Social media usage and academic

performance from a cognitive

loading perspective
Irfan Hameed, Mirza A. Haq, Najmonnisa Khan and Bibi Zainab

Irfan Hameed is based at Abstract

the College of Business
Management, Institute of
Business Management,
Karachi, Pakistan.
Mirza A. Haq is based at
IQRA University, Karachi,
Pakistan. Najmonnisa Khan
is based at the Shaheed
Zulfikar Ali Bhutto Institute
of Science and Technology,
Karachi, Pakistan.
Bibi Zainab is based at the
College of Business
Management, Institute of
Business Management,
Karachi, Pakistan.
Purpose – Social media has shown a substantial influence on the daily lives of students, mainly due to
the overuse of smartphones. Students use social media both for academic and non-academic purposes.
Due to an increase in the usage of social media, academicians are now confronting pedagogical issues,
and the question arises as to whether the use of social media affects students’ performance or not.
Considering this, this study aims to examine the role of social media usage on students’ academic
performance in the light of cognitive load theory.
Design/methodology/approach – Using a quantitative research approach, 220 valid responses were
received through an e-survey administered to university students. The proposed claims were tested
through structural equation modeling using AMOS version 24.
Findings – Findings revealed that social media usage for non-academic purposes harmed students’
academic performance. Additionally, social media usage for academic purposes and social media
multitasking did not affect students’ academic performance. Most importantly, social media self-control
failure moderates the relationship between ‘‘social media usage for non-academic purposes’’ and
students’ academic performance.
Practical implications – The findings of the study can be used by the academic policymakers of
institutions and regulatory bodies.
Originality/value – The study suggests that teachers not only rely on using social media as a learning
tool but also concentrate on improving student self-control over the use of social media through various
traditional and non-traditional activities, such as online readings, group discussions, roleplays and
classroom presentations.
Keywords Social media, Self-control failure, Teaching/learning strategies, Mobile learning,
Pedagogical issues, Social media multitasking, Academic performance
Paper type Research paper

1. Introduction
The use of social media is like an addiction and its use is inevitable. Junco (2014) defined
social media as the “applications, services, and systems that allow users to create, remix,
and share content.” Social networks bring people together by removing territorial barriers
and by providing knowledge from around the globe. An average person spends about three
hours a day on social networks (Hameed and Irfan, 2021; Celestine and Nonyelum, 2018). In
modern times, the use of internet-enabled mobile phones is very common among students
(Giunchiglia, 2018). The students can use the internet for both academic and non-academic
activities. The rapid increase in internet usage has shown a critical impact on the academic
journey of students (Owusu-Acheaw and Larson, 2015). This social media buzz influences
Received 1 April 2021
14 June 2021 their personal and social lives (Jacobsen and Forste, 2011). Furthermore, the literature has
31 October 2021
23 December 2021
shown substantial evidence of a strong connection between social media use and students’
Accepted 30 December 2021 academic performance (Giunchiglia, 2018; Lepp et al., 2015; Samaha and Hawi, 2016).

PAGE 12 j ON THE HORIZON: THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LEARNING FUTURES j VOL. 30 NO. 1 2022, pp. 12-27, © Emerald Publishing Limited, ISSN 1074-8121 DOI 10.1108/OTH-04-2021-0054
Another important element in the use of social media is the “addiction” that defines a person’s
eagerness to use social media. This is due to easy access to social media applications and
websites at any place with the help of mobile devices (Van den Eijnden et al., 2018). The use
of social media has become a norm and students cannot resist using it through their
smartphones (Du et al., 2018). Social media constitutes the websites that are useful for
collaborative interaction, information sharing and community building. Facebook, WhatsApp,
Twitter and Instagram are the most popular social media sites amongst the students.
Owusu-Acheaw and Larson (2015) proclaim that the increased use of social networking
websites has become a social norm and way of life for people from all over the world.
Teenagers and young adults have especially embraced these sites as a way to connect
with their peers, share information, reinvent their personalities and showcase their social
lives (Panek, 2014). Social media enables the students to interact with their classmates and
teachers virtually from any place (Owusu-Acheaw and Larson, 2015).
Social media users find it very difficult to control their use of social media (Junco et al.,
2011). Youngsters tend to show more interest and involvement with technology-oriented
products including social media (Fuchs, 2018). The usage of social media gives them instant
access to entertainment content. They get to know what is happening in the lives of other
people. They can also easily communicate with their friends and family (Fuchs, 2015). Apart
from the user interface the entire content is being uploaded/shared by the users. Such kinds
of features keep the students engaged in social media, resultantly they spend several hours
in social media usage (Vardeman-Winter and Place, 2015). Recent literature reports that the
use of social media further increased during COVID-19 for academic and non-academic
purposes (Ahmad and Murad, 2020). The question arises as to whether the use of social
media affects student academic performance or not (van den Eijnden et al., 2018).
The fast growth of social media networks into educational systems, as well as the provision
of educational services via these platforms, has pushed researchers and educators to
investigate how these technologies have changed the education system (Saini and
Abraham, 2019). While there are some reservations about the use of social media
applications in education, it is believed that they can help students improve their cognitive
and writing skills as well as their training capacities (Al-Qaysi et al., 2020). By providing
online lectures and allowing students to communicate with their lecturers and classmates to
gain and share information efficiently, social media has changed the educational
environment (Al-Qaysi et al., 2021). This paper aims to find out the effects of using social
media in teaching-learning concerning cognitive load theory. Moreover, it examines the role
of social media multitasking (SMM) and social media self-control failure (SMSCF) in
students’ academic performance.

2. Literature review and theoretical framework

2.1 Theory grounding the study
Cognitive load theory suggests that every learning material causes cognitive load on the
working memory. Cognitive load pertains to the number of factors demanding attention and
the cumulative mental effort required from working memory. In this theory, the learning
process is explained by the role of working memory (Sweller, 1988). Following are the four
pillars on which this theory is based:

1. capacity of working memory is limited;

2. essential unlimited capacity of long term memory;

3. working memory is actively involved in the processing and coding information into the
long term memory thus completes the learning process; and
4. working memory overload leads to futile learning.

VOL. 30 NO. 1 2022 j ON THE HORIZON: THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LEARNING FUTURES j PAGE 13
 Total cognitive load has three components; intrinsic load, extraneous load and germane
load (DeJong, 2010; Mayer and Moreno, 2003). The intrinsic load cannot be manipulated,
as it is a property of learning material. However, extraneous and germane load are the
functions of instructional design, thus, can be manipulated. Extraneous load is undesirable
and does not contribute to learning, it is caused by ineffective instructions, unnecessary
and excessive activities (Edwards et al., 2015).
From a cognitive load theory perspective, multitasking demands a correspondingly huge
working memory capacity that can easily become unaffordable for the memory system. This
is extraneous processing and can result in ineffective learning. Materials capable of
causing extraneous processing include unnecessary texts, graphics, sounds and other
similar cognitive activities. They constitute the extraneous load, causing unnecessary
processing, transfer losses and poor storage. All aforementioned affects defeats the
ultimate goal of instruction (Edwards et al., 2015).
The components of cognitive load are related to each other and collectively comprise the
total capacity. The total cognitive capacity remains the same, hence, using it on one
activity reduces the space for other undertakings. Social media has images, texts,
graphs and videos which all take the extraneous load. The usage of social media
causes more utilization of extraneous load and less space is available for intrinsic and
germane load. Similarly, SMM increases cognitive usage to a greater extent because
more than one activity is being undertaken at a single point in time. Hence, the cognitive
resources are wasted by doing excessive social media usage and SMM. The current
study analyzed the propositions proposed in Section 2 of the paper based on the cognitive
load theory.

2.2 Social media usage for academic purposes

Social media is transforming the means of communication in society due to its ease of use,
speed and usability (Junco et al., 2011). The communications range from the discussions
concerning the environment, technology and solutions to various issues (Van den Eijnden
et al., 2018). As per the research of Owusu-Acheaw and Larson (2015), social media
sites and academic performance have a direct relationship. They recommended that
students who have internet available on their mobile phones should use it for academic
purposes. Students should use this facility for reading novels and improving their
knowledge. There is a need to introduce innovative ways of developing reading materials
and novels to improve the knowledge of students (Muraven et al., 1998).
Boahene et al. (2019) in their quantitative study on tertiary level students found that social
media usage for academic purposes (SMUAP) is positively related to their academic
performance. Moreover, the effect of academic self-efficacy as a mediator has additionally
improved the academic performance of learners. It was also analyzed by Al Ahmad and
Obeidallah (2019) in their research on Jordanian University students that learning objectives
enhanced and results increased by 10.49% by the use of Facebook and YouTube in
teaching methodology. Additionally, a study on Pakistani university students found a
positive relationship between social media usage and academic performance (Ahmed
et al., 2020). Alamri (2019) found in his research with Saudi University students that their
perceptions about social media use for academic activities were positive. Participants
reported that social media saved their time, allowed self-learning and promoted
collaboration with peers and teachers. These all factors contributed to their learning
processes.
Chak and Leung (2004) stated that social networking has become a typical international
trend that has stretched virtually across each corner of the globe. Students can make
content, share, bookmark and interact at an exceptional rate on social media. Owusu-
Acheaw and Larson (2015) conducted a study on the relationship between the usefulness

PAGE 14 j ON THE HORIZON: THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LEARNING FUTURES j VOL. 30 NO. 1 2022
of time spent on social media and its impact on the academic performance of students.
They found out that the majority of students have mobile phones, they have access to the
internet and they know about many social media sites. Furthermore, they also said that
students visit these social media sites regularly. Their study revealed that there is a strong
positive relationship between social media usage and academic performance, thus we
hypothesize the following:
H1. SMUAP has a positive impact on students’ academic performance.

2.3 Social media usage for non-academic purposes

The world has changed dramatically over the past 10 years because of the major
developments in the field of social media (Martin and Yeung, 2006). Young students share
their thoughts, emotions, private information, images and videos at a startling pace on
social media (Khan et al., 2021). The use of social media has taken themselves away from
face-to-face socialization and people feel comfortable connecting through technologies.
Showcasing their lives on social media has become the norm (Celestine and Nonyelum,
2018).
Social media use has a negative relationship with academic performance and active social
media use among students can lead to lower academic grades (Hofmann et al., 2012). The
use of social media for non-academic purposes such as being too involved in social media
can have a major effect on academic performance (Alamri, 2019; Boahene et al., 2019; Lau,
2017). Similarly, a study conducted on Australian post-secondary students found that using
social networking sites has little impact on high-achievers while it jeopardizes low-achievers
(Wakefield and Frawley, 2020).
Panek (2014) found that heavy use of social media channels harms students’ educational
performance. Therefore, there has been a strong correlation between social media use and
academic performance (Jacobsen and Forste, 2011). Researchers such as Choney (2010)
and Zahid et al. (2016) worked on the social media life of students and concluded that it has
a negative effect on their academic performance (Asur and Huberman, 2010). Hence, it has
been hypothesized as follows:
H2. Social media usage for non-academic purposes (SMUNAP) has a negative impact
on students’ academic performance.

2.4 Social media multitasking and academic performance

Multitasking is the involvement in more than one activity at a particular time. SMM means
performing multiple tasks at a given time wherein at least a single task is performed through
social media (Lau, 2017). People use Facebook, WhatsApp, Twitter and LinkedIn, etc. for
sharing life events in the form of pictures and videos with their friends, family, colleagues
and others (Martin and Yeung, 2006). This SMM may take place on one or multiple devices
(Kononova and Chiang, 2015). A study reported that 85% of undergraduates do
multitasking and this number is still growing (Lau, 2017).
Studies investigating the effect of SMM on academic performance report that it has a
negative impact on three dimensions of students, namely academic performance,
behaviors and attitudes, and perceived academic learning (Van Der Schuur et al., 2015).
Lau (2017) asserted that academic performance is significantly negatively predicted by
SMM. University students who were indulged in SMM during class lectures stated that their
learning was hindered (Demirbilek and Talan, 2018).
The negative effect of SMM can be related to time displacement and limited information
processing capacity premise. Time displacement suggests that the students spend more
time on social media than on their academic activities. This is due to the appealing nature of

VOL. 30 NO. 1 2022 j ON THE HORIZON: THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LEARNING FUTURES j PAGE 15
 the media. Their focus is distracted and also affects their performance adversely. Few even
prioritize media usage over their routine activities of student’s life for example attending
classes (Walsh et al., 2013). The idea of limited information processing capacity is linked
with the cognitive load theory as discussed in Section 2.1. Theory suggests that multiple
activities at the same time consequence in cognitive bottlenecks due to limited cognitive
capabilities. This results in distraction in the thinking and learning process (Sweller, 1988).
The following hypothesis is proposed in the specific context of SMM:
H3. SMM has a negative impact on academic performance.

2.5 Social media self-control failure as a moderator

Most of the time, social media users go through the dilemma of either using social media or
doing their work. Study to get good marks in exams, make phone calls to friends or do
dishes clean-up and perform such duties which will help in accomplishing goals by leaving
short term pleasure of social media is social media self-control (Hofmann et al., 2012).
Numerous studies have revealed the benefits of social media self-control behaviors. Most of
the time, social media users fail to control their desire to use mobile phones and related
applications. The study of Lee et al. (2017) revealed that the desire to use social media is
more than doing routine activities.
Alamri (2019) interestingly found that there is no significant relationship between the amount
of time spent on social media and academic performance. This may depend on the
purpose of use. Whelan et al. (2020) conducted a study in Finland, Ireland and the USA and
found that social media overload damages self-regulation, which in turn is essential for high
academic performance. Du et al. (2018) said that social media is easily accessible for
everyone at every place through portable devices and Wireless Fidelity (Wi-Fi) connections.
Now in this situation for social media users, it is very difficult to stop themselves from using
internet facilities. Conflict arises between their goals and the desire to use social media. Lee
et al. (2017) said that self-control for social media users is very difficult and results in failure
in general.
The significance of self-control of social media has been discussed in many studies. Users
of social media commonly fail in their adaptable media behaviors (Muraven et al., 1998). For
example, in a single day a person experiences various situations where he/she has to
choose between his/her desire and work (Waris et al., 2021), but most of the time a person
fails to choose his work against the desire to use social media (Lee et al., 2017). The desire
to use the media has a conflict with so many other goals. A study by Hofmann et al. (2012)
concluded that media use has a conflict with the study goals and using time efficiently. Thus
we hypothesize that (Figure 1):

H4. SMSCF moderates the negative relationship between SMUNAP and students’
academic performance.

3. Research methodology
3.1 Sampling and procedure
This study has been carried out to examine the role of social media in influencing students’
academic performance. The data has been collected with the help of a close-ended
questionnaire based on Likert scale ranging from 1 to 5 (strongly disagree to strongly agree
or almost never to very often). The unit of analysis was university students. A self-
administered anonymous questionnaire was circulated online through Google forms for the
purpose of data collection. Standardized, reliable and valid scales were adopted from
existing studies to formulate the survey instrument. Initially, 40 undergraduate students

PAGE 16 j ON THE HORIZON: THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LEARNING FUTURES j VOL. 30 NO. 1 2022
 Figure 1 Hypothesized model

SMSCF

H1
SMUAP H4

H2
Academic
SMUNAP
Performance
H3
SMM

Notes: SMUAP = Social Media for Academic Purposes; SMUNAP = Social

Media for Non-Academic Purposes; SMM = Social Media Multitasking;
SMSCF = Social Media Self Control Failure

were selected for pilot testing following the recommendation of Peterson and Merunka
(2014). The questionnaire was further distributed to 500 students and a reminder was given
to the non-responding students after one month. Data collection was completed in three
months from June to August 2020. We received 276 responses with a response rate of
55.2% out of which 220 were useable after data cleaning. We then compared the
characteristics of respondents who returned completed surveys and non-respondents who
failed to return a completed survey. The results revealed that there are no significant
differences in the mean test of both groups, hence we preceded further with the data
analysis by using IBM SPSS AMOS version 24.
As per the analysis of the profile of the respondents, full-time students were 52.7%, whereas
part-time students were 47.3%. In total, the male respondents were 53.6% and 46.4%
females. Respondents included in the age bracket of fewer than 18 years were only 1.8%.
The majority of the respondents lived in the 18–24 (55.9%) age bracket with 41.4% of
respondents included in the 25–34 age bracket. The degree program classification tells us
that 64.1% of respondents were found to be enrolled in business administration-related
degree programs. The rest of the respondents were found to be enrolled in information
technology, media, education and other social science-related degree programs.

3.2 Measures
The instrument of data collection was divided into two components, one comprised of
demographic information of the respondents and the other about measurement scales for
constructs.
3.2.1 Social media usage for academic purpose. The seven-item unidimensional scale of
social media learning developed and refined by Mills et al. (2013) was used to assess
student perceptions of the application of SMUAP. Sample items include: “I feel a sense of
community learning becomes interactive.”
3.2.2 Social media usage for non-academic purpose. Twelve items media usage subscale of
the media and technology usage and attitudes developed by Rosen et al. (2013) was used to
evaluate SMUNAP (SMUNAP). Sample items include: “I Watch TV shows, movies, etc. on TV.”

VOL. 30 NO. 1 2022 j ON THE HORIZON: THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LEARNING FUTURES j PAGE 17
 3.2.3 Social media multitasking. SMM was measured using a three items scale from Ozer’s
(2014) study. Sample items include “I multitask with my social media account while
studying.”
3.2.4 Social media self-control failure. Three items scale developed by Du et al. (2018) has
been used for the measurement of SMSCF. Sample items include: “How often do you give
in to a desire to use social media even though your social media use at that particular
moment conflicts with other goals (for example: doing things for school/study/work or other
tasks)?”
3.2.5 Academic performance. Academic performance was evaluated on a single-item
scale, in which the participants were required to provide their cumulative grade point
averages (CGPAs) in an open response format (Paul et al., 2012).

4. Results
The results section is discussed in two parts. The first part highlights the validation of the
model through the reliability and validity measures of scales and model fitness. Whereas,
the second part represents the testing of hypotheses through SEM.

4.1 Measurement model

Confirmatory factor analysis was performed to determine the validity of the hypothesized
model. According to Kline (2011), the model fitness criteria comprises multiple fit indices,
out of which four fit indices are commonly reported. The first fit index is relative chi-square,
which is the ratio of chi-square and the degrees of freedom. The relative chi-square value is
1.533, which is less than the threshold of three. The comparative fit indices e.g. TLI and the
CFI are 0.912 and 0.924, respectively, that are greater than 0.90, suggesting an acceptable
level of model fit. In addition, the RMSEA value is 0.049, which suggests that the model is a
good fit since it fulfills the criteria of being less than 0.07. In summary, the chi-square, TLI,
CFI and RMSEA indices paint a picture that the hypothesized model fulfills the criteria of
goodness of fit as shown in Figure 2.
The reliability of the data has been tested and determined through Cronbach’s alpha. The
questionnaire was comprised of 25 questions and a reliability test was performed through
SPSS 24 software. According to Nunnally (1979) and Hair et al. (2013), if the value of
Cronbach’s alpha (a) is more than 0.7, the scales can be considered consistent and
reliable. The reliability statistics for watching TV, media sharing, internet searching and
video gaming as dimensions of SMUNAP have Cronbach’s alpha coefficient values greater
than the minimum criteria of 0.7 as shown in Table 1.
Additionally, the reliability statistics for the construct SMUAP have a Cronbach’s alpha
coefficient value of 0.833 for a seven-item scale, which reflects the good reliability statistics.
Moreover, the reliability statistics of SMM has a Cronbach’s alpha coefficient value of 0.755
on a three-item scale, which is considered acceptable. Lastly, the reliability statistics for the
construct SMSCF have a Cronbach’s alpha coefficient value of 0.689 for a 3-item scale,
which reflects the reliability statistics closer to the minimum criteria of 0.7. Moreover, the
composite reliability (CR)and average variance extracted (AVE) of each variable, as shown
above, reflect a good measurement model.
The discriminant validity of the model was assessed to see if the scales corresponded in
such a way that their conceptualization as distinct constructs was justified. The AVE values
for the constructs are greater than 0.5, suggesting that the model holds convergent validity.
Additionally, the MSV values of all constructs are less than the respective AVE values,
indicating that the model contains discriminatory validity. To sum it up, it is worth arguing
that the hypothesized model does not have a serious issue of model reliability and validity
(Table 2).

PAGE 18 j ON THE HORIZON: THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LEARNING FUTURES j VOL. 30 NO. 1 2022
 Figure 2 Confirmatory factor analysis

One of the key sources for measurement errors in models is the issue of common method
bias (Podsakoff, 2003). According to Bagozzi et al. (1991), one of the key sources of
systematic measurement error is method variance, which may come from a variety of
sources. Podsakoff (2003) reported several method bias sources that cause variances and
proposed some statistical techniques to remove the bias from the model. In this analysis,
Harman’s single-factor test was used to solve the problem of common method variance
(CMV). All of the variables in the sample were loaded into exploratory factor analysis and
the unrotated factor solution was examined to see how many factors were required to

Table 1 Cronbach’s alpha coefficient values

Construct Cronbach’s a Composite reliability (CR) Average variance extracted (AVE) Items

WTV 0.799 0.893 0.652 3

MS 0.758 0.842 0.575 2
IS 0.754 0.832 0.699 4
VG 0.844 0.924 0.676 3
SMUAP 0.833 0.933 0.738 7
SMM 0.755 0.874 0.503 3
SMSCF 0.689 0.801 0.581 3
Notes: WTV = Watching Television; MS = Media Sharing; IS = Internet Searching; VG = Video
Gaming; SMUAP = Social Media for Academic Purposes; SMM = Social Media Multitasking; SMSCF
= Social Media Self Control Failure

VOL. 30 NO. 1 2022 j ON THE HORIZON: THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LEARNING FUTURES j PAGE 19
 Table 2 Reliability and validity measures
AvgShared
Construct Composite Reliability (CR) Average Variance Extracted (AVE) Maximum Shared Variance (MSV) Variance (ASV)

WTV 0.893 0.652 0.018 0.006

MS 0.842 0.575 0.009 0.003
IS 0.832 0.699 0.015 0.004
VG 0.924 0.676 0.045 0.010
SMUAP 0.933 0.738 0.045 0.011
SMM 0.874 0.503 0.018 0.008
SMSCF 0.801 0.581 0.024 0.007
Notes: WTV = Watching Television; MS = Media Sharing; IS = Internet Searching; VG = Video Gaming; SMUAP = Social Media for
Academic Purposes; SMM = Social Media Multitasking; SMSCF = Social Media Self Control Failure

account for the variance in the variables. The exploratory factor analysis extraction was
limited to one factor, which accounted for only 19.59% of the total variance, suggesting that
one common factor does not account for the majority of the covariance among the
indicators. So, it is determined that there is no serious issue of CMV in the hypothesized
model.

4.2 Structural model

The structural equation modeling (SEM) technique was applied to test the hypotheses. Table 3
represents the coefficients, standard errors (S.E.) and t-values. Each estimated path is tested
and it is found that all the paths are statistically significant except the paths from SMUAP
and SMM to academic performance. The first hypothesis claims that SMUAP is significantly
related to a student’s academic performance. According to the results, the path between
SMUAP and academic performance is insignificant (p > 0.05). Therefore, this hypothesis is not
accepted and it is concluded that SMUAP is not related to a student’s academic performance.
The second hypothesis reveals that SMUNAP affects students’ academic performance.
According to the results, the path between SMUNAP and academic performance is found
significant (p < 0.05). Moreover, the beta value for the paths between SMUNAP and CGPA is
0.7488. This implies that this hypothesis is accepted, and it is concluded that the more you use
social media for non-academic purposes, the lower will be your academic performance. The
third hypothesis claims that SMM is related to students’ academic performance. According to
the results, the path between SMM and academic performance is insignificant (p > 0.05).
Therefore, the hypothesis, SMM affects the student’s academic performance, has been rejected.
The fourth hypothesis claims that SMSCF moderates the relationship between SMUNAP and
students’ academic performance. The results of coefficient of determination (R2) indicates that
4.47% change in CGPA is due to SMUNAP. The SMSCF shows a statistically insignificant
(p > 0.05) relationship with CGPA. Moreover, the interaction between SMUNAP and SMSCF is

Table 3 Coefficients, standard errors (S.E.) and t-values

Variable3 Beta S.E.2 T value

constant 4.39 0.82 5.32
SMUAP 0.06 0.99 0.06
SMM 0.28 0.47 0.61

SMUNAP 0.74 0.33 2.20
SMSCF 1.43 0.84 1.70

SMUNAP  SMSCF 0.69 0.33 2.04
Notes: 1.  = Significant path (p < 0.05) 2. S.E. = Standard Error 3. SMUAP= Social Media Usage for
Academic Purposes, SMUNAP = Social Media Usage for Non-Academic Purposes, SMM= Social
Media Multitasking, SMSCF= Social Media Self Control Failure

PAGE 20 j ON THE HORIZON: THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LEARNING FUTURES j VOL. 30 NO. 1 2022
statistically significant (p < 0.05) with a beta value of 0.69. This implies that “social media
usage for non-academic purposes” will have a lesser impact on the “academic performance”
of those who have low levels of SMSCF and vice versa. Figure 3 shows a graphical
representation of the coefficients of interaction effects generated through SPSS.

5. Discussions, implications, future research and conclusion

5.1 Discussions
The hypothesis that SMUAP has a positive impact on students’ academic performance (H1 )
has been rejected, which is in alignment with the findings of Lau (2017) and Abbas et al.
(2019). However, Junco et al. (2011) have found that the use of Twitter and Facebook can
enhance academic performance. Also, Al Ahmad and Obeidallah (2019) argue that
learning objectives were enhanced and results improved by the use of Facebook and
YouTube in teaching methodology, whereas Ahmed et al. (2020) found that students’ usage
of smartphones positively impacted academic performance.
There is an insignificant relationship between social media usage and academic
performance because students mostly use social media in their leisure time and for fun
purposes. Students mostly go for traditional and recommended means (Hameed et al.,
2021) i.e. textbooks, teachers or self-notes derived from lecture/books and other course
materials, etc. rather than using social media for such purposes.

Figure 3 Interaction effect

VOL. 30 NO. 1 2022 j ON THE HORIZON: THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LEARNING FUTURES j PAGE 21
 However, it needs to be studied as to why there is no significant relationship between the
two. Was the quality of interactions with social media not effective? Are traditional methods
of studying by using notes and textbooks the more effective mediums? Perhaps students
are not using their smartphones adequately or for meaningful academic purposes.
Consequently, it may be because when intending to use social media for academic
purposes, students get diverted and start indulging in SMM. In the light of cognitive load
theory (Sweller, 1988), this eventually conversely affects their learning. However, the
findings for SMM reveal something different as discussed in the consequent paragraphs.
It was also found that “social media usage for non-academic purposes” harmed students’
academic performance H2.This implies that the more you use social media for non-
academic purposes, the lower will be your academic performance. It was also reported by
Lau (2017) that the use of video gaming negatively affected students’ academic
performance. Also, usage of different social media sites revealed negative effects on
academic performance in the previous studies (Asur and Huberman, 2010; Choney, 2010;
Zahid et al., 2016). This is logical if the effect of the moderating variable is understood,
because if SMSCF is high, then students will indulge more in SMUNAP and, hence, their
academic performance will be negatively impacted.
Results also demonstrate that “social media multitasking” did not affect students’ academic
performance H3 . This is in contrast with Lau’s (2017) finding that SMM hindered student
learning. Similar findings were also reported by Demirbilek and Talan (2018), in which SMM
was an obstacle to university students’ learning. The findings of the current study are contrary
to the theory of cognitive load as well as the understanding that multitasking is said to be
negatively affecting learning. However, it may be because students are not multitasking on
many mediums at one time or perhaps, they are able to regulate their multitasking behavior.
There is an insignificant relationship between SMM and students’ academic performance.
The reason is that students do their studies and academic tasks in their schedule (Hameed
and Haq, 2021). As for SMM is concerned, most students do these social media multi-
tasking activities in their leisure and free time. So there is no connection between SMM
activity and academic performance of the students.
Empirical results also show that SMSCF moderates the relationship between “social media
usage for non-academic purposes” and students’ academic performance H4. This implies
that “social media usage for non-academic purposes” will have a lesser impact on the
“academic performance” of those who have low levels of SMSCF and vice versa. This is in
line with the findings of Muraven et al. (1998), Hofmann et al. (2012) and Lee et al. (2017). It
is the students’ propensity to put off the effort required for achieving strategic goals
because short-term, instant enjoyment increases the chance of SMSCF (Du et al., 2019).
The respondents in this study who could focus on the long-term goal moderated their use of
social media for non-academic use and hence, their academic performance as measured
by their CGPA was not negatively impacted as presented in Figure 3.

5.2 Theoretical and practical implications

The main contribution of this study is the development of the moderating role of SMSCF
between SMUNAP (SMUNAP) and academic performance (CGPA), which was not
discussed before in the cognitive load theory context. The results of the study show that
teachers and parents should discourage students from using social media for non-
academic purposes because SMUNAP hurts the student’s academic performance. On the
other hand, students should have a strong purpose and career goal before using social
media, because if students are goal-conscious i.e. concerned about their studies and
career, then they use social media in a more controlled manner, so this will have a less
negative impact on their academic performance.

PAGE 22 j ON THE HORIZON: THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LEARNING FUTURES j VOL. 30 NO. 1 2022
The findings of the study can be used by government officials especially the education
department including the Higher Education Commission. They can make certain plans on
the additional usage of social media accounts, for example, a limit can be imposed on the
usage within a particular day. Students should not be allowed to use social media forums
more than the prescribed limit. This will be a forced measure to control the additional usage
of social media and hence their academic performance will not be hampered. The study
further suggests that SMSCF is also a cause of poor academic performance. The students
can be engaged in more learning-oriented activities than social media. National television
channels and media houses under a centrally controlled authority can develop a series of
academic-oriented entertainment programs. These programs will be a source of leisure for
the students as well as they will be able to learn from them.
The trends of teaching are changing especially after COVID-19 the education and teaching
shifted to online mode in various parts of the world. The faculty members can engage their
students through social media platforms to influence their behavior. Faculty members can
develop short videos of the lectures with animated characters to guide students better.
These mentioned initiatives can be facilitated by the management of the university/
institution. Universities/institutions have the resources to develop campaigns at a mass level
to replace the additional use of social media with curriculum-related activities to enhance
learning.
As a result, decision-makers may use the findings of this study to help them create
collaborative learning communities by using a social media-based educational framework
to enhance the learning process. We may have to deal with other crises in the future other
than COVID-19 that pose a threat to educational institutions’ stakeholders (Al-Emran, 2020).
These initiatives will help the students in identifying and getting benefits from the related
resources for getting knowledge. While watching and using these resources the extraneous
load capacity will be used. Thus the space would be less for intrinsic and germane load
however the consumption of space through the extraneous load will also contribute towards
the learning process.

5.3 Limitations and future research

This study shows significant contributions in cognitive load theory as well as social
media use and students’ academic performance. But still, some limitations exist. First,
this study used a quantitative method for data analysis, but qualitative as well as mixed-
method is also a very effective tool to understand a more in-depth individual experience
of social media usage and their impact on academic performance. Second, here we
used SMSCF as a moderator between SMUNAP and academic performance. Other
important variables could be used as a moderator, i.e. teacher regulation on social
media use, student personality types (introvert vs extrovert), etc. Similarly, in this
COVID-19 scenario, the COVID-19 pandemic could also be used as a moderator
between social media usage and academic performance. Third, this study used social
media in general. In the future, we can specify a particular type of social media, i.e.
WhatsApp or Facebook or Zoom app, Google classroom, Google meet, etc. Fourth, in
the future, we could also add antecedents of social media usage, for example, social
media could be used as a mediator between teacher-specific tasks or other related
variables and academic performance. Finally, similar studies could be conducted by
including other age groups besides university students or by examining other cities in
Pakistan in particular and other cities in the world in general.

5.4 Conclusion
The current study is aimed at examining the role of social media in influencing students’
academic performance. Findings revealed that SMUAP and social media marketing did

VOL. 30 NO. 1 2022 j ON THE HORIZON: THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LEARNING FUTURES j PAGE 23
 not affect students’ academic performance. Additionally, “social media usage for non-
academic purposes” had a negative effect on students’ academic performance. This
implies that the more they use social media for non-academic purposes, the lower will
be their academic performance. This suggests that the assumptions of cognitive load
are fully applicable in the context of SMUNAP and their academic performance. Lastly,
SMSCF moderates the relationship between “social media usage for non-academic
purposes” and students’ academic performance. This implies that “social media usage
for non-academic purposes” will have a lesser impact on the “academic performance”
of those who have low levels of SMSCF. This result further highlights the importance of
cognitive load theory in the presence of SMSCF.

References
Abbas, J., Aman, J., Nurunnabi, M. and Bano, S. (2019), “The impact of social media on learning
behavior for sustainable education: evidence of students from selected universities in Pakistan”,
Sustainability, Vol. 11 No. 6, p. 1683.
Ahmad, A.R. and Murad, H.R. (2020), “The impact of social media on panic during the COVID-19
pandemic in Iraqi Kurdistan: online questionnaire study”, Journal of Medical Internet Research, Vol. 22
No. 5, p. e19556.
Ahmed, R.R., Salman, F., Malik, S.A., Streimikiene, D., Soomro, R.H. and Pahi, M.H. (2020), “Smartphone
use and academic performance of university students: a mediation and moderation analysis”,
Sustainability, Vol. 12 No. 1, p. 439.
Al Ahmad, A. and Obeidallah, R. (2019), “The impact of social networks on students’ academic
achievement in practical programming labs”, International Journal of Advanced Computer Science and
Applications, Vol. 10 No. 11, pp. 56-61.
Alamri, M.M. (2019), “Undergraduate students’ perceptions toward social media usage and academic
performance: a study from Saudi Arabia”, International Journal of Emerging Technologies in Learning
(iJET), Vol. 14 No. 03, pp. 61-79.

Al-Emran, M. (2020), “Mobile learning during the era of COVID-19”, Revista Virtual Universidad Catolica
Del Norte, Vol. 61 No. 61, pp. 1-2.
Al-Qaysi, N., Mohamad-Nordin, N. and Al-Emran, M. (2020), “What leads to social learning? Students’
attitudes towards using social media applications in Omani higher education”, Education and Information
Technologies, Vol. 25 No. 3, pp. 2157-2174.

Al-Qaysi, N., Mohamad-Nordin, N. and Al-Emran, M. (2021), “Developing a comprehensive theoretical

model for adopting social media in higher education”, Interactive Learning Environments, doi: 10.1080/
10494820.2021.1961809.
Asur, S. and Huberman, B.A. (2010), “Predicting the future with social media”, 2010 IEEE/WIC/ACM
International Conference on Web Intelligence and Intelligent Agent Technology, pp. 492-499.
Bagozzi, R.P., Yi, Y. and Singh, S. (1991), “On the use of structural equation models in experimental
designs: two extensions”, International Journal of Research in Marketing, Vol. 8 No. 2, pp. 125-140.

Boahene, K.O., Fang, J. and Sampong, F. (2019), “Social media usage and tertiary students’ academic
performance: examining the influences of academic self-efficacy and innovation characteristics”,
Sustainability, Vol. 11 No. 8, p. 2431.
Celestine, A.U. and Nonyelum, O.F. (2018), “Impact of social media on students’ academic
performance”, International Journal of Scientific & Engineering Research, Vol. 9 No. 3,
pp. 1454-1462.

Chak, K. and Leung, L. (2004), “Shyness and locus of control as predictors of internet addiction and
internet use”, Cyberpsychology & Behavior, Vol. 7 No. 5, pp. 559-570.
Choney, S. (2010), “Facebook use can lower grades by 20 percent”, Study Says, available at: www.
nbcnews.com/id/wbna39038581 (accessed 5 January 2021).
DeJong, T. (2010), “Cognitive load theory, educational research, and instructional design: some food for
thought”, Instructional Science, Vol. 38 No. 2, pp. 105-134.

PAGE 24 j ON THE HORIZON: THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LEARNING FUTURES j VOL. 30 NO. 1 2022
Demirbilek, M. and Talan, T. (2018), “The effect of social media multitasking on classroom performance”,
Active Learning in Higher Education, Vol. 19 No. 2, pp. 117-129.
Du, J., Kerkhof, P. and van Koningsbruggen, G.M. (2019), “Predictors of social media self-control failure:
immediate gratifications, habitual checking, ubiquity, and notifications”, Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and
Social Networking, Vol. 22 No. 7, pp. 477-485.
Du, J., van Koningsbruggen, G.M. and Kerkhof, P. (2018), “A brief measure of social media self-control
failure”, Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 84, pp. 68-75.
Edwards, B., Aris, B. and Shukor, N. (2015), “Cognitive load implications of social media in teaching
and learning”, Journal of Multidisciplinary Engineering Science and Technology, Vol. 2 No. 11,
pp. 3026-3030.

Fuchs, C. (2015), Culture and Economy in the Age of Social Media, Routledge, New York, NY.
Fuchs, C. (2018), “Capitalism, patriarchy, slavery, and racism in the age of digital capitalism and digital
labour”, Critical Sociology, Vol. 44 Nos 4/5, pp. 677-702.
Giunchiglia, F., Zeni, M., Gobbi, E., Bignotti, E. and Bison, I. (2018), “Mobile social media usage and
academic performance”, Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 82, pp. 177-185.
Hair, J.F., Ringle, C.M. and Sarstedt, M. (2013), “Partial least squares structural equation modeling:
rigorous applications, better results and higher acceptance”, Long Range Planning, Vol. 46 Nos 1/2,
pp. 1-12.
Hameed, I. and Haq, M.A. (2021), “Book review: research, innovation and entrepreneurship in Saudi
Arabia: vision 2030”, International Small Business Journal: Researching Entrepreneurship, Vol. 39 No. 2,
pp. 184-184.
Hameed, I. and Irfan, B.Z. (2021), “Social media self-control failure leading to antisocial aggressive
behavior”, Human Behavior and Emerging Technologies, Vol. 3 No. 2, pp. 296-303.
Hameed, I., Zaman, U., Waris, I. and Shafique, O. (2021), “A serial-mediation model to link
entrepreneurship education and green entrepreneurial behavior: application of resource-based
view and flow theory”, International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, Vol. 18
No. 2, p. 550.
Hofmann, W., Baumeister, R.F., Förster, G. and Vohs, K.D. (2012), “Everyday temptations: an experience
sampling study of desire, conflict, and self-control”, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
Vol. 102 No. 6, pp. 1318-1335.
Jacobsen, W.C. and Forste, R. (2011), “The wired generation: academic and social outcomes of
electronic media use among university students”, Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking,
Vol. 14 No. 5, pp. 275-280.
Junco, R. (2014), Engaging Students Through Social Media: Evidencebased Practices for Use in Student
Affairs, John Wiley & Sons.
Junco, R., Heiberger, G. and Loken, E. (2011), “The effect of twitter on college student engagement
and grades: twitter and student engagement”, Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, Vol. 27
No. 2, pp. 119-132.
Khan, K., Hameed, I. and Hussainy, S.K. (2021), “Antecedents and consequences of Brand citizenship
behavior in private higher education institutions”, Journal of Marketing for Higher Education, doi: 10.1080/
08841241.2021.1927934.
Kononova, A. and Chiang, Y.H. (2015), “Why do we multitask with media? Predictors of media
multitasking among internet users in the United States and Taiwan”, Computers in Human Behavior,
Vol. 50, pp. 31-41.
Lau, W.F.W. (2017), “Effects of social media usage and social media multitasking on the academic
performance of university students”, Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 68, pp. 286-291.
Lee, E.W.J., Ho, S.S. and Lwin, M.O. (2017), “Explicating problematic social network sites use: a review of
concepts, theoretical frameworks, and future directions for communication theorizing”, New Media &
Society, Vol. 19 No. 2, pp. 308-326.
Lepp, A., Barkley, J.E. and Karpinski, A.C. (2015), “The relationship between cell phone use and
academic performance in a sample of US college students”, Sage Open, Vol. 5 No. 1,
p. 2158244015573169.

VOL. 30 NO. 1 2022 j ON THE HORIZON: THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LEARNING FUTURES j PAGE 25
 Martin, J.L. and Yeung, K.-T. (2006), “Persistence of close personal ties over a 12-year period”, Social
Networks, Vol. 28 No. 4, pp. 331-362.
Mayer, R.E. and Moreno, R. (2003), “Nine ways to reduce cognitive load in multimedia learning”,
Educational Psychologist, Vol. 38 No. 1, pp. 43-52.

Mills, L.A., Knezek, G.A. and Wakefield, J.S. (2013), “Learning with social media: measurement tools for
understanding information behavior in technology pervasive environments of the 21st century”, in
Schamber, L. (Ed.), iConference 2013 proceedings, Fort Worth, TX, p. 593e600.
Muraven, M., Tice, D.M. and Baumeister, R.F. (1998), “Self-control as limited resource: regulatory
depletion patterns”, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol. 74 No. 3, pp. 774-789.
Nunnally, J.C. (1979), Psychometric Theory, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY.
Owusu-Acheaw, M. and Larson, A.G. (2015), “Use of social media and its impact on academic
performance of tertiary institution students: a study of students of Koforidua polytechnic”, Ghana. Journal
of Education and Practice, Vol. 6 No. 6, pp. 94-101.
Ozer, I. (2014), “Facebook addiction, intensive social networking site use, multitasking and
academic performance among university students in the United States”, Europe and Turkey: A
multigroup structural equation modelling approach (Unpublished doctoral dissertation), Kent State
University.
Paul, J.A., Baker, H.M. and Cochran, J.D. (2012), “Effect of online social networking on student academic
performance”, Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 28 No. 6, pp. 2117-2127.
Peterson, R.A. and Merunka, D.R. (2014), “Convenience samples of college students and research
reproducibility”, Journal of Business Research, Vol. 67 No. 5, pp. 1035-1041.

Podsakoff, P.M., MacKenzie, S.B., Lee, J.Y. and Podsakoff, N.P. (2003), “Common method biases in
behavioral research: a critical review of the literature and recommended remedies”, Journal of Applied
Psychology, Vol. 88 No. 5, p. 879.
Principal, MEF College of Bachelor in Education, Dehradun, India, & Rai, D.G. (2017), “Impact of social
networking sites (SNSs): are youth affected by its usage?”, Issues and Ideas in Education, Vol. 5 No. 1,
pp. 11-24.

Rosen, L.D., Whaling, K.K., Carrier, L.M., Cheever, N.A. and Rokkum, J.J. (2013), “The media and
technology usage and attitudes scale: an empirical investigation”, Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 29
No. 6, pp. 2501-2511.
Saini, C. and Abraham, J. (2019), “Modeling educational usage of social media in pre-service teacher
education”, Journal of Computing in Higher Education, Vol. 31 No. 1, pp. 21-55.
Samaha, M. and Hawi, N.S. (2016), “Relationships among smartphone addiction, stress, academic
performance, and satisfaction with life”, Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 57, pp. 321-325.
Sweller, J. (1988), “Cognitive load during problem-solving: effects on learning”, Cognitive Science,
Vol. 12 No. 2, pp. 257-285.
van den Eijnden, R., Koning, I., Doornwaard, S., van Gurp, F. and ter Bogt, T. (2018), “The impact of
heavy and disordered use of games and social media on adolescents’ psychological, social, and school
functioning”, Journal of Behavioral Addictions, Vol. 7 No. 3, pp. 697-706.
Van Der Schuur, W.A., Baumgartner, S.E., Sumter, S.R. and Valkenburg, P.M. (2015), “The
consequences of media multitasking for youth: a review”, Computers in Human Behavior, Vol. 53,
pp. 204-215.
Vardeman-Winter, J. and Place, K. (2015), “Public relations culture, social media, and regulation”,
Journal of Communication Management, Vol. 19 No. 4, pp. 335-353.

Wakefield, J. and Frawley, J.K. (2020), “How does students’ general academic achievement moderate
the implications of social networking on specific levels of learning performance?”, Computers &
Education, Vol. 144, p. 103694.
Walsh, J.L., Fielder, R.L., Carey, K.B. and Carey, M.P. (2013), “Female college students’ media use and
academic outcomes: results from a longitudinal cohort study”, Emerging Adulthood, Vol. 1 No. 3, pp. 219-232.
Waris, I., Farooq, M., Hameed, I. and Shahab, A. (2021), “Promoting sustainable ventures among
university students in Pakistan: an empirical study based on the theory of planned behavior”, On the
Horizon, Vol. 29 No. 1, pp. 1-16.

PAGE 26 j ON THE HORIZON: THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LEARNING FUTURES j VOL. 30 NO. 1 2022
Whelan, E., Islam, A.N. and Brooks, S. (2020), “Applying the SOBC paradigm to explain how social
media overload affects academic performance”, Computers & Education, Vol. 143, p. 103692.

Zahid, M., Mansoor, A., Hussain, S.R. and Hashmat, F. (2016), “Impact of social media of student’s
academic performance”, International Journal of Business and Management Invention, Vol. 5 No. 4,
pp. 22-29.

Further reading
Bianchi, A. and Phillips, J.G. (2005), “Psychological predictors of problem mobile phone use”,
CyberPsychology & Behavior, Vol. 8 No. 1, pp. 39-51.
Panek, E. (2014), “Evidence for the effects of parental mediation and childhood media use on US college
students’ social media use”, Journal of Children and Media, Vol. 8 No. 2, pp. 127-145.

Corresponding author
Irfan Hameed can be contacted at: irfanhameed.iu@gmail.com

For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: permissions@emeraldinsight.com

VOL. 30 NO. 1 2022 j ON THE HORIZON: THE INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF LEARNING FUTURES j PAGE 27