Access to this full-text is provided by Springer Nature.
Content available from BMC Psychology
This content is subject to copyright. Terms and conditions apply.
RESEARCH Open Access
© The Author(s) 2024. Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use,
sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and
the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this
article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included
in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will
need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The
Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available
in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
Wang et al. BMC Psychology (2024) 12:343
https://doi.org/10.1186/s40359-024-01727-4
the country, with an overall internet penetration rate of
79.2%. Moreover, even among individuals aged 55 to 64,
over 60% are internet users. In the same year, Taiwan
ocially transitioned from an aging society to an aged
society, making the use of information technology among
older adults an increasingly important topic of study.
As the number of users and time spent on social net-
work sites (SNS) continues to grow, research in this area
has expanded. Various studies have focused on dierent
social media platforms. When taking into account geo-
graphical preferences, Twitter seems to be more popular
among Americans. However, recent studies have noted a
rising interest in Instagram among dierent generations
(e.g., [2–4]).
Introduction
With the advancement of technology, interpersonal
interactions have evolved beyond physical social spaces,
extending into the realm of virtual social networks.
According to a survey by InsightXplorer [1], Taiwan
ranks third in internet usage among Asian countries, fol-
lowing only Japan and South Korea. It is estimated that
there are approximately 18.66million internet users in
BMC Psychology
*Correspondence:
Ya-Ling Wang
ylwang47@gapps.ntnu.edu.tw
1Department of Adult and Continuing Education, National Taiwan Normal
University, Taipei, Taiwan
Abstract
Does social media alleviate or exacerbate loneliness? Past research has shown mixed results regarding the
relationship between social media usage and loneliness among younger and older adults. Unlike younger
individuals, older adults may decrease their loneliness through social media interactions. Additionally, previous
research has indicated that the link between social media use and loneliness can vary depending on one’s
shy tendency. Therefore, this study aims to explore the relationship between individuals’ social media use
and loneliness while considering age and shyness tendency as moderating variables. The study employed a
questionnaire survey conducted through convenience sampling, resulting in 234 valid responses from participants
in Northern Taiwan. Among them, 113 were college students (aged 18 to 25, average age 19.40), and 121 were
older adults (aged 50 to 82, average age 60.81). Using hierarchical regression analysis, results indicated that (1) age
moderates the relationship between personal social media use and loneliness. Minimal dierences were observed
among younger individuals, but among older adults, increased social media usage time was associated with a
signicant reduction in loneliness. (2) Shyness tendency moderate the relationship between personal social media
use and loneliness. Individuals with higher shyness tendency experience an increase in loneliness as their social
media usage time lengthens.
Keywords Social media usage, Older adults, Shyness, Loneliness
The relationship between social media usage
and loneliness among younger and older
adults: the moderating eect of shyness
Ya-LingWang1* , Yi-JiaChen1 and Chih-ChiLiu1
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.
Page 2 of 12
Wang et al. BMC Psychology (2024) 12:343
Among older adults, Facebook is the preferred and the
most commonly used social media platform [5]. How-
ever, even though Instagram is primarily used by young
people, Facebook remains an important social media
platform in studies of the social behavior of the younger
generation. For example, research on the Hong Kong civil
movement by Agur and Frisch [6] and on the Taiwanese
student movement by Tsatsou [7] both centered on Face-
book as the primary social media platform. erefore,
for a comprehensive comparison of social media usage
between Taiwanese young people and older adults, Face-
book is considered as a suitable choice, especially given
its current ranking as the most widely used social media
platform in Taiwan [1].
In studies related to Facebook usage, Kross et al. [8]
conducted an experience-sampling study in which
they asked university students about their frequency
of current Facebook use over a two-week period. e
study found that participants’ life satisfaction gradually
decreased during the two weeks of Facebook use. Uni-
versity students often use social networking sites to stay
in touch with friends, and excessive time spent online or
on social media can lead to increased feelings of loneli-
ness [9]. However, for older adults, using social network-
ing sites may have potential benets. Research indicates
that older adults are more likely to experience social iso-
lation issues, such as reduced communication with col-
leagues after retirement, leading to feelings of loneliness
[10, 11]. Nevertheless, the internet can facilitate com-
munication and interaction with others among older
adults. As Jung et al. [12] pointed out, older adults use
Facebook for various reasons, including connecting with
people they wouldn’t usually have contact with, sharing
photos, passively staying in touch with friends and family,
and participating in convenient organizational and com-
munication groups. However, previous research has pri-
marily focused on specic age groups, with fewer studies
simultaneously comparing the psychological well-being
of Facebook users across dierent age groups. erefore,
this study aims to contribute to this gap in the literature.
In addition to age, an individual’s experience of lone-
liness when using social networking sites may also be
inuenced by dierences in shyness tendency. Shyness
tendency refer to an individual’s feelings of nervous-
ness, anxiety, or other awkward discomfort when inter-
acting with others [13, 14]. People who are easily shy
may face obstacles in interpersonal relationships and
have diculty integrating into social situations [14]. In
the context of the internet era, individuals with shyness
tendency may also face obstacles in online social inter-
actions, leading to feelings of loneliness. Research by
Frison and Eggermont [15] found that individuals who
can establish stable relationships online are more likely
to reduce negative feelings. Additionally, the study by
Sheldon [16] showed that users of Facebook with shyness
tendency experience lower levels of loneliness. Further-
more, extroverted individuals tend to use social media
more frequently [17]. erefore, shyness tendency may
be an important inuencing factor in social networking
site usage.
In summary, the association between social network-
ing site usage and loneliness varies not only by age but
also by individual shyness tendency. us, this study aims
to explore the relationship between Facebook usage and
loneliness in-depth, using age and shyness tendency as
moderating factors. Accordingly, the objectives of this
study are as follows: (1) to investigate whether age mod-
erates the relationship between Facebook usage time and
loneliness, and (2) to explore whether shyness tendency
moderate the relationship between Facebook usage time
and loneliness.
Literature review
Denition and related research on loneliness
is study denes loneliness based on the synthesis by
Peplau and Perlman [18] as a negative experience that
elicits aversion and unpleasantness (e.g., hostility towards
others) [19–21] and the inability to satisfy one’s need for
intimacy in relationships (e.g., family, friendship) [22].
Past research has proposed various explanations for the
causes of loneliness. e rst signicant factor is the
lack of companionship from friendships [23]. During
childhood, forming friendships and the quality of those
friendships are crucial for preventing loneliness. Lack of
companionship from friends during this period can lead
to increased feelings of loneliness. As individuals age,
the absence of a sense of belonging to a social group can
also contribute to increased loneliness [24, 25]. Lack of
friendship, low-quality friendships, or rejection and bul-
lying by peer groups are all factors that contribute to
loneliness during adolescence [11].
e second factor contributing to loneliness is the lack
of or dissatisfaction with romantic relationships. During
adolescence and young adulthood (e.g., college years), in
addition to the importance of friendship support, indi-
viduals begin to place increasing emphasis on romantic
relationships [26, 27]. Previous studies involving college
students have found a correlation between high satisfac-
tion with romantic relationships and reduced loneliness,
while disappointment in romantic relationships leads to
increased loneliness [28]. Furthermore, marital status in
later life can also predict feelings of loneliness [29].
Additionally, besides the aforementioned factors
related to friendship and romantic relationships caus-
ing increased loneliness, research on the relationship
between older adults and loneliness has identied fac-
tors such as physical and mental health decline, the
loss of a partner, and increasing social disconnection as
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.
Page 3 of 12
Wang et al. BMC Psychology (2024) 12:343
contributors to elevated loneliness. Dykstra et al. [30]
studied individuals aged 55 and above and found that as
age increases, feelings of loneliness also rise. Loneliness
can be exacerbated by the loss of a partner or declining
physical health. Courtin and Knapp [31], in a literature
review on social isolation and loneliness among older
adults and their impact on physical and mental health
found that older adults experiencing social isolation
and loneliness are at risk for depression and cardiovas-
cular health issues. eeke [32] studied the relationship
between health and loneliness risk in people aged 50 and
above, revealing that individuals who experience pro-
longed loneliness engage in less physical activity, have
more chronic health problems, and are more likely to
experience depression. Victor and Bowling [33] con-
ducted a longitudinal study on older adults and found
that loneliness not only aects physical and mental health
but is also related to changes in marital status, lifestyle
arrangements, and personal social network patterns.
Measurement of loneliness
Scholars have proposed various measurement methods
for loneliness. For example, Russell [34] dened loneli-
ness as a unidimensional concept and developed the
UCLA Loneliness Scale Version 3 (UCLA-3) using a
4-point Likert scale for measurement. However, since
this study aims to measure loneliness related to interac-
tions with dierent individuals, the UCLA-3 scale was
not used in this study. Weiss [22] was the rst to dier-
entiate loneliness into multiple dimensions. Loneliness
was divided into social loneliness and emotional loneli-
ness. Social loneliness refers to an individual’s inability to
establish good relationships with others, resulting in feel-
ings of isolation. Emotional loneliness refers to a lack of
intimate relationships (e.g., a partner) and a lack of emo-
tional connection or dependence on others. Of the two,
emotional loneliness, where emotional needs are unmet,
tends to result in greater loneliness.
DiTommaso and Spinner [35] not only validated
Weiss’s [22] concept but also further divided emotional
loneliness into romantic loneliness and family loneliness.
ey developed the Social and Emotional Loneliness
Scale for Adults (SELSA), which consists of a total of 37
items. In 1997, a short version of the SELSA was devel-
oped from the original scale, known as the Short Form
of the Social and Emotional Loneliness Scale for Adults
(SELSA-S) [35]. Other researchers have veried the sta-
bility of this scale with dierent populations (college stu-
dents, military personnel, and individuals with mental
illnesses), with Cronbach’s alpha ranging from 0.87 to
0.90 [36]. Letts [37] also used this scale and found good
reliability in a study with older adults (ages 55–88). Given
the stability of the SELSA-S scale in previous studies with
both college students and older adults, this study adapted
the SELSA-S and made modications to create a scale
suitable for its research purposes.
In summary, the causes of loneliness may change with
age, and the primary sources of loneliness may dier
among dierent age groups. However, the main causes
often relate to dissatisfaction in friendships, romantic
relationships, and family relationships. Since this study
aims to measure loneliness in both college students and
older adults, the sources of loneliness were combined for
measurement during data collection to account for the
potential direct inuence of age on loneliness.
Research on social media use and loneliness
In modern society, people often face psychological issues
related to loneliness. Previous research has shown that
adults sometimes experience loneliness, with 6% of the
population believing that they feel lonely all the time
[38]. Loneliness appears to be on the rise in today’s soci-
ety [33, 38]. However, with the advent of the internet,
virtual spaces have become available for people to inter-
act, leading to numerous studies exploring the relation-
ship between social media use and loneliness. Research
indicates that using social media for communication and
interaction with others can reduce feelings of depres-
sion and loneliness. In empirical studies, Kross et al. [8]
examined Facebook usage and found that interactions
on Facebook, such as messaging, posting, and receiving
responses, were associated with decreased depressive
emotions. Additionally, posting new status updates on
Facebook, regardless of receiving replies, was linked to
reduced loneliness within a week [39].
Furthermore, Burke and Kraut [40] conducted a
month-long longitudinal study involving 1,910 Facebook
users and questions about their subjective well-being.
ey found that prolonged conversations with close
friends on Facebook were associated with increased feel-
ings of happiness. Burke [41] also noted that engaging in
communication with others on public platforms within
social media reduced feelings of loneliness. In other
words, using social media for communication and chat-
ting with others could enhance subjective well-being and
reduce feelings of loneliness. Conversely, passive infor-
mation consumption (e.g., browsing, shopping) on social
media could lead to negative psychological responses,
such as depression and loneliness. From empirical
research, Verduyn et al. [42] found that passive Facebook
use could trigger jealousy and decrease happiness. Tan-
doc et al. [43] also pointed out that browsing Facebook
and experiencing jealousy could increase depressive and
negative emotions. Additionally, Guo et al. [44] discov-
ered that using the entertainment features of social media
could increase an individual’s feelings of loneliness.
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.
Page 4 of 12
Wang et al. BMC Psychology (2024) 12:343
Generational dierence in social media use and loneliness
e relationship between loneliness and internet use var-
ied across dierent age groups [45]. Research has shown
diverging patterns in late adolescence and adulthood,
but in studies involving older adults, social media use
has been found to reduce feelings of loneliness. ere-
fore, the following will separately examine research
on young adults and older adults regarding their use of
social media and its association with loneliness, leading
to hypothesis inferences.
Previous research has indicated that young adults
are more active on social media platforms [46]. Spend-
ing more time on social media has been associated with
negative emotions such as depression, loneliness, and
lower life satisfaction [8, 9, 47]. is might be because
college students are prone to engage in social compari-
son on social media platforms [46]. Social comparison
theory suggests that individuals, in the absence of objec-
tive information, use others as a yardstick for self-evalu-
ation [48]. In recent years, with the rise of social media,
the concept of “Facebook depression” has been proposed,
implying that excessive engagement with social media
can have negative eects, especially among young people
[49]. Relevant studies have found that investing more
eort and time into social networking sites is associated
with higher levels of depressive emotions [50]. Kross et
al. [8] conducted an experience-sampling study in which
they inquired about the frequency and feelings of college
students’ Facebook use over a two-week period. ey
found that participants experienced a gradual decrease in
life satisfaction during this time. With the advancement
of technology, smartphones have become a common
means of accessing social media content and messages.
Lemieux et al. [47] investigated Facebook use among
college students and found that spending more time on
Facebook was associated with increased feelings of lone-
liness. Peper and Harvey [51] studied smartphone addic-
tion among college students and found that higher usage
frequency was linked to higher levels of negative emo-
tions such as loneliness, anxiety, and depression. Chen
[52] proposed that college students who use the internet
more frequently, spend longer periods online, and have
higher expectations for online opposite-sex friendships
tend to experience higher levels of real-life loneliness.
Based on the above ndings, it can be inferred that young
people who invest more eort, time, and frequency into
social media tend to experience higher negative emo-
tions, such as depression, loneliness, and lower life
satisfaction.
As technology has evolved, the number of older adults
using the internet has been steadily increasing. During
this stage of life, older adults often experience a reduced
social circle due to retirement. On social media, unlike
young people who engage in social comparison, older
adults typically focus on family-related matters or one-
on-one interactions [46, 53]. Most studies indicate that
prolonged use of technology products and the internet
can reduce feelings of loneliness among older adults [54].
is is because interaction with others through tech-
nology can enhance social support for older adults and
improve their cognitive functions [55]. Choi et al. [56]
proposed that using technology products can enhance
social support among older adults through activities such
as video calls with family or friends [57], communica-
tion [58, 59], or simply learning how to use technology
products [60–62]. In summary, age dierences may lead
to variations in the degree of loneliness, with young peo-
ple experiencing increased loneliness with social media
use and older adults experiencing decreased loneliness.
erefore, the following hypotheses are proposed:
H1 Age dierences will moderate the relationship
between individual social media use and loneliness.
H1-1 Younger individuals who spend more time on Face-
book will experience increased loneliness.
H1-2 Older individuals who spend more time on Face-
book will experience decreased loneliness.
Eects of shyness on the relationship between social
media use and loneliness
e causes of loneliness can be attributed not only to the
dissatisfaction individuals may feel in their real versus
expected social relationships, and the quantity and qual-
ity of their social interactions but also to dierences in
personality traits [18]. is study aims to explore the rela-
tionship between shyness and loneliness, and the follow-
ing will mainly elaborate on the relevant content.
Zimbardo et al. [63] pointed out a signicant rela-
tionship between shyness and loneliness. Individuals
with higher shyness tendency tend to have higher self-
consciousness [64, 65], which means that they are more
concerned about how others perceive them, leading to
self-protective behaviors [66], lower self-esteem [13, 64],
and emotional issues such as anxiety and depression [63].
People with higher levels of shyness tend to experience
negative impacts on their lives, including lower subjec-
tive well-being, life satisfaction, and overall quality of life
[67–69].
According to past research, Bian and Leung [70] stud-
ied smartphone addiction and usage patterns, which
indicated that individuals who spent extended periods
on their smartphones browsing social media, and send-
ing and receiving messages, were more prone to shyness
and experienced higher levels of loneliness. Satici [71]
also found that individuals addicted to Facebook, as shy-
ness and loneliness levels increased, reported decreased
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.
Page 5 of 12
Wang et al. BMC Psychology (2024) 12:343
subjective well-being. In other words, individuals with
higher shyness tendency experienced increased feelings
of loneliness as they spent more time on Facebook.
In contrast, for individuals with lower shyness ten-
dency who use Facebook, previous research suggests
that they tend to have more extroverted personalities and
lower levels of narcissism, leading to lower feelings of
loneliness [72]. Zhou et al. [73] studied the online behav-
ior of introverted and extroverted individuals and found
that extroverted individuals were more likely to express
both positive and negative emotions online. In contrast,
introverted individuals posted more negative emotion-
related content, expressing anger, fear, and disgust. In
other words, individuals with lower shyness tendency
are more capable of expressing their positive or negative
emotions as needed, thereby reducing feelings of loneli-
ness. In summary, this study posits that as users spend
more time on Facebook, those with higher shyness ten-
dency will experience increased loneliness, whereas those
with lower shyness tendency will experience decreased
loneliness. Based on the aforementioned theories and
research, this study proposes the following hypotheses:
H2 Shyness tendency will moderate the relationship
between individual social media use and loneliness.
H2-1 Individuals with higher shyness tendency who
spend more time on Facebook will experience increased
loneliness.
H2-2 Individuals with lower shyness tendency who
spend more time on Facebook will experience decreased
loneliness.
Method
Participants
is study employed convenience sampling. e pilot
and formal questionnaires for young adults were distrib-
uted in a classroom at a university in the northern region.
However, the pilot and formal questionnaires were
distributed in dierent courses with non-overlapping
student lists. For older adults, the pilot and formal ques-
tionnaires were distributed at a community college in the
northern region, with no duplication in the completion of
the pilot and formal questionnaires.
e pilot questionnaires serve the purpose of ensuring
the reliability and validity of the questionnaire content.
Additionally, it aids in compiling the formal question-
naire by analyzing the results obtained from the pilot
questionnaire. A total of 70 valid pilot questionnaires
were collected from college students, aged between 19
and 24 years. Among them, there were 20 males (28.6%)
and 50 females (71.4%), with an average age of 20.70
years and a standard deviation of 1.20. For older adults,
22 valid pilot questionnaires were collected, with ages
ranging from 48 to 80 years. Among them, there were 2
males (9.1%) and 20 females (90.9%), with an average age
of 64.05 years and a standard deviation of 6.74. In total,
92 valid pilot questionnaires were collected, including 22
males (23.9%) and 70 females (76.1%).
A total of 113 valid formal questionnaires were col-
lected from university students in the northern region,
ranging in age from 18 to 25 years. Among them, there
were 26 males (23%) and 87 females (77%), with an aver-
age age of 19.40 years and a standard deviation of 1.33.
For older adults, 121 valid formal questionnaires were
collected, with ages ranging from 50 to 82 years. Among
them, there were 38 males (31.4%) and 83 females
(68.8%), with an average age of 60.81 years and a standard
deviation of 5.80. In total, 234 valid formal question-
naires were collected, including 64 males (27.4%) and 170
females (72.6%).
Measures
In this study, participants were asked to self-report their
social media usage. Specically, they were asked about
the total time (in minutes) spent on Facebook in a day.
A longer duration indicates that individuals spend more
time on social media. Example question: " Could you
please take a moment to reect and share with us the
average amount of time you spend on Facebook per day?”
Additionally, this study assessed the level of loneliness
using a modied version of the Social and Emotional
Loneliness Scale for Adults - Short Form (SELSA-S),
based on DiTommaso et al. [36].Based on the current
research objectives, this study opted to include the Social
and Family subscales from the SELSA-S while excluding
the Romantic subscale, as it is less pertinent to the study’s
scope of focus. e scale used a 5-point Likert scale to
measure the degree of loneliness. Each question was
rated on a scale from “strongly disagree” (1) to “strongly
agree” (5), with scores ranging from 1 to 5. ere was
a total of 9 questions, including reverse-scored items.
Higher scores indicated a higher level of perceived lone-
liness. Sample items included “I don’t have any friends
who share my views, but I wish I did” and " I feel alone
when I am with my family.”
Finally, this study aimed to investigate both adult col-
lege students and older adults. For this purpose, a modi-
ed version of the Shyness and Social Orientation Scale
for Adults, based on Asendorpf & Wilpers [74], was used
to assess shyness tendency. According to the literature
review conducted for our study, we are specically exam-
ining the moderation eect of Shyness Tendency. Conse-
quently, we have made adjustments to the Shyness and
Social Orientation in Adults scale by Asendorpf and Wil-
pers (1998) and performed a validity and reliability analy-
sis of the questionnaire, utilizing only items pertaining to
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.
Page 6 of 12
Wang et al. BMC Psychology (2024) 12:343
Shyness. e scale also used a 5-point Likert scale, rang-
ing from “strongly disagree” (1) to “strongly agree” (5),
with scores ranging from 1 to 5. ere were a total of 3
questions, and higher scores indicated a higher level of
shyness. Sample items included “I feel shy when there are
other people around” and “I nd it dicult to relax and
be myself when I’m with others.”
Reliability and validity analysis
In terms of internal consistency analysis for the pilot
questionnaire in this study, Cronbach’s alpha coecients
for the Shyness Tendency scale, as well as the Loneliness
scale, were 0.88 and 0.85, respectively. ese coecients
were both greater than 0.70, indicating good reliability
for each scale [75].
For exploratory factor analysis, the Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin
(KMO) test and Bartlett’s test of sphericity were con-
ducted to evaluate whether the scales were suitable for
factor analysis [76, 77]. Following the suggestion of Pett
et al. [78], items with factor loadings lower than 0.40 were
removed. All scales in this study met this criterion. e
Bartlett’s test results were as follows: Shyness Tendency
scale (χ2 = 240.82, df = 21, p <.001), with factor loadings
ranging from 0.62 to 0.86, all greater than 0.40; and Lone-
liness scale (χ2 = 431.74, df = 36, p <.001), with factor load-
ings ranging from 0.47 to 0.84, all greater than 0.40.
Regarding the internal consistency of the formal ques-
tionnaire in this study, Cronbach’s alpha coecients for
the Shyness Tendency scale and the Loneliness scale,
were 0.83 and 0.88, respectively. ese coecients were
both greater than 0.70, indicating good reliability for
each scale [75]. In terms of conrmatory factor analy-
sis, several criteria were applied to assess the model t.
First, items with factor loadings below 0.45 were deleted
as they did not meet the requirement for adequate t
[79, 80]. Additionally, items with close error covariances
were removed based on modication indices (MI), fol-
lowing the evaluation criteria proposed by Jackson et al.
[81] and other scholars. For the overall model evaluation,
the following t indices were considered: for the Shyness
Tendency scale, the chi-square test statistic was 20.352,
with 8 degrees of freedom, and the p-value was less than
0.05, indicating a signicant level. However, chi-square
values can be aected by sample size. Considering other
t indices, the Normed Chi-Square (NC), Standardized
Root Mean Square Residual (SRMR), Comparative Fit
Index (CFI) all met the standard criteria (NC = 2.544 < 3,
SRMR = 0.04 < 0.08, CFI = 0.95 > 0.90), and the Root Mean
Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA) was within
an acceptable range (RMSEA = 0.08 < 0.10) [79]. Over-
all, the model t for this measurement was acceptable.
For the Loneliness scale, the chi-square test statistic was
0.453, with 2 degrees of freedom, and the p-value was
less than 0.05, indicating a signicant level. However,
like the Shyness Tendency scale, the chi-square value
can be inuenced by sample size. Considering other
t indices, the Normed Chi-Square (NC), SRMR, CFI,
and RMSEA all met standard criteria (NC = 0.23 < 3,
SRMR = 0.01 < 0.08, CFI = 1.0 > 0.90, RMSEA < 0.001),
indicating good model t overall.
In terms of the analysis of model internal structure t,
according to Anderson & Gerbing [82], when the aver-
age variance extracted is greater than 0.50, it indicates
that latent variables have ideal convergent validity. On
the other hand, when the composite reliability exceeds
0.60, it indicates consistency among latent variables [83].
In this study, “Shyness Tendency” had a composite reli-
ability of 0.88 and an average variance extracted (AVE) of
0.72, while the “Loneliness” scale had a composite reli-
ability of 0.83 and an AVE of 0.56. ese values met the
acceptable standards. In other words, the questionnaire
should be able to measure individual shyness tendency
and loneliness traits eectively.
Data analysis
is study employed hierarchical regression analysis to
examine the impact of dierent independent variables on
the dependent variable. First, gender was considered as a
control variable and entered into the rst step of the hier-
archical regression to control for the inuence of indi-
vidual background: gender, on the dependent variable.
In the second step, the independent variable, Facebook
usage time, was entered, along with separate moderator
variables: age (M1) and shyness tendency (M2). In the
third step, interaction terms between the independent
variables and moderator variables were added: Facebook
usage time × age (M1) and Facebook usage time × shy-
ness tendency (M2).
To address potential issues of collinearity arising from
high correlations between independent and moderator
variables, the study followed the approach proposed by
Aiken et al. (1991) by centering the variables, which helps
mitigate problems related to multicollinearity. Finally, the
analysis examined whether the independent and mod-
erator variables interacted to inuence the dependent
variable.
Results
Descriptive statistics and correlation analysis
is study found that, in terms of descriptive statistics,
college students have an average daily total Facebook
usage time of 74.64 min with a standard deviation of
58.56min, while older adults have an average daily total
Facebook usage time of 58.56min with a standard devia-
tion of 101.13min. Regarding age (M1), there is a signi-
cant positive correlation between Facebook usage time
and loneliness among college students (r =.26, p <.01). In
contrast, the correlation between Facebook usage time
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.
Page 7 of 12
Wang et al. BMC Psychology (2024) 12:343
and loneliness among older adults did not reach a sig-
nicant level (r = −.124, p =.18). is suggests that as col-
lege students spend more time on Facebook, their levels
of loneliness tend to increase, while for older adults, the
relationship between Facebook usage time and loneliness
is not statistically signicant.
In terms of shyness tendency (M2), there is a signicant
positive correlation between shyness tendency and lone-
liness (r =.220, p <.01), indicating that individuals with
a higher level of shyness tendency tend to experience
higher levels of loneliness, as shown in Table1.
Moderation eects of age
is section aims to test Hypothesis 1 (H1): Age mod-
erates the relationship between individual social media
usage and loneliness. As shown in Table2, the interac-
tion term between total Facebook usage time and age
reaches a signicant standard (β= − 0.16, p <.05). To fur-
ther understand the interaction eects of total Facebook
usage time and age on loneliness, this study divided par-
ticipants into two groups, high and low, for both total
Facebook usage time and age, based on the mean plus or
minus one standard deviation. Subsequently, interaction
plots were created to illustrate these eects, as shown in
Fig.1.
From Fig. 1, it can be observed that age moderates
the relationship between individual social media usage
and loneliness. Both young and older individuals expe-
rience a decrease in loneliness as their Facebook usage
time increases. In the case of young individuals, the dif-
ferences are not substantial, but for older individuals,
loneliness signicantly decreases as their usage time on
Facebook increases. ese ndings partially support H1.
Moderation eect of shyness
is section aims to verify Hypothesis 2 (H2): Shyness
tendency moderates the relationship between individual
social media usage and loneliness. As shown in Table3,
the interaction term between total Facebook usage time
and shyness tendency signicantly positively predicts
(β = 0.15, p <.05). To further understand the interaction
eect of total Facebook usage time and shyness tendency
on loneliness, this study dividedthe high and low groups
of Facebook usage time and shyness tendency by adding
or subtracting one standard deviation from the mean and
presents the interaction eect graphically, as shown in
Fig.2.
Table 1 Descriptive statistics and correlation analysis
Descriptive statistics Correlation analysis
Min Max Mean SD X M1 M2
Younger adults 1. Time spent on Facebook (minutes) (X) 18 300 74.64 58.56 -
2. Age (M1) 18 25 19.40 1.33 0.21*-
3. Shyness tendency (M2) 1.33 4.67 3.18 0.82 0.03 0.13 -
4. Loneliness 1.00 4.11 1.92 0.56 0.25** 0.27** 0.14
Older adults 1. Time spent on Facebook (minutes) (X) 6 720 85.38 101.13 -
2. Age (M1) 50 82 60.81 5.80 0.07 -
3. Shyness tendency (M2) 1.00 4.00 2.44 0.70 0.00 − 0.08 -
4. Loneliness 1.00 3.22 2.10 0.51 − 0.12 0.08 0.32**
Overall 1. Time spent on Facebook (minutes) (X) 6 720 80.18 83.26 -
2. Age (M1) 18 82 40.81 21.17 0.08 -
3. Shyness tendency (M2) 1.00 4.67 2.80 0.84 − 0.02 − 0.44** -
4. Loneliness 1.00 4.11 2.01 0.54 0.02 − 0.04 0.22**
*p <.05, **p <.01
Table 2 The moderating eect of age on Facebook usage time
and loneliness
Variables Loneliness
Model A (β) Model B (β) Model C (β) VIF
Step 1
Gender 0.23** 0.20** 0.19** 1.00
Step 2
Time spent on
Facebook (min-
utes) (X)
0.39 0.10 1.04
Age (M1) 0.32*** 0.32*** 1.39
Step 3
X * M1 − 0.16*1.78
*p <.05 **p <.01 ***p <.001
Fig. 1 Moderating eect of Facebook usage time and age on loneliness
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.
Page 8 of 12
Wang et al. BMC Psychology (2024) 12:343
From Fig.2, it can be observed that overall, shyness
tendency moderates the relationship between individual
social media usage and loneliness. Compared to individu-
als with low shyness tendency, those with high shyness
tendency experience a greater increase in loneliness as
their usage time on Facebook lengthens. e results of
this study partially support Hypothesis H2.
Discussion
Moderation eect of age on social media usage and
loneliness relationship
In terms of age, this study found that both young people
and older adults experience a decrease in loneliness as
their Facebook usage time increases. However, the dif-
ference in young people is not signicant, whereas older
adults experience a substantial decrease in loneliness
with longer Facebook usage time.
Regarding the relationship between social media
usage and loneliness in older adults, the results of this
study align with past research. Heo et al. [84] studied
the internet usage patterns of 65-year-old older adults
and found that increased internet usage was associated
with reduced loneliness, better social support, increased
life satisfaction, and improved psychological well-being.
Khalaila and Vitman-Schorr [85] researched internet
usage among 502 individuals aged 50 and above and sim-
ilarly found that internet usage reduced loneliness and
directly or indirectly enhanced the quality of life for older
adults.
However, when it comes to the relationship between
social media usage and loneliness in young people, the
results have been inconsistent, with some studies align-
ing with this study’s ndings. Lou et al. [86] examined the
relationship between Facebook usage intensity and lone-
liness among college freshmen. Facebook usage intensity
refers to the level of emotional investment users had in
Facebook, with higher intensity indicating greater emo-
tional involvement and longer time spent on Facebook.
ey found that greater Facebook usage intensity was
associated with reduced loneliness.
Past research has generally shown that spending more
time online is associated with increased negative emo-
tions such as depression and loneliness among young
people [8, 9]. From the above, this study’s results partially
support its hypothesis. e study speculates that the
reason for the substantial decrease in loneliness in older
adults with longer usage time might be because college
students have more diverse social interactions. Apart
from using social media to connect with real-life friends
and online friends [87], they continue to interact with
others in their daily lives [88]. erefore, the inuence
of Facebook may be relatively smaller for young peo-
ple, resulting in minimal dierences in the relationship
between Facebook usage time and loneliness. In contrast,
older adults use Facebook mainly to enhance and main-
tain existing relationships [89]. us, using social media
to strengthen their existing social connections may
enhance social support, life satisfaction, and signicantly
reduce loneliness [84, 85].
Moderating eect of shyness on the relationship between
Facebook usage and loneliness
In terms of shyness, shyness moderates the relationship
between individual social media usage and loneliness.
Both individuals with high and low shyness experience an
increase in loneliness with longer Facebook usage time,
but the increase is more pronounced among individuals
with high shyness.
Regarding individuals with low shyness and their Face-
book usage patterns, this study’s results are consistent
with past research. Bian and Leung [70] studied smart-
phone addiction and found that individuals who spent
more time browsing social networking sites, receiving
and sending messages, which implies heavy smartphone
use, were more likely to be shy and experience higher lev-
els of loneliness. Similarly, Satici [71] found that individu-
als addicted to Facebook, especially those with higher
shyness tendency, reported reduced subjective well-
being. In other words, individuals with higher shyness
Table 3 The moderating eect of shyness tendency on
Facebook usage time and loneliness
Variables Loneliness
Model A
(β)
Model B
(β)
Model C
(β)
VIF
Step 1
Gender 0.23** 0.20** 0.19** 1.00
Step 2
Time spent on Facebook
(minutes) (X)
0.39 0.10 1.04
Shyness tendency (M2) 0.37*** 0.38*** 1.30
Step 3
X * M2 0.15* 1.49
*p <.05 **p <.01 ***p <.001
Fig. 2 Moderating eect of Facebook usage time and shyness tendency
on loneliness
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.
Page 9 of 12
Wang et al. BMC Psychology (2024) 12:343
tendency experience an increase in loneliness with longer
Facebook usage time.
However, for individuals with low shyness, this study’s
results do not align with past research. Previous stud-
ies have indicated that Facebook users tend to be more
extroverted and less lonely [72]. Additionally, Zhou et
al. [73] studied the online behavior of introverted and
extroverted individuals on social media and found that
extroverted individuals were more likely to express both
positive and negative emotions online. In contrast, intro-
verted individuals tended to post more content related to
negative emotions, expressing anger, fear, and disgust. In
other words, individuals with low shy tendency can eec-
tively express both positive and negative emotions, lead-
ing to a reduction in loneliness.
is study found that individuals with low shyness ten-
dency experience an increase in loneliness with longer
Facebook usage time, although the increase is relatively
small. From the perspective of social comparison theory,
individuals tend to engage in self-assessment by compar-
ing themselves with others in the absence of objective
comparison standards [48]. Facebook is a publicly acces-
sible non-anonymous social media platform where users
present idealized versions of themselves. Consequently,
everyone may perceive others’ lives as happier, leading
to a comparative mindset [90] and negative emotions
[91]. erefore, individuals with low shyness tendency
may also experience an increase in loneliness with longer
Facebook usage time. On the other hand, individuals with
high shyness tendency may be more prone to prolonged
social media addiction [70, 92], leading to a stronger
sense of loneliness.
Limitations and implications
is study contributes to academia by providing schol-
ars with insights into the usage patterns, basic charac-
teristics, and personality traits of social media users.
is understanding helps identify the factors inuencing
loneliness. In terms of social media platform operation:
(1) rough these analytical ndings, social media plat-
form operators can gain a deeper understanding of user
proles and personalities. is insight can help them
understand how users engage with the platform. It also
highlights that certain user types may experience more
negative emotions when using social media. Armed
with this knowledge, operators can focus on improving
or adjusting the platform in these areas. (2) e results
of this study reveal that shyness plays a signicant role
in moderating the association between Facebook usage
and feelings of loneliness. erefore, in the future, plat-
form operators may be able to reduce negative emotions
by addressing users’ comparative mindsets and fostering
self-armation. For instance, they could consider mea-
sures such as removing the “like” button on social media.
(3) Furthermore, this research indicates that age is a fac-
tor in moderating the relationship between Facebook
usage and loneliness. Older users who use social media
more frequently experience lower levels of loneliness.
erefore, in the future, platform operators can design
more features or activities that are relevant to older users
and extend online interactions into real-life situations.
is approach can strengthen older users’ appreciation of
social media platforms.
In terms of Facebook usage patterns, this study faced
constraints related to human resources, time, and bud-
get considerations, which prevented the use of a random
sampling procedure to obtain a representative sample.
erefore, the data collected may not be fully representa-
tive. For example, the sample in this study primarily con-
sisted of young adults who are university students, while
the age range of older participants was broader. Regard-
ing the age of the older participants, this study included
individuals aged between 50 and 82 years. Smith and
Anderson [93] found that even among older individuals,
there are variations in Facebook usage. e usage rate
for Facebook among people aged 50 to 64 is 68%, while it
drops to 46% for those aged 65 and above. Furthermore,
when considering the number of friends on social media,
Hutto et al. (2015) noted that younger older users (aged
50–64) tend to have more friends compared to older
users (aged 65–91).
erefore, future research could explore Facebook
usage patterns among older individuals in greater detail
by dierentiating between age groups, such as individu-
als aged 50–64 and those aged 65 and above in order to
investigate their potential dierences. In terms of moti-
vations for Facebook usage, the questionnaires in this
study were distributed to both older adults and university
students. However, due to concerns about the willing-
ness of older adults to complete extensive questionnaires,
the study was not able to comprehensively investigate
the reasons for using Facebook. Future research could
address this limitation by delving deeper into Facebook
usage patterns, such as examining the total number of
Facebook friends, and by exploring the motivations for
using Facebook, including seeking popularity, emo-
tional expression, information seeking, entertainment,
and time-passing activities [69], in relation to feelings of
loneliness.
Last but certainly not least, the present study utilizes
a cross-sectional research design, which limits our abil-
ity to observe how the causal eect between variables.
Considering that both social media usage and feelings
of loneliness may undergo dynamic changes over time,
it is advisable for future researchers to explore longitu-
dinal study designs or employ methods like experimen-
tal designs to capture data at various time points. is
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.
Page 10 of 12
Wang et al. BMC Psychology (2024) 12:343
approach would enhance the depth of research ndings
in the relevant eld.
Conclusion
is study has two main ndings. Firstly, it was discov-
ered that among older individuals, spending more time
on Facebook signicantly reduces feelings of loneliness.
is can potentially alleviate the issue of social isolation
that often aects older adults [10, 11]. Facebook usage
allows older individuals to rebuild bridges of social inter-
action, expanding and enriching their lives. Secondly, in
terms of shyness tendency, individuals with higher lev-
els of shyness experience a greater increase in feelings of
loneliness as their time on Facebook increases, in com-
parison to those with lower shyness tendency [71, 94].
However, both groups may experience increased loneli-
ness due to the potential for a comparative mindset on
Facebook [90], which can lead to negative emotions [91].
erefore, it is evident that individuals, whether they
have high or low shyness tendency, should use Facebook
with a positive attitude and in moderation to promote a
more positive life experience, rather than fostering nega-
tive emotions.
Author contributions
Planning and Design: Ya-Ling Wang, Yi-Jia Chen; Data Collection: Yi-Jia Chen;
Data Management: Ya-Ling Wang; Funding: Ya-Ling Wang; Drafting, Data
Analysis: Yi-Jia Chen, Ya-Ling Wang; Manuscript Revision: Chih-Chi Liu, Ya-Ling
Wang.
Funding
The work was supported by the Ministry of Science and Technology in Taiwan
[MOST 109-2628-H-003-002-MY3] and [MOST 111-2423-H-003-002-MY4].
Data availability
The raw data supporting the conclusions of this article will be made available
by the authors, without undue reservation. The data are not publicly available
due to restrictions their containing information that could compromise the
privacy of research participants.
Declarations
Ethical approval and consent to participate
All participants gave informed written consent with the right to withdraw
at any time. In the questionnaire, there was a paragraph introducing the
study aim and assuring condentiality of data by anonymous questionnaires.
Participants did not experience any harm and they were allowed to stop
their participation during the data collection process. Informed consent was
obtained from all participants. This study was approved by Research Ethics
Committee, National Taiwan Normal University with IRB protocol/human
subjects approval number 202005HS071. The patients/participants provided
their written informed consent to participate in this study.
Consent for publication
Not applicable.
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing interests.
Received: 28 January 2024 / Accepted: 11 April 2024
References
1. InsightXplorer. Taiwan Internet Report 2018. In.; 2018.
2. Lee E, Lee JA, Moon JH, Sung Y. Pictures speak louder than words: motivations
for using Instagram. Cyberpsychology Behav Soc Netw. 2015;18(9):552–6.
3. Lup K, Trub L, Rosenthal L. Among Instagram Use, depressive symptoms,
Negative Social Comparison, and strangers followed. Cyberpsychology Behav
Soc Netw. 2015;18(5):247–52.
4. Ting H, Ming WWP, de Run EC, Choo SLY. Beliefs about the use of Instagram:
an exploratory study. Int J Bus Innov. 2015;2(2):15–31.
5. Sheldon P, Antony MG, Ware LJ. Baby Boomers’ use of Facebook and Insta-
gram: uses and gratications theory and contextual age indicators. Heliyon
2021, 7(4).
6. Agur C, Frisch N. Digital Disobedience and the limits of persuasion: Social
Media Activism in Hong Kong’s 2014 Umbrella Movement. Soc Med Soc
2019, 5(1).
7. Tsatsou P. Social Media and Informal Organisation of Citizen activism: lessons
from the Use of Facebook in the sunower Movement. Soc Med Soc 2018,
4(1).
8. Kross E, Verduy P, Demiralp E, Park J, Lee DS, Lin N, Shablack H, Jonides J,
Ybarra O, Sueur C. Facebook use predicts declines in subjective well-being in
young adults. PLoS ONE 2013, 8(8).
9. Matsuba MK. Searching for self and relationships online. Cyberpsychology
Behav Soc Netw. 2006;9(3):275–84.
10. Luhmann M, Hawkley LC. Age dierences in loneliness from late adolescence
to oldest old age. Dev Psychol. 2016;52(6):943–59.
11. Qualter P, Vanhalst J, Harris R, Van Roekel E, Lodder G, Bangee Maes
M, Verhagen M. Loneliness across the life span. Perspect Psychol Sci.
2015;10(2):250–64.
12. Jung EH, Walden J, Johnson AC, Sundar SS. Social networking in the
aging context: why older adults use or avoid Facebook. Telematics Inform.
2017;34(7):1071–80.
13. Cheek JM, Buss AH. Shyness and sociability. J Personal Soc Psychol.
1981;41(2):330–9.
14. WH J, SR B. Shyness: conceptualization and measurement. J Personal Soc
Psychol. 1986;51(3):629–39.
15. Frison E, Eggermont S. Toward an integrated and dierential approach to
the relationships between loneliness, dierent types of Facebook use, and
adolescents’ depressed mood. Commun Res 2015.
16. Sheldon P. Proling the non-users: examination of life-position indicators,
sensation seeking, shyness, and loneliness among users and non-users of
social network sites. Comput Hum Behav. 2012;28(5):1960–5.
17. Gil de Zuniga H, Diehl T, Huber B, Liu J. Personality traits and social media
use in 20 countries: how personality relates to frequency of social media use,
social media news use, and social media use for social interaction. Cyberpsy-
chol Behav Soc Netw. 2017;20(9):540–52.
18. Peplau LA, Perlman D. Loneliness:a sourcebook of current theory. research,
and therapy: Wiley; 1982.
19. Reichmann FF, Loneliness. Psychiatry Res. 1959;22(1):1–15.
20. Suedfeld P. Aloneness as a healing experience. In: Loneliness: A Sourcebook
of Current Theory, Research and Therapy edn. Edited by Peplau L, Perlman D:
Wiley and Sons; 1982: 54–67.
21. Zilboorg G. Loneliness. Atl Monthly. 1938;161:45–54.
22. Weiss RS. Loneliness: the experience of emotional and social isolation. MIT
Press; 1973.
23. Parker JG, Asher SR. Friendship and friendship quality in middle childhood:
links with peer group acceptance and feelings of loneliness and social dis-
satisfaction. Dev Psychol. 1993;29(4):611–21.
24. Crone EA, Dahl RE. Understanding adolescence as a period of social–aective
engagement and goal exibility. Nat Rev Neurosci. 2012;13(9):636.
25. Giord-Smith ME, Brownell CA. Childhood peer relationships: social accep-
tance, friendships, and peer networks. J Sch Psychol. 2003;41(4):235–84.
26. Collins WA, Welsh DP, Furman W. Adolescent romantic relationships. Annu
Rev Psychol. 2009;60:631–52.
27. Dush CMK, Amato PR. Consequences of relationship status and quality for
subjective well-being. J Soc Pers Relatsh. 2005;22(5):607–27.
28. Flora J, Segrin C. Relationship development in dating couples: implications
for relational satisfaction and loneliness. J Soc Pers Relatsh. 2000;17(6):811–25.
29. Diener E, Gohm CL, Suh E, Oishi S. Similarity of the relations between marital
status and subjective well-being across cultures. J Cross-Cult Psychol.
2000;31(4):419–36.
30. Dykstra PA, van Tilburg TG, Gierveld JJ. Changes in older adult loneliness:
results from a seven-year longitudinal study. Res Aging. 2005;27(6):725–47.
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.
Page 11 of 12
Wang et al. BMC Psychology (2024) 12:343
31. Courtin E, Knapp M. Social isolation, loneliness and health in old age: ascop-
ing review. Health Soc Care Community. 2017;25(3):799–812.
32. Theeke LA. Sociodemographic and health-related risks for loneliness and-
outcome dierences by loneliness status in a sample of U.S. older adults. Res
Gerontol Nurs. 2010;3(2):113–25.
33. Victor CR, Scambler SJ, Bowling ANN, Bond J. The prevalence of, and risk
factors for, loneliness in later life: a survey of older people in Great Britain.
Ageing Soc. 2005;25(6):357–75.
34. Russell DW. UCLA Loneliness Scale (Version 3): reliability, validity, and factor
structure. J Pers Assess. 1996;66(1):20–40.
35. DiTommaso E, Spinner B. The development and initial validation of the Social
and emotional loneliness scale for adults (SELSA). Personal Individ Dier.
1993;14(1):127–34.
36. DiTommaso E, Brannen C, Best LA. Measurement and validity characteristics
of the short version of the social and emotional loneliness scale for adults.
Educ Psychol Meas. 2004;64(1):99–119.
37. Letts CA. Loneliness, social provisions and desire for control among older
Adults. Canada: Dissertation, University of New Brunswick; 1997.
38. Victor CR, Yang K. The prevalence of loneliness among adults: a case study of
the United Kingdom. J Psychol. 2012;146(1–2):85–104.
39. Deters FG, Mehl MR. Does posting Facebook status updates increase or
decrease loneliness? An online social networking experiment. Soc Psychol
Personal Sci 2013, 4(5).
40. Burke M, Kraut RE. The relationship between Facebook use and well-being
depends on communication type and tie strength. J Comput-Mediat Com-
mun. 2016;21(4):265–81.
41. Burke M. Reading, writing, relationships: the impact of social network sites on
relationships and well-being. Carnegie Mellon University; 2011.
42. DS PV, O LJPHSAOJB. Passive Facebook usage undermines aective
well-being: experimental and longitudinal evidence. J Exp Psychol-Gen.
2015;144(2):480.
43. Tandoc EC, Ferrucci P, Duy M. Facebook use, envy, and depression among
college students: is facebooking depressing?Comput hum Behav 2015,
43:139–46.
44. Guo Y, Li Y, Ito N. Exploring the predicted eect of social networking site use
on perceived social capital and psychological well-being of Chinese interna-
tional students in Japan. Cyberpsychology Behav Soc Netw. 2014;17(1):52–8.
45. Nowland R, Necka EA, Cacioppo JT. Loneliness and social internet use:
pathways to reconnection in a digital world? Perspect Psychol Sci.
2018;13(1):70–87.
46. Ozimek P, Bierho HW. Facebook use depending on age: the inuence of
social comparisons. Comput Hum Behav. 2016;61:271–9.
47. Lemieux R, Lajoie S, Trainor NE. Anity-seeking, social loneliness, and social
avoidance among Facebook users. Psychol Rep. 2013;112(2):545–52.
48. Festinger L. A theory of cognitive dissonance. Volume 2. Stanford University
Press; 1962.
49. Guernsey L. Garbled in translation: Getting Media Research to the Press and
Public. J Child Media. 2014;8(1):87–94.
50. Blomeld Neira CJ, Barber BL. Social networking site use: linked to adoles-
cents’ social self-concept, self-esteem, and depressed mood. Aust J Psychol.
2014;66(1):56–64.
51. Peper E. R Harvey 2018 Digital addiction: increased loneliness, anxiety, and
depression. NeuroRegulation 5 1 3–8.
52. Chen JI. An analysis on the relationship between the Use of Internet
and Social Loneliness for College Students. Chin Annu Rep Guid Couns.
2003;14:63–88.
53. McAndrew FT, Jeong HS. Who does what on Facebook? Age, sex, and
relationship status as predictors of Facebook use. Comput Hum Behav.
2012;28(6):2359–65.
54. Chopik WJ. The benets of social technology use among older adults
are mediated by reduced loneliness. Cyberpsychology Behav Soc Netw.
2016;19(9):551–6.
55. Krueger KR, Wilson RS, Kamenetsky JM, Barnes LL, Bienias JL, Bennett DA.
Social engagement and cognitive function in old age. Exp Aging Res.
2009;35(1):45–60.
56. Choi M, Kong S, Jung D. Computer and internet interventions for loneli-
ness and depression in older adults: a meta-analysis. Healthc Inf Res.
2012;18(3):191–8.
57. Tsai HH, Tsai YF. Changes in depressive symptoms, social support, and loneli-
ness over 1 year after a minimum 3-month videoconference program for
older nursing home residents. J Med Internet Res 2011, 13(4).
58. Erickson J, Johnson GM. Nternet use and psychological wellness during late
adulthood. Can J Aging-Rev Can Vieil. 2011;30(2):197–209.
59. Sum S, Mathews RM, Hughes I, Campbell A. Internet use and loneliness in
older adults. Cyberpsychology Behav Soc Netw. 2008;11(2):208–11.
60. Cotten SR, Anderson WA, McCullough BM. Impact of internet use on loneli-
ness and contact with others among older adults: cross-sectional analysis. J
Med Internet Res. 2013;15(2):e2306.
61. Fokkema T, Knipscheer K. Escape loneliness by going digital: a quantitative
and qualitative evaluation of a Dutch experiment in using ECT to overcome
loneliness among older adults. Aging Ment Health. 2007;11(5):496–504.
62. Shapira N, Barak A, Gal I. Promoting older adults’ well-being through internet
training and use. Aging Ment Health. 2007;11(5):477–84.
63. Zimbardo PG, Pilkonis PA, Norwood R. The silent prison of shyness (ONR tech.
Rep. Stanford University; 1974. pp. Z–17.
64. Alden L, Cappe R. Interpersonal Process Training for Shy Clients. In: Shyness:
Perspectives on Research and Treatment edn. Edited by WH Jones JCSB:
Springer US; 1986: 343–355.
65. Crozier WR. Shyness and social relationships: Continuity and change. In:
Shyness: Development, consolidation and change edn. Edited by Crozier W:
Routledge; 2000: 1–21.
66. O’Shaughnessy J, O’Shaughnessy NJ. The marketing power of emotion.
Oxford University Press; 2002.
67. Li C, Shi X, Dang J. Online communication and subjective well-being in Chi-
nese college students: the mediating role of shyness and social self-ecacy.
Comput Hum Behav. 2014;34:89–95.
68. Wang J, Zhao J, Wang Y. Self-ecacy mediates the association between
shyness and subjective well-being: the case of Chinese college students. Soc
Indic Res. 2014;119(1):341–51.
69. Zhao J, Kong F, Wang Y. Shyness and subjective well-being: the role of emo-
tional intelligence and social support. Soc Indic Res. 2013;114(3):891–900.
70. Bian M, Leung L. Linking loneliness, shyness, smartphone addiction symp-
toms, and patterns of smartphone use to social capital. Soc Sci Comput Rev.
2015;33(1):61–79.
71. Satici SA. Facebook addiction and subjective well-being: a study of the
mediating role of shyness and loneliness. Int J Mental Health Addict.
2018;17(1):41–55.
72. Ryan T, Xenos S. Who uses Facebook? An investigation into the relationship
between the Big Five, shyness, narcissism, loneliness, and Facebook usage.
Comput Hum Behav. 2011;27(5):1658–64.
73. Zhou Z, Xu K, Zhao J. Extroverts tweet dierently from introverts in Weibo. EPJ
Data Sci. 2018;7(1):1–22.
74. Asendorpf JB, Wilpers S. Personality eects on social relationships. J Pers Soc
Psychol. 1998;74(6):1531–44.
75. Nunnally J. Psychometric methods. McGraw-Hill; 1978.
76. Kaiser HF. An index of factorial simplicity. Psychometrika. 1974;39(1):31–6.
77. Bartlett MS. Tests of signicance in factor analysis. Br J Stat Psychol.
1950;3(2):77–85.
78. Pett MA, Lackey NR, Sullivan JJ. Making sense of factor analysis: the use of fac-
tor analysis for instrument development in health care research. Sage; 2003.
79. Browne MW, Cudeck R. Alternative ways of assessing model t. Sociol Meth-
ods Res. 1992;21(2):230–58.
80. Jöreskog KG, Sörbom D. LISREL7: a guide to the program and applications.
SPSS; 1989.
81. Jackson DL, Gillaspy JJA, Purc-Stephenson R. Reporting practices in conr-
matory factor analysis: an overview and some recommendations. Psychol
Methods. 2009;14(1):6.
82. Anderson JC, Gerbing DW. Structural equation modeling in practice: a review
and recommended two-step approach. Psychol Bull. 1988;103(3):411–23.
83. Bagozzi RP, Yi Y. On the evaluation of structural equation models. J Acad Mark
Sci. 1988;16(1):74–94.
84. Heo J, Chun S, Lee S, Lee KH, Kim J. Internet use and well-being in older
adults. Cyberpsychology Behav Soc Netw. 2015;18(5):268–72.
85. Khalaila R, Vitman-Schorr A. Internet use, social networks, loneliness, and
quality of life among adults aged 50 and older: mediating and moderating
eects. Qual Life Res. 2018;27(2):479–89.
86. Lou LL, Yan Z, Nickerson A, McMorris R. An examination of the reciprocal rela-
tionship of loneliness and Facebook use among rst-year college students. J
Educ Comput Res. 2012;46(1):105–17.
87. Thayer SE, Ray S. Online communication preferences across age, gender, and
duration of internet use. Cyberpsychology Behav Soc Netw. 2006;9(4):432–40.
88. Zickuhr K, Madden M. Older adults and internet use. Pew Internet Am Life
Project. 2012;6:1–23.
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.
Page 12 of 12
Wang et al. BMC Psychology (2024) 12:343
89. Kim C, Shen C. Connecting activities on Social Network Sites and life satisfac-
tion: a comparison of older and younger users. Comput Hum Behav 2020,
105.
90. Chou HTG, Edge N. They are happier and having better lives than I am: the
impact of using Facebook on perceptions of others’ lives. Cyberpsychology
Behav Soc Netw. 2012;15(2):117–21.
91. Steers MLN, Wickham RE, Acitelli LK. Seeing everyone else’s highlight reels:
how Facebook usage is linked to depressive symptoms. J Soc Clin Psychol.
2014;33(8):701–31.
92. Phu B, Gow AJ. Facebook use and its association with subjective happiness
and loneliness. Comput Hum Behav. 2019;92:151–9.
93. Smith A, Anderson M. Social Media Use in 2018 [Monograph]. In.; 2018.
94. Brenk-Franz K, Strauss B, Tiesler F, Fleischhauer C, Ciechanowski P, Schneider
N, Gensichen J. The inuence of adult attachment on patient self-manage-
ment in primary care - the need for a Personalized Approach and patient-
centred care. PLoS ONE. 2015;10(9):e0136723.
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in
published maps and institutional aliations.
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Terms and Conditions
Springer Nature journal content, brought to you courtesy of Springer Nature Customer Service Center GmbH (“Springer Nature”).
Springer Nature supports a reasonable amount of sharing of research papers by authors, subscribers and authorised users (“Users”), for small-
scale personal, non-commercial use provided that all copyright, trade and service marks and other proprietary notices are maintained. By
accessing, sharing, receiving or otherwise using the Springer Nature journal content you agree to these terms of use (“Terms”). For these
purposes, Springer Nature considers academic use (by researchers and students) to be non-commercial.
These Terms are supplementary and will apply in addition to any applicable website terms and conditions, a relevant site licence or a personal
subscription. These Terms will prevail over any conflict or ambiguity with regards to the relevant terms, a site licence or a personal subscription
(to the extent of the conflict or ambiguity only). For Creative Commons-licensed articles, the terms of the Creative Commons license used will
apply.
We collect and use personal data to provide access to the Springer Nature journal content. We may also use these personal data internally within
ResearchGate and Springer Nature and as agreed share it, in an anonymised way, for purposes of tracking, analysis and reporting. We will not
otherwise disclose your personal data outside the ResearchGate or the Springer Nature group of companies unless we have your permission as
detailed in the Privacy Policy.
While Users may use the Springer Nature journal content for small scale, personal non-commercial use, it is important to note that Users may
not:
use such content for the purpose of providing other users with access on a regular or large scale basis or as a means to circumvent access
control;
use such content where to do so would be considered a criminal or statutory offence in any jurisdiction, or gives rise to civil liability, or is
otherwise unlawful;
falsely or misleadingly imply or suggest endorsement, approval , sponsorship, or association unless explicitly agreed to by Springer Nature in
writing;
use bots or other automated methods to access the content or redirect messages
override any security feature or exclusionary protocol; or
share the content in order to create substitute for Springer Nature products or services or a systematic database of Springer Nature journal
content.
In line with the restriction against commercial use, Springer Nature does not permit the creation of a product or service that creates revenue,
royalties, rent or income from our content or its inclusion as part of a paid for service or for other commercial gain. Springer Nature journal
content cannot be used for inter-library loans and librarians may not upload Springer Nature journal content on a large scale into their, or any
other, institutional repository.
These terms of use are reviewed regularly and may be amended at any time. Springer Nature is not obligated to publish any information or
content on this website and may remove it or features or functionality at our sole discretion, at any time with or without notice. Springer Nature
may revoke this licence to you at any time and remove access to any copies of the Springer Nature journal content which have been saved.
To the fullest extent permitted by law, Springer Nature makes no warranties, representations or guarantees to Users, either express or implied
with respect to the Springer nature journal content and all parties disclaim and waive any implied warranties or warranties imposed by law,
including merchantability or fitness for any particular purpose.
Please note that these rights do not automatically extend to content, data or other material published by Springer Nature that may be licensed
from third parties.
If you would like to use or distribute our Springer Nature journal content to a wider audience or on a regular basis or in any other manner not
expressly permitted by these Terms, please contact Springer Nature at
onlineservice@springernature.com
