SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

References

  • Cogan, B. (2005). “Framing usefulness:” An examination of journalistic coverage of the personal computer from 1982–1984. Southern Communication Journal, 70(3), 248265.
  • Dainton, M., & Aylor, B. (2002). Patterns of communication channel use in the maintenance of long-distance relationships. Communication Research Reports, 19, 118129.
  • Hargittai, E. (2007). Whose space? Differences among users and non-users of social network sites. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 13(1), article 14. Retrieved June 20, 2008, from http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol13/issue1/hargittai.html.
  • Horrigan, J. B. (2007). A Typology of Information and Communication Technology Users. Retrieved October 5, 2007, from http://www.pewInternet.org/pdfs/PIP_ICT_Typology.pdf.
  • Kraut, R., Kiesler, S., Boneva, B., Cummings, J., Helgeson, V., & Crawford, A. (2002). Internet paradox revisited. Journal of Social Issues, 58, 4974.
  • Liu, H. (2007). Social network profiles as taste performances. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 13(1), http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol13/issue11/liu.html.
  • Liu, H., Maes, P., & Davenport, G. (2006). Unraveling the taste fabric of soical networks. International Journal on Semantic Web and Information Systems, 2(1), 4271.
  • Marvin, C. (1987). When old technologies were new: Thinking about electric communications in the late nineteenth century. New York: Oxford University Press.
  • Neff, G., & Stark, D. (2003). Permanently beta: Responsive organization in the Internet era. In P.Howard & S.Jones (Eds.), Society online: The Internet in context (pp. 173188). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  • Parks, M. (2008). Characterizing the communicative affordances of MySpace: A place for friends or a friendless place? Paper presented at the International Communication Association, Montreal, Canada.
  • Parks, M., & Roberts, L. D. (1998). “Making MOOsic”: The development of personal relationships on line and a comparison to their off-line counterparts. Journal of Social & Personal Relationships, 15(4), 517537.
  • Ramirez, A., & Zhang, S. (2007). When online meets offline: The effect of modality switching on relational communication. Communication Monographs, 74, 287310.
  • Thelwall, M. (2008). Social networks, gender, and friending: An analysis of MySpace member profiles. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 59(8), 13211330.
  • Turow, J., & Kavanaugh, A. L. (2003). Introduction: The wired homestead. In J.Turow & A. L.Kavanaugh (Eds.), The wired homestead: An MIT Press sourcebook on the Internet and the family (pp. 119). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  • Von Hippel, E. (2005). Democratizing innovation. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  • Walther, J. B. (in press). Computer-mediated communication. In C. R.Berger, M. E.Roloff & D.Roskos-Ewolsen (Eds.), Handbook of communication science (2nd ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
  • Walther, J. B., & Parks, M. (2002). Cues filtered out, cues filtered in: Computer mediated communication and relationships. In M. L.Knapp, J. A.Daly & G. R.Miller (Eds.), The handbook of interpersonal communication (3rd ed., pp. 529563). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
  • World Internet Usage Statistics News and World Population Statistics . (2008). Retrieved August 8, 2008, from http://www.Internetworldstats.com/stats.htm.