-
oo
nefromty atern; 50nd Ft inwhek. Htow
2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction
socialwitterr in imudiedargh (ne fromced imo geogpace
growing evidence that social anxiety may play an important
rolein the use of SNSs (Buote, Wood, & Pratt, 2009; Caplan,
2007).
In the current study, we explored the use of Facebook from
theperspective of adult attachment theory, examining whether
thereexist relationships between attachment style and Facebook
use.A number of characteristic features of Facebook (and
otherSNSs), including maintaining geographically distant
relationships,
Dozens of papers have been published on the social and
psycho-logical correlates of Facebook use and attitudes (Nadkarni
&Hofmann, 2012). Some demographic correlates have beenreported,
including gender, ethnicity, and parental education(Hargittai,
2008; Moore & McElroy, 2012), as well as cross
culturaldifferences (Buote et al., 2009; Caplan, 2007). The
majority of re-search, however, has focused on personality
correlates of Facebookuse (Moore & McElroy, 2012; Ross et al.,
2009; Ryan & Xenos, 2011;Vasalou, Joinson, & Courvoisier,
2010). All studies report signicantassociations between personality
traits and aspects of Facebookuse, supporting Amichai-Hamburger
(2002) claim that personality
Corresponding author. Tel.: +44 1904 433190; fax: +44 1904
433181.
Computers in Human Behavior 29 (2013) 11421149
Contents lists available at
u
eviE-mail address: [email protected] (J.A.
Oldmeadow).characteristics, McKenna and Bargh speculated, could
make onlinesocial interactions particularly appealing to certain
types of people,such as those suffering from social anxieties that
handicap them inofine interactions. In the past few years
considerable research hasinvestigated the psychological
characteristics of internet users,particularly SNS users, with a
focus on the personality correlatesand psychological outcomes of
internet use (Nadkarni & Hofmann,2012). Conrming McKenna and
Barghs suspicions, there is
tent by attachment style, particularly attachment anxiety. This,
inturn, suggests that Facebook may provide a sense of closeness
orbelonging that satises attachment needs in individuals who
areotherwise anxious or avoidant in close personal
relationships.
1.1. Psychological correlates of Facebook useWith the growth in
popularity ofsuch as Facebook, Myspace and Tinteraction have
emerged that diffeofine interactions more typically stOver a decade
ago McKenna and Bcharacteristics that differentiate onlitions:
increased anonymity, reduappearance, reduced barriers due tgreater
control over the time and0747-5632/$ - see front matter 2012
Elsevier Ltd.
Ahttp://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2012.10.006networking sites
(SNSs), new forms of socialportant ways from theby social
psychologists.2000) highlighted fourofine social interac-
portance of physicalraphical distance, andof interactions.
These
maximizing control over the pace and time of interactions,
andenabling perpetual contact with a social network, suggest
thatFacebook could potentially serve needs for belonging,
closenessand security for those with high levels of attachment
anxiety and/or avoidance. To explore this possibility, an online
survey wasadministered to a large and demographically diverse
sample ofthe general adult population, eliciting data on
respondents attach-ment styles, social skills, and use and
experience with Facebook.These data revealed reliable and
theoretically consistent relation-ships between attachment style
and Facebook use that lend supportto the hypothesis that the use of
Facebook is inuenced to some ex-trolled. These results suggest that
Facebook may serve attachment functions and provide a basis
forunderstanding how online communication may be related to
attachment styles.Attachment style, social skills, and Faceb
Julian A. Oldmeadow , Sally Quinn, Rachel KowertDepartment of
Psychology, University of York, Heslington, York YO10 5DD, UK
a r t i c l e i n f o
Article history:Available online 13 November 2012
Keywords:AttachmentSocial skillsSocial networkOnlineFacebook
a b s t r a c t
Research suggests that onliexamined Facebook usebetween
attachment anxieto attachment style and inadult participants (N =
617dimensions, social skills, ament theory, we found thawere more
likely to use itperceived them on Facebooand less positive
attitudes
Computers in H
journal homepage: www.elsll rights reserved.k use amongst
adults
communication may benet those high in social anxiety. The
current studythe perspective of adult attachment theory, exploring
relationships
nd avoidance and Facebook use. Social skills have been found to
be relatedet use thus we also examined the role of these skills. A
diverse sample of.1% female) completed a self report questionnaire
measuring attachmentacebook use and experience. In line with
predictions grounded in attach-dividuals with high attachment
anxiety used Facebook more frequently,n feeling negative emotions
and were more concerned about how othersigh attachment avoidance
was related to less Facebook use, less opennessards Facebook. These
relationships remained when social skills were con-
SciVerse ScienceDirect
man Behavior
er .com/locate /comphumbeh
-
Humis a major factor in internet use. Although the results
across studiesare not always consistent, taken together they
implicate at leastextroversion, shyness and self-esteem.
Extroversion associateswith more time on Facebook and larger
friendship networks,whereas shyness and low self-esteem associate
with smallerfriendship networks but more intensive Facebook use
(Nadkarni& Hofmann, 2012; Orr et al., 2009).
These patterns suggest Facebook use may serve different
func-tions for different people, on the one hand satisfying
extrovertsneeds for social stimulation and large networks, and on
the otherhand facilitating social interaction and a sense of
belongingamongst shy individuals and those with low self-esteem.
Basedon a review of the literature, Nadkarni and Hofmann (2012)
sug-gest Facebook use is motivated by two fundamental needs,
theneed for self-presentation and the need to belong. In support,
theycite evidence that a sense of disconnection motivates
Facebookuse, and that Facebook use may increase a sense of
connectionand self-esteem (Sheldon, Abad, & Hirsch, 2011; Yu,
Tian, Vogel,& Kwok, 2010). Thus, there is converging evidence
to suggest thatsocial networking sites like Facebook may offer a
form of socialconnecting that is particularly appealing to certain
types of indi-viduals whose needs for belonging and connection with
othersare not fully realized in ofine social interactions.
While Facebook may not offer the anonymity and invisibilitythat
characterized the chat rooms and newsgroups to whichMcKenna and
Bargh (2000) referred, it does offer social interactionwithout
physical proximity and enables greater control over thetime and
pace of interactions. In addition, particularly with theuse of
mobile devices, individuals can connect to Facebook virtu-ally
anytime, anyplace and anywhere, a characteristic we have re-ferred
to elsewhere as the Martini Effect (Quinn & Oldmeadow,submitted
for publication). These characteristics, more so thananonymity or
physical appearance, may make online social inter-actions
particularly appealing for individuals who are anxiousabout
personal closeness or physical intimacy, who anticipaterejection
from others, and who therefore tend to avoid developingclose
personal relationships. These kinds of response sets aredescribed
and explained by adult attachment theory (Hazan &Shaver, 1987;
Mikulincer & Shaver, 2007).
1.2. Adult attachment theory
Adult attachment theory stems from Bowlbys (Bowlby, 1969/1982,
1973, 1980) work on childrens attachment to their primarycaregiver,
extending the principles of child-parent attachment toclose
personal relationships in adulthood (Hazan & Shaver,
1987;Mikulincer & Shaver, 2007). Infants and childrens
experienceswithattachment gures shape their working models about
themselves,others and relationships, which inuence cognitive,
emotional,and behavioral response patterns in attachment-relevant
contexts.These working models are characterized along two
dimensions,referred to as attachment anxiety and avoidance
(Brennan, Clark,& Shaver, 1998; Collins & Allard, 2004).
When needs for comfortand security are consistently satised the
infant develops a securebond towards the attachment gure
characterized by a positiveview of the self as lovable and of
others as dependable. However,if needs are not met by the
attachment gure a working modeldevelops in which the individual
fears and expects rejection fromattachment gures. Individuals with
this type of model are high inattachment anxiety, dened as an
anxious or fearful preoccupationwith relationships (Smith,Murphy,
& Coats, 1999). If the experienceof neglect is repeated
consistently enough the individualmay devel-op a working model of
others as untrustworthy and undependable,
J.A. Oldmeadow et al. / Computers inand of the self as
autonomous and self-sufcient. They may thenavoid developing close
relationships, which they fear will only leadto disappointment.
Individuals with this type of working model arehigh in attachment
avoidance, dened as a tendency to dismiss oravoid intimate
relationships (Smith et al., 1999).
Attachment theory was developed to explain childrens attach-ment
to primary care givers, but it has been successfully adapted
toexplain adult relationships more generally, and romantic
partner-ships in particular (Hazan & Shaver, 1987; Mikulincer
& Shaver,2007). The working models developed in the context of
primarycaregivers during childhood generalize to other kinds of
social rela-tionships during adulthood. Individuals high in
attachment anxietyhave a hyper activated attachment system. They
expect and fearrejection from others, so are particularly vigilant
in detecting cuesto untrustworthiness or rejection, and
particularly sensitive to crit-icism and conict. They may be
particularly concerned with man-aging their self-presentation,
engage in behaviors designed toreinforce relationships (e.g. gift
giving), and seek regular conrma-tion of close others
responsiveness. Individuals high in attachmentavoidance have a
deactivated attachment system. They down-reg-ulate their needs for
closeness and reinforcement from others andavoid situations that
activate the attachment system. They tend toavoid developing
intimate relationships and are more likely to besocially isolated.
The patterns of thinking, feeling and behavingthat characterize
attachment anxiety and avoidance suggest,rstly, that online social
interactions may be particularly attractiveto individuals with
attachment insecurities and, secondly, thatindividuals high in
attachment anxiety and avoidance may useSNSs such as Facebook in
different ways.
1.3. Attachment style and Facebook use
In the domain of interpersonal relationships Facebook may
offeradvantages over ofine interactions for individuals high in
attach-ment anxiety and/or avoidance. For example, having the
ability tocarefully manage self-presentation could be a
particularly attrac-tive feature of Facebook for individuals high
in attachment anxiety,who desire closeness but anticipate and fear
rejection. By manag-ing how they present themselves to others,
through text, pictures,links, etc., such individuals may feel more
condent in their abilityto maintain interpersonal relationships.
Similarly, the ability tocontrol the time and pace of interactions
and to maintain relation-ships without physical proximity could
appeal to individuals highin attachment avoidance, who tend to
avoid closeness and valuetheir autonomy. Thus, online social
interactions, and Facebook inparticular, may contain a number of
features that facilitate thedevelopment and maintenance of
interpersonal relationships forindividuals high in attachment
anxiety and/or avoidance. Previousresearch has alluded to this
possibility, as individuals with an anx-ious or avoidant attachment
report approaching and responding toonline and ofine friendships
differently (Buote et al., 2009).
Another way in which Facebook may appeal to individuals
withattachment issues is by providing a sense of belonging to a
socialnetwork. Research shows that social network site use can
increasea sense of belonging amongst both adults (Sheldon et al.,
2011) andchildren (Quinn & Oldmeadow, in press). Facebook
provides ameans of staying in touch with what others are doing,
observingrelationships between others, and maintaining ones own
presencewithin the network (through wall posts, messages, pokes,
etc.).This may appeal to those whose attachment issues extend to
socialrelationships more generally, such as social groups. Very
little re-search has been done on attachment to social groups.
However,Smith et al. (1999) reasoned that individuals develop
workingmodels of themselves in relation to groups that parallel
thoseunderlying interpersonal attachment styles. They developed
ameasure of group attachment by adapting an existing measure of
an Behavior 29 (2013) 11421149 1143interpersonal attachment, and
found moderate correlations be-tween interpersonal and group
attachment anxiety and avoidance.These ndings suggest that
attachment styles are not restricted to
oanaHighlight
oanaHighlight
-
between attachment style and Facebook use may generalize to
pendent of the relationships between attachment style and
Face-
Humbook use and experience.
2. Method
2.1. Participants
Participants were recruited in several ways. Some were
re-cruited from within the psychology student population and
re-ceived course credit for their participation. Others were
recruitedthrough posts on the authors social networking sites and
receivedno compensation. The remainder were recruited through
AmazonsMechanical Turk, a crowd sourcing website, where
respondentswere paid $0.50 USD for taking the survey. A total of
742 completeresponses were received. One hundred twenty ve
participantswho indicated they do not use Facebook were excluded
from anal-yses, leaving 617 participants (50.1% female). Age ranged
from 18 to64 years, with a mean of 27.63 (SD = 8.42). Sixty one
percent of thesample identied as Caucasian, 16.1 percent as Asian,
4.9 percentHispanic, 3.9 percent Indian/South Asian, 3.7 percent
Black, andother forms of internet use.
1.4. The current study
In this study we examined relationships between
attachmentstyles, social skills and use and experience of Facebook.
Based onthe view that Facebook provides a sense of closeness or
belongingthat is attractive to individuals who are otherwise
anxious in oravoidant of close personal relationships, we
hypothesized thatthere would be direct relationships between
attachment style,measured as levels of attachment anxiety and
avoidance, and theuse and experience of Facebook. Specically, we
hypothesized that(1) attachment anxiety would associate positively
with intensity ofFacebook use, (2) that individuals high in
attachment anxietywould tend to use Facebook more when feeling
negative emotions,and also, (3) would express stronger concerns
over how they mightbe viewed by others on Facebook. Since
individuals high in attach-ment avoidance view themselves as
autonomous and self-suf-cient, it is possible that Facebook does
not serve attachmentfunctions in the same way as for individuals
high in attachmentanxiety. Therefore we hypothesized that, (4)
attachment avoidancewould be uncorrelated with the intensity of
Facebook use. Finally,we expected that (5) social skills would
associate with Facebookuse and experience, but that their impact
would be largely inde-interpersonal relationships, but extend to
relationships to groupsas well.
A third way that attachment styles could inuence Facebookuse is
indirectly through social skills. Attachment styles have beenshown
to inuence a number of social skills, including the ability
toexpress emotions, empathy, the use of and understanding of
bodylanguage, and the ability to control ones social behavior
(DiTomm-aso, Brannen-McNulty, Ross, & Burgess, 2003). Although
to ourknowledge there is no research linking social skills with
social net-work site use in particular, a number of studies show
associationsbetween social skills and excessive internet use
(Caplan, 2005;Engelberg & Sjoberg, 2004; Iacovelli &
Valenti, 2009; Liu & Peng,2009). If attachment style inuences
social skills, and individualswith certain social skills are
attracted to various forms of onlineinteraction, it is possible
that attachment may inuence Facebookuse indirectly through social
skills. If so, then Facebook use maynot specically cater to
attachment needs and any relationships
1144 J.A. Oldmeadow et al. / Computers in5.9 percent as Other.
Almost half (46.3%) were employed or self-employed, and 39.7% were
students (28.4% undergraduate; 10.9%postgraduate). 6.5% of the
total sample were psychology students.2.2. Measures
2.2.1. Experiences in Close Relationships Scale (ECR; Brennan et
al.,1998)
The ECR is a 36-item scale that measures the two major
dimen-sions of attachment (anxiety and avoidance) in the context of
closeadult relationships. An example item measuring attachment
anxi-ety is I need a lot of reassurance that close relationship
partnersreally care about me. An example of an item measuring
attach-ment avoidance is I get uncomfortable when someone wants
tobe very close to me. Across hundreds of studies the scale
hasshown excellent reliability and validity, and is the scale of
choiceamongst leading adult attachment researchers (see Mikulincer
&Shaver, 2007). The main reason we chose this scale for the
currentstudy is that it yields two separate dimension scores for
each par-ticipant, rather than assigning them to an attachment
style cate-gory (cf. Bartholomew & Horowitz, 1991). It is
therefore anappropriate measure for assessing linear relationships
betweenattachment dimensions, social skills, and Facebook use. In
the cur-rent study Cronbachs alphas for the anxiety and avoidance
sub-scales were .84 and .91 respectively, and the correlation
betweenthe two was .246 (p < .001).
2.2.2. Social Skills Inventory (SSI; Riggio, 1986)The standard
SSI uses 90 items to measure six subcomponents
of social skills, three each in emotional and social domains:
Emo-tional Expressivity (EE), Emotional Sensitivity (ES), Emotional
Con-trol (EC), Social Expressivity (SE), Social Sensitivity (SS),
and SocialControl (SC). The emotional and social components assess
non-ver-bal and verbal dimensions of social ability respectively.
Theexpressivity subscales focus on ones ability to communicate,
bothverbally (SE) and non-verbally (EE); the sensitivity subscales
assessones ability to interpret verbal (SS) and non-verbal (SE)
communi-cation; and the control subscales measure the ability to
control andregulate non-verbal (EC) and verbal (SC) displays
(Riggio, 1989).Because of the length of the SSI and the overall
size of the onlinequestionnaire used in this study, we created an
abridged versionof the SSI by choosing four items to measure each
of the six sub-scales (i.e. 24 items in total; see Appendix A).
These items were se-lected by identifying the four highest loading
items from aprevious study in which we administered the full SSI to
over 600participants. Within the current sample a principle
componentsfactor analysis with oblique rotation carried out on
these 24 itemsreturned six factors with eigenvalues above 1, with
the intendedfour items loading separately on each factor. Cronbachs
alphasfor the subscales were all above .8, except for emotional
expressiv-ity (alpha = .53). Correlations between subscales ranged
from.007 to .482. Thus, the four items used for each
subcomponentappeared to capture distinct and largely reliable
aspects of socialskills, indicating they constituted an adequate
measure of the in-tended constructs. Factor scores were computed
for each subscalefor use in subsequent analyses.
2.2.3. Facebook usage and experienceA range of questions were
asked about participants usage and
experience with Facebook. These questions were devised by
theauthors, drawing on previous research (Farahani,
Aghamohamadi,Kazemi, Bakhtiarvand, & Ansari, 2011; Hughes,
Rowe, Batey, &Lee, 2012; Moore & McElroy, 2012; Orr et al.,
2009). Questionsfocusing on Facebook usage included: How often do
you useFacebook? (1 = Less than once a month; 7 = daily); Think
aboutthe last day you logged onto Facebook. In total, how long did
youspend logged onto Facebook? (1 = about 15 min or less; 7 = 3
h
an Behavior 29 (2013) 11421149or more); How often do you post
updates on Facebook?(1 = Never; 7 = 45 times a week); How often do
you change yourFacebook prole picture? (1 = Never; 7 = Daily); and
Who do you
-
normally include as friends on your Facebook prole? (1 =
Prettymuch anybody; 7 = Close personal friends or family only). An
addi-tional 18 items probed a variety of dimensions of
participantsexperience with Facebook, including their dependence on
Face-book (e.g. I get anxious if I cannot check Facebook for a
while),which emotions motivate them to use Facebook (e.g. I nd
myselfwanting to check Facebook particularly when I feel
(lonely,stressed, bored, sad, anxious, happy)), concern over social
evalua-tion through Facebook (e.g. I worry about the impression
peoplemight get of me through Facebook), pride in Facebook (I
am
3.2. Attachment, social skills, and Facebook usage and
experience
J.A. Oldmeadow et al. / Computers in Human Behavior 29 (2013)
11421149 1145proud of my Facebook prole), and indifference (e.g. If
I dontcheck Facebook for a while I tend to forget about it).
Responseswere given on 7-point scales (1 = Strongly disagree; 7 =
Stronglyagree).
2.3. Procedure
Participants completed an online survey that included theabove
measures as well as an additional section on video gameplay. The
latter is not relevant to the current study so will not bediscussed
further. The order in which the various sections of thesurvey (ECR,
SSI, Facebook usage and experience) were presentedwas randomized
across participants.
3. Results
Several studies have reported gender differences in
attachmentstyles and social skills (Deniz, Hamarta, & Ari,
2005; DiTommasoet al., 2003). In the current study independent
t-tests revealed gen-der differences in avoidant attachment (p <
.001), and on four ofthe six subcomponents of social skills (ES,
EC, EE and SC,ps < .05). To control for these effects, gender
was held as a covariatein our analyses of relationships between
attachment, social skillsand Facebook usage and experience (see
DiTommaso et al. for asimilar approach). Consequently, hypotheses 1
through 4 weretested using partial correlations (controlling for
gender), andhypothesis 5 was tested using a hierarchical regression
(also con-trolling for gender).
3.1. Attachment style and social skills
Table 1 shows the associations (partial correlations
controllingfor gender) between anxious and avoidant attachment
scores andeach subcomponent of social skills. Attachment anxiety
was nega-tively associated with SE, SC and EE. However, anxiety was
moststrongly associated with ES and EC. Those high in attachment
anx-iety were more likely to be sensitive to criticism (ES) and
more ableto control or hide their emotions (EC). Attachment
avoidance wasalso negatively associated with SE, SC and EE. Those
high in attach-ment avoidance reported being less likely to enjoy
socializing andmeeting new people (SE), less likely to take a
leading role in groups(SC), and less likely to show their emotions
(EE).
Table 1Partial correlations (controlling for gender) between
attachment style and socialskills.
Social skill Anxiety Avoidance
Social expressivity 0.119* 0.385**Social sensitivity 0.443**
0.061Social control 0.096* 0.241**Emotional expressivity 0.209**
0.484**Emotional sensitivity 0.002 0.045Emotional control 0.338**
0.008** p < .001.* p < .05.The items relating to Facebook
usage (e.g. How often do you useFacebook?, How often do you post
updates on Facebook?) weresummed to give a single measure of
Facebook usage (alpha = .621).The 18 items relating to Facebook
experience were factor analyzed toextract the principle components.
Principle components factor anal-ysis with oblique rotation was
used. Five factors emerged with eigen-values greater than 1,
explaining 65.3 percent of the variance (seeAppendix B). Items
loading highly on the rst factor included thoserelated to using
Facebook particularly when feeling negative emo-tions (lonely,
stressed, sad, anxious). We called this factor FB com-fort seeking.
Items loading on the second factor included beinghappy for others
(employer, parents) to view ones prole. We calledthis factor FB
openness. The third factor included items relating toconcern about
how one is perceived by others on Facebook (e.g. I amconcerned
about how I appear to others on Facebook). We called thisfactor FB
evaluation concern. The fourth factor included itemsrelating to
detachment from Facebook, such as I think about remov-ing my
Facebook prole, and If I dont check Facebook for a while Itend to
forget about it. We reverse-scored this factor and called itFB
attachment. The nal factor included items expressing a gener-ally
positive orientation towards Facebook, such as I like my Face-book
prole and I nd myself wanting to check Facebookparticularly when I
feel happy. We called this factor FB positivity.Factor scores were
computed for each of these ve factors.
Relationships between Facebook usage/experience and attach-ment
and social skills are given in Table 2. In terms of usage,
apositive association was found with attachment anxiety, withhigher
attachment anxiety associating with more intensive use ofFacebook.
Usage also associated positively with three of the sixsocial skills
(SS, SE and SC). Participants higher in social sensitivity,social
expressivity and social control tended to use Facebook
moreintensively than those lower in these social skills.
Signicant associations were found between attachment styleand
each aspect of Facebook experience. Notably, attachment anx-iety
was strongly associated with FB comfort seeking, that is,
usingFacebook particularly when feeling negative emotions.
Attachmentanxiety was also associated with FB evaluation concern,
that is,worrying about how one appears to others on Facebook. Both
com-fort seeking and evaluation concern also were associated
withattachment avoidance, but less so than attachment anxiety.
Attach-ment avoidance was negatively associated with FB attachment,
FBopenness and FB positivity. That is, participants high in
attachmentavoidance weremore likely to think about removing their
Facebookprole, less happy for signicant others to view their prole,
andless likely to be happy with and like their Facebook prole.
There were numerous signicant associations between aspectsof
Facebook experience and social skills (see Table 2). There was
astrong association between social sensitivity (e.g. I am often
con-cerned with what others are thinking of me) and FB
evaluationconcern (e.g. I am concerned about how I appear to others
on Face-book). Social sensitivity also was associated with comfort
seeking(i.e. using Facebook when feeling negative emotions) and
attach-ment to Facebook. These relationships also held (though
weaker)with emotional control (e.g. I am very good at maintaining a
calmexterior even if I am upset). Thus, those high in social
sensitivityand/or emotional control were more concerned with how
theyappear to others on Facebook, and tended to use
Facebookparticularly when feeling sad, lonely, stressed or anxious.
Incontrast, emotional expressivity (e.g. I rarely show my
feelings
1 Cronbachs alpha is likely to underestimate the reliability of
ordinal scales
(Zumbo, Gadermann, & Zeisser, 2007). Given this, and the
relatively small number oitems (5), we considered an alpha of .62
to be adequate. Nonparametric correlationsbetween items were all
positive, signicant (
-
nd e
atio
8**
6**
6*
57**
67**
2
del.
HumTable 2Partial correlations (controlling for gender) between
components of Facebook usage a
Usage Comfort seeking Evalu
AttachmentAnxiety 0.149** 0.401** 0.37Avoidance 0.008 0.151**
0.15Social skillsEE 0.001 0.182** 0.09ES 0.008 0.019 0.05EC 0.107
0.202** 0.15SE 0.157** 0.027 0.02SS 0.104* 0.223** 0.40SC 0.084*
0.0001 0.05
** p < .001.* p < .05.
Table 3R2 and standardized beta weights for individual
predictors at steps 2 and 3 in the mo
Usage Comfort seeking
Step 2 Anxiety .151** .387**
Avoidance 0.044 0.06Step 3 Anxiety .142* .343**
Avoidance 0.046 0.068EE 0.024 .097*ES 0.048 -0.07EC -0.04
-0.063SE .179** .094*
SS 0.009 0.037SC 0.032 0.031
R2 change .034* .025*
Total R2 .061** .194**
1146 J.A. Oldmeadow et al. / Computers inor emotions [reversed])
was negatively associated with both com-fort seeking and evaluation
concern. Those high in emotionalexpressivity were less likely to
use Facebook when feeling negativeemotions and less concerned with
how they appear to others onFacebook.
There were further associations between social skills and
open-ness, positivity, and attachment to Facebook. In particular,
thosehigh in social expressivity (e.g. I love to socialize) were
more at-tached to their Facebook prole and more open and positive
aboutit than those low in social expressivity. Those high in social
control(e.g. I am often chosen to be the leader of a group) were
alsomore open and positive about their Facebook proles than
thoselower in social control.
3.3. Regression analyses
Hierarchical regression analyses assessed the contributions
ofattachment dimensions and social skills to explaining each
aspectof Facebook usage and experience. In each model gender
(dummycoded) was entered rst to partial out gender effects. In the
secondstep, attachment anxiety and avoidance were entered. The six
so-cial skills subscales were entered in step 3. The total amount
ofvariance explained in the nal model and beta weights of
eachindividual predictor are shown in Table 3. In each case the
attach-ment dimensions explained a signicant proportion of
varianceover and above gender (step 2). With the exception of FB
opennessand FB positivity, adding the social skills subscales in
step 3 signif-icantly improved prediction of each outcome.
Nevertheless, attach-ment anxiety remained a signicant predictor of
FB usage, comfortseeking, evaluation concern and positivity
independent of socialskills (step 3). Attachment avoidance remained
a signicant pre-dictor of evaluation concern, openness and
positivity independentof social skills.
** p < .001.* p < .05.xperience, and attachment and social
skills.
n concern Attachment Openness Positivity
0.087 0.047 0.0660.083* 0.193** 0.141*
0.094* 0.076 0.0620.056 0.048 0.088*0.073 0.004 0.0320.118*
0.123* 0.128*
0.136* 0.059 0.0380.028 0.169** 0.113*
Effects of gender were partialled out in step 1 and are not
reported here.
Evaluation concern Attachment Openness Positivity
.369** .107* 0.009 0.0850.066 .111* .186** .165**.225** 0.065
0.030 .108*.175** 0.013 0.154* .122*0.039 0.09 0.011 0.024.114*
0.073 0.008 0.0690.016 0.014 0.012 0.0000.034 0.119* 0.010
0.060.334 0.103* 0.062 0.035.111* 0.022 .131* 0.050.103** .029*
0.019 0.014.262** .050** .054** .045*
an Behavior 29 (2013) 114211494. Discussion
The aim of the present study was to explore any links
betweenattachment style and Facebook use and experience. In line
with ourrst three hypotheses, we found that individuals with a
highattachment anxiety were more likely to spend more time on
thesite, to use it when they were feeling negative emotions and
toshow concern over how other Facebook users perceived them.We also
found no relationship between the avoidant attachmentstyle and
Facebook usage, supporting our fourth hypothesis.Although social
skills were found to have some relationship withFacebook use and
experience, they were found to have little effecton the
relationships between the two attachment styles and Face-book use
and experience, supporting our nal hypothesis. This sug-gests that
the way people experience and use Facebook may have adirect
relationship with their style of attachment.
Securely attached individuals have been found to be high in
so-cial and emotional expressivity, high in social control, and low
insocial sensitivity (Deniz et al., 2005; Dereli & Karakus,
2011). Inthe current study social expressivity and social control
both wereassociated with more openness and positivity towards
Facebook.In addition, while those high in social expressivity and
social con-trol tended to use Facebook more than those low in
social expres-sivity and social control, there were no associations
betweenthese traits and comfort seeking or evaluation concern. This
patterngives rise to an image of a securely attached individual,
outgoing,sociable and expressive, who uses Facebook in a positive
way. Theyare happy for important others to view their Facebook
prole, theyare proud of their Facebook prole and enjoy using
Facebook whenfeeling happy. Since Nadkarni and Hofmann (2012)
suggest thatFacebook may help to increase a sense of connection to
others,our data suggest that securely attached individuals may use
Face-book as a tool to augment existing relationships in the
ofineworld.
-
HumIndividuals high in attachment anxiety are typically
character-ized by anxiousness about being alone, being sensitive to
criticismreceived from others and having a need for reassurance
(Brennanet al., 1998). In the present study, we found that
attachment anx-iety was positively related to Facebook usage,
comfort seekingand to evaluation concern. This would suggest that
Facebook isbeing used more frequently by those with an anxious
attachmentstyle as a way to alleviate their feeling of being alone.
In addition,their motivation for logging on and using Facebook may
be moti-vated by their mood that is, they may seek to improve their
neg-ative mood by interacting with others. Social networking sites
canoffer users instant access to social interaction with a myriad
ofpeople (Urista, Dong, & Day, 2009) and it is perhaps this
featurethat is particularly attractive to users high in attachment
anxiety.This instant access offers them interaction with others
that maybe needed, particularly when their mood is negative. In a
qualita-tive study, Urista et al. (2009) found that receiving
comments ona photograph, for example, can result in the user
feeling as thoughthey are popular. An anxious Facebook user may log
onto their pro-le when they are in a negative mood to check if any
of theirfriends have commented on their content, which may
improvetheir mood by making them feel popular to some degree. What
re-mains to be seen however is whether or not this Facebook
usageresults in a changed mood and if so, to what degree. It has
beensuggested elsewhere that the link between user experience
andbenets gained from Facebook usage may relate to the
characteris-tics of the user and how they use the site (DiTommaso
et al., 2003).Future studies should consider examining the
relationships be-tween Facebook use and mood change taking into
account eachattachment style. Since those high in attachment
anxiety are sen-sitive to criticism and also require frequent
reassurance, it couldbe hypothesized that for those high in
attachment anxiety, Face-book interactions would only improve mood
if the interactionsare constantly positive and continually boost
self esteem.
We found that Facebook users who were high in attachmentanxiety
were also more likely to be concerned about how otherFacebook users
perceive them. Since those high in attachment anx-iety are
sensitive to criticism, social interactions via Facebook maybe
particularly attractive to these individuals. The online
environ-ment can provide users with greater control over
interactions(McKenna & Bargh, 2000) and Facebook may therefore
allow theseindividuals to have greater control over their
self-presentation. Forexample, they can take their time over what
to post on their statusupdate, what photos to put on their own
prole and how to com-ment on others photos and posts. This may also
go some way inexplaining why we found that high attachment anxiety
was relatedto higher usage of Facebook. For example, upon posting a
photo-graph, the anxious attachment Facebook user may log on
regularlyto check if anyone has commented on their photo - being
con-cerned about how others may have perceived them in this
photo-graph. In addition, they may spend more time on the
siteperfecting their Facebook self-portrayal, in an attempt to
ensurethat others would view them in a positive light.
The present study also provided evidence that regardless of
so-cial skills, individuals high in attachment avoidance used
Facebookless often, were less likely to be open about their
Facebook proleand less likely to hold a positive attitude about
Facebook. Thesendings would seem to t with the characteristics
associated withthis type of attachment that is, someone who is
autonomous,reluctant to share emotions and sees others as
untrustworthy.However, we also found a signicant positive
relationship betweenhigh attachment avoidance and evaluation
concern. This wouldsuggest that although those high in attachment
avoidance are typ-
J.A. Oldmeadow et al. / Computers inically autonomous, they do
have some level of concern over howothers view them, at least on
Facebook. Since we found no relation-ship between this style of
attachment and social sensitivity, it sug-gests that for the
present sample those high in attachmentavoidance generally do not
have concerns over how others perceivethem. There may therefore be
some unique features of Facebookthat, for those high in attachment
avoidance, result in being con-cerned about what others think of
them. It must, however, be con-sidered that our study focused only
on Facebook users, whomay onthe whole be relatively low in
attachment avoidance. The charac-teristics typically associated
with high attachment avoidance maytherefore be slightly weakened
within the present sample. Thismight go some way in explaining why
there seems to be a relation-ship between attachment avoidance and
evaluation concern.
We included measures of social skills because previous
researchshows relationships between social skills and attachment
style(Deniz et al., 2005; Dereli & Karakus, 2011; DiTommaso et
al.,2003) and between social skills and internet use (Caplan,
2005;Engelberg & Sjoberg, 2004; Harman, Hansen, Cochran, &
Lindsey,2005). We therefore wanted to examine whether attachment
stylewould predict Facebook use over and above social skills.
Indeed,there were signicant relationships between social skills
andattachment style, and between social skills and aspects of
Facebookuse and experience. Social expressivity was positively
related toFacebook usage, indicating those who are more outgoing
tend touse Facebook more intensively, and there was a strong
associationbetween emotional sensitivity and FB evaluation concern.
Thosewho tend to be emotionally sensitive generally tend also to be
con-cerned with how others view them on Facebook.
Importantly,though, these associations between social skills and
Facebook usedid not account for the relationships between
attachment styleand Facebook use. The relationships of attachment
anxiety andavoidance to Facebook use and experience were largely
unaffectedby the inclusion of social skills in the regression
models. This sug-gests that attachment style inuences Facebook use
and experi-ence largely independently of social skills, and
supports the viewthat Facebook may serve attachment functions.
Social networking sites such as Facebook can be many things
tomany people. The current study provides initial evidence that
Face-book may serve attachment functions for people high in
attach-ment anxiety, and to some extent avoidance. Although
therelationships observed between attachment and Facebook useand
experience were largely independent of social skills, this doesnot
rule out a role for other individual difference variables.
Furtherresearch should aim to partial out the effects of attachment
stylefrom other variables such as loneliness, extroversion, and
moregeneral social anxiety to further clarify the unique role that
attach-ment plays in SNS use.
The advantage of an attachment theory approach to SNS use isthat
it offers a more theoretically grounded framework for
under-standing how and why people use SNSs than simply
identifyingassociations between personality or other traits and SNS
use. Anattachment theory approach invites one to ask which
componentsof the attachment behavioral system are implicated in SNS
use, andwhat kinds of SNS use serve attachment functions. As
already sug-gested, further research could examine whether using
SNSs actu-ally leads to positive outcomes like improved mood
forindividuals with different attachment styles. Another
avenuewould be to examine more closely the effects of activating
theattachment system on SNS use. Our data show that individualshigh
in attachment anxiety reported being motivated to use Face-book
particularly when feeling negative emotions such as loneli-ness.
However, a more experimental approach that seeks toactivate the
attachment system and observe subsequent SNS activ-ity would help
to clarify whether SNS use is motivated by attach-ment needs and
not just negative mood per se.
an Behavior 29 (2013) 11421149 1147A word of caution is
warranted when generalizing from Face-book use to other SNSs.
Facebook is currently the most popularSNS (Kazeniac, 2009) and 83
percent of our survey respondents
-
indicated they use Facebook. However, there are other SNSs andwe
cannot be sure that the relationships we observed generalizeto
other sites. In theory these relationships should generalize
toother sites that also offer the features of enhanced control,
self-pre-sentation and perpetual contact that we theorize make
Facebookattractive to individuals with high attachment anxiety.
However,they may not generalize to other sites that serve more
professionalthan purely social functions, such as Linkedin or
Academia. Furtherresearch would be needed to precisely dene which
types of inter-net sites and/or usage are related to attachment
styles.
5. Conclusion
To conclude, the current study provides evidence of
theoreti-cally consistent relationships between dimensions of adult
attach-ment and Facebook use and experience that are
largelyindependent of social skills. These ndings support the view
thatFacebook (and possibly other SNSs) can serve attachment
functionsand may be particularly attractive for individuals high in
attach-
I rarely show my feelings or emotions ().
I always seem to knowwhat peoples true feelings are no matterhow
hard they try to conceal them.
I can accurately tell what a persons character is upon rst
meet-ing him or her.
I can instantly spot a phony the minute I meet him or her.
Emotional Control (EC):
I am not very skilled in controlling my emotions (). It is very
hard for me to control my emotions (). I am very good at
maintaining a calm exterior even if I am upset. I am rarely able to
hide a strong emotion ().
Social Expressivity (SE):
I love to socialize. I always mingle at parties. At parties I
enjoy talking to a lot of different people. I enjoy going to large
parties and meeting new people.
ecklon
I nd myself wanting to check Facebook particularly when I feel
strborsadanxhap
ceb
1148 J.A. Oldmeadow et al. / Computers in Human Behavior 29
(2013) 11421149I nd myself wanting to check Facebook particularly
when I feelI nd myself wanting to check Facebook particularly when
I feelI nd myself wanting to check Facebook particularly when I
feelI nd myself wanting to check Facebook particularly when I feelI
think about removing my Facebook proleI worry about what people
might say about me on FacebookI worry about the impression people
might get of me through FaI am concerned about how I appear to
others on FacebookHow I appear to others on Facebook is important
to meI am proud of my Facebook proleI like my Facebook
proleEmotional Sensitivity (ES):
I can easily tell what a persons character is by watching his
orher interactions with others.
Items
I get anxious if I cannot check Facebook for a whileIf I dont
check Facebook for a while I tend to forget about itThe longer I am
unable to check Facebook the more I want to chI nd myself wanting
to check Facebook particularly when I feelment anxiety. Further
research should investigate which attach-ment functions SNS use
serves, or which parts of the attachmentbehavioral system SNS use
responds to. The current study providesa promising rst step towards
understanding SNS use from thetheoretically rich perspective of
adult attachment theory.
Appendix A
Abridged Social Skills Inventory listing the items used to
assesseach component of social skills. Responses were given on
5-pointscales ranging from 1 (not at all like me) to 5 (exactly
like me).
Emotional Expressivity (EE):
I usually feel uncomfortable touching other people (). Sometimes
I have trouble making my friends and family realizehow angry or
upset I am with them ().
I often touch my friends when talking to them.I would be happy
for a potential employer to view my Facebook proI would be happy
for my parents to view my Facebook proleSocial Sensitivity
(SS):
I am very sensitive of criticism. It is very important that
other people like me. I am generally concerned about the impression
I am making onothers.
I am often concerned what others are thinking of me.
Social Control (SC):
When I am with a group of friends I am often the spokespersonfor
the group.
I nd itverydifcult to speak in frontof a largegroupofpeople ().
I am usually very good at leading group discussions. I am often
chosen to be the leader of a group.
() Represents a reverse scored item.
Appendix B
Structure matrix for the principle components factor analysison
Facebook experience items. The highest loading items in eachfactor
are in bold.
Factors
0.564 0.001 0.410 0.647 0.1490.268 0.030 -0.143 0.788 0.242
it 0.528 0.008 0.402 0.722 0.188ely 0.757 0.128 0.282 0.165
0.308essed 0.823 0.023 0.342 0.266 0.214ed 0.328 0.191 0.085 0.073
0.628
0.828 0.022 0.343 0.198 0.171ious 0.838 0.049 0.376 0.223
0.203py 0.414 0.103 0.213 0.293 0.482
0.147 0.266 0.058 0.600 0.1850.400 0.034 0.774 0.081 0.044
ook 0.299 0.099 0.895 0.076 0.0490.310 0.005 0.914 0.162
0.1260.292 0.093 0.824 0.261 0.2700.116 0.417 0.233 0.277
0.7380.076 0.428 0.099 0.385 0.770le 0.045 0.814 0.018 0.144
0.1420.019 0.785 0.017 0.068 0.187
-
References
Amichai-Hamburger, Y. (2002). Internet and personality.
Computers in HumanBehavior, 18(1), 110.
Bartholomew, K., & Horowitz, L. M. (1991). Attachment styles
among yound adults:A test of a four category model. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 61,226244.
Bowlby, J. (1969/1982). Attachment and loss: Vol. 1. Attachment.
NY: Basic Books.Bowlby, J. (1973). Attachment and loss: Vol. 2.
Separation: Anxiety and anger. NY:
Basic Books.Bowlby, J. (1980). Attachment and loss: Vol. 3.
Sadness and depression. NY: Basic
Books.Brennan, K. A., Clark, C. L., & Shaver, P. R. (1998).
Self-report measurement of adult
romantic attachment: An integrative overview. In J. A. Jimpson
& W. S. Rholes(Eds.), Attachment theory and close relationships
(pp. 4676). NY: The GuildfordPress.
Buote, V., Wood, E., & Pratt, M. (2009). Exploring
similarities and differencesbetween online and ofine friendships:
The role of attachment style. Computersin Human Behavior, 25,
560567.
Caplan, S. E. (2005). A social skill account of problematic
internet use. Journal ofCommunication, 55(4), 721736.
Caplan, S. E. (2007). Relations among loneliness, social
anxiety, and problematicInternet use. CyberPsychology &
Behavior, 234242.
Collins, N. L., & Allard, L. M. (2004). Cognitive
representations of attachment: Thecontent and function of working
models. In G. J. O. Fletcher & M. S. Clark (Eds.),Blackwell
handbook of social psychology: Interpersonal processes (pp. 6085).
MA:Blackwell.
Deniz, M. E., Hamarta, E., & Ari, R. (2005). An
investigation of social skills andloneliness levels of university
students with respect to their attachment styles
Iacovelli, A., & Valenti, S. (2009). Internet addictions
effect on likeability andrapport. Computers in Human Behavior,
25(2), 439443.
Kazeniac, A. (2009). Social networks: Facebook takes over top
spot, Twitter climbs.Compete Pulse,
http://blog.compete.com/2009/02/09/facebook-myspace-twitter-social-network/,
(Retrieved 23.06.2012).
Liu, M., & Peng, W. (2009). Cognitive and psychological
predictors of the negativeoutcomes associated with playing MMOGs
(massively multiplayer onlinegames). Computers in Human Behavior,
25(6), 13061311.
McKenna, K. Y. A., & Bargh, J. A. (2000). Plan 9 from
cyberspace. The implications ofthe internet for personality and
social psychology. Personality and SocialPsychology Review, 5(1),
5775.
Mikulincer, M., & Shaver, P. R. (2007). Attachment in
adulthood: Structure, dynamicsand change. NY: The Guildford
Press.
Moore, K., & McElroy, J. C. (2012). The inuence of
personality on Facebook usage,wall postings, and regret. Computers
in Human Behavior, 28(267274).
Nadkarni, A., & Hofmann, S. G. (2012). Why do people use
Facebook? Personality andIndividual Differences, 52(3), 243249.
Orr, E. S., Sisic, M., Ross, C., Simmering, M. G., Arseneault,
J. M., & Orr, R. R. (2009).The inuence of shyness on the use of
Facebook in an undergraduate sample.CyberPsychology & Behavior,
12(3), 337340.
Quinn, S., & Oldmeadow, J. A. (submitted for publication).
The Martini Effect andsocial networking sites.
Quinn, S., & Oldmeadow, J. A. (in press). Is the
i-generation a we generation?Children, social networking sites and
belonging. British Journal of DevelopmentalPsychology.
Riggio, R. E. (1986). Assessment of basic social skills. Journal
of Personality and SocialPsychology, 51, 649660.
Riggio, R. E. (1989). Manual for the social skills inventory.
Palo Alto: ConsultingPsychologists Press.
J.A. Oldmeadow et al. / Computers in Human Behavior 29 (2013)
11421149 1149in a sample of turkish students. Social Behavior and
Personality, 33(1), 1932.Dereli, E., & Karakus, O. (2011). An
examination of attachment styles and social
skills of sniversity students. Electronic Journal of Research in
EducationalPsychology, 9(2), 16922095.
DiTommaso, E., Brannen-McNulty, C., Ross, L., & Burgess, M.
(2003). Attachmentstyles, social skills and loneliness in young
adults. Personality and IndividualDifferences, 35, 303312.
Engelberg, E., & Sjoberg, L. (2004). Internet use, social
skills, and adjustment.CyberPsychology & Behavior, 7(1),
4147.
Farahani, H. A., Aghamohamadi, S., Kazemi, Z., Bakhtiarvand, F.,
& Ansari, M.(2011). Examining the relationship between
sensitivity to rejection and usingFacebook in university students.
Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 28,807810.
Hargittai, E. (2008). Whose space? Differences among users and
non-users of socialnetwork sites. Journal of Computer Mediated
Communication, 13, 267297.
Harman, J. P., Hansen, C. E., Cochran, M. E., & Lindsey, C.
R. (2005). Liar, liar: Internetfaking but not frequency of use
affects social skills, self = esteem, social anxiety,and
aggression. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 8(1), 16.
Hazan, C., & Shaver, P. R. (1987). Romantic love
conceptualized as an attachmentprocess. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 52, 511524.
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. Computers inHuman Behavior, 28, 561569.Ross,
C., Orr, E. S., Sisic, M., Arseneault, J. M., Simmering, M. G.,
& Orr, R. R. (2009).Personality and motivations associated with
Facebook use. Computers in HumanBehavior, 25, 578586.
Ryan, T., & Xenos, S. (2011). Who uses Facebook? An
investigation into therelationship between the big ve, shyness,
narcissism, loneliness, and Facebookusage. Computers in Human
Behavior, 27, 16581664.
Sheldon, K. M., Abad, N., & Hirsch, C. (2011). A two-process
view of Facebook useand relatedness need-satisfaction:
Disconnection drives use, and connectionrewards it. Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, 100, 766775.
Smith, E. R., Murphy, J., & Coats, S. (1999). Attachment to
groups: Theory andmeasurement. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 77(1), 94110.
Urista, M. A., Dong, Q., & Day, K. D. (2009). Explaining why
young adults useMySpace and Facebook through uses and gratications
theory. HumanCommunication, 12(2), 215230.
Vasalou, A., Joinson, A. N., & Courvoisier, D. (2010).
Cultural differences, experiencewith social networks and the nature
of true commitment in Facebook.International Journal of
Human-Computer Studies, 68(10), 719728.
Yu, A. Y., Tian, S. W., Vogel, D., & Kwok, R. C.-W. (2010).
Can learning be virtuallyboosted? An investigation of online social
networking impacts. Computers andEducation, 55, 14941503.
Zumbo, B. D., Gadermann, A. M., & Zeisser, C. (2007).
Ordinal versions of coefcientsalpha and theta for likert rating
scales. Journal of Modern Applied StatisticalMethods, 6, 2129.
Attachment style, social skills, and Facebook use amongst
adults1 Introduction1.1 Psychological correlates of Facebook use1.2
Adult attachment theory1.3 Attachment style and Facebook use1.4 The
current study
2 Method2.1 Participants2.2 Measures2.2.1 Experiences in Close
Relationships Scale (ECR; Brennan et al., 1998)2.2.2 Social Skills
Inventory (SSI; Riggio, 1986)2.2.3 Facebook usage and
experience
2.3 Procedure
3 Results3.1 Attachment style and social skills3.2 Attachment,
social skills, and Facebook usage and experience3.3 Regression
analyses
4 Discussion5 ConclusionAppendix AAppendix BReferences
