A Dissertation

Entitled

Social Belongingness, Depression, and Anxiety in Association with Problematic Social

Networking Site Use: Investigating Fear of Missing Out as a Mediator

by

Abigail E. Dempsey

Submitted to the Graduate Faculty as partial fulfillment of the requirements for the
Doctor of Philosophy Degree in Clinical Psychology

Dr. Jon Elhai, Committee Chair

Dr. Matthew Tull, Committee Member

Dr. Jason Levine, Committee Member

Dr. Andrew Geers, Committee Member

Dr. Onur Sapci, Committee Member

Dr. Scott C. Molitor, Dean

College of Graduate Studies

The University of Toledo

August 2022
 Copyright 2022, Abigail E. Dempsey
This document is copyrighted material. Under copyright law, no parts of this document
may be reproduced without the expressed permission of the author.
 An Abstract of

Social Belongingness, Depression, and Anxiety in Association with Problematic Social

Networking Site Use: Investigating Fear of Missing Out as a Mediator

by

Abigail E. Dempsey

Submitted to the Graduate Faculty as partial fulfillment of the requirements for the
Doctor of Philosophy Degree in Clinical Psychology

The University of Toledo

August 2022

Problematic social networking site (SNS) use has demonstrated associations with

depression and anxiety symptoms throughout the literature; however, less is known about

social factors that may contribute to the development of problematic SNS use, such as

perceived social belongingness and fear of missing out on rewarding experiences

(FoMO). There is an especially prominent gap in the literature regarding problematic use

of various SNSs independently of each other. The present study builds on recent research

findings that FoMO mediates the relationship between problematic SNS use with both

depression/anxiety severity and social belongingness, and that these relationships may be

different depending on the SNS used. We explored how FoMO served as a mediator

between the problematic use of three different SNSs and depression/anxiety and social

belongingness. Data were collected online from an undergraduate university sample and

analyzed using linear regression and mediation analyses. Offline belongingness and

anxiety were related to problematic Twitter use severity, while online belongingness and

anxiety were related to problematic Snapchat use severity. Depression severity was only

associated with problematic Instagram use severity. FoMO accounted for the relations

between anxiety/online belongingness and problematic use severity of all three SNSs.

iii
This dissertation is dedicated to the memory of my stepfather, who always encouraged

me to dream big, and to my nieces and nephews who give me reason to.
Acknowledgments

This endeavor would not have been possible without the support and patience of

my mentor. I am extremely grateful to my defense committee, who generously provided

knowledge and expertise. Words cannot describe my gratitude to Matthew Tull and Jason

Levine for their encouragement and willingness to listen to all my ideas, sensical and

otherwise.

Special thanks to my family and friends, especially my parents and partner. Their

unwavering belief in me has kept my spirits and motivation high during this process.

None of this would have been possible without their support and sacrifice throughout the

years. I would also like to thank my dear friend and local barista for keeping me inspired

and sufficiently caffeinated and my cats for their entertainment and emotional support.

v
Table of Contents

Abstract iii

Contents vi

List of Tables viii

List of Figures ix

List of Abbreviations x

1 Literature Review 1

1.1 Depression and Anxiety. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3

1.2 Social Belongingness. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4

1.3 Fear of Missing Out. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5

1.4 Specific Social Networking Sites. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6

1.5 Problematic SNS Use Measurement. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

1.6 Theory. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .10

2 Hypotheses 15

3 Methods 18

3.1 Participants. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .18

3.2 Procedure and Materials. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .19

3.2.1 Depression, Anxiety, and Stress Scale. . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .20

3.2.2 Social Networking Use. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

vi
 3.2.3 Smartphone Addiction Scale. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21

3.2.4 Social Belongingness. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .22

3.2.5 Fear of Missing Out. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22

4 Analyses 24

4.1 Regression Analysis. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .24

4.2 Mediation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .25

5 Results 27

5.1 Preliminary Analyses. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27

5.2 Linear Regression. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .29

5.2.1 Problematic Instagram Use. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .29

5.2.2 Problematic Snapchat Use. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .29

5.2.3 Problematic Twitter Use. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29

5.3 Mediation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30

6 Discussion 31

6.1 Theoretical Implications. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35

6.2 Limitations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .36

6.3 Future Directions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37

References 38

A Informed Consent 48

B Proposed Analyses 50

vii
List of Tables

5.1 Correlations among primary variables. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .28

5.2 Frequencies of smartphone use behaviors. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .28

5.3 Mediation results with standardized estimates displayed. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30

viii
List of Figures

1-1 Revised Interaction of Person-Affect-Cognition-Execution (I-PACE)

model of specific Internet use disorders. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .14

4-1 Regression model for problematic Twitter use. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25

4-2 Regression model for problematic Instagram use. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .25

4-3 Regression model for problematic Snapchat use. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .26

B-1 Original hypothesized model. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52

ix
List of Abbreviations

BPNSFS . . . . . . Basic Psychological Need Satisfaction and Frustration Scale

BPNT . . . . . . . . Basic Psychological Needs Theory

CFA . . . . . . . . . Confirmatory factor analysis

CFI . . . . . . . . . . Comparative fit index

DASS-21 . . . . . . Depression, Anxiety, and Stress Scale

FoMO . . . . . . . . Fear of Missing Out

I-PACE. . . . . . . .Interaction of Person-Affect-Cognition-Execution

ML. . . . . . . . . . . Maximum Likelihood

PSNS-I. . . . . . . . Problematic Instagram use

PSNS-S. . . . . . . .Problematic Snapchat use
PSNS-T. . . . . . . .Problematic Twitter use

RMSEA. . . . . . . .Root mean square error of approximation

RMT. . . . . . . . . .Relationships Motivation Theory

SAS-SV. . . . . . . Smartphone Addiction Scale—Short Version

SAS. . . . . . . . . . Smartphone Addiction Scale
SDT. . . . . . . . . . Self-Determination Theory
SEM. . . . . . . . . . Structural equation modeling
SNS. . . . . . . . . . Social networking site use
SRMR. . . . . . . . .Standard root mean square residual

TLI. . . . . . . . . . . Tucker-Lewis index

VIF. . . . . . . . . . . Variance inflation factors

x
Chapter 1

Literature Review

For more than two decades, researchers and lay people alike have become

concerned about problematic social networking site (SNS) use, as use prevalence has

grown, and age of onset has become younger. In the United States, approximately 70% of

adults use some form of SNS; this is a dramatic increase from only 5% in 2005 and 50%

in 2011 (Pew Research Center, 2019). Among users, the majority incorporate SNS use

into their daily routines, with approximately 75% of Facebook users and 63% of

Instagram users visiting the sites at least once per day (Pew Research Center, 2019). With

the ubiquity of smartphones and their continual demands on time and attention

throughout the day, it is unsurprising that SNS sites that enable quick information sharing

and social connectedness have simultaneously risen in popularity. While problematic

smartphone use itself interests researchers, as evidenced by the ever-growing body of

literature examining antecedents and consequences of excessive use, the present study

concerns itself with SNS use behaviors. As such, the present study adapts the accepted

conceptualization of problematic smartphone use to its close relative problematic SNS

use. This inquiry includes adapting measures, such as the Smartphone Addiction Scale

1
(SAS; Kwon, Lee, et al., 2013), to measure the specific SNSs of interest to the present

study.

Problematic SNS use is conceptualized as having a strong desire to log in or use

SNSs and devoting excessive time to SNS use to the extent that it causes impairments in

domains such as social activities, occupation, education, interpersonal relationships,

and/or psychological wellbeing (Andreassen & Pallesen, 2014). Problematic SNS use

leads to behaviors associated with behavioral addictions, such as tolerance, withdrawal,

and relapse, among other symptoms (Griffiths, 1996, 2005). A review of the literature

reveals evidence that mental health difficulties, such as increased depression and anxiety

symptoms, are associated with problematic SNS use (Andreassen et al., 2016; Shensa et

al., 2017; van Rooij, Mheen, & Schoenmakers, 2017). While some may experience

impairment in psychological wellbeing as a result of problematic SNS use, research and

theory suggest that mental health difficulties lead some people to engage in problematic

SNS use, rather than the other way around. Therefore, new mental health stressors likely

exacerbate existing mental health difficulties among vulnerable individuals, which

perpetuates problematic SNS use (Brand et al., 2019; Brand, Young, Laier, Wölfling, &

Potenza, 2016).

Beyond establishing a link between psychopathology and problematic SNS use,

however, the associations between specific SNS behaviors and mental health remains

largely unexplored. Because of the inherent social nature of humans (Baumeister &

Leary, 1995), it is important to investigate how social factors—both online and offline—

relate to psychopathology and the development and maintenance of problematic SNS use.

While there is evidence to suggest that seeking and obtaining online support is one of

2
many motives that drive individuals to use SNSs (Masur, Reinecke, Ziegele, & Quiring,

2014), some studies have found that problematic SNS use emerged when users spent

excessive time online or became socially isolated (Ceyhan & Ceyhan, 2008; Morrison &

Gore, 2010). Additionally, individuals who use SNSs in a manner that enables perceived

social support and connectedness report less severe symptoms of depression and anxiety

overall, which may act as a protective factor against problematic SNS use (Frison &

Eggermont, 2015; Indian & Grieve, 2014).

These findings in the context of SNSs are more recent, but ample research exists

suggesting that these patterns exist offline as well. In offline contexts, individuals who

experience thwarted belongingness (i.e., being excluded or ignored) tend to experience

feelings of sadness or anger (Williams, 2007), and individuals who lack feelings of social

belongingness in general tend to experience more negative affect than those whose social

belongingness needs are met (Beekman, Stock, & Marcus, 2016; Erzen & Çikrikci, 2018;

Steger & Kashdan, 2009). Overall, these findings suggest that many of the needs and

motives pursued in online interactions imitate their offline analogues. As such, one aim

of the present study was to investigate both online and offline social belongingness as

correlates of mental health difficulties (i.e., depression and anxiety symptoms), which

may be associated with problematic SNS use severity.

1.1 Depression and Anxiety

Increased depression and anxiety symptoms in young adults have been associated

with problematic SNS use levels (Andreassen et al., 2016; Shensa et al., 2017), with

some evidence that individuals may experience greater anxiety and depression severity

when engaging with several SNSs compared to engaging in only one or two platforms

3
(Primack et al., 2017). Additionally, within the context of broader problematic internet

use, one Dutch study found that depression symptoms were associated with social use of

the internet, including use of SNSs (van Rooij et al., 2017). These findings were

supported in another country, with one study from Taiwan finding additional evidence

that adolescents who experienced greater depression severity were more likely to use the

internet for social purposes (Hwang, Cheong, & Feeley, 2009). Taken together, these

results suggest that individuals who experience depression and anxiety symptoms may

engage in more social internet use.

1.2 Social Belongingness

Baumeister and Leary (1995) described the need to belong as the need to have

frequent, positive interactions with others in which they perceive that they are liked and

that there is stability and concern for wellbeing in the relationship. Because the need to

belong is innate, individuals who are not satisfied with their social relationships will seek

out and form additional support (Baumeister & Leary, 1995). In addition to seeking out

relationships with others to fulfill a need to belong, individuals who experience ostracism

or exclusion tend to experience feelings of sadness or anger (Williams, 2007). In reaction

to this psychological discomfort, individuals may engage in cognitive or behavioral tasks,

such as reminding oneself of groups to which they belong, intensifying feelings of

affection for others, or conforming to group norms (Baumeister & Leary, 1995) to fortify

their need to belong (Williams & Sommer, 1997; Williams, Wheeler, & Harvey, 2001;

Williams & Zadro, 2005).

Online social interactions are characterized by features of the interaction setting

and motives and needs of users (Bargh & McKenna, 2004). As previously discussed,

4
these needs mimic the needs and motives for offline social interaction: seeking

information or belongingness (Ridings & Gefen, 2004). In the context of Baumeister and

Leary’s theory (1995), individuals may be especially motivated to use SNSs to pursue

feelings of belongingness if offline social relationships are lacking. This pursuit of online

social interactions may be beneficial to the user’s mental health if such a pursuit does not

interfere with offline social support (Ceyhan & Ceyhan, 2008; Morrison & Gore, 2010).

Passive SNS users also tend to report lower wellbeing than their active counterparts

(Verduyn et al., 2015), which may lead to problematic SNS use and further social

functional impairment.

1.3 Fear of Missing Out

Several researchers have highlighted the relevance of fear of missing out (FoMO)

in studying SNS use behaviors (Elhai, Yang, & Montag, 2021). FoMO is a recently

investigated phenomenon that refers to the feeling that others may be having rewarding

experiences from which one is absent and is characterized by the desire to stay connected

with what others are doing (Przybylski, Murayama, DeHaan, & Gladwell, 2013). There is

some overlap between FoMO and problematic SNS use in that both constructs involve

social factors. However, there is an important distinction between the two constructs in

that problematic SNS use emphasizes functional impairment in several life domains,

while FoMO involves discomfort and anxiety related to social exclusion, and an urge to

connect with one’s social network. Furthermore, a recent review (Elhai, Yang, et al.,

2021) demonstrated that the two constructs are moderately-to-highly correlated but

distinct.

5
 FoMO has been shown to mediate the relationship between online social support

and problematic SNS use, where the higher an individual’s level of online social support

was, the more severe their FoMO, which in turn led to more problematic use (Liu & Ma,

2018). Further, FoMO was found to mediate the relationship between emotional support

via SNS and “phubbing” behaviors, in which an individual opts to engage socially online

during offline interpersonal interactions (Fang, Wang, Wen, & Zhou, 2020). In addition

to predicting problematic SNS use levels, both generally and within the context of

specific SNS platforms (Rozgonjuk, Sindermann, Elhai, & Montag, 2020), FoMO also

functions as a mediator between basic psychological (Przybylski et al., 2013) and social

needs (Beyens, Frison, & Eggermont, 2016) and psychopathology (Oberst, Wegmann,

Stodt, Brand, & Chamarro, 2017). Taken together, evidence suggests FoMO should

mediate the relations between both social belongingness and psychopathology severity

with specific problematic SNS use (i.e., Instagram, Snapchat, and Twitter) severity.

1.4 Specific Social Networking Sites

Despite a growing body of literature on problematic SNS use, the majority of

studies to date have focused almost exclusively on Facebook use (Stoycheff, Liu,

Wibowo, & Nanni, 2017). With Facebook being the oldest and most widely used of the

available SNSs, it makes sense to focus on the effects of Facebook use. However, relying

so heavily on a single SNS limits the research base in a number of ways (Rains &

Brunner, 2015). First, focusing only on one platform limits generalizability of the

findings. For example, there is evidence to suggest that demographics (Hampton, Goulet,

Rainie, & al., 2011; Wilkinson & Thelwall, 2010) and culture (Boyd, 2011) influence

selection and use of SNSs. More recently, studies have shown that personality and

6
demographic differences are related to the choice of SNSs, where multi-site users tended

to be younger, more often female, and more extraverted than individuals who did not

endorse SNS use (Marengo, Sindermann, Elhai, & Montag, 2020). Further research has

found that individual and demographic differences exist among users who have different

patterns of SNS use, possibly choosing sites that provide different content and functions

based on predisposing individual differences (Marengo et al., 2020; Sindermann, Elhai,

& Montag, 2020).

Additionally, there is some evidence to suggest differences in SNS engagement

relative to social belongingness. Differences in the type of online socializing may account

for differences in outcomes. For example, passively browsing one’s SNS feed may not be

as beneficial as active SNS social engagement (Escobar-Viera et al., 2018). More

specifically, studies which focused on communication through an SNS such as Facebook

found negative associations between wellbeing and online socializing (Kross et al., 2013;

O'Dea & Campbell, 2011; Pantic et al., 2012). Studies that investigated other forms of

online socializing found positive associations between wellbeing and online socializing

(Lelkes, 2013; Pendry & Salvatore, 2015; Pénard, Poussing, & Suire, 2013; Selfhout,

Branje, Delsing, ter Bogt, & Meeus, 2009). These findings suggest that the type of SNS

platform likely matters; therefore, it is important to examine SNS on a platform level.

Moreover, SNSs undergo frequent updates at the behest of their creators. The

indirect influence of platform creators and attractiveness of specific site features may

influence which sites users are drawn to and how they engage with the platform over

time, if that site does not first become obsolete (Rains & Brunner, 2015). Indeed, there is

some evidence that platform-specific relatedness, which differs by the features offered,

7
can be used to predict wellbeing among those who socialize online (Jurgens, 2020).

Additionally, Internet users value online communities more when those communities

offer ways to fulfill users’ motives (Seraj, 2012; Tausczik & Huang, 2020), meaning that

users may value SNSs that offer a sense of belonging and provide options for acquiring

or exchanging information.

Furthermore, some evidence suggests that individual SNSs operate as their own

problematic behaviors (Rozgonjuk, Sindermann, Elhai, Christensen, & Montag, 2021)

with differing levels of severity (Rozgonjuk, Sindermann, Elhai, & Montag, 2021). It is

therefore necessary to expand the literature to include multiple SNSs to better understand

differences driving SNS choice and use/overuse. The second aim of the present study was

to expand the research in this way by examining problematic SNS use for individual

sites.

1.5 Problematic SNS Use Measurement

Because there is no widely used standard for measuring SNS overuse, the present

study used modified versions of the Smartphone Addiction Scale – Short Version (SAS-

SV), adapted for SNS use as done in previous studies (Rozgonjuk et al., 2021a;

Rozgonjuk et al., 2021b). The Smartphone Addiction Scale (SAS) and SAS-SV were

developed by Kwon and colleagues using samples from two universities and two

companies in South Korea (Kwon, Kim, Cho, & Yang, 2013; Kwon, Lee, et al., 2013),

and are two of the most commonly used measures of problematic smartphone use in the

literature (Harris, Regan, Schueler, & Fields, 2020). The SAS is a 33-item measure with

response options ranging from “1 = Strongly Disagree” to “6 = Strongly Agree,” with

higher scores indicating higher levels of problematic use; however, there are no

8
suggested cut off points on the original measure (Kwon, Lee, et al., 2013). Items on the

SAS are divided into six subscales: daily life disturbance, positive anticipation,

withdrawal, cyberspace-oriented relationship, overuse, and tolerance. Examples of items

found on the SAS include, “Using a smartphone is the most fun thing to do,” and “My

fully charged battery does not last for one full day.” The SAS demonstrates high internal

consistency and concurrent validity (Cronbach's alpha = 0.93; Harris, McCredie, &

Fields, 2020).

Because of brevity of the scale and frequency of use throughout the literature, the

present study used the SAS-SV, which condenses the original 33-item scale to a 10-item

scale that measures social and health impairment resulting from smartphone use (Kwon,

Kim, et al., 2013). The 10 items were selected based on their validity and review by

experts in the field. As with the SAS, response options on the SAS-SV range from “1 =

Strongly Disagree” to “6 = Strongly Agree.” Items include statements such as, “I have a

hard time concentrating in class, while doing assignments, or while working due to

smartphone use,” and “I use my smartphone longer than I had intended.” The SAS-SV

demonstrates reliability and validity comparable to the SAS (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.84),

suggesting that the SAS-SV is a reasonable alternative to the SAS (Harris, McCredie, et

al., 2020). We adapted the scale to ask about the individual SNS platform of interest

instead of the smartphone, as done recently (Rozgonjuk et al., 2021a; Rozgonjuk et al.,

2021b).

In addition to measures of problematic SNS use, we collected information about

frequency of use of specific features offered by SNSs. While measurement of

problematic SNS use focuses on functional impairment due to overuse, analyzing

9
frequency of feature use may help identify which features are being overused and help

better understand how individuals engage with SNSs.

1.6 Theory

The present study was conceptualized in part using Brand and colleagues’ (2019)

updated Interaction of Person-Affect-Cognition-Execution (I-PACE) model of specific

Internet use disorders (Brand et al., 2019). The I-PACE model (Figure 1-1) is a

comprehensive model that integrates predispositions, affective and cognitive responses to

stimuli, executive and inhibitory control, decision-making behaviors, and consequences

of using the Internet to gain a fuller, more complete understanding of problematic

Internet use. Personal factors that may influence Internet use behaviors include such

aspects as genetics, early childhood experiences, psychopathology (e.g., depression and

anxiety), temperamental features, and general coping style. The model also identifies

behavior-specific predisposing variables, such as specific needs, motives, and values. Of

importance to the present study are affect and cognition factors of the model. In their

model, Brand and colleagues (2019) proposed that those who perceive internal triggers,

such as negative mood, in specific situations may respond with urges to behave in certain

ways (Starcke, Antons, Trotzke, & Brand, 2018). More specifically, behaviors such as

engaging in SNS use may lead to feelings of gratification or relief from negative mood

(Laier & Brand, 2017), which subsequently changes the individual’s reward expectancies

associated with SNS use and may also modify coping style.

One main idea of the I-PACE model is that the development of problematic use

occurs only in interactions between an individual’s predisposing variables and certain

aspects that specific situations deliver, such as changes in affect and cognitions (Brand et

10
al., 2019). I–PACE thus conceptualizes affective and cognitive response variables as

mediating or moderating factors explaining relations between predisposing variables and

excessive internet use. Previous studies conceptualized using the I-PACE model (Elhai,

Levine, Dvorak, & Hall, 2016; Elhai, Levine, O’Brien, & Armour, 2018; Elhai, Tiamiyu,

Weeks, et al., 2018) tested relations between psychopathology factors (e.g., depression

and anxiety) and problematic internet/smartphone use mediated by levels of cognitive

and affective factors, such as distress tolerance, FoMO, and rumination.

The present study conceptualizes the need to belong and feelings of

belongingness both online and offline as stable, predisposing variables (i.e., specific

needs and motives). This conceptualization is consistent with Self-Determination Theory

(SDT), which names three basic psychological needs: autonomy, competence, and

relatedness (Ryan & Deci, 2017). The Basic Psychological Needs Theory (BPNT), a mini

theory nested within the broader SDT, argues that psychological well-being and optimal

functioning are predicated on the aforementioned needs, and if any of the needs are

thwarted, there will be negative outcomes, including mental health difficulties (Ryan &

Deci, 2017; Vansteenkiste, Niemiec, & Soenens, 2010). Important to the present study is

the need of relatedness, which is satisfied by connecting to and feeling significant to

others; when this need is thwarted, an individual may experience feelings of exclusion or

loneliness (Baumeister & Leary, 1995; Deci & Ryan, 2000).

The need for relatedness is highlighted in SDT’s Relationships Motivation Theory

(RMT), which posits that some amount of close, personal relationships is essential for

wellbeing, as it satisfies the need for social relatedness (Ryan & Deci, 2017). When these

needs are not met, and need frustration occurs, individuals may experience stress

11
(Campbell et al., 2017; Weinstein & Ryan, 2011), depression symptoms (Cordeiro,

Paixão, Lens, Lacante, & Luyckx, 2016), and/or anxiety symptoms (Inguglia, Liga, Lo

Coco, Musso, & Ingoglia, 2018). Because of the strong correlations between

psychopathology and relatedness (i.e., belongingness), and consistent with I-PACE, for

the purposes of this study, depression, anxiety, and belongingness all functioned as

predictor variables.

In the context of both the I-PACE model and SDT, FoMO can be conceptualized

as a mechanism by which psychopathology drives problematic SNS use. Within SDT,

FoMO may be considered a negative result of unmet social relatedness needs (Przybylski

et al., 2013), which may motivate individuals to engage in online social behaviors to

compensate for the frustrated need (Vansteenkiste & Ryan, 2013). Conceptualized using

the I-PACE model, FoMO can be considered a maladaptive (internet-related) cognitive

bias, possibly acting as a consequence of social isolation caused by depression and

anxiety. This relation may, in turn, drive problematic SNS use as conceptualized

previously (Elhai, Yang, & Montag, 2019; Wegmann, Oberst, Stodt, & Brand, 2017).

This conceptualization of FoMO is consistent with previous findings that FoMO mediates

relations between psychopathology and problematic Facebook use severity (Dempsey,

O'Brien, Tiamiyu, & Elhai, 2019). A recent review by Elhai, Yang, and Montag (2021)

found that, in addition to being correlated with both anxiety and depression severity,

FoMO has also mediated the relationship between such constructs with various forms of

problematic technology use, including SNS use (Elhai, Yang, et al., 2021). Thus, FoMO

may be a mechanism that explains how some individuals with depression and anxiety

12
symptoms, combined with a thwarted sense of belonging, may develop problematic SNS

use.

13
Figure 1-1: Revised Interaction of Person-Affect-Cognition-Execution (I-PACE) model
of specific internet use disorders. Figure A shows early stages of development of
addictive behaviors, and Figure B shows later stages of the process and factors that
contribute to the maintenance of addictive behaviors.

14
Chapter 2

Hypotheses

Baumeister and Leary (1995) asserted that much of human behavior is motivated

by a need to belong. Research has shown that online social support motivates SNS use.

However, relying too heavily on online social support to the detriment of one’s offline

social support may result in depression symptoms and feelings of loneliness.

Furthermore, these findings may vary depending on the SNS platform used and features

offered. Despite these findings, little work has been conducted to examine the role that

both online and offline feelings of belongingness play in the selection and use of SNSs. It

is possible that individuals seek online feelings of belongingness when such feelings are

lacking offline. If a person obtains feelings of belongingness online, presumably by

selecting sites that promote such feelings, online belongingness-seeking behaviors are

then reinforced and persist, which may negatively affect offline relationships over time.

The aims of the present study were three-fold: 1) to investigate how offline and

online social belongingness relate to problematic SNS use severity; 2) to investigate what

role depression and anxiety severity play, along with both online and offline

belongingness levels, in association with problematic SNS use severity; and 3) to

investigate these relations in the context of specific SNSs. Specific hypotheses were:

15
 H1) Offline social belonging will be inversely related to problematic SNS use

severity, in that individuals who experience lower levels of offline social belongingness

will have higher problematic SNS use severity. This hypothesis is consistent with prior

research, which has found that individuals are motivated by social belongingness to use

SNSs, which may be particularly true for those who are lacking social support offline.

H2) Online social belongingness will be positively corelated with problematic

SNS use severity, in that individuals who experience lower levels of online social

belongingness will have lower problematic SNS use severity. Again, if individuals are

motivated by social belongingness to engage with SNSs, individuals who do not perceive

high levels of social belongingness online should not be motivated to engage in

problematic use.

H3) Depression severity will be positively correlated with problematic SNS use

severity. This hypothesis is consistent with previous findings and theory.

H4) Anxiety severity will be positively correlated with problematic SNS use

severity. This hypothesis is also consistent with previous findings and theory.

H5) FoMO will be positively related with problematic SNS use severity. In

conjunction with I-PACE and SDT, prior research has found moderate to large

associations for FoMO with problematic SNS use severity in college students.

H6) FoMO will account for relations between anxiety, depression, and

belongingness with problematic SNS use severity. Existing literature demonstrates a

relationship between psychopathology and problematic SNS use severity as well as social

needs and problematic SNS use severity.

16
 H6a) FoMO will account for the relationship between anxiety severity and

problematic SNS use severity.

H6b) FoMO will account for the relationship between depression severity and

problematic SNS use severity.

H6c) FoMO will account for the relationship between offline social

belongingness and problematic SNS use severity.

H6d) FoMO will account for the relationship between online social belongingness

and problematic SNS use severity.

H7) While the breakdown of above hypotheses into specific problematic SNS use

severity is largely exploratory, higher online levels of social belongingness are expected

to be positively associated with problematic use of sites that my foster more active social

use (e.g., Instagram, Snapchat), and higher offline social belongingness will be positively

associated with sites that may facilitate more passive, less social use (e.g., Twitter).

17
Chapter 3

Methods

3.1 Participants

Participants were undergraduate students enrolled in Introductory Psychology

courses at the University of Toledo. See Appendix A for a copy of the informed consent

form approved by the Institutional Review Board. The initial sample size for this study

consisted of 327 participants. Eleven (n = 11) participants were dropped from the sample

for failure to complete the survey, answering no more than the initial demographic items.

An additional 41 (n = 41) participants were dropped for responding to the survey twice.

Duplicate survey responses were identified by selecting participants whose names

appeared twice in the closing screen dataset, making note of the date and time the closing

screens were started, and matching these with the dates and times the surveys were

ended. Each of the participants who had duplicate responses had unique names, so it was

easy to identify these as duplicates rather than a different participant with the same name.

Second response sets occurred at times ranging from immediately after the first response

to several days after the first response. None of the second response sets occurred after

failure to complete the survey all the way through the first time. Possible explanations for

this phenomenon include participants’ misunderstanding of how research credits are

18
awarded, mistakenly thinking they would be awarded automatically upon completion of

the survey, or realizing they committed errors the first time. It is also possible that

participants forgot they already completed the survey or completed it again because they

needed one more half-credit of research for their course requirements.

Because of the aforementioned reasons, the first responses were excluded from

the study under the assumption that answers may be more accurate the second time taking

the survey because participants would have had a second chance to consider the questions

and reflect on their experiences. Another 140 (n = 140) participants were excluded for not

endorsing use of all three social networking sites.

The final sample consisted of 135 undergraduate students (Mage = 19.60, SD =

1.6; 43.0% male). The sample predominantly identified as Caucasian (n = 114; 84.4%),

with some participants identifying as African American (n = 22; 16.2%), Asian (n = 10;

7.4%), American Indian or Alaskan Native (n = 1; 0.7%), and Pacific Islander (n = 1;

0.7%). Four participants endorsed not knowing their racial background (n = 4; 3.0%).

Ten participants endorsed being of Hispanic of Latinx descent (n = 10; 7.4%). Race and

ethnic endorsements were not mutually exclusive. Most participants were freshmen (n =

82; 60.7%), employed part-time (n = 67; 49.6%) or unemployed (n = 59; 41.5%), and

were not currently in a relationship (n = 75; 55.5%).

3.2 Procedure and Materials

All study procedures were approved by the University of Toledo’s Institutional

Review Board. Participants were recruited using the department’s Sona Systems website,

which lists available departmental research studies throughout the semester. In exchange

for participation, students were awarded course research points. Those who chose to

19
participate were routed to an online consent statement. After consenting, participants

were directed to a web survey hosted on PsychData.com, where they completed

demographic information and the following measures:

3.2.1 Depression, Anxiety, and Stress Scale

Depression and anxiety severity were measured using the 21-item short version of

the Depression, Anxiety, and Stress Scale DASS-21 (DASS-21; Lovibond & Lovibond,

1995). Items on the DASS-21 inquire about symptoms over the past week and are rated

on a Likert-type scale with responses ranging from “0 = Did not apply to me at all” to “3

= Applied to me very much or most of the time.” Items for anxiety include “I felt scared

without any good reason,” and “I was aware of the action of my heart in the absence of

physical exertion.” Items for depression include “I found it difficult to work up the

initiative to do things,” and “I felt down-hearted and blue” (Lovibond & Lovibond,

1995). For purposes of the present study, only depression and anxiety items were used in

analyses; stress items were not analyzed. There is convergent validity with other

measures of depression and anxiety (Antony, Bieling, Cox, Enns, & Swinson, 1998;

Brown, Chorpita, Korotitsch, & Barlow, 1997). Coefficient alpha for the present study

was 0.92 for the depression subscale and 0.84 for the anxiety subscale.

3.2.2 Social Networking Use

For descriptive purposes, we assessed how much SNS use participants reported.

To measure frequency of use, participants answered questions regarding how often they

engaged in various social networking behaviors such as direct messaging, commenting,

liking, posting stories, posting to timeline, reading news, and checking notifications.

Items were rated on a Likert-type scale with response options ranging from “1 = Never”

20
to “6 = Very Often.” A previous study used a similar questionnaire to measure frequency

of Facebook use and found good internal consistency ( = 0.87) as well as significant

bivariate Pearson correlations with FoMO, r(294) = -.19, p < .01 (Dempsey et al., 2019).

Coefficient alpha for this present study was 0.84.

We also asked one question per SNS platform, inquiring how often participants

use the platform. We asked how many hours the participant uses the platform each week

with options including 0, 1-2, 3-4, 5-6, 7-8, 9-10, and 10+ hours. As mentioned above,

only participants reporting at least 1-2 weekly hours of each SNS platform were included

in analyses.

3.2.3 Smartphone Addiction Scale

To measure problematic SNS use severity, the SAS-SV developed by Kwon,

Kim, et al. (2013) was adapted. The SAS-SV is a 10-item scale with response options

ranging from “1 = Strongly Disagree” to “6 = Strongly Agree.” Items on the SAS-SV

measure social and health impairment related to smartphone use and include items such

as “The people around me tell me that I use my smartphone too much,” and “Won’t be

able to stand having a smartphone.” Several items were reworded into a first-person voice

for greater accessibility and consistency for participants. For example, “Missing planned

work due to smartphone use,” was reworded to “I missed planned work due to

smartphone use” (Duke & Montag, 2017). Scores on the SAS-SV are related to measures

of problematic internet use and PSU severity (Kwon, Kim, et al., 2013) and smartphone

use frequency (Elhai, Tiamiyu, Weeks, et al., 2018; Lopez-Fernandez, 2017). The SAS-

SV was modified from smartphone use to measure each SNS individually by replacing

“smartphone” with “Instagram” (PSNS-I;  = 0.91), “Twitter” (PSNS-T;  = 0.90), or

21
“Snapchat” (PSNS-S;  = 0.91), consistent with previous studies (Rozgonjuk et al.,

2021a; Rozgonjuk et al., 2021b).

3.2.4 Social Belongingness

To assess for both online and offline social belongingness, participants completed

the Basic Psychological Need Satisfaction and Frustration Scale (BPNSFS), which is a

24-item scale that assesses both frustration and satisfaction in the domains of autonomy,

relatedness, and competence (Deci & Ryan, 2000; Gagné, 2003). For the purposes of the

present study, only the relatedness satisfaction subscale was used: an internally consistent

( = 0.76), reliable, and validated 8-item subscale that measures participants’ satisfaction

with their degree of relatedness. Items are rated on a Likert-type scale with response

options ranging from “1 = Not true at all” to “5 = Completely true.” Items include

statements such as, “I feel that the people I care about also care about me,” and “I feel

connected with people who care for me, and for whom I care” (Deci & Ryan, 2000;

Gagné, 2003). Again, participants were asked to complete this measure (8 items) with

consideration for their relationships offline ( = 0.79) and once more for their

relationships online ( = 0.72).

3.2.5 Fear of Missing Out

To assess FoMO, participants completed the Fear of Missing Out Scale, which

consists of 10 items rated on a Likert-type scale with response options ranging from “1 =

Not at all true of me,” to “5 = Extremely true of me” (Przybylski et al., 2013). Examples

of items include, “I get anxious when I don’t know what my friends are up to,” and “I get

worried when I find out my friends are having fun without me.” Scores on the FoMO

Scale are related to measures of basic psychological need satisfaction, general mood, life

22
satisfaction, and high levels of engagement with SNS (Przybylski et al., 2013);

coefficient alpha for the present study was 0.87.

23
Chapter 4

Analyses

Small amounts of missing item-level data were observed for the measures.

Maximum likelihood (ML) estimation with the expectation minimization algorithm

(Graham, 2009) was used to estimate missing item-level data for each scale separately

among participants missing less than 50% of items on a given scale; subsequently, total

scale scores were computed and missing total scale scores were estimated for those

participants missing fewer than half of their scale scores. Initially, we planned to compute

a measurement model for the SAS-SV using confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and test

a model using structural equation modeling (SEM), outlined in Appendix B. However,

while over 300 people participated in our study, a surprising number of them had to be

excluded for not using all three SNSs, rendering these analyses unusable. As such, we

performed the analyses below:

4.1 Regression Analyses

Sex and age served as covariates of PSNS-I, PSNS-S, and PSNS-T in the models

separately (as three separate models), as problematic use is associated with female sex

and younger age (Jeong, Kim, Yum, & Hwang, 2016; Wang, Wang, Gaskin, & Wang,

2015). The model in Figure 4-2 was tested using linear regression. Depression, anxiety,

FoMO, online social belongingness, and offline social belongingness were specified to

24
predict problematic Twitter use severity (Figure 4-1). Similar models were tested for

problematic Instagram use (Figure 4-3) and Problematic Snapchat use (Figure 4-4)

separately.

Figure 4-1: Regression model for problematic Twitter use.

Figure 4-2: Regression model for problematic Instagram use.

25
Figure 4-3: Regression model for problematic Snapchat use.

4.2 Mediation

Mediation analyses were computed to explore how FoMO mediates relations

between each predictor (depression, anxiety, online belongingness, and offline

belongingness) and each of the social networking sites (separately) using indirect effect

testing by computing cross-products of direct path coefficients. The Delta method was

used for estimating the standard error of a given indirect effect. Dividing the indirect

effect’s path coefficient by its Delta-estimated standard error produces a z-test for

assessing statistical significance of the mediation effect. Because indirect effect estimates

obtained this way are normally distributed on a sampling distribution, 1,000 bootstrapped

replications were implemented for accurate estimates. Such indirect testing procedures

are discussed elsewhere (MacKinnon, 2008).

26
Chapter 5

Results

5.1 Preliminary Analyses

We conducted preliminary analyses to assess for deviations from the parametric

assumption of normality. There was no substantial evidence of non-normality, with

PSNS-I and PSNS-T having the largest values for skewness (1.28 and 1.25, respectively)

and kurtosis (1.17 and 0.87, respectively) and all other values being under an absolute

value of one. Summed scores for FoMO averaged 23.30 (SD = 8.04). Summed scores for

the DASS-21 averaged 5.21 (SD = 5.09) for depression and 4.73 (SD = 4.34) for anxiety.

Based on total scores from the SAS-SV, the average for PSNS-I was 18.80 (SD = 8.99),

for PSNS-S was 24.40 (SD = 11.40), and for PSNS-T was 17.40 (SD = 8.94). Summed

scores for online belongingness averaged 42.70 (SD = 6.66), and summed scores for

offline belongingness averaged 43.9 (SD = 7.33). A correlation matrix of these scaled

scores along with age and sex is presented in Table 5.1.

Additionally, we computed frequencies of using smartphone features. Based on

items marked “Very Often,” participants most engaged in checking notifications and

liking posts, images, or links. Additional frequency data for using smartphone features

can be found in Table 5.2 below.

27
Table 5.1: Correlations among primary variables. *p < .05, **p < 0.01
Variable 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
1. Age ---
2. Sex -.26** ---
3. Depression -.09 .27** ---
4. Anxiety -.14 .23** .72** ---
5. Instagram -.14 .03 .14 .14 ---
6. Snapchat -.22** .17* .13 .20* -.47** ---
7. Twitter .04 .01 .26** .32** .43** .37** ---
8. Online -.01 -.09 -.35** -.22** -.14 -.10 -.03 ---
9. Offline -.04 -.11 -.47** -.27** -.09 -.09 -.21* .79** ---
10. FoMO -.20* .15 .22** .29** .42** .60** .33** -.05 .01 ---

Table 5.2: Frequencies of smartphone use behaviors. N = 135.

Smartphone Feature Never Rarely Occasionally Somewhat Often Often Very Often
Direct Messaging 4 21 24 22 31 40
Commenting 7 31 38 20 29 17
Liking 3 8 20 17 39 54
Posting Stories 7 27 38 27 29 13
Posting to Own Timeline 19 43 33 23 14 10

Posting to Other’s Timeline 52 52 17 11 3 5

Reposting Content 10 26 39 19 31 17
Reading News 8 18 28 36 32 19
Checking Notifications 2 4 18 18 40 60

28
5.2 Linear Regression

Linear regression was used to test if online and offline social belongingness,

depression, anxiety, and FoMO significantly predicted problematic social networking site

usage. Three models were tested separately, one for each SNS site. Variance inflation

factors (VIF) were used to detect multicollinearity, and none of the independent variables

were greater than five, with offline belongingness having the highest VIF of 3.22.

5.2.1 Problematic Instagram Use

The results of the regression indicated that the model overall predicts problematic

Instagram use significantly, R2=.76, F(7, 134)=10.98, p<.0001. However, only depression

was found to significantly predict problematic Instagram use severity (=.28, S.E.=.10,

p=.005). Neither FoMO (=-.16, S.E.=.11, p=.14), anxiety (=.05, S.E.=.11, p=.66),

offline belongingness (=.06, S.E.=.11, p=.56), nor online belongingness (=-.06,

S.E.=.11, p=.56) significantly predicted problematic Instagram use severity.

5.2.2 Problematic Snapchat Use

The results related to problematic Snapchat use severity indicated that the model

was statistically significant, R2=.61, F(7, 134)=9.28, p<.0001. Both anxiety (=.39,

S.E.=.10, p<.0001) and online belongingness (=.24, S.E.=.09, p=.006) significantly

predicted problematic Snapchat use severity. Neither FoMO (=-.03, S.E.=.08, p=.71),

depression (=.10, S.E.=.09, p=.28), nor offline belongingness (=.08, S.E.=.08, p=.37)

significantly predicted problematic Snapchat use severity.

5.2.3 Problematic Twitter Use

Finally, relevant to problematic Twitter use severity, the overall regression was

statistically significant, R2=.38, F(7, 134)=6.30, p<.0001. It was found that anxiety

29
(=.30, S.E.=.08, p<.0001) and offline belongingness (=.58, S.E.=.06, p<.0001)

significantly predicted problematic Twitter use; FoMO (=.01, S.E.=.06, p=.81),

Depression (=.03, S.E.=.07, p=.62), and online belongingness (=-.04, S.E.=.07, p=.56)

were not significant.

5.3 Mediation

Overall, FoMO was found to mediate relations between both anxiety and online

belongingness and all three measures of problematic SNS use, offering support for H6a

and H6d. However, FoMO did not mediate relations between depression or offline

belongingness with any measure of problematic SNS use severity, thus failing to support

H6b and H6c. Mediation results are displayed in Table 5.3 with p-values displayed for

statistical significance of indirect effects.

Table 5.3: Mediation results with standardized estimates displayed.

Indirect Effect  S.E. z P
H6a) Anxiety → FoMO → PSNS-I .09 .04 2.38 .02
H6a) Anxiety → FoMO → PSNS-S .09 .04 2.12 .03
H6a) Anxiety → FoMO → PSNS-T .11 .05 2.51 .01

H6b) Depression → FoMO → PSNS-I -.03 .03 -1.11 .27

H6b) Depression → FoMO → PSNS-S -.03 .03 -1.11 .27
H6b) Depression → FoMO → PSNS-T -.04 .03 -1.09 .28

H6c) Offline → FoMO → PSNS-I .06 .04 1.55 .12

H6c) Offline → FoMO → PSNS-S .06 .03 1.67 .10
H6c) Offline → FoMO → PSNS-T .07 .04 1.57 .12

H6d) Online → FoMO → PSNS-I .15 .04 2.45 .01

H6d) Online → FoMO → PSNS-S .10 .04 2.36 .02
H6d) Online → FoMO → PSNS-T .13 .04 3.25 .001

30
Chapter 6

Discussion

Mental health difficulties, such as depression and anxiety symptoms, are

associated with problematic SNS use severity (Andreassen et al., 2016; Shensa et al.,

2017; van Rooij et al., 2017). Despite the growing body of literature linking

psychopathology with problematic SNS use severity, associations between mental health

and specific SNS use behaviors remain largely unexplored. People are innately social

(Baumeister & Leary, 1995), and there are well-documented inverse correlations between

psychopathology and social belongingness (Beekman et al., 2016; Erzen & Çikrikci,

2018; Steger & Kashdan, 2009). Therefore, it is important to investigate online and

offline social factors as they relate to psychopathology and the development and

maintenance of problematic SNS use.

The aims of the present study, then, were to investigate 1) how offline and online

social belongingness relate to problematic SNS use severity; 2) what role depression and

anxiety severity play, along with both online and offline social belongingness, in

association with problematic SNS use severity; and 3) the role of the above relationships

within the context of specific SNSs. We predicted that offline belongingness would be

inversely related to problematic SNS use severity (H1) while online belongingness would

31
be positively correlated with problematic SNS use severity (H2). Additionally, we

predicted that depression severity (H3), anxiety severity (H4), and FoMO (H5) would be

positively correlated with problematic SNS use severity, and that FoMO would account

for relationships between anxiety, depression, and both online and offline belongingness

with problematic SNS use (H6). Finally, while the breakdown of the above hypotheses

into specific problematic SNS use severity was largely exploratory, we predicted that

higher levels of online social belongingness would be positively associated with

problematic use of SNSs that may foster more active social use (e.g., Instagram,

Snapchat), and higher offline belonging would be positively associated with problematic

use of SNSs that may facilitate passive, less social use (e.g., Twitter).

We found only partial support for H1 and H7. In bivariate correlations, offline

belongingness was not significantly related to problematic Instagram or Snapchat use

severity. It was, however, negatively associated with problematic Twitter use severity,

suggesting that individuals who experience lower levels of offline social belongingness

have greater problematic Twitter use severity. Similarly, offline belongingness predicted

problematic Twitter use severity but not problematic Snapchat or Instagram use severity

in regression analyses. Also surprising was the limited support found for online social

belongingness as a predictor of problematic SNS use (H2). Online belongingness only

significantly predicted problematic Snapchat use severity; it did not predict problematic

Instagram or Twitter use severity.

Given that the present study was exploratory relative to social belongingness, and

the relationship between social belongingness and SNS use remains a prominent gap in

the literature, it is unclear why these differences between SNSs exist. One possible

32
explanation is that in offline contexts, those who experience thwarted belongingness tend

to experience feelings of sadness or anger (Williams, 2007), and individuals with

decreased social belongingness in general tend to experience more negative affect than

those whose social belongingness needs are met (Beekman et al., 2016; Erzen & Çikrikci,

2018; Steger & Kashdan, 2009). In reaction to this psychological discomfort, individuals

may try to remind themselves of groups to which they belong, intensifying feelings of

affection for others (Baumeister & Leary, 1995) to fortify their need to belong (Williams

& Sommer, 1997; Williams et al., 2001; Williams & Zadro, 2005).

Furthermore, if someone experiences thwarted offline belongingness and

consequently experiences anger, and they choose to engage in Twitter use, there may be

simultaneous processes happening: expressions of and engagement with anger online are

reinforced (Brady, McLoughlin, Doan, & Crockett, 2021), and a person is not

experiencing the same social connection as they might experience on another site

associated with online belongingness, like Snapchat. Therefore, they are prolonging their

experience of anger and not obtaining the benefits of online social support, which may

lead to problematic Twitter use, where other SNSs more readily fortify needs for social

belonging that may protect against problematic use. More information is needed about

how individuals engage with specific SNSs to better understand the differences in

relationships between social belongingness and problematic use across sites.

We found only partial support for H3 and H4. Depression severity showed

significant bivariate correlations with problematic Twitter use severity but not

problematic Instagram or Snapchat use severity. Interestingly, depression severity only

33
significantly predicted Instagram use severity but not problematic Twitter or Snapchat

use severity in regression analyses.

Additionally, anxiety was significantly correlated with and predicted problematic

Snapchat and Twitter (but not Instagram) use severity in bivariate correlations and

regression analyses. These results are somewhat consistent with previous findings that

depression and anxiety symptoms are related to problematic smartphone use (Elhai,

Dvorak, Levine, & Hall, 2017) and problematic SNS use (Keles, McCrae, & Grealish,

2020). While there are some discrepancies between meta-analytic findings and results of

the present study, these differences may be explained by the more granular approach

taken here. That is, in looking at specific SNSs rather than problematic SNS use as a

whole, the present study offers a slightly more nuanced understanding of the relationship

between depression and anxiety symptoms and problematic SNS use.

Finally, FoMO showed significant bivariate correlations with problematic

Instagram, Twitter, and Snapchat use severity (H5). Furthermore, FoMO accounted for

relations between anxiety and online belongingness with problematic use of all three

SNSs but did not account for the relationship between depression or offline

belongingness with all three sites, demonstrating only partial support for H6. FoMO,

therefore, appears to be a mechanism for all three SNSs in explaining anxiety/online

belongingness and relations with problematic SNS use. These findings are consistent with

the conceptualization of FoMO, which involves discomfort and anxiety related to social

exclusion and an urge to connect with one’s social network, particularly in online

contexts (Elhai et al., 2017; Przybylski et al., 2013). Similarly, mediation results are

consistent with previous findings that FoMO mediates the relationship between online

34
social support and problematic SNS use, where the higher an individual’s online support

was, the more severe their FoMO, which in turn led to more problematic SNS use (Liu &

Ma, 2018).

6.1 Theoretical Implications

Taken together, the present study has two important implications: 1) depression

and anxiety differentially predict problematic use severity of different SNSs, and 2)

social belongingness is related to problematic SNS use severity. These results provide

some support for the I-PACE model, which posits that the development of problematic

Internet use occurs only in the interactions between an individual’s predisposing

variables and certain aspects that specific situations deliver, such as changes in affect and

cognitions (Brand et al., 2019). Overall, results of the present study demonstrate this link

between predisposing variables, specifically anxiety and online belongingness through

FoMO.

However, there was little support for depression predicting problematic SNS use,

suggesting that the pathway from psychopathology to problematic use through FoMO is

nuanced and differs across SNSs. Results of the present study lend credence to the idea

that the expected and accepted relations between psychopathology severity and

problematic SNS use are not necessarily generalizable across social networks. This is

consistent with previous evidence that people’s problematic use of different SNSs vary

(Rozgonjuk et al., 2021a) and provides additional support for studying problematic use of

specific SNSs in addition to problematic SNS use in general.

The limited support for depression as a predictor of problematic SNS use found in

this study is consistent with findings from a previous study, which found that depression

35
symptoms were associated with social use of the internet (van Rooij et al., 2017). It is

possible that individuals experiencing loneliness caused by depression symptoms may

turn to image-based over text-based SNSs like Instagram to feel more connected to others

(Pittman & Reich, 2016). Furthermore, it is possible that depression symptoms act as a

protective factor against problematic use of sites like Twitter and Snapchat (Choi et al.,

2015) in that individuals have less energy and motivation to actively engage in SNSs.

Interestingly, within the context of SDT (Ryan & Deci, 2017), results of the

present study suggest that overall, it is high belongingness rather than thwarted offline

belongingness that influences problematic SNS use behaviors. There is evidence to

suggest that seeking and obtaining online support is one of many motives that drive

individuals to use SNSs (Masur et al., 2014), and thus different motives may help account

for results of the present study and problematic use of certain SNSs over others.

6.2 Limitations

Limitations of this study include use of a college student sample, which may not

represent the larger population. Additionally, the present study is limited by a relatively

small sample size given the number of analyses performed. We used a cross-sectional

design; therefore, causation cannot be inferred. We used self-report questionnaires rather

than clinical diagnostic interviews to assess depression and anxiety, and we did not use

objective measures to assess Internet or SNS use (for an example, see Elhai, Tiamiyu, &

Weeks, 2018).

Similarly, this study did not evaluate use of specific features on sites, so insight

into how Twitter use might differ from Instagram and Snapchat use is limited. This study

may also be limited by the specific SNSs selected. Finally, and importantly, the above

36
findings may have been affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. With changes in form and

availability of offline socializing and increases in online learning, it is likely that relations

between people and SNSs, and subsequent impairment from excessively using SNSs,

were impacted (Elhai, McKay, et al., 2021).

6.3 Future Directions

More information is needed about how individuals engage with specific SNSs to

better understand the differences in relationships between social belongingness and

problematic use across SNSs. Future studies would benefit from further exploring the

driving forces behind problematic Instagram use compared to other SNSs. Additionally,

future studies may benefit from further exploring online and offline belongingness,

perhaps by assessing the number of offline close friends and acquaintances and number

of online followers/following or investigating factors related to a deeper versus more

superficial sense of social connectedness. Relatedly, future studies would benefit from

examining other aspects of SDT theory in relation to problematic SNS use, such as

competence and autonomy (Deci & Ryan, 2000). Finally, future studies should explore

differences in problematic use of specific features across SNSs and include more widely

used sites for this age group, such as TikTok (Montag, Yang, & Elhai, 2021).

37
References

Andreassen, C., Billieux, J., Griffiths, M. D., Kuss, D. J., Demetrovics, Z., Mazzoni, E.,
& Pallesen, S. (2016). The relationship between addictive use of social media and
video games and symptoms of psychiatric disorders: A large-scale cross-sectional
study. Psychol Addict Behav, 30(2), 252-262. doi:10.1037/adb0000160

Andreassen, C. S., & Pallesen, S. (2014). Social Network Site Addiction - An Overview.
Current Pharmaceutical Design, 20(25), 4053-4061.
doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.2174/13816128113199990616

Antony, M. M., Bieling, P. J., Cox, B. J., Enns, M. W., & Swinson, R. P. (1998).
Psychometric properties of the 42-item and 21-item versions of the Depression
Anxiety and Stress Scales in clinical groups and a community sample.
Psychological Assessment, 10(2), 176-181.

Bargh, J. A., & McKenna, Y. K. (2004). The Internet and Social Life. Annual Review of
Psychology, 55(1), 573-590. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.55.090902.141922

Baumeister, R. F., & Leary, M. R. (1995). The need to belong: Desire for interpersonal
attachments as a fundamental human motivation. Psychological Bulletin, 117(3),
497-529. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.117.3.497

Beekman, J. B., Stock, M. L., & Marcus, T. (2016). Need to Belong, Not Rejection
Sensitivity, Moderates Cortisol Response, Self-Reported Stress, and Negative
Affect Following Social Exclusion. The Journal of Social Psychology, 156(2),
131-138. doi:10.1080/00224545.2015.1071767

Beyens, I., Frison, E., & Eggermont, S. (2016). “I don’t want to miss a thing”:
Adolescents’ fear of missing out and its relationship to adolescents’ social needs,
Facebook use, and Facebook related stress. Computers in Human Behavior, 64, 1-
8. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2016.05.083

Boyd, D. (2011). White flight in networked publics? How race and class shaped
American teen engagement with MySpace and Facebook. In L. Nakamura & P. A.
Chow-White (Eds.), Race after the Internet (pp. 203-222). New York: Routledge.

38
Brady, W. J., McLoughlin, K., Doan, T. N., & Crockett, M. J. (2021). How social
learning amplifies moral outrage expression in online social networks. Sci Adv,
7(33). doi: 10.1126/sciadv.abe5641

Brand, M., Wegmann, E., Stark, R., Müller, A., Wölfling, K., Robbins, T. W., & Potenza,
M. N. (2019). The Interaction of Person-Affect-Cognition-Execution (I-PACE)
model for addictive behaviors: Update, generalization to addictive behaviors
beyond internet-use disorders, and specification of the process character of
addictive behaviors. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 104, 1-10.
doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2019.06.032

Brand, M., Young, K. S., Laier, C., Wölfling, K., & Potenza, M. N. (2016). Integrating
psychological and neurobiological considerations regarding the development and
maintenance of specific internet-use disorders: An Interaction of Person-Affect-
Cognition-Execution (I-PACE) model. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews,
71, 252-266. doi:10.1016/j.neubiorev.2016.08.033

Brown, T. A., Chorpita, B. F., Korotitsch, W., & Barlow, D. H. (1997). Psychometric
properties of the Depression Anxiety Stress Scales (DASS) in clinical samples.
Behav Res Ther, 35(1), 79-89.

Campbell, R., Tobback, E., Delesie, L., Vogelaers, D., Mariman, A., & Vansteenkiste, M.
(2017). Basic psychological need experiences, fatigue, and sleep in individuals
with unexplained chronic fatigue. Stress and Health, 33(5), 645-655.

Ceyhan, A. A., & Ceyhan, E. (2008). Loneliness, depression, and computer self-efficacy
as predictors of problematic internet use. Cyberpsychol Behav, 11(6), 699-701.
doi:10.1089/cpb.2007.0255

Choi, S., Kim, D., Choi, J., Ahn, H., Choi, E., Song, W.,… Youn, H. (2015). Comparison
of risk and protective factors associated with smartphone addiction and Internet
addiction. Jounral of Behavioral Addictions, 4(4), 308-314.

Cordeiro, P., Paixão, P., Lens, W., Lacante, M., & Luyckx, K. (2016). The Portuguese
Validation of the Basic Psychological Need Satisfaction and Frustration Scale:
Concurrent and Longitudinal Relations to Well-being and Ill-being. Psychologica
Belgica, 56(3), 193-209. doi:10.5334/pb.252

Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The" what" and" why" of goal pursuits: Human needs
and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological inquiry, 11(4), 227-268.

Dempsey, A. E., O'Brien, K. D., Tiamiyu, M. F., & Elhai, J. D. (2019). Fear of missing
out (FoMO) and rumination mediate relations between social anxiety and
problematic Facebook use. Addictive Behaviors Reports, 9, 100150.

39
DiStefano, C., & Morgan, G. B. (2014). A comparison of diagonal weighted least squares
robust estimation techniques for ordinal data. Structural Equation Modeling,
21(3), 425-438. doi:10.1080/10705511.2014.915373

Duke, É., & Montag, C. (2017). Smartphone addiction, daily interruptions and self-
reported productivity. Addictive Behaviors Reports, 6, 90-95.
doi:10.1016/j.abrep.2017.07.002

Elhai, J. D., Dvorak, R. D., Levine, J. C., & Hall, B. J. (2017). Problematic smartphone
use: A conceptual overview and systematic review of relations with anxiety and
depression psychopathology. Journal of Affective Disorders, 207, 251-259.
doi:10.1016/j.jad.2016.08.030

Elhai, J. D., Levine, J. C., Dvorak, R. D., & Hall, B. J. (2016). Fear of missing out, need
for touch, anxiety and depression are related to problematic smartphone use.
Computers in Human Behavior, 63, 509-516. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2016.05.079

Elhai, J. D., Levine, J. C., O’Brien, K. D., & Armour, C. (2018). Distress tolerance and
mindfulness mediate relations between depression and anxiety sensitivity with
problematic smartphone use. Computers in Human Behavior, 84, 477-484.
doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2018.03.026

Elhai, J. D., McKay, D., Yang, H., Minaya, C., Montag, C., & Asmundson, G. J. G.
(2021). Health anxiety related to problematic smartphone use and gaming
disorder severity during COVID-19: Fear of missing out as a mediator. Hum
Behav Emerg Technol, 3(1), 137-146. doi:10.1002/hbe2.227

Elhai, J. D., Tiamiyu, M., & Weeks, J. (2018). Depression and social anxiety in relation
to problematic smartphone use: The prominent role of rumination. Internet
Research, 28(2), 315-332. doi:doi:10.1108/IntR-01-2017-0019

Elhai, J. D., Tiamiyu, M. F., Weeks, J. W., Levine, J. C., Picard, K. J., & Hall, B. J.
(2018). Depression and emotion regulation predict objective smartphone use
measured over one week. Personality and Individual Differences, 133, 21-28.
doi:10.1016/j.paid.2017.04.051

Elhai, J. D., Yang, H., & Montag, C. (2021). Fear of missing out (FOMO): Overview,
theoretical underpinnings, and literature review on relations with severity of
negative affectivity and problematic technology use. Brazilian Journal of
Psychiatry. doi:10.1590/1516-4446-2020-0870

Elhai, J. D., Yang, H., & Montag, C. (2019). Cognitive- and Emotion-Related
Dysfunctional Coping Processes: Transdiagnostic Mechanisms Explaining
Depression and Anxiety’s Relations with Problematic Smartphone Use. Current
Addiction Reports, 6(4), 410-417. doi:10.1007/s40429-019-00260-4

40
Erzen, E., & Çikrikci, Ö. (2018). The effect of loneliness on depression: A meta-analysis.
International Journal of Social Psychiatry, 64(5), 427-435.
doi:10.1177/0020764018776349

Escobar-Viera, C. G., Shensa, A., Bowman, N. D., Sidani, J. E., Knight, J., James, A. E.,
& Primack, B. A. (2018). Passive and Active Social Media Use and Depressive
Symptoms Among United States Adults. Cyberpsychol Behav Soc Netw, 21(7),
437-443. doi:10.1089/cyber.2017.0668

Fang, J., Wang, X., Wen, Z., & Zhou, J. (2020). Fear of missing out and problematic
social media use as mediators between emotional support from social media and
phubbing behavior. Addictive Behaviors, 107, 106430.
doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addbeh.2020.106430

Frison, E., & Eggermont, S. (2015). Exploring the Relationships Between Different
Types of Facebook Use, Perceived Online Social Support, and Adolescents'
Depressed Mood. Social Science Computer Review, 34.
doi:10.1177/0894439314567449

Gagné, M. (2003). The Role of Autonomy Support and Autonomy Orientation in

Prosocial Behavior Engagement. Motivation and Emotion, 27(3), 199-223.
doi:10.1023/A:1025007614869

Graham, J. W. (2009). Missing data analysis: Making it work in the real world. Annual
Review of Psychology, 60, 549-576.
doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.58.110405.085530

Griffiths, M. D. (1996). Behavioural addictions: An issue for everybody? (Vol. 8).

Griffiths, M. D. (2005). A 'components' model of addiction within a biopsychosocial

framework. Journal of Substance Use, 10(4), 191-197.
doi:10.1080/14659890500114359

Hampton, K. N., Goulet, L. S., Rainie, L., & al., e. (2011). Social networking sites and
our lives. Retrieved from https://www.pewinternet.org/wp-
content/uploads/sites/9/media/Files/Reports/2011/PIP-Social-networking-sites-
and-our-lives.pdf

Harris, B., McCredie, M., & Fields, S. (2020). Examining the psychometric properties of
the Smartphone Addiction Scale and its short version for use with emerging adults
in the US. Computers in Human Behavior Reports, 1, 100011.

Harris, B., Regan, T., Schueler, J., & Fields, S. A. (2020). Problematic Mobile Phone and
Smartphone Use Scales: A Systematic Review. Frontiers in Psychology, 11.

41
Hu, L.T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure
analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation
Modeling, 6(1), 1-55. doi:10.1080/10705519909540118

Hwang, J. M., Cheong, P. H., & Feeley, T. H. (2009). Being young and feeling blue in
Taiwan: examining adolescent depressive mood and online and offline activities.
New Media & Society, 11(7), 1101-1121. doi:10.1177/1461444809341699

Indian, M., & Grieve, R. (2014). When Facebook is easier than face-to-face: Social
support derived from Facebook in socially anxious individuals. Personality and
Individual Differences, 59, 102-106.
doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2013.11.016

Inguglia, C., Liga, F., Lo Coco, A., Musso, P., & Ingoglia, S. (2018). Satisfaction and
frustration of autonomy and relatedness needs: Associations with parenting
dimensions and psychological functioning. Motivation and Emotion, 42(5), 691-
705. doi:10.1007/s11031-018-9702-6

Jeong, S.-H., Kim, H., Yum, J.-Y., & Hwang, Y. (2016). What type of content are
smartphone users addicted to?: SNS vs. Games. Computers in Human Behavior,
54, 10-17. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2015.07.035

Jurgens, C. T. (2020). Relatedness and well-being in the digital age. (Masters of Arts).
University of Dayton,

Keles, B., McCrae, N., & Grealish, A. (2020). A systematic review: the influence of
social media on depression, anxiety and psychological distress in adolescents.
International Journal of Adolescence and Youth, 25(1), 79-93.
doi:10.1080/02673843.2019.1590851

Kross, E., Verduyn, P., Demiralp, E., Park, J., Lee, D. S., Lin, N., . . . Ybarra, O. (2013).
Facebook Use Predicts Declines in Subjective Well-Being in Young Adults.
PLOS ONE, 8(8), e69841. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0069841

Kwon, M., Kim, D.-J., Cho, H., & Yang, S. (2013). The Smartphone Addiction Scale:
Development and Validation of a Short Version for Adolescents. PLOS ONE,
8(12), e83558. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0083558

Kwon, M., Lee, J.-Y., Won, W.-Y., Park, J.-W., Min, J.-A., Hahn, C., . . . Kim, D.-J.
(2013). Development and validation of a Smartphone Addiction Scale (SAS).
PLoS ONE, 8(2).

Laier, C., & Brand, M. (2017). Mood changes after watching pornography on the Internet
are linked to tendencies towards Internet-pornography-viewing disorder.
Addictive behaviors reports, 5, 9-13.

42
Lelkes, O. (2013). Happier and less isolated: Internet use in old age1. Journal of Poverty
and Social Justice, 21, 33-46. doi:10.1332/175982713X664047

Liu, C., & Ma, J. (2018). Social support through online social networking sites and
addiction among college students: The mediating roles of fear of missing out and
problematic smartphone use. Current Psychology. doi:10.1007/s12144-018-0075-
5

Lopez-Fernandez, O. (2017). Short version of the Smartphone Addiction Scale adapted to

Spanish and French: Towards a cross-cultural research in problematic mobile
phone use. Addict Behav, 64, 275-280. doi:10.1016/j.addbeh.2015.11.013

Lovibond, P. F., & Lovibond, S. H. (1995). The structure of negative emotional states:
Comparison of the Depression Anxiety Stress Scales (DASS) with the Beck
Depression and Anxiety Inventories. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 33(3),
335-343. doi:10.1016/0005-7967(94)00075-U

MacKinnon, D. P. (2008). Introduction to statistical mediation analysis. New York, New

York: Routledge Academic.

Marengo, D., Sindermann, C., Elhai, J. D., & Montag, C. (2020). One Social Media
Company to Rule Them All: Associations Between Use of Facebook-Owned
Social Media Platforms, Sociodemographic Characteristics, and the Big Five
Personality Traits. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 936.

Masur, P. K., Reinecke, L., Ziegele, M., & Quiring, O. (2014). The interplay of intrinsic
need satisfaction and Facebook specific motives in explaining addictive behavior
on Facebook. Computers in Human Behavior, 39, 376-386.
doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.05.047

Montag, C., Yang, H., & Elhai, J. D. (2021). On the Psychology of TikTok Use: A First
Glimpse From Empirical Findings. Front Public Health, 9, 641673.
doi:10.3389/fpubh.2021.641673

Morrison, C. M., & Gore, H. (2010). The relationship between excessive Internet use and
depression: a questionnaire-based study of 1,319 young people and adults.
Psychopathology, 43(2), 121-126. doi:10.1159/000277001

O'Dea, B., & Campbell, A. (2011). Online social networking amongst teens: friend or
foe? In.

Oberst, U., Wegmann, E., Stodt, B., Brand, M., & Chamarro, A. (2017). Negative
consequences from heavy social networking in adolescents: The mediating role of
fear of missing out. Journal of Adolescence, 55, 51-60.
doi:10.1016/j.adolescence.2016.12.008

43
Pantic, I., Damjanovic, A., Todorovic, J., Topalovic, D., Bojovic-Jovic, D., Ristic, S., &
Pantic, S. (2012). Association between online social networking and depression in
high school students: behavioral physiology viewpoint. Psychiatria Danubina,
24(1.), 90-93.

Pendry, L. F., & Salvatore, J. (2015). Individual and social benefits of online discussion
forums. Computers in Human Behavior, 50, 211-220.
doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.03.067

Pew Research Center. (2019). Social Media Fact Sheet. Retrieved from
https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/fact-sheet/social-media/

Pittman, M., & Reich, B. (2016). Social media and loneliness: Why an Instagram picture
may be worth more than a thousand Twitter words. Computers in Human
Behavior, 62, 155-167. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2016.03.084

Primack, B. A., Shensa, A., Escobar-Viera, C. G., Barrett, E. L., Sidani, J. E., Colditz, J.
B., & James, A. E. (2017). Use of multiple social media platforms and symptoms
of depression and anxiety: A nationally-representative study among U.S. young
adults. Computers in Human Behavior, 69, 1-9.
doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.11.013

Przybylski, A. K., Murayama, K., DeHaan, C. R., & Gladwell, V. (2013). Motivational,
emotional, and behavioral correlates of fear of missing out. Computers in Human
Behavior, 29(4), 1841-1848. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2013.02.014

Pénard, T., Poussing, N., & Suire, R. (2013). Does the Internet make people happier? The
Journal of Socio-Economics, 46, 105-116.
doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socec.2013.08.004

Rains, S. A., & Brunner, S. R. (2015). What can we learn about social network sites by
studying Facebook? A call and recommendations for research on social network
sites. New Media & Society, 17(1), 114-131. doi:10.1177/1461444814546481

Ridings, C. M., & Gefen, D. (2004). Virtual Community Attraction: Why People Hang
Out Online. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 10(1), 00-00.
doi:10.1111/j.1083-6101.2004.tb00229.x

Rozgonjuk, D., Sindermann, C., Elhai, J. D., Christensen, A. P., & Montag, C. (2021).
Associations between symptoms of problematic smartphone use, Facebook,
WhatsApp, and Instagram use: An item-level exploratory graph analysis
perspective. Journal of Bheavioral Addictions.

Rozgonjuk, D., Sindermann, C., Elhai, J. D., & Montag, C. (2020). Fear of missing out
(FoMO) and social media’s impact on daily-life and productivity at work: do

44
 WhatsApp, Facebook, Instagram and Snapchat use disorders mediate that
association? Addictive Behaviors, 106487.

Rozgonjuk, D., Sindermann, C., Elhai, J. D., & Montag, C. (2021). Comparing
smartphone, WhatsApp, Facebook, Instagram, and Snapchat: Which platform
elicits the greatest use disorder symptoms? Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and
Social Networking.

Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2017). Self-determination theory: Basic psychological needs
in motivation, development, and wellness: Guilford Publications.

Selfhout, M. H. W., Branje, S. J. T., Delsing, M., ter Bogt, T. F. M., & Meeus, W. H. J.
(2009). Different types of Internet use, depression, and social anxiety: The role of
perceived friendship quality. Journal of Adolescence, 32(4), 819-833.
doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2008.10.011

Seraj, M. (2012). We create, we connect, we respect, therefore we are: intellectual, social,

and cultural value in online communities. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 26(4),
209-222.

Shensa, A., Escobar-Viera, C. G., Sidani, J. E., Bowman, N. D., Marshal, M. P., &
Primack, B. A. (2017). Problematic social media use and depressive symptoms
among U.S. young adults: A nationally-representative study. Soc Sci Med, 182,
150-157. doi:10.1016/j.socscimed.2017.03.061

Sindermann, C., Elhai, J. D., & Montag, C. (2020). Predicting tendencies towards the
disordered use of facebook's social media platforms: on the role of personality,
impulsivity, and social anxiety. Psychiatry Research, 285, 112793.

Starcke, K., Antons, S., Trotzke, P., & Brand, M. (2018). Cue-reactivity in behavioral
addictions: A meta-analysis and methodological considerations. Journal of
behavioral addictions, 7(2), 227-238.

Steger, M. F., & Kashdan, T. B. (2009). Depression and Everyday Social Activity,
Belonging, and Well-Being. J Couns Psychol, 56(2), 289-300.
doi:10.1037/a0015416

Stoycheff, E., Liu, J., Wibowo, K., & Nanni, D. (2017). What have we learned about
social media by studying Facebook? A decade in review. New Media & Society,
19, 146144481769574. doi:10.1177/1461444817695745

Tausczik, Y., & Huang, X. (2020). Knowledge generation and sharing in online
communities: Current trends and future directions. Current Opinion in
Psychology.

45
van Rooij, A., Mheen, D., & Schoenmakers, T. (2017). Time to abandon Internet
Addiction? Predicting problematic internet, game, and social media use from
psychosocial well-being and application use. Clinical Neuropsychiatry, 14, 113–
121.

Vansteenkiste, M., Niemiec, C. P., & Soenens, B. (2010). The development of the five
mini-theories of self-determination theory: An historical overview, emerging
trends, and future directions. In The decade ahead: Theoretical perspectives on
motivation and achievement: Emerald Group Publishing Limited.

Vansteenkiste, M., & Ryan, R. M. (2013). On psychological growth and vulnerability:

basic psychological need satisfaction and need frustration as a unifying principle.
Journal of psychotherapy integration, 23(3), 263.

Verduyn, P., Lee, D. S., Park, J., Shablack, H., Orvell, A., Bayer, J., . . . Kross, E. (2015).
Passive Facebook usage undermines affective well-being: Experimental and
longitudinal evidence. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 144(2),
480.

Wang, J.-L., Wang, H.-Z., Gaskin, J., & Wang, L.-H. (2015). The role of stress and
motivation in problematic smartphone use among college students. Computers in
Human Behavior, 53, 181-188. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2015.07.005

Wegmann, E., Oberst, U., Stodt, B., & Brand, M. (2017). Online-specific fear of missing
out and Internet-use expectancies contribute to symptoms of Internet-
communication disorder. Addictive Behaviors Reports, 5, 33-42.

Weinstein, N., & Ryan, R. M. (2011). A self‐determination theory approach to

understanding stress incursion and responses. Stress and Health, 27(1), 4-17.

Wilkinson, D., & Thelwall, M. (2010). Social network site changes over time: The case
of MySpace. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and
Technology, 61(11), 2311-2323. doi:10.1002/asi.21397

Williams, K. D. (2007). Ostracism: The Kiss of Social Death. Social and Personality
Psychology Compass, 1(1), 236-247. doi:10.1111/j.1751-9004.2007.00004.x

Williams, K. D., & Sommer, K. L. (1997). Social Ostracism by Coworkers: Does

Rejection Lead to Loafing or Compensation? Personality and Social Psychology
Bulletin, 23(7), 693-706. doi:10.1177/0146167297237003

Williams, K. D., Wheeler, L., & Harvey, J. A. R. (2001). Inside the social mind of the
ostracizer. In The social mind: Cognitive and motivational aspects of
interpersonal behavior. (pp. 294-320). New York, NY, US: Cambridge
University Press.

46
Williams, K. D., & Zadro, L. (2005). Ostracism: the indiscriminate early detection
system. In K. D. Williams, J. P. Forgas, & W. v. Hippel (Eds.), The social
outcast: ostracism, social exclusion, rejection, and bullying (pp. 19-34). New
York: Psychology Press.

47
Appendix A

Informed Consent

Department of Psychology
2801 West Bancroft Street
Toledo, Ohio 43614
Phone: 419-530-2717
Fax: 419-530-8479
ADULT RESEARCH SUBJECT - INFORMED CONSENT FORM

Social networking and emotions

Principal Investigator Jon D. Elhai, Ph.D., 419-530-2829

Other Investigators Abigail E. Dempsey, M.A., 419-530-2721

Purpose: You are invited to participate in the research project entitled “Social
networking and emotion,” which is being conducted at the University of Toledo under the
direction of Dr. Jon D. Elhai and Abigail E. Dempsey. The purpose of this study is to
investigate how social media use is related to emotion.

Description of Procedures: This research study will take place online via
PsychData.com and will take approximately 30 minutes to complete. You will be asked
to fill out demographic information and various questionnaires in which you will evaluate
your mental health and social media use.

Potential Risks: A potential risk for participating in this study is loss of confidentiality.
However, to minimize risk, data will be de-identified and kept in secure, password-
protected locations.

Potential Benefits: The only direct benefit to you if you participate in this research may
be that you will learn about how psychology survey studies are run, and you may learn
more about social networking site use and mental health. The field of psychology may
benefit from this research by furthering our understanding of how mental health relates
to social networking site use. Others may benefit by learning about the results of this
research. Upon successful completion of this survey, you will be awarded research

48
credits for your undergraduate psychology course. If you decide not to participate, you
will not receive research credit. However, there are alternatives to participating in
research (e.g., participating in other research studies or writing reviews of research
articles

Confidentiality: Signed consent documents and de-identified data will be stored in

locked files on a password protected computer. Only the researchers involved with
conducting this study will have access to the data. Signed consent forms will be kept for
a minimum of three years after the project is closed.

Voluntary Participation: The information collected from you may be de-identified and
used for future research purposes. As a reminder, your participation in this research is
voluntary. Your refusal to participate in this study will involve no penalty or loss of
benefits to which you are otherwise entitled and will not affect your relationship with The
University of Toledo or any of your classes. You may skip any questions that you may be
uncomfortable answering. In addition, you may discontinue participation at any time
without any penalty or loss of benefits.

Contact Information: If you have any questions at any time before, during or after your
participation or experience any psychological distress as a result of this research, you
should contact a member of the research team: Dr. Jon D. Elhai (419-530-2829) or
Abigail E. Dempsey (419-530-2721).

If you have questions beyond those answered by the research team or your rights as a
research subject or research-related injuries, the Chairperson of the SBE Institutional
Review Board may be contacted through the Human Research Protection Program on
the main campus at (419) 530-6167.

SIGNATURE SECTION – Please read carefully

You are making a decision whether or not to participate in this research study. By
checking the box below, you are giving an electronic signature. Your signature indicates
that you have read the information provided above, you have had all your questions
answered, and you have decided to take part in this research. You may take as much
time as necessary to think it over.

By participating in this research, you confirm that you are at least 18 years old.

49
Appendix B

Proposed Analyses

Confirmatory Factor Analysis

The initial plan was to compute a measurement model for the SAS-SV—as the

primary dependent variable—using CFA. Items on the SAS-SV would have been treated

as ordinal (Elhai, Levine, et al., 2018). Consequently, a polychoric covariance matrix

would have been estimated using weighted least squares estimation with mean-and

variance-adjusted chi-square, and factor loadings would have been estimated using probit

regression (DiStefano & Morgan, 2014). The latent factor would have been scaled by

fixing its factor variance to 1, freely estimating all factor loadings. Missing item-level

values would have been estimated by maximum likelihood procedures. Residual error

covariances would have been fixed to zero.

According to this initial plan, reported fit indices would have been the

comparative fit index (CFI), Tucker-Lewis Index (TLI), root mean square error of

approximation (RMSEA), and standardized root mean square residual (SRMR) with CFI

and TLI > .95, RMSEA < .06, and SRMR < .08 typically indicating adequate fit (Hu &

Bentler, 1999). The original sample size (n = 300) could have worked for a fully latent

structural model. However, as discussed above, a surprising number of participants

50
(n = 140) had to be excluded for not using all three SNSs despite all three sites being

popular among young people. Given the remaining subjects after finishing a second

semester of data collection (n = 135), in consultation with my advisor, it was determined

there would not be adequate power for SEM. Therefore, I proceeded with the backup plan

discussed below, which includes testing regression and mediation in lieu of SEM. The

below analyses were approved by the dissertation proposal committee.

Structural Equation Modeling

The model in Figure B-1 would have been tested using structural equation

modeling (SEM). Depression severity, anxiety severity, and belongingness would have

been specified to predict FoMO, and FoMO would have been predicted to mediate the

relations between depression severity, anxiety severity, and belongingness with

problematic SNS use severity on Instagram, Twitter, and Snapchat. The SAS-SV for each

of the SNSs would have been modeled as latent variables; all other psychological

constructs would have been treated as observed scaled scores to preserve statistical

power. The same estimation approach would have been used for SEM as for CFA. If sex

was bivariately associated with problematic SNS use variables, we would have used sex

as a covariate of these variables in the SEM model.

51
Figure B-1: Original hypothesized model. PSNS-I, PSNS-S, and PSNS-T = problematic
Instagram use, problematic Snapchat use, and problematic Twitter use, respectively.
Circles represent latent variables; squares represent observed variables. For visual clarity,
the latent problematic SNS use variables’ items are not pictured.

52