SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

References

  • Althaus, S. L. (1997). Computer-mediated communication in the university classroom: An experiment with on-line discussions. Communication Education, 46(3), 158174.
  • Ambra, J. D., & Rice, R. E. (2001). Emerging factors in user evaluation of the World Wide Web. Information & Management, 38(6), 373384.
  • Amichai-Hamburger, Y., & Ben-Artzi, E. (2003). Loneliness and Internet use. Computers in Human Behavior, 19(1), 7180.
  • Argyle, M., Furnham, A., & Graham, J. A. (1981). Social Situations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Ashmore, M. (1989). The Reflexive Thesis: Wrighting Sociology of Scientific Knowledge. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
  • Barbeite, F. G., & Weiss, E. M. (2004). Computer self-efficacy and anxiety scales for an Internet sample: Testing measurement equivalence of existing measures and development of new scales. Computers in Human Behavior, 20(1), 115.
  • Bargh, J. A. (2002). Beyond simple truths: The human-internet interaction. Journal of Social Issues, 58(1), 18.
  • Bargh, J. A., McKenna, K. Y. A., & Fitzsimons, G. M. (2002). Can you see the real me? Activation and expression of the “true self” on the Internet. Journal of Social Issues, 58(1), 3378.
  • Bavelas, J. B., Black, A., Chovil, N. & Mullett, J. (1990). Equivocal Communication. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
  • Baym, N. K., Zhang, Y. B., & Lin, M.-C. (2004). Social interactions across media. New Media & Society, 6(3), 299318.
  • Beckers, J. J., & Schmidt, H. G. (2001). The structure of computer anxiety: A six-factor model. Computers in Human Behavior, 17(1), 3549.
  • Bertacco, M., & Deponte, A. (2005). Email as a speed-facilitating device: A contribution to the reduced-cues perspective on communication. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 10(3), article 2. Retrieved January 21, 2006 from http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol10/issue3/bertacco.html
  • Bozionelos, N. (2002). Computer interest: A case for expressive traits. Personality and Individual Differences, 33(3), 427444.
  • Brandon, D. P., & Hollingshead, A. B. (1999). Collaborative learning and computer-supported groups. Communication Education, 48(2), 109126.
  • Brenner, V. (1997). Psychology of computer use: XLVII. Parameters of Internet use, abuse, and addiction: The first 90 days of the Internet usage survey. Psychological Reports, 80(3), 879882.
  • Brosnan, M., & Lee, W. (1998). A cross-cultural comparison of gender differences in computer attitudes and anxieties: The United Kingdom and Hong Kong. Computers in Human Behavior, 14(4), 550577.
  • Bubaš, G. (2002). Unpublished data. University of Zagreb, Croatia.
  • Bubaš, G. (2005). Competence in Computer-Mediated Communication: An Evaluation and Potential Uses of a Self-Assessment Measure. Manuscript submitted for presentation consideration, University of Zagreb, Croatia.
  • Bubaš, G., & Aurer, B. (1998). Non-technical competencies required for information technology professionals: How to effectively interact with clients/users. Zbornik radova: Journal of Information and Organizational Sciences, 22(1), 4152.
  • Bubaš, G., & Hutinski, Z. (2003, May). Conceptual model, empirically derived predictors and potential dimensions of Internet affinity. Manuscript submitted for presentation consideration, University of Zagreb, Croatia.
  • Bubaš, G., Radošević, D., & Hutinski, Ž. (2003, September). Assessment of computer mediated communication competence: Theory and application in an online environment. Paper presented at the 14th International Conference on Information and Intelligent Systems, Varaždin, Croatia.
  • Bunz, U. (2002, May). Shifting frontiers: Passing from computer literacy into computer-mediated communication competency territory. Paper presented at the 53rd International Communication Association Conference, San Diego, CA.
  • Bunz, U. (2003). Growing from computer literacy towards computer-mediated communication competence: Evolution of a field and evaluation of a new measurement instrument. Information Technology, Education and Society, 4(2), 5384.
  • Bunz, U. (2004). The computer-email-web (CEW) fluency scale—Development and validation. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 17(4), 479506.
  • Bunz, U., & Campbell, S. W. (2004). Politeness accommodation in electronic mail. Communication Research Reports, 21(1), 1125.
  • Burgoon, J. K., Bonito, J. A., Bengtsson, B., Cederberg, C., Lundeberg, M., & Allspach, L. (2000). Interactivity in human-computer interaction: A study of credibility, understanding, and influence. Computers in Human Behavior, 16(6), 553574.
  • Burgoon, J. K., Bonito, J. A., Ramirez, A., Jr., Dunbar, N. E., Kam, K., & Fischer, J. (2002). Testing the interactivity principle: Effects of mediation, propinquity, and verbal and nonverbal modalities of interpersonal interaction. Journal of Communication, 52(3), 657677.
  • Cai, X. (2004). Is the computer a functional alternative to traditional media? Communication Research Reports, 21(1), 2638.
  • Campbell, S. W., & Neer, M. R. (2001). The relationship of communication apprehension and interaction involvement to perceptions of computer-mediated communication. Communication Research Reports, 18(4), 391398.
  • 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(5), 553575.
  • Castellá, V. O., Abad, A. M. Z., Alonso, F. P., & Silla, J. M. P. (2000). The influence of familiarity among group members, group atmosphere, and assertiveness on uninhibited behavior through three different communication media. Computers in Human Behavior, 16(2), 141159.
  • Cerulo, K. A. (1997). Reframing sociological concepts for a brave new (virtual?) world. Sociological Inquiry, 67(1), 4858.
  • Cheseboro, J. W. (2000). Communication technologies as symbolic form: Cognitive transformations generated by the Internet. Qualitative Research Reports in Communication, 1(1), 813.
  • Chua, S. L., Chen, D.-T., & Wong, A. F. L. (1999). Computer anxiety and its correlates: A meta-analysis. Computers in Human Behavior, 15(5), 609623.
  • Cochrane, P. (1995). The information wave. In S. J.Emmott (Ed.), Information superhighways: Multimedia users and futures (pp. 1733). San Diego, CA: Academic.
  • Cooper, A. (2000). Cybersex and sexual compulsivity: The dark side of the force. In Cooper, A. (Ed.), Cybersex: The dark side of the force (pp. 13). Philadelphia, PA: Brunner-Routledge.
  • Cooper, A., Delmonico, D. L., & Burg, R. (2000). Cybersex users, abusers, and compulsives: New findings and implications. Sexual Addiction & Compulsivity, 7(1/2), 529.
  • Cornwell, B., & Lundgren, D. C. (2001). Love on the Internet: Involvement and misrepresentation in romantic relationships in cyberspace vs. realspace. Computers in Human Behavior, 17(2), 197211.
  • Corston, R., & Colman, A. M. (1996). Gender and social facilitation effects on computer competence and attitudes toward computers. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 14(2), 171183.
  • Cummings, J. N., Butler, B., & Kraut, R. (2002). The quality of online relationships. Communications of the ACM, 45(7), 103108.
  • Davis, R. A. (2001). A cognitive-behavioral model of pathological Internet use. Computers in Human Behavior, 17(2), 187195.
  • Dietz-Uhler, B., & Bishop-Clark, C. (2001). The use of computer-mediated communication to enhance subsequent face-to-face discussions. Computers in Human Behavior, 17(3), 269283.
  • Eastin, M. S., & LaRose, R. (2000). Internet self-efficacy and the psychology of the digital divide. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 6(1). Retrieved November 27, 2005, from http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol6/issue1/eastin.html
  • Eisenberg, E. M. (1984). Ambiguity as strategy in organizational communication. Communication Monographs, 51(3), 227242.
  • Fang, K. (1998). An analysis of electronic mail usage. Computers in Human Behavior, 14(2), 349374.
  • Finkelhor, D., Mitchell, K. J., & Wolak, J. (2000). Online victimization: A report on the nation’s youth. Alexandria, VA: National Center for Missing and Exploited Children.
  • Fulk, J., Schmitz, J., & Steinfield, C. W. (1990). A social influence model of technology use. In J.Fulk & C.Steinfield (Eds.), Organizations and Communication Technology (pp. 117140). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
  • Garton, L., & Wellman, B. (1995). Social impacts of electronic mail in organizations: A review of the research literature. In B. R.Burleson (Ed.), Communication Yearbook 18 (pp. 434453). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  • Gaudron, J.-P., & Vignoli, E. (2002). Assessing computer anxiety with the interaction model of anxiety: Development and validation of the computer anxiety trait subscale. Computers in Human Behavior, 18(3), 315325.
  • Gergen, K. J. (1991). The saturated self: Dilemmas of identity in contemporary life. New York: Basic Books.
  • Goodson, P., McCormick, D., & Evans, A. (2001). Searching for sexually explicit materials on the Internet: An exploratory study of college students’ behavior and attitudes. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 30(2), 101118.
  • Greene, J. O. (1997). A second generation action assembly theory. In J. O.Greene (Ed.), Message production: Advances in communication theory (pp. 151170). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  • Griffiths, M. (1999). Internet addiction: Fact or fiction? Psychologist, 12(5), 246250.
  • Griffiths, M. (2001). Sex on the Internet: Observations and implications for Internet sex addiction. Journal of Sex Research, 38(4), 333342.
  • Gross, E. F., Juvonen, J., & Gable, S. L. (2002). Internet use and well-being in adolescence. Journal of Social Issues, 58(1), 7590.
  • Hacker, K. L., & Steiner, R. (2001). Hurdles of access and benefits of usage for Internet communication. Communication Research Reports, 18(4), 399407.
  • Hancock, J. T., & Dunham, P. J. (2001). Impression formation in computer-mediated communication revisited: An analysis of the breadth and intensity of impressions. Communication Research, 28(3), 325347.
  • Hardy, B. W., & Scheufele, D. A. (2005). Examining differential gains from Internet use: Comparing the moderating role of talk and online interactions. Journal of Communication, 55(1), 7184.
  • Harper, V. B., Jr. (1999). African-American college students’ perceptions of computer-mediated communication (CMC) competence: An exploratory study. Washington, DC: Howard University.
  • Harper, V. B., Jr. (2002). Sex differences in perceived outcomes of electronic mail interactions. Psychological Reports, 90(2), 701702.
  • Harrison, A. W., & Rainer, R. K., Jr. (1996). A general measure of user computing satisfaction. Computers in Human Behavior, 12(1), 7992.
  • Hart, W. B. (1998). Intercultural computer-mediated communication (ICCMC). The edge: The e-journal of intercultural relations, 1(4). Retrieved January 21, 2006, from http://interculturalrelations.com/v1i4Fall1998/f98hart.htm
  • Havighurst, R. J. (1957). The social competence of middle-aged people. Genetic Psychology Monographs, 56(2), 297375.
  • Hawes, L. C. (1975). Pragmatics of analoguing: Theory and model construction in communication. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
  • Heise, D. R. (1979). Understanding events: Affect and the construction of social action. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Herring, S. C. (2001). Gender and power in online communication. CSI Working Paper (No. WP-01-05). Retrieved January 21, 2006, from http://rkcsi.indiana.edu/archive/CSI/WP/WP01-05B.html
  • Herring, S. C. (2004). Slouching toward the ordinary: Current trends in computer-mediated communication. New Media & Society, 6(1), 2636.
  • Herring, S. C., & Martinson, A. (2004). Assessing gender authenticity in computer-mediated language use: Evidence from an identity game. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 23(4), 424446.
  • Hiltz, S. R. (1986). The “virtual classroom:” Using computer-mediated communication for university teaching. Journal of Communication, 36(2), 95104.
  • Hollingshead, A. B., McGrath, J. E., & O’Connor, K. M. (1993). Group task performance and communication technology: A longitudinal study of computer-mediated versus face-to-face work groups. Small Group Research, 24(3), 307333.
  • Hovick, S. R. A., Meyers, R. A., & Timmerman, C. E. (2003). E-mail communication in workplace romantic relationships. Communication Studies, 54(4), 468482.
  • Hunter, J., & Allen, M. (1992). Adaptation to electronic mail. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 20(3), 254274.
  • Hutchby, I. (2001). Conversation and technology: From the telephone to the Internet. Cambridge: Polity.
  • Inose, H., & Pierce, J. R. (1984). Information technology and civilization. New York: W.H. Freeman.
  • Internet World Stats. (2005). Internet usage statistics—The big picture. Retrieved July 25, 2005, from http://www.internetworldstats.com/stats.htm
  • Jones, S. (2002). The Internet goes to college: How students are living in the future with today’s technology. Washington, DC: Pew Internet & American Life Project.
  • Kedzie, C. R. (1997). A brave new world or a new world order? In S.Kiesler (Ed.), Culture of the Internet (pp. 209232). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  • Kayany, J. M., Wotring, C. E., & Forrest, E. J. (1996). Relational control and interactive media choice in technology-mediated communication situations. Human Communication Research, 22(3), 399421.
  • Kellermann, K., & Shea, B. C. (1996). Threats, suggestions, hints, and promises: Gaining compliance efficiently and politely. Communication Quarterly, 44(2), 145165.
  • Knox, D., Daniels, V., Sturdivant, L., & Zusman, M. E. (2001). College student use of the Internet for mate selection. College Student Journal, 35(1), 158160.
  • Koutougos, A. (1989). Research programmes and paradigms as dialogue structures. In K.Gavroglu, Y.Goudaroulis, & P.Nicolacopoulos (Eds.), Boston studies in the philosophy of science: vol. 111. Imre Lakatos and theories of scientific change (pp. 361374). Boston: Kluwer Academic.
  • Kraut, R., Kiesler, S., Boneva, B., Cummings, J., Helgeson, V., & Crawford, A. (2002). Internet paradox revisited. Journal of Social Issues, 58(1), 4974.
  • Kraut, R., Patterson, M., Lundmark, V., Kiesler, S., Mukopadhyay, T., & Scherlis, W. (1998). Internet paradox: A social technology that reduces social involvement and psychological well-being? American Psychologist, 53(9), 10171031.
  • Ladwig, M. A., & Spitzberg, B. H. (2005). Great expectations: An expectancy approach to computer-mediated communication competence. Manuscript submitted for conference presentation.
  • Lakatos, I. (1970). Falsification and the methodology of scientific research programmes. In I.Lakatos & A.Musgrave (Eds.), Proceedings of the international colloquium in the philosophy of science: vol. 4. Criticism and the growth of knowledge (pp. 91196). Cambridge: Cambridge University.
  • LaLomia, M. J., & Sidowski, J. B. (1990). Measurements of computer satisfaction: Literacy, and aptitudes: A review. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 2(3), 231253.
  • LaRose, R., Eastin, M. S., & Gregg, J. (2001). Reformulating the Internet paradox: Social cognitive explanations of Internet use and depression. Journal of Online Behavior, 1(2). Retrieved October 14, 2002, from http://www.behavior.net/job/v1n2/paradox.html
  • Lea, M., & Spears, R. (1995). Love at first byte? Building personal relationships over computer networks. In J. T.Wood & S.Duck (Eds.), Under-studied relationships: Off the beaten track (pp. 197233). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  • Lenhart, A., Madden, M., & Hitlin, P. (2005). Teens and technology: Youth are leading the transition to a fully wired and mobile nation. Washington DC: Pew Internet & American Life Project.
  • Levine, T., & Donitsa-Schmidt, S. (1998). Computer use, confidence, attitudes, and knowledge: A causal analysis. Computers in Human Behavior, 14(1), 125146.
  • Markey, P. M., & Wells, S. M. (2002). Interpersonal perception in Internet chat rooms. Journal of Research in Personality, 36(2), 134146.
  • Markus, M. L. (1994). Finding a happy medium: Explaining the negative effects of electronic communication on social life at work. ACM Transactions on Information Systems, 12(2), 119149.
  • Mazur, M. A., Burns, R. J., & Emmers-Sommer, T. M. (2000). Perceptions of relational interdependence in online relationships: The effects of communication apprehension and introversion. Communication Research Reports, 17(4), 397406.
  • McCown, J. A., Fischer, D., Page, R., & Homant, M. (2001). Internet relationships: People who meet people. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 4(5), 593596
  • McGrath, M. G., & Casey, E. (2002). Forensic psychiatry and the Internet: Practical perspectives on sexual harassers in cyberspace. Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law, 30(1), 8194.
  • McKenna, K. Y. A., Green, A. S., & Gleason, M. E. J. (2002). Relationship formation on the Internet: What’s the big attraction? Journal of Social Issues, 58(1), 932.
  • McQuail, D., & Windahl, S. (1993). Communication models for the study of mass communication (2nd ed.). New York: Longman.
  • McQuillen, J. S. (2003). The influence of technology on the initiation of interpersonal relationships. Education, 123(3), 616623.
  • Meyrowitz, J. (1985). No sense of place: The impact of electronic media on social behavior. New York: Oxford University Press.
  • Morahan-Martin, J., & Schumacher, P. (2000). Incidence and correlates of pathological Internet use among college students. Computers in Human Behavior, 16(1), 1329.
  • Morahan-Martin, J., & Schumacher, P. (2003). Loneliness and social uses of the Internet. Computers in Human Behavior, 19(6), 659671.
  • Morreale, S. P., Spitzberg, B. H., & Barge, J. K. (2001). Human communication: Motivation, knowledge, & skills. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
  • Nice, M. L., & Katzev, R. (1998). Internet romances: The frequency and nature of romantic on-line relationships. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 1(3), 217223.
  • Nie, N. H., & Erbring, L. (2000). Internet and society: A preliminary report. Retrieved June 13, 2001, from the Stanford Institute for the Quantitative Study of Society Web site http://www.Stanford.edu/group/siqss/press_release/preliminary_report.pdf
  • O’Sullivan, P. B. (2000). What you don’t know won’t hurt me: Impression management functions of communication channels in relationships. Human Communication Research, 26(3), 403431.
  • O’Sullivan, P. B., & Flanagin, A. J. (2003). Reconceptualizing ‘flaming’ and other problematic messages. New Media & Society, 5(1), 6994.
  • Papineau, D. (1989). Has Popper been a good thing? In K.Gavroglu, Y.Goudaroulis, & P.Nicolacopoulos (Eds.), Boston studies in the philosophy of science: vol. 111. Imre Lakatos and theories of scientific change (pp. 431440). Boston: Kluwer Academic.
  • Parks, M. R., & Floyd, K. (1996). Making friends in cyberspace. Journal of Communication, 46(1), 8097.
  • Parks, M. R., & Roberts, L. D. (1998). ‘Making MOOsic:’ The development of personal relationships on line and a comparison to their off-line counterparts. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 15(4), 517537.
  • Patterson, B. R., & Gojdycz, T. K. (2000). The relationship between computer-mediated communication and communication related anxieties. Communication Research Reports, 17(3), 278287.
  • Peris, R., Gimeno, M. A., Pinazo, D., Ortet, G., Carrero, V., Sanchiz, M., & Ibañez, I. (2002). Online chat rooms: Virtual spaces of interaction for socially oriented people. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 5(1), 4351.
  • Perse, E. M., & Ferguson, D. A. (2000). The benefits and costs of web surfing. Communication Quarterly, 48(4), 343359.
  • Pew Internet & American Life Project. (2000, May 10). Tracking online life: How women use the Internet to cultivate relationships with family and friends. Washington DC: Author.
  • Pew Internet & American Life Project. (2001, June 20). Teenage life online: The rise of the instant-message generation and the Internet’s impact on friendships and family relationships. Washington DC: Author.
  • Potosky, D., & Bobko, P. (1998). The computer understanding and experience scale: A self-report measure of computer experience. Computers in Human Behavior, 14(2), 337348.
  • Pratarelli, M. C., Browne, B. L., & Johnson, K. (1999). The bits and bytes of computer/Internet addiction: A factor analytic approach. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 31(2), 305314.
  • Pratt, L., Wiseman, R. L., Cody, M. J., & Wendt, P. F. (1999). Interrogative strategies and information exchange in computer-mediated communication. Communication Quarterly, 47(1), 4666.
  • Preece, J., Nonnecke, B., & Andrews, D. (2004). The top five reasons for lurking: Improving community experiences for everyone. Computers in Human Behavior, 20(2), 201223.
  • Ramirez, A., Jr., Walther, J. B., Burgoon, J. K., & Sunnafrank, M. (2002). Information-seeking strategies, uncertainty, and computer-mediated communication: Toward a conceptual model. Human Communication Research, 28(2), 213228.
  • Rice, R. E. (1993). Media appropriateness: Using social presence theory to compare traditional and new organizational media. Human Communication Research, 19(4), 451484.
  • Rice, R. E., D’Ambra, J., & More, E. (1998). Cross-cultural comparison of organizational media evaluation and choice. Journal of Communication, 48(3), 326.
  • Rice, R. E., & Shook, D. E. (1990). Relationships of job categories and organizational levels to use of communication channels, including electronic mail: A meta-analysis and extension. Journal of Management Studies, 27(2), 195229.
  • Richter, T., Naumann, J., & Groeben, N. (2000). Attitudes toward the computer: Construct validation of an instrument with scales differentiated by content. Computers in Human Behavior, 16(5), 473491.
  • Rideout, V., Roberts, D. F., & Foehr, U. G. (2005). Generation m: Media in the lives of 8–18 year olds. Washington DC: Kaiser Family Foundation.
  • Ring, K., & Wallston, K. (1968). A test to measure performance styles in interpersonal relations. Psychological Reports, 22(1), 147154.
  • Ring, K., Braginsky, D., & Braginsky, B. (1966). Performance styles in interpersonal relations: A typology. Psychological Reports, 18(1), 203220.
  • Ring, K., Braginsky, D., Levine, L., & Braginsky, B. (1967). Performance styles in interpersonal behavior: An experimental validation of a topology. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 3(2), 140159.
  • Rosen, L. D., & Weil, M. M. (1995). Computer anxiety: A cross-cultural comparison of university students in ten countries. Computers in Human Behavior, 11(1), 4564.
  • Rouse, S. V., & Haas, H. A. (2003). Exploring the accuracies and inaccuracies of personality perception following Internet-mediated communication. Journal of Research in Personality, 37(5), 446467.
  • Rubin, R. B. (1983). Conclusions. In R. B.Rubin (Ed.), Improving speaking and listening skills (pp. 95100). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
  • Rumbough, T. (2001). The development and maintenance of interpersonal relationships through computer-mediated communication. Communication Research Reports, 18(3), 223229.
  • Savicki, V., Kelley, M., & Oesterrich, E. (1999). Judgments of gender in computer-mediated communication. Computers in Human Behavior, 15(2), 185194.
  • Scharlott, B. W., & Christ, W. G. (1995). Overcoming relationship-initiation barriers: The impact of a computer-dating system on sex role, shyness, and appearance inhibitions. Computers in Human Behavior, 11(2), 191204.
  • Schneider, J. P. (2000). Effects of cybersex addiction on the family: Results of a survey. Sexual Addiction & Compulsivity, 7(1/2), 3158.
  • Schwartz, M. F., & Southern, S. (2000). Compulsive cybersex: The new tea room. Sexual Addiction & Compulsivity, 7(1/2), 124144.
  • Séguin-Levesque, C., Laliberté, M. L. N., Pelletier, L. G., Blanchard, C., & Vallerand, R. J. (2003). Harmonious and obsessive passion for the Internet: Their associations with the couple’s relationship. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 33(1), 197221.
  • Sheehan, K. B., & Hoy, M. G. (1999). Flaming, complaining, abstaining: How online users respond to privacy concerns. Journal of Advertising, 28(3), 3751.
  • Sheehy, N. (1995). Designing organizations using telematic technologies: Risks and benefits. In S. J.Emmott (Ed.), Information superhighways: Multimedia users and futures (pp. 103119). San Diego, CA: Academic.
  • Shields, P., & Samarajiva, R. (1993). Competing frameworks for research on information-communication technologies and society: Toward a synthesis. In S. A.Deetz (Ed.), Communication Yearbook 16 (pp. 349380). Newbury Parks, CA: Sage.
  • Sitkin, S. B., Sutcliffe, K. M., & Barrios-Choplin, J. R. (1992). A dual-capacity model of communication media choice in organizations. Human Communication Research, 18(4), 563598.
  • Smith, B., Caputi, P., Crittenden, N., Jayasuriya, R., & Rawstorne, P. (1999). A review of the construct of computer experience. Computers in Human Behavior, 15(2), 227242.
  • Smith, B., Caputi, P., & Rawstone, P. (2000). Differentiating computer experience and attitudes toward computers: An empirical investigation. Computers in Human Behavior, 16(1), 5981.
  • Sohn, D., & Lee, B.-K. (2005). Dimensions of interactivity: Differential effects of social and psychological factors. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 10 (3), article 6. Retrieved November 27, 2005, from http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol10/issue3/sohn.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.
  • Spitzberg, B. H. (1983). Communication competence as knowledge, skill, and impression. Communication Education, 32(3), 323328.
  • Spitzberg, B. H. (1990). The construct validity of trait-based measures of interpersonal competence. Communication Research Reports, 7(2), 107116.
  • Spitzberg, B. H. (1991). An examination of trait measures of interpersonal competence. Communication Reports, 4, 2229.
  • Spitzberg, B. H. (1993). The dialectics of (in)competence. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 10(1), 137158.
  • Spitzberg, B. H. (1994a). The dark side of (in)competence. In W. R.Cupach & B. H.Spitzberg (Eds.), The dark side of interpersonal communication (pp. 2450). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  • Spitzberg, B. H. (1994b). Instructional assessment of interpersonal competence: The Conversational Skills Rating Scale. In S.Morreale, M.Brooks, R.Berko, & C.Cooke (Eds.), 1994 SCA summer conference proceedings: Assessing college student competency in speech communication (pp. 325352). Annandale, VA: Speech Communication Association.
  • Spitzberg, B. H. (1994c). Intercultural effectiveness. In L. A.Samovar & R. E.Porter (Eds.), Intercultural communication: A reader (7th ed., pp. 347359). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
  • Spitzberg, B. H. (2000). What is good communication? Journal of the Association for Communication Administration, 29, 103119.
  • Spitzberg, B. H., Brookshire, R. G., & Brunner, C. C. (1990). The factorial domain of interpersonal skills. Social Behavior and Personality, 18(1), 137150.
  • Spitzberg, B. H., & Brunner, C. C. (1991). Toward a theoretical integration of context and communication competence inference research. Western Journal of Speech Communication, 55(1), 2846.
  • Spitzberg, B. H., & Cupach, W. R. (1984). Interpersonal communication competence. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
  • Spitzberg, B. H., & Cupach, W. R. (2002). Interpersonal skills. In M. L.Knapp & J. A.Daly (Eds.), Handbook of interpersonal communication (pp. 564611). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  • Spitzberg, B. H., & Hecht, M. L. (1984). A component model of relational competence. Human Communication Research, 10(4), 575599.
  • Spitzberg, B. H., & Hoobler, G. (2002). Cyberstalking and the technologies of interpersonal terrorism. New Media & Society, 4(1), 7192.
  • Spitzberg, B. H., & Hurt, H. T. (1987). The measurement of interpersonal skills in instructional contexts. Communication Education, 36(1), 2845.
  • Straus, S. G., Miles, J. A., & Levesque, L. L. (2001). The effects of videoconference, telephone, and face-to-face media on interviewer and applicant judgments in employment interviews. Journal of Management, 27(3), 363381.
  • Suler, J. R. (1999). To get what you need: Healthy and pathological Internet use. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 2(5), 385393.
  • Sussman, N. M., & Tyson, D. H. (2000). Sex and power: Gender differences in computer-mediated interactions. Computers in Human Behavior, 16(4), 381394.
  • Tanis, M., & Postmes, T. (2003). Social cues and impression formation in CMC. Journal of Communication, 53(4), 676693.
  • Tewksbury, D., & Althaus, S. L. (2000). An examination of motivations for using the World Wide Web. Communication Research Reports, 17(2), 127138.
  • Thompson, L., & Nadler, J. (2002). Negotiating via information technology: Theory and application. Journal of Social Issues, 58(1), 125142.
  • Thompson, P. A., & Foulger, D. A. (1996). Effects of pictographs and quoting on flaming in electronic mail. Computers in Human Behavior, 12(2), 225243.
  • Tidwell, L. C., & Walther, J. B. (2002). Computer-mediated communication effects on disclosure, impressions, and interpersonal evaluations: Getting to know one another a bit at a time. Human Communication Research, 28(3), 317348.
  • Turkle, S. (1995). Life on the screen: Identity in the age of the Internet. New York: Simon & Schuster.
  • Turner, J. H. (1985). In defense of positivism. Sociological Theory, 3(2), 2430.
  • Turner, J. H. (1990). The misuse and use of metatheory. Sociological Forum, 5(1), 3753.
  • U.S. Department of Commerce. (1998). The emerging digital economy. Washington DC: U.S. Department of Commerce.
  • Utz, S. (2000). Social information processing in MUDs: The development of friendships in virtual worlds. Journal of Online Behavior, 1(1). Retrieved October 14, 2002 from http://www.behavior.net/job/v1n1/utz.html
  • Van Den Hooff, B., Groot, J., & De Jonge, S. (2005). Situational influences on the use of communication technologies. Journal of Business Communication, 42(1), 427.
  • Van Slooten, P., & Spitzberg, B. H. (2002). Unpublished raw data.
  • Wachter, R. M. (1999). The effect of gender and communication mode on conflict resolution. Computers in Human Behavior, 15(6), 763782.
  • Walther, J. B. (1996). Computer-mediated communication: Impersonal, interpersonal, and hyperpersonal interaction. Communication Research, 23, 343.
  • Walther, J. B. (1997). Group and interpersonal effects in international computer-mediated collaboration. Human Communication Research, 23(1), 342369.
  • Walther, J. B., Anderson, J. F., & Park, D. W. (1994). Interpersonal effects in computer-mediated interaction: A meta-analysis of social and antisocial communication. Communication Research, 21(4), 460487.
  • Walther, J. B., & Parks, M. R. (2002). Cues filtered out, cues filtered in: Computer-mediated communication and relationships. In M. L.Knapp & J. A.Daly (Eds.), Handbook of interpersonal communication (3rd ed., pp. 529563). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  • Walther, J. B., & Tidwell, L. C. (1995). Nonverbal cues in computer-mediated communication, and the effect of chronemics on relational communication. Journal of Organizational Computing & Electronic Commerce, 5(4), 355378.
  • Wästlund, E., Norlander, T., & Archer, T. (2001). Internet blues revisited: Replication and extension of an Internet paradox study. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 4(3), 385391.
  • Westmyer, S. A., DiCioccio, R. L., & Rubin, R. B. (1998). Appropriateness and effectiveness of communication channels in competent interpersonal communication. Journal of Communication, 48(3), 2748.
  • Wheeless, L. R., Eddleman-Spears, L., Magness, L. D., & Preiss, R. W. (2005). Informational reception apprehension and information from technology aversion: Development and test of a new construct. Communication Quarterly, 53(2), 143158.
  • Whitley, B. E., Jr. (1997). Gender differences in computer-related attitudes and behavior: A meta-analysis. Computers in Human Behavior, 13(1), 122.
  • Whitty, M. T. (2002). Liar, liar! An examination of how open, supportive and honest people are in chat rooms. Computers in Human Behavior, 18(4), 343352.
  • Whitty, M. T. (2003). Cyber-flirting: Playing at love on the Internet. Theory & Psychology, 13(3), 330357.
  • Wolak, J., Mitchell, K. J., & Finkelhor, D. (2002). Close online relationships in a national sample of adolescents. Adolescence, 37(147), 441455.
  • Wolak, J., Mitchell, K. J., & Finkelhor, D. (2003). Escaping or connecting? Characteristics of youth who form close online relationships. Journal of Adolescence, 26(1), 105119.
  • Wright, K. B. (2000). Social support satisfaction, on-line communication apprehension, and perceived life stress within computer-mediated support groups. Communication Research Reports, 17(2), 139147.
  • Yuan, Y., Fulk, J., Shumate, M., Monge, P. R., Bryant, J. A., Matsaganis, M. (2005). Individual participation in organizational informational commons: The impact of team level social influence and technology-specific competence. Human Communication Research, 31(2), 212240.