Computers in Human Behavior 98 (2019) 80–92

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Computers in Human Behavior

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/comphumbeh

From attachment to addiction: The mediating role of need satisfaction on T

social networking sites
Adela Chen
CIS Department, College of Business, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO, 80523-1277, USA

ARTICLE INFO ABSTRACT

Keywords: We develop a mediation model to explain the relationship between attachment and Social Networking Site (SNS)
SNS addiction addiction. Drawing upon the Needs-Affordances-Features model, we investigate the mediating role of satisfac-
Attachment anxiety tion of the innate psychological needs that are salient in the SNS context (i.e., need for relatedness, need for self-
Attachment avoidance presentation, and need for autonomy). Based on an empirical study of 314 daily Facebook users, results reveal
Need satisfaction
distinct effects of attachment anxiety and attachment avoidance on SNS addiction through the satisfaction of
Need for relatedness
Need for self-presentation
different psychological needs. Satisfaction of the need for relatedness and the need for self-presentation mediates
Need for autonomy the positive relationship between attachment anxiety and SNS addiction. Satisfaction of these needs also med-
iates the negative relationship between attachment avoidance and SNS addiction. Satisfaction of the need for
autonomy mediates the positive relationship between attachment avoidance and SNS addiction. We conclude the
study with the implications for research and practice.

1. Introduction
Using social networking sites (SNSs) has long been integrated into
people's “routine practices of relating” (Baym, 2010, p. 5). As a re-
lationship tool, SNSs allow users to forge new relationships and main-
tain existing ones through a variety of interaction management features
such as creating user profile, managing contacts, sharing social in-
formation (e.g., photos and videos), using search engines to filter user-
generated content and find contacts, exchanging private messages, and
expressing social support (e.g., Facebook and Twitter “Likes”). Ac-
counting for one in every 5 min spent online, SNS use represents a
major activity to various demographic groups and especially appeals to
a young demographic (Lella & Lipsman, 2016). More than 95% of
18–34 year-olds in the U.S. use SNSs, with Facebook, Instagram, and
Twitter being the most popular (Lella & Lipsman, 2016).
A growing body of research has recognized the profound impact of
SNSs on people's social life. SNS use has been linked to enhanced in-
terpersonal communications and strengthened ties (Lee, 2013). How-
ever, SNS use tends to be engrossing and even addictive to some users,
overtaking their daily activities, adversely affecting their well-being,
and leading to lower self-control (Wilcox & Stephen, 2013). Owing to
the features that are designed to stimulate engagement and encourage
enduring usage, SNSs are interactive and immersive (Vaghefi &
Lapointe, 2013). The prevalence of always-on mobile technologies en-
ables users to pursue their relational needs almost everywhere and at
any time, reinforcing their addictive tendency and making it difficult to
contain their urge (Vorderer, Krömer, & Schneider, 2016). People are
increasingly concerned about the significant impairment that SNS ad-
diction has caused in various aspects of their life such as social diffi-
culties, performance deterioration, interference with school, family,
and work, and mood disorders (Andreassen, 2015). As such, it is im-
portant to gain an in-depth understanding of what may lead to SNS
addiction in order to develop effective interventions.
SNSs are essentially a social platform where users seek and refine
interpersonal attachments by managing relationships (Kwon, So, Han,
& Oh, 2016). Attachment theory, which centers on explaining how
people view and approach interpersonal relationships, represents a
suitable lens for investigating how individuals use socially oriented
technologies such as SNSs. By more directly capturing dispositional
inclination towards social interaction, attachment dimensions — an-
xiety and avoidance — have offered unique insights into what may lead
to SNS addiction above and beyond general antecedents such as broad
personality traits (Blackwell, Leaman, Tramposch, Osborne, & Liss,
2017; Hart, Nailling, Bizer, & Collins, 2015). However, studies on at-
tachment avoidance and SNS addiction reveal contradictory findings.
Moreover, there is little explication of the mediating mechanisms in the
attachment-addiction relationship. In response to a call for research
that elucidate how attachment dimensions (especially avoidance) in-
fluence people using or not using SNSs (Nitzburg & Farber, 2013), we
draw upon the Needs-Affordances-Features (NAF) framework

E-mail address: Adela.Chen@colostate.edu.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2019.03.034
Received 27 July 2018; Received in revised form 25 March 2019; Accepted 28 March 2019
Available online 29 March 2019
0747-5632/ © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
A. Chen
(Karahanna, Xu, Xu, & Zhang, 2018) to identify the innate psycholo-
gical needs that motivate SNS use and to examine the satisfaction of
these needs as mediating mechanisms of the attachment–addiction re-
lationship.
Building on the universal and fundamental role of innate psycho-
logical needs in the functioning of human beings, NAF represents the
first theory-based comprehensive framework that identifies the innate
psychological needs salient in the social media1 context. Most human
activities are driven by the fulfillment of certain needs. People can
develop compulsive behaviors and addictive tendencies when their
psychological needs become strong and frequent (Robinson & Berridge,
2003). Need satisfaction is rewarding and therefore provides a positive
reinforcement, motivating repeated engagement in the activity that
fulfills the need. Addiction often emerges from processes that produce
positive reinforcement and neural sensitization (Robinson & Berridge,
2003). Use of technology that fills psychological voids or produces thrill
is more likely to turn into addiction (Masur, Reinecke, Ziegele, &
Quiring, 2014; Young, Yue, & Ying, 2011). For example, online gaming,
by fulfilling players’ need for advancement, can nurture excessive en-
gagement and addiction (Xu, Turel, & Yuan, 2012). Therefore, we ex-
pect SNSs to nurture addiction among users with unique standings on
attachment dimensions by means of satisfying their unique needs
salient in the interpersonal environment. Examining need satisfaction
as mediators of the attachment–addiction relationship also has im-
portant implications for practice. We can target these mediators with
interventions to help individuals to relieve their addiction by learning
how to better satisfy their psychological needs.
2. Theoretical background
2.1. Attachment theory
As a relatively stable and consistent dispositional trait, an in-
dividual's attachment orientation is the systematic pattern of relational
expectations, needs, emotions, and social behaviors that are shaped by
a particular history of attachment experiences (Mikulincer & Shaver,
2007). Attachment theory posits that infants are born with an in-
stinctive tendency to seek and maintain proximity to their caregivers
who can protect them from physical or psychological threats (Bowlby,
1973). Attachment orientation results from the internalization of in-
dividuals' earliest interactions with a primary caregiver and continues
to guide their social behaviors and expectations throughout the life
span (Mikulincer & Shaver, 2005). Central to attachment theory is the
notion that people develop “representational or working models” of
themselves, others, and relationships based on their actual experiences
with important others, and once developed, these models are general-
ized to new social situations (Bowlby, 1973). Infant attachment can be
extended to adulthood as infants' attachment to their caregivers will be
carried over to supportive others such as colleagues and friends when
they grow up.
Early research views individual differences in attachment as cate-
gorical. However, recent research shows that such individual differ-
ences fit more consistently with a dimensional rather than categorical
model (Fraley, Hudson, Heffernan, & Segal, 2015). Attachment or-
ientation characterizes individual differences in social interaction along
two dimensions — attachment anxiety and attachment avoidance
1
Social media refer to the online platforms where users form communities in
which they co-create, re-create, share, and exchange contents (Kaplan &
Haenlein, 2010). SNSs, the focus of our study, represent one type of social
media applications. They are networked communication platforms where in-
dividuals (1) build a uniquely identifiable profile with user-generated content
and/or system-level data, (2) articulate interpersonal connections that can be
publicly viewed and traversed by others, and (3) consume, generate, and/or
interact with streams of user-generated content based on their connections
(Ellison & Boyd, 2013, p. 158).
81
Computers in Human Behavior 98 (2019) 80–92
(Brennan, Clark, & Shaver, 1998). Attachment anxiety represents the
degree to which an individual fears rejection or abandonment from
others in time of need. Due to their low confidence about their self-
worth in a relationship, individuals with high attachment anxiety tend
to be more vigilant for signs of abandonment or rejection and therefore,
have an excessive need for closeness to and approval from others. At-
tachment avoidance represents the degree to which an individual fears
interpersonal dependency and intimacy and distrusts others’ goodwill
or capacity to help. Less convinced of the value of social intimacy, in-
dividuals with high attachment avoidance tend to avoid getting close to
others and therefore, have an excessive need for independence and self-
reliance (Fraley & Shaver, 2000).
Attachment theory has been used to understand people's relation-
ship functioning in a variety of interpersonal settings such as infidelity
(DeWall et al., 2011), work-life spillover (Sumer & Knight, 2001),
emotion regulation, turnover intention, and organizational citizenship
behaviors (Richards & Schat, 2011). Although there is substantial evi-
dence of the strong associations between attachment and close re-
lationships (e.g., with parents or spouse), attachment dimensions have
also been found to guide behaviors, feelings, and expectations of people
in other types of relationships, e.g., in interactions with coworkers
(Richards & Schat, 2011) and even strangers (Feeney, Cassidy, &
Ramos-Marcuse, 2008). This suggests the potential of attachment
theory to explain individual functioning in a general social context
(e.g., functioning on SNSs) because it reflects people's working models
of their social world and themselves in it, which in turn influences their
relationship functioning across contexts.
2.2. Addiction to social networking sites (SNSs)
Building on Turel, Serenko, & Giles's (2011, p. 1044) definition of
technology addiction, we define SNS addiction as a psychological state
of maladaptive dependency on SNS use to the extent that behavioral
addiction symptoms occur. The typical symptoms of behavioral addic-
tion include: (1) salience – technology use dominates people's thoughts
and behaviors; (2) conflict – people's technology use interferes with
their normal functioning; (3) withdrawal – negative emotions arise due
to cessation of technology use; (4) mood moderation – technology use
generates positive emotions and changes mood; (5) tolerance – people
have to engage in progressively higher levels of technology use to
achieve the same level of thrill and relief; and (6) relapse and re-
instatement – people cannot voluntarily abstain from using the tech-
nology (Turel, Serenko, & Giles, 2011).
Personality traits, the relatively stable and consistent set of in-
dividual differences, play an essential role in shaping people's percep-
tions and behaviors. Although mounting evidence suggests that per-
sonality traits influence SNS addiction, most research to date has
focused on broadly conceptualized traits such as conscientiousness,
extraversion, neuroticism, self-efficacy, and self-esteem (Ho, Lwin, &
Lee, 2017; Milošević-Đorđević & Žeželj, 2014). Despite the lack of in-
depth investigation of the attachment–addiction relationship, the
salient connection of attachment to interpersonal functioning suggests
that attachment dimensions can advance our understanding of SNS
addiction.
Attachment anxiety and attachment avoidance have not been well
studied as predictors of SNS addiction with few exceptions. For ex-
ample, attachment anxiety has been positively associated with SNS use
(Hart et al., 2015; Oldmeadow, Quinn, & Kowert, 2013) and SNS ad-
diction (Blackwell et al., 2017; Eroglu, 2015). Despite the relatively
consistent results on the effects of attachment anxiety, the literature
presents some contradictory findings on how attachment avoidance
may influence SNS use and addiction. Attachment avoidance has been
found to have a negative (Hart et al., 2015) or non-significant
(Oldmeadow et al., 2013) effect on SNS use. Its effect on SNS addiction
has been found to be positive (Blackwell et al., 2017) or negative
(Eroglu, 2015). The contradictory findings suggest the co-existence of
A. Chen
positive and negative effects of attachment avoidance on SNS addiction.
On the one hand, SNSs, with a primary function of developing inter-
personal connection, may represent a means for building relationships
rather than avoiding intimacy, which leads to a negative association
between avoidance and addiction. On the other hand, SNSs may also
offer a digital means for individuals with high attachment avoidance to
maintain personal relationships at a psychological arm's length. Avoi-
dant people may use SNS engagement as a deactivation strategy to
engage in social interactions devoid of physical closeness, which leads
to a positive association between avoidance and addiction. Moreover,
Blackwell et al. (2017) found that the positive effects of attachment
dimensions on SNS addiction became non-significant after a motiva-
tional factor (i.e., fear of missing out) was added to the model. This
suggests that motivational factors may serve as mediating mechanisms,
which weaken the effects of independent variables (i.e., attachment)
when added to the model.
In order to provide a finely grained view of the attachment–addic-
tion relationship, we develop a mediation model by examining the
mediating role of motivational factors. The effects of distal traits, such
as those of attachment anxiety and attachment avoidance on SNS ad-
diction, are mediated through more proximal motivational factors
(Kanfer, 1990). Very few studies have identified mediating mechanisms
to explain the relationship between personality traits, general or si-
tuation-specific, and SNS addiction. To fill the gap, we draw on the NAF
model to more systematically identify the innate psychological needs
salient in the SNS context and assess the satisfaction of these needs as
mediating mechanisms by which people of different attachment or-
ientations may develop SNS addiction.
3. Research model and hypotheses
To understand the effects of attachment anxiety and attachment
avoidance on SNS addiction, we leverage the Needs-Affordances-
Features (NAF) model (Karahanna et al., 2018) to identify the innate
psychological needs that are relevant to the SNS context and uniquely
appeal to people with different standings on attachment dimensions:
the need for relatedness, the need for self-presentation, and the need for
autonomy.2 There is also empirical evidence that these three psycho-
logical needs significantly affect users’ functioning on SNSs such as
Facebook (Karahanna et al., 2018). We argue that the satisfaction of
these needs mediates the relationship between attachment dimensions
and SNS addiction (see Fig. 1).
3.1. Satisfaction of the need for relatedness
Need for relatedness represents an individual's innate psychological
need to interact with and feel connected to others (Deci & Ryan, 2000).
People with high attachment anxiety tend to have excessive need for
relatedness. Attachment anxiety is associated with heightened efforts to
maintain contact with others (Mikulincer & Shaver, 2007). People with
high attachment anxiety are characterized by strong focus on re-
lationships to secure the attention they crave from others (Mikulincer &
Shaver, 2007). Therefore, they may find satisfaction of the need for
relatedness especially rewarding and important.
With an abundance of relationship tools, SNSs are specifically de-
signed to satisfy users’ need to forge and sustain interpersonal close-
ness. For example, relationship formation features (e.g., friending on
Facebook, following others on Twitter) enable users to form a new
connection with other users on SNSs, while communication features
(e.g., chatting on Facebook) allow users to directly communicate with
2
We exclude the other psychological needs from the NAF model given their
relevance to other types of social media, e.g., the need for competence in online
gaming or online crowdsourcing and the need for having a place in online
virtual world.
82
Computers in Human Behavior 98 (2019) 80–92
each other, fostering closeness and strengthening bonds. Sharing con-
tents related or unrelated to self in the form of broadcasting provides
fodder for conversational grounding, which is valuable for both main-
taining established relationships and developing new ones (Knapp &
Vangeslisti, 2003). Moreover, presence signaling features (e.g., “who is
available to chat” on Facebook) enable users to indicate their own
presence and monitor the accessibility of others. In fact, the second
most common use of Facebook is for monitoring the online and offline
activities of others (Joinson, 2008).
Given their heightened need for interpersonal closeness, people
with high attachment anxiety would find the abovementioned features
of SNSs especially appealing and useful in their attempts to develop
social intimacy. In fact, SNS use has been found to increase intimacy
and support for people with high attachment anxiety, satisfying their
need for relatedness (Morey, Gentzler, Creasy, Oberhauser, &
Westerman, 2013). Over-practised use behavior tends to give rise to
technology addiction (Turel & Serenko, 2012). When their excessive
need for relatedness is repeatedly satisfied on SNSs, people with high
attachment anxiety may develop an unrealistic positive expectation and
become maladaptively dependent on SNSs to satisfy their ongoing
pursuit of social closeness, which re-wires their brains and creates ad-
dictive tendencies (Turel et al., 2011).
H1a. The positive relationship between attachment anxiety and SNS
addiction will be mediated by satisfaction of the need for relatedness.
People with high attachment avoidance tend to perceive others as
negatively disposed, rejecting, and untrustworthy. In order to protect
themselves against the anticipated rejection by others, they distance
themselves from the source of threat by avoiding social contacts, dis-
missing the importance of relationships, and inhibiting proximity-
seeking actions (Bowlby, 1988). Indeed, attachment avoidance is as-
sociated with lower involvement in relationship building on SNSs (Lee,
2013). Although socially oriented behaviors (those targeted at building
and sustaining interpersonal connection) appeal to people with high
attachment anxiety, satisfying their excessive need for relatedness and
thus making them prone to SNS addiction, these behaviors are per-
ceived differently by people with high attachment avoidance. Against
their tendency to abstain from social closeness, socially oriented be-
haviors make them less likely to develop excessive use patterns or be-
come addicted to SNSs.
H1b. The negative relationship between attachment avoidance and SNS
addiction will be mediated by satisfaction of the need for relatedness.
3.2. Satisfaction of the need for self-presentation
The need for self-presentation represents individuals’ innate psy-
chological need to communicate their identity to others (Karahanna
et al., 2018). People with high attachment anxiety tend to have ex-
cessive need for self-presentation, which manifests in a strong desire to
manage the impressions other people form of them. Characterized by a
negative self-view and a preoccupation with self-worth, individuals
with high attachment anxiety are inclined to control their elevated
anxiety by seeking constant displays of approval, support, and valida-
tion from others (Mikulincer & Shaver, 2007). They would strive to
project a desirable self-image in order to receive positive feedback and
reassurance from others, as a defensive enhancement of self-worth.
Therefore, satisfaction of their need for self-presentation will be espe-
cially rewarding and important to people with high attachment anxiety.
SNSs provide a variety of features that enable users to boost self-
worth through expressing a desirable self-identity and winning re-
assurance from others. First, the features for expressing self-identity
(e.g., constructing a personal profile on Facebook, uploading Pins on
Pinterest) and content sharing (e.g., sharing links of others' content that
reflect their own interests and values on Facebook or Twitter) can be
leveraged as a self-promotion tool. These features allow users to project
A. Chen
Fig. 1. Research model.
a desirable identity in front of a large self-selected audience. The
asynchronous nature of constructing personal profiles and sharing
content enables SNS users to preselect and emphasize thoughts and
images that present themselves in a positive light (Ellison, Heino, &
Gibbs, 2006). Second, SNSs also provide features that allow users to
seek reassurance by monitoring cues of approval and acceptance (e.g., a
thumb-up or “Like”) from a large audience. For example, meta-voicing
features (e.g., commenting pins on Pinterest, leaving comments or
liking others’ posts on Facebook, retweeting on Twitter) enable users to
see how others react to their own presence, profiles, content, and ac-
tivities (Karahanna et al., 2018).
Given their deep-seated sense of unworthiness and excessive depen-
dence on others for validation of self-worth, people with high attachment
anxiety would find the abovementioned features useful in soliciting ap-
proval from others to boost their self-worth. In fact, research shows that
updating one's profile on SNSs can boost self-worth (Gonzales &
Hancock, 2011). This may lead to repeated and excessive use behaviors,
positively reinforcing users' maladaptive dependence on SNSs.
H2a. The positive relationship between attachment anxiety and SNS
addiction will be mediated by satisfaction of the need for self-
presentation.
Self-presentation through user-generated content, such as photo,
video, and status update, is essentially a self-disclosure behavior where
people share information about themselves or express their feelings and
thoughts. Users can easily share life details with a broad audience on
SNSs. Willingness for self-disclosure significantly motivates information
sharing on SNSs (Shang, Chen, & Chang, 2015). People with high at-
tachment avoidance, who emphasize distance and detachment in in-
terpersonal relationships, tend to avoid self-disclosure (Mikulincer &
Nachshon, 1991). Therefore, engaging in self-presentation behaviors on
SNSs would be unrewarding to people with high attachment avoidance,
who may be turned away and thus become less likely to develop ad-
dictive tendencies.
H2b. The negative relationship between attachment avoidance and SNS
addiction will be mediated by satisfaction of the need for self-
presentation.
3.3. Satisfaction of the need for autonomy
Need for autonomy represents an individual's innate psychological
need to act with a sense of volition and in harmony with one's true self
(Deci & Ryan, 2000). We expect people with high attachment avoidance
to have excessive need for autonomy. People with high attachment
avoidance believe that others cannot be trusted or relied on, so they
defensively eschew dependence and tend to engage in compulsive self-
reliance as a deactivation strategy in order to protect themselves
against the anticipated rejection by others (Mikulincer & Shaver, 2007).
Driven by their preference for self-reliance and independence, people
83
Computers in Human Behavior 98 (2019) 80–92
with high attachment avoidance tend to maximize autonomy, strive for
personal strength, and handle difficulties alone (Mikulincer & Shaver,
2007). Therefore, they may find satisfaction of the need for autonomy
especially rewarding and appealing.
SNS users have ample room for self-determined behaviors
(Reinecke, Vorderer, & Knop, 2014), which greatly appeal to people
with high attachment avoidance. First, feelings of control within the
SNS environment are supported by the features of asynchronous con-
tent sharing. SNSs allow users to freely choose what to share and how to
present themselves. With asynchronous communication, SNSs provide
an enhanced level of communication control, allowing users to focus on
the content of communication without worrying about giving off un-
intended information through nonverbal cues such as body language.
This leads to a stronger feeling of being in charge of the communication
process. Second, with content accessible anywhere and anytime and
given the solitary nature of content consumption, SNSs also allow users
to freely decide what to consume (i.e., read, listen to, or watch). On
SNSs people with high attachment avoidance can freely choose and
engage in behaviors that reflect their true self without the influence of
others in their real-life social or professional settings, satisfying their
excessive need for autonomy. However, when taken too far, their desire
to be autonomous and independent can become maladaptive and lead
to excessive use of SNSs. Need satisfaction will further reinforce such
maladaptive dependency on SNSs and nurture addictive tendencies.
H3. The positive relationship between attachment avoidance and SNS
addiction will be mediated by satisfaction of the need for autonomy.
We do not hypothesize the mediating effect of satisfaction of the
need for autonomy on the relationship between attachment anxiety and
SNS addiction. Attachment anxiety reflects an individual's negative
view of self (i.e., that one is unworthy of care and attention from
others). Given their inferior self-regard, people with high attachment
anxiety would unlikely have strong and frequent need for autonomy,
which in turn makes the satisfaction of such need less relevant and
rewarding.
3.4. Controls
We include as controls the broadly conceptualized Big Five per-
sonality traits (agreeableness, conscientiousness, extraversion, neuro-
ticism, and openness to experience) and two IT-specific personality
traits (computer playfulness and IT innovativeness) in order to evaluate
the effects of attachment styles above and beyond these dispositional
characteristics that have been linked to SNS use and addiction. Studies
show significant effects of the Big Five personality traits on SNS use
(Correa, Hinsley, & Zúñiga, 2010) and addiction (Kuss & Griffiths,
2011). Computer playfulness, the degree of an individual's cognitive
spontaneity in interaction with a computer, and IT innovativeness, an
individual's willingness to try out new technology, have been found to
influence people's technology use. Prior research has linked both IT-
A. Chen
Fig. 2. Flow chart of procedure.
specific personality traits to cognitive absorption, which is a state of
deep involvement with technology manifested in focused immersion
and temporal disassociation (Agarwal & Karahanna, 2000), and to
problematic use of technology (Jia, Hartke, & Pearson, 2007).
4. Methods
4.1. Procedure
We collected data through an online questionnaire administered to
undergraduate business students from a public American university in
2016. Participation was voluntary and rewarded with course credit
(i.e., five bonus points). Those who chose not to participate in this study
had an opportunity to complete an alternative project for the same
incentive. Respondents were asked to complete a questionnaire on at-
tachment styles, satisfaction of psychological needs on Facebook, and
Facebook use upon signing up for the study. A month later respondents
completed a questionnaire on their broad and IT-specific personality
traits and addiction to Facebook at a computer lab (Fig. 2). By keeping
the administration of two questionnaires a month apart, we temporally
separated the measurements of criterion and predictor variables as a
procedural remedy (Podsakoff, Mackenzie, Lee, & Podsakoff, 2003) to
mitigate common method variance (CMV).
4.2. Sample
A total of 314 respondents who completed the first questionnaire
showed up to complete the second questionnaire. Although student
samples may be problematic for certain studies, they provide an ap-
propriate setting for our examination of SNS addiction. Many students
are heavy users of Facebook, and SNS addiction is more likely to be
observed among heavy users. At the time when they filled out the first
questionnaire, all respondents used Facebook on a daily basis and had
on average 5.11 years of Facebook experience, with a standard devia-
tion of 1.92. Respondents reported an average of 88.8% of their friends
being Facebook users. The sample consisted of 194 men (61.8%) and
120 women (38.2%), and the average age was 23.37, with a standard
deviation of 4.59.
4.3. Measures
All the variables in our model are measured using established scales
with multiple items, which are summarized in Appendix A. Responses
were captured with seven-point Likert scales ranging from “strongly
disagree” to “strongly agree”, except for age, gender, years of using
Facebook, and social desirability (with true and false response cate-
gories). Following Ayyagari, Grover, and Purvis (2011), we created
psychological separation by interspersing statements theoretically ir-
relevant to the study throughout the questionnaire to mitigate CMV.3
3
An example of these statements is “Did you know? A camel does not sweat
until its body temperature reaches 106 °F.” (source: National Geographic).
84
Computers in Human Behavior 98 (2019) 80–92
Attachment: Our measures of attachment anxiety and attachment
avoidance are based on the 12-item, short form of the Experiences in
Close Relationship scale (ECR, Brennan et al., 1998), which is devel-
oped by Wei, Russell, Mallinckrodt, and Vogel (2007) in the context of
romantic relationships. Following Richards and Schat (2011), we fur-
ther adapted the scale to measure attachment in a general, context-free
manner by removing the reference to a specific attachment figure in a
close relationship. For example, we adapted the item “It helps to turn to
my romantic partner in times of need” by replacing “my romantic
partner” with “others.” The scales showed satisfactory internal con-
sistencies (Attachment anxiety: Cronbach's α = 0.94, Attachment
avoidance: Cronbach's α = 0.91).
Satisfaction of Psychological Needs: To measure the satisfaction of the
three psychological needs included in our model, we adapted the ex-
isting measures of need satisfaction (Partala, 2011) to the SNS context.
Specifically, we changed the stem from ‘In Second Life’ to ‘On Face-
book.’ The scales showed satisfactory internal consistencies (Need sa-
tisfaction for relatedness: Cronbach's α = 0.89, Need satisfaction for
self-presentation: Cronbach's α = 0.89, Need satisfaction for autonomy:
Cronbach's α = 0.86).
SNS addiction: Following prior research on technology addiction
(e.g., Turel et al., 2011), we measured SNS addiction as a continuous
variable by adapting the Behavioral Technology Addiction scale to the
Facebook context (Charlton, 2002). Consistent with other addiction
studies (Blackwell et al., 2017; Kanat-Maymon, Almog, Cohen, &
Amichai-Hamburger, 2018; Masur et al., 2014), these items capture the
six core criteria of behavioral addiction: salience, conflict, withdrawal,
mood modification, tolerance, and relapse (Cronbach's α = 0.92).
We chose Facebook as the object of addiction for two reasons. First,
Facebook is conducive to user addiction. It has been deeply embedded
in people's life in such a way that the healthy balance in their life is
challenged or even adversely affected, leading to crippling side effects
such as addiction (Ryan, Chester, Reece, & Xenos, 2014). Therefore,
people's functioning on Facebook warrants more research that can in-
form the development of interventions. Facebook accounts for one in
every 6 min that people spend online and more than one in every 5 min
spent on a mobile platform (Lella & Lipsman, 2016). Problematic Fa-
cebook use and its impact may intensify over time given the growing
trend of SNS engagement on mobile platforms. The vast majority of SNS
use takes place on mobile devices, with Facebook being the top one
mobile app by reach (Lella & Lipsman, 2016). Second, although users
may spread their attention across several SNSs, focusing on a single site
allows us to control for the effects of site-specific characteristics. De-
spite the fact that some newer SNSs such as Snapchat and Instagram
have gained fast popularity, Facebook remains the leading one in terms
of audience size and amount of time spent per user across demographic
segments in the U.S., including young people (i.e., 18–34 years old)
where our sample was drawn (Lella & Lipsman, 2016).
Control variables: We measured the Big Five personality traits using
items from the 20-item scale of Mini-International Personality Item
Pool (IPIP) (Goldberg, 1990), which has been found to exhibit similar
validity and internal consistency to the longer version of the IPIP
(Donnellan, Oswald, Baird, & Lucas, 2006). The scales showed sa-
tisfactory internal consistencies (Agreeableness: Cronbach's α = 0.84,
Conscientiousness: Cronbach's α = 0.85, Extraversion: Cronbach's
α = 0.89, Neuroticism: Cronbach's α = 0.92, Openness to experience:
Cronbach's α = 0.93).
To assess individual playfulness during the interaction with
Facebook (Cronbach's α = 0.91), we used the scale adapted by Agarwal
and Karahanna (2000), who positively reversed the negatively worded
items from the original scale developed by Webster and Martocchio
(1992). Following the studies that adapt this scale to different situations
such as the web (Agarwal & Karahanna, 2000), we also made the items
context-specific to Facebook. We used the scale developed by Agarwal
and Prasad (1998) to measure IT innovativeness (Cronbach's α = 0.89).
Given that use has been found to be a predictor of technology
A. Chen
addiction, we included the overall SNS use (Cronbach's α = 0.93) as a
control variable, adapting the items from Chen and Karahanna (2018).
In addition, we also controlled for age, gender, years of SNS experience,
and social desirability assessed with the 13-item, short form of Mar-
lowe-Crowne scale (Reynolds, 1982). We included Fashion Conscious-
ness as a theoretically unrelated variable to assess the influence of CMV.
It was measured using two items from the original Generalized Overall
Fashion Consciousness scale (Gould & Stern, 1989) on a seven-point
agree-disagree Likert scale, which was consistent with the measurement
of most variables (Cronbach's α = 0.78).
4.4. Data analysis
Descriptive statistics are presented for the model constructs, in-
cluding means, standard deviations, and correlations (Appendix B). The
square root of the average variance extracted (AVE) for each construct
is larger than the inter-construct correlations, demonstrating adequate
discriminant validity. All indicators have sufficient loadings on their
substantive latent factors and the AVE for all constructs exceeds 0.50,
demonstrating acceptable convergent validity (Chin, 1998). Before
testing our hypotheses, we also addressed concerns about common
method bias and social desirability bias.
Common method variance can potentially inflate the correlation
between variables in self-reported data (Spector, 2006). We address the
potential effect of CMV using several techniques. First, our result of
Harman's single factor test (Podsakoff & Organ, 1986) does not yield a
single dominant factor with the most variance explained by a single
factor in the unrotated factor solution being 14.5%. Second, we explicitly
modeled a latent common method factor in the CFA (Podsakoff et al.,
2003) to compare the fit indices between the two measurement models
(Table 1). The chi-square difference is non-significant and the difference
in CFI is 0.004, which is lower than the suggested 0.05 threshold (Little,
1997). Finally, we conducted a partial correlation test using a marker
variable (Fashion Consciousness) to adjust the correlations among the
principal variables. We did not find any significant correlations between
the marker variable and the principal variables (Appendix B). Following
recommended guidelines (Lindell & Whitney, 2001), we used both the
smallest positive correlation (0.01) and the second-smallest positive
correlation (0.02) as an estimate of CMV to produce the CMV-adjusted
correlation matrix. Our analysis showed that none of the significant
correlations became non-significant when adjusted for CMV. Based on
the results from the abovementioned tests, we conclude that CMV is
unlikely to have a major influence on study validity.
Individuals tend to under-report phenomena that may reflect ne-
gatively on themselves (Crowne & Marlowe, 1960; Williams &
Podsakoff, 1992). SNS addiction, which is considered the dark side of
technology use (Tarafdar, Gupta, & Turel, 2013), represents a sensitive
topic. Therefore, it is plausible that our measurement of SNS addiction
was subject to socially desirable responses. We assessed this possibility
in two ways. First, following existing studies on technology addiction
(e.g., Turel & Serenko, 2012), we checked the correlation between so-
cial desirability and SNS addiction, which is non-significant (r = 0.04).
Second, we included social desirability as a control (e.g., Ridgway et al.,
2008) and its effect on SNS addiction (Table 2) was non-significant.
Therefore, social desirability will unlikely pose a serious threat to the
Table 1
Model fit statistics.
Measurement Model
CFI 0.92
Chi-square/df 1.57 (3328.88/2120)
RMSEA (90% Confidence Interval) 0.043 (90% C.I.: 0.040–0.046)
SRMR 0.054
Note: CFI – Comparative Fit Index, RMSEA – Root Mean Square Error of Approximation, SRMR – Standardized Root Mean Square Residual.
Computers in Human Behavior 98 (2019) 80–92
study validity.
We analyzed the data using covariance-based structural equation
modeling in Mplus (Muthén & Muthén, 2007). The measurement model
(Confirmatory Factor Analysis) includes all the items loading on their
substantive factors, while the measurement model with common
method factor consists of all the items loading on both their substantive
factors and a single method factor (Table 1). In the structural model, we
removed factor covariances and added structural paths to reflect the
proposed hypotheses. The model fit indices shown in Table 1 are all
within the recommended ranges for good model fit (Kline, 2005). Our
hypotheses posited that attachment dimensions are related to SNS ad-
diction via the satisfaction of psychological needs. To test our media-
tion hypotheses (Table 2), we formally assessed the mediating effects of
attachment anxiety and attachment avoidance by following the statis-
tical procedures and Mplus syntax described by Preacher and Hayes
(2008). After assessing the effects of attachment dimensions on med-
iators (the second, third, and fourth columns of Table 2), we entered
attachment dimensions and control variables (Step 1 in Table 2), and
then added the mediators to the model (Step 2 in Table 2). We used
bootstrapping (5000 resamples) to estimate 95% confidence intervals
for the population value of the unstandardized indirect effect.
5. Results
The results of our structural model test support all the hypothesized
relationships. Attachment anxiety and attachment avoidance are asso-
ciated with the satisfaction of all three needs except the non-significant
relationship between anxiety and need satisfaction for autonomy
(Table 2). Because zero is not in the 95% confidence intervals, the re-
sults suggest that the indirect effect of attachment anxiety on SNS ad-
diction is mediated by satisfaction of the need for relatedness (coeffi-
cient = 0.12, standard error = 0.03, confidence interval = [0.03,
0.13]) and by satisfaction of the need for self-presentation (coeffi-
cient = 0.04, standard error = 0.02, confidence interval = [0.01,
0.07]), indicating support for H1a and H2a, respectively. Furthermore,
the results also provide evidence that the indirect effect of attachment
avoidance on SNS addiction is mediated by satisfaction of the need for
relatedness (coefficient = −0.03, standard error = 0.02, confidence
interval = [-0.08, −0.01]), by satisfaction of the need for self-pre-
sentation (coefficient = −0.04, standard error = 0.02, confidence in-
terval = [-0.10, −0.002]), and by satisfaction of the need for autonomy
(coefficient = 0.07, standard error = 0.02, confidence in-
terval = [0.01, 0.10]), indicating support for H1b, H2b, and H3, re-
spectively. As shown in Table 2, both attachment anxiety and attach-
ment avoidance become non-significant in the presence of mediators,
which suggests full mediation.
Table 3 presents the total effects (standardized) of attachment an-
xiety and attachment avoidance. The total effects of attachment anxiety
on SNS addiction are positive, while the total effects of attachment
avoidance are negative but non-significant. Attachment anxiety has
positive effects through need satisfaction for relatedness and self-pre-
sentation, with the former being much stronger. Attachment avoidance
has negative effects through need satisfaction for relatedness and self-
presentation, and positive effect through satisfaction of the need for
autonomy.
Measurement Model with Common Method Factor Structural Model
0.93 0.92
1.50 (3087.23/2053) 1.56 (3223.95/2063)
0.040 (90% C.I.: 0.037–0.043) 0.043 (90% C.I.: 0.040–0.045)
0.048 0.050
85
A. Chen Computers in Human Behavior 98 (2019) 80–92

Table 2
Results of model testing (mediation hypotheses).

Satisfaction of the Need for Satisfaction of the Need for Self- Satisfaction of the Need for Social Media Addiction
Relatedness Presentation Autonomy
Step 1 Step 2

Controls
Age 0.03 NS (0.02) 0.00 NS (0.01) −0.01 NS (0.02) −0.01 NS (0.01) −0.01 NS (0.01)
Gender 0.71 ∗∗∗ (0.19) −0.11 NS (0.13) 0.60 ∗∗ (0.20) 0.30 ∗ (0.13) 0.11 NS (0.12)
Facebook Years 0.03 NS (0.04) 0.02 NS (0.03) 0.10 ∗ (0.05) 0.01 NS (0.03) −0.02 NS (0.03)
Social Desirability −0.06 NS (0.04) 0.01 NS (0.03) −0.01 NS (0.04) −0.04 NS (0.03) −0.03 NS (0.02)
Extent of Use −0.01 NS (0.05) 0.001 NS (0.04) 0.00 NS (0.06) 0.01 NS (0.04) 0.01 NS (0.03)
Agreeableness 0.19 ∗ (0.09) 0.03 NS (0.06) 0.13 NS (0.09) 0.01 NS (0.06) −0.05 NS (0.05)
Conscientiousness −0.41 ∗∗ (0.14) −0.15 NS (0.09) −0.51 ∗∗∗ (0.15) −0.38 ∗∗∗ (0.09) −0.21 ∗ (0.08)
Extraversion −0.03 NS (0.08) 0.05 NS (0.06) 0.12 NS (0.09) 0.08 NS (0.05) 0.06 NS (0.05)
Openness −0.02 NS (0.06) −0.07 NS (0.04) −0.05 NS (0.06) −0.003 NS 0.03 NS (0.04)
(0.04)
Neuroticism 0.03 NS (0.06) 0.01 NS (0.04) −0.04 NS (0.07) 0.05 NS (0.04) 0.05 NS (0.04)
Computer Playfulness 0.12 ∗ (0.06) 0.18 ∗∗∗ (0.04) 0.11 NS (0.06) 0.06 NS (0.04) −0.03 NS (0.04)
IT Innovativeness 0.10 NS (0.07) 0.04 NS (0.05) −0.03 NS (0.07) 0.07 NS (0.05) 0.05 NS (0.04)
Direct Effects
Attachment Anxiety 0.39 ∗∗∗ (0.06) 0.13 ∗∗ (0.04) 0.11 NS (0.08) 0.21 ∗∗∗ (0.04) 0.07 NS (0.04)
Attachment Avoidance −0.17 ∗ (0.07) −0.12 ∗ (0.05) 0.27 ∗∗∗ (0.06) −0.06 NS (0.05) −0.07 NS (0.04)
Mediating Effects
Relatedness 0.18 ∗∗∗ (0.05)
Self-Presentation 0.28 ∗∗∗ (0.06)
Autonomy 0.14 ∗∗ (0.04)
R-square 31.3% 23.7% 22.0% 26.6% 44.9%

Note: Unstandardized path coefficient (standard error); ∗∗∗

p < 0.001 ∗∗
p < 0.01 p < 0.05 NS – Non-significant.
∗

6. Discussion technology represents a convenient tool for users with high attachment
anxiety to satisfy their heightened social needs, and the rewarding ex-
We examined a mediation model to provide a nuanced under- perience of need satisfaction can nurture and reinforce addictive ten-
standing of the attachment–addiction relationship. First, our findings dencies.
show that the distal personality traits of attachment anxiety and at- In contrast, need satisfaction for relatedness and need satisfaction
tachment avoidance are associated with SNS addiction through prox- for self-presentation play a different role in the relationship between
imal motivational mediators (i.e., satisfaction of psychological needs). attachment avoidance and SNS addiction. Against their tendency to
Results based on the survey responses from 314 daily Facebook users avoid social intimacy, satisfying the need for relatedness and the need
support all the hypothesized mediated effects, indicating that need sa- for self-presentation weakens users’ vulnerability to excessive use and
tisfaction accounts for the generalized effects of attachment on SNS SNS addiction. Rather, in their compulsive pursuit of independence,
addiction. Our mediation analyses demonstrates different trajectories of people with high attachment avoidance may find the satisfaction of
addiction development based on people's unique standings on attach- their need for autonomy rewarding, which provides a positive re-
ment dimensions. Need satisfaction for relatedness and need satisfac- inforcement and nurtures maladaptive dependence on SNSs.
tion for self-presentation represent important motivational mechanisms Second, the mediating effects of need satisfaction vary in terms of
that link attachment anxiety to SNS addiction. It suggests that SNSs are direction and size. Attachment anxiety has positive effects on SNS ad-
experienced as rewarding by anxious people for multiple reasons, diction through need satisfaction for relatedness and need satisfaction
making them especially vulnerable to SNS addiction. This is also con- for self-presentation, with the former (0.11) being much stronger than
sistent with findings of the studies on the relationship of attachment the latter (0.06). It suggests that need satisfaction for relatedness re-
anxiety to other types of technology addiction such as mobile phone presents a major factor that motivates anxious people's addictive ten-
addiction (Han, Geng, Jou, Gao, & Yang, 2017) and Internet addiction dencies, shown by the relatively sizable effect mediated. In contrast, the
(Shin, Kim, & Jang, 2011) or with other types of maladaptive behaviors effects of attachment avoidance on SNS addiction are mixed. Although
such as sexting (Drouin & Landgraff, 2012). These results suggest that the total effects of attachment avoidance on SNS addiction are non-
significant, the mediated effects — by means of satisfying different
Table 3 needs — are significant but in opposite directions. The negative
Results of path analysis. mediated effects (need satisfaction for relatedness: −0.04, need sa-
tisfaction for self-presentation: −0.05) completely offset the positive
Effects on SNS Addiction Attachment Attachment
mediated effect (need satisfaction for autonomy: 0.06), leading to the
Anxiety Avoidance
total mediated effects of attachment avoidance (−0.03) being non-
Total Effects (direct + indirect) 0.30 ∗∗∗ −0.13 NS significant. Although SNSs can be useful in fulfilling avoidant people's
Direct Effects 0.11 NS −0.10 NS excessive need for autonomy, the interpersonal nature of SNSs is, in the
Total Indirect Effects 0.19 ∗∗∗ −0.03 NS
meantime, against their tendency to dismiss the importance of re-
Through Need Satisfaction for 0.11 ∗ −0.04 ∗
Relatedness lationships and distance themselves from others. In other words, al-
Through Need Satisfaction for Self- 0.06 ∗
−0.05 ∗
though they may develop addictive tendencies by excessively using
Presentation SNSs to satisfy their need for independence, this positive reinforcement
Through Need Satisfaction for 0.02 NS 0.06 ∗
may be jeopardized by the abundance of social content and features
Autonomy
aimed at interpersonal connection, which prevent heightened engage-
Note: ∗∗∗
p < 0.001 p < 0.01 ∗p < 0.05 NS – Non-significant.
∗∗ ment and hinder the development of addiction among users with high
attachment avoidance. The co-existence of mediated effects in opposite

86
A. Chen
directions provides a plausible explanation for the contradictory find-
ings of the relationship between attachment avoidance and SNS ad-
diction reported in prior studies. The dynamics among multiple med-
iating effects may vary across samples, which leads to the total effects of
avoidance on SNS addiction being positive (Blackwell et al., 2017),
negative (Eroglu, 2015), or non-significant (this study). Such variation
may be attributable to the possibility that mediating effects of the sa-
tisfaction of multiple needs vary in magnitude and valence across
groups of users, who may weigh the psychological needs differently and
may, therefore, be motivated differently by the satisfaction of those
needs. Assessing the effects of multiple mediators can help identify the
factor that primarily drives the attachment-addiction relationship.
Finally, it is also noteworthy that need satisfaction mediates the
effects of some control variables on SNS addiction. Specifically, the
negative relationship between conscientiousness and SNS addiction is
partially mediated by need satisfaction for relatedness (coeffi-
cient = −0.08, standard error = 0.04, confidence interval = [-0.17,
−0.02]) and by need satisfaction for autonomy (coefficient = −0.08,
standard error = 0.03, confidence interval = [-0.16, −0.02]). It sug-
gests that conscientious individuals, dutiful and goal-oriented, tend to
moderate excessive behaviors and thus are less likely to develop SNS
addiction. In the meanwhile, conscientious individuals tend not to rely
on SNS use to satisfy their need for relatedness or autonomy, which
makes them less vulnerable to excessive SNS use and addictive ten-
dencies. Moreover, the effect of gender on SNS addiction is fully
mediated by need satisfaction for relatedness (coefficient = 0.13,
standard error = 0.06, confidence interval = [0.04, 0.27]) and by need
satisfaction for autonomy (coefficient = 0.09, standard error = 0.04,
confidence interval = [0.03, 0.18]). It suggests that female users have
greater tendency to develop addictive tendencies through their de-
pendence on SNS use to satisfy the need for relatedness and autonomy.
This is consistent with the finding on gender differences in SNS usage
patterns and Internet addiction — females tend to use SNSs for com-
munication purpose (Kuss & Griffiths, 2011) and are more likely to
develop addictive behaviors through engaging in online communica-
tion with both closed and anonymous friends (Young, 1998). In addi-
tion, need satisfaction for self-presentation fully mediates the positive
effect of computer playfulness on SNS addiction (coefficient = 0.05,
standard error = 0.02, confidence interval = [0.02, 0.11]). It suggests
that SNS use has a unique appeal to playful users by satisfying their
need for self-presentation. Indeed, SNSs provide a “playground for self-
expression” (Schoenebeck, Ellison, Blackwell, Bayer, & Falk, 2016, p.
1483). For example, Facebook users can engage in playful backstalking
to reconcile the identities of adolescence and emerging adulthood
(Schoenebeck et al., 2016). They can also construct multiple pre-
sentations of themselves (e.g., playful and informal content targeted at
old friends, a mature and professional self-presentation targeted at
colleagues) to manage social relationships in heterogeneous networks
(DiMicco & Millen, 2007).
6.1. Implications for research
Our findings have several important implications for understanding
the attachment–addiction relationship. First, our development of the
mediation model and our empirical findings shed light on the processes
through which attachment dimensions are related to SNS addiction. We
integrate dispositional and motivational factors to provide a finely
grained view of the attachment–addiction connection. By leveraging
the NAF model, we identify three innate psychological needs that are
salient in the SNS context and provide a theoretical explanation of how
people's attachment orientation may increase or decrease their addic-
tive tendencies through the fulfillment of these needs, which may sa-
tisfy or jeopardize people's distinct attachment goals. The significant
mediating role of need satisfaction in explaining the attachment–ad-
diction relationship suggests different trajectories of addiction devel-
opment that are determined by people's unique standings on
87
Computers in Human Behavior 98 (2019) 80–92
attachment anxiety and attachment avoidance. For example, satisfac-
tion of the same psychological need (e.g., relatedness, self-presentation)
can be experienced differently by anxious people and avoidant people,
and thus lead to different outcomes. Our findings demonstrate the po-
tential of motivational mechanisms as useful mediators.
Second, our study demonstrates the promising prospect in applying
attachment theory to understand the use of socially oriented technol-
ogies. People's attachment orientation is vitally important in under-
standing their interpersonal functioning (Griffin & Bartholomew,
1994). Many technologies of interest to researchers are used in inter-
personal settings, such as SNSs and virtual collaboration tools. How-
ever, attachment theory has not been widely leveraged to shed light on
individual differences in the context of SNS addiction. To our knowl-
edge, this study represents one of the first systematic attempts to in-
vestigate the unique predictive power of attachment dimensions when
broad (e.g., Big Five) and other context-specific (e.g., IT-specific) dis-
positional traits are statistically controlled. In particular, we juxtaposed
three different sets of personality traits – the broadly conceptualized
traits of Big Five, the context-specific traits that focus on IT (i.e.,
computer playfulness and IT innovativeness), and the context-specific
traits that focus on interpersonal functioning (i.e., attachment anxiety
and attachment avoidance). Including both broad and context-specific
dispositional traits in the model enables us to develop a more complete
understanding of personality-based individual differences in the context
of SNS addiction. Broad traits capture individuals' tendency to respond
consistently across situations, but, due to the lack of specific targets,
may exert a less pervasive influence within specific domains than
context-specific traits that predispose individuals to behave consistently
toward specific targets or within a narrow context (e.g., functioning on
SNSs) (Thatcher & Perrewe, 2002). Our results suggest that attachment
anxiety and attachment avoidance, despite their theoretically mean-
ingful associations with the Big Five facets, exert a more pervasive in-
fluence on SNS addiction when compared to the broadly conceptualized
Big Five traits, which have been widely studied as an overarching fra-
mework to capture major individual differences in personality. This
also corroborates previous research that found attachment dimensions
to be better predictors of relationship-specific outcomes such as re-
lationship quality (Noftle & Shaver, 2006).
6.2. Implications for practice
Two potential implications for practice arise from this study. First,
the findings highlight the dual nature of SNSs, which represent a
double-edged sword for users with high attachment anxiety and those
with high attachment avoidance. In the continuous pursuit of their at-
tachment goals (i.e., social closeness and reassurance for anxious
people, independence for avoidant people), users may resort to SNS use
as a maladaptive approach to satisfying their heightened needs. Our
finding that need satisfaction mediates the attachment–addiction re-
lationship suggests that users’ preoccupation with using SNSs to fulfill
their excessive needs may foster addictive tendencies. Satisfaction of
innate psychological needs is rewarding, but it also poses a serious
threat to anxious and avoidant users by providing a positive re-
inforcement, which may encourage excessive use behaviors and nurture
addictive tendencies. Therefore, SNS users, especially those with high
attachment anxiety or high attachment avoidance, should be aware of
the undesirable outcome of relying on SNS use to fulfill their excessive
psychological needs. They should also mindfully moderate or seek al-
ternative means to fulfill their heightened needs.
Second, our findings can inform the development of education
programs and interventions that aim to address the unexpected (often
negative) outcomes of SNS use. Our results provide some insights in
how attachment anxiety and attachment avoidance can be associated
with SNS addiction. This study contributes to a better understanding of
the motivational factors that make people with different attachment
orientations vulnerable to SNS addiction in different ways (e.g., need
A. Chen Computers in Human Behavior 98 (2019) 80–92

satisfaction for relatedness and for self-presentation influences the an-
xiety-addiction relationship and the avoidance-addiction relationship in
opposite directions). Thus, interventions aiming to prevent or reduce
SNS addiction may succeed to the extent that they take into account
such nuanced differences and target the right group of users.
Meaningful offline programs can be developed to nurture healthy and
satisfactory interpersonal connection and also help individuals mod-
erate their excessive needs so that they do not maladaptively depend on
SNS use to fulfill those needs or supplement their unsatisfactory offline
interaction.
6.3. Limitations and future research
Implications of our findings need to be interpreted in light of the
study's limitations. First, only undergraduate business students from a
public university in the U.S. participated in our research. Since business
students may differ from other types of undergraduate students, our
respondents were not randomly selected from the student population.
Therefore, our sample may not be representative of the student popu-
lation in particular or other populations in general. As such, the results
of this study may not generalize to a different user population. Future
studies may leverage a different user population to assess the mediating
role of need satisfaction in the attachment-addiction relationship.
Moreover, to the extent to which individuals' inclination towards social
connection and pursuit of psychological needs on SNSs are culturally
dependent, our results may not generalize to other cultures. For ex-
ample, based on a sample mostly recruited from the U.S., Blackwell
et al. (2017) found a positive relationship between attachment avoid-
ance and SNS addiction, whereas Eroglu (2015), based on a sample of
Turkish respondents, reported a negative one. Future studies can also
assess the attachment–addiction relationship in a different culture.
Second, we tested our research model in the context of Facebook.
Technology addiction can be predicted by individual-related and
technology-related factors (Vaghefi & Lapointe, 2013). Focusing on a
single SNS (i.e., Facebook) allows us to eliminate confounding effects of
technology-specific factors in our investigation of how individual-related
factors, i.e., attachment dimensions, are related to SNS addiction
through need satisfaction. But this may limit the generalizability of our
findings. To the extent that using certain features of Facebook may be
particularly conductive to addiction, our results may not generalize to
other SNSs where addiction can develop as well. Future research is
needed to examine the attachment–addiction relationship in the context
of a different SNS (e.g., Instagram), and identify the technology-specific
features that may account for any variation.
Finally, we only examined the satisfaction of three psychological
needs (i.e., relatedness, self-presentation, and autonomy) as mediating
mechanisms to explain the attachment-addiction relationship. Future
research may identify additional psychological needs that are salient in
the SNS context as well as the distinct use patterns that satisfy these
needs. We hope that our study can spur future research that captures
additional pathways to addiction via other mediating mechanisms.
7. Conclusion
SNSs play a vital role in mediating interpersonal connection.
Drawing upon the NAF model, we examine the satisfaction of three
psychological needs as mediating mechanisms to explain the relation-
ship between attachment and SNS addiction. Our findings reveal that
people's unique standings on attachment anxiety and attachment
avoidance are associated with distinct pathways to SNS addiction
through the satisfaction of different psychological needs. Our study
demonstrates the promising potential of attachment theory and moti-
vational factors in understanding individual differences in the context
of socially oriented technologies.

Appendix A. Constructs and Scales

Construct Definition and Source of Measure Measure

1. Attachment Anxiety Attachment anxiety represents the degree to which an individual fears rejection or abandonment from
others in time of need and is often characterized by an excessive need for closeness to and approval
• Imeworry that other people won't care about
as much as I care about them.
from others. Source: Experience of Relationships Scale (ECR) (Richards & Schat, 2011); ECR-Short
Form (Wei et al., 2007)
• My desire to be very close sometimes scares
people away.
• Iappreciated
need a lot of reassurance that I am liked and
by other people.
• I(R)do not often worry about being abandoned.
• Iclose
find that other people don't want to get as
as I would like.
• Iwhen
get frustrated if others are not available
I need them.
2. Attachment Avoidance Attachment avoidance represents the degree to which an individual fears interpersonal dependency
and intimacy and distrusts others' goodwill or capacity to help, and is often characterized by an
• Ipulling
want to get close to others, but I keep
back.
excessive need for independence and self-reliance. Source: Experience of Relationships Scale (ECR)
(Richards & Schat, 2011); ECR-Short Form (Wei et al., 2007)
• Itoamme.nervous when other people get too close
• II try to avoid getting too close to others.
• withusually discuss my problems and concerns
other people. (R)
• ItI turn
helps to turn to others in times of need. (R)
• cludingtocomfort
other people for many things, in-
and reassurance. (R)
3. Satisfaction of the Ne-
ed for Relatedness
Satisfaction of the need for relatedness refers to the fulfillment of individuals' innate psychological
need to interact with and feel connected to others. Source: Satisfaction of Psychological Needs (Partala,
• On Facebook I feel a sense of contact with
people who care for me, and whom I care
2011) for.
• On Facebook I feel close and connected with
other people who are important to me.
• On Facebook I feel a strong sense of intimacy
with the people I spend time with.
4. Satisfaction of the Ne-
ed for Self-Presentat-
Satisfaction of the need for expressing self-identity refers to the fulfillment of individuals' innate
psychological need to communicate their identity to others. Source: Satisfaction of Psychological Needs
• On Facebook I feel that I effectively express
who I am.
ion (Partala, 2011) • On Facebook I feel I effectively express my
personality.

88
A. Chen Computers in Human Behavior 98 (2019) 80–92

• On Facebook I feel I effectively express my

self-identity.
5. Satisfaction of the Ne-
ed for Autonomy
Satisfaction of the need for autonomy refers to the fulfillment of individuals' innate psychological need
to act with a sense of volition and in harmony with one's true self. Source: Satisfaction of Psychological
• On Facebook I feel that my choices are
based on my true interests and values.
Needs (Partala, 2011) • On
way.
Facebook I feel free to do things my own

• On Facebook I feel that my choices express my

“‘true self.”
6. SNS Addiction Social media addiction is defined as the excessive social media use driven by psychological
dependency, notwithstanding the negative consequences on physical, mental, professional, and
• Icause
sometimes neglect important things be-
of my interest in Facebook.
financial well-being. Source: Behavioral Dependency (Charlton, 2002) •My social life in face-to-face settings has
sometimes suffered because of me using
Facebook.
•Using Facebook has sometimes interfered
with my study.
•When I am not using Facebook I often feel
agitated.
•Arguments have sometimes arisen at home
because of the time I spend on Facebook.
• I think that I am addicted to Facebook.
• I often fail to get enough rest because of using
Facebook.
• I have made unsuccessful attempts to reduce
the time I spend on Facebook.
• I am sometimes late for engagements because
I am on Facebook.
7. Computer Playfulness Computer playfulness is defined as the degree of an individual's cognitive spontaneity in interactions • When using Facebook I am Spontaneous.
with computer. Source: Computer Playfulness Scale (Webster & Martocchio, 1992) • When using Facebook I am Imaginative.
• When using Facebook I am Flexible.
• When using Facebook I am Creative.
• When using Facebook I am Playful.
• When using Facebook I am Original.
• When using Facebook I am Inventive.
8. IT Innovativeness IT innovativeness, the trait of personal innovativeness in the IT context, refers to an individual's
willingness to try out new technology. Source: IT Innovativeness Scale (Agarwal & Prasad, 1998)
• If I heard about a new information tech-
nology, I would look for ways to experiment
with it.
• In general, I am hesitant to try out new
information technologies.
• Among my peers, I am usually the first to try
out new information technologies.
• I like to experiment with new information
technologies.
9. Agreeableness Agreeableness represents the tendency to be cooperative, considerate, sympathetic, kind, and
forgiving. Source: Mini International Personality Item Pool (IPIP) scale (Goldberg, 1990)
• I am not interested in other people's pro-
blems.
• I am not really interested in others.
• I feel others' emotions.
• I sympathize with others' feelings.
10. Conscientiousness Conscientiousness represents the tendency to be intrinsically motivated, self-disciplined, strong-willed, • I like order.
and reliable. Source: Mini International Personality Item Pool (IPIP) scale (Goldberg, 1990) • I make a mess of things.
• I get chores done right away.
• I often forget to put things back in their proper
place.
11. Extraversion Extraversion represents the tendency to be social, active, cheerful, and optimistic. Source: Mini • I am the life of the party.
International Personality Item Pool (IPIP) scale (Goldberg, 1990) • I keep in the background.
• I don't talk a lot.
• I talk to a lot of different people at parties.
12. Neuroticism Neuroticism represents the tendency to be anxious, self-conscious, paranoid, and prone to negative • I get upset easily.
reactions. Source: Mini International Personality Item Pool (IPIP) scale (Goldberg, 1990) • I seldom feel blue.
• I have frequent mood swings.
• I am relaxed most of the time.
13. Intensity of Use Intensity use captures an individual's overall SNS use. Source: Use scale (Chen & Karahanna, 2018) • I rate my intensity of Facebook use during
the previous three months to be: 1 = Very
light. 7 = Very heavy
• Considering my average behavior for the
previous three months, I frequently use
Facebook.
• Considering my average behavior for the
previous three months, I spend a lot of time
using Facebook.
14. Social Desirability B-
ias
Social desirability captures respondents' tendency to provide answers that make them look good.
Source: Social Desirability Scale (Reynolds, 1982)
• It is sometimes hard for me to go on with my
work if I am not encouraged. (False)
• I sometimes feel resentful when I don't get my
way. (False)
• On a few occasions, I have given up doing
something because I thought too little of my
ability. (False)
• There have been times when I felt like rebel-
ling against people in authority even though I
knew they were right. (False)

89
A. Chen Computers in Human Behavior 98 (2019) 80–92

• No matter who I'm talking to, I'm always a

good listener. (True)
• There have been occasions when I took ad-
vantage of someone. (False)
• I'm always willing to admit it when I make a
mistake. (True)
• Iforgive
sometimes try to get even, rather than
and forget. (False)
• Idisagreeable.
am always courteous, even to people who are
(True)
• Ipressed
have never been irked when people ex-
ideas very different from my own.
(True)
• There have been times when I was quite
jealous of the good fortune of others. (False)
• Ifavors
am sometimes irritated by people who ask
of me. (False)
• Ihurt
have never deliberately said something that
someone's feelings. (True)
15. Fashion conscious- Fashion consciousness refers to an individual's involvement with fashionability. (Marker variable). • I'm very alert to changes in fashion.
ness
16. Demographic infor-
Source: Generalized Overall Fashion Consciousness Scale (Gould & Stern, 1989)
N/A
• I would say I'm very fashion conscious.
Please tell us something about yourself.
mation Birth year: __________
Gender (Please type Male, Female, or Other):
__________
Number of years using Facebook: __________

(R) Reverse coded items.

Appendix B. Descriptives, Correlations, and Measurement Model Statistics

Mean (SD) CFA Item 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Loadings

1 3.89 (1.50) 0.76–0.94 0.85

2 3.25 (1.40) 0.82–0.88 −0.10 0.84
3 2.81 (1.53) 0.79–0.87 0.35∗∗ −0.07 0.84
4 1.90 (0.90) 0.84–0.87 0.16∗∗ 0.14∗ 0.10 0.85
5 3.67 (1.54) 0.82–0.90 −0.01 0.23∗∗ 0.40∗∗ 0.09 0.86
6 2.08 (0.99) 0.67–0.84 0.27∗∗ 0.10 0.44∗∗ 0.21∗∗ 0.53∗∗ 0.76
7 4.95 (1.34) 0.73–0.79 −0.10 0.06 0.03 −0.03 0.02 −0.05 0.77
8 5.28 (1.05) 0.64–0.89 0.24∗∗ −0.28∗∗ −0.05 −0.04 −0.07 −0.17∗∗ 0.09 0.78
9 5.39 (1.16) 0.75–0.89 0.09 −0.21∗∗ 0.03 0.06 0.15∗∗ 0.07 0.12∗ 0.32∗∗ 0.82
10 4.44 (1.66) 0.83–0.93 0.01 −0.04 −0.01 −0.09 −0.01 0.01 −0.04 −0.08 −0.02
11 3.27 (1.55) 0.82–0.90 0.01 0.27∗∗ 0.07 0.15∗∗ 0.04 0.14∗ 0.00 −0.05 −0.10
12 3.64 (1.48) 0.70–0.89 0.12∗ 0.14∗ 0.18∗∗ 0.39∗∗ 0.15∗∗ 0.22∗∗ −0.07 0.02 0.15∗∗
13 3.85 (1.54) 0.85–0.88 0.27∗∗ −0.05 0.11∗ 0.16∗∗ 0.04 0.06 −0.04 0.19∗∗ 0.14∗
14 3.85 (1.82) 0.84–0.94 0.14∗ −0.31∗∗ 0.06 0.01 0.13∗ 0.05 0.00 0.24∗∗ 0.30∗∗
15 23.37 n/a 0.00 0.02 0.04 −0.04 −0.07 −0.11∗ 0.01 0.01 −0.11∗
(4.59)
16 1.38 (0.49) n/a 0.06 −0.02 0.28∗∗ 0.02 0.31∗∗ 0.24∗∗ 0.06 −0.10 0.10
17 5.11 (1.92) n/a −0.02 −0.13∗ 0.05 0.03 0.19∗∗ 0.05 0.01 0.04 0.14∗
18 1.44 (0.17) n/a −0.04 0.02 −0.04 −0.09 0.04 0.04 −0.03 0.03 −0.03
19 3.48 (1.67) 0.70–0.93 0.05 0.03 0.10 −0.08 −0.02 −0.08 −0.07 −0.05 0.06

Mean (SD) CFA Item 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19

Loadings

1 3.89 (1.50) 0.76–0.94

2 3.25 (1.40) 0.82–0.88
3 2.81 (1.53) 0.79–0.87
4 1.90 (0.90) 0.84–0.87
5 3.67 (1.54) 0.82–0.90
6 2.08 (0.99) 0.67–0.84
7 4.95 (1.34) 0.73–0.79
8 5.28 (1.05) 0.64–0.89
9 5.39 (1.16) 0.75–0.89
10 4.44 (1.66) 0.83–0.93 0.89
11 3.27 (1.55) 0.82–0.90 −0.06 0.87
12 3.64 (1.48) 0.70–0.89 0.04 0.34∗∗ 0.77
13 3.85 (1.54) 0.85–0.88 −0.09 0.05 0.21∗∗ 0.82
14 3.85 (1.82) 0.84–0.94 0.02 −0.005 0.15∗∗ 0.18∗∗ 0.90
15 23.37 n/a −0.03 0.01 −0.13∗ 0.03 −0.13∗ 1.00
(4.59)

90
A. Chen
16 1.38 (0.49) n/a 0.08 0.01 0.10
17 5.11 (1.92) n/a −0.06 −0.06 −0.01
18 1.44 (0.17) n/a 0.07 −0.04 −0.05
19 3.48 (1.67) 0.70–0.93 −0.03 0.02 −0.02
1-Attachment Anxiety, 2-Attachment Avoidance, 3-Satisfaction of the need for Relatedness, 4-Satisfaction of the need for Self-Presentation, 5-Satisfaction of the need
for Autonomy, 6-SNS Addiction, 7-Agreeableness, 8-Conscientiousness, 9-Extraverion, 10-Openness to Experience, 11-Neuroticism, 12-Computer Playfulness, 13-IT
Innovativeness, 14-Extent of Use, 15-Age, 16-Gender, 17-Years of Facebook Experience, 18-Social Desirability, 19-Fashion Consciousness (Marker).
The shaded leading diagonal elements represent the square root of average variance extracted (AVE); The CFA loadings reflect the range of loadings (lowest loading-
highest loading) that the items of each scale have on their latent construct; ∗p < 0.05 (2-tailed); ∗∗p < 0.01 (2-tailed).
References
Agarwal, R., & Karahanna, E. (2000). Time flies when you’re having fun: Cognitive ab-
sorption and beliefs about information technology usage. MIS Quarterly, 24(4),
665–694.
Agarwal, R., & Prasad, J. (1998). A conceptual and operational definition of personal
innovativeness in the domain of information technology. Information Systems
Research, 9(2), 204–215.
Andreassen, C. S. (2015). Online social network site addiction: A comprehensive review.
Current Addiction Reports, 2(2), 175–184.
Ayyagari, R., Grover, V., & Purvis, R. (2011). Technostress: Technological antecedents
and implications. MIS Quarterly, 35(4), 831–858.
Baym, N. K. (2010). Personal connections in the digital age. MA: Polity Press.
Blackwell, D., Leaman, C., Tramposch, R., Osborne, C., & Liss, M. (2017). Extraversion,
neuroticism, attachment style and fear of missing out as predictors of social media
use and addiction. Personality and Individual Differences, 116, 69–72.
Bowlby, J. (1973). Attachment and loss: Vol. 2. Separation: Anxiety and angerNew York:
Basic Books.
Bowlby, J. (1988). A secure base: Clinical applications of attachment theory. London:
Routledge.
Brennan, K. A., Clark, C. L., & Shaver, P. R. (1998). Self-report measurement of adult
attachment: An integrative overview. In J. A. Simpson, & W. S. Rholes (Eds.).
Attachment theory and close relationships (pp. 46–76). New York: Guilford Press.
Charlton, J. P. (2002). A factor-analytic investigation of computer ‘addiction’ and en-
gagement. British Journal of Psychology, 93(3), 329–344.
Chen, A., & Karahanna, E. (2018). Life interrupted: The effects of technology-mediated
work interruptions on work and life outcomes. MIS Quarterly, 42(4), 1023–1042.
Chin, W. W. (1998). Issues and opinions on structural equation modeling. MIS Quarterly,
22(1), 7–16.
Correa, T., Hinsley, A. W., & De Zuniga, H. G. (2010). Who interacts on the Web?: The
intersection of users' personality and social media use. Computers in Human Behavior,
26(2), 247–253.
Crowne, D. P., & Marlowe, D. (1960). A new scale of social desirability independent of
psychopathology. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 24(4), 349–354.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2000). The" what" and" why" of goal pursuits: Human needs
and the self-determination of behavior. Psychological Inquiry, 11(4), 227–268.
DeWall, C. N., Lambert, N. M., Slotter, E. B., Pond, R. S., Jr., Deckman, T., Finkel, E. J.,
et al. (2011). So far away from one's partner, yet so close to romantic alternatives:
Avoidant attachment, interest in alternatives, and infidelity. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology, 101(6), 1302–1316.
DiMicco, J. M., & Millen, D. R. (2007, November). Identity management: Multiple pre-
sentations of self in facebook. Proceedings of the 2007 international ACM conference on
Supporting group work (pp. 383–386). ACM.
Donnellan, M., Oswald, F., Baird, B., & Lucas, R. (2006). The mini-IPIP scales: Tiny-yet-
effective measures of the big five factors of personality. Psychological Assessment,
18(2), 192–203.
Drouin, M., & Landgraff, C. (2012). Texting, sexting, and attachment in college students'
romantic relationships. Computers in Human Behavior, 28(2), 444–449.
Ellison, N. B., & Boyd, D. M. (2013). Sociality through social network sites. In W. H.
Dutton (Ed.). The Oxford handbook of Internet studies (pp. 151–172). Oxford, England:
Oxford University Press.
Ellison, N., Heino, R., & Gibbs, J. (2006). Managing impressions online: Self-presentation
processes in the online dating environment. Journal of Computer-Mediated
Communication, 11(2), 415–441.
Eroglu, Y. (2016). Interrelationship between attachment styles and Facebook addiction.
Journal of Education and Training Studies, 4(1), 150–160.
Feeney, B. C., Cassidy, J., & Ramos-Marcuse, F. (2008). The generalization of attachment
representations to new social situations: Predicting behavior during initial interac-
tions with strangers. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95(6), 1481.
Fraley, R. C., Hudson, N. W., Heffernan, M. E., & Segal, N. (2015). Are adult attachment
styles categorical or dimensional? A taxometric analysis of general and relationship-
specific attachment orientations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 109(2),
354.
Fraley, R. C., & Shaver, P. R. (2000). Adult romantic attachment: Theoretical develop-
ments, emerging controversies, and unanswered questions. Review of General
Psychology, 4(2), 132–154.
Goldberg, L. R. (1990). An alternative “description of personality”: The big-five factor
structure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59(6), 1216–1229.
Gonzales, A. L., & Hancock, J. T. (2011). Mirror, mirror on my Facebook wall: Effects of
exposure to Facebook on self-esteem. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social
Networking, 14(1–2), 79–83.
91
Computers in Human Behavior 98 (2019) 80–92
−0.25∗∗ 0.16∗∗ −0.09 1.00
0.14∗ 0.06 −0.03 0.11 1.00
−0.03 −0.09 0.04 0.06 −0.01 1.00
−0.07 −0.02 −0.02 0.01 0.02 0.08 0.82
Gould, S. J., & Stern, B. B. (1989). Gender schema and fashion consciousness. Psychology
and Marketing, 6(2), 129–145.
Griffin, D. W., & Bartholomew, K. (1994). Models of the self and other: Fundamental
dimensions underlying measures of adult attachment. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 67(3), 430–445.
Han, L., Geng, J., Jou, M., Gao, F., & Yang, H. (2017). Relationship between shyness and
mobile phone addiction in Chinese young adults: mediating roles of self-control and
attachment anxiety. Computers in Human Behavior, 76, 363–371.
Hart, J., Nailling, E., Bizer, G. Y., & Collins, C. K. (2015). Attachment theory as a fra-
mework for explaining engagement with Facebook. Personality and Individual
Differences, 77, 33–40.
Ho, S. S., Lwin, M. O., & Lee, E. W. (2017). Till logout do us part? Comparison of factors
predicting excessive social network sites use and addiction between Singaporean
adolescents and adults. Computers in Human Behavior, 75, 632–642.
Jia, R., Hartke, H., & Pearson, J. (2007). Can computer playfulness and cognitive ab-
sorption lead to problematic technology usage? Proceedings of the 28th international
conference on information systems, paper 22 (Montreal, Canada).
Joinson, A. N. (2008). “Looking at”, “looking up” or “keeping up with” people? Motives
and uses of facebook. Proceedings of the 26th annual SIGCHI conference on human
factors in computing systems (pp. 1027–1036). Florence, Italy: ACM.
Kanat-Maymon, Y., Almog, L., Cohen, R., & Amichai-Hamburger, Y. (2018). Contingent
self-worth and Facebook addiction. Computers in Human Behavior, 88, 227–235.
Kanfer, R. (1990). Motivation theory and industrial and organizational psychology. In
(2nd ed.). M. D. Dunnette, L.M., & Hough (Vol. Eds.), Handbook of industrial and
organizational psychology: Vol. 1, (pp. 75–171). Palo Alto, CA: Consulting
Psychologists Press.
Kaplan, A. M., & Haenlein, M. (2010). Users of the world, unite! the challenges and op-
portunities of Social Media. Business Horizons, 53(1), 59–68.
Karahanna, K., Xu, S., Xu, Y., & Zhang, N. (2018). The needs-affordances features (NAF)
perspective for the use of social media. MIS Quarterly, 42(3), 737–756.
Kline, R. B. (2005). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. New York: The
Guilford Press.
Knapp, M. L., & Vangeslisti, A. L. (2003). Interpersonal communication and human re-
lationships, Vol. 5. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Kuss, D. J., & Griffiths, M. D. (2011). Online social networking and addiction—a review of
the psychological literature. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public
Health, 8(9), 3528–3552.
Kwon, H. E., So, H., Han, S. P., & Oh, W. (2016). Excessive dependence on mobile social
apps: A rational addiction perspective. Information Systems Research, 27(4), 919–939.
Lee, D. Y. (2013). The role of attachment style in building social capital from a social
networking site: The interplay of anxiety and avoidance. Computers in Human
Behavior, 29(4), 1499–1509.
Lella, A., & Lipsman, A. (2016). U.S. Cross-platform future in focus, comScore.
Lindell, M. K., & Whitney, D. J. (2001). Accounting for common method variance in cross-
sectional research designs. Journal of Applied Psychology, 86(1), 114–121.
Little, T. D. (1997). Mean and covariance structures (MACS), analyses of cross-cultural
data: Practical and theoretical issues. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 32(1), 53–76.
Masur, P. K., Reinecke, L., Ziegele, M., & Quiring, O. (2014). The interplay of intrinsic
need satisfaction and Facebook specific motives in explaining addictive behavior on
Facebook. Computers in Human Behavior, 39, 376–386.
Mikulincer, M., & Nachshon, O. (1991). Attachment styles and patterns of self-disclosure.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61(2), 321–331.
Mikulincer, M., & Shaver, P. R. (2005). Attachment theory and emotions in close re-
lationships: Exploring the attachment-related dynamics of emotional reactions to
relational events. Personal Relationships, 12(2), 149–168.
Mikulincer, M., & Shaver, P. R. (2007). Attachment in adulthood: Structure, dynamics, and
change. New York: Guilford Press.
Milošević-Đorđević, J. S., & Žeželj, I. L. (2014). Psychological predictors of addictive
social networking sites use: The case of Serbia. Computers in Human Behavior, 32,
229–234.
Morey, J. N., Gentzler, A. L., Creasy, B., Oberhauser, A. M., & Westerman, D. (2013).
Young adults' use of communication technology within their romantic relationships
and associations with attachment style. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(4),
1771–1778.
Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (2007). Mplus user's guide (5th ed.). Los Angeles: Muthén &
Muthén.
Nitzburg, G. C., & Farber, B. A. (2013). Putting up emotional (facebook) walls?
Attachment status and emerging adults' experiences of social networking sites.
Journal of Clinical Psychology, 69(11), 1183–1190.
Noftle, E. E., & Shaver, P. R. (2006). Attachment dimensions and the big five personality
traits: Associations and comparative ability to predict relationship quality. Journal of
Research in Personality, 40(2), 179–208.
A. Chen
Oldmeadow, J. A., Quinn, S., & Kowert, R. (2013). Attachment style, social skills, and
Facebook use amongst adults. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(3), 1142–1149.
Partala, T. (2011). Psychological needs and virtual worlds: Case second life. International
Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 69(12), 787–800.
Podsakoff, P. M., Mackenzie, S. B., Lee, J.-Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method
biases in behavior research: A critical review of the literature and recommended
remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879–903.
Podsakoff, P. M., & Organ, D. W. (1986). Self-reports in organizational research: Problems
and prospects. Journal of Management, 12(4), 69–82.
Preacher, K. J., & Hayes, A. F. (2008). Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing
and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research
Methods, 40(3), 879–891.
Reinecke, L., Vorderer, P., & Knop, K. (2014). Entertainment 2.0? The role of intrinsic and
extrinsic need satisfaction for the enjoyment of facebook use. Journal of
Communication, 64(3), 417–438.
Reynolds, W. M. (1982). Development of reliable and valid short forms of the Marlowe-
Crowne social desirability scale. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 38(1), 119–125.
Richards, D. A., & Schat, A. C. (2011). Attachment at (not to) work: Applying attachment
theory to explain individual behavior in organizations. Journal of Applied Psychology,
96(1), 169–182.
Ridgway, N. M., Kukar-Kinney, M., & Monroe, K. B. (2008). An expanded con-
ceptualization and a new measure of compulsive buying. Journal of Consumer
Research, 35(4), 622–639.
Robinson, T. E., & Berridge, K. C. (2003). Addiction. Annual Review of Psychology, 54(1),
25–53.
Ryan, T., Chester, A., Reece, J., & Xenos, S. (2014). The uses and abuses of facebook: A
review of facebook addiction. Journal of Behavioral Addictions, 3(3), 133–148.
Schoenebeck, S., Ellison, N. B., Blackwell, L., Bayer, J. B., & Falk, E. B. (2016). February).
Playful backstalking and serious impression management: How young adults reflect
on their past identities on Facebook. Proceedings of the 19th ACM conference on
computer-supported cooperative work & social computing (pp. 1475–1487). ACM.
Shang, R. A., Chen, Y. C., & Chang, J. W. (2015). Individual attachment style, self-dis-
closure, and how people use social network. International conference on multi-
disciplinary social networks research (pp. 45–59). Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
Shin, S. E., Kim, N. S., & Jang, E. Y. (2011). Comparison of problematic internet and
alcohol use and attachment styles among industrial workers in Korea.
Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 14(11), 665–672.
92
Computers in Human Behavior 98 (2019) 80–92
Spector, P. E. (2006). Method variance in organizational research truth or urban legend?
Organizational Research Methods, 9(2), 221–232.
Sumer, H. C., & Knight, P. A. (2001). How do people with different attachment styles
balance work and family? A personality perspective on work–family linkage. Journal
of Applied Psychology, 86(4), 653–663.
Tarafdar, M., Gupta, A., & Turel, O. (2013). The dark side of information technology use.
Information Systems Journal, 23(3), 269–275.
Thatcher, J. B., & Perrewe, P. L. (2002). An empirical examination of individual traits as
antecedents to computer anxiety and computer self-efficacy. MIS Quarterly, 26(4),
381–396.
Turel, O., & Serenko, A. (2012). The benefits and dangers of enjoyment with social net-
working websites. European Journal of Information Systems, 21(5), 512–528.
Turel, O., Serenko, A., & Giles, P. (2011). Integrating technology addiction and use: An
empirical investigation of online auction users. MIS Quarterly, 35(4), 1043–1061.
Vaghefi, I., & Lapointe, L. (2013). Can it hurt productivity? An investigation of IT ad-
diction. Proceedings of the 34th international conference on information systems (Milan,
Italy).
Vorderer, P., Krömer, N., & Schneider, F. M. (2016). Permanently online–Permanently
connected: Explorations into university students' use of social media and mobile
smart devices. Computers in Human Behavior, 63, 694–703.
Webster, J., & Martocchio, J. J. (1992). Microcomputer playfulness: Development of a
measure with workplace implications. MIS Quarterly, 16(2), 201–226.
Wei, M., Russell, D. W., Mallinckrodt, B., & Vogel, D. L. (2007). The experiences in close
relationship scale (ECR)-short form: Reliability, validity, and factor structure. Journal
of Personality Assessment, 88(2), 187–204.
Wilcox, K., & Stephen, A. T. (2013). Are close friends the enemy? Online social networks,
self-esteem, and self-control. Journal of Consumer Research, 40(1), 90–103.
Williams, M. L., & Podsakoff, P. M. (1992). Effects of group-level and individual-level
variation in leader behaviours on subordinate attitudes and performance. Journal of
Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 65(2), 115–129.
Xu, Z., Turel, O., & Yuan, Y. (2012). Online game addiction among adolescents:
Motivation and prevention factors. European Journal of Information Systems, 21(3),
321–340.
Young, K. (1998). Caught in the Net. New York, NY, USA: Wiley.
Young, K. S., Yue, X. D., & Ying, L. (2011). Prevalence estimates and etiologic models of
internet addiction. In K. S. Young, & C. N. Abreu (Eds.). Internet addiction - a handbook
and guide to evaluation and treatment (pp. 1–17). New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons.