Skip to Main Content
 

Global Search Box

 
 
 
 

ETD Abstract Container

Abstract Header

Cell Phone Communication Versus Face-to-Face Communication: The Effect of Mode of Communication on Relationship Satisfaction and the Difference in Quality of Communication

Abstract Details

2008, MA, Kent State University, College of Arts and Sciences / Department of Sociology and Criminology.

With the advent of cell phones, individuals are now able to maintain relationships regardless of distance and time. The purpose of this research was to identify what role the mode of communication plays in determining overall relationship satisfaction, in order to identify how communication over the cell phone compares to face-to-face communication. It is also possible that this relationship between mode of communication and relationship satisfaction is mediated by the quality of communication that is experienced within both modes of communication. To test the hypotheses, a random sample of 2,600 university students was drawn in two separate waves, of which a total of 516 students completed a web-based survey. The results of this research yield some interesting findings. First, it appears that the relationship between mode of communication and relationship satisfaction varies according to the type of relationship being studied when the quality of communication indicators are not controlled for. For friendships, communication over the cell phone has a greater positive impact on relationship satisfaction than does face-to-face communication. Family members are just the opposite: face-to-face communication has a greater positive impact on their relationship satisfaction than does cell phone communication. For Romantic Partners, however, both modes of communication are equally important in their overall relationship satisfaction when the quality of communication is not accounted for. When the quality of communication indicators are accounted for, however, it appears that in almost all cases, the frequency and quality of face-to-face communication has a greater effect on relationship satisfaction than does the frequency and quality of cell phone communication, with one exception: the frequency of cell phone communication has a greater impact on relationship satisfaction for romantic partners than does the frequency of face-to-face communication. This study also provides empirical evidence that in all three relationship conditions, the quality of face-to-face communication is significantly higher than the quality of cell phone communication on average, and that overall, the quality of communication is more important for relationship satisfaction than the quantity of communication. The results of this study identify a whole new area for future study by social scientists, and communications researchers alike.

Richard Serpe, PhD (Committee Chair)
Richard Adams, PhD (Committee Member)
David Purcell, PhD (Committee Member)
115 p.

Recommended Citations

Citations

  • Schwarz, R. M. (2008). Cell Phone Communication Versus Face-to-Face Communication: The Effect of Mode of Communication on Relationship Satisfaction and the Difference in Quality of Communication [Master's thesis, Kent State University]. OhioLINK Electronic Theses and Dissertations Center. http://rave.ohiolink.edu/etdc/view?acc_num=kent1227282130

    APA Style (7th edition)

  • Schwarz, Rebecca. Cell Phone Communication Versus Face-to-Face Communication: The Effect of Mode of Communication on Relationship Satisfaction and the Difference in Quality of Communication. 2008. Kent State University, Master's thesis. OhioLINK Electronic Theses and Dissertations Center, http://rave.ohiolink.edu/etdc/view?acc_num=kent1227282130.

    MLA Style (8th edition)

  • Schwarz, Rebecca. "Cell Phone Communication Versus Face-to-Face Communication: The Effect of Mode of Communication on Relationship Satisfaction and the Difference in Quality of Communication." Master's thesis, Kent State University, 2008. http://rave.ohiolink.edu/etdc/view?acc_num=kent1227282130

    Chicago Manual of Style (17th edition)