & Society, 1(1), 303329.
  • Provonost, G. (2002). The Internet and time displacement: A Canadian perspective. IT & Society, 1(1), 4453.
  • Putnam, R. D. (2000). Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of american community. New York: Simon & Schuster.
  • Qiu, Y., Pudrovska, T., & Bianchi, S. (2002). Social activity and Internet use in dual-earner families: A weekly time diary approach. IT & Society, 1(1), 3843.
  • Quan-Haase, A., & Wellman, B. (2004). How does the Internet affect social capital? In M.Huysman & V.Wulf (Eds.), Social capital and information technology (pp. 113132). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  • Resnick, P. (2001). Beyond bowling together: Socio-technical capital. In J.Carroll (Ed.), HCI in the new millennium (pp. 647672). New York: Addison-Wesley.
  • Shah, D., Kwak, N., & Holbert, R. L. (2001). “Connecting” and “disconnecting” with civic life: Patterns of Internet use and the production of social capital. Political Communication, 18(2), 141162.
  • Sherif, M. (1988). The robbers cave experiment: Intergroup conflict and cooperation. Scranton, PA: Wesleyan University Press.
  • Shklovski, I., Kraut, R., & Rainie, L. (2004). The Internet and social participation: Contrasting cross-sectional and longitudinal analysis. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 10(1). Retrieved January 18, 2006, from http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol10/issue1/shklovski_kraut.html
  • Spears, R., Postmes, T., Lea, M., & Wolbert, A. (2002). When are net effects gross products? The power of influence and the influence of power in computer-mediated communication. Journal of Social Issues, 58(1), 91108.
  • Stolle, D. (1998). Bowling together, bowling alone: The development of generalized trust in voluntary associations. Political Psychology, 19(3), 497526.
  • Sunstein, C. (2001). republic.com. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
  • UCLA Center for Communication Policy. (2001). The UCLA Internet project: Year two. Retrieved January 21, 2006, from http://www.digitalcenter.org/pdf/InternetReportYearTwo.pdf
  • Wellman, B., Boase, J., & Chen, W. (2002). The networked nature of community: Online and offline. IT & Society, 1(1), 151165.
  • Wellman, B., Quan-Haase, A., Boase, J., Chen, W., Hampton, K., Isla de Diaz, I, et al. 2003). The social affordances of the Internet for networked individualism. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 8(3). Retrieved January 18, 2006, from http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol8/issue3/wellman.html
  • Wellman, B., Salaff, J., Dimitrova, D., Garton, L., & Haythornthwaite, C. (1996). Computer networks as social networks: Collaborative work, telework, and virtual community. Annual Review of Sociology, 22, 213238.
  • Weston, J. (1997). Old freedoms and new technologies: The evolution of community networking. The Information Society, 13(2), 195201.