Research Article

Exploring university students’ online self-presentation techniques and self-disclosure behaviors as predictors of staff response

Beatrice Hayes 1 *
More Detail
1 Department of Psychology, Royal Holloway, University of London, London, UK* Corresponding Author
Journal of Digital Educational Technology, 4(1), 2024, ep2405, https://doi.org/10.30935/jdet/14169
Published: 30 January 2024
OPEN ACCESS   781 Views   704 Downloads
Download Full Text (PDF)

ABSTRACT

Online educational platforms (e.g., Microsoft Outlook and Moodle) are integrated within higher education communication. Predominantly aged 18-24 years, university students have only ever known a digitally connected world and communicating online is a core component of their reality. Higher education students and staff are thus regularly communicating online. Online self-presentation techniques and online self-disclosure behaviors are required to communicate online. The online disinhibition effect elevates the risk of over-disclosure. Students may be drawing upon online self-presentation techniques and self-disclosure behaviors to communicate with staff via online educational platforms; this may be useful and result in informative responses from staff, or this could be unsuccessful (particularly if students over-disclose) and result in less informative responses from staff. To explore this, a mixed methods approach has been adopted within this study drawing upon 100 Moodle forum posts and 100 emails between students and staff at one U.K. higher education institution. A deductive thematic analysis identifies occurrences of students online self-presentation techniques and self-disclosure behaviors, and staff’s content disclosure (informativeness of responses). A path analysis then explores the predictive relationship between these components. Findings are the first to highlight that students are indeed utilizing online self-presentation techniques and self-disclosure behaviors via online educational platforms, and that these do predict the informativeness of staff response. Importantly, these findings should be used to support students in how to effectively communicate with staff via online educational platforms, and to educate staff in considerations of how they respond.
Keywords: communication, education, online, self-disclosure, self-presentation

CITATION (APA)

Hayes, B. (2024). Exploring university students’ online self-presentation techniques and self-disclosure behaviors as predictors of staff response. Journal of Digital Educational Technology, 4(1), ep2405. https://doi.org/10.30935/jdet/14169

REFERENCES

  1. Abell, L., & Brewer, G. (2014). Machiavellianism, self-monitoring, self-promotion and relational aggression on Facebook. Computers in Human Behavior, 36, 258-262. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.03.076
  2. Adams, C., Gringart, E., & Strobel, N. (2022). Explaining adults’ mental health help-seeking through the lens of the theory of planned behavior: A scoping review. Systematic Reviews, 11, 160. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-022-02034-y
  3. Ahmed, A. A.-A. M. (2014). Self-presentation strategies among users of social networking sites. International Journal of Interactive Communication Systems and Technologies, 4(2), 64-78. https://doi.org/10.4018/IJICST.2014070105
  4. Aleven, V., Stahl, E., Schworm, S., Fischer, F., & Wallace, R. (2003). Help seeking and help design in interactive learning environments. Review of Educational Research, 73(3), 277-320. https://doi.org/10.3102/00346543073003277
  5. Amro, H., Maxwell, G. M., & Kupczynski, L. (2013). Faculty perceptions of student performance in the online classroom. E-Learning and Digital Media, 10(3), 294-304. https://doi.org/10.2304/elea.2013.10.3.294
  6. Anderson, E. L., Steen, E., & Stavropoulos, V. (2017). Internet use and problematic internet use: A systematic review of longitudinal research trends in adolescence and emergent adulthood. International Journal of Adolescence and Youth, 22(4), 430-454. https://doi.org/10.1080/02673843.2016.1227716
  7. Bachman, G. F., & Guerrero, L. K. (2006). Fogiveness, apology, and communicative responses to hurtful events. Communication Reports, 19(1-2), 45-56. https://doi.org/10.1080/08934210600586357
  8. Barutçu Yıldırım, F., & Demir, A. (2020). Self-handicapping among university students: The role of procrastination, test anxiety, self-esteem, and self-compassion. Psychological Reports, 123(3), 825-843. https://doi.org/10.1177/0033294118825099
  9. Basford, T. E., Offermann, L. R., & Behrend, T. S. (2014). Please accept my sincerest apologies: Examining follower reactions to leader apology. Journal of Business Ethics, 119(1), 99-117. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-012-1613-y
  10. Binali, T., Tsai, C. C., & Chang, H. Y. (2021). University students’ profiles of online learning and their relation to online metacognitive regulation and internet-specific epistemic justification. Computers & Education, 175, 104315. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2021.104315
  11. Bolino, M. C., Klotz, A. C., & Daniels, D. (2014). The impact of impression management over time. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 29(3), 266-284. https://doi.org/10.1108/JMP-10-2012-0290
  12. Bolino, M., Long, D., & Turnley, W. (2016). Impression management in organizations: Critical questions, answers, and areas for future research. Annual Review of Organizational Psychology and Organizational Behavior, 3, 377-406. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-orgpsych-041015-062337
  13. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2014). What can “thematic analysis” offer health and wellbeing researchers?. International Journal of Qualitative Studies on Health and Well-being, 9(1), 26152. https://doi.org/10.3402/qhw.v9.26152
  14. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2019). Reflecting on reflexive thematic analysis. Qualitative research in sport, exercise and health, 11(4), 589-597. https://doi.org/10.1080/2159676X.2019. 1628806
  15. Broadbent, J., & Lodge, J. (2021). Use of live chat in higher education to support self-regulated help seeking behaviors: A comparison of online and blended learner perspectives. International Journal of Educational Technology in Higher Education, 18, 1-20. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41239-021-00253-2
  16. Browne, M. W., & Cudeck, R. (1989). Single sample cross-validation indices for covariation structures. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 24, 445-455. https://doi.org/10.1207/ s15327906mbr2404_4
  17. Burusic, J., & Ribar, M. (2014). The moderating role of self-presentation tactics: Judgments of personality traits and self-presentation of others based on a limited amount of information. Swiss Journal of Psychology, 73(4), 235-242. https://doi.org/10.1024/1421-0185/a000142
  18. Chen, B., & Marcus, J. (2012). Students’ self-presentation on Facebook: An examination of personality and self-construal factors. Computers in Human Behavior, 28(6), 2091-2099. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2012.06.013
  19. Chen, Z., Sun, K., & Wang, K. (2018). Self-esteem, achievement goals, and self-handicapping in college physical education. Psychological Reports, 121(4), 690-704. https://doi.org/10.1177/0033294117735333
  20. Cheng, B., Guo, G., Tian, J., & Kong, Y. (2023). ‘I disdain the company of flatterers!’: How and when observed ingratiation predicts employees’ ostracism toward their ingratiating colleagues. Human Relations. https://doi.org/10.1177/00187267231170175
  21. Cheng, K. H., Liang, J. C., & Tsai, C. C. (2013). University students’ online academic help seeking: The role of self-regulation and information commitments. The Internet and Higher Education, 16, 70-77. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2012.02.002
  22. Cheng, Z., Pan, Y., & Ni, Y. (2019). Self-determination affects the use of self-presentation strategies on social networking sites. Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal, 47(3), 1-11. https://doi.org/10.2224/sbp.7758
  23. Chung, E. K., Lee, Y. M., Chae, S. J., Yoon, T. Y., Kim, S. Y., Park, S. Y., Park, J. Y., & Park, C. S. (2019). Korean medical students’ attitudes toward academic misconduct: A cross-sectional multicenter study. Korean Journal of Medical Education, 31(4), 309. https://doi.org/10.3946/kjme.2019. 141
  24. Clark-Gordon, C. V., Bowman, N. D., Goodboy, A. K., & Wright, A. (2019). Anonymity and online self-disclosure: A meta-analysis. Communication Reports, 32(2), 98-111. https://doi.org/10.1080/08934215.2019.1607516
  25. Cohen, J. (2001). Defining identification: A theoretical look at the identification of audiences with media characters. Mass Communication & Society, 4(3), 245-264. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327825MCS0403_01
  26. Comegys, C., Hannula, M., & Väisänen, J. (2006). Longitudinal comparison of Finnish and US online shopping behavior among university students: The five-stage buying decision process. Journal of Targeting, Measurement and Analysis for Marketing, 14, 336-356. https://doi.org/10.1057/PALGRAVE.JT.5740193
  27. De Cremer, D., & Schouten, B. C. (2008). When apologies for injustice matter: The role of respect. European Psychologist, 13(4), 239-247. http://doi.org/10.1027/1016-9040.13.4.239
  28. Dimock, M. (2019). Defining generations: Where Millennials end and Generation Z begins. https://www.pewresearch.org/short-reads/2019/01/17/where-millennials-end-and-generation-z-begins/
  29. Dunn, K. E., Rakes, G. C., & Rakes, T. A. (2014). Influence of academic self-regulation, critical thinking, and age on online graduate students’ academic help-seeking. Distance Education, 35, 75-89. https://doi.org/10.1080/01587919.2014.891426
  30. Er, E., Kopcha, T. J., Orey, M., & Dustman, W. (2015). Exploring college students’ online help-seeking behavior in a flipped classroom with a web-based help-seeking tool. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 31(5), 537-555. https://doi.org/10.14742/ajet.2527
  31. Fan, Y. H., & Lin, T. J. (2023). Identifying university students’ online academic help-seeking patterns and their role in Internet self-efficacy. The Internet and Higher Education, 56, 100893. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2022.100893
  32. Ferrari, J. R., & Díaz-Morales, J. F. (2007). Procrastination: Different time orientations reflect different motives. Journal of Research in Personality, 41(3), 707-714. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2006.06.006
  33. Gardner, W. L. (2003). Perceptions of leader charisma, effectiveness, and integrity: Effects of exemplification, delivery, and ethical reputation. Management Communication Quarterly, 16(4), 502-527. https://doi.org/10.1177/0893318903251324
  34. Gillespie, A. (2020). Disruption, self-presentation, and defensive tactics at the threshold of learning. Review of General Psychology, 24(4), 382-396. https://doi.org/10.1177/1089268020914258
  35. Goffman, E. (1959). The moral career of the mental patient. Psychiatry, 22(2), 123-142. https://doi.org/10.1080/00332747.1959.11023166
  36. Goodwin, J., Behan, L., Kelly, P., McCarthy, K., & Horgan, A. (2016). Help-seeking behaviors and mental well-being of first year undergraduate university students. Psychiatry Research, 246, 129-135. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2016.09.015
  37. Gordon, R. A. (1996). Impact of ingratiation on judgments and evaluations: A meta-analytic investigation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71, 54-70. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.71.1.54
  38. Grapentine, T. (2000). Path analysis vs. structural equation modeling. Marketing research, 12(3).
  39. Hall, J. A., Pennington, N., & Lueders, A. (2014). Impression management and formation on Facebook: A lens model approach. New Media & Society, 16(6), 958-982. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444813495166
  40. Hart, W., Richardson, K., Tortoriello, G. K., & Breeden, C. J. (2019a). Revisiting profiles and profile comparisons of grandiose and vulnerable narcissism on self-presentation tactic use. Personality and Individual Differences, 151, 109523. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2019.109523
  41. Hart, W., Tortoriello, G. K., Richardson, K., & Breeden, C. J. (2019b). Profiles and profile comparisons between Dark Triad constructs on self-presentation tactic usage and tactic beliefs. Journal of Personality, 87(3), 501-517. https://doi.org/10.1111/jopy.12411
  42. Haugh, M., & Chang, W. L. M. (2019). “The apology seemed (in) sincere”: Variability in perceptions of (im) politeness. Journal of Pragmatics, 142, 207-222. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2018.11.022
  43. HESA. (2023). Who’s studying in HE? https://www.hesa.ac.uk/ data-and-analysis/students/whos-in-he
  44. Highhouse, S., Brooks, M. E., & Wang, Y. (2016). Status seeking and manipulative self-presentation. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 24(4), 352-361. https://doi.org/10.1111/ijsa.12153
  45. Hong, S., Jahng, M. R., Lee, N., & Wise, K. R. (2020). Do you filter who you are?: Excessive self-presentation, social cues, and user evaluations of Instagram selfies. Computers in Human Behavior, 104, 106159. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2019.106159
  46. Horgan, A., & Sweeney, J. (2012). University students’ online habits and their use of the Internet for health information. Computers, Informatics, Nursing, 30(8), 402-408. https://doi.org/10.1097/nxn.0b013e3182510703
  47. Jones, E. E., Gergen, K. J., & Jones, R. G. (1963). Tactics of ingratiation among leaders and subordinates in a status hierarchy. Psychological Monographs: General and Applied, 77(3), 1-20. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0093832
  48. Karabenick, S. A., & Puustinen, M. (2013). Introduction. In S. A. Karabenick, & M. Puustinen (Eds.), Advances in help-seeking research and applications: The role of emerging technologies (pp. 1-6). IAP Information Age Publishing.
  49. Kármen, D., Kinga, S., Edit, M., Susana, F., Kinga, K. J., & Réka, J. (2015). Associations between academic performance, academic attitudes, and procrastination in a sample of undergraduate students attending different educational forms. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 187, 45-49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.03.009
  50. Kim, J., & Dindia, K. (2011). Online self-disclosure: A review of research. In K. B. Wright, & L. M. Webb (Eds.), Computer-mediated communication in personal relationships (pp. 156-180). Peter Lang Publishing.
  51. Koc, S., & Liu, X. (2016). An investigation of graduate students’ help-seeking experiences, preferences and attitudes in online learning. Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 15(3), 27-38.
  52. Lattie, E. G., Lipson, S. K., & Eisenberg, D. (2019). Technology and college student mental health: Challenges and opportunities. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 10, 246. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2019.00246
  53. Lea, S. J., D. Stephenson, & J. Troy (2003). Higher education students’ attitudes to student centered learning: Beyond ‘educational bulimia’. Studies in Higher Education, 28(3), 321-334. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075070309293
  54. Lee, S. J., Quigley, B. M., Nesler, M. S., Corbett, A. B., & Tedeschi, J. T. (1999). Development of a self-presentation tactics scale. Personality and Individual Differences, 26(4), 701-722. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0191-8869(98)00178-0
  55. Liu, X., Liu, S., Lee, S. H., & Magjuka, R. J. (2010). Cultural differences in online learning: International student perceptions. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 13(3), 177-188.
  56. Lleras, C. (2005). Path analysis. Encyclopedia of social measurement, 3(1), 25-30.
  57. Lohnes, S., & Kinzer, C. (2007). Questioning assumptions about students’ expectations for technology in college classrooms. Innovate: Journal of Online Education, 3(5).
  58. Martin, K. A., & Brawley, L. R. (2002). Self-handicapping in physical achievement settings: The contributions of self-esteem and self-efficacy. Self and Identity, 1(4), 337-351. https://doi.org/10.1080/15298860290106814
  59. Martin-Arbos, S., Castarlenas, E., & Duenas, J. M. (2021). Help-seeking in an academic context: A systematic review. Sustainability, 13(8), 4460. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13084460
  60. McAllister, M., Wynaden, D., Happell, B., Flynn, T., Walters, V., Duggan, R., Byrne, L., Heslop, K., & Gaskin, C. (2014). Staff experiences of providing support to students who are managing mental health challenges: A qualitative study from two Australian universities. Advances in Mental Health, 12(3), 192-201. https://doi.org/10.1080/18374905.2014.11081897
  61. McCabe, A., & O’Connor, U. (2014). Student-centred learning: The role and responsibility of the lecturer. Teaching in Higher Education, 19(4), 350-359. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562517.2013.860111
  62. McKibben, W. B., Cade, R., Purgason, L. L., & Wahesh, E. (2020). How to conduct a deductive content analysis in counseling research. Counseling Outcome Research and Evaluation, 13(2), 156-168. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 21501378.2020.1846992
  63. Meier, A. J. (1998). Apologies: What do we know?. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 8(2), 215-231. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1473-4192.1998.tb00130.x
  64. Michikyan, M., Dennis, J., & Subrahmanyam, K. (2015). Can you guess who I am? Real, ideal, and false self-presentation on Facebook among emerging adults. Emerging Adulthood, 3, 55-64. https://doi.org/10.1177/2167696814532442
  65. Michikyan, M., Subrahmanyam, K., & Dennis, J. (2014). Can you tell who I am? Neuroticism, extraversion, and online self-presentation among young adults. Computers in Human Behavior, 33, 179-183. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.01.010
  66. Morand, D. A. (2000). Language and power: An empirical analysis of linguistic strategies used in superior–Subordinate communication. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 21(3), 235-248. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-1379(200005)21:3<235::AID-JOB9>3.0.CO;2-N
  67. Newman, R. S. (2008). The motivational role of adaptive help seeking in self-regulated learning. In D. H. Schunk, & B. J. Zimmerman (Eds.), Motivation and self-regulated learning: Theory, research, and applications (pp. 315-337). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
  68. Nguyen, M., Sun Bin, Y., & Campbell, A. (2012). Comparing online and offline self-disclosure: A systematic review. Cyberpsychology, Behavior and Social Networking, 15(2), 103-111. https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2011.0277
  69. Nikolopoulou, K. (2022). Face-to-face, online and hybrid education: University students’ opinions and preferences. Journal of Digital Educational Technology, 2(2), 2022, ep2206. https://doi.org/10.30935/jdet/12384
  70. O’Mara, E. M., Kunz, B. R., Receveur, A., & Corbin, S. (2019). Is self-promotion evaluated more positively if it is accurate? Reexamining the role of accuracy and modesty on the perception of self-promotion. Self and Identity, 18(4), 405-424. https://doi.org/10.1080/15298868.2018.1465846
  71. Oeldorf-Hirsch, A., Birnholtz, J., & Hancock, J. T. (2017). Your post is embarrassing me: Face threats, identity, and the audience on Facebook. Computers in Human Behavior, 73, 92-99. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.03.030
  72. Office for Students. (2022). The office for students annual review 2022. https://www.officeforstudents.org.uk/publications/ annual-review-2022/
  73. Ofcom. (2022). Adults’ media use and attitudes report 2022. https://www.ofcom.org.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0020/234362/adults-media-use-and-attitudes-report-2022.pdf
  74. Orpen, C. (1998). The causes and consequences of academic procrastination: A research note. Westminster Studies in Education, 21(1), 73-75. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 0140672980210107
  75. Øverup, C. S., & Neighbors, C. (2016). Self-presentation as a function of perceived closeness and trust with romantic partners, friends, and acquaintances. The Journal of Social Psychology, 156(6), 630-647. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224545.2016.1152215
  76. Ozkan, O. S., Durna, G., & Araz, A. (2022). Psychometric evaluation of the turkish version of the self-presentation tactics scale. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi [Journal of Dokuz Eylül University Social Sciences Institute], 24(2), 779-800. https://doi.org/10.16953/deusosbil.1010261
  77. Paechter, M., & Maier, B. (2010). Online or face-to-face? Students’ experiences and preferences in e-learning. The Internet and Higher Education, 13(4), 292-297. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2010.09.004
  78. Pandey, J. (2022). Ingratiation for self-enhancement. In J. pandey (Ed.), Nature and dynamics of social influence: Interpersonal and organizational contexts (pp. 95-123). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-4598-4_5
  79. Park, J. H. (2010). Differences among university students and faculties in social networking site perception and use: Implications for academic library services. The Electronic Library, 28(3), 417-431. http://doi.org/10.1108/02640471011051990
  80. Pretorius, C., Chambers, D., & Coyle, D. (2019). Young people’s online help-seeking and mental health difficulties: Systematic narrative review. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 21(11), e13873. https://doi.org/10.2196/13873
  81. RStudio Team (2020). RStudio: Integrated development for R. RStudio, PBC, Boston, MA. http://www.rstudio.com
  82. Ranzini, G., & Hoek, E. (2017). To you who (I think) are listening: Imaginary audience and impression management on Facebook. Computers in Human Behavior, 75, 228-235. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.04.047
  83. Reed, P., & Saunders, J. (2020). Sex differences in online assertive self-presentation strategies. Personality and Individual Differences, 166, 110214. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2020.110214
  84. Rim, H., & Song, D. (2016). “How negative becomes less negative”: Understanding the effects of comment valence and response sidedness in social media. Journal of Communication, 66(3), 475-495. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcom.12205
  85. Rosseel, Y. (2012). lavaan: An R package for structural equation modeling. Journal of Statistical Software, 48, 1-36.
  86. Rui, J., & Stefanone, M. A. (2013a). Strategic management of other-provided information online: Personality and network variables. In 2013 46th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (pp. 3941-3950). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/HICSS.2013.500
  87. Rui, J., & Stefanone, M. A. (2013b). Strategic self-presentation online: A cross-cultural study. Computers in human behavior, 29(1), 110-118. https://doi.org/10.1016/ j.chb.2012.07.022
  88. Sadler, M. E., Hunger, J. M., & Miller, C. J. (2010). Personality and impression management: Mapping the multidimensional personality questionnaire onto 12 self-presentation tactics. Personality and Individual Differences, 48(5), 623-628. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2009.12.020
  89. Sanchez-Ruiz, P., Wood, M. S., & Long-Ruboyianes, A. (2021). Persuasive or polarizing? The influence of entrepreneurs’ use of ingratiation rhetoric on investor funding decisions. Journal of Business Venturing, 36(4), 106120. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2021.106120
  90. Sawyer, S. M., Azzopardi, P. S., Wickremarathne, D., & Patton, G. C. (2018). The age of adolescence. The Lancet Child & Adolescent Health, 2(3), 223-228. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2352-4642(18)30022-1
  91. Schlenker, B. R. (1980). Impression management. Brooks/Cole.
  92. Schlosser, A. E. (2020). Self-disclosure versus self-presentation on social media. Current Opinion in Psychology, 31, 1-6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2019. 06.025
  93. Schmid, P., & Betsch, C. (2019). Effective strategies for rebutting science denialism in public discussions. Nature Human Behavior, 3(9), 931-939. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-019-0632-4
  94. Schumann, K. (2018). The psychology of offering an apology: Understanding the barriers to apologizing and how to overcome them. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 27(2), 74-78. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721417741709
  95. Schunk, D. H., & Zimmerman, B. J. (Eds.). (2012). Motivation and self-regulated learning: Theory, research, and applications. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203831076
  96. Schwinger, M., Wirthwein, L., Lemmer, G., & Steinmayr, R. (2014). Academic self-handicapping and achievement: A meta-analysis. Journal of Educational Psychology, 106(3), 744-761. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0035832
  97. Shahani-Yeilaghi, M., & Basaknejad, S. (2007). A study of simple and multiple relationships of defensive self-presentation with imposter syndrome in graduate students of Shahid Chamran University (Ahwaz-Iran). Clinical Psychology and Personality, 5(2), 61-74.
  98. Stockdale, L. A., & Coyne, S. M. (2020). Bored and online: Reasons for using social media, problematic social networking site use, and behavioral outcomes across the transition from adolescence to emerging adulthood. Journal of Adolescence, 79, 173-183. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2020.01.010
  99. Strunk, K. K., & Steele, M. R. (2011). Relative contributions of self-efficacy, self-regulation, and self-handicapping in predicting student procrastination. Psychological Reports, 109(3), 983-989. https://doi.org/10.2466/07.09.20.PR0.109. 6.983-989
  100. Suler, J. (2004). The online disinhibition effect. Cyberpsychology & Behavior, 7(3), 321-326. https://doi.org/10.1089/1094931041291295
  101. Tong, A., Sainsbury, P., & Craig, J. (2007). Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ): A 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups. International journal for quality in health care, 19(6), 349-357. https://doi.org/10.1093/intqhc/mzm042
  102. Tsai, W. C., Huang, T. C., Wu, C. Y., & Lo, I. H. (2010). Disentangling the effects of applicant defensive impression management tactics in job interviews. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 18(2), 131-140. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2389.2010.00495.x
  103. Van der Velden, G. (2013). Staff perceptions of student engagement. The Student Engagement Handbook, 77-92.
  104. Vogel, D. L., & Wester, S. R. (2003). To seek help or not to seek help: The risks of self-disclosure. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 50(3), 351-361. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0167.50.3.351
  105. Vonk, R. (2002). Self-serving interpretations of flattery: Why ingratiation works. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 82(4), 515-526. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.82.4.515
  106. Walsh, J. L., Fielder, R. L., Carey, K. B., & Carey, M. P. (2013). Female college students’ media use and academic outcomes: Results from a longitudinal cohort study. Emerging Adulthood, 1(3), 219-232. https://doi.org/10.1177/2167696813479780
  107. Waycott, J., Bennett, S., Kennedy, G., Dalgarno, B., & Gray, K. (2010). Digital divides? Student and staff perceptions of information and communication technologies. Computers & Education, 54(4), 1202-1211. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2009.11.006
  108. Wong, W. K. W. (2012). Faces on Facebook: A study of self-presentation and social support on Facebook. http://hdl.handle.net/2031/6847
  109. Yagil, D. (2001). Ingratiation and assertiveness in the service provider-customer dyad. Journal of Service Research, 3(4), 345-353. https://doi.org/10.1177/109467050134007
  110. Yang, C., Chen, Y., & Gao, J. (2022). How and when can employees with status motivation attain their status in a team? The roles of ingratiation, OCBI, and procedural justice climate. Group & Organization Management. https://doi.org/10.1177/10596011221112232
  111. Ye, J. (2006). Traditional and online support networks in the cross-cultural adaptation of Chinese international students in the United States. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 11(3), 863-876. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2006.00039.x
  112. Zochil, M. L., & Thorsteinsson, E. B. (2018). Exploring poor sleep, mental health, and help-seeking intention in university students. Australian Journal of Psychology, 70, 41-47. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajpy.12160