| Literature DB >> 35103040 |
Vanessa Caba Machado1, David Mcilroy1, Francisca M Padilla Adamuz2, Rebecca Murphy3, Susan Palmer-Conn1.
Abstract
Research shows that use of social network sites is associated with loneliness and this may be amplified in tertiary students by their transition from home life, especially if they struggle to integrate with peers. The buffering effects of social support may offer a solution and the online dimension may offer a suitable outlet for lonely and isolated students. In this study, N = 111 university students, aged 18-40, completed a frequency assessment of Instagram and WhatsApp, the Spanish version of the UCLA loneliness scale and the Multidimensional Scale of Social Support in an online survey. The statistical analysis was completed by Structural Equation Modeling using AMOS 25.0. The construct validity of social network sites was established by good factor loadings for WhatsApp and Instagram, but Facebook was excluded as it did not load adequately on to the latent measurement model, in keeping with the diminishing trend for Facebook use in young students. Loneliness emerged as pivotal in a mediation model, and online social support from friends/significant others, emerged as salient in the predictive model in contrast to family. However, these associations may not have the same advantageous weight for mature students given the observed negative associations with age. Results may have implications for policy and planning through highlighting the psychological variables that are operative in the dynamics of integration, retention, and adjustment to tertiary level experience.Entities:
Keywords: Social network sites (SNS); loneliness; perceived social support
Year: 2022 PMID: 35103040 PMCID: PMC8791808 DOI: 10.1007/s12144-021-02673-9
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Curr Psychol ISSN: 1046-1310
Fig. 1Flow chart on data collection process
Correlation matrix, descriptive statistics and reliabilities for variables used in SEM.
| (1) | (2) | (3) | (4) | (5) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age (1) | |||||
| SNS (2) | -.42** | 1 | |||
| Lone (3) | .12 | -.26** | 1 | ||
| Fri-SO (4) | -.13 | .33** | -.63** | 1 | |
| Fam (5) | -.19* | .20* | -.28** | .26** | 1 |
| Mean | 21.03 | 15.57 | 41.24 | 5.40 | 5.28 |
| Midpoint | - | 11 | 50 | 32 | 16 |
| SD | 4.68 | 3.59 | .31 | 1.13 | .75 |
| α | - | .52 | .92 | .90 | .92 |
| Skew | - | -.92 | .60 | -.69 | .92 |
| Kurto | - | .01 | -.24 | .12 | 2.22 |
Key: Skew = Skewness; Kurto = Kurtosis; Lone = Loneliness; SNS = Social Networking Sites; Fri-SO = Perceived social support from friends-significant others; Fam = Perceived social support from family. * =p ≤ .05; **=p ≤ .01.
Fig. 2SEM for Social Networking Sites, loneliness, perceived social support from friends-significant others, perceived social support from family and age
Standardized Effects for the path model presented in Fig.1.
| Causal Variable | Endogenous Variable | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fri-SO | Fam | Loneliness | SNS | |
SNS Direct Effect Indirect Effect (CIs 95%) Total Effect | ||||
| .21* | .18 | -.30* | - | |
| .17** (.04 to .30) | .07 (-.02 to .15) | - | - | |
| .38** | .25 | -.30* | - | |
Loneliness Direct Effect Indirect Effect (CIs 95%) Total Effect | ||||
| -.57** | -.23** | - | - | |
| - | - | - | - | |
| -.57** | -.23** | - | - | |
Age Direct Effect Indirect Effect (CIs 95%) Total Effect | ||||
| - | - | - | -.49** | |
| -.18** (-.38 to -.05) | -.12 (-.37 to .01) | .15** (.05 to .40) | - | |
| -.18** | -.12 | .15** | -.49** | |
CIs= confidence intervals (95% upper and lower boundaries).
*p ≤ 0.05, **p ≤ 0.01.