Instant messaging and relationship satisfaction across different ages and cultures
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Research suggests that using IM is generally beneficial for maintaining personal relationships, yet well-being benefits are likely to be conditional on micro- and macro-level variables. This study investigates the link between IM use and relationship satisfaction across age groups using survey data collected from 19 countries (N = 20,358, age range 18–94, Mage = 41.0, SD = 14.6). The multilevel regression results revealed that (1) overall IM use with strong ties is positively related to individuals' satisfaction with their relationships across all countries and (2) this link is weaker among older people compared to younger ones. The hypothesized cross-level interactions were not statistically significant overall, yet comparing individual countries (e.g., Germany and Indonesia), which are on the opposite ends of the autonomy-embeddedness value dimension, suggests that the use of IM might indeed be more important for relationship satisfaction in more embeddedness-oriented cultures and relationship benefits may be more similar across age groups than in autonomy-oriented cultures. More large-scale cross-cultural studies and multilevel theories are needed to arrive at a more contextualized understanding of IM as a global communication phenomenon.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".