Computers in

Human Behavior
Computers in Human Behavior 20 (2004) 591–606
www.elsevier.com/locate/comphumbeh

Internet use and college adjustment:

the moderating role of gender
Richard P. Lanthier *, R. Craig Windham
The George Washington University, Graduate School of Education and Human Development,
2134 G St. NW, Washington, DC 20052, USA
Available online 14 January 2004

Abstract

We examined the links between Internet use and college adjustment in a sample (n ¼ 272) of
college undergraduate students and whether gender moderated these links. Internet use was
assessed using three scales: hours online, social use, and negative aspects of use. Internet use was
a consistent predictor of college adjustment. Hours online was unrelated to college adjust-
ment. Social use was positively associated with college adjustment, but only for males. Neg-
ative aspects of use was associated with poorer adjustment regardless of participant gender.
Results are interpreted in light of current research.
Ó 2003 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Internet; College education; Gender

1. Introduction

The college years represent a time of transition for many students as they leave their
families and familiar peers and enter a new social environment characterized by greater
freedom, academic challenges, and changing responsibilities. At the same time, stu-
dents are contending with the developmental tasks of late adolescence and young
adulthood, including establishing autonomy and personal identity as well as mean-
ingful intimate relationships (Erikson, 1963). Erikson (1968) commented on the psy-
chosocial moratorium in which adult commitments are delayed, giving young people in
industrialized societies additional time for identity and role experimentation. Research
*
Corresponding author. Tel.: +1-202-994-1608; fax: +1-202-994-3436.
E-mail address: lanthier@gwu.edu (R.P. Lanthier).

0747-5632/$ - see front matter Ó 2003 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.chb.2003.11.003
592 R.P. Lanthier, R.C. Windham / Computers in Human Behavior 20 (2004) 591–606

has shown that identity development is rarely complete by the end of high school and
continues through a personÕs late teens and twenties (Valde, 1996; Waterman, 1982).
Updating and expanding on EriksonÕs research, Arnett (2000) has proposed an
additional developmental stage bridging adolescence and young adulthood which he
calls ‘‘emerging adulthood,’’ including the ages of typical college undergraduates.
This stage, when it occurs in a supportive socioeconomic and cultural context, is
described as a dynamic period in which a range of life directions and roles may be
explored before assuming adult responsibilities: ‘‘Emerging adulthood is a time of
life . . . when little about the future has been decided for certain, when the scope of
independent exploration of lifeÕs possibilities is greater for most people than it will be
at any other period . . .’’ (p. 469). Yet this developmental stage, where aspects of
identity and worldview are in flux, also presents challenges.
Many students experience adjustment difficulties while in college, and several
studies have attempted to predict college adaptation and achievement (e.g., Brooks
& DuBois, 1995; De Fruyt & Mervielde, 1996) with some success using variables
such as personality and self-worth. Using a large college student sample in Belgium,
De Fruyt and Mervielde (1996) found that conscientiousness was a consistent pre-
dictor of academic success. Brooks and DuBois (1995), in a smaller sample, in the
United States found that emotional stability was positively associated with social
adjustment in the college setting.
A relatively new change on college campuses is the heightened role of technology.
For nearly all college students, the Internet has become an increasingly important
factor in the academic and social realms of life on campus. Universities are em-
bracing and encouraging the use of information technology, with 84% offering dis-
tance learning/online courses or components such as lectures and study groups
(Jecusco, 2002). Close to 99% of all college students have Internet access, and just
over 84% (about 13 million students) have readily available high speed access on
campus – in most cases, these broadband connections now extend to dormitories
(Berman, 2001; Hayes, 2001). Broadband Internet users tend to spend more time
online than dial-up users, and they are more than twice as likely as dial-up users to
go online several times a day (Horrigan & Rainie, 2002). Not surprisingly, recent
studies have found that the vast majority of college students – 93% in one survey –
say they use the Internet on a regular basis, and most go online not only for aca-
demic purposes but also to enhance their social lives (College students, 2002; Pew
Internet & American Life Project [PIALP], 2002).
The impact of Internet use on adjustment is a controversial issue. The longitu-
dinal HomeNet study concluded that Internet use was associated with an increase in
depression and loneliness, with teenagers showing larger declines in social support
and larger increases in loneliness than adults (Kraut et al., 1998). But a more recent
follow-up of the same subjects noted that nearly all of the negative effects had dis-
sipated, and a companion study of a new sample found increased Internet usage to
be associated with positive outcomes relating to psychological well-being and social
involvement (Kraut et al., 2002). McKenna and Bargh (2000) state that ‘‘there is not
a simple main effect of the Internet on the average person’’ (p. 59): How a person is
affected depends on their reasons for going online as well as personal variables.
 R.P. Lanthier, R.C. Windham / Computers in Human Behavior 20 (2004) 591–606 593

One salient factor appears to be gender. Through the mid-1990s, the majority of
Internet users were men, but the gender gap among users has narrowed rapidly in
recent years (GVUCs 10th, 1998; Sherman et al., 2000). By 2000, surveys on overall
computer and Internet use found parity between males and females, especially
among college students, but lingering differences in terms of pattern, intensity, and
self-perception of use (Odell, Koregen, Schumacher, & Delucchi, 2000; Ono & Za-
vodny, 2003; Sherman et al., 2000; UCLA Higher Education Research Institute
[UCLA-HERI], 2000). Women, including those in college, tend to spend less time
online, go online less frequently, and use the Internet more for communication than
do men, although instant messaging (IMing) is equally popular with male and female
college students (GVUCs 10th, 1998; PIALP, 2000; UCLA-HERI, 2000). Boneva,
Kraut, and Frohlich (2001) contend that women tend to use e-mail more than men
do to keep in touch with friends and relatives living at a distance because e-mail ‘‘fits
better with womenÕs expressive style of relationship maintenance’’ (p. 546). But they
add that locally – on a college campus, for instance – women and men both use e-
mail mainly to coordinate activities with friends. A number of studies have found
that with the possible exception of e-mail use, college men feel more competent and
comfortable than their female classmates in using computer technology and the
Internet (Schumacher & Morahan-Martin, 2001; Sherman et al., 2000; UCLA-
HERI, 2000).
Some researchers have concluded that 8–13% of undergraduates who go online
can be regarded as Internet abusers or psychologically dependent on the Internet,
with problems ranging from fatigue and loss of sleep to poor academic performance
and diminished face-to-face social interactions (Morahan-Martin, 2001; Scherer,
1997). Problematic Internet users are more likely to be males, in particular those who
are technically sophisticated (Morahan-Martin & Schumacher, 2000). Kandell
(1998) asserts that ‘‘overinvolvement with the Internet can inhibit the development
of skills needed for identity and intimacy’’ (p. 16). Kubey, Lavin, and Barrows (2001)
agree, adding that for some students unlimited online access ‘‘could result in a de-
velopmental retreat, as the Internet does offer a ready and convenient haven . . . that
the student can control’’ (p. 379).
Interestingly, several investigations have also pointed to the positive benefits of
the Internet as an arena for dealing with social and developmental issues common
among college students. McKenna (1999) found that individuals who are high in
social anxiety can use the Internet to form successful intimate relationships and
those relationships that are formed are not of lesser quality than those formed in
traditional ways (McKenna & Bargh, 2000; Parks & Floyd, 1996). The Internet
allows students to fulfill unmet intimacy needs and to explore social connections,
sexuality, and aspects of self that might otherwise remain hidden (Morahan-
Martin, 2001; Turkel, 1995). In a recent survey, more than six in 10 young people
who were frequent Internet users said online communication has improved their
relationships with their friends, and some reported feeling freer to be their true
selves on the Internet (PIALP, 2001). Morahan-Martin (2001) concludes that ‘‘for
most students, using the Internet to meet [personal] needs is not problematic . . .
Going online has been beneficial and expanded their world in positive ways’’ (pp.
594 R.P. Lanthier, R.C. Windham / Computers in Human Behavior 20 (2004) 591–606

213–214). As an arena of communication, discovery, and social interaction, the

Internet may serve as an important element in the developmental process of
emerging adulthood.
Given the importance of student recruitment and retention, Universities have
increased the availability of Internet access through high speed ‘‘always on’’ access
in college dormitories and computer labs. Our review suggests that the psycholog-
ical implications of such availability is unclear: some research points out the positive
benefits of Internet use while others highlight the negative impact of Internet ad-
diction. Anecdotal evidence suggests that some students who use the Internet ex-
tensively may be at risk for failure and dropout (Keenan, 1996). However, it is
unclear how or if normative Internet use is related to adjustment in college settings.
Therefore, the need for some empirical research examining this issue is important.
In this paper, we focus on the connection between Internet use and college ad-
justment in a sample of average users. The bulk of negative evidence for Internet use
has focused on Internet addiction rather than average levels of use. In addition,
based on evidence that males and females may be using the Internet differently, we
examined whether gender moderated the links between Internet use and adjust-
ment. Because our research questions were exploratory, no specific hypotheses were
generated.

2. Methods

2.1. Participants

Two hundred and seventy two college students attending a large public university
in the Southwestern United States participated in the research. Students were en-
rolled in an introduction to computers course and received partial course credit for
their participation. This course can serve as a general studies requirement for stu-
dents across the university. Study is self-paced within an academic semester. The
sample was a traditionally aged college sample (mean age, 19.9 years; range, 17–24),
with the majority of students (70%) in their first or second year of college. The
students were primarily Caucasian (83%) and female (68%), yet represented a di-
verse SES background in that nearly 30% reported family incomes below $30,000
and 35% reported family incomes above $75,000. Students had been using the In-
ternet for an average of 3.5 years. In terms of academic achievement, participantsÕ
grade point averages were 2.78 on a four-point scale. This represents a C+ average
course grade.

2.2. Measures

2.2.1. College adjustment

We assessed studentsÕ college adjustment via the Student Adaptation to College
Questionnaire (SACQ, Baker & Siryk, 1989). The SACQ is a 67-item self-report
questionnaire that has been used extensively in studies attempting to understand
 R.P. Lanthier, R.C. Windham / Computers in Human Behavior 20 (2004) 591–606 595

college student adjustment, not only in the US but in Europe as well (see Beyers &
Goossens, 2002 for discussion of the psychometric properties of the SACQ in a
European sample). Items are rated on a nine-point Likert-like scale. Anchors are
supplied for the end-points and mid-point of the scale. Selecting a scale point of 1 is
anchored as applies very closely to me. Selecting a scale point of 9 is anchored as does
not apply to me at all.
Four domain specific subscales and a total score are computed from the item
pool. Academic adjustment (24 items) reflects the studentsÕ perceptions of the
quality of their academic performance. Items in this scale ask, for example, about
keeping up with course assignments, performance on examinations, and enjoy-
ment of academic work. Social adjustment (20 items) indexes the studentsÕ per-
ceptions and satisfaction with their social lives. Items in this scale deal with
making friends, meeting people, and satisfaction with extracurricular activities.
The personal/emotional adjustment (15 items) scale reflects studentsÕ perceptions of
psychological and emotional difficulties. Items in this scale ask about feeling
nervous, depressed, and having sleep problems. Institutional attachment (15 items)
measures how happy the student is with the college they are attending and how
attached they feel to the institution. Items in this scale, for example, ask about
how happy student is that they chose this college, how homesick they are, and
how well they fit into the college scene. Some items ask about student satisfaction
with dormitory life and roommate difficulties, however these items are optional
and may be skipped. Approximately fifty percent of the students in the sample
lived in university dormitories and the remainder lived at home or in off campus
housing.
Traditionally, scores for each of the four composites are derived by summing
appropriate items, which results in different possible minimum and maximum scores
for each scale. However, because we are not interested in using SACQ norms, we
computed mean scores for each subscale, thereby ensuring comparability across
SACQ scores. These means can thus vary from 1 to 9. We made one other minor
change to our SACQ scoring: In order to facilitate interpretation, all items were
reverse-scored prior to scale computation thus higher scores indicate better adjust-
ment. Internal consistency for the four composites and total score in the current
study was high (mean a ¼ .90; range, .86–.95). Correlations among the SACQ sub-
scales are moderate to high ranging from a low of .49 to a high of .87. This is not
surprising as several SACQ items are included in multiple scales. This issue is of
particular concern for the institutional attachment and social adjustment scales.
These scales share seven items and, not surprisingly, the highest degree of correla-
tion. The average correlation among the SACQ scales, not including the total score,
in the current study was .60.
Internet use was measured using a revised version of the Internet Behavior
Questionnaire (IBQ; Egger & Rauterberg, 1996). The original IBQ was used though
some language was edited for clarity. We created three scales based on the content of
the items and the psychometric properties of the scales. The first scale, hours online,
consisted of four items that tapped the number of hours per week spent in various
Internet activities. These items were open-ended and students entered the number of
596 R.P. Lanthier, R.C. Windham / Computers in Human Behavior 20 (2004) 591–606

hours they spent (a) surfing/browsing the web, (b) reading and posting to news-
groups and discussion groups, (c) reading and writing e-mail, and (d) other online
services (such as FTP). In addition to these four items included in the scale, the IBQ
also asks students the number of hours they spent on Multi-User Dungeons
(MUDÕs) and Internet Relay Chat (IRC). The amount of time spent on these online
activities was very low, however, with averages less than one hour per week, and
including either of these variables reduced the reliability of the hours online variable
considerably. Given these findings, these two items were excluded from the scale and
from further analysis. Students also spent less than an hour, on average, reading and
posting to newsgroups and in other online services, however, including these items in
the scale did not reduce the reliability and thus were retained. ChronbachÕs a for the
hours online scale was .74.
The second scale, social use, consisted of two items that measured the number of
people the individuals communicate with regularly on the Internet and the number of
friends and acquaintances they had made solely on the Internet. These two items, like
the hours online items, were also open-ended. The ChronbachÕs a for this scale was .69.
Finally, 11 items were used to form the negative aspects of use scale, which asked
about negative thoughts, feelings and experiences the individuals had regarding their
Internet use. Sample items included in this scale include: Do you ever feel guilty or
depressed after using the Internet for along time?, Have you ever lied to your friends
about the time youÕve spent on the Internet? and Do you feel a strong necessity to go
onto the Internet when you are not online? These items were rated on a five-point
Likert-type scale ranging from a low of no/never to a high of always. The Chron-
bachÕs a for this scale was .80.
The derived scales have empirical reliability and validity. In terms of the reliability
of our scales, as a set, these derived scales showed adequate levels of internal con-
sistency (mean a ¼ .74). As for the validity of our scales, as a set, these derived scales
showed low to moderate levels of intercorrelation (mean correlation ¼ .33) suggesting
that the scales are indeed tapping different constructs.

2.3. Data collection procedures

The data reported here were collected as part of a larger study focusing on college
adjustment. Data collection procedures were conducted online during scheduled
sessions in a university computer lab outside of class time. Students completed the
survey on their own and no student took more than one hour to complete the tasks.
The students were tested in groups, no more than five at a time, and a graduate
student was available to handle questions and technical problems. Approximately
one half of the enrolled students in the course completed the survey. The entire
survey was programmed using Microsoft Access. This programming resulted in
randomized item orders within sections and partially randomized section presenta-
tions. For example, demographic questions were always presented first to ensure that
we had at least this information if student chose not to complete the session or if
there were problems writing responses to the database.
 R.P. Lanthier, R.C. Windham / Computers in Human Behavior 20 (2004) 591–606 597

3. Results

The results are presented in three sections. First we provide basic descriptive in-
formation on the variables used in the study including means, ranges, and standard
deviations. Second, we present regression analyses using the Internet use variables to
predict college adjustment. Finally, we present the analyses testing whether gender
moderates the links between Internet use and college adjustment.

3.1. Descriptive statistics

Means and standard deviations for all variables are provided in Tables 1 and 2. In
order to contextualize our sampleÕs responses and our overall findings with regard to
Internet use, we provided item level descriptive statistics as well.

Table 1
Means and standard deviations for Internet use variables derived from the Internet Behavior Question-
naire
Variable M SD
Hours online 6.83 8.18
1. WWW 2.38 3.20
2. Reading and posting to news and discussion groups. 0.63 2.08
3. E-mail 3.06 3.72
4. Other online services 0.69 1.45
Social use 7.69 11.19
1. How many different people do you communicate regularly via the 6.09 7.64
Internet?
2. How many new acquaintances have you made solely on the Internet? 1.67 4.84

Negative aspects of usea 0.47 0.47

1. Do you feel a strong necessity to go onto the Internet when you are not 0.55 0.93
online?
2. Do you feel an anticipation before you are using the Internet? 0.40 0.78
3. Do you ever feel guilty or depressed after using the Internet for along 0.18 0.56
time?
4. Does the Internet play any role in your dreams? 0.08 0.38
5. Do you think about what is happening on the Internet when you are not 0.12 0.48
using it?
6. Do you spend more time on the Internet than you originally planned? 1.17 1.24
7. Have you ever lied to your friends about the time youÕve spent on the 0.15 0.54
Internet?
8. Have you deliberately restricted your Internet usage due to previously 0.20 0.69
excessive use?
9. How often was your Internet usage restricted (e.g., by the employer, 0.22 0.65
online-service) due to previously excessive use?
10. Have you ever lost track of time when you are using the Internet ? 1.55 1.12
11. How often has anyone complained that you spend too much time on 0.39 0.75
the Internet?
Note. Higher scores indicate higher levels of the Internet use variable.
a
Scored on a five-point scale (0–4).
598 R.P. Lanthier, R.C. Windham / Computers in Human Behavior 20 (2004) 591–606

Table 2
Means and standard deviations for college adjustment variables derived from the Student Adaptation to
College Questionnaire
Variable M SD
Academic adjustment 5.93 1.07
Lowest rated item: enjoy writing papers 3.25 2.40
Highest rated item: having doubts about value of college (reversed) 8.02 1.85

Social adjustment 6.55 1.34

Lowest rated item: have information contacts with professors 4.01 2.68
Highest rated item: have good friends 7.50 2.06
Emotional/personal adjustment 6.00 1.42
Lowest rated item: felt tired 4.35 2.38
Highest rated item: ask for help from counseling center (reversed) 7.77 2.28
Institutional attachment 6.93 1.34
Lowest rated item: enjoy living in dorm 4.50 2.86
Highest rated item: thinking of dropping out (reversed) 8.46 1.58

Total score 6.31 1.02

Note. Higher scores indicate better college adjustment. Scores can range from 1 to 9.

Participants in the sample spent almost 7 h in online activities per week, though
there was high variability in this time (range 0–84 h/week). Students spent the bulk of
their time on e-mail (3.06 h/week) and surfing/browsing the web (2.38 h/week). The
social use variable has a raw score average of 7.69 but a high degree of variability
(ranging from 0 to 110). These students communicated with about six people reg-
ularly using the Internet and had made nearly two friends solely on the Internet. The
sample, overall, did not score high on the items that made up the negative aspects of
use scale (m ¼ 0:47), though again there was variability (range, 0–2.39). Items that
ranked highest in terms of negative aspects of use included: Do you spend more time
on the Internet than you originally planned? and Have you ever lost track of time
when you are using the Internet?
Descriptive statistics for the SACQ subscales are presented in Table 2. In addi-
tion, the highest and lowest scoring items for each subscale are also shown. Overall,
the students in the sample were satisfied with their college experiences to date.
Students were least satisfied with their academic performance and were most satisfied
with the college they had selected.
Participant gender had little relation to the Internet use variables or to college
adjustment. Independent sample t tests were conducted on all seven variables. Re-
sults indicated statistically significant differences for academic adjustment, with fe-
males reporting better academic adjustment (p < :05).

3.2. Internet use predicting college adjustment

Prior to examining relations between Internet use and college adjustment, we

examined distribution properties of the independent and dependent variables. Hours
online and social use exhibited highly elevated skew and kurtosis values. Negative
 R.P. Lanthier, R.C. Windham / Computers in Human Behavior 20 (2004) 591–606 599

Table 3
Independent variables before and after trimming procedure for outliers
Statistic Before trimming After trimming
Hours online
Mean 6.82 5.18
Skew 4.42 1.67
Kurtosis 32.12 3.13

Social use
Mean 7.68 6.56
Skew 4.79 1.48
Kurtosis 33.50 2.46
Negative aspects of use
Mean 0.47 0.45
Skew 1.80 1.20
Kurtosis 4.56 0.93

aspects of use also displayed relatively high levels of skew and kurtosis, though not
as high as the other two predictors. We decided to used trimmed values on these
variables for the regression analyses to eliminate the effect of outliers on our findings.
Cases with values greater than three standard deviations above the mean were
eliminated from the analysis. This procedure for outlier management resulted in
substantial reduction in skew and kurtosis values (see Table 3). The SACQ depen-
dent variables did not exhibit distribution problems of elevated skew or kurtosis and
thus the full range of scores were retained.
Multiple linear regression analyses were used to determine the extent to which
Internet use predicted college adjustment. Predictor variables were entered simul-
taneously as we had no a priori hypotheses about the strength or ordering of variable
prediction. As such, all probability levels reported are based on two-tailed signifi-
cance tests. In addition, tolerance and variance inflation factor were examined in
each analysis to determine whether multicollinearity was likely to create problems in
the analyses reported. These statistics indicated that multicollinearity of predictors
was not a problem for the regression analyses (von Eye & Schuster, 1998).
As a group, the Internet use variables accounted for a statistically reliable portion
of the variance in college adjustment (R2 , range .05–.08), which represent small effect
sizes. Looking at the individual predictors, negative aspects of use was consistently
negatively associated with adjustment, that is, the more negative the students felt
about their Internet use, the poorer their adjustment in the college setting. Hours
online and social use were unrelated to college adjustment (see Table 4).

3.3. Gender as a moderator variable

Our final analyses examined whether gender moderated the relations between
Internet use and college adjustment. We computed three multiplicative interaction
terms between the three Internet use variables and gender. As recommended by
Cohen, Cohen, West, and Aiken (2003), we centered the Internet use variables prior
600 R.P. Lanthier, R.C. Windham / Computers in Human Behavior 20 (2004) 591–606

Table 4
Summary of simultaneous regression analyses of Internet use variables predicting college adjustment
ðN ¼ 230Þ
Criterion variable Predictor variables (b)
Hours online Social use Negative aspects of use
Academic adjustment 0.03 )0.02 )0.24


Social adjustment )0.09 0.11 )0.23


Emotional adjustment )0.04 0.00 )0.21


Institutional attachment )0.03 0.07 )0.24


Total score )0.03 0.04 )0.19


Note. R2 values for the full equations range from .05 to .08 (ps < :05).
**
p < :01.

Table 5
Summary of simultaneous regression analyses of Internet use variables predicting college adjustment in-
cluding gender and gender of Internet use interactions ðN ¼ 230Þ
Criterion variable Predictor variables (b)
Hours Social Negative Gender Gender  Gender  Gender 
online use aspects hours Social negative
Academic adjustment 0.06 )0.10 )0.20
)0.18

)0.06 0.16
)0.06
Social adjustment )0.05 0.00 )0.19
)0.10 )0.05 0.21

)0.08
Emotional adjustment 0.01 )0.06 )0.15 0.05 )0.10 0.12 )0.11
Institutional attachment 0.00 )0.05 )0.16 )0.11 )0.05 0.23

)0.14
Total score 0.02 )0.07 )0.21
)0.10 )0.09 0.21
)0.11
Note. R2 values for the full equations range from .08 to .12 (ps < :05).
*
p < :05.
**
p < :01.

8.0

7.5
Predicted Academic Adjustment

7.0

6.5

6.0

5.5
Males

5.0 Females
-6.50 0 6.50

Social Use (Centered)

Fig. 1. College academic adjustment as a function of gender and social use.

 R.P. Lanthier, R.C. Windham / Computers in Human Behavior 20 (2004) 591–606 601

8.0

7.5

Predicted Social Adjustment

7.0

6.5

6.0

5.5
Males

5.0 Females
-6.50 0 6.50

Social Use (Centered)

Fig. 2. College social adjustment as a function of gender and social use.

to computing the interaction terms. We then computed simultaneous multiple re-

gression analyses with seven predictor variables (gender, three Internet use variables,
and three interaction terms) for each of the SACQ adjustment measures. The results
of these analyses are summarized in Table 5. Gender moderated the effect of social use
on academic adjustment, social adjustment, institutional attachment, and total ad-
justment (ps < :05). To interpret the moderator effect, we computed simple slopes for
social use for each gender and plotted the resulting regression lines (see Figs. 1–4).

8.0
Predicted Institutional Attachment

7.5

7.0

6.5

6.0

5.5
Males

5.0 Females
-6.50 0 6.50

Social Use (Centered)

Fig. 3. College institutional attachment as a function of gender and social use.

602 R.P. Lanthier, R.C. Windham / Computers in Human Behavior 20 (2004) 591–606

8.0

7.5

Predicted Total Adjustment

7.0

6.5

6.0

5.5
Males

5.0 Females
-6.50 0 6.50

Social Use (Centered)

Fig. 4. College total adjustment as a function of gender and social use.

These follow-up analyses indicated that social use was associated with better ad-
justment for males. For females, social use was unrelated to adjustment.

4. Discussion

These results suggest that overall, the amount of time spent online has little to do
with college adjustment. What is important, however, is the manner in which the
time is spent and the feelings and experiences associated with that time. Social
contact on the Internet was positively associated with college adjustment for males.
Negative feelings and experiences were, not surprisingly, associated with poorer
adjustment. These findings are in line with work highlighting the potential social
benefits of relationships developed on the Internet (see, e.g., McKenna & Bargh,
2000; Parks & Floyd, 1996; Turkel, 1995). However, they also point to the negative
consequences of Internet use. Future research should examine variables that predict
when and how such negative experiences and feelings come about.
The precise meaning of the findings with regard to gender is unclear. Males and
females did not differ in their Internet use, for example, and their levels of adjust-
ment, with the exception of academics, were the same. There is recent work that
sheds light on our findings. One might speculate that the Internet provides an en-
vironment that allows male students to step outside gender stereotypes that can
restrict emotional openness and expressiveness. Morahan-Martin (1998) found that
men are more likely than women to open up online and be more disclosive, intimate,
and genuine. The fact that personal appearance is not a factor in online interactions
may also increase opportunities for interpersonal authenticity. McKenna and Bargh
(2000) state that ‘‘the relative anonymity of Internet communication may allow in-
dividuals to take greater risks in making disclosures to their Internet friends than
 R.P. Lanthier, R.C. Windham / Computers in Human Behavior 20 (2004) 591–606 603

they would in a more traditional . . . setting’’ (p.62). Cummings, Butler, and Kraut
(2002), on the other hand, conclude that Internet communication is not as effective
as other means of forming strong friendships, and they suggest that more attention
be paid to the opportunity costs of time spent online: Does it substitute for time that
would otherwise have been spent in real-world social or group activity? A study by
Morahan-Martin and Schumacher (1999) found that Internet users who self-iden-
tified as lonely reported their Internet use interfered with real-life social interaction
and left them feeling guilty.
Potential moderators beyond gender also warrant investigation. Kraut et al.
(2002), for instance, have found that Internet use by extraverts is associated with
increased self-esteem and community involvement and a decline in negative affect,
while it was associated with the reverse for introverts. Thus it appears that per-
sonality variables also moderate links between Internet use and adjustment. The
search for potential moderators of the effects of Internet use is an important one as it
gives educators, researchers, and the lay-public important qualifiers to media de-
pictions of the Internet ‘‘addict.’’
In any case, we strongly believe that the key to whether Internet use is adaptive or
maladaptive for college students may lie in personal factors and attitudes toward use.
Our most robust findings were the consistent relations between negative feelings and
experiences with the Internet and college adjustment. Of course, our design is cor-
relational, and it is impossible to untangle direction of effect. While one might argue
that it is experiences with the Internet that are driving poorer adjustment, however, it
is equally plausible that students experiencing adjustment difficulties create negative
experiences with the Internet. In short, there is a need for experimental or quasi-
experimental designs that can sort out these issues. Additionally, longitudinal de-
signs tracking use and adjustment over time would be most enlightening.
We should also note the limitations of our data collection- self-reports- and
recommend replication with more extensive collection of online experiences. This
could perhaps be accomplished via Internet use monitoring or tracking, however this
is very difficult given that college students have access to many different computers
while at school. Another option would be for students to keep a log of online activity
over a typical one week period. This might provide a more accurate assessment of
Internet usage patterns.
Replication in a sample of current users is essential to establish the generaliz-
ability of our findings. Internet use has increased tremendously, particularly among
college students. In particular, the use of instant messaging has transformed online
communication beyond e-mail and affords both men and women other outlets for
meeting new people and maintaining contact with existing friends and acquain-
tances. The impact of this new medium of communication and its implications for
adjustment in young adults is unexplored. However, a recent paper by Gross, Ju-
vonen, and Gable (2002) suggests that at least in middle school, student spend more
time instant messaging than any other online activity.
Finally, we believe that it is important to replicate our findings across more di-
verse samples of students. Our sampleÕs use was constrained by the fact that many
were not extensive users of the Internet. With the explosion of instant messaging,
604 R.P. Lanthier, R.C. Windham / Computers in Human Behavior 20 (2004) 591–606

more people are using the Internet for social means now than ever before. The In-
ternet is a rapidly-changing arena of communication and social interaction warrants
ongoing attention by researchers.

5. Summary

In contrast to negative portrayals of the effects of Internet use on young adults, we

found that hours spent online had no relation to college adjustment. However,
negative aspects of use were, predictably, associated with poorer adjustment. Finally,
the Internet appears to provide, especially for men, an outlet for expression and
exploration of intimacy and emotion not available in traditional settings – an outlet
that may be beneficial for adjustment within the college setting.

Acknowledgements

The authors wish to thank Amanda Williams and Tara Stevens for their assis-
tance in data collection. A previous version of this paper was presented at the 2001
Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Seattle, WA.

References

Arnett, J. (2000). Emerging adulthood: A theory of development from the late teens through the twenties.
American Psychologist, 55, 469–480.
Baker, R. W., & Siryk, B. (1989). Manual for the student adaptation to college questionnaire. Los Angeles,
CA: Western Psychological Services.
Berman, A. (2001, November 12). College students hooked on campus broadband. USA Today. Retrieved
July 1, 2002. Available: http://www.usatoday.com/life/cyber/bonus/1101/bonus-college.htm.
Beyers, W., & Goossens, L. (2002). Concurrent and predictive validity of the student adaptation to college
questionnaire in a sample of European freshman students. Educational and Psychological Measure-
ment, 62, 527–538.
Boneva, B., Kraut, R., & Frohlich, D. (2001). Using e-mail for personal relationships: The difference
gender makes. American Behavioral Scientist, 45, 530–549.
Brooks, J., & DuBois, D. (1995). Individual and environmental predictors of adjustment during the first
year of college. Journal of College Student Development, 36, 347–360.
Cohen, J., Cohen, P., West, S. G., & Aiken, L. S. (2003). Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for
the behavioral sciences (3rd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
College students spend $200 billion per year. (2002, July 29). Retrieved August 5, 2002. Available: http://
www.harrisinteractive.com/news/allnewsbydate.asp?NewsID ¼ 480.
Cummings, J., Butler, B., & Kraut, R. (2002). The quality of online social relationships. Communications
of the ACM, 45, 103–108.
De Fruyt, F., & Mervielde, I. (1996). Personality and interests as predictors of educational streaming and
achievement. European Journal of Psychology, 10, 405–425.
Egger, O., & Rauterberg, M. (1996). Internet behavior and addiction. ETH Technical Report AP-01-96,
Swiss Federal Institute of Technology, Zurich. Retrieved June 20, 2002. Available: http://
www.ipo.tue.nl/homepages/mrauterb/publications/INTERNET96report.pdf.
Erikson, E. (1968). Identity: Youth and crisis. New York: Norton.
 R.P. Lanthier, R.C. Windham / Computers in Human Behavior 20 (2004) 591–606 605

Erikson, E. (1963). Childhood and society (2nd ed.). New York: Norton.
GVUÕs 10th WWW user surveys. Retrieved August 2, 2002. Available: http://www.gvu.gatech.edu/
user_surveys/survey-1998-10/.
Gross, E. F., Juvonen, J., & Gable, S. L. (2002). Internet use and well being in adolescence. Journal of
Social Issues, 58, 75–90.
Hayes, D. (2001, August 20). Target: Animal house. Broadband Week. Retrieved August, 7. Available:
http://www.broadbandweek.com/news/010820/print/010820_biz_coll.htm.
Horrigan, J., & Rainie, L. (2002). The broadband difference: How online AmericansÕ behavior changes with
high-speed Internet connections at home. Washington, DC: Pew Internet and American Life Project.
Jecusco, C. (2002, January). The college technology review 2001–2002. Retrieved July 25. Available: http://
www.schooldata.com/datapoint74.html.
Kandell, J. J. (1998). Internet addiction on campus: The vulnerability of college students. CyberPsychology
and Behavior, 1, 11–17.
Keenan, J. (1996). Students stuck in cyber web. Insight on the News, 12, 38.
Kraut, R., Lundmark, V., Patterson, M., Kiesler, S., Mukopadhyahy, T., & Sherlis, W. (1998). Internet
paradox: A social technology that reduces social involvement and psychological well being? American
Psychologist, 53, 1017–1031.
Kraut, R., Kiesler, S., Boneva, B., Cummings, J., Helgeson, V., & Crawford, A. (2002). Internet paradox
revisited. Journal of Social Issues, 58, 49–74.
Kubey, R. W., Lavin, M. J., & Barrows, J. R. (2001). Internet use and collegiate academic performance
decrements: Early findings. Journal of Communication, 51, 366–382.
McKenna, K. Y. A. (1999). The computers that bind: Relationship formation on the Internet.
Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Ohio University.
McKenna, K. Y. A., & Bargh, J. A. (2000). Plan 9 from cyberspace: The implications of the Internet for
personality and social psychology. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 4, 57–75.
Morahan-Martin, J. (1998). Males, females and the Internet. In J. Gackenbach (Ed.), Psychology and the Internet:
Intrapersonal, interpersonal, and transpersonal implications (pp. 169–197). San Diego: Academic Press.
Morahan-Martin, J. (2001). Caught in the web: Research and criticism of Internet abuse with application
to college students. In C. R. Wolfe (Ed.), Learning and teaching on the world wide web (pp. 191–219).
San Diego, CA, USA: Academic Press.
Morahan-Martin, J., & Schumacher, P. (1999, August). Loneliness and social uses of the Internet. Paper
presented at the 107th Annual Convention of the American Psychology Association.
Morahan-Martin, J., & Schumacher, P. (2000). Incidence and correlates of pathological Internet use
among college students. Computers in Human Behavior, 16, 13–29.
Odell, P., Koregen, K., Schumacher, P., & Delucchi, M. (2000). Internet use among female and male
college students. Cyberpsychology & Behavior, 3, 855–862.
Ono, H., & Zavodny, M. (2003). Gender and the Internet. Social Science Quarterly, 84, 111–121.
Parks, M. R., & Floyd, K. (1996). Making friends in cyberspace. Journal of Communication, 46, 80–95.
Pew Internet and American Life Project. (2002, September 15). The Internet goes to college: How students
are living in the future with todayÕs technology. Retrieved September 17. Available: http://
www.pewinternet.org/reports/.
Pew Internet and American Life Project. (2001, June 20). Teenage life online: The rise of the instant-
message generation and the InternetÕs impact on friendships and family relationships. Retrieved
August 1, 2002. Available: http://www.pewinternet.org/reports/.
Pew Internet and American Life Project. (2000, May 10). Tracking online life: How women use the
Internet to cultivate relationships with family and friends. Retrieved August 2, 2002. Available: http://
www.pewinternet.org/reports/.
Scherer, K. (1997). College life on-line: Healthy and unhealthy Internet use. Journal of Colleget Student
Development, 38, 655–665.
Schumacher, P., & Morahan-Martin, J. (2001). Gender, Internet, and computer experiences. Computers
and Human Behavior, 17, 95–110.
Sherman, R., End, C., Kraan, E., Cole, A., Campbell, J., Birchmeier, Z., & Klausner, J. (2000). The Internet
gender gap among college students: Forgotten but not gone? Cyberpsychology & Behavior, 3, 885–894.
606 R.P. Lanthier, R.C. Windham / Computers in Human Behavior 20 (2004) 591–606

Turkel, S. (1995). Life on the screen: Identity in the age of the Internet. New York: Simon and Schuster.
UCLA Higher Education Research Institute. (2000). An overview of the 2000 freshman norms. Retrieved
August 27, 2002. Available: http://www.gseis.ucla.edu/heri/00_exec_summary.htm.
Valde, G. (1996). Identity closure: A fifth identity status. Journal of Genetic Psychology, 157, 245–254.
von Eye, A., & Schuster, C. (1998). Regression analysis for social sciences. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
Waterman, A. (1982). Identity development from adolescence to adulthood: An extension of theory and a
review of research. Developmental Psychology, 18, 341–358.