1-20 of 2811
Sort by
Image
Published: 27 April 2025
Figure 2. Odds ratios of beneficial use predicted by smartphone access in split sample analysis. Note. * p  < .05; ** p  < .01; *** p  < .001 Bar graph of odds ratios showing smartphone use is generally more likely to be positively associated with beneficial internet use when internet service i
Image
Published: 27 April 2025
Figure 1. Odds ratios of beneficial use predicted by computer access in split sample analysis. Note. * p  < .05; ** p  < .01; *** p  < .001 Bar graph of odds ratios showing computer use is positively associated with all five measures of beneficial internet use across both datasets, regardless o
Journal Article
Amy L Gonzales and Ceciley (Xinyi) Zhang
Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, Volume 30, Issue 3, May 2025, zmaf007, https://doi.org/10.1093/jcmc/zmaf007
Published: 27 April 2025
Journal Article
Jasmina Rosič and others
Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, Volume 30, Issue 3, May 2025, zmaf005, https://doi.org/10.1093/jcmc/zmaf005
Published: 10 April 2025
Journal Article
Ward van Zoonen and others
Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, Volume 30, Issue 3, May 2025, zmaf006, https://doi.org/10.1093/jcmc/zmaf006
Published: 05 April 2025
Image
Published: 13 March 2025
Figure 1. Theoretical model. Note. W1 = Wave 1, W2 = Wave 2. All constructs on gray background were measured separately for incivility, intolerance, and threat. Autoregressive paths are dotted and in gray.
Image
Published: 13 March 2025
Figure 2. A . Simple slopes plot for the interaction of perceived severity and free-speech attitudes on punishing preferences for incivility. B . Johnson–Neyman plot for the interaction of perceived severity and free-speech attitudes on punishment preferences for incivility.
Image
Published: 13 March 2025
Figure 3. A . Simple slopes plot for the interaction of perceived severity and free-speech attitudes on punishment preferences for threats. B . Johnson–Neyman plot for interaction of perceived severity and free-speech attitudes on punishment preferences for threats.
Journal Article
Rinat Meerson and others
Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, Volume 30, Issue 2, March 2025, zmaf002, https://doi.org/10.1093/jcmc/zmaf002
Published: 13 March 2025
Image
Published: 07 March 2025
Figure 1. Estimated differences and 95% confidence intervals in interaction quality between face-to-face interactions and four mediated modalities. A box graph depicting the differences in interaction quality between face-to-face and mediated modalities, showing that video calls and calls have on average s
Journal Article
Aurelio Fernández and others
Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, Volume 30, Issue 2, March 2025, zmaf004, https://doi.org/10.1093/jcmc/zmaf004
Published: 07 March 2025
Image
Published: 07 March 2025
Figure 2. Fluctuations of interaction quality (in blue) for two participants with interaction modality categories as background color indicators. A line graph depicting interaction quality fluctuations across momentary questionnaires for two participants, with background colors showing interaction modality
Image
Published: 07 March 2025
Figure 3. Predicted values of two-way interactions in which location (first row), interaction partner familiarity (second row), and purpose (third row) moderate the effect of modality on interaction quality. Note . Reference category is face-to-face together with the reference category indicated in the lege
Journal Article
Rasa Jämsen and others
Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, Volume 30, Issue 2, March 2025, zmaf003, https://doi.org/10.1093/jcmc/zmaf003
Published: 26 February 2025
Image
Published: 26 February 2025
Figure 1. Analysis of the interview data Graphical representation of the data analysis, starting altogether with 18 descriptive first level codes, which combine into six second-level categories which again combine into three third-level conceptualizations.
Image
Published: 26 February 2025
Figure 2. Overview of the findings Graphical representation of the study’s findings. Two boxes represent datafied work environment with gamified elements and coopetitive practices. Two double arrows connect the boxes. The arrows represent data skepticism and data opportunism.
Journal Article
Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, Volume 30, Issue 2, March 2025, zmaf001, https://doi.org/10.1093/jcmc/zmaf001
Published: 25 February 2025
Journal Article
Ori Tenenboim
Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, Volume 30, Issue 1, January 2025, zmae024, https://doi.org/10.1093/jcmc/zmae024
Published: 24 January 2025
Image
Published: 24 January 2025
Figure 1. Theoretical framework.
Journal Article
Alexis Shore Ingber
Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, Volume 30, Issue 1, January 2025, zmae023, https://doi.org/10.1093/jcmc/zmae023
Published: 24 January 2025