A Study on College Students' Interpersonal Relationships

Interpersonal relationships among college students has always been an interesting topic; however, with new technology, it is important to study how interpersonal relationships are affected by computer mediated communication and whether that plays a bigger role in a student's life than other forms of communication. Technology is becoming a more integral part of people's lives, particularly college students (McMillan & Morrison, 2006). Because the study conducted was run mainly by college students in long-distant relationships, questions about whether long-distance relationships worked better than local-distance relationships arose as well as whether computer mediated communication was more satisfying in a relationship than the telephone. In this study, the Internet will be referred to as computer-mediated communication, also known as CMC.

Previous studies have found that the internet contributes to all aspects of people's lives (McMillan & Morrison, 2006). However, there is a "duality of feelings that interactive media technologies evoke for young adults" (McMillan & Morrison, 2006, p. 88). In other words, people are starting to feel dependent on the internet and have mixed feelings about this dependence (McMillan & Morrison, 2006). Many people reported the internet was needed to maintain social interactions (McMillan & Morrison, 2006). They also reported "that they were 'expected' to be connected and if they weren't they would not be able to participate in their community" (McMillan & Morrison, 2006, p. 87). McMillan and Morrison (2006) said learning how to use the internet and other new technologies is seen by most people as a coming of age ritual. Young people use the internet because they "are objective driven and are focused on making their everyday lives easier" (McMillan & Morrison, 2006, p. 80). McMillan and Morrison dealt with the idea that it is important to use the internet as a means of keeping in touch with people. Inherently this means it is important for people in interpersonal relationships to use the Internet to interact.

Because there is more technology, it is easier to keep in contact with long-distance relations. Baym, Zhang and Lin (2004) found that among college students, there are only slightly less internet interactions than telephone calls, which means the internet is becoming a more important method of communicating in personal relationships. However, "relationships are often maintained through multiple media" (Baym, Zhang & Lin, 2004, p. 309). Baym, Zhang and Lin (2004) said online communication was more likely to occur in a long-distance relationship than a local relationship, the telephone was more likely to be used in a local relationship than a long distance relationship, long-distance internet communication was reported to be more significant than local-distance internet communication, and local phone conversations were more significant than local internet communication (Baym, Zhang & Lin, 2004). Baym, Zhang & Lin (2004) said the internet was used in almost as many relationships as the phone in long-distance relationships and internet communication was viewed as only slightly less satisfying than telephone calls. Because of this information, this study wanted to test whether computer-mediated communication was more satisfying than the telephone. Hence,

H1: People who use the phone more than CMC will have more relationship standards met.

Because Baym, Zhang and Lin (2004) reported long-distance relationships used the internet more than the telephone, this study tested whether the location of two people in a romantic relationship was related to level of satisfaction. It is important to note that satisfaction in a relationship using face-to-face communication was not tested because it is known to be the most widely used form of communication and, as McMillan and Morrison (2004) said, mediated communication is growing in popularity. Hence,

R1: Is the distance between partners related to relationship satisfaction?

Vangelisti and Daly (1997) said women were less likely to be satisfied with their relationships than men. However, both men and women have similar standards in relationships and value each standard similarly (Vangelisti & Daly, 1997). Vangelisti and Daly (1997) suggest this is because of the perspective of the different experiences model, which states that "a woman's caretaker role, their relatively intimate style of interaction and their communication skills create a relational context in which men's standards are more likely to be met than women's" (Vangelisti & Daly, 1997, p. 214). It is possible that women pay more attention to their relational issues (Vangelisti & Daly, 1997). This led to a research question about whether a person's gender really is related to relationship satisfaction. In this study, relationship satisfaction is relationship standards. Hence,

R2: Is gender related to relationship satisfaction?

Method

Data for this study came from a survey of UCSB students, ages 18-23, conducted in the spring of 2006. The sample (N= 42) was based on a convenience, purposive technique; only students who claimed to be in a romantic relationship were allowed to participate. Students in the Communication 88 class, students living in the dormitories, and students randomly seen on campus either in front of the library or walking by the HSSB building were all questioned. The study was conducted in about one week by four aspiring communication majors.

It was a 2 x 2 x 3 design with three independent variables: sex (male/female), type of relationship (local/long-distance) and mediated communication (phone, computer-mediated, or both). In addition, there was a dependent variable of relationship standards met. 15 males and 27 females participated in this study.

Procedure

The survey asked participants to identify whether they were male or female and if they were in a local or long-distance relationship. A local relationship was defined as both partners being in Santa Barbara County and a long-distance relationship was defined as one partner living outside Santa Barbara County and while the other partner was living in Santa Barbara County. Participants were also asked whether they used the phone or CMC more often as a means of communicating with their significant other, or if they used both forms an equal amount of time. Relationship satisfaction was based on relationship standards, which were taken from a list of relationship standards in the Vangelistis and Daly (2004) experiment. Survey questions were posed in a Likert-type style, where participants were asked to either agree or disagree with statements regarding how well they felt there was adaptability, privacy, freedom, fidelity, acceptance, respect, affection demonstration, reliability, coping, frankness, commitment, other-directedness, emotional attachment, and enjoyment in their relationship. Because the questions were Likert-type, the answers were based on intervals ranging from 1 to 7, where 1 represented strong disagreement and 7 represented strong agreement. An interval is a "variable measured with successive points on a scale with equal intervals" (Mullin, 2006, May 9). All of the surveys were self-reported, and because there was only one sample taken from one point in time (Mullin, 2006), it was a cross-sectional study.

Results

Of the 15 males surveyed, 8 were in local-distance relationships and 7 were in long-distance relationships. Of the 8 in local-distance relationships, 5 reported using CMC more often than the phone (μ= 5.41), 1 reported using the phone more often than CMC (μ= 5.76), and 2 said they both the phone and CMC equal amounts of time (μ= 5.24). Of the 7 in long-distance relationships, 3 reported using the phone more often than CMC (μ= 6.55), 1 said he used CMC more often than the phone (μ= 6.94), and 4 reported using both the phone and CMC equally (μ= 5.84).

Of the 27 females surveyed, 17 were in local-distance relationships and 10 were in long-distant relationships. Of the 17 in local-distance relationships, 10 reported using the phone more often than CMC (μ= 6.13), 2 reported using CMC more often than the phone (μ= 6.09), and 5 reported using both the phone and CMC equally as much (μ=6.39). Of the 10 in long-distance relationships, 5 reported using the phone more often than CMC (μ= 6.69), 5 reported using CMC and the phone equally (μ= 6.19), and no one reported using CMC more often than the phone.

Overall, females (μ= 6.44) were found to be more satisfied with their relationships than males ((μ= 5.96). People in long-distance relationships (μ=6.44) claimed they were more satisfied than people in local-distance relationships (μ= 5.84). There was only a slight difference in satisfaction levels between people who used the phone more often (μ= 6.26) than people who used CMC more often (μ= 6.20). However, people who used both CMC and the phone equally were considerably less satisfied (μ= 5.91).

Discussion

This study examined how satisfied people in relationships are, and whether gender, distance and type of communication affected satisfaction. The findings from the study did not support the hypothesis that people who use the phone more than CMC are more satisfied in their relationships. In fact, there was only a slight difference in satisfaction between people who use the phone more versus people who use CMC more. However, the study did find that distance and gender affect satisfaction. Long-distance relationships seem to have more satisfaction than local-distance relationships and females seem to be more satisfied than males. This may be that people in long-distance relationships know each other well enough to feel comfortable and more satisfied with each other, whereas local-distance relationships may be newer and the people involved may not feel close enough to be satisfied yet. Finding that women are more satisfied than men in relationships contradicts previous research. It may be that because this study surveyed fewer males than females, the males surveyed happened to be odd exceptions.

There were many weaknesses in this study, which means there is not much external or internal validity. This study only applies to the specific group of people who filled out the questionnaire, which means there is no external validity because it is not possible to generalize beyond the sample to other settings or conditions (Mullin, 2006). If anything, this study attempted to have construct validity, which is when there are logical relationships among variables (Mullin, 2006). It cannot even be considered reliable because in some conditions there was only one participant, and there was one condition that did not include any participants. This study did not have proper sampling; there should have been five people in each condition, totaling 60 participants in the study. However, there were only 42 participants, and there were not 5 in each condition. Because the questions in the survey were Likert-type items, they were closed-ended questions and therefore easy to process. However, it is also easier to miss other possible responses or more complex attitudes (Mullin, 2006). For example, it was not possible to know how long each person had been in a relationship or how each person interpreted the relational standards. Each participant may have had a different interpretation, and consequently his or her answers may have been affected. Another weakness may have been a social desirability effect. Although all the surveys were anonymous, they were conducted near the researchers. Therefore, participants may have answered questions differently in an attempt to sound more appealing.

There were a few strengths to this study. All of the questions were exhaustive and mutually exclusive, meaning all possible answers to questions were offered and there were no questions where it was possible to have multiple answers (Mullin, 2006). There also was no order effect, meaning questions about gender, distance, and type of communication were asked at the end of the survey so as not to stimulate thought on these key subjects and cause certain questions to be rated higher than it normally would (Mullin, 2006).

Future studies should survey more people and make sure there is an even number of participants in each condition. It would also be more beneficial to use random sampling instead of convenience sampling; it would increase the external validity. An interesting variable to look at in a future study would be the duration of a relationship and at what developmental stage in life the relationship began (i.e., high school, college, etc.). Looking at these variables will allow researchers to further study levels of intimacy and how that affects communication and levels of satisfaction.

References

Baym, N. K., Zhang, Y. B., & Lin, M. (2004). Social interactions across media:
Interpersonal communication on the internet, telephone and face-to-face. New Media and Society, 6, 299-318.

McMillan, S. J., & Morrison, M. (2006). Coming of age with the internet: A qualitative exploration of how the internet has become an integral part of young people's lives. New Media and Society, 8, 73-95.

Mullin, D. (2006, May 9). Survey Research. Class lecture for Communication 88, Department of Communication, University of California, Santa Barbara.

Vangelisti, A. L., & Daly, J. A. (1997). Gender differences in standards for romantic relationships. Personal Relations, 4, 203-219.