MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Facebook, Social Comparison, and Subjective Well-Being

2019· book-chapter· en· W2953780615 on OpenAlexaff
Jessica J. Joseph

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in psychology, mental health, and behavioral studies (APMHBS) book series · 2019
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicImpact of Technology on Adolescents
Canadian institutionsMount Royal University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologySubjective well-beingBootstrapping (finance)CyberpsychologyContrast (vision)Social mediaSocial psychologyApplied psychologyComputer scienceWorld Wide WebArtificial intelligenceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Facebook use has implications for subjective well-being. Previous research has revealed that passive Facebook use is typically related to deficits in subjective well-being, which is thought to be linked through upward social comparison. In contrast, active Facebook use is typically related to enhancements in subjective well-being. The main objective of the present study was to synthesize findings related to Facebook use and subjective well-being and to expand by proposing and testing whether the benefits associated with active Facebook use compensate for the negative effects associated with passive use. The second objective was to discuss policy and research directions. A total of 310 undergraduate students completed an online survey with questions regarding Facebook use, social comparison, and subjective well-being. Bootstrapping analyses revealed that active Facebook use did not buffer the negative effects for subjective well-being that occur during passive Facebook use. Recommendations for future research and education programs are discussed.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.902
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.006
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.054
GPT teacher head0.452
Teacher spread0.398 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvances in psychology, mental health, and behavioral studies (APMHBS) book seriesSame topicImpact of Technology on AdolescentsFrench-language works237,207