Complementary Channel Use and the Role of Social Competence

Ruppel, Erin K.; Burke, Tricia J.

doi:10.1111/jcc4.12091

Cited by 54 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 32 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Several studies have provided empirical support for this rationale: For example, in a study of 1,210 Dutch adolescents, students who spent more time using IMs also spent more time with their friends in offline contexts (Valkenburg & Peter, ). Next, people who write more e‐mails also write more text messages and use SNSs more actively (Ruppel & Burke, ). Similarly, Dutta‐Bergman () found that after 9/11, people who contributed to online support forums were also more likely to engage in offline support communities.…”

Section: Theoretical Backgroundmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reinforcement or Displacement? The Reciprocity of FtF, IM, and SNS Communication and Their Effects on Loneliness and Life Satisfaction

Dienlin

Masur

Trepte

2017

J Comput-Mediat Comm

165

122

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Does communication on social network sites (SNSs) or instant messengers (IMsOne often hears that social network sites such as Facebook or Twitter and online instant messengers such as WhatsApp or Snapchat reduce face-to-face communication and make people lonelier and less satisfied with their lives. At the same time, one also hears that these same services instead connect people, foster communication, and increase well-being. In order to further increase our understanding of these phenomena, we asked two questions in this paper. First, does communicating via social network sites and via instant messengers reinforce or displace face-to-face communication? And second, does communicating via social network sites and via instant messengers increase or decrease loneliness and life satisfaction?In general, communication can take place via a number of channels, including face-to-face (FtF) communication, video calls, telephone calls, mail, e-mail, voicemail, text messaging/SMS, instant messengers (IMs), social network sites (SNSs), or even online virtual worlds (e.g., Second Life) or

show abstract

Section: Theoretical Backgroundmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reinforcement or Displacement? The Reciprocity of FtF, IM, and SNS Communication and Their Effects on Loneliness and Life Satisfaction

Dienlin

Masur

Trepte

2017

J Comput-Mediat Comm

165

122

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Research related to mobilisation shows that use of mobile technology affords disadvantaged groups opportunities for cultural participation on their mobile devices (Chen, 2015). However, research supporting normalisation highlights that people with existing resource advantages (knowledge, material, networking, skills, or social, for example) tend to use the Internet or new technologies to enhance their network and social capacities, heightening the differences between themselves and with people who do not have either networking or technological competence (Ruppel and Burke, 2014).…”

Section: Information and Communication Capacity (Routinised Mobile Tementioning

confidence: 99%

Digital disparities and vulnerability: mobile phone use, information behaviour, and disaster preparedness in Southeast Asia

2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper proposes an ecological view to investigate how disparities in mobile technology use reflect vulnerabilities in communities vis-à-vis disaster preparedness. Data (n=1,603) were collected through a multi-country survey conducted equally in rural and urban areas of Indonesia, Myanmar, Philippines, and Vietnam, where mobile technology has become a dominant and ubiquitous communication and information medium. The findings show that smartphone users' routinised use of mobile technology and their risk perception are significantly associated with disaster preparedness behaviour indirectly through disaster-related information sharing. In addition to disaster-specific social support, smartphone users' disaster-related information repertoires are another strong influencing factor. In contrast, non-smartphone users are likely to rely solely on receipt of disaster-specific social support as the motivator of disaster preparedness. The results also reveal demographic and rural-urban differences in disaster information behaviour and preparedness. Given the increasing shift from basic mobile phone models to smartphones, the theoretical and policy-oriented implications of digital disparities and vulnerability are discussed.

show abstract

“…For example, understanding the implications of relational talk about certain topics via technologies requires knowing how partners talk about those topics face-to-face (Caughlin & Sharabi, 2013). Further, use of one communication technology is often associated with the use of other communication technologies, and these associations can vary based on individual or relational factors (Ruppel & Burke, 2015;Ruppel, Burke, & Cherney, 2018). Despite the growing acknowledgement that communication technologies are embedded in the larger communication context of people's lives and relationships, over time, research has trended more toward studying specific technologies, such as social networking sites or video games (Borah, 2017).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%