Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36135225›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of investigation in health, psychology and education2022

Marcella Bianchi, Rosa Fabbricatore, Daniela Caso

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of investigation in health, psychology and education, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Marcella BianchiDepartment of Humanities, University of Naples Federico II, 80133 Naples, Italy.
Rosa FabbricatoreDepartment of Social Sciences, University of Naples Federico II, 80138 Naples, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-4056-4375
Daniela CasoDepartment of Humanities, University of Naples Federico II, 80133 Naples, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-6579-963X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Previous research investigating antecedents of online self-disclosure pointed out two perspectives: social compensation and enhancement hypotheses, showing controversial findings. Furthermore, most contributions have focused on social networking sites (SNSs) considered mainstream, like Facebook and Instagram, and such results are often considered universally valid for all SNSs. Tumblr is a less-studied SNS with peculiar features—such as anonymity, higher control over the presentation of personal aspects, supportive communities—that could particularly lead individuals to self-disclose. As prior contributions highlighted that the features and affordances could define how a medium will be used, this paper aims to investigate the antecedents of online self-disclosure on Tumblr and other mainstream SNSs. We run a survey on 559 Tumblr users (aged 13−70; M = 28.86; SD = 12.34). T-test showed that Tumblr users have a higher willingness to self-disclose on Tumblr compared to another SNSs (t = 22.44, p < 0.001). A path analysis model confirmed the predictive role of some psychological variables on self-disclosure on Tumblr but not on mainstream SNSs. In particular, self-disclosure on Tumblr was predicted by self-esteem, negative emotionality, and preference for online social interactions, which was in turn predicted by social anxiety. These findings partially supported both social compensation and enhancement hypotheses, indicating that the phenomenon is more complex than expected.

Indexed as

enhancementnegative emotionalityonline self-disclosurepreference for online social interactionsself-esteemsocial anxietysocial compensation

Identifiers

PMID36135225
PMCPMC9498212

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.