31

The Effects of Internet Communication on Adolescents' Psychosocial Development

An Assessment of Risks and Opportunities

Jochen Peter and Patti M. Valkenburg

Adolescents and the Internet

In most rich Western countries, Internet communication has become an integral part of adolescents' lives. Adolescents are the defining users of Internet communication. They far outnumber adults in their use of Internet communication technologies, such as instant messaging and social networking sites (e.g., Lenhart, Madden, Smith, & Macgill, 2007). For example, 53% of US and 91% of Dutch adolescent Internet users communicate online through instant messaging (Rideout, Foehr, & Roberts, 2010; Valkenburg & Peter, 2009a), and increasing numbers of adolescents have started to use social network sites (e.g., Facebook), blogs, and photo and video sharing sites (e.g., YouTube). Across thirteen European countries, 66% of all Internet users aged 15 or older visited social network sites in 2008 (comScore, 2009). Further, 28% of all adolescent Internet users in the United States reported blogging in 2007, as opposed to 8% of the adult Internet users (Lenhart et al., 2007). Finally, data from 2010 show that 74% of all US adolescents aged 13–18 have created a profile on a social network site (Rideout et al., 2010).

Adolescents' massive and rapidly changing use of communication technologies has elicited mixed reactions, both from academics and the public. On the one hand, concerns have been voiced that adolescents may become victims of abusive relationships, or develop shallow interpersonal relationships with strangers (for summaries of these concerns, see e.g., Donnerstein, 2009; Hinduja & Patchin, 2008). These concerns have been fueled by parents' inability to control their children's Internet use (Donnerstein, 2009). On the other hand, it has been argued that the Internet provides adolescents with enormous opportunities to explore their identity in a relatively safe space; develop close and meaningful relationships beyond the obstacles of face-to-face communication; and find information and social support regarding developmentally sensitive issues (e.g., McKenna & Bargh, 2000; Subrahmanyam & Greenfield, 2008; Turkle, 1995). Proponents of this position typically refer to adolescents' self-regulatory capacities and their Internet competence as a potential protection against adverse consequences (e.g., Sternheimer, 2003).

Adolescents' extensive use of the Internet and the uncertainty about its consequences call for an integrative perspective that helps us understand both the attraction of Internet communication and its risks and opportunities. The aim of this chapter is to hypothesize, and if possible, substantiate by evidence that both the appeal of Internet communication and its psychosocial consequences can be attributed to the enhanced controllability of self-presentation and self-disclosure in Internet communication. Self-presentation and self-disclosure are functional skills that have to be learned in adolescence, and are vital for two components of psychosocial development: identity and intimacy. We will discuss how five features of Internet communication influence self-presentation and self-disclosure skills, and thereby, identity and intimacy development. Subsequently, we review research on the opportunities and risks of Internet communication for adolescents' identity and intimacy development. Finally, we discuss some shortcomings of existing research and possibilities for future research. By Internet communication, we mean any social interaction on the Internet, but we focus on instant messaging and social network sites because they are most popular among adolescents. Texting through mobile phones, although also popular among adolescents, falls outside the scope of this chapter.

Internet Communication and Psychosocial Development in Adolescence

Developmental researchers agree that the overarching developmental goal in adolescence is that young people achieve psychosocial autonomy from their parents (e.g., Bukatko, 2008; Steinberg, 2008). Within this overarching goal, at least two developmental tasks are important for psychosocial development (Steinberg, 2008). First, adolescents have to develop a firm sense of identity, that is, they need to achieve a secure feeling about who they are and who they become (e.g., Erikson, 1968; Harter, 1999; Kegan, 1982; Loevinger, 1976). Second, they have to develop a sense of intimacy, that is, they need to acquire the abilities that are necessary to form, maintain, and terminate close, meaningful relationships with others (e.g., Buhrmester, 1990; Buhrmester & Furman, 1987; Buhrmester & Prager, 1995; Furman & Wehner, 1994).

Each of these two developmental tasks is accompanied by a specific skill that does not arise automatically, but that adolescents have to learn and practice. For the development of a firm sense of identity, they need to learn how to present themselves to others and how to adjust their self-presentation according to the reactions of others (e.g., Baumeister, 1982; Harter, 2003; Leary, 1996). Through self-presentation, adolescents not only communicate various identities to others, but they also learn to consolidate or modify these identities in line with the feedback they receive (Valkenburg et al., 2007). To develop a sense of intimacy and, more specifically, close relationships, they need to learn to disclose intimate information to others (e.g., Buhrmester, Furman, Wittenberg, & Reis, 1988; Franzoi & Davis, 1985; Rubin & Shenker, 1978). Self-disclosure not only helps them to validate the appropriateness of their cognitions, emotions, and behaviors, but also elicits, through the norm of reciprocity, close, emotionally supportive relationships (Buhrmester & Prager, 1995).

Identity, Intimacy, and Five Characteristics of Internet Communication

Traditionally, adolescents learn and rehearse self-presentation and self-disclosure in face-to-face communication, often with peers and close friends. However, several studies suggest that self-presentation and self-disclosure – in particular to peers and close friends – increasingly take place on the Internet (Davis, 2010; Schmitt, Dayanim, & Matthias, 2008; Schouten, Valkenburg, & Peter, 2007). A possible explanation of why Internet communication is so attractive to adolescents is that, in comparison to face-to-face communication, it enhances the controllability of their self-presentation and self-disclosure (e.g., Schouten et al., 2007; Valkenburg & Peter, 2009b; Walther, 1992, 1996). In other words, young people can decide more easily than in face-to-face conversations how they present themselves and what they choose to confide in particular others. There is initial evidence that many adolescents are aware of the controllability of Internet communication. In a Dutch study, 45% of the adolescents perceived Internet communication as more controllable than face-to-face communication (Peter & Valkenburg, 2006).

Five features of Internet communication are responsible for the enhanced controllability of self-presentation and self-disclosure. These features, which partly overlap, are: (1) anonymity, (2) asynchronicity, (3) cue management, (4) accessibility, and (5) retrievability. As will be specified below, these features are not inherently beneficial or harmful. The enhanced controllability that results from the five features creates a sense of security in adolescents, allowing them to feel freer in their interpersonal interactions than in face-to-face situations (Walther, 1996). Positively, this sense of security and freedom may loosen restraints and stimulate psychosocial development, for example through the facilitation of self-disclosure, which in turn stimulates friendship formation and maintenance (Valkenburg & Peter, 2009b). Negatively, it may increase uninhibited behavior, such as online aggression or bullying. Thus, the five features of online communication eventually provide adolescents with both opportunities and risks for psychosocial development.

Anonymity

In most Internet applications, adolescents are in command of the extent to which they want to be anonymous or identifiable as persons (although anonymity should rather be seen as a relative anonymity, given the technical problems involved in remaining completely unidentifiable on the Web). They may anonymously post questions about sensitive issues on online support networks, thereby finding information and social support (e.g., Subrahmanyam, Smahel, & Greenfield, 2006; Suzuki & Beale, 2006; Suzuki & Calzo, 2004). Conversely, the possibility of anonymous communication may also result in aggressive and insulting comments, as well as in online harassment of peers and classmates.

Asynchronicity

Some Internet applications, such as instant messaging, allow for communication to take place more or less at the same time (although online communication in such applications is never entirely synchronous). In other applications, such as email and social network sites, communication between partners is typically more delayed. Generally, adolescents' control over the information that they wish to convey grows as the asynchronicity of the communication increases. This allows them to carefully think about and edit information that is relevant to self-disclosure and self-presentation, for example when they design their online profile on a social network site. Conversely, the asynchronous communication allows adolescents to tailor information such that it may become particularly painful for a target.

Cue Management

The Internet gives adolescents ample opportunity to control the richness of cues with which they present themselves (Schouten et al., 2007). Adolescents can decide whether they present themselves only through textual descriptions or whether they add more cues, for example by including pictures or video clips in their self-description. Moreover, Internet communication gives adolescents opportunities to edit and manipulate these cues (e.g., by means of specific software). On the one hand, cue-richness management and the editability of cues increase adolescents' possibilities to optimize their online self-disclosure and self-presentation. This enhances the opportunities for approval and social acceptance (Valkenburg, Peter, & Schouten, 2006). On the other hand, cue-richness management and cue editability may trap adolescents in uncomfortable situations, for example when they exaggerate their online self-presentation, and subsequently become ridiculed and socially rejected by their peers.

Accessibility

Through the Internet, it has become extremely easy to look up persons and to get in contact with them. The easy accessibility of persons, for example on social network sites, allows adolescents to get in touch with other teenagers who they may not have seen for a long time or whom they cannot easily meet in their offline lives. Similarly, adolescents can conveniently spread information about themselves among a wide variety of people. However, the easy accessibility of persons on the Internet also creates risks for adolescents. For example, they can get in contact with strangers whom many adults may not consider appropriate company for adolescents. In addition, they may more easily become the target of unsolicited contact attempts than in offline settings.

Retrievability

Compared to face-to-face communication, information on the Internet can be retraced easily, often for a long time after it was posted. Moreover, information posted on the Internet can easily be copied and forwarded to others. On the one hand, the easy retrievability of information maximizes adolescents' opportunities to distribute information about themselves with a lot of people over an extended period of time, for example on blogs or social network sites. On the other hand, it enables others to share information with an unintended audience, long after the information has initially been sent and at times when it may no longer be valid.

Opportunities and Risks of Internet Communication: Empirical Evidence

The five features of Internet communication explain – on a theoretical basis – not only why Internet communication is so attractive to adolescents, but also why it may be beneficial or risky for adolescents' psychosocial development. Recently, researchers have also started to investigate empirically whether Internet communication presents an opportunity or a risk to adolescents' identity and intimacy development.

Identity Development

Internet researchers have focused on two aspects of identity development: self-concept-clarity and self-esteem. Self-concept clarity refers to the extent to which beliefs and opinions about one's self are clearly and confidently defined, internally consistent, and stable (Campbell, 1990). Developing a consistent self-concept is an important developmental task in adolescence (e.g., Steinberg, 2008). Self-esteem is the evaluative aspect of the self-concept, and it usually refers to how adolescents value their selves (i.e., their self-worth) (Harter, 1999, 2003). The development of self-esteem is also an important goal in adolescence.

Self-Concept Clarity

The risks of Internet communication on self-concept clarity are emphasized in two opposite hypotheses, the self-concept fragmentation and the self-concept unity hypothesis. The fragmentation hypothesis states that the ease with which possible identities can be crafted online fragments adolescents' selves. Moreover, the many possibilities for new relationships may confront them with people and ideas that may further disintegrate their already fragile selves (e.g., Gergen, 1991; Reid, 1998). In contrast, the self-concept unity hypothesis states that the Internet gives adolescents more opportunities than ever to get in contact with people of different backgrounds. As a result, adolescents can validate their identities against a vastly expanded social sounding board, which in turn stimulates their self-concept clarity (e.g., Calvert, 2002; Mazur & Kozarian, 2010; Schmitt et al., 2008; Valkenburg & Peter, 2008).

To our knowledge, at least three cross-sectional survey studies have investigated the relationship between Internet communication and adolescents' self-concept clarity (Matsuba, 2006; Mazalin & Moore, 2004; Valkenburg & Peter, 2008). These studies have yielded indecisive results. Two studies have shown that frequent Internet use and online identity experiments (i.e., pretending to be someone else) were associated with a less stable self-concept (Matsuba, 2006; Mazalin & Moore, 2004). However, more rigorous, multivariate analyses demonstrated the spuriousness of the association between these Internet activities and self-concept as soon as other variables, such as loneliness and social anxiety, were considered (Valkenburg & Peter, 2008). Therefore, current research does not permit the conclusion that the use of the Internet improves or hinders adolescents' self-concept clarity. Other factors, such as loneliness – and thus the lacking opportunity to learn about oneself in an offline social context – seem to influence adolescents' self-concept more strongly than Internet use (Matsuba, 2006; Valkenburg & Peter, 2008).

Self-Esteem

Fluctuations in self-esteem are particularly evident during adolescence (e.g., Harter, 1999). All theories on self-esteem agree that there is a universal desire among human beings to maintain, protect, and enhance their self-esteem (Rosenberg, 1989). Two important antecedents of self-esteem are the control over one's environment and approval and acceptance from others (Harter, 1999, 2003; Leary, 1996). Internet communication may provide adolescents with both of them. As discussed in the previous section, Internet communication enables adolescents to control what they want others to know about them. They can create or modify the presentation of their selves, and they can choose the pace, breadth, and depth of self-disclosure. By experimenting with their self-presentation and self-disclosure, they can optimize the reactions and feedback from their peers and thus enhance their self-esteem.

At least seven studies have investigated the relationship between (forms of) Internet communication and self-esteem among adolescents. Most of these studies have shown that Internet communication increases adolescents' self-esteem. For example, in a study that combined a survey of US adolescents with the analyses of their personal home pages and blogs, Schmitt et al. (2008) found that adolescents indeed experienced a sense of mastery and control through the creation of home pages and blogs. This sense of mastery and control, in turn, was associated with higher self-esteem. The sense of mastery and control was stronger among adolescents than among preadolescents, attesting to the important function of online self-presentation during adolescence.

Focusing on Dutch adolescents' use of social network sites, Valkenburg et al. (2006) also found positive relations with adolescents' self-esteem. The frequency with which the site was used was not directly related to self-esteem; the type of reactions that the teenagers received on their online profiles (i.e., picture and self-description) mediated the effect of use frequency on self-esteem. They found that the more often adolescents used the social network site, the more often they received reactions; and the more reactions they received, the more positive these reactions became. Eventually, these positive reactions were associated with a higher self-esteem. Because the vast majority of reactions to the online profiles were positive, most adolescents benefited from the use of the social network site. However, among 7% of the adolescents, the reactions on their profile were mostly negative. For these adolescents, which involved mostly younger adolescents, their online self-presentation decreased their self-esteem.

In an experiment, Gross (2009) showed that online communication may even restore adolescents' self-esteem. Adolescents who had undergone a laboratory induction of social exclusion and afterwards communicated online with another-sex peer, showed a greater replenishment of self-esteem than adolescents who had been socially excluded and had solitarily played a computer game afterwards. Thus, the study suggests that online communication may help adolescents restore their self-esteem after temporary threats to belonging, which frequently occur in their lives.

The aforementioned studies point to a positive relation between adolescents' communication-oriented Internet activities and their self-esteem. However, none of these studies dealt with compulsive forms of Internet use, that is, an unhealthy attachment to Internet applications (e.g., Caplan, 2002). There is consistent evidence that compulsive Internet use – for instance, an inability to regulate the time spent online or the replacement of face-to-face activities with online activities – is negatively related to self-esteem (e.g., Kim & Davis, 2009; van der Aa et al., 2009). In summary, Internet communication seems to be beneficial for self-esteem only if it is not compulsive in nature.

Intimacy Development

Internet research has focused on whether Internet communication presents an opportunity or a risk for two particular aspects of intimacy development: friendship formation and the quality of existing friendships. In addition, research has dealt with two potential downsides of Internet communication: cyberbullying and relationships with strangers.

Friendship Formation

Research on the effects of the Internet on friendship formation has revolved around two hypotheses, the social compensation and the rich-get-richer hypothesis. The social-compensation hypothesis states that the Internet is particularly beneficial for lonely and socially anxious adolescents. Because of the controllability of Internet communication, these adolescents may more easily overcome the problems they face in offline communication. As a result, they may more easily disclose information about themselves while being online. This eventually facilitates the formation of friendships (e.g., Kraut, 2002; McKenna & Bargh, 1999; Peter, Valdenburg, & Schouten, 2005). The rich-get-richer hypothesis proposes that especially adolescents who already have strong social skills and many offline friends will benefit from the Internet when it comes to friendship formation (e.g., Kraut, 2002; Peter et al., 2005).

Studies on the effects of the Internet on friendship formation found support for both hypotheses. As predicted by the social-compensation hypothesis, lonely and socially anxious adolescents have been found to prefer online communication to face-to-face communication (e.g., Peter et al., 2005; Pierce, 2009). They more strongly value the controllability of Internet communication and perceive it as broader, deeper and more reciprocal than non-socially anxious and non-lonely adolescent respondents do (Peter & Valkenburg, 2006).

However, there is evidence that, overall, socially anxious and lonely adolescents communicate online less often than non-lonely adolescents do, which is in line with the rich-get-richer hypothesis (Valkenburg & Peter, 2007c; van den Eijnden et al., 2008). This suggests that the greater appreciation of Internet communication by socially anxious and lonely adolescents does not in itself lead to new friendships (for an exception, see Valkenburg & Peter, 2007c). Rather, the occurrence of social-compensation effects may depend on certain conditions.

Research points to three basic conditions that need to be met for social-compensation effects to occur. First, adolescents need to be motivated to use Internet communication to compensate for troubles that they encounter in offline interactions. For example, in a Dutch study socially anxious adolescents generally communicated online less often than non-socially anxious adolescents, which subsequently impaired their friendship formation on the Internet (Peter et al., 2005) – an effect that has been replicated in other studies (e.g., Lee, 2009; Valkenburg & Peter, 2007c). However, if adolescents were motivated to use Internet communication to overcome problems they face in face-to-face interactions, they also started communicating more often online and eventually made more friends – a social compensation effect (Peter et al., 2005).

A second condition that needs to be met for social-compensation effects to occur is that socially anxious and lonely adolescents need to use the Internet for communication rather than for entertainment and information. As another study from the Netherlands has shown, adolescents with a low quality of friendships felt less lonely when they used the Internet for instant messaging. In contrast, they felt more lonely and more socially anxious when they primarily used the Internet for surfing (Selfhout et al., 2009).

A final condition of social-compensation effects is that adolescents' Internet activities are not compulsive. If these activities are classified as compulsive, socially anxious and lonely adolescents typically do not benefit from the Internet. For example, a survey among nearly 8,000 adolescents has shown that socially anxious adolescents were more prone to develop compulsive Internet use. This compulsive Internet use, in turn, was linked with greater loneliness (van der Aa et al., 2009). However, the study was based on a cross-sectional design. As a result, the causal relations found need to be treated with some caution.

Quality of Existing Friendships

Research on how Internet communication affects the quality of adolescents' existing friendships has also revolved around two hypotheses. The displacement hypothesis states that Internet communication impairs adolescents' quality of existing friends, because it displaces the time that could be spent in more meaningful interactions with offline friends (e.g., Kraut et al., 1998; Mesch, 2003; Nie, 2001). Adherents of this hypothesis assume that the Internet motivates adolescents to form online contacts with strangers rather than to maintain friendships with their offline peers. Because online contacts are seen as superficial weak-tie relationships that lack feelings of affection and commitment, the Internet is believed to reduce the quality of adolescents' existing friendships.

The stimulation hypothesis, in contrast, emphasizes that more recent Internet-based communication technologies, such as instant messaging or social network sites, are designed to encourage communication with existing friends. As a result, much of time spent on Internet communication is used to maintain and deepen existing friendships, which eventually enhances the closeness of these friendships (Bryant, Sanders-Jackson, & Smallwood, 2006; Valkenburg & Peter, 2007b).

Overall, the stimulation hypothesis has received more support than the displacement hypothesis (for a review, see Valkenburg & Peter, 2009b). However, the positive effects on the quality of friendships are conditional. They have been found only when the Internet communication is nonymous (in contrast to anonymous) and interaction-oriented. Several studies have shown that adolescents only have friendships of higher quality (i.e., greater relationship satisfaction, friends' approval, and support) when they frequently communicated with their friends online through instant messaging (Valkenburg & Peter, 2007b). In contrast, the use of the Internet primarily for entertainment goals (e.g., playing online games, surfing) and for communication with strangers caused the quality of existing friendships to deteriorate (Blais, Craig, Pepler, & Connolly, 2008; Punamaki, Wallenius, Holtto, Nygard, & Rimpela, 2009; Valkenburg & Peter, 2007c).

Existing research points to two more extensions or qualifications of the stimulation hypothesis. First, the stimulation effect also applies to romantic relationships. A longitudinal study among US teenagers showed that, over the course of one year, the use of ICQ (“I seek you,” an instant messaging software) improved the quality of romantic relationships (Blais et al., 2008). Second, the positive impact of nonymous Internet communication does not only apply to the quality of friendships, but affects the entire friendship process from friendship formation to friendship intensification and the definition of group identities. A Taiwanese study has demonstrated that the use of instant messaging helps adolescents to start and maintain individual friendships; to improve offline relationships; and to articulate a sense of belonging to the group of friends (Lee & Sun, 2009).

An attempt to explain why and how Internet communication can stimulate the quality of friendships is the Internet-enhanced self-disclosure hypothesis (Valkenburg & Peter, 2009b). This hypothesis, which received support in a longitudinal study (Valkenburg & Peter, 2009a), is based on three assumptions. First, in line with Walther's (1992, 1996) social information processing and hyperpersonal-communication model, it is assumed that a better cue management on the Internet creates a safe space that facilitates online self-disclosure. Second, higher online self-disclosure stimulates the quality of adolescents' friendships. Third, online self-disclosure mediates the direct relationship between Internet communication and the quality of friendships.

Although the bulk of evidence points to a stimulation effect, some studies have yielded no significant relationship between Internet communication and the quality of friendships (Lee, 2009; Mesch, 2001; Subrahmanyam & Lin, 2007). Finally, there are also research findings in support of the displacement hypothesis. However, with the exception of the findings of an Israeli research group (Mesch & Talmud, 2006), these studies were typically done in the early days of the Internet (e.g., Kraut et al., 1998; for summaries, see Lee, 2009; Valkenburg & Peter, 2007b).

Two changes in Internet use may render negative effects on psychosocial development less likely now than when the Internet was new. First, in the early days of the Internet, it was hard to maintain one's existing social network on the Internet because the greater part of this network was not yet online. At the time, online contacts were separated from offline contacts. However, at present, the vast majority of adolescents in Western countries have access to the Internet. At such high access rates, a negative effect of the Internet on the quality of friendships is less likely because adolescents have more opportunities to maintain their social network through this medium. Second, communication technologies that were popular among adolescents in the 1990s, such as chat rooms, were typically used for communication between strangers. However, in recent years several communication technologies, such as instant messaging and social network sites have been developed that encourage adolescents to communicate with existing friends.

Communication with Strangers

Although recent communication technologies encourage adolescents to communicate with existing friends, a minority of them do use the Internet to search for contact with strangers (e.g., Peter, Valkenburg, & Schouten, 2006). Roughly, the studies on Internet communication with strangers can be divided into two lines of research. The first line of research has largely dealt with adolescents who use the Internet to cope with problems they encounter in the offline world. This line of research has generally found positive effects of online contacts with strangers. For example, an analysis of postings on health boards has shown that the typically anonymous communication on such sites provides adolescents not only with concrete information about pressing issues, but also with emotional support (Suzuki & Calzo, 2004). Similar results were reported for adolescents who talked with online strangers about severe diseases, such as cancer, or eating and self-injury disorders (e.g., Suzuki & Beale, 2006; Whitlock, Powers, & Eckenrode, 2006; Winzelberg, 1997). Recently, an experimental study has also demonstrated that an instant messaging session with an unknown opposite-sex peer can restore adolescents' self-esteem after experiences of social exclusion (Gross, 2009).

The second line of research on the effects of contact with online strangers has primarily focused on general online contact with strangers, regardless of the motives of teenagers. This line has found negative effects. For example, a survey study among Dutch adolescents has shown that online talk with strangers reduced adolescents' well-being. Tellingly, the negative impact of online contact with strangers was most distinct among lonely adolescents (Valkenburg & Peter, 2007a). Contacts with online strangers also seem to moderate the relationship between adolescents' Internet communication and the quality of their friendships. Another Dutch study has shown that only among adolescents who primarily interacted with their friends did Internet communication increase closeness. Among adolescents who primarily interacted with strangers this was not the case (Valkenburg & Peter, 2007c).

Cyberbullying

An important risk of Internet communication is the increasing number of cyber-bullying incidents among adolescents, with victimization rates being as high as 53% in some studies (for a review, see Kowalski, Limber, & Agatston, 2008). Cyberbullying occurs when Internet-based applications are used to systematically intimidate or insult a person in order to humiliate, embarrass, or hurt that person. Similar to offline bullying, cyberbullying involves intentional repetitive actions and psychological violence. Unlike offline bullying, however, cyberbullying is characterized (a) by the frequent anonymity or anonymization of the cyberbully; (b) the lacking confrontation of the cyberbully with the immediate impact of the cyberbullying; (c) parents' unawareness of cyberbullying; and (d) the easy accessibility and long-term retrievability of digital manifestations of cyberbullying (Dehue, Bolman, & Vollink, 2008).

The bulk of existing research on cyberbullying has dealt with the characteristics of cyberbullies and victims. Typically, cyberbullies have low levels of social connectedness, externalizing problems (e.g., aggression, delinquency), and use the Internet frequently. Victims of cyberbullying usually have internalizing problems (e.g., anxiety depression), are often also the victim of offline bullying, and tend to use instant messaging and webcams frequently (for a review, see Vandebosch & Van Cleemput, 2009). Research on the consequences of cyberbulling is still scarce. Correlational studies among US teenagers have shown that being the victim of cyberbullying is associated with increased social anxiety (Juvonen & Gross, 2008), psychological distress (Ybarra, Mitchell, Wolak, & Finkelhor, 2006), and symptoms of depression (Ybarra, 2004). Other US-based studies suggested that being the target of cyber-bullying is related to aggressive tendencies, poor anger management, and school problems (Ybarra, Diener-West, & Leaf, 2007a; Ybarra, Espelage, & Mitchell, 2007b). However, none of the available studies has decisively demonstrated whether the various social and psychological problems cause or result from cyberbullying.

Conclusions, Shortcomings, and Future Research

Our review of the literature has shown that Internet communication has important consequences for adolescents' identity and intimacy development. It has also shown the limitations of both dystopic and utopic views of the consequences of Internet communication for adolescents' psychosocial development. Neither is the Internet a place where adolescents are exclusively confronted with risks that they cannot handle, nor is it a place that, in itself and automatically, would create opportunities for positive psychosocial development. Rather, the nature of effects of Internet communication on identity and intimacy development seems to depend on at least six factors: (1) the predominant use of Internet communication (i.e., whether it is anonymous or nonymous); (2) the type of use (compulsive or noncompulsive use); (3) the type of communication partner (i.e., communication with existing friends or with strangers); (4) the time of data collection (i.e., the effects were more negative in the early stages of the Internet); (5) personality (i.e., the extent of social anxiety and loneliness); and (6) motivations to use a particular technology (i.e., the effects on friendships is beneficial only when the Internet is primarily used for communication rather than for entertainment/information seeking goals).

Although the impact of Internet communication on psychosocial development thus depends on technological, situational, and personal factors, our review clearly suggests that an adequate understanding of today's adolescents' psychosocial development cannot ignore their Internet communication. The thesis that media increase adolescents' possibilities for self-socialization is not new (Arnett, 1995). But never before have adolescents had such a chance to explore their identities with such a multiplicity of means while being so unsupervised by traditional socialization agents such as parents and schools. Our review suggests that, overall, this does not necessarily have to be a cause of concern, but it certainly raises important questions about the future role of parents and schools in adolescents' psychosocial development.

The research we reviewed has debunked several myths about the relation between adolescents' Internet communication and their psychosocial development. At the same time, the reviewed research has created many new insights that enrich our knowledge about the issue. However, there are a number of challenges in this line of research that future studies have to address. First, existing research has not paid sufficient attention to adequate sampling procedures and sample constitution. Several studies employed convenience sampling procedures. Online surveys, in particular, are often based on self-selected samples. The lack of truly random samples endangers the generalizability of the results. Moreover, there is the tendency to generalize from college students samples – emerging adults, thus – to adolescents. From a developmental perspective, this is problematic, not least when processes such as identity and intimacy development are investigated.

Second, many studies have been based on cross-sectional designs. This calls into question whether the impact of Internet communication on adolescents' psychosocial development has been studied rigorously enough. For the further development of the field, it is essential that more internally valid designs be chosen. While several studies based on longitudinal designs have already emerged recently (Selfhout et al., 2009; Valkenburg & Peter, 2009a; van den Eijnden et al., 2008), experimental research is very much needed.

Third, existing research sometimes tends to conflate highly different types of Internet use. As our review has shown, it is crucial that different types of Internet use and Internet communication be conceptually distinguished and assessed separately in their operational translation. For the valid assessment of different types of Internet use and Internet communication, it may be necessary to go beyond traditional self-reported frequency estimates in surveys. These estimates are prone to a number of distortions, ranging from memory errors to social-desirability biases. Alternative methods, such as the media diary method, have elicited promising results (Gross, Juvonen, & Gable, 2002), but are still rarely applied.

Fourth, there is the tendency in some research not to explicate sufficiently where and to what extent Internet communication differs from other forms of communication. As a result, it sometimes remains unclear what we really learn from studying Internet communication beyond what we already know from studies of interpersonal and mass communication. A profound understanding of the role of Internet communication in the psychosocial development of adolescents heavily depends on a stronger integration of the particular features of Internet communication into our theoretical frameworks. This stronger focus on more abstract features of Internet communication may also prevent us from generalizing findings obtained with one particular Internet application to Internet communication in general.

Fifth, much of the existing research has focused on rather simplistic main effects of Internet communication on adolescents' psychosocial development. Although this focus may be understandable given the novelty of Internet communication, it keeps us from a more nuanced view of the processes that underlie these effects. Moreover, it obstructs our view of individual differences in these effects. Investigating which groups of adolescents differ in the effects of Internet communication may greatly enhance our understanding of which adolescents may benefit from Internet communication, and which adolescents may be at risk.

Finally, existing research largely comes from rich Westernized countries. Many other regions and countries of the world are heavily underrepresented. For example, we know little about the extent and the consequences of adolescents' Internet communication in Latin America, Africa, the Arabic world, parts of Eastern Europe, and many countries in Central Asia. Because identity and intimacy development are inherently socially and culturally contingent, it may be that the results we report may change considerably with more research from the aforementioned regions. Cross-culturally comparative research, as has been started in Europe (Livingstone & Haddon, 2009), is therefore urgently needed.

In conclusion, as Internet communication has become so pervasive in the lives of many Western adolescents – scholars, parents, teachers, and practitioners are confronted with new questions about how this form of communication interacts with adolescents' psychosocial development. Although a young and thriving research field has started to address several pressing issues, many more will arise in the following years. At the beginning of the 2000s, few people would have imagined the emergence and success of social network sites. Even fewer people would have predicted that adolescents would massively use these sites. And nobody would have raised questions about the risk and opportunities that this use may bring about. At the beginning of the 2010s, we are in a similar situation. We do not dare to predict which social Internet application will be the next big success. But we do predict that adolescents will be its defining users. And we also predict that it will be related to adolescents' psychosocial development.

NOTE

1 This chapter is an extension and further development of Valkenburg, P. M., & Peter, J. (2011). Online communication among adolescents: An integrative model of its attraction, opportunities, and risks. Journal of Adolescent Health, 48, 121–127.

REFERENCES

Arnett, J. J. (1995). Adolescents' uses of media for self-socialization. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 24, 519–533.

Baumeister, R. F. (1982). A self-presentational view of social phenomena. Psychological Bulletin, 91, 3–26.

Blais, J. J., Craig, W. M., Pepler, D., & Connolly, J. (2008). Adolescents online: The importance of Internet activity choices to salient relationships. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 37, 522–536.

Bryant, J. A., Sanders-Jackson, A., & Smallwood, A. M. K. (2006). IMing, text messaging, and adolescent social networks. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 11, 577–592.

Buhrmester, D. (1990). Intimacy of friendship, interpersonal competence, and adjustment during preadolescence and adolescence. Child Development, 61, 1101–1111.

Buhrmester, D., & Furman, W. (1987). The development of companionship and intimacy. Child Development, 58, 1101–1113.

Buhrmester, D., Furman, W., Wittenberg, M. T., & Reis, H. T. (1988). Five domains of interpersonal competence in peer relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 55, 991–1008.

Buhrmester, D., & Prager, K. (1995). Patterns and functions of self-disclosure during childhood and adolescence. In K. J. Rotenberg (Ed.), Disclosure processes in children and adolescents (pp. 10–56). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Bukatko, D. (2008). Child and adolescent development. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.

Calvert, S. L. (2002). Identity construction on the Internet. In S. L. Calvert, A. B. Jordan, & R. R. Cocking (Eds.), Children in the digital age: Influences of electronic media on development (pp. 57–70). Westport, CT: Praeger.

Campbell, J. D. (1990). Self-esteem and clarity of the self-concept. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 59, 538–549.

Caplan, S. E. (2002). Problematic Internet use and psychosocial well-being: Development of a theory-based cognitive-behavioral measurement instrument. Computers in Human Behavior, 18, 553–575.

comScore. (2009). Tuenti most popular social networking site in Spain. Retrieved December 30, 2009, from http://www.comscore.com/press/release.asp?press=2733

Davis, K. (2010). Coming of age online: The developmental underpinnings of girls' blogs. Journal of Adolescent Research, 25, 145–171.

Dehue, F., Bolman, C., & Vollink, T. (2008). Cyberbullying: Youngsters' experiences and parental perception. Cyberpsychology and Behavior, 11, 217–223.

Donnerstein, E. (2009). The Internet. In V. C. Strasburger, B. J. Wilson, & A. B. Jordan (Eds.), Children, adolescents, and the media (pp. 471–498). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Erikson, E. (1968). Identity: Youth and crisis. New York, NY: Norton.

Franzoi, S. L., & Davis, M. H. (1985). Adolescent self-disclosure and loneliness: Private self-consciousness and parental influences. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 48, 768–780.

Furman, W., & Wehner, E. A. (1994). Romantic views: Toward a theory of adolescent romantic relationships. In R. Montemayor, G. R. Adams, & T. P. Gullotta (Eds.), Personal relationships during adolescence (pp. 168–195). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Gergen, K. J. (1991). The saturated self: Dilemmas of identity in contemporary life. New York, NY: Basic Books.

Gross, E. F. (2009). Logging on, bouncing back: An experimental investigation of online communication following social exclusion. Developmental Psychology, 45, 1787–1793.

Gross, E. F., Juvonen, J., & Gable, S. L. (2002). Internet use and well-being in adolescence. Journal of Social Issues, 58, 75–90.

Harter, S. (1999). The construction of the self: A developmental perspective. New York, NY: Guilford Press.

Harter, S. (2003). The development of self-representation during childhood and adolescence. In M. R. Leary & J. P. Tangney (Eds.), Handbook of self and identity (pp. 611–642). New York, NY: Guilford Press.

Hinduja, S., & Patchin, J. W. (2008). Personal information of adolescents on the Internet: A quantitative content analysis of MySpace. Journal of Adolescence, 31, 125–146.

Juvonen, J., & Gross, E. F. (2008). Extending the school grounds? Bullying experiences in cyberspace. Journal of School Health, 78, 496–505.

Kegan, R. (1982). The evolving self: Problem and process in human development. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Kim, H. K., & Davis, K. E. (2009). Toward a comprehensive theory of problematic Internet use: Evaluating the role of self-esteem, anxiety, flow, and the self-rated importance of Internet activities. Computers in Human Behavior, 25, 490–500.

Kowalski, R. M., Limber, S. P., & Agatston, P. W. (2008). Cyberbullying: Bullying in the digital age. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.

Kraut, R. (2002). Internet paradox revisited. Journal of Social Issues, 58, 49–74.

Kraut, R., Lundmark, V., Patterson, M., Kiesler, S., Mukhopadhyay, T., & Scherlis, W. (1998). Internet paradox: A social technology that reduces social involvement and psychological well-being? American Psychologist, 53, 1017–1031.

Leary, M. R. (1996). Self-presentation: Impression management and interpersonal behavior. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

Lee, S. J. (2009). Online communication and adolescent social ties: Who benefits more from Internet use? Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 14, 509–531.

Lee, Y. C., & Sun, Y. C. (2009). Using instant messaging to enhance the interpersonal relationships of Taiwanese adolescents: Evidence from quantile regression analysis. Adolescence, 43, 199–208.

Lenhart, A., Madden, M., Smith, A., & Macgill, A. (2007). Teens and social media. Retrieved January 14, 2010, from http://www.pewinternet.org/Reports/2007/Teens-and-Social-Media.aspx

Livingstone, S., & Haddon, L. (2009). EU Kids online: Final report. London, UK: EU Kids Online (EC Safer Internet Plus Programme Deliverable D6.5).

Loevinger, J. (1976). Ego-development: Conceptions and theories. San Francisco, CA: Josey-Bass.

Matsuba, M. K. (2006). Searching for self and relationships online. CyberPsychology and Behavior, 9, 275–284.

Mazalin, D., & Moore, S. (2004). Internet use, identity development and social anxiety among young adults. Behaviour Change, 21, 90–102.

Mazur, E., & Kozarian, L. (2010). Self-presentation and interaction in blogs of adolescents and young emerging adults. Journal of Adolescent Research, 25, 124–144.

McKenna, K. Y. A., & Bargh, J. A. (1999). Causes and consequences of social interaction on the Internet. A conceptual framework. Media Psychology, 1, 249–269.

McKenna, K. Y. A., & Bargh, J. A. (2000). Plan 9 from cyberspace: The implications of the Internet for personality and social psychology. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 4, 57–75.

Mesch, G. S. (2001). Social relationships and Internet use among adolescents in Israel. Social Science Quarterly, 82, 329–339.

Mesch, G. S. (2003). The family and the Internet: The Israeli case. Social Science Quarterly, 84, 1038–1050.

Mesch, G. S., & Talmud, I. (2006). The quality of online and offline relationships: The role of multiplexity and duration of social relationships. Information Society, 22, 137–148.

Nie, N. H. (2001). Sociability, interpersonal relations and the Internet: Reconciling conflicting findings. American Behavioral Scientist, 45, 420–435.

Peter, J., & Valkenburg, P. M. (2006). Research-note: Individual differences in perceptions of Internet communication. European Journal of Communication, 21, 213–226.

Peter, J., Valkenburg, P. M., & Schouten, A. P. (2005). Developing a model of adolescent friendship formation on the Internet. Cyberpsychology and Behavior, 8, 423–430.

Peter, J., Valkenburg, P. M., & Schouten, A. P. (2006). Characteristics and motives of adolescents talking with strangers on the Internet. Cyberpsychology and Behavior, 9, 526–530.

Pierce, T. (2009). Social anxiety and technology: Face-to-face communication versus technological communication among teens. Computers in Human Behavior, 25, 1367–1372.

Punamaki, R. L., Wallenius, M., Holtto, H., Nygard, C. H., & Rimpela, A. (2009). The associations between information and communication technology (ICT) and peer and parent relations in early adolescence. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 33, 556–564.

Reid, E. (1998). The self and the Internet: Variations on the illusion of one self. In J. Gackenbach (Ed.), Psychology and the Internet: Intrapersonal, interpersonal, and transpersonal implications (pp. 29–41). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

Rideout, V. J., Foehr, U. G., & Roberts, D. F. (2010). Generation M²: Media in the lives of 8- to 18-year-olds. Menlo Park, CA: Kaiser Family Foundation.

Rosenberg, M. (1989). Self-esteem and adolescent problems: Modeling reciprocal effects. American Sociological Review, 54, 1004–1018.

Rubin, Z., & Shenker, S. (1978). Friendship, proximity, and self-disclosure. Journal of Personality, 4, 1–22.

Schmitt, K. L., Dayanim, S., & Matthias, S. (2008). Personal home page construction as an expression of social development. Developmental Psychology, 44, 496–506.

Schouten, A. P., Valkenburg, P. M., & Peter, J. (2007). Precursors and underlying processes of adolescents' online self-disclosure: Developing and testing an “Internet-attribute-perception” model. Media Psychology, 10, 292–314.

Selfhout, M. H. W., Branje, S. J. T., Delsing, M., Ter Bogt, T. F. M., & Meeus, W. H. J. (2009). Different types of Internet use, depression, and social anxiety: The role of perceived friendship quality. Journal of Adolescence, 32, 819–833.

Steinberg, L. (2008). Adolescence (8th ed.). Boston, MA: McGraw Hill.

Sternheimer, K. (2003). It's not the media: The truth about pop culture's influence on children. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

Subrahmanyam, K., & Greenfield, P. (2008). Online communication and adolescent relationships. Future of Children, 18, 119–146.

Subrahmanyam, K., & Lin, G. (2007). Adolescents on the net: Internet use and well-being. Adolescence, 42, 659–677.

Subrahmanyam, K., Smahel, D., & Greenfield, P. M. (2006). Connecting developmental constructions to the Internet: Identity presentation and sexual exploration in online teen chat rooms. Developmental Psychology, 42, 395–406.

Suzuki, L. K., & Beale, I. I. (2006). Personal web home pages of adolescents with cancer: Self-presentation, information dissemination, and interpersonal connection. Journal of Pediatric Oncology Nursing, 23, 152–161.

Suzuki, L. K., & Calzo, J. P. (2004). The search for peer advice in cyberspace: An examination of online teen bulletin boards about health and sexuality. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 25, 685–698.

Turkle, S. (1995). Life on the screen: Identity in the age of the Internet. New York, NY: Simon & Schuster.

Valkenburg, P. M., & Peter, J. (2007a). Internet communication and its relation to well-being: Identifying some underlying mechanisms. Media Psychology, 9, 43–58.

Valkenburg, P. M., & Peter, J. (2007b). Online communication and adolescent well-being: Testing the stimulation versus the displacement hypothesis. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 12, 1169–1182.

Valkenburg, P. M., & Peter, J. (2007c). Preadolescents' and adolescents' online communication and their closeness to friends. Developmental Psychology, 43, 267–277.

Valkenburg, P. M., & Peter, J. (2008). Adolescents' identity experiments on the Internet: Consequences for social competence and self-concept unity. Communication Research, 35, 208–231.

Valkenburg, P. M., & Peter, J. (2009a). The effects of instant messaging on the quality of adolescents' existing friendships: A longitudinal study. Journal of Communication, 59, 79–97.

Valkenburg, P. M., & Peter, J. (2009b). Social consequences of the Internet for adolescents: A decade of research. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 18, 1–5.

Valkenburg, P. M., Peter, J., & Schouten, A. P. (2006). Friend networking sites and their relationship to adolescents' well-being and social self-esteem. Cyberpsychology and Behavior, 9, 584–590.

Vandebosch, H., & Van Cleemput, K. (2009). Cyberbullying among youngsters: Profiles of bullies and victims. New Media and Society, 11, 1349–1371.

van den Eijnden, R. J. J. M., Meerkerk, G.-J., Vermulst, A. A., Spijkerman, R., & Engels, R. C. M. E. (2008). Online communication, compulsive Internet use, and psychosocial well-being among adolescents: A longitudinal study. Developmental Psychology, 44, 655–665.

van der Aa, N., Overbeek, G., Engels, R. C. M. E., Scholte, R. H. J., Meerkerk, G. J., & van den Eijnden, R. J. J. M. (2009). Daily and compulsive Internet use and well-being in adolescence: A diathesis-stress model based on big five personality traits. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 38, 765–776.

Walther, J. B. (1992). Interpersonal effects in computer-mediated communication: A relational perspective. Communication Research, 19, 52–90.

Walther, J. B. (1996). Computer-mediated communication. Impersonal, interpersonal, and hyperpersonal interaction. Communication Research, 23, 3–43.

Whitlock, J. L., Powers, J. L., & Eckenrode, J. (2006). The virtual cutting edge: The Internet and adolescent self-injury. Developmental Psychology, 42, 407–417.

Winzelberg, A. (1997). The analysis of an electronic support group for individuals with eating disorders. Computers in Human Behavior, 13, 393–407.

Ybarra, M. L. (2004). Linkages between depressive symptomatology and Internet harassment among young regular Internet users. Cyberpsychology and Behavior, 7, 247–257.

Ybarra, M. L., Diener-West, M., & Leaf, P. J. (2007a). Examining the overlap in Internet harassment and school bullying: Implications for school intervention. Journal of Adolescent Health, 41, S42–S50.

Ybarra, M. L., Espelage, D. L., & Mitchell, K. J. (2007b). The co-occurrence of Internet harassment and unwanted sexual solicitation victimization and perpetration: Associations with psychosocial indicators. Journal of Adolescent Health, 41, S31–S41.

Ybarra, M. L., Mitchell, K. J., Wolak, J., & Finkelhor, D. (2006). Examining characteristics and associated distress related to Internet harassment: Findings from the Second Youth Internet Safety Survey. Pediatrics, 118, E1169–E1177.

FURTHER READING

Bargh, J. A., & McKenna, K. Y. A. (2004). The Internet and social life. Annual Review of Psychology, 55, 573–590.

Caplan, S. E. (2003). Preference for online social interaction: A theory of problematic Internet use and psychosocial well-being. Communication Research, 30, 625–648.

Castells, M. (1996). The rise of the network society. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.

DiMaggio, P., Hargittai, E., Neuman, W. R., & Robinson, J. P. (2001). Social implications of the Internet. Annual Review of Sociology, 27, 307–336.

Katz, J. E., Rice, R. E., & Aspden, P. (2001). The Internet, 1995–2000: Access, civic involvement, and social interaction. American Behavioral Scientist, 45, 405–419.

Kiesler, S., Siegel, J., & McGuire, T. W. (1984). Social psychological aspects of computer-mediated communication. American Psychologist, 39, 1123–1134.

Livingstone, S. (2009). Children and the Internet. Cambridge, UK: Polity.

Livingstone, S., & Haddon, L. (Eds.) (2009). Kids online. Opportunities and risks for children. Bristol, UK: Policy Press.

Wartella, E. A., & Jennings, N. (2000). Children and computers: New technology – old concerns. Future of Children, 10, 31–43.

Winzelberg, A. (1997). The analysis of an electronic support group for individuals with eating disorders. Computers in Human Behavior, 13, 393–407.