Capstone Final Project

Running head: MEDIA GRATIFICATIONS AND COLLEGE STUDENTS
Technology-Driven Gratifications: Through texting and Twitter use among undergraduate

college students
Elijah Melas
John Carroll University 17
Integrated Marketing in Communications Major
emelas17@jcu.edu
716-531-3781
MEDIA GRATIFICATIONS AND COLLEGE STUDENTS 2

Abstract
Studies in the past have applied and analyzed the Uses and Gratifications Theory to heavy
texting use among undergraduate college students, which helped identify the many different
reasons and practices that individuals use their phones so much. This study incorporates those
concepts and goes further into understanding the perceived effects that heavy texting and Twitter
use has on relationships. A survey was distributed among sixty-four college-aged individuals,
between the ages 18 and 24. From this data, it was evident that heavy texting or Twitter use is
deemed as more of a normal behavior when in groups of four or larger. Yet, heavy phone use
when in smaller groups or even 1-on-1 situations is widely agreed as being a rude behavior. This
study also explored the perceived effects that occur in regards to the amount and types of social
media posts by ones romantic partner. Generally, more participants recognized they do not care
about how much their partner posts or posts about. Yet, there were some notable gender
differences that provide some insight. Practical implications of the results are discussed, but this
study should provide some baseline awareness and areas to explore in the future.

Purpose and Significance
The overall purpose of this study is to understand the perceived effects that occur in relationships
heavy Twitter use and texting habits among college undergraduates. This study is not limited to
only romantic relationships, but will also analyze the perceived effects that occur in friendships,
acquaintances, and other relationship types. Due to the rise in technology and social media, it is
important to understand the benefits and the consequences that flow from the heavy use of both
media. Ideas that will be explored in this study will include the Uses and Gratifications Theory,
how the use of Twitter can generate perceived effects on relationships, and the attitudes of this
target audience in relation to technology use in the presence of others.
Literature Review
Introduction
For undergraduate college students, the growth of digital and mobile technology has become a
part of everyday life. By growing up and being exposed to it almost right from birth, individuals
between the ages of 18-24 have become digital natives and do not regard their media use as
anything out of the ordinary. If anything, sometimes it is even seen as being against the norm, to
not engage, through social media and text message exchanging. According to the Pew Research
Center (2015), individuals aged 18 and 24 send an average of 128 texts per day. In 2016, there
were a reported 2.34 billion social media users worldwide (Statista, 2016). Of the current
research available, a variety of studies have applied Uses and Gratifications Theory to describe
the reasoning behind the use of these media. This literature reviews main purpose is to analyze
why and how individuals are texting and engaging on social media, while focusing on the effects
that follow and how it can affect relationships, both positively and negatively.

Why and how college undergraduates are texting
Texting has become such an integral part of communication among individuals, and nowadays it
can serve a wide variety of purposes and satisfactions (Cahir, 2016; Grellhesl & Punyanunt
2012; Ishii et al, 2016; Ledbetter et al, 2015; Phua et al, 2016). Some concepts that are important
to analyze when looking at text messaging and college undergraduates would include why
texting is so prevalent and important among this age group, the possible Uses and Gratifications
that result from texting, and the growth of a particular form of language that is heavily used
among text messages (Grace et al, 2015). This is not only extremely apparent in the United
States, but in countries around the world. According to Ishii, Rife, & Kagawa (2016), greater
media richness can sometimes be found in asynchronous channels because it leads to more
communication satisfaction and effectiveness across all cultures. The asynchronous nature of
text-messaging allows users to either respond immediately or not. Text-messaging also allows
users to communicate anytime and anywhere while saving all records of the interaction (p. 397).
Even though text messaging can be a very interactive and quick exchange of information, that
doesnt mean it has to be a real-time interaction. Since it is not a demand of the same level as a
face-to-face interaction, this allows for individuals to analyze the message, respond at their own
convenience, and take their time to formulate responses (p. 402).
In terms of applying the Uses & Gratifications Theory to text messaging, Grellhesl &
Punyanunt-Carter (2012) looked at male and female undergraduates and identified seven
variables that come into consideration, which include: Socialization/affection, relaxation/escape,
accessibility/mobility, status, entertainment, coordination for business, and information seeking.
For both male and female undergraduates, the highest-ranking reasons for using texting as a

main source of communication are ease of access and convenience. Something of importance to
note was that college-aged women tended to have stronger ties to their cell phones when
compared to college-aged males. Women also reported significantly higher scores in regards to
the Uses and Gratifications variables presented through the questionnaire. Grellhesl et al. (2012)
explained this idea by saying, Women reported higher scores overall on the questionnaire
because they feel texting allows them to successfully fill dual roles, which would include
traditional societal roles (be more caring, maintain connections, showing responsibility towards
others) and showing independence (p. 2179).
Another study that applies the Uses and Gratifications Theory was conducted by Albert J.
Flanagin (2005), who found that cell phones are used more to maintain existing relations and
accomplish tasks, such as making plans for the future. Due to the informal and convenient
nature of texting, individuals may text one another to receive information, make plans, have
good conversation and create connections, or for other reasons that would be interesting to keep
exploring.
When looking at texting among college undergraduates today, it is also very interesting to
understand and analyze the texting language that has become a byproduct of the technological
emergence. According to Grace, Kemp, Martin, and Parilla (2015), the spellings and character
use that are associated with texting are called textisms. Textism is the alternative language
that individuals use while messaging in order to create more convenience, quickness, and to
display slang. Examples of textisms could be alternative spellings, omitting characters to save
time and effort, or using additional characters to add expression, such as emojis, exclamation
marks, etc. (Grace et al., 2015). With the use of this technology continually growing, scholars

and professors have continued to wonder whether or not participating in textisms can affect an
individuals formal literacy, as well as wonder whether these individuals who use textisms can
differentiate between the right and wrong times to use this alternative language. Situations that
were explored could include messaging between friends, emailing a professor, or even using this
type of language in more formal situations such as handing in homework or completing exams.
While educating students as to when and where textism use is appropriate has been
recommended before, in this case at least it seems that these undergraduates were quite capable
of differentiating between settings without explicit instruction (p. 803). Although there are still
individuals who need to work on this differentiation of where and when to apply textisms, it is at
least encouraging that this study showed results that indicated the majority of college students
formal literacy is not affected by this.
College undergraduates and the emergence of social media
Social media have become a huge part of everyday life for many college undergraduates.
Becoming engaged in social media allows for an individual to create a personal profile, make
connections with peers (and possibly celebrities), voice an opinion on an issue, and virtually
develop a personal brand (Bicen & Cavus, 2012; Kim & Lee, 2016; Phua et al, 2016). In 2016,
78% of the United States population was engaged with social media profiles (Statista, 2016).
Among motivations for using social media, two of the most commonly found would include
social relationships and information seeking (Kim & Lee, 2016). When posting and engaging
on social media, the main goal is to receive likes or favorites for things that you post, which
can be received based upon what the message content is, who is involved, and the overall tone of
the post (such as humor, sarcasm, seriousness, etc.).


Since college undergraduates are widely seen as being attached to their phones already
through texting, social media adds another component to the picture and offers other ways to get
satisfaction and feelings of belonging. With the boom in popularity of social networking sites
also available on handhelds, the need to text in order to stay close to those in our social circles
and networks is being replaced by features found on Facebook or similar sites (Grellhesl et al.
2012, p. 2179). While this helps to explain the social media boom that has continued to grow, it
also shows how undergraduates are seeking socialization and affection through media other than
texting. In studies done in the past, the focus has usually been on social media platforms other
than Twitter, such as Facebook or Snapchat (Halpern, 2016; Kim, 2016; Phua, 2016). For that
reason, it would be insightful and interesting to take a deeper look at Twitter and the media
effects, particularly the Uses and Gratifications that arise from its use.
Effects of media and relationships
A major concern when analyzing media usage is the issue that individuals face when trying to
balance technology use and relationships. When analyzing social media use and the effects it has
on romantic partners, Halpern, Katz, & Caril (2016) help provide some meaningful insight into
how heavy social media use by one partner can lead to relationship problems, as well as the
jealousy effect. The jealousy effect comes into play when a significant other posts excessive
individual photos, posts, or comments that are deemed flattering towards others, which may
invoke problems into the romantic relationship and make the other partner feel as if they are not
doing enough or are incapable of pleasing the other. For example, Twitter has been found to be a
medium that is used by romantic partners to publicize their fights, which has been strongly

associated with sequential breakups (Halpern et al., 2016). This is obviously a negative effect on
a relationship due to the accessibility to post on this medium.
Texting while in the presence of others is also another major issue among college
undergraduates today that may have an effect on relationships. For some, texting while with
others can seen as a form of disrespect and a social irritant, whereas for others, it may seem
completely normal to respond to messages rapidly. A study done by Cahir and Lloyd (2016)
found that most participants in the study understood that texting while in the presence of others
can be considered rude, yet this doesnt always make people refrain from doing it. This can have
negative effects on not only personal friendships, but also family and professional relationships.
Text messaging while at the movies or in a lecture was seen as a display of deficient interest in
the co-present activity and a lack of care towards formalized power structures in the shared
social space (Cahir, 2016, p. 716). In this case for example, texting during a lecture class would
negatively affect the relationship between that student and the person speaking because it makes
them feel as if what they are saying is not important.
To conclude, a review of the literature shows there has been a lot of work already
provided regarding the uses and gratifications theory and how it applies to texting and social
media use among college undergraduates. Although there are some easily apparent benefits of
extensive media use, there are still some negative effects that should be considered when
analyzing this new wave of communication. The following research questions arose from this
review:
RQ1: How do ones Twitter use and texting habits while with others affect the perception of
ones relationships?

RQ2: How do the amount and types of posts on Twitter by ones romantic partner effect the
perception of the romantic relationship?
Methods
For this research design, the proposed method of gathering data will be through a questionnaire.
The questionnaire will be developed through the software Qualtrics and an external link will
be available to direct participants to the site. This questionnaire will be distributed through the
use of the snowball effect, meaning that the participants will be selected based on other
participants recommendations (Stacks, 2011, p. 202). The principal investigator will send out
the questionnaire to 20 friends; then, these participants will be asked to forward the email along
to three other individuals to gain a broader and more diverse group. The questionnaire also
intends to be distributed through a John Carroll class called Interpersonal Communications,
where the instructor has already agreed to allow this measure. This class deals with issues of
relationships and situations involving media, therefore, this questionnaire could be useful in
gathering a wide-range of participants and could also help gain more insight from a group of
students involved in the topic. One major advantage of sending a questionnaire out in this
fashion is the ability to reach a larger population quicker and reach participants that would
otherwise be unable to reach. This questionnaire will also offer anonymity for all participants,
since it will be sent out through a link in the recruitment email. By completing the questionnaire
online, it will only take a relatively short time to complete, since there are only 12 questions.
The snowball effect will be the most effective way of gathering data, for several reasons.
The first reason is convenience, mainly because of the access and ability to gather the data. The
second reason for choosing this target audience is because of the extensive use of technology to

receive gratifications and for some, the constant need that to stay connected with others.
College-aged students are likely to have some form of social media accounts and are more than
likely to be familiar and skillful in the use of text messaging than other age groups.
In terms of reliability and validity, an online survey can be troublesome at times, which is
important to understand when analyzing the data. Although questionnaires can provide deep and
meaningful insights into the current research, there can be questions of who is actually
completing the survey and it also deals with issue of self-reporting. Since the recruitment email
will be initially distributed to college-aged students, it would be unlikely of the participants to
send it along to individuals out of the target audience; yet, it is something important to consider.
Therefore, a question has been inserted asking the participants age. In this case, this study is
relying on the fact that individuals will accurately self-report on the issues being examined in
order to help further the research, which is another important factor to consider. The
questionnaire can be found in Appendix A, along with the Qualtrics external link. The
recruitment email can be found in Appendix B.
Results
After distribution of the questionnaire, many interesting findings have arisen that could provide
meaningful insight into the subject at hand. Of the 62 individuals that completed the survey,
there were 24 male (38.71%) and 38 female (61.25%) participants.
Participants were asked on their perceptions of their peers texting habits while in a
variety of different situations, mainly to determine the level of rudeness that comes from
texting while with others. In a group of four to five individuals, 40.68% of participants viewed
texting as a normal behavior; this idea changes as the size of the group decreases and the

behavior is regarded as being rude. If a person is texting a lot in a group of two to three people,
then 35.59% consider this behavior as moderately rude. Another 30.51% marked this behavior
as slightly rude. Now, in 1-on-1 situations, this was an obvious agreement that heavy texting use
in this situation is deemed as a rude behavior. 59.32% of participants categorized this behavior
as very rude; while another 32.2% categorized it as moderately rude.
There were several survey questions that dealt with the correlation of an individuals
perception of their relationship and the amount and/or type of posting that their romantic partner
exhibits. From the survey, if a persons romantic partner did not post about their relationship on
Twitter, then 33.9% said they do not feel this would affect their perception of the relationship.
Whereas another 27.12% noted they would feel a little excluded, but it wouldnt impact their
overall perception. Another 25.42% noted they did not care whether or not their partner posts
about their relationship at all.
Another question asked about an individuals perception of their relationship if their
romantic partner had posted a flattering photo of just themselves. Overall, 30.5% said they
would feel a little excluded, yet it wouldnt impact their larger perception. An additional 28.81%
of participants noted they do not care if their partner posts photos with their friends or by
themselves. One of the major gender differences that arose from this research was that women
were more likely than men to acknowledge a feeling of hurt, unhappiness, or a feeling that they
are not doing enough for their partner.
Another finding in the performed research deals with the level and amount of posting
done by ones romantic partner. Overall, 37.29% of all participants acknowledged they do not
care how much their partner posts about their relationship. For this question, 39.47% of all

female participants expressed that one post per week by their romantic partner is reasonable;
compared to only 22.73% of males responding this way. Yet, 18.18% of males thought that two
or three posts per week were reasonable, whereas only 2.6% of females believed this.
When participants were asked whether or not they have been in a relationship where one
partner posts something too personal, 89.83% of all participants answered no. Yet, if they
were to experience a situation like this, 79.41% of participants stated they would specifically ask
their partner about the post.
Analysis and discussion
To refresh, these are the following research questions that this study aimed at attacking:
RQ1: How do ones Twitter use and texting habits while with others affect the perception of
ones relationships?
RQ2: How do the amount and types of posts on Twitter by ones romantic partner effect the
perception of the romantic relationship?
After completing and analyzing the survey results, some insight has been generated into
how heavy texting and Twitter use while with other people affects an individuals perception of
the relationship. From this data, texting while in larger groups is viewed generally as being
normal behavior, or slightly rude; while texting in 1-on-1 situations is widely considered as
being very or moderately rude. Therefore, in smaller group situations, individuals are more
likely to have a negative perception of the current relationship if their peers are on their phones a
lot. 59.32% of participants categorized this behavior as being very rude; zero participants
labeled this heavy phone use as being normal behavior. Even in groups of two to three people,
66.1% of all participants characterized heavy texting as being slightly to moderately rude. It is

interesting to note how quickly the perception changes when analyzing a group of four to five
people and comparing it to smaller group situations.
Another interesting finding from this research were the gender differences found in the
questions examining an individuals perception of their romantic relationship and their partners
level of posting, in regards to their posts about their relationship. Overall, 37.29% of all
participants believed they do not care how much their romantic partner posts about their
relationship. 39.47% of female participants expressed that one post per week by their partner is
seen as reasonable, with only 2.6% believing that two or three posts per week is sufficient. In
comparison, 22.73% of male participants believed that one post per week were reasonable; yet,
18.18% of males thought that two or three posts per week are reasonable. This is something that
was not expected that arose from the research because a higher number of female participants
believe that one post per week about their relationship would positively impact their perception;
yet, a higher percentage of male participants, when compared to females, express a larger desire
for several posts per weeks about their relationships. It is important to note though, that more
males expressed an overall disinterest in the level or type of posting by their partner, with
36.36% of male participants categorizing themselves as not caring about how much their partner
posts. This is noteworthy because it helps outline the different levels of gratifications that some
individuals seek through their online profiles.
In regards to the types of posts that participants are comfortable with their partner
posting, there was not much gender difference at all. 79.66% of all participants agreed that dates
or events shared together can be posted, as well as another 81.36% of participants stating that
pictures of the both of you are comfortable with their partner posting. Only two participants,

both female, believe that personal conversations can be shared online, but only if the
conversations are humorous. Another question examined the level of comfort one feels if their
romantic partner posts about them and women were generally more likely to answer on some
level of comfortableness. 72.97% of all female participants responded to this question as either
slightly, moderately, or extremely comfortable with their partner posting about them. On the
other hand, only 59.09% of all male participants expressed some level of comfortableness.
Limitations
There are several limitations that can be identified with this study. One limitation of the study
was the construction of the actual survey. If the study were to be done over again, the wording
of some of the questions should be changed. For example, some likert scale questions seven
different options, which sometimes ask for the participant to differentiate between slightly
agree and moderately agree. This can be troublesome for some participants because for some
subjects, it is hard to distinguish the lines between two options that are quite similar in ways. By
decreasing the likert scale to five options, this should allow for easier data collection and
analysis.
A limitation that could play a role in this research and is important to identify is the
analyzing of self-reporting. Since this subject deals with romantic relationships, it is noteworthy
to acknowledge that some individuals may falsely self-report, either because they arent happy
about their prior actions, do not want to remember, or they do not want to admit to falling into
certain actions. Although it is unlikely that false self-reporting occurs since this topic isnt
extremely sensitive, but it should be noted as a possible factor.


Another limitation of this study lies within the sample size. Ideally, this type of study
would want to have much more than 62 participants and would want to be equally distributed
among genders. Since the distribution among genders was dissimilar, this made analysis harder
and more difficult to compare the two. Due to the lack of time and resources, this study was not
able to acquire the level of data that would be ideal and although this data cannot be completely
generalizable to the total target population, this research does provide some good insight into the
minds of college-aged individuals and how heavy texting and Twitter use affects the perceptions
of a variety of relationships.
Conclusions
To conclude this study, this research has been able to add some significant understanding into
how college-aged individuals seek and analyze their own technology-driven gratifications. From
this research, we have identified that this target audience regards heavy texting and Twitter use
as a rude behavior mainly when in smaller groups or 1-on-1 situations. However, in larger
groups, they seem to generally view this as normal behavior. An individuals perception of the
relationship becomes negative in a more intimate situation and when their peers are on their
phone a lot. Therefore, this study did conclude that heavy texting and Twitter use has effects on
an individuals perception of the relationship.
In regards to the level of posting and comfortability, females were more comfortable with
their partner posting about their relationship and in general, were more interested in social media
gratifications than males. Males were more likely to express disinterest in the amount or types of
posts among their romantic partners; yet, there were not many gender differences in total through
this research. It was found through the research though, that a large number of female

participants believed that their romantic partner should post about their relationship at least once
a week, which is an interesting finding.
There are several suggestions that this study can provide for future research. One
interesting area of possible exploration would be to examine how individuals in this target
audience use Twitter as a medium to glorify their relationship. For example, in some cases it
may seem as if a couple is posting on social media to make it seem like they have a better
relationship than they really do. This would be another interesting concept to explore in the
realms of an individuals perceptions on their relationships.
Another possible area for future research could be to examine how individuals respond
to certain notifications. If this idea were to be examined, it would be wise to include Snapchat as
another form of social media. For example, someone may receive texts, Snapchats, and/or social
media notifications at one time; does this individual respond right away? To what degree of
immediate gratification does an individual in this target audience for each medium? Does the
individual answer one medium over the others? And to what degree of quick responses plays a
role in a persons perceptions of the relationship? By looking at some of these areas, this could
help increase our overall understanding of the effects of technology on ones perceptions of their
relationships.

References:
Almendrala, A. (2015) College kids text during showers, sex, and class. Were doomed. The
Huffington Post. Retrieved from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/04/08/college-
kids-text_n_7014214.html
Bicen, H., Cavus, N. (2012). Twitter usage habits of undergraduate students. Procedia Social
and Behavioral Sciences, 46, 335-339
Cahir, J., Lloyd, J. (2016). People just dont care: Practices of text messaging in the presence of
others. Media, Culture, & Society, 37(5), 703-719. doi: 10.1177/0163443715577242.
Degraff, J. (2014). Digital natives vs. digital immigrants. The Huffington Post. Retrieved from
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jeff-degraff/digital-natives-vs-digita_b_5499606.html
Flanagin, A. J., (2005). IM online: instant messaging use among college students.
Communciation Research Reports, 22(3), 175-187.
Grace, A., Kemp, N., Martin, F.H., Parrilla, R. (2015). Undergraduates attitudes to text
messaging language use and intrusions of textisms into formal writing. New media &
society, 17(5), 792-809. doi: 10.1177/1461444813516832.
Grellhesl, M., Punyanunt-Carter, N. (2012). Using the uses and gratifications theory to
understand gratifications sought through text messaging practices of male and female
undergraduate students. Computers in Human Behavior, 28, 2175-2181.
Halpern, D., Katz, J.E., Carril, C. (2016) The online ideal persona vs. the jealousy effect: Two
explanations of why selfies are associated with lower-quality romantic relationships.
Telematics and Informatics, 34, 114-123.


Ishii, K., Rife, T.S., Kagawa, N. (2016). Technology-driven gratifications sought through text
messaging among college students in the U.S and Japan. Computers in Human Behavior,
69, 396-404.
Joy, O. (2012). What does it mean to be a digital native? CNN. Retrieved from
http://www.cnn.com/2012/12/04/business/digital-native-prensky/
Kim, C., Lee, J.K. (2016). Social Media type matters: investigating the relationship between
motivation and online social network heterogeneity. Journal of Broadcasting &
Electronic Media, 60(4), 676-693. doi: 10.1080/08838151.2016.1234481.
Kuznekoff, J.H., Munz, S., Titsworth, S. (2015). Mobile phones in the classroom: examining the
effects of texting, twitter, and message content on student learning. Communication
Education, 64(3), 344-365.
Ledbetter, A.M., Taylor, S.H., Mazer, J.P. (2015). Enjoyment fosters media use frequency and
determines its relational outcomes: Toward a synthesis of uses and gratifications theory
and media multiplexity theory. Computers in Human Behavior, 54, 149-157.
McEwan, B., Horn, D. (2016). ILY & Can U Pick Up Some Milk: effects of relational
maintenance via text messaging on relational satisfaction and closeness in dating
partners. Southern Communication Journal, 81(3), 168-181. doi:
10.1080/1041794X.2016.1165728.
Smith, A. (2015). U.S smartphone use in 2015. Pew Research Center: Internet, Science, &
Tech. Retrieved from http://www.pewinternet.org/2015/04/01/us-smartphone-use-in-
2015/

Phua, J., Venus Jin, S., Kim, J.J. (2016). Gratifications of using Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, or
Snapchat to follow brands: The moderating effect of social comparison, trust, tie strength,
and network homophily on brand identification, brand engagement, brand commitment,
and membership intention. Telematics and Informatics, 34, 412-424.
Stacks, D.W. (2011). Primer of Public Relations Research. New York: The Guilford Press.
Statista: The statistics portal (2016). Social Media statistics & Facts. Retrieved from
https://www.statista.com/topics/1164/social-networks/
Yang, K.C.C., Pulido, A., Kang, Y. (2016). Exploring the relationship between privacy concerns
and social media use among college students: A communication privacy management
perspective. Intercultural Communication Studies, 25(2), 46-62.


Appendix A: Questionnaire
Introduction & Informed Consent:
Thank you for participating in my research project. In this study, I am aiming to learn
more about the uses and gratifications that are sought out after through texting and Twitter use
among undergraduates. This questionnaire will only take about 5 minutes to complete. If at any
time you feel you do not want to participate anymore, you may choose to leave the
questionnaire. Your name will not be collected in this study, and all data and identifiers will be
kept confidential. No identifying information about you will appear in any results.
If you have any questions or concerns about this study or any of these procedures, please
contact Eli Melas at 716-531-3781 or through email: emelas17@jcu.edu. If you have any
questions or concerns about the rights and welfares of research participants, please contact Dr.
Margaret Finucane at: mfinucane@jcu.edu.
Your participation is voluntary. You may quit the questionnaire at any time without
penalty.
By continuing with this experiment you confirm that you have read and understand the
information above and you willingly give your consent to participate in this research study. You
also confirm that you are at least 18 years of age.
Once again, thank you very much for participating. Your contributions to participate in
this study will help further the current research on technology use among college students.
Questionnaire:
1. What is your gender?
a. Male

b. Female
2. Please indicate what age group you belong in.
a. 18 24
b. 25 30
c. Over 30
3. In a group of four to five people, to what degree is heavy phone use (texting and Twitter
use) deemed as rude.
a. 1 Not rude at all
b. 2 Slightly rude
c. 3 Viewed as normal behavior
d. 4 Moderately rude
e. 5 Very rude
4. In a group of two or three people, to what degree is heavy phone use (texting and Twitter
use) deemed as rude.
b. 2 Slightly rude
e. 5 Very rude
5. If you are with a romantic partner or in a 1-on-1 situation with someone, to what degree
would heavy phone use (texting and Twitter use) be deemed as rude.


b. 2 Slightly rude
e. 5 Very rude
6. How comfortable would you feel with your partner posting about you on Twitter?
a. Extremely comfortable
b. Moderately comfortable
c. Slightly comfortable
d. Neither comfortable nor uncomfortable
e. Slightly uncomfortable
f. Moderately uncomfortable
g. Extremely uncomfortable
7. What level of posting by your romantic partner would be seen as reasonable, in regards to
your relationship?
a. Almost never
b. Once a week
c. Two or three times a week
d. Everyday
e. Multiple times a week
f. I do not care how much my partner posts
8. What types of posts would you feel comfortable with your romantic partner posting?
Click all that apply.


a. Dates / events you shared together
b. Pictures of you
c. Pictures of the both of you
d. Personal conversations
e. Other: ________________
9. Have you or your romantic partner ever posted something on Twitter that was too
personal? (i.e. escalating a fight on Twitter, describing behaviors or actions taken, etc.)
a. Yes
b. No
10. If the answer to question #10 was yes, to what degree would this type of behavior lead
you to rec-consider your relationship? If you answered no, then answer how you think
you would feel.
a. 1 I would re-evaluate our relationship
b. 2 I would specifically ask the partner about the post
c. 3 I would do no type of action
d. 4 I would not care
11. If you romantic partner did not post anything about you at all on Twitter, how would this
impact your perception of the relationship?
a. 1 I would feel hurt or have no sense of belonging
b. 2 I would feel as if I am not doing enough to make the other romantic partner
happy
c. 3 I dont think it would have any effect on my perception of the relationship


d. 4 I would feel a little excluded, but it wouldnt impact my perception
e. 5 I would not care whether or not my romantic partner posted about me
12. How would your romantic partner posting flattering photos of only themselves effect
your perception of the relationship?
a. 1 I would feel hurt or have no sense of belonging
b. 2 I would feel as if I am not doing enough to make the other romantic partner
happy
c. 3 I dont think it would have any effect on my perception of the relationship
d. 4 I would feel a little excluded but it wouldnt impact my perception
e. 5 I would not care whether or not my romantic partner posted photos of only
themselves or with friends
The making of the survey was done through Qualtrics and can be accessed anonymously at:
https://johncarroll.az1.qualtrics.com/SE/?SID=SV_9zB5g3IseacctCZ

Appendix B: Recruitment email
Hello,
My name is Eli Melas and I am a senior at John Carroll. I am currently in the Senior
Capstone for Communication Studies class and I am looking for college-aged students to
participate in my survey. The survey will take less than 10 minutes to complete and discusses
the topic of texting and Twitter use along with the perceived effects it has on relationships.
By participating in this survey, you are ensured confidentiality and anonymity throughout
the whole process.
I am actively looking for more college-aged students to participate and would greatly
appreciate it if you could complete the following survey and forward this email to three of your
friends. By doing this, it will allow for the research results to be more diverse and hopefully
create more meaningful insight into technology use and the perceived effects it can have.
Thank you very much for your help. Your participation is really appreciated and will
help further the discussion on this topic. Below is the link to complete the survey:
https://johncarroll.az1.qualtrics.com/SE/?SID=SV_9zB5g3IseacctCZ
Once again, thank you!
Eli Melas
Integrated Marketing in Communications
JCU 17


Appendix C: IRB form
IRB APPLICATION FOR HUMAN PARTICIPANT RESEARCH
1. PROJECT TITLE
Title of Project: Technology-driven gratifications: through texting and Twitter use
among college-aged males and females
2. PROJECT DATES
a. Anticipated starting and completion dates: 2/15/2017 to 4/19/2017
NOTE: Project may not start prior to approval from the IRB.
b. This project may be conducted on an annual basis: Yes X No
3. PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR INFORMATION

a. Contact Information
Principal Investigator: Elijah Melas
Department or Affiliation: Communications
Telephone: 716-531-3781 Email: emelas17@jcu.edu
Name of chair/supervisor: Dr. Margaret Finucane
Email of chair/supervisor: mfinucane@jcu.edu

b. Status
PI status: Undergraduate: X Graduate: Faculty: Staff: Other:
Students and external researchers must provide their current address:
1799 Wrenford Road, South Euclid, Ohio 44121
c. Student / External Researcher Information

If you are a student or external researcher, please provide the following as applicable:
Type of project: Thesis/Essay: X Independent Study: Class Project: Other:
Course # & Name: Senior Capstone in Communication Studies
JCU Faculty/Staff Sponsor: Dr. Carrie Buchanan Dept: Communications
Sponsor Email: cbuchanan@jcu.edu Phone: 216-397-3078
NOTE: An application by a student or external researcher must have the following statement signed by a
John Carroll University faculty/staff sponsor:
I have examined this completed form and I am satisfied with the adequacy of the proposed research
design and the measures proposed for the protection of human participants. For student projects, I will
take responsibility for informing the student of the need for the safekeeping of all raw data (e.g., test
protocols, tapes, questionnaires, interview notes, etc.) in a University or computer file.
Signature of Faculty/Staff Sponsor Date


All faculty/staff sponsors are required to complete online CITI training in the ethical conduct of human subjects
research and take the Students in Research module as one of the electives. See our CITI page for more
information.
CITI Training Completion Date:
4. FUNDING
Is this project being funded? Yes X No
If yes, list the funding source:
5. RESEARCH STATEMENT: Provide a summary of your project. Include information about

the background and rationale for the study, the research hypothesis, and goal(s) of the study.
Cite previous research where applicable. Specific jargon should be avoided or explicitly
explained.
The overall goal of this study is to understand the effects that heavy texting and Twitter use
have on relationships. My main target populations are 18 24 year old males and females.
I have two research questions. RQ1: how do ones Twitter use and texting habits while with
others effect the perception of the current relationship? RQ2: how does the amount and
types of posts on Twitter by ones romantic partner effect the perception of the romantic
relationship? There have been studies in the past applying the Uses and Gratifications
theory and this will play also play a factor in this study because I am interested in learning
how and why college-aged individuals interact in certain ways.
6. RESEARCH RESULTS: What will you do with the results of the study (e.g. publish, present
publicly at a conference/presentation, archive data for a future project, etc.)? Contact the
IRB Administrator first if the project is only for internal program evaluation or if the results will
not be shared outside of the classroom.
At this point, I do not plan on attending graduate school or publishing this study; although,
this may change in the future. Yet, I do plan on using this study as a piece for my portfolio.
For right now, the purpose of this project will be used primarily for this class.
7. PARTICIPANT POPULATION:
a. Indicate which, if any, of the following groups will be research participants (check all that
apply):
Minors (under 18) Pregnant Women Terminally Ill
X Students Institutional Residents Prisoners
Employees Mentally/Physically Disabled Senior Citizens (> 65)

Cognitively Impaired Non-English Speakers No Special Groups
Single Subject Populations (e.g., by Gender, Race, Ethnicity, or Religion)
X Other (specify): 18 24 year old males and females
b. JCU Students or Employees:

Will you recruit students from courses you are teaching?
Yes X No
If Yes, explain why this population is necessary to the study. Coercion to participate is
a significant concern. Explain how you will ensure you will not know which of your
students have consented to participate and which have not until after semester grades
are posted.
Will you recruit JCU employees?
X Yes No
If Yes, explain why this population is necessary to the study. Describe procedures for
protecting employees confidentiality.
Dr. Jacqueline Schmidt has agreed to distribute either the recruitment email or the survey
itself to her students in her Interpersonal Communications class. I plan on forwarding the
email to Dr. Schmidt and then have her forward it along to her students, which would be
easier for data collection and anonymity among participants. Throughout this whole process,
Dr. Schmidt has been my mentor and she thought the questionnaire would be a good
reflection for her students to participate in (for their own benefit), as well as provide an
increase in diversity among the participants (different majors and different ages).
Note: if your research involves campus-wide recruitment of JCU students or
employees, institutional approval may also be required.
c. If other participant groups from the list above are selected, state the rationale for their use.
d. What is the approximate number of participants to be recruited? 60
e. How will the participants be recruited? Check all that apply and attach all applicable
recruitment materials.
Recruitment Scripts Cover Letters Advertisements
X Recruitment Emails Flyers JCU Psych Pool
Direct Solicitation Other (specify):

8. INFORMED CONSENT
See IRB Guidelines on Informed Consent for detailed information on consent and assent forms,
the required consent elements, and to view sample consent forms. Attach copies of all
applicable consent materials (e.g., informed consent form, information sheet, SONA study
description page for JCU Psych Pool studies, parental consent/child assent forms).
a. Type of Informed Consent (check all that apply):

(i) X Adult Consent

(ii) Use of Minors (under 18 years of age)
Parent/Guardian Consent
Child/Minor Assent (Non-readers: Not able to read or not-proficient at reading)
Child/Minor Assent (Proficient readers: Can read & understand a simple assent form)

(iii) In certain circumstances, a waiver of informed consent/minor assent may be requested.
In this case, participants are not informed or only partially informed about a study. To
request that informed consent or assent be waived, indicate category below (check all
that apply).
Partial Consent/Concealment: Information will initially be withheld from participants
Informed consent will not be obtained
Parental consent will not be obtained
Child/minor assent will not be obtained
If (iii), justify why informed consent will not be obtained. For partial consent, explain
why this is necessary for this study and include plans for how and when participants
will be debriefed. If a debriefing statement will not be used, explain why.
(Refer to 45 CFR 46.116d and 46.117 for the federal guidelines regarding
waivers):

b. Deception of participants
Deception occurs when participants are deliberately given false information about some
aspect of the study. If your research involves deception, you must provide the following
information:
(i) Describe the type of deception being used.
(ii) Why is deception a necessary and unavoidable component of the experimental

design?

(iii) What alternative procedures were considered that did not involve deception and why
were these alternatives rejected?
(iv) If deception is used, describe the significant prospective scientific, educational, or

applied value of the research.
(v) If deception is used, how will participants be debriefed?
c. Method to obtain informed consent: check (i) or (ii)

(i) Written Consent/Assent (written signature will be obtained from participants)
(ii) X No Written Consent/Assent Obtained (a written signature will not be obtained from
participants. Documentation of a signature is waived.)
If (ii), a waiver of a signature is requested, indicate below how participants will be informed:
X An Information Sheet will be used. Explain rationale below.
An information sheet prior to the start of the questionnaire will be included.
This can be seen in the attached Appendix A. By clicking agree through
the Qualtrics database, this will tell the participant of their consent and by
moving forward, you are accepting this.
Oral Consent will be obtained. Explain rationale below.
Electronic Consent (only for researchers using the JCU SONA System)

9. DATA COLLECTION & CONFIDENTIALITY ISSUES
a. Data collection methods (check all that apply):
X Questionnaire or Survey Archival Data
Web or Internet Intervention
Interview Focus Groups
Observation Testing/Evaluation
Video or Audio Taping Instruction/Curriculum
Computer Collected Task Data Physical Tasks

Other:
b. Will the data be collected anonymously (i.e., so that no one, not even the researchers, can
determine who participated? See the IRB Privacy page for an explanation of anonymity vs.
confidentiality.
X Yes No
c. If you answered NO to 9.b., describe procedures for keeping data confidential and secure (i.e.,
for ensuring that even though the researchers can determine which participant provided which
data, no third party could gain access to the data and determine who provided it). Be sure to
explain how the data will be stored both during the data collection process and after the study
is conducted since this will affect the confidentiality of the data.
10. METHODOLOGY: Describe in detail how the research will be practically conducted step by
step. Be sure to address (1) how participants will be identified and the process of
contacting, selecting and excluding participants; (2) how informed consent will be handled;
and (3) how data will be collected, including how data instruments, if used, will be distributed
and collected, and the location where the study will take place. Please reference
attachments, where applicable.
I have attached the recruitment email and the Qualtrics questionnaire that I plan on using. I
am looking for participants 18 24 and will initially send it out to 20 people in my current
JCU classes. From there, my recruitment email will encourage participants to forward it
along to 1 or 2 individuals. Dr. Schmidt will also encourage her students to participate by
forwarding my email along to them. Informed consent is presented at the beginning of the
Qualtrics questionnaire and by continuing past the first page, you click and accept the
terms. The data will be collected through the Qualtrics database and will not receive any
data regarding email addresses among participants. Any other identifiers for participants
will not be recorded in the data as well, so anonymity is guaranteed.
In the questionnaire, it asks to specify for age. I left three categories for this just in case
individuals outside of the age group participate. Since the questionnaire will be
encouraged by Dr. Schmidt, there are possibilities that an older undergraduate may
participate and by including this, it can help identify outliers in the research.
11. RISK FACTORS: Does your study involve any of the following elements?
Coercion or undue influence Yes X No
Procedures that might cause mental discomfort Yes X No
Collection of information that, if disclosed, could be embarrassing or
harmful to participants reputation, employability, financial standing, or Yes X No
insurability, or place the participant at risk for criminal/civil liability

Procedures that might cause physical harm to participants Yes X No
Biomedical procedures, including the use of drugs Yes X No
Participants will be audio or video recorded, or photographed Yes X No
a. Describe any other potential risks to participants besides those above. You should
consider potential physical, psychological, social, legal or other risks.
b. For all potential risks, assess the likelihood of their occurring and their seriousness, even if
you think these risks will be avoided.
c. Describe the procedures you will use to mitigate these risks as well as any provisions for
ensuring necessary professional intervention in the event of a distressed participant.
12. BENEFITS
Describe the anticipated benefits to participants and contributions to general knowledge in
the field of inquiry:
To further the overall knowledge and insight into the texting and Twitter habits among college-
aged males and females; and also, to learn more about the perceived effects these medias
have on relationships.
13. COMPENSATION
If the research participants will be compensated or rewarded, indicate the type and amount
of compensation. If participants are being recruited from JCU classes or the Psych Pool,
indicate whether students are receiving course credit (regular or extra credit) and, if so,
what alternatives are offered to those students who do not wish to participate in the
research.
There will be no compensation.

14. SUBMISSION MATERIAL: TWO COMPLETE HARD COPIES OF THE FOLLOWING

The IRB must review copies of all final material presented to participants. The IRB cannot
approve a project without a complete and accurate application and final copies of all supporting
materials. Please indicate below what materials have been attached to this application (check
all that apply):
X Recruitment material (flyer, announcement, oral script, email, letter, etc.)
X Data instruments (surveys, interview questions, tests, web-survey, etc.)


X Informed consent (consent and assent forms, information sheet, oral consent script,
psych-pool electronic consent, etc.)
Debriefing statement
Video clips, music CDs, photos, etc.
Other: (specify)

15. CERTIFICATION STATEMENT
In making this application, I certify that I have read and understood John Carroll Universitys policies and
procedures governing research with human participants (specifically, those as described in John Carroll
Universitys Institutional Review Board Policy). I shall comply with the letter and spirit of those policies and will
not undertake the research without IRB approval. Furthermore, I am aware that certain departments may
have their own standards for conducting research, and it is up to me to familiarize myself with them. I further
acknowledge my obligation to: (1) obtain written approval of significant deviations from the originally approved
protocol BEFORE making those deviations; and (2) report immediately all adverse effects of the study on the
participants to the Chairperson of the Institutional Review Board and the Chairperson or Supervisor of my
Department.
Elijah Melas 3/13/2017

Principal Investigator Signature Date
PI CITI Training Completion Date: 2/15/2017
CO-INVESTIGATORS:
a. Name: Title:
Signature: Affiliation:
b. Name: Title:
c. Name: Title:
16. SUBMISSION INFORMATION

Send one original and one copy of this packet (the application and all pertinent
supporting materials) to:
IRB Administrator

John Carroll University
1 John Carroll Blvd, AD 250
University Heights, OH 44118
You will receive an acknowledgment when the application has been processed for review.
The submission of handwritten and/or incomplete packets may significantly delay the
review process. Forms and policy guidelines are available at:
http://sites.jcu.edu/research/pages/irb/forms/.
For questions, comments, or assistance in completing the form, contact the IRB
Administrator at 216-397-1527 or ckrus@jcu.edu.
rev. 10/16

Capstone Final Project

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Capstone Final Project

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Running head: MEDIA GRATIFICATIONS AND COLLEGE STUDENTS

Technology-Driven Gratifications: Through texting and Twitter use among undergraduate

John Carroll University 17

Integrated Marketing in Communications Major

target audience in relation to technology use in the presence of others.

convenience, and take their time to formulate responses (p. 402).

variables that come into consideration, which include: Socialization/affection, relaxation/escape,

accessibility/mobility, status, entertainment, coordination for business, and information seeking.

others) and showing independence (p. 2179).

formal literacy is not affected by this.

College undergraduates and the emergence of social media

the post (such as humor, sarcasm, seriousness, etc.).

Effects of media and relationships

a relationship due to the accessibility to post on this medium.

them feel as if what they are saying is not important.

perception of the romantic relationship?

intends to be distributed through a John Carroll class called Interpersonal Communications,

will be initially distributed to college-aged students, it would be unlikely of the participants to

recruitment email can be found in Appendix B.

there were 24 male (38.71%) and 38 female (61.25%) participants.

as very rude; while another 32.2% categorized it as moderately rude.

about their relationship at all.

Another question asked about an individuals perception of their relationship if their

are not doing enough for their partner.

their partner about the post.

Analysis and discussion

perception of the romantic relationship?

people and comparing it to smaller group situations.

individuals seek through their online profiles.

extremely sensitive, but it should be noted as a possible factor.

an individuals perception of the relationship.

a week, which is an interesting finding.

realms of an individuals perceptions on their relationships.

Huffington Post. Retrieved from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/04/08/college-

and Behavioral Sciences, 46, 335-339

others. Media, Culture, & Society, 37(5), 703-719. doi: 10.1177/0163443715577242.

Communciation Research Reports, 22(3), 175-187.

society, 17(5), 792-809. doi: 10.1177/1461444813516832.

undergraduate students. Computers in Human Behavior, 28, 2175-2181.

explanations of why selfies are associated with lower-quality romantic relationships.

Telematics and Informatics, 34, 114-123.

motivation and online social network heterogeneity. Journal of Broadcasting &

Electronic Media, 60(4), 676-693. doi: 10.1080/08838151.2016.1234481.

effects of texting, twitter, and message content on student learning. Communication

Education, 64(3), 344-365.

and media multiplexity theory. Computers in Human Behavior, 54, 149-157.

maintenance via text messaging on relational satisfaction and closeness in dating

partners. Southern Communication Journal, 81(3), 168-181. doi:

Tech. Retrieved from http://www.pewinternet.org/2015/04/01/us-smartphone-use-in-

and network homophily on brand identification, brand engagement, brand commitment,

and membership intention. Telematics and Informatics, 34, 412-424.

perspective. Intercultural Communication Studies, 25(2), 46-62.

Introduction & Informed Consent:

Margaret Finucane at: mfinucane@jcu.edu.

also confirm that you are at least 18 years of age.

1. What is your gender?

2. Please indicate what age group you belong in.

use) deemed as rude.

a. 1 Not rude at all

c. 3 Viewed as normal behavior

use) deemed as rude.

a. 1 Not rude at all

c. 3 Viewed as normal behavior