Education and Information Technologies

, Volume 19, Issue 4, pp 781–804 | Cite as

Usage patterns of communication interfaces for social support among at-risk adolescents



Social and interpersonal support has mostly been carried out face-to-face. However, the internet was able, in the last couple of decades, to facilitate social interactions through a range of computer-mediated communication (CMC) interfaces—from email applications, chat-rooms, forums, instant messages (IM), short text messages (SMS), social networks, and others. Various studies have examined how these interfaces influence interpersonal communication among adolescents from a wide spectrum of angles. Some studies examined the impact that CMC interfaces are having on written language Ling (2005); Segerstad (2002), while others examined the behavioral and economic effects which they applied to different users Yang (2003); Livingstone (2008). Our research aimed to examine the correlation between CMC interfaces and interpersonal social support among at-risk adolescents, with the goal of studying the patterns of use of today’s four most commonly used CMC interfaces: email, SMS, IM, and closed forums within social networks. An occasional sample was taken from two cities and involved 316 (n = 316) 8th graders who were identified by their teachers as being at-risk teenagers. Each teenager filled out a questionnaire Kraut (2002) which was adapted especially for this research in order to examine the patterns of use with the four CMC interfaces. The results indicated that instant-message (IM) and the short-message (SMS) interfaces were the most preferred interfaces for expressing social support among adolescents at-risk. These findings reflect the results of other studies, which showed a clear preference for the IM interface in normative adolescents Lenhart et al. (2001); Boneva et al. (2005). However, in contrast with these results, our study found that the conversations on social characteristics were more supportive than those on emotional characteristics. We found that the participating at-risk adolescents preferred the IM interface only when topics of conversations were related to the categories of ‘negative partner’ (conversations on topics such as complains and gossip). To a similar extent, they preferred the SMS interface only in the category of ‘social support’ (conversations on topics such as asking favors or advice and gossip), as opposed to email and chat interfaces. However, they preferred to a significant degree the chat interface when the conversations were on topics related to the category of ‘relationship partner’ (conversations on topics such as acquaintances and romance). These results indicate that there is a correlation between the type of the interface and the topics of conversation, and that at-risk adolescents prefer certain interfaces over others for conducting conversations of a different nature.


At-risk adolescents Social support Interpersonal computer interfaces Short messages Instant messaging 


  1. Amichai-Hamburger, Y., & Furnham, A. (2007). The positive net. Computers in Human Behavior, 27(2), 1033–1045.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Barak, A. (2007). Emotional support and suicide prevention through the internet: a field project report. Computers in Human Behavior, 23(2), 971–984.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bar-Tzuri, R. (2008). Cellphone use among teenagers 12–15. The directorate for economics and research, ministry of commerce and industry, Last accessed October 2012.
  4. Berge, Z. L. (1994). Overview and perspectives. In M. P. Collins (Ed.), Computer mediated communication and the online classroom. New York: Hampton Press.Google Scholar
  5. Boneva, B., Quinn, A., Kraut, R., Kiesler, S., Cummings, J. & Shklovski, I. (2005). Teenage communication in the instant messaging era. In R. Kraut, M. Brynin, & Kiesler, S. (Eds.). Information Technology at Home (pp. 612–672). Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  6. Boyd, D. (2008). Why youth love social network sites: The role of networked publics in teenage social life. In David Buckingham (Ed.), Youth, Identity, and DigitalMedia. The John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation Series on Digital Media and Learning. The MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, 119–142. Last accessed October 2012
  7. Braithwaite, D. O., Waldron, V. R., & Finn, J. (1999). Communication of social support in computer mediated groups for persons with disabilities. Health Communication, 11, 123–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Brich, D. A. (1998). Identifying sources of social support. Journal of School Health, 68(4), 159–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Burleson, B. R., Albrecht, T. L., & Sarason, I. L. (Eds.). (1994). Communication of social support: Message, interactions, relationships, and community. California: Sage Publication.Google Scholar
  10. Cassel, J. (1976). The contribution of the social environment to host resistance. American Journal of Epidemiology, 104, 99–125.Google Scholar
  11. Cobb, S. (1976). Social support as a moderator of life stress. Psychosomatic Medicine, 38, 300–314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Colarossi, L. G. (2001). Adolescent gender differences in social support: structure, function, and provider type. Social Work Research, 25(4), 233–241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Colvin, J., Chenoweth, L., Bold, M., & Harding, C. (2004). Caregivers of older adults: advantages and disadvantages of internet-based social support. Family Relations, 53(1), 49–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Degirmencioglu, S. M., Urber, K. A., Tolson, J. M., & Richard, P. (1998). Adolescent friendship networks: community and change over the school year. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly., 44, 313–337.Google Scholar
  15. Epstein, S. (2010). Forecast and trends in internet marketing. Last accessed October 2012
  16. Gelkin, R., Friedman, L., Ostrovsky-Ordokhanian, T. & Zlotin, V. (2006). Socio-cultural Adaptation of New Immigrants and its Influence on the Drop-out of Adolescents from School (from the former USSR). State of Israel: Ministry of Immigration Absorption: Senior Branch for Absorption in the Sciences. Jerusalm.Google Scholar
  17. Kraut, R. (2002). The HomeNet project questionnaire 3. Pittsburgh: Carnegie Mellon University.Google Scholar
  18. Lepore, S. J. (1994). Social support. In Encyclopedia of human behavior. 4, 247–252. San Diego: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  19. Lenhart, A., Rainie, L. & Lewis, O. (2001). Teenage life online: The rise of instant message generation and the internet impact on friendships and family relationships. Pew internet and American life project, Last accessed October 2012.
  20. Ling, R. (2004). The mobile connection: The cell phone’s impact on society. San Francisco: Elsevier.Google Scholar
  21. Ling, R. (2005). The socio-linguistics of SMS: An analysis of SMS use by a random sample of Norwegians. In R. Ling & P. Pedersen (Eds.), Mobile communications: Renegotiation of the social sphere (pp. 335–349). London: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Livingstone, S. (2008). Taking risky opportunities in youthful content creation: teenagers’ use of social networking sites for intimacy, privacy and self-expression. New Media & Society., 10(3), 393–411.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Markward, M., McMillan, L., & Markward, N. (2003). Social support among youth. Children and Youth Services Review, 25(7), 571–587.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Mesch, G. & Talmud, I. (2003). The nature of computer mediated social networks among Israeli youth. Paper presented at the International Conference on Computer Networks and Social Networks. University of Haifa, August 25–27.Google Scholar
  25. McCann, R. A. & Austin, S. (1988). At-risk youth: Definitions, dimensions, and relationships. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association. New Orleans, April 5–9. Last accessed October 2012
  26. Segerstad, Y. H. (2002). Use and adaptation of written language to the conditions of computer-meditated communication. Sweden: Ph.D. Dissertation, Department of Linguistics Goteborg University.Google Scholar
  27. Schaefer, C., Coyne, J. C., & Lazarus, R. S. (1981). The health-related functions of social support. Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 4(4), 381–406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Smilansky, M. (1988). The Challenge of Adolescence. Volume 1, Ramot, Tel-Aviv.Google Scholar
  29. Solberg, S. (1996). Psychology of the child and adolescent: A foreword to developmental psychology. Jerusalem: The Hebrew University Press.Google Scholar
  30. Walter, J. B., & Boyd, S. (2002). Attraction to computer mediated social support. In C. A. Lin & D. Atkin (Eds.), Communication technology and society: Audience adoption and users (pp. 153–188). NJ: Cresskill.Google Scholar
  31. Wellman, B., & Haythornthwaite, C. (2002). The internet in everyday life: An introduction. Oxford: Blackwell.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Yang, G. (2003). The impact of computer-mediated communication on the processes and outcomes of buyer-seller negotiations. Irvine: Ph.D. Dissertation, University of California.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of EducationBar-Ilan UniversityRamat-GanIsrael

Personalised recommendations