Telematics and Informatics 33 (2016) 102–108

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Telematics and Informatics

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/tele

Personality traits, interpersonal relationships, online social

support, and Facebook addiction
Jih-Hsin Tang a,⇑, Ming-Chun Chen b, Cheng-Ying Yang c, Tsai-Yuan Chung d, Yao-An Lee b
a
Department of Information Management, National Taipei University of Business, Taiwan, ROC
b
Department of Psychology & Counseling, University of Taipei, Taiwan, ROC
c
Department of Computer Science, University of Taipei, Taiwan, ROC
d
Center for Teacher Education and Career Development, University of Taipei, Taiwan, ROC

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Because of the prevalence of mobile devices, the overuse of social networking sites has
Received 17 March 2015 become a global phenomenon. One of the most popular social networking sites,
Received in revised form 9 June 2015 Facebook, has received a considerable attention in recent years, and the excessive use of
Accepted 10 June 2015
Facebook has become a major concern in schools. The purpose of this study was to inves-
Available online 11 June 2015
tigate the reasons for Facebook addiction. By surveying 894 college students in Taiwan, we
found that although only 1% was classified as addicts, 17.8% were in the alert group.
Keywords:
Approximately 80% of the students used Facebook every day, and 10% spent more than
Facebook addiction
Online interpersonal relationships
8 h a day on Facebook. Interpersonal relationships and online social support were found
Personality traits to be positively associated with Facebook addiction; however, some personality traits, such
Online social support as agreeableness, conscientiousness, and neuroticism, were negatively associated with
Facebook addiction. Online interpersonal relationships and neuroticism were found to be
prominent predictors of Facebook addiction. Practical implications are provided herein.
Ó 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction

Because of the popularity of mobile devices, such as smartphones and tablet PCs, the trend of people using these devices
for excessive amounts of time is increasing. One of the most intriguing phenomena is the overuse of social networking sites,
such as Facebook, Myspace, and Twitter. Smartphone addiction has been the focus of trade journals, television programs, and
newspaper articles in recent years. Researchers have investigated the underlying reasons for Internet addiction (Chou et al.,
2005; Griffiths, 1998; Kandell, 1998; Young, 2004) and smartphone addiction (Lee et al., 2014; Salehan and Negahban, 2013).
Some scholars have argued that Internet addicts become addicted to various aspects of online use, such as gaming, online
sexual activities, and e-mailing or messaging (Andreassen et al. (2012)). Messaging is common on social networking sites
and Facebook is the most popular site of this type; therefore, Facebook addiction is an emerging research area.
Numerous reasons exist for using Facebook; past research has adopted different perspectives to examine the use of
Facebook, such as personality theory (Aydm and San, 2011; Buckner et al., 2012; Ross et al., 2009; Sariyska et al., 2014;
Tan and Yang, 2014), the theory of planned behavior (Pelling and White, 2009), and technology adoption theory and
attachment theory (Shin et al., 2011; Oldmeadow et al., 2013). Some scholars have focused on the relationship between

⇑ Corresponding author at: No. 321, Sec. 1, Jinan Rd., Taipei, Taiwan, ROC.
E-mail addresses: jefftang@ntub.edu.tw (J.-H. Tang), cmcchen@utaipei.edu.tw (M.-C. Chen), cyang@utaipei.edu.tw (C.-Y. Yang), tchung@go.utaipei.edu.
tw (T.-Y. Chung), licarchi@gmail.com (Y.-A. Lee).

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2015.06.003
0736-5853/Ó 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
 J.-H. Tang et al. / Telematics and Informatics 33 (2016) 102–108 103

individual personality traits and Facebook use, and others have emphasized the social support that Facebook provides
(Gunuc and Dogan, 2013; Indian and Grieve, 2014; Tsai et al., 2009).
The current study was designed to investigate the underlying relationships among individual personality traits, interper-
sonal relationships, online social support, and the overuse of Facebook.

2. Theoretical background and research questions

2.1. Personality and Facebook use

Individual personality traits have been regarded as critical predictors of Facebook use. For example, people scoring high
on narcissism indices tend to be more active on Facebook. Several studies have focused on the Big Five model of personality
traits, in which personality assessment is based on the five main dimensions of extraversion (e.g., being talkative), agreeable-
ness (e.g., being sympathetic and warm), conscientiousness (e.g., being organized and prompt), neuroticism (e.g., being ner-
vous and moody), and openness to experience (e.g., being creative and intellectually oriented). Extraversion, neuroticism,
and openness to experience have been shown to be positively associated with the use of social media (Hughes et al.,
2012; Wang et al., 2012). People scoring low on conscientiousness are assumed to use social media cautiously and are neg-
atively associated with the use of social media. Neuroticism is assumed to be positively related to the use of social media
because it can be used as a method of seeking support.

2.2. Interpersonal relationships and Facebook use

Maintenance of interpersonal relationships has been considered the main reason for the use of social networking sites. A
recent review article showed that social networking sites were used mainly for maintaining relationships with offline
acquaintances (Kuss et al., 2013). It seems that people use Facebook to maintain existing relationships and to expand per-
sonal social networks.
It seems that the greater the need to maintain offline acquaintances, the greater the likelihood of becoming addicted to
Facebook. Similarly, the greater the need to maintain online friendships, the greater the likelihood of becoming addicted to
Facebook.

2.3. Online social support and Facebook use

Social support is a broad concept that comprises numerous qualitatively different types of support, such as instrumental,
informational, and emotional assistance (House et al., 1985). Social support can be considered a communication process that
can help people manage and cope with uncertainty, improving well-being (Tanis, 2007). Social support has numerous def-
initions. For example, Cobb (1976) defined social support as ‘‘information leading the subject to believe that he or she is
cared for and loved, that he/she is esteemed and valued, and he/she belongs to a network of communication and mutual obli-
gation.’’ House (1981) defined social support as the flow between people of emotional concern, instrumental aid, informa-
tion, and appraisal. We adopted House’s definition in this study because it can be applied to both online and offline
environments.
Recent studies of social support have reported varied results because of differing definitions of social support and the lack
of a clear conceptualization of the construct. However, recent research has generally attempted to measure the functional
components of social support because functional support is the most crucial and can be divided into (a) emotional support,
which involves caring, loving, and sympathy; (b) instrumental support, which involves providing material aid or behavioral
assistance; (c) informational support, which involves offering guidance, advice, or information that can provide a solution to
a problem; (d) affectionate support, which involves expressions of love and affection; and (e) social companionship (also
called ‘‘positive social interaction’’), which involves spending time with others in leisure and recreational activities
(Sherbourne and Steward, 1991).
The Internet has gradually become integrated into everyday life, thus becoming a crucial medium for giving and receiving
social support. Sites such as Facebook, Myspace and Twitter have had a major impact on interpersonal behavior, including
online social support. Recent studies have demonstrated that people gain support from friends on Facebook to reduce stress
or lose weight.
Facebook can provide three types of social support: informational, affectionate, and social companionship. Informational
support involves offering guidance, advice, information, or feedback that can provide a solution to a problem. Facebook pro-
vides a convenient channel to quickly receive suggestions from friends. Affectionate support involves expressions of love and
affection. Facebook provides several tools, such as its ‘‘like’’ and messaging functions, that can be used to show support and
express emotions to friends. Social companionship involves spending time with others in leisure and recreational activities.
Facebook seems to provide a safe and trusted online environment in which to share happy moments with friends. In other
words, Facebook has provided a convenient channel for people to acquire informational, emotional, and even material
assistance from online acquaintances.
104 J.-H. Tang et al. / Telematics and Informatics 33 (2016) 102–108

Prior research has indicated that giving and receiving online support motivates people to use Facebook for excessive
amounts of time. It seems reasonable that the greater the need of an individual to give or receive online social support,
the higher the likelihood that he or she will become addicted to Facebook.

2.4. Facebook addiction

Internet addiction has become a severe problem and has been listed in new versions of the Diagnostic and Statistical
Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition. Facebook, one of the most popular social networking sites with a membership
of over one billion, has received considerable attention recently. Facebook addiction is defined as a subtype of Internet addic-
tion which focuses on the addiction one of the most popular social networking sites – Facebook.
We adopted a survey approach to investigate the relationship between the intrinsic personality traits, extrinsic motiva-
tion (interpersonal relationships and social support) and Facebook addiction in Taiwan.

3. Methods

3.1. Data collection and sampling

We recruited 792 students from eight universities in Taiwan and obtained 102 online samples by using the snowball
method for a total of 894 valid samples. We compared the results of a written survey with an online survey and found
no significant differences in any of the variables; therefore, we combined these results for further analysis.

3.2. Measures

3.2.1. Facebook addiction scale

We translated Facebook addiction scale (18 items) from Andreassen et al. (2012) into traditional Chinese and added 2
items from the Obsessive Compulsive Foundation scale to create our final scale. Each item was scored on a 5-point
Likert-type scale, where 1 = never, 2 = seldom, 3 = sometimes, 4 = often, and 5 = always, from which a final score of 20–100
points was obtained. The pretest demonstrated high reliability with a Cronbach’s alpha of .94, and fair validity.

3.2.2. Personality scale

We adopted Saucier’s (1994) mini-markers scale to measure the Big Five personality traits: extraversion, agreeableness,
conscientiousness, neuroticism, and openness. We used this scale because it is reliable, and easy to understand (Dwight
et al., 1998).

3.2.3. Online social support scale

We adopted Leung and Lee’s online social support scale (2005) because it has been translated into Chinese and demon-
strated high reliability for its three subscales: information support (.92), affectionate support (.88), and social companionship
(.88), with an overall Cronbach’s alpha of .96. Three factors were also ascertained using confirmatory factor analysis (Fang,
2010). Typical questionnaire items included ‘‘someone to give you good advice about a crisis’’ (informational), ‘‘someone to
show you love and affection’’ (affectionate), and ‘‘someone to get together with for relaxation’’ (social companionship). Or
how often do you feel the need for some? A 4-point scale was used for responses, consisting of never, sometimes, often,
and always. The higher the score, the more social support needed.

3.2.4. Interpersonal relationship scale

We adapted a scale from Chen’s (2002) online and offline interpersonal interaction survey, which measures intimacy and
information disclosure between online friends, offline friends, and families. We deleted all items about families, and
reworded all of the items that refer to online friends so that they referred to friends on Facebook. The final 20-item scale
had a high reliability with a Cronbach’s alpha of .94, and high validity. Typical survey items included ‘‘I talk about my life
or activities in school with friends on Facebook’’ and ‘‘I chat about news with my offline friends or classmates.’’ A 4-point
scale was used for responses, consisting of never, sometimes, often, and always. The higher the score, the more online and off-
line interpersonal interaction received.

4. Results

4.1. Facebook use patterns

Of the participants, 65% were female (n = 584), and nearly half were from private universities (48%). Nearly 33% were
sophomores, 17% were freshmen, and 24% were juniors. Most participants joined Facebook more than 3 years ago (56%),
followed by 1–3 years ago (35%) and within the last year (2%), and 2.4% of the participants had not joined Facebook. Most
participants used Facebook from half an hour to 1 h daily (32.5%), followed by 2–3 h (32%) and over 4 h (20%). Most
 J.-H. Tang et al. / Telematics and Informatics 33 (2016) 102–108 105

participants had a friend list of over 400 people (33.5%), followed by 201–300 people (21.4%), 301–400 people (19.5%), and
101–200 people (15%).
Most participants (56%) declared that they had used Facebook for more than 3 years, followed by 1–3 years (37%), and less
than 1 year (7%). This sample suggests that the majority of university students in Taiwan have a reasonable amount of expe-
rience using Facebook. Most students used Facebook every day (80%), followed by 5–6 days a week (6.7%), 3–4 days a week
(5.6%), and 1–2 days a week (7.2%). Of those who used it every day, most spent 1–2 h on Facebook (32.5%), followed by 2–3 h
(32%), 4–5 h (13%), and less than half an hour (12.9%). Unexpectedly, 2.8% of the students sampled declared that they spent
over 8 h a day on Facebook. Most students declared that they used Facebook at home or in their dormitory (62%), followed by
at school (25.5%), and 10% declared that they were on Facebook all the time. Regarding devices, most students declared that
they used smartphones to access Facebook (45.7%), followed by notebook computers (31.4%), and desktop computers
(21.2%). The most prominent uses for Facebook were to increase interpersonal interaction (13%), to contact friends (12%),
and to kill time (12%). Most students had over 400 friends on Facebook (33.5%), followed by 201–300 friends (21.4%),
301–400 friends (19.5%), 101–200 friends (15%), 51–100 friends (5.8%), and fewer than 50 friends (4.3%). This showed that
the majority of the university students had a high number of Facebook friends. Regarding the sources of Facebook friends,
most students declared that their friends were university students (21.9%), followed by senior high school students (20.8%),
junior high and elementary school students (15.3%), and family or relatives (14.7%). However, some declared that they had
friends that they had never met offline (4.8%), which implies that university students might expand their personal social net-
works by using Facebook.

4.1.1. Control variables

We conducted a series of statistical tests on the association between Facebook addiction and control variables, such as
gender (t = 0.57, p > .05), grade (F = 2.11, p > .05), and school type (t = 0.62, p > .05). No significant differences were observed
at the .05 level, implying that demographic variables did not significantly affect the results.

4.2. Facebook addiction results

Table 1 shows basic statistics relating to personality traits, online and offline relationships, online social support, and
Facebook addiction. We further investigated the frequency of Facebook addiction scales, and found that the distribution
was diverse (Table 2). We applied the diagnosis criteria suggested by the Obsessive Compulsive Foundation and separated
participants into three groups according to their Facebook addiction score: addict (P80), alert (50–79), and normal (<50).
Table 3 shows that only 1% of the participants were classified as Facebook addicts, but 17.8% were in the alert group.
These findings showed that ‘‘Facebook addiction’’ is not merely a buzzword and has become a severe problem among college
students, with nearly 20% of the college students in the study reporting compulsive use of Facebook.

4.3. Relationships among personality traits, interpersonal relationships, and online social support

We conducted a Pearson product–moment correlation analysis, the findings of which are shown in Table 4. Some indi-
vidual personality traits (agreeableness, conscientiousness, and neuroticism) were significantly negatively associated with
Facebook addiction ( .08⁄, .13⁄⁄ and .32⁄⁄, respectively), but online and offline relationships and online social support
were significantly positively associated with Facebook addiction (.27⁄⁄, .38⁄⁄, .27⁄⁄, .29⁄⁄, .21⁄⁄, all alpha = .01).
These findings supported our hypothesis that Facebook addiction is a complex process that may result from both person-
ality and motivational factors. The findings implied that Facebook addiction is influenced not only by personality, but also by
external motivational factors such as relationship maintenance and the giving and receiving of online support. This may be
the reason for the widespread use of Facebook.

Table 1
Basic statistics of personality, interpersonal relationship, online support and Facebook addiction.

Variables No. of items Means SD

1. Facebook addiction 20 (5 points) 38.64 13.47
2. Extraversion 8 (5 points) 27.05 5.01
3. Agreeableness 8 (5 points) 30.06 4.08
4. Conscientiousness 8 (5 points) 27.85 4.43
5. Neuroticism 8 (5 points) 27.43 4.81
6. Openness to experience 8 (5 points) 26.07 4.81
7. interpersonal relationship (offline) 20 (5 points) 31.26 6.07
8. interpersonal relationship (online) 35.44 7.47
9. Information support 30 (4 points) 26.75 6.35
10. Affectionate support 16.76 4.36
11. Social companionship 17.44 3.89
106 J.-H. Tang et al. / Telematics and Informatics 33 (2016) 102–108

Table 2
Frequency distribution of Facebook addiction scores in Taiwan.

Facebook addiction Overall

Score Count Percentage
20–29 254 28.3
30–39 247 27.5
40–49 193 21.5
50–59 100 11.1
60–69 45 5.0
70–79 15 1.7
80–89 7 0.8
>90 2 0.2
Mean (SD) 38.64 13.47
Total 863 96.0

Note: 36 subjects did not fill out this subscale, making the final sample
863.

Table 3
Classification of Facebook addiction among college students in Taiwan.

Classification Overall
Count Percentage
Addict 9 1.0
Alert 160 18.5
Normal 694 80.4
Sum 863 100.0

Table 4
The correlation matrix of personality traits, interpersonal relationship, and online social support and Facebook addiction.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
* ** ** ** ** ** **
1. Facebook addiction 1 0.03 .08 .13 .32 .01 .27 .38 .27 .29 .21**
2. Extraversion 1 .34** .22** .24** .39** .21** .19** .17** .16** .16**
3. Agreeableness 1 .30** .33** .24** .30** .22** .17** .18** .26**
4. Conscientiousness 1 .25** .38** .09* .07* .14** .08* .13**
5. Neuroticism 1 .19** .04 .09* .05 .02 .05
6. Openness to experience 1 .23** .17** .19** .17** .19**
7. interpersonal relationship (offline) 1 .79** .47** .50** .51**
8. interpersonal relationship (online) 1 .59** .62** .61**
9. Information support 1 .88** .82**
10. Affectionate support 1 .84**
11. Social companionship 1
*
p < .05.
**
p < 0.1.

4.4. Hierarchical regression results of personality traits, interpersonal relationships, and social support and Facebook addiction

We used the aforementioned variables as predictors of Facebook addiction and conducted hierarchical regression analy-
sis. The results shown in Table 5 suggest that online interpersonal relationships are the most crucial predictors of Facebook
addiction, because they accounted for 14.2% of the total variance. The second most prominent predictor was one of the Big
Five personality traits, neuroticism, which accounted for 8.3% of the total variance. The third most prominent predictor was a
type of online support, information support, which accounted for 1% of the total variance. The remainder of the total variance
was accounted for by conscientiousness and social companionship, but these variables only accounted for a small amount of
the total variance. The findings implied that both a person’s personality and how he or she treats online interpersonal rela-
tionships might accurately predict whether he she will become addicted to Facebook.
According to the findings shown in Table 5, interpersonal relationships were the most prominent predictor of Facebook
addiction, followed by neuroticism and online support. These findings are interesting because Facebook addiction was seem-
ingly driven more by online and offline interpersonal relationships than by other factors. Our study also appears to contradict
previous studies that suggest that women message and engage in online social activity more than men do. Our study sug-
gested that college students devoted a large amount of time to maintaining their interpersonal relationships on Facebook
regardless of gender, grade, or school. Their interpersonal relationships on Facebook were integrated with their daily life,
and that was the most prevalent reason for addiction.
 J.-H. Tang et al. / Telematics and Informatics 33 (2016) 102–108 107

Table 5
Hierarchical regression results of personality traits, relationship, online support and Facebook addiction.

R R2 Adjusted R2 F test
1 Online relationship 0.38 0.14 0.14 133.72**
2 Online relationship, neuroticism 0.48 0.23 0.23 117.45**
3 Online relationship, neuroticism, information support 0.49 0.24 0.23 81.89**
4 Online relationship, neuroticism, information support, conscientiousness 0.49 0.24 0.24 64.41**
5 Online relationship, neuroticism, information support, conscientiousness, 0.50 0.25 0.25 53.16**
social companionship
Chosen variables Unstandardized Standardized confidents b t
confidents
b Standard errors
5 Constant 43.55 3.73 11.67*
Online relationship 0.57 0.07 0.32 7.92*
Neurotic 0.76 0.09 0.27 8.55*
Information support 0.46 0.11 0.22 4.09*
Conscientiousness 0.30 0.10 0.10 3.03*
Social companionship 0.48 0.19 0.14 2.54*
*
p < .05.
**
p < .01.

5. Conclusion

Our results showed that interpersonal relationship maintenance (both online and offline) was significantly positively
associated with Facebook addiction, and all types of social support (information, affectionate and companionship) were
positively associated with Facebook addiction. Further, the results implied that both individual personality and external
motivation might play a critical role in shaping an person’s addictive behavior toward Facebook.
In agreement with prior research, the current study confirmed that some personality traits were related to Facebook
addiction, particularly neuroticism and conscientiousness. However, the most crucial finding was that online interpersonal
relationships were the dominant predictor of Facebook addiction. This finding is interesting because it shows that interper-
sonal relationship maintenance is a crucial daily activity of university students, thus increasing the risk of addiction.
Unlike prior studies, no gender difference was found in the use of Facebook among university students in Taiwan. Past
research has emphasized that women might use social networking sites more than men; however, our findings showed that
the effect of these demographic variables might be minimal when considering the purpose (recreational or informational) of
using Facebook. Our study also suggested that Facebook is an integral part of the lives of most university students in Taiwan,
with approximately 80% of the study group using Facebook every day, and 1% spending 8 h a day on Facebook.
This study shows that Facebook addiction is a severe and growing problem among college students in Taiwan. Although
only 1% of the sample was classified as severe Facebook addicts, 17% of the sample was classified as being in the alert group.
It appears that ‘‘Facebook addiction’’ is therefore not merely a buzzword or a trend, but has a tangible effect on the daily lives
of college students. Scholars should investigate the underlying reasons for addiction, and educators should focus on devising
measures to prevent Facebook addiction.

6. Limitations

The participants were university students in Taiwan and, therefore, generalizations should be applied cautiously and
these findings should be used to guide future studies. Additional studies might investigate the influence of online interper-
sonal relationships on Internet addiction or smartphone addiction, or even the interplay between the effects of personal
traits and interpersonal relationships on Internet addiction.
Our criteria of Facebook addiction were adopted based on the Obsessive Compulsive Foundation and the study by
Andreassen et al. (2012) Additional studies could establish clear-cut criteria for diagnosing Facebook addiction.

References

Andreassen, C.S., Torsheim, T., et al, 2012. Development of a Facebook addiction scale. Psychol. Rep. 110 (2), 501–517.
Aydm, B., San, S.V., 2011. Internet addiction among adolescents: the role of self-esteem. Procedia – Soc. Behav. Sci. 15, 3500–3505.
Buckner, V.J.E., Castille, C.M., et al, 2012. The five factor model of personality and employees’ excessive use of technology. Comput. Hum. Behav. 28 (5),
1947–1953.
Chen, Y.Z., 2002. Personality Traits, Real and Internet Relationships, and Well-being Among Senior High School Students, Master’s thesis, National Ping Tung
University [in Chinese].
Chou, C., Condron, L., et al, 2005. A review of the research on internet addiction. Educ. Psychol. Rev. 17 (4), 363–388.
Cobb, S., 1976. Social support as a moderator of life stress. Psychosom. Med. 38 (5), 300–314.
108 J.-H. Tang et al. / Telematics and Informatics 33 (2016) 102–108

Dwight, S.A., Cummings, K.M., Glenar, J.L., 1998. Comparison of criterion-related validity coefficients for the Mini-Markers and Goldberg’s Markers of the Big
Five Personality Factors. J. Pers. Assess. 70, 541–550.
Fang, Z.W., 2010. Relations among problematic internet use, coping, loneliness and online social support: A comparison of male and female undergraduates.
Bull. Educational Psychol. 41 (4), 773–798 [in Chinese].
Griffiths, M.D. (Ed.), 1998. Internet Addiction: Does it Really Exist? Psychology and the Internet: Intrapersonal, Interpersonal, and Transpersonal
Implications. Academic Press, New York.
Gunuc, S., Dogan, A., 2013. The relationships between Turkish adolescents’ Internet addiction, their perceived social support and family activities. Comput.
Hum. Behav. 29 (6), 2197–2207.
House, J.S., 1981. Work Stress and Social Support. Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA.
House, James S., Kahn, Robert L., McLeod, Jane D., 1985. In: Williams, David, Cohen, Sheldon, Syme, S. Leonard (Eds.), Social Support and Health, vol. xvii.
Academic Press, San Diego, CA, US, pp. 83–108, 390 pp.
Hughes, D.J., Rowe, M., Batey, M., Lee, A., 2012. A tale of two sites: Twitter vs. Facebook and the personality predictors of social media usage. Comput. Hum.
Behav. 28 (2), 561–569.
Indian, M., Grieve, R., 2014. When Facebook is easier than face-to-face: social support derived from Facebook in socially anxious individuals. Personality
Individ. Differ. 59, 102–106.
Kandell, J., 1998. Internet addiction on campus: the vulnerability of college students. Cyberpsychol. Behav. 1 (1), 11–17.
Kuss, D.J., Griffiths, M.D., et al, 2013. Internet addiction in students: prevalence and risk factors. Comput. Hum. Behav. 29 (3), 959–966.
Lee, Y.-K., Chang, C.-T., et al, 2014. The dark side of smartphone usage: psychological traits, compulsive behavior and technostress. Comput. Hum. Behav. 31,
373–383.
Oldmeadow, J.A., Quinn, S., et al, 2013. Attachment style, social skills, and Facebook use amongst adults. Comput. Hum. Behav. 29 (3), 1142–1149.
Pelling, E., White, K., 2009. The theory of planned behavior applied to young people’s use of social networking Web sites’’. CyberPsychol. Behav. 12 (6), 755–
759.
Ross, C., Orr, E.S., et al, 2009. Personality and motivations associated with Facebook use. Comput. Hum. Behav. 25 (2), 578–586.
Salehan, M., Negahban, A., 2013. Social networking on smartphones: when mobile phones become addictive. Comput. Hum. Behav. 29 (6), 2632–2639.
Sariyska, R., Reuter, M., et al, 2014. Self-esteem, personality and Internet Addiction: a cross-cultural comparison study. Personality Individ. Differ. 61–62,
28–33.
Saucier, G., 1994. Mini-markers: A brief version of Goldberg’s unipolar Big-Five markers. J. Pers. Assess. 63 (3), 506–516.
Sherbourne, C.D., Stewart, A.L., 1991. The MOS social support survey. Soc. Sci. Med. 32, 705–714.
Shin, S.-E., Kim, N.-S., et al, 2011. Comparison of problematic internet and alcohol use and attachment styles among industrial workers in Korea.
CyberPsychol. Behav. Soc. Netw. 14 (11), 665–672.
Tan, W.-K., Yang, C.-Y., 2014. Internet applications use and personality. Telematics Inform. 31 (1), 27–38.
Tanis, Martin, 2007. The Oxford Handbook of Internet Psychology. Oxford University Press, New York, pp. 139–154.
Tsai, H.F., Cheng, S.H., et al, 2009. The risk factors of Internet addiction—A survey of university freshmen. Psychiatry Res. 167 (3), 294–299.
Wang, J.L., Jackson, L.A., Zhang, D.J., Su, Z.Q., 2012. The relationships among the Big Five Personality factors, self-esteem, narcissism, and sensation-seeking
to Chinese University students’ uses of social networking sites (SNSs). Comput. Hum. Behav. 28 (6), 2313–2319.
Young, K.S., 2004. Internet addiction: the emergence of a new clinical disorder. Am. Behav. Sci. 48 (4), 402–415.