Running head: RELATIONSHIP SATISFACTION WITH COLLEGE ROOMMATE 1

Roommate Satisfaction

Holly Elko, Casey Fitzgerald, McKenzie Covell, and Diego Castro

James Madison University

Author Note

Holly Elko, Casey Fitzgerald, McKenzie Covell, and Diego L. Castro, SCOM 383

Quantitative Research Methods, Dr. Jennifer Gill Rosier, Ph.D., Department of Communications,

James Madison University.

Thank you to the Department of Communications for creating this research opportunity.
RELATIONSHIP SATISFACTION WITH COLLEGE ROOMMATE 2

Introduction

This research project was designed to help evaluate what the best option for incoming

college students to pick their roommates for their first year of college life will be. The fear of

bad roommate relationship is heavily induced in college students across the country.

Undoubtedly an important decision that may determine, and ultimately decide whether a

particular student’s college experience will be a satisfactory one, the researchers felt this

particular topic is one that has never been discussed academically and analyzed statistically, but

is one of the many important life decisions that first year college students need to make and thus

research was needed to help guide those students to make the best choice possible.

Traditional options have included being randomly assigned a roommate based on

homogenous attributes that people may share in common, such as age, gender, study habits, etc.,

This method can include filling out a survey or questionnaire prior and having people grouped

together based on the similarities of their answers. In the era of the digital age we have begun to

see a shift in the way students are choosing their roommates through the use of social media

outlets such as Facebook. Instead of a student being completely unaware of their upcoming

roommate, they are now able to look them up online and see pictures, previous posts, and try and

determine if that person will be the best fit for them based on the image portrayed via social

media.

The purpose of this research is to understand the most successful way to choose a college

roommate in order to have the most relationship satisfaction with that person. The researchers

believed the importance of answering this questions stems from previous research concluding

that a positive living experience is vital for college students to develop important social and

academic networks and transition smoothly into the college lifestyle (Kaya, 2005).
RELATIONSHIP SATISFACTION WITH COLLEGE ROOMMATE 3

The researchers believe that we will find that roommates who met online will have a

higher level of roommate satisfaction than those who were randomly assigned, and in correlation

to that statement we also believe that Female roommate who met via social media will result in a

lower roommate satisfaction than male roommates who met through social media. We support

this belief because we feel that the shift towards the digital age with the younger generation will

allow them to identify potential positive relationships better via social media than through the

answering of questionnaires and surveys and random homogenous selection. In addition to this

information, we do believe there will be a difference in the level of roommate satisfaction of

those who met online based on gender, and we conclude this due to the greater difficulty for

females to create and maintain relationship satisfaction than males in new environments.

Surveys will be conducted by college students at James Madison University with

participants being any students living with roommates that are not freshman, since the survey is

being conducted only 2 months into the current academic calendar year thus participants will not

be able to properly evaluate their roommates at this point. Aside from creating new surveys, the

researchers also provided a stealthy collection of academic journals regarding the topic for

review and analyzation to help better understand and explain the phenomenon. The following

will explain important topics from the researcher's review of literature, firstly a theoretical

background on how people establish relationships in general, then how social media and the

internet now play a vital role in roommate matching, the benefits to homogenous grouping of

roommates, and finally review how roommate relationships play a significant role in the overall

wellbeing of a student in college.

Review of Literature

Social Penetration Theory

RELATIONSHIP SATISFACTION WITH COLLEGE ROOMMATE 4

Social penetration theory (Altman & Taylor, 1973) aims to explain how people get to

know each other by increasing intimacy over the course of a relationship. To further explain the

premise of their theory, Altman and Taylor (1973) used an onion as a metaphor for human

beings. The theorists believed that human intimacy could be compared to onions in that both

onions and human have several layers. The outer layer contains basic information that is

superficial in nature. As one delves deeper in conversation, the information that gets revealed is

more personal. It is the sharing of this information that sparks intimacy formation (Pennington,

2008).

Social penetration theory states that this self-disclosure is part of an inward cost-benefit

analysis. This analysis weighs the impact that self-disclosure will have on the relationship. Self-

disclosure typically occurs in a pattern; progressing from non-intimate details to intimate details

as a result of the cost-benefit analysis (Ayres, 1979). During interactions, a person must decide

whether it would be beneficial for them to disclose a piece of personal information based on the

perceived level of intimacy between the parties. This perceived level of intimacy also determines

the rate at which people choose to disclose information. The rate at which information seeking

questions are asked is determined by the outcome of the cost-benefit analysis. This process is

ongoing and takes time to develop (Ayres, 1979). Interestingly, it typically takes a matter of

weeks for social actors to evaluate the costs and benefits of forming a lasting relationship

(Griffin, 2000). The cost-benefit analysis ultimately helps the people engaging in the relationship

determine whether or not the relationship will be a success.

Using Social Media to Find a Roommate

With the ever-growing importance of social media in adolescent life, Facebook is

transforming the transition from high school to college by linking students prior to arriving on
RELATIONSHIP SATISFACTION WITH COLLEGE ROOMMATE 5

campus. Before students ever set foot on campus, they can make friends, join clubs, locate

activities, find roommates, and discuss future student events (Lombardi, 2007). With this new

trend, it is vital for students seeking a roommate to take advantage of social media sites, such as

Facebook (Heiberger & Harper, 2008; Junco, 2012; Martinez-Alemán & Wartman, 2008).

Facebook is well-known and widespread with 1.44 billion personal accounts registered and more

than half of those users logging in at least once a day (Facebook, 2015; Pew Research Center,

2015). Today’s generation of college students must especially adapt to this new social media

trend and apply its use to help promote the best college experience possible, “[social networking

sites like Facebook are for this generation of college and university students a fundamental

component of their lived experiences, and an important element of the phenomenology of

campus culture” (Nehls & Livengood, 2017)The potential of Facebook for helping students

connect, communicate and affiliate with their campuses also highlights its usefulness and for this

generation social media exchanges are a primary means of communication (Davis, Deil-Amen,

Rios-Aguilar, & González, 2015; Ghosh, Chawla, & Mallott, 2012; Nehls & Smith 2014;

Russell, Nazione, & Smith 2012). Research (Nehls & Smith, 2014) also indicates the emergence

of websites specifically dedicated to roommate matching such as URoomSurf.com, a website

that does for dormitory life what eHarmony and Match.com have long done for romance. Each

individual fills out a questionnaire covering study habits, overnight guests, tidiness, politics,

sexual orientation, and religion, among other topics (Foderaro, 2015). However, the preferred

and most recommended site for college students to meet new potential friends and roommates on

according to survey research is Facebook, “Realistically, even the most personal roommate-

matching service can’t match Facebook,” said Adam Gang, 18, of Colorado, who will be a
RELATIONSHIP SATISFACTION WITH COLLEGE ROOMMATE 6

freshman at American University. “You’re an accepted friend request away from knowing

someone” (Johnson, 2011)

Homogenous Roommates

Over time, various researchers and college administrators have debated over the best

method for assigning roommates. One idea in particular is that of homogeneous grouping,

assigning individuals together based on similar personality traits, communication styles, or living

preferences (Carli, Ganley, & Pierce-Otay, 1991; Martin & Anderson, 1985; Lapidus, Green, &

Baruh, 1985). In general, when roommates who are similar live together, it has been found that

their overall satisfaction is better. Buffington (1984) argues that when residents are matched on

the basis on personality, habits, and values, they tend to have less conflict and closer personal

relationships.

Regarding personality, it has been theorized that those with similar traits will like their

roommates more and be more satisfied (Cario, 2015). Wetzel, Shwartz, and Vasu (1979)

conducted a study attempting to discover the ideal roommate relationship. They hypothesized

roommates would be compatible if they possess similar amounts of the same personality traits,

perceive each other as having socially desirable traits, and see each other as fulfilling the each

other’s ideals. The results showed a positive relationship between these variables and roommate

satisfaction (Wetzel, Shwartz, & Vasu, 1979). Clearly, individuals desire roommates with traits

similar to their own. Hanason and Nadler (2012) also found that when students create “ideal”

roommates in their heads, by imagining desirable traits, there was greater satisfaction if these

traits were met. These two studies argue that individuals will be more satisfied with their

experience if their desires of having a similar roommate are met. Even perception of similarity

plays a role in this satisfaction. A study by Carli, Ganley, and Pierce-Otay (1991) showed that
RELATIONSHIP SATISFACTION WITH COLLEGE ROOMMATE 7

people who just perceive themselves as being similar to their roommates claimed greater social

attraction and affinity for them.

In addition to sharing similar personality traits, it has been argued that roommates who

have similar communication styles will have more satisfaction towards one another (Martin &

Anderson, 1995). Martin and Anderson (1995) conducted a study on 203 college students seeing

if roommates, who were similar in their communication traits, such as willingness to

communicate, interpersonal communication competence, and verbal aggressiveness, would

express more satisfaction/affinity to each other. These findings showed roommates that were

pro-socially similar (high in willingness to communicate and interpersonal competence, and low

in verbal aggressiveness) reported the highest satisfaction.

While personality and communication styles play a major role in roommate similarity,

research on roommates with similar living preferences, such as sleep habits and cleanliness,

shows greater satisfaction as well (Jones, McCaa, & Martecchini, 1980; Lapidus, Green, &

Baruh, 1985). Jones et al. (1980) studied roommates with similar sleep and study habits and

concluded that differences are less likely to become serious if personal orientations are

compatible. Additionally, Carey, Stanley, and Biggers (1988) found that roommates who were

similar in their sleeping patterns reported having greater rapport.

Importance of College Students’ Roommate Relationship

College years represent a developmentally critical time period for most 18 to 24 year

olds. In many industrialized societies, college is an environment where young people experience

significant change and psychological developments (Arnett, 2000). This is a critical time period

where young adults will gain the foundation for their careers, relationships, and achievements for

the remainder of their lives (Chisholm & Hurrelmann, 1995). During this critical time period,
RELATIONSHIP SATISFACTION WITH COLLEGE ROOMMATE 8

interpersonal relationships and interactions with peers have a profound impact on the wellbeing

of a college student. Erb, Renshaw, Short, and Pollard (2014) analyzed the importance of college

students’ roommate relationships. From prior research, they found that positive roommate

relationships might help protect college students from psychological distress. In addition, Lepore

(1992) examined the effects of perceived social support from college students. Individuals with

high levels of perceived social support from their roommates had little adjustment issues or

psychological distress.

Although there are significant positive outcomes to having satisfying roommate

relationships, there is also evidence that roommate relationships can be a risk factor for mental

health problems. Students have reported that they experience annoyance with their roommates’

habits and personalities that can often annoy and add stress to their everyday lives (Erb,

Renshaw, Short, & Pollard, 2014).

Understanding the ways in which roommates interact with one another can often lead to

understanding the reasoning behind the level of satisfaction in the relationship. Whether it is a

positive or negative relationship, college roommates have a profound impact on the adjustment

of young adults in college.

Methodology

Method

In order to examine the first hypothesis, our independent variable was the method in

which the participants chose their college roommate (social media, random assignment,

previously known, or other) while the dependent variable was roommate relationship

satisfaction. In order to examine our second hypothesis, our independent variable was the
RELATIONSHIP SATISFACTION WITH COLLEGE ROOMMATE 9

biological sex of the participants (male, female) while our dependent variable was roommate

relationship satisfaction.

Participants

There were 123 participants in our study. 109 participants were female (82.1%) and 22

participants were male (17.9%). The age of our participants ranged from 18 to 21, with the mean

age being 18.27. Out of our participants, there were 114 freshman (92.7%), 3 sophomores

(2.4%), 3 juniors (2.4%) and 3 seniors (2.4%).

Procedures

Individuals who decided to participate in our study clicked on the link that was provided

to them and were greeted with our cover letter. After reading the cover letter, they willingly

agreed to participate by clicking to continue to the survey. They were then asked to complete the

survey according to their personal experiences with their college roommates in order to measure

our dependent variable.

Manipulations and Measurements

Participants were asked to choose from one of the following options that described their

situation best. The options were the method of roommate selection with the following choices:

met online, knew previously, randomly assigned, and another write-in section. The second

option that the participant were prompted with was their biological sex. The dependent variable,

Roommate Relationship Satisfaction, was measured with a Level of Roommate Relationship

Satisfaction Scale (see appendix A), which was created for this study. The participants were

asked to choose on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from strongly disagree to strongly agree. The

Likert scale intended to measure the level of overall satisfaction with the participant’s current
RELATIONSHIP SATISFACTION WITH COLLEGE ROOMMATE
10

roommate. The survey consisted of six statements. Sample statements included items such as, “I

feel like my roommate respects me” and “I enjoy spending time with my roommate.”

Rationale

Our objectives in conducting this research was to find out the best method for incoming

college students to find a roommate that will lead to the greatest level of relationship satisfaction

possible, thus increasing their success at college. The researchers believed this area to be of

significant importance because relationships formed in college, especially amongst those living

in close quarters tend to have a significant effect on the success and happiness of college students

and there has yet to be an all recognized best way to finding roommates in college. Another

motivating factor for the researchers was the lack of direct quantitative research regarding the

topic of study that needed to be addressed, and this is one of the reasons why more research is

needed in the particular field of study. The research question posed has minimal quantitative data

that can relate to the specific field of interest, and even qualitative data regarding the questions is

not specific but must be drawn from a broad range of already more heavily researched areas of

study. The researchers proposed the first directly correlated quantitative research study

conducted in the topic of interest by taking surveys of college students at James Madison

University in Harrisonburg, VA and asking them to describe their roommate relationships and

answer how they met those roommates to try to uncover any patterns amongst responses. An

analysis of this data will be written to create qualitative data regarding the study and attempt to

relate theories back to the data that could explain possible any anomalies in the research findings.

The researchers believe that Social Penetration Theory answers questions about the

development of the roommate relationship that occurs throughout the college career of that

student. An understanding of this area is fundamental in our research to check for patterns and
RELATIONSHIP SATISFACTION WITH COLLEGE ROOMMATE
11

inconsistencies in negative roommate relationships and explain and answer what is the best way

have a satisfactory relationship with a roommate. Social penetration theory (Altman & Taylor,

1973) aims to explain how people get to know each other by increasing intimacy over the course

of a relationship and is thus vital in our understanding of relationship satisfaction. With today’s

trend of relational communication amongst friends shifting mainly from interpersonal to online,

social media networks are quickly becoming the new way to make friends, find lovers, and

match up with your next college roommate. Meeting online people use Social Penetration Theory

to self-disclose information bit by bit to discover who the other person really is, and thus decide

whether or not to live with them as a consequence of those responses. Just like the peeling of an

onion (Altman & Taylor, 1973) each responds to the questions as they become progressively

more in depth and personal. The reason we do this is research has proven that homogeneous

roommate relationships often tend to be the most successful, and in general, when roommates

who are similar live together, it has been found that their overall satisfaction is better

(Buffington, 1984). The review of literature proposed by the researchers all connects to the topic

of study for because one needs to properly self-disclose and find a good, homogenous roommate

relationship online via social media in today’s digital media age and one needs to do this because

of the importance of college students’ roommate relationship’s on their success not only

academically, by socially and mentally as well, as this is a critical time period where young

adults will gain the foundation for their careers, relationships, and achievements for the

remainder of their lives (Chisholm & Hurrelmann, 1995).

Hypothesis 1: Roommates who met online will have a higher level of roommate

satisfaction than those who were randomly assigned.

RELATIONSHIP SATISFACTION WITH COLLEGE ROOMMATE
12

Hypothesis 2: Female roommates who met via social media will result in a lower

roommate satisfaction than male roommates who met through social media.

Results Section

Method of Analysis

For hypothesis 1, our independent variable was method of roommate selection (through

social media vs. randomly assigned) and the dependent variable was level of roommate

satisfaction. For hypothesis 2, we decided to isolate the participants who selected roommates

through social media. Our independent variable was biological sex (male vs. female) and the

dependent variable was level of roommate satisfaction. For both of the hypotheses we chose a t-

Test because the independent variable was nominal with two levels and the dependent variable

was interval/ratio.

Reliability Analysis

The Level of Roommate Relationship Satisfaction Scale (α=0.950) had 6 items and no

items had to be deleted to achieve higher reliability.

Findings

For hypothesis 1, we expected to find that roommates who met via social media would

have a higher level of roommate satisfaction than those who were randomly assigned. The results

from our t-Test showed that there was no significant difference between roommates who met

online (M=3.96) and those who were randomly assigned (M=3.85), t (85) =.446, p>.05, Cohen’s

d = .105. Our results do not support our hypothesis.

For hypothesis 2, we expected to find that female roommates who met through social

media would have a higher roommate satisfaction than male roommates who met through social

media. The results from our t-Test showed that there was no significant difference of roommate
RELATIONSHIP SATISFACTION WITH COLLEGE ROOMMATE
13

satisfaction between females who met online (M=4.04) and males who met online (M=3.16), t

(54) =-1.65, p>.05, Cohen’s d=.665.Our results did not support our hypothesis.

Discussion Section

Results

After conducting a t-test for all of the data, it was determined that there was no

significant difference of roommate satisfaction based on the method of roommate selection or the

gender of the roommates. Therefore, both hypotheses were rejected.

Previous literature (Wetzel, Shwartz, & Vasu, 1979; Hanason and Nadler, 2012) helped

form the first hypothesis on the basis that those roommates who had some form of control in

choosing their roommates through social media would have a higher level of roommate

satisfaction. The rationale was that roommates who met online would choose each other as a

roommate because they perceived some form of similarity between the two of them where as the

randomly assigned roommates let the university decide for them. However, our results showed

that there was no significant difference between the two methods. We believe that it was the

design of our research that led to our hypothesis being rejected. The timing of our survey may

have been too early for the roommates to have a real grasp on whether or not they were satisfied

with their roommate. We made a large theoretical leap in assuming that roommates would be

able to accurately analyze their level of satisfaction after only living with their roommate for a

couple of months. This leap comes in the form of social penetration theory which states that true

intimacy between two people will take a long time to form (Altman and Taylor, 1973).

Our second hypothesis predicted that females who met via social media would have a

higher level of roommate satisfaction than males who met via social media. This hypothesis was

rejected. Similar to our first hypothesis, we feel as though we made a theoretical leap in
RELATIONSHIP SATISFACTION WITH COLLEGE ROOMMATE
14

believing that enough time had passed for an accurate analysis of their roommate satisfaction. In

addition, our participant pool was heavily skewed in favor of female participants. There were 5

males and 49 females.

Strengths & Weaknesses of Research Design

Due to the fact that both our hypotheses were not supported, it can be assumed that there

were limitations to our research design. Among those limitations were threats to experimental

validity such as attrition and selection threat. Although there were some weaknesses to our study,

our data showed some strengths such as high reliability and large participant pool.

Our data showed attrition, where multiple participants dropped out halfway through the

study, or just failed to answer some of the questions. Our participant pool also experienced

selection threat. The participants were largely James Madison University freshman enrolled in a

communication class that offers extra credit our course credit for SONA participation. This leads

to a decrease in participant motivation in answering the questions legitimately. The results could

have been more accurate and maybe our hypothesis could have been supported if we were able to

survey voluntary participants, and if our participation pool had the same amount of males as

females.

One of the strengths in our research study was our high reliability coefficient of .95. This

number indicates that our results were produced under constant conditions, meaning that there

are limited errors in our results.

Although we had a large participant pool, we found a low number in male participant (5

males). As our independent variable groups were not equal, our numbers were biased. This

impacted our results as males and females could interact with their roommates differently, thus

impacting their relationship satisfaction.

RELATIONSHIP SATISFACTION WITH COLLEGE ROOMMATE
15

Implications of Findings

Despite both of our hypotheses being rejected, there are still implications that can be used

from the results. While our findings were inconclusive, there are still benefits from this area of

research. Finding the most effective method of choosing a freshman year roommate has the

potential to improve a student’s college experience from their first days on campus. Being able to

start off on the right foot could help provide a more solid foundation for the students in order to

have a successful college career.

As previously stated, the transition from high school to college is a stressful time for a

young adult. The process of moving away from home, being responsible for your own schedule

and diet, passing classes, and establishing a social life is a lot to ask. The purpose of this study

was to find a way to eliminate the stress of choosing and living with a new roommate. The

previous literature suggested that when residents are matched on the basis on personality, habits,

and values, they tend to have less conflict and closer personal relationships (Buffington 1984).

Finding the most effective way of selecting a roommate that results in the highest satisfaction

will be beneficial to future college students looking to start their careers on the right foot. Had

our hypotheses been supported, this study would have had the ability to be applied to more than

the freshmen class at James Madison. A successful study could have been applied to other

universities around the country and provided a template of sorts to help the roommate selection

process.

The theoretical implications of the findings have the potential to further the research on

social penetration theory as well as the research regarding homogeneous relationships.

Understanding how roommate relationships form over time can add to the research associated

with social penetration theory. A more thorough study of this topic would have to be performed
RELATIONSHIP SATISFACTION WITH COLLEGE ROOMMATE
16

in order to gain a better understanding how college freshmen establish intimacy with their

roommate. This study can add to the previous research on homogenous roommates by Wetzel,

Shwartz, and Vasu (1979) as well as Erb, Renshaw, Short, and Pollard (2014) who analyzed the

importance of college students’ roommate relationships Erb, Renshaw, Short, and Pollard (2014)

analyzed the importance of college students’ roommate relationships and found that positive

roommate relationships might help college students psychologically. Had the hypotheses been

supported the findings could have added to their findings.

Suggestions for Future Research

Being one of the first to critically analyze the topic we were unable to find a lot of

previously completed research from which we could work off of, however, now having paved

the way, any future research into the topic will now have our findings as a basis from which they

can begin. Also, further subcategories could be used to better analyze our survey results. We

were limited to findings from only one university that does not have a very diverse pool of

students so many answers came from people who grow up with similar backgrounds. Extending

the research to different universities with different racial and social backgrounds would help to

decipher any similarities/differences between the data to better answer our questions. One of the

weaknesses our study was the fact the only 5 males responded to our survey gave us limited data

upon which we could analyze our 2nd hypothesis. Possibly studies conducted at a male only

campus versus a female only campus will have a much greater impact on determining the

accuracy of our 2nd hypothesis. A more exhaustive study with a greater number of subcategories

as opposed to random selection and social media would also have provided a greater breadth of

knowledge as to what exactly are the options facing incoming college students. The researchers

are aware that students do meet roommates through other means, however, the limited number of
RELATIONSHIP SATISFACTION WITH COLLEGE ROOMMATE
17

participants as well as the limited amount of ways through which they could have been matched

up together on the James Madison University Campus or surrounding Harrisonburg, VA area

were also limited.

Conclusion

Our study aimed to determine the most effective way to choose a freshman year

roommate based on level of roommate satisfaction. The t-test results rejected both of our

hypotheses. Further studies still need to be conducted to have a better understanding and

explaining of the best ways to find a college roommate that will generate the highest relationship

satisfaction level. Due to our participant pool being primarily female and our survey being

administered early in the first semester, the researchers believe that a more accurate study needs

to be performed at the end of the spring semester. This type of study has the potential to improve

the college experience for incoming freshmen and provide them the important first step of

success at James Madison University.

RELATIONSHIP SATISFACTION WITH COLLEGE ROOMMATE
18

References

Altman, I. & Taylor, D. (1973) Social Penetration: The Development of Interpersonal

Relationships. Holt. New York.

Arnett, J. J. (2000). Emerging Adulthood: A Theory of Development from the Late Teens
through the Twenties. American Psychologist, 55(5), 469-80.

Ayres, J. Uncertainty and Social Penetration Theory Expectations About Relationship

Communication: A Comparative Test. Western Journal of Speech Communication:
WJSC. 43, 3, 192-200, 1979. ISSN: 01936700

Carli, L. L., Ganley, R., & Pierce-Otay, A. (1991). Similarity and satisfaction in roommate
relationships. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 17(4), 419-426.

Chisholm, L., & Hurrelmann, K. (1995). Adolescence in Modern Europe: Pluralized Transition
Patterns and Their Implications for Personal and Social Risks. Journal Of Adolescence,
18(2), 129-58.

Davis, C. H. III, Deil-Amen, R., Rios-Aguilar, C., and González Canché, M. S. (2015). Social
Media, Higher Education, and Community Colleges: A Research Synthesis and
Implications for the Study of Two-Year Institutions. Community College Journal of
Research and Practice, 39 (5), 409-422. doi: 10.1080/10668926.2013.828665

Facebook. 2015. Facebook Stats. Accessed http://newsroom.fb.com/company-info/

Foderaro, L. W. (2015). Http://www.avensonline.org/fulltextarticles/JSUR-2332-4139-S1-

0001.html. Roommates Who Click. doi:10.13188/2332-4139.s100001

Heiberger, G., and R. Harper. 2008. “Have You Facebooked Astin Lately? Using Technology to
Increase Student Involvement.” New Directions for Student Services 2008: 19–35.

Griffin, E. (2000) A First Look at Communication Theory (4th ed.). McGraw-Hill Higher
Education.

Ghosh, K., S. Chawla, and K. Mallott (2012). Use of Social Media by U.S. Colleges: Potential
and Pitfalls. Journal of Higher Education Theory and Practice, 12 (2): 105-118.

Johnson, J. (2011). College freshmen turn to Facebook to find roommates. Retrieved October 13,
2017, from https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/education/college-freshmen-turn-to-
facebook-to-find-
roommates/2011/08/05/gIQAmHAJxI_story.html?utm_term=.b1d0257dde3a

Junco, R. 2012. “The Relationship between Frequency of Facebook Use, Participation in

Facebook Activities, and Student Engagement.” Computers & Education 58 (1): 162–
171. doi:10.1016/j.compedu.2011.08.004.
RELATIONSHIP SATISFACTION WITH COLLEGE ROOMMATE
19

Kaya, N. (2005). Residence hall climate: Predicting first year students' adjustment to college.
Journal of the First-Year Experience and Students in Transition, 16, 101-118

Kimberly Nehls & Jake Livengood (2017): Facebook, crowdsourcing

and the transition to college, Journal of Further and Higher Education, DOI:
10.1080/0309877X.2017.1281885

Lepore, S. J. (1992). Social Conflict, Social Support, and Psychological Distress: Evidence of
Cross-Domain Buffering Effects. Journal Of Personality & Social Psychology, 63(5),
857-867.

Lombardi, K. S. (2007). Make New Friends Online and You Won’t Start College Friendless.
New York times. Accessed http://
www.nytimes.com/2007/03/21/education/21friends.html?_r=0

Matthew M. Martin & Carolyn M. Anderson (1995) Roommate similarity: Are roommates who
are similar in their communication traits more satisfied?, Communication Research
Reports, 12:1, 46-52, DOI: 10.1080/08824099509362038

Martinez-Alemán, A. M., and K. L. Wartman. 2008. Understanding Online Social Networking

on Campus: Student Identity and Culture. New York: Routledge/ Francis Taylor Group.

Nehls, K., and B. D. Smith. 2014. “The Role of Facebook in Fostering Transfer Student
Integration.” Journal of Student Affairs Research and Practice 51 (4): 392–406.
doi:10.1515/jsarp-2014-0040.

Pennington, N. (2008). Will You Be My Friend: Facebook as a Model for the Evolution of the
Social Penetration Theory. Conference Papers -- National Communication Association,
1.

Russell, J., S. Nazione, and S. Smith. 2012. “An Initial Examination of Facebook as a Source of
Memorable Messages for First- Year College Students.” Journal of the First Year
Experience & Students in Transition 24 (2): 107–121.

Sarah E. Erb, Keith D. Renshaw, Jerome L. Short & Jeffrey W. Pollard (2014) The Importance
of College Roommate Relationships: A Review and Systemic Conceptualization,Journal
of Student Affairs Research and Practice, 51:1, 43-55, DOI: 10.1515/jsarp-2014-0004
RELATIONSHIP SATISFACTION WITH COLLEGE ROOMMATE
20

Appendix A

Level of Roommate Relationship Satisfaction Scale

Please rate your perception after reading this scenario by rating the following messages from 1-5
(strongly disagree, disagree, neutral, agree, or strongly agree):

Overall Satisfaction of Roommate Experience:

I feel like my roommate respects me:

1 2 3 4 5
Strongly disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree

My roommate fulfills my expectations as a roommate:

1 2 3 4 5
Strongly disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree

I am content with the relationship I have with my roommate:

1 2 3 4 5
Strongly disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree

I enjoy spending time with my roommate:

1 2 3 4 5
Strongly disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree

I look forward to being with my roommate:

1 2 3 4 5
Strongly disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree roommate

I do not like my roommate:

1 2 3 4 5
Strongly disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree