Always Available, Always Attached: A Relational Perspective on the Effects of Mobile Phones and Social Media on Subjective Well-Being

In this study, we examine the effects of the near-constant use of digital media in everyday life on well-being in the context of close relationships. Building on media multiplexity and attachment perspectives, we argue that communication over a dyad’s media ecosystem, including face-to-face, text messaging, cellphone calls, e-mail, and instant messaging, creates connected availability. Connected availability is the perception that a partner is at a continuous (digital) arm’s reach offering protection and security. Using longitudinal dyadic data of cohabitating romantic partners, we track the effects of media multiplexity on well-being by factoring in both partners’ perspectives to untangle the security offered through partner’s availability from the stress of maintaining one’s own constant availability to a partner. The results support salutary effects of media use on well-being because of increased connected availability, with limited evidence for adverse impacts of maintaining constant availability with a close partner. The always-on, always-available nature of digital life means almost constant connection and availability between romantic partners, family members, and close friends. Being tethered to one another can give people a sense of security, while simultaneously causing more stress. In this article, we find that keeping a romantic partner constantly within a (digital) arm’s reach promotes better well-being for oneself. In addition, keeping a romantic partner always available also predicted better well-being for the romantic partner. Further, the analysis did not show added stress for the partner.

[1]  N. Collins,et al.  This Paper is Embargoed until 29 August , 2014 .

[2]  Pablo J. Boczkowski,et al.  Domesticating WhatsApp: Family, friends, work, and study in everyday communication , 2019, New Media Soc..

[3]  Caroline Haythornthwaite,et al.  Strong, Weak, and Latent Ties and the Impact of New Media , 2002, Inf. Soc..

[4]  Natalya N. Bazarova,et al.  Revisiting Media Multiplexity: A Longitudinal Analysis of Media Use in Romantic Relationships , 2018, Journal of Communication.

[5]  D. Kashy,et al.  Growth curve models for indistinguishable dyads using multilevel modeling and structural equation modeling: the case of adolescent twins' conflict with their mothers. , 2008, Developmental psychology.

[6]  P. Valkenburg,et al.  The effect of social media on well-being differs from adolescent to adolescent , 2020, Scientific Reports.

[7]  Craig Leth-Steensen,et al.  Testing Mediation in Structural Equation Modeling , 2016, Educational and psychological measurement.

[8]  Robert E. Kraut,et al.  The Relationship between Facebook Use and Well-Being depends on Communication Type and Tie Strength , 2016, J. Comput. Mediat. Commun..

[9]  Keith N. Hampton,et al.  Digital media and stress: the cost of caring 2.0 , 2016 .

[10]  D. Watson,et al.  The role of person versus situation in life satisfaction: a critical examination. , 2004, Psychological bulletin.

[11]  Jeffrey A. Hall,et al.  Calling and texting (too much): Mobile maintenance expectations, (over)dependence, entrapment, and friendship satisfaction , 2012, New Media Soc..

[12]  Caroline Haythornthwaite,et al.  Social networks and Internet connectivity effects , 2005 .

[13]  Andrew M. Ledbetter,et al.  Extending media multiplexity theory to the extended family: Communication satisfaction and tie strength as moderators of violations of media use expectations , 2017, New Media Soc..

[14]  P. Vorderer,et al.  Permanently Online Permanently Connected Living and Communicating in a POPC World 1st Edition , 2017 .

[15]  Nicole B. Ellison,et al.  Who likes to be reachable? Availability preferences, weak ties, and bridging social capital , 2017 .

[16]  Jesse Fox,et al.  The dark side of social networking sites: An exploration of the relational and psychological stressors associated with Facebook use and affordances , 2015, Comput. Hum. Behav..

[17]  Emily Weinstein,et al.  The social media see-saw: Positive and negative influences on adolescents’ affective well-being , 2018, New Media Soc..

[18]  The psychological effects of the contextual activation of security-enhancing mental representations in adulthood , 2015 .

[19]  Andrew K. Przybylski,et al.  A Large-Scale Test of the Goldilocks Hypothesis , 2017, Psychological science.

[20]  D. A. Kenny,et al.  Assessing Mediation in Dyadic Data Using the Actor-Partner Interdependence Model , 2011 .

[21]  Jessica Vitak,et al.  Explicating Affordances: A Conceptual Framework for Understanding Affordances in Communication Research , 2017, J. Comput. Mediat. Commun..

[22]  Diana Rieger,et al.  Permanently on Call: The Effects of Social Pressure on Smartphone Users' Self-Control, Need Satisfaction, and Well-Being , 2019, J. Comput. Mediat. Commun..

[23]  C. Hazan,et al.  Attachment as an Organizational Framework for Research on Close Relationships , 1994 .

[24]  Christoph Klimmt,et al.  Permanently online and permanently connected: Development and validation of the Online Vigilance Scale , 2018, PloS one.

[25]  Natalya N. Bazarova,et al.  Social Media and Subjective Well-Being , 2018, A Networked Self and Love.

[26]  Michael Chan,et al.  Multimodal Connectedness and Quality of Life: Examining the Influences of Technology Adoption and Interpersonal Communication on Well-Being Across the Life Span , 2015, J. Comput. Mediat. Commun..

[27]  Christian Licoppe,et al.  ‘Connected’ Presence: The Emergence of a New Repertoire for Managing Social Relationships in a Changing Communication Technoscape , 2004 .

[28]  Rich Ling,et al.  Soft coercion: Reciprocal expectations of availability in the use of mobile communication , 2016, First Monday.

[29]  R. Slatcher,et al.  Smartphones and Close Relationships: The Case for an Evolutionary Mismatch , 2019, Perspectives on psychological science : a journal of the Association for Psychological Science.

[30]  Jesse Fox,et al.  Distinguishing technologies for social interaction: The perceived social affordances of communication channels scale , 2017 .

[31]  Dong Liu,et al.  Digital Communication Media Use and Psychological Well-Being: A Meta-Analysis , 2019, J. Comput. Mediat. Commun..

[32]  Richard Ling,et al.  Taken for Grantedness: The Embedding of Mobile Communication into Society , 2012 .

[33]  Sabine Trepte,et al.  Reinforcement or Displacement? The Reciprocity of FtF, IM, and SNS Communication and Their Effects on Loneliness and Life Satisfaction , 2017, J. Comput. Mediat. Commun..

[34]  E. Diener.  The Remarkable Changes in the Science of Subjective Well-Being , 2013, Perspectives on psychological science : a journal of the Association for Psychological Science.

[35]  Andrew K. Przybylski,et al.  The association between adolescent well-being and digital technology use , 2019, Nature Human Behaviour.