Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Distinct Modalities of Electronic Communication and School Adjustment

  • Empirical Research
  • Published:
Journal of Youth and Adolescence Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Social media platforms and instant messaging applications have a widespread presence in today’s secondary schools. However, the implications of these ubiquitous communication technologies for adolescent’s social functioning with peers and academic competence in the classroom are not well understood. In fact, research on adolescents’ digital lives has only rarely incorporated direct assessments of adjustment in school environments. The current study addressed these limitations with a school-based data collection. 376 adolescents (Mage = 14.4; 209 girls; including 29.2% Latino/Hispanic, 27.3% White, 28.2% mixed) were recruited from an urban high school and followed for one year. Social reputations were indexed via peer nominations and electronic communication tendencies were assessed using self-report questionnaires. Grade point averages, disciplinary events, and attendance data were obtained from school records. On a cross-sectional basis, frequent use of fashionable social networks (i.e., Instagram, Snapchat, and Twitter) was associated with popular-aggressive social reputations, poor achievement, and rule-breaking behavior. E-mail use, in contrast, was associated with academic competence. Longitudinal analyses were less conclusive because the examined constructs were highly stable across the period of data collection. The full pattern of findings indicates that electronic communication patterns can be a powerful marker of academic and social functioning at school.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Previous investigators have often conducted comparisons between composite popularity (popularity–unpopularity) and social preference (liking–disliking) scores (e.g., Cillessen and Mayeux 2004). Social preference is an alternative conceptualization of social standing that indexes positive affective reactions from peers rather than high status, visibility, and prestige (Coie et al. 1982). For exploratory purposes, we conducted analyses with social preference and the composite popularity scores as simultaneous predictors. Social preference was not significantly correlated with any of the electronic communication variables (all p’s > 0.20) whereas the effects for popularity were identical to the pattern reported in Table 4.

  2. SEM brings a number of analytic advantages, which should ultimately lead to a conservative perspective on the results. For exploratory purposes, we also mirrored our latent variable models with a series of regression analyses. Each of the T2 adjustment variables was predicted by gender, SES, the corresponding T1 adjustment variable, and the electric communication variable. Use of fashionable social networks was associated with increases in popularity (β = 0.069, p = 0.036) and truancy (β = 0.070, p = 0.040). E-mail use was associated with decreases in disciplinary violations (β = −0.118, p = 0.015).

References

  • Arbuckle, J. L., & Wothke, W. (1999). AMOS 4.0 user’s guide. Chicago: SPSS Incorporated.

  • Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research (2017). New survey: Snapchat and Instagram are most popular social media platforms among American teens: Black teens are the most active on social media and messaging apps. ScienceDaily. www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2017/04/170421113306.htm.

  • Barry, C. T., Sidoti, C. L., Briggs, S. M., Reiter, S. R., & Lindsey, R. A. (2017). Adolescent social media use and mental health from adolescent and parent perspectives. Journal of Adolescence, 61, 1–11.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bentler, P. M. (1990). Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Psychological Bulletin, 107, 238–246.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Best, P., Manktelow, R., & Taylor, B. (2014). Online communication, social media and adolescent wellbeing: a systematic narrative review. Children and Youth Services Review, 41, 27–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1993). Alternative ways of assessing model fit. Sage Focus Editions, 154, 136–136.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cheng, J. T., Tracy, J. L., Foulsham, T., Kingstone, A., & Henrich, J. (2013). Two ways to the top: evidence that dominance and prestige are distinct yet viable avenues to social rank and influence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 104, 103–125.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cillessen, A. H. (2011). Toward a theory of popularity. In A. H. Cillessen, D. Schwartz & L. Mayeux (Eds.), Popularity in the Peer System (pp. 273–299). New York, NY: The Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cillessen, A. H., & Mayeux, L. (2004). From censure to reinforcement: developmental changes in the association between aggression and social status. Child Development, 75, 147–163.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Coie, J. D., Dodge, K. A., & Coppotelli, H. (1982). Dimensions and types of social status: a cross-age perspective. Developmental Psychology, 18, 557–570.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Crick, N. R., & Grotpeter, J. K. (1995). Relational aggression, gender, and social-psychological adjustment. Child Development, 66, 710–722.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Dawes, M., & Xie, H. (2014). The role of popularity goal in early adolescents’ behaviors and popularity status. Developmental Psychology, 50, 489–497.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Dawes, M., & Xie, H. (2017). The trajectory of popularity goal during the transition to middle school. The Journal of Early Adolescence, 37, 852–883.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Desjarlais, M., & Willoughby, T. (2010). A longitudinal study of the relation between adolescent boys and girls’ computer use with friends and friendship quality: support for the social compensation or the rich-get-richer hypothesis? Computers in Human Behavior, 26, 896–905.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Digital divide persists even as lower-income Americans make gains in tech adoption (2019). https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2019/05/07/digital-divide-persists-even-as-lower-income-americans-make-gains-in-tech-adoption/.

  • Dijkstra, J. K., Cillessen, A. H., Lindenberg, S., & Veenstra, R. (2010). Basking in reflected glory and its limits: why adolescents hang out with popular peers. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 20, 942–958.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dodge, K. A., Pettit, G. S., & Bates, J. E. (1994). Socialization mediators of the relation between socioeconomic status and child conduct problems. Child Development, 65, 649–665.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Duong, M. T., Schwartz, D., & McCarty, C. A. (2014). Do peers contribute to the achievement gap between Vietnamese‐American and Mexican- American adolescents? Social Development, 23, 196–214.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Email is the new generation gap (2015). https://gizmodo.com/email-is-the-new-generation-gap-1743697716.

  • Fox, A. B., Rosen, J., & Crawford, M. (2009). Distractions, distractions: does instant messaging affect college students’ performance on a concurrent reading comprehension task? Cyber Psychology & Behavior, 12, 51–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gorman, A. H., Schwartz, D., Nakamoto, J., & Mayeux, L. (2011). Unpopularity and disliking among peers: partially distinct dimensions of adolescents’ social experiences. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 32, 208–217.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Greenwood, S., Perrin, A., & Duggan, M. (2016). Social media update 2016. Pew Research Center. http://assets.pewresearch.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/14/2016/11/10132827/PI_2016.11.11_Social-Media-Update_FINAL.pdf.

  • Hollingshead, A. B. (1975). Four Factor Index of Social Status. New Haven, CT: Yale University.

  • Huang, C. (2018). Social network site use and academic achievement: a meta-analysis. Computers & Education, 119, 76–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hygen, B. W., Zahl‐Thanem, T., Wichstrøm, L., Belsky, J., Stenseng, F., Kvande, M. N., & Skalicka, V. (2019). Time spent gaming and social competence in children: reciprocal effects across childhood. Child Development, https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.13243.

  • Karpinski, A. C., Kirschner, P. A., Ozer, I., Mellott, J. A., & Ochwo, P. (2013). An exploration of social networking site use, multitasking, and academic performance among United States and European university students. Computers in Human Behavior, 29, 1182–1192.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Karpinski, A. C., Kirschner, P. A., Shreffler, A. V., Albert, P. A., & Tomko, C. A. (2016). United States and European students’ social-networking site activities and academic performance. International Journal of Cyber Behavior, Psychology and Learning, 6, 1–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Killeya-Jones, L. A., Nakajima, R., & Costanzo, P. R. (2007). Peer standing and substance use in early-adolescent grade-level networks: a short-term longitudinal study. Prevention Science, 8, 11–23.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kline, R. B. (1998). Software review: software programs for structural equation modeling: Amos, EQS, and LISREL. Journal of Ppsychoeducational Assessment, 16, 343–364.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kuncel, N. R., Credé, M., & Thomas, L. L. (2005). The validity of self-reported grade point averages, class ranks, and test scores: a meta-analysis and review of the literature. Review of Educational Research, 75, 63–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • LaFontana, K. M., & Cillessen, A. H. (2010). Developmental changes in the priority of perceived status in childhood and adolescence. Social Development, 19, 130–147.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lenhart, A. (2015). Teens, social media, and technology overview 2015. Washington, DC: Pew Research Centre. http://www.pewinternet.org/2015/04/09/teens-social-media-technology-2015/.

  • Liu, D., Kirschner, P. A., & Karpinski, A. C. (2017). A meta-analysis of the relationship of academic performance and social network site use among adolescents and young adults. Computers in Human Behavior, 77, 148–157.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Luthar, S. S. (2003). The culture of affluence: psychological costs of material wealth. Child Development, 74, 1581–1593.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Marker, C., Gnambs, T., & Appel, M. (2018). Active on Facebook and failing at school? Meta-analytic findings on the relationship between online social networking activities and academic achievement. Educational Psychology Review, 30, 651–677.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mayeux, L., Sandstrom, M. J., & Cillessen, A. H. (2008). Is being popular a risky proposition? Journal of Research on Adolescence, 18, 49–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McDonald, R. P., & Krane, W. R. (1977). A note on local identifiability and degrees of freedom in the asymptotic likelihood ratio test. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 30, 198–203.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nesi, J., Choukas-Bradley, S., & Prinstein, M. J. (2018a). Transformation of adolescent peer relations in the social media context: part 1—a theoretical framework and application to dyadic peer relationships. Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review, 21, 267–294.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Nesi, J., Choukas-Bradley, S., & Prinstein, M. J. (2018b). Transformation of adolescent peer relations in the social media context: part 2—application to peer group processes and future directions for research. Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review, 21, 295–319.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Nesi, J., & Prinstein, M. J. (2015). Using social media for social comparison and feedback-seeking: gender and popularity moderate associations with depressive symptoms. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 43, 1427–1438.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Parkhurst, J. T., & Hopmeyer, A. (1998). Sociometric popularity and peer-perceived popularity: two distinct dimensions of peer status. The Journal of Early Adolescence, 18, 125–144.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Percentage of teenagers in the United States who use Twitter as of April 2018, by age group (2018). https://www.statista.com/statistics/184307/usage-of-twitter-among-us-teenagers-by-age-group/.

  • Prinstein, M. J., Choukas-Bradley, S. C., Helms, S. W., Brechwald, W. A., & Rancourt, D. (2011). High peer popularity longitudinally predicts adolescent health risk behavior, or does it?: An examination of linear and quadratic associations. Journal of Pediatric Psychology, 36, 980–990.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Rambaran, J. A., Hopmeyer, A., Schwartz, D., Steglich, C., Badaly, D., & Veenstra, R. (2017). Academic functioning and peer influences: a short‐term longitudinal study of network–behavior dynamics in middle adolescence. Child Development, 88, 523–543.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Rideout, V. J. (2012). Social media, social life: how teens view their digital lives. In Common sense media research study (pp. 1–46). http://www.commonsensemedia.org.

  • Rose, A. J., & Rudolph, K. D. (2006). A review of sex differences in peer relationship processes: potential trade-offs for the emotional and behavioral development of girls and boys. Psychological Bulletin, 132, 98–131.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Rose, A. J., & Swenson, L. P. (2009). Do perceived popular adolescents who aggress against others experience emotional adjustment problems themselves? Developmental Psychology, 45, 868–872.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Rose, A. J., Swenson, L. P., & Waller, E. M. (2004). Overt and relational aggression and perceived popularity: developmental differences in concurrent and prospective relations. Developmental Psychology, 40, 378–387.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sandstrom, M. J. (2011). The power of popularity. In A. H. Cillessen, D. Schwartz & L. Mayeux (Eds), Popularity in the Peer System (pp. 219–244). New York, NY: The Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schafer, J. L., & Graham, J. W. (2002). Missing data: our view of the state of the art. Psychological Methods, 7, 147–177.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Scheiber, C., Reynolds, M. R., Hajovsky, D. B., & Kaufman, A. S. (2015). Gender differences in achievement in a large, nationally representative sample of children and adolescents. Psychology in the Schools, 52, 335–348.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz, D., & Gorman, A. H. (2011). The high price of high status. In A. H. Cillessen, D. Schwartz & L. Mayeux (Eds.), Popularity in the Peer System (pp. 245–270). New York, NY: The Guilford Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz, D., Gorman, A. H., Nakamoto, J., & McKay, T. (2006). Popularity, social acceptance, and aggression in adolescent peer groups: links with academic performance and school attendance. Developmental Psychology, 46, 1116–1127.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz, D., Kelly, B. M., & Duong, M. T. (2013). Do academically-engaged adolescents experience social sanctions from the peer group? Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 42, 1319–1330.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz, D., Kelly, B. M., Mali, L. V., & Duong, M. T. (2016). Exposure to violence in the community predicts friendships with academically disengaged peers during middle adolescence. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 45, 1786–1799.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Schwarz, N. (1999). Self-reports: how the questions shape the answers. American Psychologist, 54, 93–105.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shapiro, L. A. S., & Margolin, G. (2014). Growing up wired: social networking sites and adolescent psychosocial development. Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review, 17, 1–18.

    Article  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Shen, C., & Williams, D. (2011). Unpacking time online: connecting internet and massively multiplayer online game use with psychosocial well-being. Communication Research, 38, 123–149.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shiffman, S., Stone, A. A., & Hufford, M. R. (2008). Ecological momentary assessment. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology, 4, 1–32.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, A., & Anderson, M. (2018). Social media use in 2018. http://www.pewinternet.org/2018/03/01/socialmedia-use-in-2018/.

  • Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2006). Using multivariate statistics. 5th Edn. Boston: Allyn & Bacon/Pearson Education.

  • Throuvala, M. A., Griffiths, M. D., Rennoldson, M., & Kuss, D. J. (2019). Motivational processes and dysfunctional mechanisms of social media use among adolescents: a qualitative focus group study. Computers in Human Behavior, 93, 164–175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trepte, S., Reinecke, L., & Juechems, K. (2012). The social side of gaming: how playing online computer games creates online and offline social support. Computers in Human Behavior, 28, 832–839.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Troop-Gordon, W., Visconti, K. J., & Kuntz, K. J. (2011). Perceived popularity during early adolescence: links to declining school adjustment among aggressive youth. The Journal of Early Adolescence, 31, 125–151.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • U.S. Teen Mobile Report Calling Yesterday, Texting Today, Using Apps Tomorrow (2010). http://www.nielsen.com/us/en/insights/news/2010/u-s-teen-mobile-report-calling-yesterday-texting-today-using-apps-tomorrow.html.

  • Wohlwill, J. F.(1973). The environment is not in the head. Environmental Design Research, 2, 166–181.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yang, C., & Brown, B. (2016). Online self-presentation on Facebook and self development during the college transition. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 45, 402–416.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Yau, J. C., & Reich, S. M. (2019). “It’s just a lot of work”: adolescents’ self‐presentation norms and practices on Facebook and Instagram. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 29, 196–209.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author’s Contributions

D.S. conceived of the study, participated in its design and coordination, performed statistical analyses, and drafted the manuscript; A.K. contributed to study design and helped draft and revise manuscript content; S.M. performed the statistical analyses and interpretation of results and provided critical revision to the manuscript; L.M. participated in the study design and substantially revised the manuscript for critical intellectual content; Y.R. provided critical revision of the manuscript; A.H. and T.L. participated in the study design and coordination and made substantial contributions to data acquisition and design conception. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Data Sharing and Declaration

This manuscript’s data will not be deposited.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Southern California, San Diego, CA, USA

    David Schwartz, Annemarie Kelleghan, Sarah Malamut, Luiza Mali & Yana Ryjova

  2. Occidental College, San Diego, CA, USA

    Andrea Hopmeyer

  3. University of California, San Diego, CA, USA

    Tana Luo

Authors
  1. David Schwartz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Annemarie Kelleghan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Sarah Malamut
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Luiza Mali
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Yana Ryjova
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Andrea Hopmeyer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Tana Luo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to David Schwartz.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical Approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional review board (USC University Park IRB, #UP-15-00579) and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed Consent

Parental consent and youth assent were obtained from all participants included in the study.

Additional information

Publisher’s note: Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Schwartz, D., Kelleghan, A., Malamut, S. et al. Distinct Modalities of Electronic Communication and School Adjustment. J Youth Adolescence 48, 1452–1468 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-019-01061-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10964-019-01061-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation