Carrie Torgerson dissertation by ICSW

Institute for Clinical Social Work

The Experiences of Emerging Adults Communicating Electronically

A Dissertation Submitted to the Faculty of the Institute for Clinical Social Work in Partial Fulfillment For the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy

By Carrie Torgerson

Chicago, Illinois February, 2016

Abstract

This qualitative study explored the experiences using nonverbal and non face-to-face electronic forms of communication in the lives of 20 emerging adults between the ages of 18 and 25. All participants used an electronic device, laptop, personal computer, tablet, or cellular phone with a minimum of text messaging capability to interact and communicate with people in their lives. Each participant was interviewed in-person following grounded theory methodology for semi-structured interviews and data analysis. Self psychology and developmental theories were used to interpret the four findings. The first finding indicated the desire and need for a shared emotional experience that occurred face-to-face and was replicated electronically only when an in-person relationship had already been established. The absence of nonverbal modes of communication through electronic interactions lacked empathic connection and resonance for emerging adults. The second finding describes the collective social and cultural norms of electronic interactions and the resulting unintentional, uncharacteristic, and unempathic behaviors of participants. Communicating and posting positive aspects on life was the third finding as a compensatory strategy to disavow uncomfortable feelings and experiences. The final finding is the self-blame and experience of feeling unimportant in the attempt to make sense of delayed or no electronic response.

I would like to thank my husband, Edward, for all his support, patience, and kindness throughout this journey.

iii

Acknowledgements

I would like to express my gratitude to my committee members, Joan DiLeonardi, PhD., for her wisdom and guidance as I wandered aimlessly at times through the plethora of data; Joe Palombo, MA, LCSW for his calming presence and clarity of thought; and Lynne Tylke, PhD., for her encouragement and challenging my thinking with her ideas and questions. I also want to thank my readers, Michael Hoffman, MD and Connie Goldberg, LCSW for their thoughtful feedback and constant support. They are wonderful teachers and mentors and I am grateful to each of them. Lastly, I would like to thank my ICSW cohort, Damon Krohn, Amy Patterson, Amy Groessl, Xhosa Burford, Victoria Mahboub, Angela Song, and Tara Thomason for providing a safe and stimulating learning space to grow personally and professionally in ways I would never have imagined.

Table of Contents Page Abstract…………………………………………………………………………………..ii Acknowledgments……………………………………………………………………….iv Chapter I. Introduction…………………………………………………………………….......1 II. Literature Review……………………………………………………….………...6 Psychoanalytic Theories of Development Other Developmental Theories Electronic Communication Theory of Nonverbal Communication Theoretical and Conceptual Framework III. Methodology……………………………………………………………………..40 Study Design Participant Recruitment Description of Participants Data Collection Data Analysis

Table of Contents – Continued Chapter

Page

IV. Introduction to the Findings……………………………………………………46 V. Findings…………………………………………………………………………...49 It’s Important to Actually Interact: I Want to Be with Them In-Person A Double Edged Sword; It’s the Best and the Worst Sharing the News of Life; I Want to Put My Best Foot Forward What’s Going On: Don’t Leave Me Hanging VI. Discussion……………………………………………………………………..…98 It’s Important to Actually Interact: I Want to Be with Them In-person A Double Edged Sword; It’s the Best and the Worst Sharing the News of Life; I Want to Put My Best Foot Forward What’s Going On: Don’t Leave Me Hanging Implications Implications for Clinical Practice Limitations Future Research Appendices A. Participant Informed Consent…………………………………………………152 B. Participant Recruitment Flyer 1……………………………………………….156 C. Revised Participant Recruitment Flyer……………………………………..…158 D. Interview Protocol………………………………………………………………160 References………………………………………………………………………..…163 vi

Chapter I

Introduction History of the Problem The purpose of this grounded theory study was to explore the meaning, importance, and function of communicating electronically in the absence of face-to-face or voice-tovoice interactions of emerging adults. With the increased accessibility and utilization of personal computers, mobile phones, and smartphones over the past decade, emerging adults between the ages of 18 and 25 have grown up with electronic devices and a multitude of options to communicate and interact through social media, text messages, and email messages. With the potential for immediate responsiveness, more time is spent looking at and using these devices to electronically interact with people, often at the expense of face-to-face interactions with other human beings. Although these devices and various formats make it possible to connect with friends, family, and other people from across the globe, the function and experience of using electronic forms of communication in the lives of emerging adults had not been explored. Arnett (2000) introduced a new developmental stage, emerging adulthood, to reflect the social and cultural changes that occurred in industrialized nations. During the latter half of the 20th century, attending college became more prevalent for increasing numbers of 18 year olds. This altered and postponed the age at which emerging adults entered into

marriage, delayed securing permanent, full-time employment, and the ability to financially support independent living. As a result, emerging adults are dependent on their parents for financial and emotional support for an extended period of time and the transitional period between adolescence and adulthood has lengthened. According to Arnett (2000), during this transitional phase of emerging adulthood, the subjective experience for emerging adults is neither as adolescents nor adult. Access to the internet, and ownership of personal computers, mobile devices, and smartphones are readily available in the 21st century. Emerging adults have grown up within the electronic technology boom. Many emerging adults had personal computers at home, played video games, used handheld gaming devices, searched the internet, owned a cellular phone, blogged, and used Facebook and other social media sites. As a result, they have become avid users of the internet, mobile phones, and social media as a way to communicate with friends and family. In the 2014 Pew Research report (2014), 98% of 18 to 29 year olds own mobile phones and 92% of American adults own a smartphone. Social networking sites have become a predominant means of communicating with others. According to a Pew Report in 2015, 43% of smartphone users between the ages of 18 and 29 report using their apps constantly. Mobile messaging and the usage of social networking sites by 18 to 29 years olds was greater than any other age range (Pew Research, 2015). The prevalence of social networking sites in this study indicated 82% of this age group most widely used Facebook followed by 55% using Instagram, 32% using Twitter, 37% Pinterest, and 20% Tumblr. Since its founding in 2004, Facebook (2015) amassed over one billion average monthly users as of 2013 with 665 million active monthly users, and 894 million mobile monthly users (Facebook, 2015).

Launched in 2010, Instagram had 182.5 million monthly active users with 58 million photos uploaded daily (Instagram, 2015). Twitter, launched in 2006, has over 320 million active users with an average of 200 million tweets per day (Twitter, 2015). Pinterest, launched in 2010, had 79.343 million users with 10 million monthly visitors (Pinterest, 2015). In 2007 Tumblr, a blogging site to post text, photos, videos, and links, was launched. By 2015, Tumblr had 260.5 million blogs and 26% of its users are between 18 and 24 years old (Tumblr, 2015). Snapchat (2015) has 115 million users, 32.9% are 18 to 24 year olds, with 410 million Snapchats per day. In addition to social media, text messaging has become an increasingly common means of communication for emerging adults. Mobile cellular subscribers worldwide topped 6.8 billion in 2013 with one billion American subscribers (ITU, 2013). In the United States, text messaging and taking photos are the most common uses of non-voice functions of a cellular phone, particularly among the 18 to 24 olds (Smith, 2011). In this age range, 95% own a cellular phone and 97% use text messaging to send or receive an average of 109.5 daily text messages or 3,200 messages monthly. However, 12% of 18 to 24 year olds send or receive more than 200 text messages daily or 6,000 messages monthly (Smith, 2011). Current research findings are mixed regarding the benefits and disadvantages of using different electronic forms of communication. For some college students who are shy, fearful, and anxious in face-to-face communication using Facebook to communicate may alleviate loneliness and shyness; however, they had fewer Facebook friends than their peers (Orr, Sisic, Ross, Simmering, Arseneault, & Orr, 2009; Sheldon, 2008). When Facebook interactions occurred in addition to moderate or high levels of face-to-face

interactions, college students reported feeling better. However, when face-to-face interactions were experienced more frequently, affective wellbeing declined when interacting online through Facebook (Kross, et al., 2013). Facebook can mediate shyness and anxiety by creating the appearance of safety for users in expressing the realities of life (Farahani, Aghamohamadi, Kazemi, Bakhtiarv, & Ansari, 2011; Tonsun, 2012), however this online honesty tends to be perceived as negative and unlikeable and less likely to garner online support (Forest & Wood, 2012). As a result, the cultural expectations of social media promote a positive self-presentation that leads to subjective well-being (Kim & Lee, 2011; Panek, Nardis, Konrath, 2013; Wang, 2013). Text messaging allows emerging adults to remain close to friends, particularly when texts are personal and retain the humanness of communication (Horstmanshof & Power, 2005). In addition, text messaging with the immediacy of responsiveness can enhance intimacy and face-to-face interactions (Hu, Wood, Smith, & Westbrook, 2004; Jin & Park, 2010). In fact, communicating through text messaging was a stronger motivation in maintaining relationships than voice-to-voice mobile phone communication (Ellison, Steinfield, & Lampe, 2007; Ishii, 2006; Jin & Park, 2010). Using nonverbal electronic means of communication has been associated with maintaining established relationships with family and close friends, particularly with friends from high school (Subrahmanya, Reich, Waechter, Espinoza, 2008; Tonsun, 2012; Young, 2011). Electronic forms of communication can have a negative effect on psychological wellbeing, including increased levels of loneliness, daily life stress, and depression for internet users (Kraut et al., 1998; Verduyn et al., 2015). When compared to face-to-face interactions, emerging adults with higher levels of loneliness experience increased

loneliness when using the internet (Hu, 2007) and are less likely to engage in face-to-face interactions (Jin & Park, 2010). The use of text messaging by anxious individuals is preferred to voice calling and at times can be a way to escape or avoid something (Farahani et al, 2011; Jin & Park, 2010); and lonely individuals prefer voice calling to text messaging (Reid & Reid, 2007). In addition, studies suggest media multitasking is a risk factor for depression and anxiety (Becker, Alzahabi, & Hopwood, 2013; Chen & Lee, 2012). Much of the research to date have been quantitative studies from the fields of social, developmental, and cyber psychology in an attempt to shed light on how electronic technology is being used by emerging adults. These attempts to quantify psychological processes such as self worth, loneliness, and anxiety limit understanding the complexity of internalized psychic structures. This exploratory qualitative study set out to understand the emerging adultâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s experience interacting with others through nonverbal electronic forms of communication.

Chapter II

Literature Review Psychoanalytic Theories of Development Young adulthood, as a developmental phase, has a limited presence in psychoanalytic theory. Most recently, contemporary theorists in psychoanalysis, developmental psychology, and social psychology have addressed and incorporated changing social, educational, familial roles, and expectations of young adults in the 21st century. However, overall attention to the years between 18 and 20 as a developmental period is narrow. In addition, psychoanalytic theories may be outdated as they were formulated prior to the increased ownership and usage of electronic technology by children, parents, and peers for entertainment, educational purposes, information gathering, and alternate ways of communicating. Based on the psychosexual stages outlined by Freud, Mahler (1963) developed her developmental theory on the separation-individuation phase in early childhood that contributed to the psychological structure of the individual. This transition from the “symbiotic relationship at the level of need satisfaction is gradually transformed into object relationship” (Mahler, 1963, p. 308). A sense of identity was marked by the toddler’s successful separation and individuation by virtue of differentiating, or hatching,

from the symbiotic relationship with the mother to a differentiated self. This occurs through verbal and nonverbal communication in which the mother’s affective response to her child that aids the development of his innate potential, ego functions, and love object which is separate from self (Mahler, 1967). Mahler recognized the relational component of the infant and mother dyad in that both need to attune to the other. She also noted that the mother’s emotional availability was necessary for the child’s ego to obtain autonomy. As the toddler becomes mobile and begins to explore the world separate from his mother, the toddler keeps an eye on her and returns to her, either physically or by catching her eye, as a way to check in with her. When the mother is able to respond to the child’s exploratory and emotional experience with encouragement, pleasure, and comfort the toddler when frightened or hurt, the toddler feels safe to continue exploring his newfound world and actualize his potential. This first separation- individuation phase during toddlerhood was crucial for Mahler. She recognized the impact of the first 2 years of life in the formation of identity. This phase of identity formation recapitulates during adolescence; however, Mahler did not develop a clear developmental theory for the adolescent phase of life. Mahler’s stage-based developmental theory culminates in full separation and sexual identity near 17 years of age. Mahler’s developmental theory is outdated based on contemporary psychodynamic theories that no longer conceptualize development occurring in stages. Erickson’s theory of psychosocial development is also outdated in the 21st century. His theory is also based on sequential stages of development that require an engagement with a psychosocial crisis, either successfully or deficiently resolved, each of which is dependent on previous resolutions. The adolescent psychosocial conflict is that of identity

versus identity diffusion (Erickson, 1956). This stage marks the end of childhood and culminates in a clearer definition of self. At this stage, the ego’s function is to integrate the psychosexual and psychosocial components of earlier developmental stages and to integrate childhood identifications and newly formed aspects of identity through role experimentation and social play (Erickson, 1956). This stage consolidates familial, social, societal, and cultural values into identity. Adolescence is “a psychosocial moratorium during which extremes of subjective experience, alternatives of ideological choice, and potentialities of realistic commitment can become the subject of social play and joint mastery” (Erickson, 1956, p. 117). This moratorium allows the adolescent to experiment with an array of relationships, limit testing, values, religious or spiritual beliefs, educational and vocational ideas and choices. This stage culminates in identify formation based on how the adolescent views himself, repudiating earlier identifications to formulate his own identity within the context of his family, community, and society that recognizes the adolescent as somebody (Erickson, 1956). Emerging adulthood also encompasses Erickson’s psychosocial developmental stage of intimacy versus isolation, comprising the years from 20 to either 24 or 30. This stage is a period of continued identify formation as relationships with friends continue and other relationships form through expanding social, vocational, and educational experiences. However, in this stage, the challenge for identity formation is the ability to form intimate relationships with others, particularly with a significant other often culminating in a longterm commitment. If identity has not solidified and experiences of failed relationships have not been integrated, isolation may occur in that the ego cannot bear the pain of rejection. As a result, isolation becomes the protective solution from hurt and pain

associated with disappointments and rejections that occur in intimate relationships (Erickson, 1963). The dichotomous dilemmas or crises that result in either satisfactory or deficient resolution in Erikson’s stages of psychosocial development, represents an early theory in psychoanalytic understanding of human development. However, his adolescent and young adulthood stages of psychosocial development do not adequately address the complexity of intrapsychic structure or trends in social, cultural, and technological development over the past 25 years. Peter Blos (1967) attempted to incorporate Mahler’s idea of separation-individuation along with ideas from Erickson’s psychosocial developmental model to introduce a second separation-individuation phase occurring in adolescence. He adheres to the idea of developmental phases and stages of progressive development, which is built upon previous periods along a developmental trajectory. He identified similarities between Mahler’s separation-individuation phase during toddlerhood and adolescence in that both include personality structure formation that can lead to health or psychopathology (Blos, 1967). He identified crucial aspects of adolescent development that are marked by conflict, maturational tasks, and resolution. When these challenges are successfully navigated, the outcome results in stable and consistent self esteem and mood, and increased independence from external sources except when dependency is chosen by the adolescent or emerging adult (Blos, 1967). Regression, according to Blos, is necessary at this stage of development because the adolescent needs to experience the infantile object libido in order to relinquish or give it up to seek out new love objects. This period also allows the adolescent to vacillate between regressive and progressive experiences that permit experimentation; this aids the adolescent in differentiating from infantile love

objects and creating self esteem. The functions of the ego transform during adolescence, according to Blos (1967), and when successfully negotiated, the ego has a distinct organization. Blos did not conceptualize development past adolescence, therefore leaving a gap in the psychoanalytic literature for the period of early adulthood or emerging adulthood. Adatto (1980) expanded psychoanalytic developmental theory to include late adolescence and early adulthood in order to encompass the years from 18 to 25. The deidealization or repudiation of parental identifications that transpires during adolescence culminates in the formation of lasting love object ties. Adatto also correlates the late adolescent experience of emptiness with feelings of grandiosity. External influences contribute to the development of the superego and ego ideals as the late adolescent matures in separating from early libidinal love objects and investing in new objects. Reality testing matures in this process as well as the ability for introspection. However, for young adults pursuing higher education, the more primitive defense of intellectualization remains active because intellect is required for academic achievement (Adatto, 1980). The psychological transformational process from adolescence to adulthood includes intrapsychic modification in object relations no longer dominated by the superego and parental idealization (Staples & Smarr, 1980). At this time in development, identity formation is consolidated internally and externally through identification with others, including society and its values and morals. The developmental tasks needed to make the transition to adulthood include: attainment of separation and independence from parents; sexual identity; commitment to work; development of moral values; capacity for lasting,

sexual, satisfying heterosexual relationship; and an adult relationship with parents (Staples & Smarr, 1980). Psychoanalytic theory of development has included the importance of broadening tasks of late adolescence and young adulthood, and understanding the length of this transitional phase is dependent on the attitudes of parents and significant people in the life of the young adult (Blaine & Farnsworth, 1980). These authors contend that early life experiences with significant people within the societal and cultural contexts in which the individual is immersed support the development of separation and individuation. The areas of early development which impact the young adultâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s ability to develop healthy commitments in adulthood include problem solving, sexuality, career choice, and intimacy. Whether young adults enter college or the workforce, they are faced with a variety of internal and external dilemmas and decisions. When uncertain, they tend not to seek out external guidance and instead look inward, often feeling embarrassed for not knowing. When young adults had the opportunity to explore their expanding world with the support, encouragement, and guidance from significant others, including the community and society, the young adult was able to recognize his own realistic capacities in solving problems, setting goals, and developing close, intimate relationships. Therefore, the relationship and interaction with significant people and society contribute to the development of the young adultâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s capacity to form commitments in trusting and reciprocal relationships, problem solving, and career choice (Blaine & Farnsworth, 1980). The developmental period of late adolescence according to Isay, (1980) is focused on the 17 or 18 year old entering college. As increasing numbers of late adolescents attend college, independence develops differently than in previous generations. The nature of

leaving home to attend college fosters physical separation and independence from parents. These late adolescents are left to make their own decisions, exercise judgment, and regulate their own physical and emotional states (Isay, 1980). During this stage of development, aggressive and libidinal impulses are pushing for discharge. Some of these impulses can be experienced as quite intense and may unconsciously scare the late adolescent. They are unsure of what to do or how to manage these impulses because ego functions are still in a state of transition. In addition, the late adolescent may experience depression in response to mourning the separation from parents. Without stable ego functioning, late adolescents test limits that require external intervention by others in authority as a replacement for ego and superego functions of the lost parent. It is common for colleges and universities to provide external interventions for students and function in loco parentis. Through testing capabilities in reality, the late adolescent develops “autonomous characteristics, such as motor, language and thinking skills that are primarily concerned with increasing mastery over the environment” (Isay, 1980, p. 514). Self psychology does not include a developmental theory for adolescence or emerging adulthood. Kohut (1971) outlined a theory in the development of a healthy self that stresses the importance of the interactions between the caregiver and infant. Infants innately have a cohesive sense of self that remains present by way of the responsiveness and interactions within the infant-caregiver dyad and environment. The experience of attuned responsiveness to emotional, physical, and psychological needs by another person “in shoring up our self” (Kohut, 1984, p. 49) is what Kohut termed a selfobject. Normal disruptions in attunement that occur can aid in the internalization of healthy self structures. However; if disruptions in attunement are unpredictable or traumatic resulting

in overwhelming affect, the child develops deficits in the self such as difficulty regulating affect and self-esteem (Kohut, 1984). These ruptures are only experienced when responsiveness by a caregiver is delayed or absent. Kohut disagreed with developmental theories advocating a shift from dependence or symbiosis to independence. Instead, he asserted “that the developmental move of normal psychological life must be seen in the changing nature of the relationships between the self and selfobjects – not as a replacement of selfobjects by love objects, not as a move from narcissism to object love” (Kohut, 1984). Achieving independence and a stable identity as an emerging adult developmental phase were not addressed in Kohut’s self psychology theory. However; Palombo (1988) did conceptualize adolescent development from a self psychological perspective. As Kohut emphasized, individuals require selfobject functions throughout the life span; however, how the need and use changes over time. For adolescents, their selfobject milieu expands beyond parents to the larger world of school and the community. As they experience and interact in this wider arena, adolescents incorporate these experiences in their conceptualization of the world. These experiences present adolescents with the availability of expanded selfobject experiences. The development of a sense of self is the culmination of experiences with others in providing selfobject functions that support the self. Palombo (2013) contends that a cohesive sense of self is represented in a cohesive self- narrative. Self-narratives are created and shaped through development and represent themes in the lives of adolescents. These themes are repeated in life as enactments in relationships with others. Since adults have their own self-narratives, parents’ wishes, desires, and expectations are

communicated to their children both verbally and nonverbally. The dependence on parents for caregiving is ripe for children to conform and accommodate parental values, needs, and wishes that can become interwoven in their own self-narrative called emplotment (Palombo, 2013). By accommodating to parental wishes, the child develops a false self by conforming to the wants and needs of parents. Emplotment occurs in other contexts and relationships such as school systems, peer groups, and social norms. In addition, cultural values and expectations are another factor in the formation of self-narratives. For adolescents, their world expands as they are exposed to wider interpersonal and world experiences. These experiences become incorporated in the adolescent narrative in the form of rituals of the social group, culture, and society in what Palombo (2013) calls conventionalization. Conventionalization includes societal and cultural narratives that include norms, values, and ideals. The rituals and expectations dictated by these larger groups present challenges for adolescents in that they need to either conform or reject them. By accepting them, adolescents incorporate them into their own self-narrative which can be experienced as social or cultural transference or twinship. However, if emplotment occurs, an adolescentâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s acceptance of the social or cultural norms is in the service of being accepted into the group as a strategy to avoid rejection or being ostracized. An attempt to conform to social or cultural expectations not embraced by the adolescent may lead to the development of a false self. Rejecting them can lead to isolation and abandonment by the social and cultural groups. The relationship with caregivers and significant people in the life of the adolescent during this time can mitigate the conflicts between their self-narrative and integrating the social, cultural norms and values presented by others.

During adolescence, selfobject functions continue to be needed to enhance and strengthen a sense of self. The three selfobject functions involved are mirroring, idealization, and alter ego (Palombo, 1988) which can be provided by parents, other significant people in the adolescent’s life, the community, and culture. The responsiveness of selfobjects in adolescence can contribute to a healthy sense of self, or if disappointed, can contribute to vulnerabilities in the self. Mirroring is necessary in developing a sense of self that affirms the adolescent’s value and leads to healthy ambitions and goals. Exhibitionism, the need for recognition and affirmation, are central tenets of the mirroring selfobject function. In infancy and early childhood, caregivers praise and encourage the child’s achievements and attempts at new endeavors so that the child can experience the gleam in the mother’s eye. For adolescents, the onset of puberty creates hormonal and physical changes that frequently create self consciousness and body image distortions. Because of these challenges, the need for recognition and validation continues to be vitally important for adolescents from both their peer group and parents. The need and desire for parents to provide mirroring selfobject functions is challenging during adolescence, partially because of the adolescent’s embarrassment about having these needs particularly at a time when identity with their peer group is prevalent. It is here that the social group, community, and culture can offer mirroring selfobject functions to adolescents; however, they are searching for mirroring experiences that resonate with feeling deeply valued as a person and not just superficially acknowledged (Palombo, 1988). Idealization is another selfobject function that remains important during adolescence. According to Kohut, (1971) the early developmental line of the idealized parental imago

allows children to maintain their original blissful state by experiencing the powerful perfect other. Initially, infants do not have the capacity to regulate their physical or emotional states. Therefore, the idealized parental imago becomes a conduit so the child can remain connected, sharing in the safety created by the idealized other. From the experience of being with an idealized other who is able to attune to the physical and emotional needs of the child without prolonged over stimulating distress or neglect, a sense of safety is felt and the ability to regulate affect develops. During adolescence, they begin to realize that their parents are fallible human beings with flaws and the process of de-idealization occurs. At this time, they are able to experience parents from a more realistic perspective. The inevitable human disappointments experienced by adolescents by their parents often lead to anger because the injury to the self can be unbearable and they may feel betrayed by their parents (Palombo, 1988). How parents respond to this de-idealization can impact further development. When parents acknowledge and validate their own limitations and the experience of their adolescent, the capacity to regulate affect and the ability to assess and evaluate their own value system is enhanced. As a result of parental de-idealization, adolescents look outside the family to peers and to the community, in search of idealized selfobjects. The externalization of selfobjects outside of parents extended Kohutâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s (1971) idea of the alter-ego or twinship of being like the other. This is notable during adolescence because being part of and similar to oneâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s peer group is often a primary focus. Togashi and Kottler (2012) have expanded the concept of twinship to include additional aspects of a twinship experience. The experience of a meaningful sense of belonging is particularly

relevant to adolescents and emerging adults (Togashi & Kottler, 2012). For adolescents, it is important to be part of some group, to have the experience of being like the larger group, and that the larger group also experiences the person as similar to the group. It is a mutual alikeness. If the adolescent or emerging adult does not experience this twinship, or not in the dominant group, this can lead to exclusion or feeling different, ostracized, and bullied that can result in the experience of dehumanization. Being different and treated as such impacts the ability to integrate personal and community values and establish meaningful relationships. It is important to keep in mind that psychoanalytic theories were developed in the context of working with middle and upper class patients and were conceptualized and formulated prior to the age of electronic technology. As such, these theories of development assume generalizability to all patients and clients of psychotherapy. In addition, psychoanalytic theories do not address cultural, socioeconomic, racial, and gender differences in psychopathology and development. The advancement in computer technology and the prevalence in ownership of personal computers and handheld electronic devices have created a new social environment in which emerging adults interact and construct their lives and relationships. Therefore, understanding the experience of using electronic forms of communication in the lives of emerging adults is an opportunity to begin an exploration of psychological development in the age of social technology.

Other Developmental Theories Over the past 40 years, the meaning of the years between 18 and 25 has changed for young adults because of altered expectations in the social and cultural structures in industrialized nations. Historically, young adults during this timeframe got married shortly after completing high school, started families, and were settled in fulltime employment. In the United States, this is no longer the norm. Today the cultural norm is for both young men and women to attend college after high school, followed by completing advanced degrees to ensure secure employment and financial stability. Many professional jobs require a masterâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s or doctoral degree to be considered as a candidate for employment. Consequentially, the 18 to 25 year old in the 21st century marries and starts a family later, entrance into fulltime employment is postponed, and permanent independent living is also delayed. The need for college and other post-secondary higher education, as well as the need to return to living with parents until securely employed contribute to delayed independence. Because of these social and cultural changes, Arnett (2000) termed a new developmental stage for the 18 to 25 year olds as emerging adulthood. Arnett (2000) describes emerging adulthood as a period of exploring identity. Although this is an unsettled time for the emerging adult, it does allow freedom to explore a variety of social, relational, educational, and vocational experiences. This is similar to Ericksonâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s stage of identity, including a moratorium; however, in the 21st century the emerging adult now has increasing opportunities to study abroad or participate in mission trips around the world as part of their college education or through various organizations. In addition, travel outside the United States with family has

become more frequent among families with financial means. Experiencing other cultures offers a widened worldview and impacts the shaping of identity, the forming and maintaining friendships and significant love relationships, work opportunities, and spiritual beliefs. Emerging adults are able to have these experiences without being fully responsible for themselves because they are still dependent on parental support. In addition to the freedom to explore, the emerging adult also spends much time alone, engaged in productive activities such as school or part time employment. The developmental tasks outlined by Arnett (2000) that define the transition into adulthood are: being responsible for oneself; making independent decisions; and financial independence. However, his theory does not include an understanding of the internal structure in the development of a sense of self. According to Arnett (2006), emerging adulthood has five features that distinguish this time between 18 and mid-20s as a separate developmental period. The first feature in his theory is the age of identity which is similar to Eriksonâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s (1963) stage of identity versus role confusion, although this occurs later than adolescence. The emerging adult experiences the moratorium suggested by Erikson; this is an unsettled period marked by leaving home for college. Attending and living away at college offers exploration of self through experiences with a larger pool of peers and important others such as professors. Living away from parents also provides the opportunity to make decisions in daily life. All of this expands the worldview of the emerging adult which aids in forming identity in relationships, love, and vocation. Emerging adulthood is also a time of instability due to frequent changes in residence while attending college or difficulty securing a stable job that offers financial security.

During emerging adulthood, cohabitation with friends and significant others at college is common and often necessary to share the financial burden independent living. Again, Erikson’s moratorium is applicable in that emerging adults do not yet have the responsibilities or obligations that this age group had 40 years ago. At this transitional developmental period, emerging adults experience themselves as not yet adults but no longer adolescents (Arnett, 2000). All of these changes are not based on achieving developmental tasks or mastering crises, but on living through external experiences over a lengthy period of time. Developmentally the period between 18 and 26 is a time of transition that emerging adults experience as having the most impact on major aspects of their lives (Tanner, 2006). The transition to becoming self-sufficient adults occurs within the context of significant relationships in their lives. It is through these relationships that emerging adults experience the values, roles, and expectations that prepare them to assume responsibility for themselves in an independent and self-directed manner. Tanner (2006) terms this process recentering which encompasses ego development, a sense of agency, impulse control, and self-regulation. She proposes a three stage process of “recentering” that includes developmental tasks and intrapsychic structuring as the emerging adult interacts with important people within the context of social and cultural expectations. Central to recentering is the capacity for emerging adults to experience themselves as separate individuals while remaining connected to important others in their lives. The ability to transition to young adulthood is comprised of the capacity to sustain commitment to others, to establish a career, to make life choices, and regulate one’s

experience. These capacities are contingent upon involvement in interdependent systems that continue to support and sustain the individual (Tanner, 2006). Separation and individuation, concepts that are central to Tanner’s (2006) recentering process for emerging adults, underscore the importance of earlier relationships with parents and the sense of self that has developed within the context of the relational matrix in the family of origin. However, if the child-caregiver relationship is too close, as with “helicopter” parents, the ability to separate interferes with emerging adult’s capacity to recenter and form their own sense of self sufficiency. In these experiences, the caregiver’s over involvement in doing for or taking on the responsibilities of the child leads to a deficiency in developing a sense of competency and confidence in abilities, skills, and emotional regulation. The child, and later adolescent and emerging adult, continues to be dependent on caregivers to mitigate their experiences which leads to an inability in forming a sense of self separate from caregivers. Psychoanalytic and developmental theories propose phase-specific tasks in human development. However, conceptualizing development as the mastery of tasks limits the understanding of psychological development in the 21st century. Human development is now understood in a relational context. Developing a sense of self that is stable is influenced by past and present experiences. Earlier theories do not address the impact of the electronic technological revolution on development as children use the technology throughout their early, adolescent, and emerging adulthood years. As such, this leaves us to speculate whether or how technology enhances, interrupts, or diminishes the relational component of development.

Electronic Communication Until the latter half of the 20th century, human interaction occurred through direct communication by face-to-face contact or telephone calls. The only nonverbal form of communication was through hand written letters. The advent of the computer age advanced indirect written communication options to include text messages, emails, blogs, and postings on Facebook, Twitter, Tumblr, Pinterest, Snapchat, and other social network sites. Staying connected and communicating with other people can occur instantaneously, at any time of the day or night. These communications can be sent to one person, to a specified group, or the public subscribers of social network sites. The effect of communicating with others electronically seems to paradoxically contribute to psychological distress and enhance psychological wellbeing. A two year field trial study conducted at Carnegie Mellon of 93 families and 253 consenting participants using the Internet for the first time found that loneliness, depression, and stress increased as their Internet usage increased (Kraut, et al, 1998). An additional result of this study indicated that social support, size of social circles, and family communication all decreased as Internet usage increased. These findings suggest that the use of nonverbal and non face-to-face electronic communication through Internet usage and social networking can negatively affect the sense of self and connection to other human beings. These findings may also suggest that time spent on social network sites such as Facebook could lead to isolation and withdrawal. Sherry Turkle (2011) has studied technology over the past 30 years which supports the isolation and withdrawal people experience in using technology.

The abundance of electronic devices leads people to a tethered existence of always being connected, or â&#x20AC;&#x153;always onâ&#x20AC;? (Turkle, 2011, p. 151); yet there is an illusion of connection with the ability to move on to the next person in the friends list, image, profile, or tweet to obtain what is needed or wanted. Online people begin to be treated as objects instead of people, to be discarded, de-friended, ignored, blocked, and abandoned. In addition, an online presence is often one dimensional, a simplified version of self (Turkle, 2011). The self that is projected electronically is frequently only the socially accepted or positive components of life (Blease, 2015; Kim & Lee, 2011; Panek, Nardis, Konrath, 2013; Wang, 2013) to minimize exclusion, isolation, and rejection from the online community. However, positive self-promotion through social media can lead to feelings of isolation, self-doubt, and envy when comparisons are made regarding the success and achievements of others (Tandoc Jr., Ferrucci, & Duffy, 2015; Verduyn et al., 2015). Not only has research shown that social media and text messages can result in isolation and withdrawal, self-esteem and depression can also be effected. When people presented themselves online as they actually felt or in a depressed fashion, they were rejected, criticized, and ignored which led to a loss in self worth (Forest & Wood, 2012; Takao, Takahashi, & Kitamura, 2009). The ease of communicating with others has been explored as a positive aspect of electronic communication. Many studies have found that offline relationships are maintained through online electronic forms of communication, particularly for emerging adults enrolled in college (Ellison, Steinfield, & Lampe, 2007; Jin & Park, 2010; McMillan & Morrison, 2006; Sheldon, 2008; Subrahmanya, Reich, Waechter, & Espinoza, 2008). According to Battestini, Setlu, and Sohn (2010), university students

used text messaging to converse with friends, classmates, siblings, and significant others with an average text response time of six minutes and four seconds. Texting has been described as an inexpensive and convenient way of communicating with close friends in an emerging adultâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s social network (Hortsmanshof & Power, 2005) as a way to maintain intimate relationships with family and friends when they already had established face to face interactions. For these emerging adults, texting was experienced as similar to a verbal conversation in that reciprocity in responsiveness was expected. In addition, the frequent text exchanges created a sense of a portable world that could be accessed whenever needed (Hortsmanshof & Power, 2005). Social media has become another common format in strengthening and sustain relationships. According to Young (2011), Facebook facilitates maintaining relationships and face-to-face interactions, particularly in reuniting friends and people from earlier life experiences. In addition, Facebook was identified as a convenient and quick format to let others know they are thought of and to arrange social events (Young, 2011). Maintaining connections with friends and loved ones through text messaging and other forms of electronic communication devices is one benefit; however, there are conflicting results in the literature. According to Reid and Reid (2007), individuals with social anxiety who used text messaging found that it helped in managing their anxiety. It provided time to think before responding and could be used as a distraction to avoid social situations. The more anxious individuals were, the less likely they were to reach out to others for either face to face or text communication. This avoidance perpetuated their social anxiety. Studies have also shown that entering the virtual world and social media is used to avoid and minimize rejection and anxiety (Farahani, Agamohamadi,

Kazemi, Bakhtiar, & Ansari, 2011) through positive self-promotion (Blease, 2015; Lemieux, Lajoie, & Trainor, 2013: Levinson, Langer, & Rodebaugh, 2013; Przybylski, Murayama, DeHaan, & Gladwell, 2013). In a study of shyness, shy individuals spent more time on the social network site Facebook than individuals who did not identify as being socially shy; however shy individuals had fewer friends and contacts both in person and online (Orr, et. al, 2009; Reid & Reid, 2007). Another study of anxious individuals with low self-esteem who used Facebook found that online communications strengthened connections to others and built a sense of community (Spears, Postmes, Lea, & Wolbert, 2002). Using a social identity model, these researchers concluded that the anonymity provided by online chat rooms created a virtual community and a sense of belonging (Spears, Postmes, Lea, & Wolbert, 2002).

Theory of Nonverbal Communication Communicating between individuals is essential in creating relationships. To share experiences, particularly emotional experiences, is the ability to understand another human being via mindsharing (Palombo, 2006). To understand another human being, language is the vehicle through which we communicate. There are two language channels, verbal and nonverbal, each is essential in communicating, receiving, and processing messages between the speaker or sender and the listener or receiver. Understanding and processing communication necessitates a method to decode meanings of language through the development of signs to encode meaning. The process of assigning meaning to signs within language develops through a sign system within a social and cultural context. The construction of verbal encoding utilizes verbal sounds of

the culture to assign letters that become words; words become signs that represent objects, actions, people, and places. The words are combined to form sentences that convey a message. Verbal language is generally learned in a formalized method, particularly in Western countries. In early childhood, language is taught when parents talk, identify and name people and objects, and when they read to their children. In addition, there are early learning electronic devices and programs that teach letters and words to children before attending school. In the 21st century there are sociable robots that â&#x20AC;&#x153;meet our gaze, speak to us, and learn to recognize usâ&#x20AC;? (Turkle, 2011, p. 2). Once in school, elementary education includes reading, spelling, and grammar. It is through these methods that members of the culture recognize the signs and decode them to understand their meaning and the intended message. It is through these exchanges of sending and receiving messages that social interactions occur and relationships are built. Decoding verbal language is one process in understanding the meaning of a verbal message. Prosody, the tone of voice or inflection the speaker uses, provides additional information that includes conveying emotional expression to the message. Unlike the more formalized instruction in the meaning and spelling of words, grammar and sentence structure, understanding the meaning of voice inflection is not directly taught. Instead, prosody is learned through the experience of interacting with others and requires the listener to infer meaning in the tone of voice while simultaneously listening to the intended verbal message (Palombo, 2006). As a result, there can be ambiguity and uncertainty in decoding and understanding the meaning in the speakerâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s tone of voice. To complicate the process of decoding and understanding the intended message, speakers can be unaware of the tone in their own voice unconsciously expressing emotional

meaning which the listener decodes and incorporates into the meaning of the message. On the receiving end of the message, the listener may not pick up or comprehend the tone, leaving a gap in understanding or misperceiving the interaction between the speaker and listener. The verbal content of an interaction is one channel of communication. Interactions also include a nonverbal channel that add meaning and convey emotional content to the message (Palombo, 2006). Nonverbal communication includes decoding signs related to body language, gestures, and facial expressions which are communicated between the interacting partners. Gestures and body language are signs that contain expressive meaning that add emotion to the communication, such as crying or to emphasize a point, like pounding a fist on a table. Similar to verbal language, nonverbal meaning is constructed culturally. For example, cultures have different nonverbal ways to greet another person. It can be a handshake, wave, or bow depending on the cultural context. Meaning of nonverbal gestures and body language can also be constructed within a social context such as the two finger peace sign in the 1960â&#x20AC;&#x2122;s or between individual dyads, like a wink to indicate an inside joke. Gestures that are culturally determined, like a peace sign, are emblems, as they communicate an intended message even without speech (Goldin-Meadow, 2003). The encoded meaning of these signs is not universal and can be construed differently by the listeners or receivers depending on their frames of reference. However, hand gestures while speaking are not always within the conscious awareness of the speaker but are integral in conveying meaning (Goldin-Meadow, 2003). Every listener can read gestures, often unbeknownst to them that communicate meaning.

According to Goldin-Meadow, gestures can express thoughts and information that the speaker cannot verbally speak (2003). Facial expressions, on the other hand, seem to be universally understood across cultures (Ekman, 2003). Specific facial features, muscles, the shape of the mouth, eyes, eyebrows, chin, cheek, and forehead have been studied by Ekman (2003) indicating that specific emotions can be recognized and identified across cross cultures which underscores the universal expressiveness and meaning of facial expressions. The subtle nuances in facial muscles indicate a wide range of emotions along an emotional continuum that communicate expressive meaning between people in social interactions. Other expressive nonverbal forms of communication include eye contact or gazing which is also culturally determined (Palombo, 2006). Direct eye contact during a social interaction can indicate intimacy, intimidation, attentiveness, or disrespect depending on cultural rules and expectations. Touch is another expressive nonverbal aspect of communication that has cultural meaning. Depending on the physical touch, this could be an expression of affection, a threat of physical harm, or comfort. Personal and culturally prescribed boundaries indicate the acceptable physical space between people called proximics (Palombo, 2006, p. 88). Individuals have their own defined personal spaces that are defined and created based on their own levels of comfort. A sense of time or chronimics (Palombo, 2006, p. 88) is also inherent in nonverbal communication. There are rules about turn taking in interactions, acceptable length of time for responses, and when one has overstayed their welcome are examples of chronimics. Decoding and understanding these nonverbal messages contribute in what are called social skills. Since these nonverbal communications do not follow the same structured system of signs that

verbal communication does, there is no universal construction of meaning despite social and cultural expectations and contexts. As such, an individualâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s own experiences relating to others contribute in the construction of meaning attached to the nonverbal aspects of social communication. The content and quality of these relational experiences can influence how messages are received and perceived. The ability to discern nonverbal messages and prosody in social interactions is learned through experience in social relationships beginning at birth. During infancy before the acquisition of language, babies experience their world through the relationship with caregivers (Stern, 1985). Since the infant has no language, the baby begins connecting experiences externally and internally through sensory experiences. It is through the caregiverâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s nonverbal interactions of touch, gaze, eye contact, voice inflection, and timing when responding to the infantâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s needs, and affective experience, that the infant constructs meaning to nonverbal signs and verbal language. Difficulties can occur in the encoding and decoding of nonverbal signs and signals called dyssemia (Palombo, 2006, p. 97). This can occur as a result of neurological deficits, emotionally traumatic experiences, or the absence or deficient early caregiving responsiveness and nonverbal interactions in experiences, and have been associated with nonverbal learning disorders (Palombo, 2006). Children with nonverbal learning disorders often experience difficulty in their relationships with other children and adults due to challenges in understanding nonverbal language that impede experiencing a sense of connection and relatedness. Due to the nonverbal learning disability, these children often have difficulty reading nonverbal and/or social cues; are unable to connect their behaviors and actions to negative consequence; as a result, they continue to utilize the

same behaviors and actions and do not modify their behavior to obtain more favorable outcomes; are unable to comprehend rules and order in games; and often feel sad, lonely, and anxious (Palombo, 2006). This indicates that difficulties in decoding meaning from the expressive language of nonverbal communication, impairments and deficits occur in interactions that can affect the quality of relationships. These children are often misunderstood, blamed for their awkward behaviors and misunderstanding social cues, and frequently ostracized by other children. The relational impairments and deficits that are experienced by these children over time have an impact on their internal world and sense of self (Palombo, 2006). Many of the electronic forms of communication, social media, text messages or email exchanges do not incorporate nonverbal components of language. Facial expressions, hand gestures, tone of voice, response time, and touch are absent in these electronic formats. Although pictures can be posted and emoticons used in an attempt to convey emotional content, how they are decoded and the meaning inferred by the receiver through an electronic visual screen, is open to personal interpretation. According to Palombo (2006), â&#x20AC;&#x153;people who are most effective in their social interactions are successful at decoding the nonverbal behaviors of others and also are able to express previously encoded nonverbal information in a manner that others can understandâ&#x20AC;? (p. 74). This study explored how interactions and social relationships are experienced by emerging adults in the electronic world of nonverbal communication.

Theoretical and Conceptual Framework This study attempted to understand the meaning and experience of emerging adults when communicating and interacting through electronic mediums in the absence of faceto-face communication. The way in which emerging adults use the technology in their relationships was of primary interest. Interacting through electronic forms of communication in the context of their relationships lends itself to exploring the experience of emerging adults from a self psychology perspective. Kohut developed the theory of self psychology in his understanding of the development of healthy narcissism through his work with his own patients. Kohut focused on narcissism, not as a pathological or a negative aspect of human experience, but saw it as a natural developmental line that could result in healthy narcissism, consisting of feeling proud with a strong sense of self, and living a life that is joyful and meaningful (Kohut, 1984; Palombo, Bendicsen, & Koch, 2009; Siegel, 1996). He looked at the interactional pattern between caregivers and their children as fundamental in the development of a sense of self that influences how they think and what they believe about themselves, the people in their lives and the world around them. How children experience themselves internally, and in the context of their environment, forms a sense of self (Stern, 1985). Kohut (1971) outlined the development of a cohesive sense of self, or healthy narcissism that underscores the psychological motivations that form character structure and patterns in relationships. The persistent patterns in relating to others and self are based on the responsiveness by caregivers in providing necessary psychological functions that are not yet developed in children. Infants are not born with these psychological

capacities. Caregivers are needed to provide the psychological supplement to ensure that children experience these psychological capacities as part of themselves. Kohut and Wolf (1978) recognized the significance of caregivers providing particular psychological functions to their infants and children in the development of a cohesive self that they termed selfobject functions. As caregivers respond to the child’s emotional, physical, or social experience in a way that enhances a sense of understanding, provides comfort, or meets a need, the child experiences a sense of safety, mastery, and competence through the selfobject experience. A cohesive sense of self develops along three developmental lines, the grandiose self, idealized parental imago, and alter ego or twinship (Kohut, 1971). Development along these three lines occurs simultaneously and not in prescribed stages or phases. The grandiose self represents the need to be seen, appreciated, validated, and applauded by others. When a baby is born, caregivers take over the care of the infant. Initially, the baby’s physical needs and feelings are attended to by caregivers in an attuned fashion. This attuned responsiveness, or mirroring selfobject function, instills the infant with a sense of import and value that Kohut (1971) termed the grandiose self. When responsiveness by the caregiver is consistent, loving, and reliable, treating the child like the center of its universe, the infant experiences a mirroring selfobject function that supports the child’s sense of self. For example, when an infant cries, the caregiver speaks gently and soothingly, asking the baby what’s wrong while checking the diaper, body temperature, and the time since the last feeding, until the caregiver figures out that the baby is hungry. While preparing the baby for feeding, the caregiver continues to calm, soothe, and rock the baby until feeding begins. During the feeding, the caregiver

continues to verbally comfort and identify the experience saying “you were hungry,” “is your tummy getting full;” or “mommy’s here.” In this way, the caregiver is providing a mirroring selfobject function in both satiating the physical experience of hunger and alleviating the physical and emotional distress. The child develops a healthy grandiose sense of self as a result of this attuned responsiveness by the caregiver. As children grow and physically develop, they begin to experience a gradual diminishment of grandiosity as a sense of self becomes more realistic through incremental failures in responsiveness Kohut called “optimal frustration” (Kohut, 1984, p. 64) that are necessary for internalizing the psychological structure that leads to self-esteem and affect regulation. According to Kohut (1971) children tolerate the loss of grandiosity by merging with the idealized parental imago. The child idealizes the caregiver, experiencing him or her as powerful and the protector that shelters the child from harm. This can be observed in children who proclaim their dad is the strongest, or their mother is the prettiest. When caregivers are able to tolerate being idealized and admired, children feel powerful, have a sense of agency, are able to regulate affect, and experience a set of values, a moral sense of being in the world, and develop ambitions and ideals (Siegel, 1996). When caregivers are able to provide mirroring selfobject function to their children in the development of the grandiose self, followed by gradual failures or optimal frustration in responding to the children’s needs as they become more capable of caring for themselves along with the experience of merging with an idealized other, a cohesive sense of self develops. According to Stern (1985), these attuned selfobject functions along with relational experiences of safety and security are transformed into an organized belief system about the self, the external world, and relationships with others (Stern, 1985).

Alter ego, or twinship, is another aspect of Kohut’s theory of self psychology. There is a need for the experience of being with a like-minded other described by Kohut (1984) as “the reassuring experience of essential alikeness” (p. 193). The self can be sustained and strengthened when aligned with others who share the same values and interests and think and feel similarly. This can occur between individuals and as a member of a group such as people on the same committee, organization, or social group. This twinship experience creates a sense of wellbeing and shared humanness. When twinship selfobject functions are deficient or absent, a sense of alienation, confusion, dissonance (Palombo, Bendicsen, Koch, 2009), and a “sense of not being human” (Kohut, 1984, p. 200) can emerge. When there are ruptures, failures, inconsistencies, or traumatic experiences in selfobject functions, deficits occur that can develop into disorders of the self that result in a fragile self structure (Kohut, 1971). When mirroring by caregivers is inadequate then the grandiose self leads to a need for reinforcement, approval, and admiration. Deficiencies in mirroring occur through inconsistencies, delayed or absent responsiveness or physical or emotional abandonment, leaving children to feel inadequate, undervalued, underappreciated, and vulnerable. Continued deficits in mirroring can lead to depression. If, during the normative development of the grandiose self, a trauma occurs for the caregiver, such as death or divorce, the caregiver may become depressed, withdrawn, and unable to attune and be responsive to the child. The child’s development along the line of the grandiose self can become fixated at the omnipotent grandiose self, exhibiting narcissistic tendencies and vulnerabilities. Deficits can also occur along the idealized parental imago line of development. When caregivers cannot tolerate being idealized by their children either by deflecting or rejecting the idealization or persistently

disappointing them, children feel devalued, vulnerable, and ignored (Siegel, 1996). As a way to compensate, children may believe their own omnipotence, act as if reality does not exist, may be involved in risk taking behavior, or de-idealize others by diminishing others, particularly people in authority (Palombo, Bendicsen, Koch, 2009), or searching for merger or idealization with others. This leads to a self structure that is prone to fragmentation and prone to rage as a reaction to selfobject failures. The need for selfobject functions of mirroring and idealization are vital throughout the lifespan. Kohut (1971, 1984) stressed that people are never so independent that they do not need selfobject functions. There is an ongoing need for selfobject relationships with which to merge at times of physical, emotional, or psychological vulnerability in order to feel safe, valued, understood, supported, and available as a source of strength. There are a multitude of life experiences that create a sense of disequilibrium such as at times of significant losses, serious illness, natural disaster, trauma, or increased stress. Even with a cohesive sense of self, selfobject relationships and functions are needed to restore the momentary vulnerability. Early theoretical self psychology concepts were based on scientific positivistic traditionalists as when Kohut (1971) attempted to adhere to Freudâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s drive theory. However, over time, he moved away from innate drives to a hermeneutic metapsychology and phenomenological approach in understanding the subjective meaning of their experiences in the development of a disordered sense of self. This was a move away from a human science perspective to the natural science perspective, where meanings are central in understanding human beings and human motivation from a hermeneutic perspective (Dilthey, 1986). The import of understanding another through

their own stories, narratives, and experiences is the foundation of hermeneutics. From a phenomenological perspective, the outcome is discovering commonalities between narratives to come up with a shared way of understanding words or experiences. In the hermeneutic perspective, the method of observation, or viewpoint, is one of introspection or empathy. Another foundation of hermeneutics is the art of understanding for the meaning of a story, whether it is verbalized or in written format. This is accomplished when the listener becomes immersed in the text, words, and language used. What is important to note is everyone has been exposed to words within the context of their particular culture, family unit, religion, and language which influence the perception and interpretation of meaning that creates a commonality between people but can also cause contradictions or anomalies (Dilthey, 1986, Palombo, 1996). Dilthey (1986) proposed a hermeneutic perspective for natural science in which he contended that it is essential to look at life as a text, as a way to understand and interpret life, to make sense and meaning of shared experiences. He underscored the inherent aspects of commonalities required in communication between people stating â&#x20AC;&#x153;understanding of other people and their lifeexpression is developed on the basis of experience and self-understanding and the constant interaction between themâ&#x20AC;? (Dilthey, 1986, p. 152). Within the hermeneutic perspective, it is important to also consider the hermeneutic circle as it is relevant in self psychology. The hermeneutic circle describes the experience and the re-experiencing of texts, stories, and life expressions through the listening stance of empathy (Dilthey, 1986). Empathy is used to discover the connection between what is being expressed or experienced by another with oneâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s own experience which establishes

a platform for which meaning and understanding can be made. It is through the telling, the words, and language that create meaning. When immersed in the words of the storyteller, we initially take in their words and experience. We think and reflect on what we heard that influences and often changes our perspective. When we re-read, re-hear, or re-experience the words or stories we have a new experience, impacted by our own life experience, that Dilthey (1986) viewed as a circular process leading to a higher level of understanding. Hermeneutics does not derive information from hypothesis but information is based on how people make sense of their self-narrative by understanding the meaning and intentions within the context of their story. Kohut conceptualized the use of empathy or vicarious introspection from a hermeneutic perspective that became the primary mode of observation in self psychology. He struggled with observing clients through a biological lens purporting that he could not use his senses to see or understand the fantasies, wishes, or dreams of his patients. The observer is not collecting data through his senses, but places himself in the mind or experience of the other. It is through attuning to the other which permits the observer to vicariously experience the affect state of the other (Kohut, 1959). In 1984, Kohut defined empathy as â&#x20AC;&#x153;the capacity to think and feel oneself into the inner life of another person. It is our lifelong ability to experience what another person experiences, though usually, and appropriately, to an attenuated degreeâ&#x20AC;? (p. 82). This becomes the method by which meaning is constructed between two people. To truly understand another is to immerse oneself in the subjective experience of another. Empathy requires the observer to tap into his own experience while at the same time take into account another personâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s perspective, what the other thinks, feels, and

understands. It is this shared experience of constructing meaning together that becomes the therapeutic means of understanding the intrapsychic motives and selfobject deficits. In self psychology, the constructed understanding between patient and therapist is reviewed, re-experienced, and modified during treatment resulting from new awareness, information, experiences, and understandings “of the selfobject transferences” (Kohut, 1984, p. 41) that occur within the therapeutic relationship. According to Kohut and from a hermeneutic perspective, empathy is vital to human life, especially in the development of self esteem, healthy narcissism, and a cohesive sense of self. It is essential for human beings to be seen, understood, affirmed, and accepted by others. Responsive and attuned interactions between caregivers and children create the milieu for the development of a cohesive sense of self. The only way of knowing another is through empathy. Kohut contended that the lack of empathy and maintaining a neutral stance by not gratifying needs of patients was actually experienced as deprivation and caused psychotic or paranoid states in vulnerable clients (Kohut, 1971). From the hermeneutic perspective there is no neutral stance. The observer, just like the therapist, cannot be free of their own biases and life experiences; instead, the observer needs to be aware of them (Palombo, 2008, Schwandt, 2000) in order to understand and construct the meaning of the patient’s experience. The essence of Kohut’s theory is a striving toward the cohesion of the self by choosing “healthier sustaining selfobject experiences” (Siegel, 1996, pp. 165) in order to feel a sense of wellbeing, wholeness (Palombo, Bendicsen, Koch, 2009), and “feeling that one is a human being among other human beings” (Kohut, 1984, p. 200).

Self psychology offers a theory within which to explore the experiences of selfobject relationships in the electronic communication patterns of emerging adults. Emerging adults, aged 18 to 25, living in the United States in middle income families, have grown up together with a proliferation in computer technology with regular usage and ownership of multiple electronic devices in their household. Many of these adults use computers or cellular phones to email, post on Facebook, or text a family member or friends living near and far. The question arises: how do we understand the development of a cohesive sense of self in the context of electronic communication which involves the absence of seeing or hearing the other person? How is striving for and maintaining a cohesive sense of self experienced through electronic communication? Although technology affords the potential for frequent and rapid electronic interactions and responses to anyone who owns a cellular phone, personal computer, laptop, or tablet, what is considered reliable responsiveness? What is considered optimal frustration? What constitutes an empathic failure in the electronic world and how are ruptures repaired? Can selfobject functions of mirroring, idealization, or twinship be experienced through only written words or pictures in electronic formats? Exploring the sense of self through self psychology, the cohesive and potential deficits in self structure and the interplay with electronic communication in the development, sustenance, and fragmentation of the self in this study begins to offer some perspective in this growing phenomenon.

Chapter III

Methodology Study Design This was a qualitative exploratory study to understand the experience of using nonverbal forms of electronic communication in the lives of emerging adults. In order to understand the meaning, purpose, and subjective experience of emerging adults communicating through nonverbal electronic mediums, grounded theory (Charmaz, 2006) was the method of study. Grounded theory â&#x20AC;&#x153;focuses on creating conceptual frameworks or theories through building inductive analysis from the dataâ&#x20AC;? (Charmaz, 2006, p.187). This method of grounded theory is a social constructivist position that includes the social and cultural context of using electronic communication as an additional dimension in understanding meaning in the lives of emerging adults. Within the current lifespan of emerging adults, computer technology advanced at a rapid rate with widespread ownership and usage of personal computers, mobile phones, smartphones, and tablets: social media and instant communication around the world is part of daily life for many emerging adults. As a result, it was necessary to incorporate the personal experiences of emerging adults within their own developmental life phase as well as within the context of the social and cultural changes that occurred in adapting to the rampant use of electronic technology as a nonverbal form communication.

Charmaz (2006) contends that grounded theory from a constructivist perspective is an area of study that is co-constructed within the context of the experience between the data and analysis. The researcher considers how and why participants attach and understand meaning to the area of study, but also considers how it is understood within a larger context including society, social group, relationship, and historically in time. This was particularly important in this exploratory study to understand the experience of emerging adults from their perspective as the advancement and usage of technology became more prevalent in their lifetime. Implicit in the construction of theory in grounded theory is the researcherâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s position in collecting and interpreting the data. Through the process of a reflexive stance, defined by Charmaz (2006) as â&#x20AC;&#x153;how the researcher conducts his or her research, relates to the research participants, and represents them in written reportsâ&#x20AC;? (p. 189), meanings were constructed through the interactions, information, and the shared experiences of the participant and researcher during the interview process.

Participant Recruitment Participants were recruited through recruitment flyers. Flyers were placed in coffee shops, public libraries, and university information bulletin boards in downtown Chicago and surrounding suburbs. The initial posting of flyers resulted in recruiting only three participants over the course of three months. Flyers were modified slightly and placed in coffee shops, train stations, public libraries, and university information boards. In addition, flyers were provided to social work colleagues and college educators to post in areas at their work populated by emerging adults. The remaining 17 participants were recruited through this expanded recruitment method.

Description of Participants Twenty participants were recruited and interviewed. All participants were between the ages of 18 and 25. Half of the participants were 23 to 25 years old and the majority of participants were female. Below is the age and gender distribution:

18 19

Female

Male

Transgender

Nineteen participants were single; ten were in significant relationships. One participant was married. The majority of participants, 16, were Caucasian, two were African American, one bi-racial, and one Hispanic. Educationally, 14 participants were enrolled in school, one a senior in high school, nine in undergraduate institutions, four were in graduate school. The remaining six participants were employed full-time and all completed undergraduate programs and two had masterâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s degrees.

Data Collection

Open-ended interviewing was utilized by asking questions that facilitated describing and illuminating the experiences of participants (Charmaz, 2006). In the constructivist ground theory of Charmaz (2006), built on grounded theory methods of Corbin and Strauss (2008), it was important for the researcher to remain open, alert, and flexible to the ideas, thoughts, and experiences that emerged as participants shared their experiences.

To understand the meaning attached to a participantâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s experience required exploring details, elaborating the meaning and uses of terminology, and fuller descriptions of experiences that were relevant in understanding the participantsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; experiences using nonverbal forms of electronic communication in their lives. Open-ended questions were asked to allow participants to provide their own subjective experience and perspective. Additional questions were asked and explored as topics and themes emerged. Each interview began with an explanation of the study and written consent was obtained. Each interview began with the same open ended question: tell me what forms of electronic communication you use and how you interact with people in your life. Some participants experienced this question as too general and asked for more direction. At these times, the researcher inquired more specifically about the kinds of electronic formats they used, who the interacted with, and how they functioned as communication tools. At the end of every interview, participants were asked if they wanted to share any additional information and whether they had questions for the researcher. Interviews were conducted at locations selected by participants for their convenience. Locations of interviews included public libraries, university libraries, participantâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s work offices, and homes. Each interview was digitally recorded and transcribed. After each interview the researcher made notes regarding the interview, including observations, key phrases, and impressions of the participant and summarized points. These interview notes were reviewed during the transcription process for clarity and to record observed details and impressions of the interview.

Data Analysis Coding data from a grounded theory perspective is the process of identifying and defining “what is happening in the data” (Charmaz, 2006. P. 46). Coding began after the first interview was transcribed by comparing data with data related to the words, ideas, meanings, and experiences shared in the interview. It was through this process of comparing data to data that an understanding of the participant’s experiences and meanings emerged. The first step in data analysis was initial coding. Using words and short phrases in a quick, spontaneous manner in the margins of the transcribed interview allowed for ideas to emerge. Line-by line coding was used to stay close to the precise language used by participants. In addition, line-by-line coding resulted in experiences of participants being described which were followed up in subsequent interviews. The next step in grounded theory was focused coding. Constructing codes involved comparing data to data and incident to incident to discern similarities and differences within each transcript as well as between transcripts. The process of focused coding examined initial codes to determine how they capture data and how they may fit into broader categories. Participant descriptions and quotes were pulled from transcripts and focused coding was utilized to “move across interviews and observations and compare people’s experiences, actions, and interpretations” (Charmaz, 2006). This functioned as a way to check codes for accuracy in coding across the data collected. From this point, the individualized descriptions were put into broader categories based on similar and differing experiences expressed by participants. Each of the four categories which emerged during analysis derived from the words used by participants to describe their experience.

As part of the data analysis, the researcher employed memo writing as outlined by Charmaz (2006). Memo writing facilitated the analytic process by capturing the ideas, thoughts, connections, and questions that were stimulated by the content and experience of obtaining data in the interviews. Charmaz (2006) contends memo writing is crucial in analyzing data early as “a space and place for making comparisons between data and data, data and codes, codes and other codes, codes and category, and category and concept and for articulating conjectures about these comparisons” (p. 71-71). The process of memo writing allowed the researcher to be immersed in the data to essentially free associate in an attempt to become aware of “implicit, unstated, and condensed meanings” (Charmaz, 2006, p. 83). Writing memos provided new suppositions for consideration that were explored in subsequent interviews and provided a deeper understanding of experiences shared by the emerging adults in this study. During data analysis, there were times the researcher struggled with the plethora of data from the 20 interviews. It was necessary at several points during data analysis to utilize the technique of clustering (Charmaz, 2006) to visually conceptualize, organize, and re-organize ideas and codes. By using note cards with participant quotes, ideas, and preliminary codes, it was useful to physically arrange and re-arrange the cards to represent connections and relationships between cards. This process provided the opportunity to be creative and flexible in exploring the data.

Chapter IV

Introduction to the Findings The findings of this study are grouped into four categories that describe the experience of communicating through text messages and social media by emerging adults. The four categories are: 

It’s Important to Actually Interact: I Want to be with Them In-Person



A Double Edged Sword: It’s the Best and the Worst



Sharing the News of Life: I Want to put My Best Foot Forward



What’s Going On: Don’t Leave Me Hanging

The first category, It’s Important to Actually Interact: I want to be with Them InPerson, describes the experience of face- to-face interactions and encounters in friendships and close relationships for emerging adults. These in-person relationships include shared emotional experiences, such as support, validation, and investing time and attention in each other. Through these experiences, the relational dyad creates a history, a narrative, and an intimate and meaningful connection that is important in the lives of emerging adults in this study. Once trusting relationships are established in the real world, emerging adults can re-create connectedness through electronic communication, closely replicating the in person experience of being with family members or friends. The experience of using electronic forms of communication such as texting, Facebook, Snapchat, and dating apps seems to be embedded in the culture of emerging

adults. The second category, A Double Edged Sword: It’s the Best and the Worst, illustrates the prevalence in communicating through technology and the effect in their lives. This includes unintended or unconscious treatment of others that occurs through the anonymity of “keyboard courage” in electronic communication. This category also includes the experience of being on the receiving end of electronic interactions. Social media have become the promotion of private and personal life experiences into public news. The third category, Sharing News of Life: I Want to Put My Best Foot Forward, describes the meaning and experience of emerging adults as they disseminate information about their lives, who they are, what they are doing, and who they are with in person. Emerging adults in the study identified how they electronically shared their news as a need to spin information to be interesting to others and show they are doing great things in their life. Social media are formats to be seen by others and contribute to the information highway but generally only tolerate positive posts. This category also describes the experience of emerging adults comparing themselves to other people based on the positive personal news posted by others. The final category, What’s Going On: Don’t Leave Me Hanging, illustrates the confusion and disappointment participants experienced in the delayed or absent electronic response. These experiences raised questions and uncertainty about the relationship as participants attempted to make sense of the delayed response. In the process of understanding these delays, participants questioned their own behavior, wondering what they had done or said that may have created a conflict or angered the other person. They also wondered if the other person was ignoring them. This category describes the use of

social media, text messages, and emails by emerging adults as instruments to avoid uncomfortable situations, relationships, people, and their own feelings.

Chapter V

Findings It’s Important to Actually Interact: I Want to Be with Them In-Person Actually doing things together with your friends builds relationship. You have the same likes, you do things together, it builds memories. I think that whole part of the relationship is necessary in order to have a strong lasting one … if there’s a loose connection between friends now, it’s like they can be quite more disposable if you’re not really invested in each other. This category, It’s Important to Actually Interact: I Want to be with Them In-Person, was an unexpected finding from the emerging adult participants, all of whom use various platforms to communicate electronically. Participants found value in having human to human contact and shared experiences as a foundation in relationships. The need and desire for human connection both emotionally and physically, were an important component for participants to feel happy and fulfilled in their relationships and with oneself. “We connect on some level of our human hood and have interactions that make me feel happy and make me feel fulfilled.” “I’m touchy feely and I need to be loved and touched and hugged … I like physical contact.”

I have someone important in my life that I want to see. I want to be with them in person rather than not see them or talk to them on social media instead. I want to actually be with them. The importance of spending time with people was meaningful to participants. For many, the choice to be physically present with friends and family indicated how important the person was to them, how much they cared about them, and felt more companionship. It was important for some participants to have established trust and a sense of safety exclusively with people in person. It is these people with whom participants preferred seeing in person, hanging out, going out to dinner, engaging in conversations, and sharing more about their personal lives. In particular, sharing meaningful life events, serious discussions, and needing comfort or support was preferred to be done verbally rather than through social media or text messages. Having that relationship with someone, being able to be on that level with someone to communicate face to face about something that’s important to me. That means that you are probably important to me because I don’t share any information with people I follow on Facebook. It usually means that I am your friend, I want to spend time with you, I want to acknowledge you as a person, I trust and I can confide in. “Friends in the real world, you talk to them and you hang out with them and those are the certain people you can tell your business to when you have problems, you can go to them.”

If it’s someone that’s very important to you and you want to let them know you care of them and you’re thinking about them and they’re important to you, then you would pick up the phone at least once in a while to check up with how they’re doing.

If you’re having a serious conversation then obviously I’d rather it be in-person just because then it’s more personable and you can see the person’s reactions and react on it yourself. “What I want to do is have a personal connection with someone and I don’t feel that when I’m doing something over social media. “I need, I want to feel comforted; I want to enjoy it with other people in a personal, verbal kind of way.” “I would definitely like to talk to someone face to face over social media all the time.” “But when I’m just hanging out with my friends, it’s just more enjoyable just to have a person to be there.” Interacting face-to-face is a way to share feelings, stories, struggles, and accomplishments in the moment, spontaneously reacting to each other and experiencing emotions simultaneously. Often times when participants communicated important news or an emotional message through a text message directed to a specific person or group, there was usually a delay in receiving a response. This delay left participants alone with their emotional reactions, unsupported in the moment of need as one participant shared: If I text with some sort of emotion included, by the time I get a response I may not be in the same emotional place that I was and so that supportive response that would have

felt so good at the time, doesn’t anymore because I’m not in that emotional place anymore. For participants separated from parents or close friends while away at college, being face-to-face or at least hearing their loved ones voices created a connection that mitigated homesickness and loneliness. Without some form of verbal interaction, either in person or by phone, many participants experienced the relationship more distant, disconnected, and sometimes lost. “I’d like to talk to my parents on the phone because then it’s not that it takes away missing them because you obviously still do, but I think it helps to hear somebody’s voice.” “If I’ve really missed my family then I pick up the phone and call them because I want to hear their voice.” “If you don’t have any verbal communication whether on the phone or in person, then I think you’d kind of lose that relationship because it wouldn’t be the same. I think we become more distant obviously, physically and socially.” Some participants also appreciated unforeseen and spontaneous in person experiences with unexpected people they encountered in their day to day life. “Having experiences with humans that you don’t expect to have happen like this right now [the interview] and getting in touch with someone who I don’t know and having a conversation with or talking to people on the subway.”

Here I am smiling because some random person decided that it was okay to say hi and ask me a question … someone noticed me not because I got dressed up and took a picture and put it on Facebook. They noticed me because I was pushing a cart around. The value of in-person relationships can be compromised through electronic communication. All participants used some form of electronic technology to communicate with close friends and family through written words, pictures, text messages, or social media. For many participants, interacting electronically dehumanized people and relationships that reduced them to words or a “disembodied voice.” In general, compared to face-to-face interactions, electronic communications consisting of written words or pictures were experienced differently by emerging adults in this study. In addition, many participants expressed difficulty understanding electronic messages and experienced frequent miscommunications. “There’s much more to conversations rather than just the words. It’s hard to understand that if you’re not face-to-face or you don’t hear their voice.” “If I could do all my chatting face-to-face, that would be easier for me because I think I’m better at that whereas I think you lose context when you’re just sending words.” There’s a lot of misunderstanding in texting, which is why sometimes you need to just call because you can’t really tell sarcasm or just can misread things when it’s just like a text or your voice if you’re completely kidding. “Those messages don’t necessarily have the context or the inflection of conversations in real life has so I think that kind of misunderstanding happens sometimes.”

Most participants sent short text messages to communicate information such as coordinating a time and place to meet, a shopping list, or to check with a loved one or friend. Although this can be meaningful in established relationships, texting or clicking a thumbs up can never replace the value of spending time together. For some participants, sending an electronic birthday greeting diminished the significance of the relationship: “The electronic greeting suffices yet the effort it takes to remember a birthday, send a card or a gift, suggests a meaningful connection or relationship and does not replace the significance of spending time together. “ “A morning text or checking in during the day can be valuable and meaningful. It can never replace the value of just spending a good amount of casual time together. “I strongly prefer the in person relationships and I think that the online component can supplement your real life relationships but it just can’t be everything because I don’t think it’s really a relationship. I think seeing someone is really important. I think that seeing what they’re up to [on Facebook] can suffice for some people like saying happy birthday to someone on Facebook. I don’t think there’s much value in that anymore, like remembering. You don’t have to remember someone’s birthday, you don’t have to go give them a card or a hug or a cupcake. So I think there is a lot of value in face to face contact.

Getting to see someone is much more meaningful than just sending them a message really quickly [to Facebook] because I think that it’s the thought that’s put into it and that’s the time and the effort and it takes no effort whatsoever to do that.

Another reason participants’ valued face-to-face interaction was experiencing the whole context of the conversation in order to better understand the message. Being faceto-face allowed participants to hear the tone of the message, see the reaction and expression of emotions through body language and facial expressions as described by these participants: “There’s much more to conversations rather than just the words and it’s hard to understand that if you’re not face-to-face or you don’t hear their voice.” “It’s hard to communicate the nonverbal. The nonverbal part of communication is completely lost.” “As we’re face-to-face I can hear it, I can see it whether it’s in your body movement, your facial expression, or just hearing it, hearing your tone of voice.” I feel like I know more about my neighbors than I do people when they’re on the internet because you can see it, you can feel it, you know all your senses are being used … you just experience so much more, it’s much more stimulation than there is online. Interacting face-to-face allows the opportunity for a shared emotional experience that is much more difficult to replicate electronically for many participants. The meaning of the communication and how people are feeling cannot be expressed electronically in the same way as talking on the phone or in person. Participants described the written words in text messages, Facebook posts, or comments as an inaccurate expression of emotions. Several participants explained the emotional differences they experienced communicating electronically in the following way:

“You can usually see or hear the hurt in a way that you can’t when you say ‘today sucked’ via text.” “If that person had seen my reaction in person, they would have been able to witness my excitement or if they were confused, they would have had more opportunity to question me on the spot.” “Blankly looking into a screen typing, you can’t get much emotion out of it.”

I feel more in tune with a person when I’m next to them. I can pick up if something is bothering them or if they’re happy about something. I’m just able to share in whatever they’re trying to communicate with me.

When I put I’m engaged on Facebook, it’s not going to be as big of news, it’s not going to be as huge as when I’m like “I got engaged” [said with an excited tone of voice]. Like people won’t be able to tell how ecstatic I really am about the situation. Participants wanted the experience of being physically, socially, and emotionally in the presence of other people when interacting. Communicating face-to-face provided more spontaneous interchanges that included the ability to see the other person’s reactions as well as if their words were congruent with behaviors. When communicating through text messages or social media, participants were uncertain and questioned the genuineness of the written or pictorial response.

“Like joking around, laughter, and just like having fun, like you can’t do that through texting. Like you can’t laugh, you can’t, you can say LOL but people say LOL when they’re not even laughing.” When you have a real life interaction too, like sometimes people’s instant reaction is going to be much different than their planned reaction and sometimes that’s in words and sometimes that’s in actions … and sometimes that can tell you a lot about who a person is, is their instant reactions in the moment. The process of developing and maintaining meaningful relationships through actual shared experiences can be extended to electronic interactions, but only after establishing an in-person connection. Participants who were physically separated from family and friends felt more connected to them by sharing photos, posts, and texting. One participant discussed her use of social media to stay connected to her best friend that moved to Europe: When she posts pictures I get to pretend I’m there with her and like we’re still together and not apart … like even if you haven’t seen your friend in a long time and you see their posts all the time, you’re like, I feel like we were just hanging out because I know so much about you and all the things that you’ve been doing but in reality you haven’t seen each other in five months or more. Many participants questioned whether an online relationship actually is a relationship if they did not spend time together offline. This became evident in the way participants differentiated the meaning of friends in real life from Facebook friends.

Facebook friends included people they had personal, real life relationships with these participants explained: “The people who are not talking to me on Facebook are my better friends.” “Face-to-face friends I think I tell them a little bit more of what’s going on in my life.” My friends on Facebook I keep them at arm’s length [stretches arms out]. And then the face-to-face, I keep them a lot closer and would probably share almost everything with the people that are in my little circle of close friends. Although many participants valued the ability to remain connected to people they had in-person relationships with through texting and social media, many also wondered if the technology hindered their willingness to connect in person or their social skills: I think it [technology] affects us negative, in a negative way. I think so, because like I said, people don’t go out and talk to each other anymore or everyone just is [picked up their phone] wherever they’re at talking. “I have cousins who just had babies and see pictures of their kids is nice when I don’t, can’t go up to see them all the time. So it doesn’t replace actually going to see them and playing.” “Like I said, they’re staring at their phone so it’s a distraction and it’s just kind of a barrier itself when you’re actually communicating face-to-face.” But what if that [social media posts and pictures] really isn’t helping out the situation because I do see periodically what they’re doing and what’s going on through their statuses and so that basically discourages me, like makes me less inclined to call them and actually meet up.

People are just getting them [cell phones] so much younger and they’re getting much more screen time which is not always good for the brain development and everything … and they’re just looking at the screen all day. I believe it is putting a barrier in their communication skills. Despite some concerns about the impact of primarily using text messages and social media to communicate with others, face-to-face interactions are not only valued but considered necessary as one of the youngest participants stated: You’re always gonna have to talk to someone, like it doesn’t matter. You’re gonna have to and that’s why I feel it gets better that you work on your like … communication skills with people you don’t know because eventually you’re gonna have to talk to someone. You can’t text everybody. Your phone can’t always help you.

A Double Edged Sword: It’s the Best and the Worst When I first got it [Facebook], it was like cool. I was in 8th grade but now at this point I’m thinking it’s a habit. Like when I wake up I look at my Facebook app on my phone. So it’s just become routine and I don’t know how I feel about that actually. The experience of using electronic forms of communication, texting, emailing, and social media has become embedded in the culture of emerging adults. Most participants had a home computer and grew up with technology such as video games and were given cell phones by the time they were in middle school. At the time, their cell phone was used primarily for phone calls to parents. Participants who could text on their cell phone had limited texting packages and were subject to overage charges. During their childhood,

home computers were often shared with other family members so many participants only had access to the computer after school and in the evening to check Facebook or instant message friends. However, during their lives, cell phones have become handheld computers with easy access to the internet, social media sites, and a multitude of apps. This category, A Double Edged Sword: It’s the Best and the Worst, speaks to the cultural norm of having a Smartphone and the unintended or unconscious implications experienced by participants and the people they interact with electronically. Every participant in this study, except one, had a smartphone. All expressed the importance of communicating electronically with people in their life as well as the luxury of immediate access to information. The participant without a smartphone made a conscious decision not to own one for the following reason: I’ve resisted smartphones because I know myself well enough. I spend too much time on Facebook as it is and so if I had it on my phone I just wouldn’t know where I was physically because I just wouldn’t be looking around. All participants discussed how using electronic forms of communication has become socially acceptable and a normal part of their life and relationships. Even interacting with someone electronically rather than with people in front of them has become typical behavior. “Like when I wake up I look at my Facebook app on my phone, just so, it’s become routine and I don’t know how I feel about that actually.” I’ve been trying to put my phone down more because I know that it is a problem. But because it is just so easy now, everybody just picks up their phone so you want to pick

up your phone too but it’s hard to make the conscious decision when it’s so socially acceptable now. “I use my iPhone from the moment I wake up until the moment I go to bed.” “People just have their phones up while they’re eating and talking … where it’s super normalized and it’s totally socialized.” “It’s also a distraction, so you’ve got a double edged sword. Really, it’s the best and it’s the worst. Nineteen participants owned and used a Smartphone. They all use their smartphones daily to access social media, emails, texts, and other online websites. Participants described their experiences with their Smartphone in the following way: “If I didn’t have my phone, I would go crazy.” “My cell phone is as important as my driver’s license like what’s going to happen now that it’s so embedded within our lives.” They use their phones primarily to look at and post on Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat, Yik Yak, and other social media sites. Participants also used text messaging daily. Some used and checked email accounts. Many participants’ also used or tried dating apps such as Tinder, Grinder, and Hinge. Whatever electronic platform they used, participants referred to their usage and phone behavior as an addictive response that “eats up my time.” It’s a huge addiction. Huge addiction! I want to know what’s going on. I want to know what’s going on in everybody’s life. I do! I might have checked Facebook 10 minutes ago and I’ll be like, what’s going on in everybody’s life?

“I would definitely say people 10 through 25 are just general teenagers now, love to know what everyone’s doing at all times. That’s why people are so into social media.” “People like to know what people are doing at all times, that’s why it’s so addicting.” “There’s constantly a bing or buzz to look at something. “ During the interview, many participants needed time to consider how communicating electronically functioned in their life and in their relationships. Some could not verbally articulate their experiences using technology as a communication tool and often responded with “that’s a good question” or “I haven’t thought about that.” Or, if they took a moment to consider their experience before responding, many participants became aware of their own behaviors. To have something I can just scroll through and like here’s who’s in the area and I guess, it’s kind of gossipy too, just to see if you know anybody and what’s happening. And that’s actually funny, I never would have thought about that.

I don’t think people realize and I think that’s the thing too. I never really thought about is they don’t get any feedback. If you say something crazy, you can usually evaluate instant feedback by people’s reaction or facial features. “It’s so bizarre to me to think of going to college without internet. So I have nothing to compare it to except I guess my parent’s experience. So I guess I don’t know how it’s affected it [relationships]. Participants described the prevalence of using a cell phone in the presence of others as a new social norm. One participant described the phone in hand as “the new extra limb.” It was a common experience for friends and family to check their cell phones, post

on Facebook, or text while being with participants. Many participants considered this behavior rude, disrespectful, annoying, and felt ignored. I’ve had that happen before and it’s just like aggravating and you’re like [made a confused face and laughed] and it’s almost like they’re not purposefully doing it but like I said, it’s like a second nature because that’s like how used to it people are now. It’s just like normal to do that so you don’t really think about what the other person is doing.

It is so annoying. I had a roommate in college that I would start telling a story and when I realized she wasn’t listening to me I just stopped speaking and go on to something else … and sometimes she would never even ask, she didn’t even realize I was talking. “I can get annoyed if someone I’m out with and they just keep scrolling through their phone.” While discussing their own reactions to others using their phones when together, many participants had not thought about their own behaviors and how they may be perceived by others, as illustrated by these participants: “And I think, or I’ve [emphasis added], I think it’s totally normal at least that’s through my practice. I act like it’s totally normal. Stepping back, it’s probably rude.” Sometimes I do think that I take that a little too personally though because I think it’s like they’re thinking that their phone is like more important than the conversation that we’re actually having. But then I’m like multi-tasking, I do it to people too so I try not to like think too much about it.

I hadn’t thought about that. I would like to think that I would put time aside to get a hold of this person and devote, even if it’s just 3 or 4 minutes, to devote my attention to that person. “They’re talking to you and like interested (talking about online dating app). What they don’t know is three guys like laughing at the, which I guess now saying that, sounds really cruel.” Most participants used Facebook to communicate with people in their friends list to stay in touch with them. They posted information, shared pictures, received notifications, and invitations for personal and college or university events. Participants differentiated between in-person and virtual friendships. However, some participants struggled with the meaning of friend in the context of the automated friending and following on social media. But if I’m like not making plans with them to do things, then I don’t really see them as like a, like a fr [tone changes to more intense and urgent] I mean, see now I don’t know the definition of friend. These are really things I don’t think about though.

The term friendship is definitely weirder now or it’s more just vague now. Because if I’m friends with someone on Facebook, I might never ever see them in real life but I mean, are we really friends in real life or are we just “friends” [used air quotes] on social media? I don’t know.

I think it really helps maintain those relationships that normally I wouldn’t maintain. Even if it’s through commenting on something on Facebook with people I went to high school that I probably haven’t seen in 6 years but I still, their presence is in my life I guess through the internet.

If you’re friends on Facebook it’s not always going to be your friends in real life. It may be they added you and you don’t want to be rude, or you used to go to elementary school with them and you’re like “hey, let’s see what they’re doing” so you add them. Or if we go to the same college together and we’ve passed by each other, someone might say “oh, I’ve seen that girl, I’ll add her as a friend.” Some participants were unaware of the implications of their decision to de-friend, delete, or not respond to people through electronic platforms. When reminded of a Facebook friend’s birthday, some participants utilized this as the criteria to de-friend the person. Or if people posted sad, negative, depressing situations, or attempted to garner sympathy, some participants ignored the post or de-friended the person. As they shared this realization, they commented on how sad or mean this sounded. “So I might delete them on their birthday ‘cause then I’ll remember, which sounds mean but it’s a way for me to realize like, they aren’t in my life anymore.” We came up with the idea of looking at whoever’s birthday it was and if you don’t know them well enough to actually want to text them, then maybe they shouldn’t be your Facebook friend. That was the criteria. And it’s almost sad because … here’s an un-gift for you.

You know when I said I de-friended people? Sometimes if someone just keep posting like depressing stuff on Facebook, like “oh, like this and like feel bad for me,” basically I’m just like, I don’t want to hear this. It’s like I, well that depends actually, that sounds kind of bad, kind of mean. Although many participants became aware of the unintended consequences or meanings of their electronic interactions and choices, others were surprised when they recognized unexpected experiences that impacted their lives through online interactions. For some participants, social media and the internet afforded them the opportunity to explore the world outside their immediate circumstance and community. One participant was severely depressed during early adolescence, often too depressed to leave home. During this time, the participant played virtual games that provided the opportunity to interact with fellow gamers online. This participant reported: “I would spend 9 hours on the computer. These people seemed to care for me. They were just always there, just a click away. “ Another participant grew up in a community that offered few opportunities educationally, vocationally, and socially. The internet, social media, and chat rooms presented alternate experiences for exploration by interacting with a wide variety of individuals in the United States and around the world. According to this participant: It helped me immensely with like personality development by just being exposed to the different possibilities, just knowing that there’s more out there than what’s around my general community … it basically planted a seed of like the thrill of wanting to experience and explore more. It allowed me to um, explore things and I guess technically if it wasn’t for that, I’m not sure how I would be….So that actually

encouraged me to do better in school because, well the more you know, the further you go. Another participant talked about being very shy when younger. The fear of talking to someone was so intense that calling to order a pizza was impossible. During high school, this participant continued to struggle socially, unable to interact with peers in person. However online, the participant was able to use chat rooms, virtual gaming, and instant messaging to communicate with friends and people around the country by texting and typing interactions. This participant identified feeling more confident communicating in person due to the experience of practicing social skills and conversing with others online but was unaware of this effect until discussing this experience during the interview for this study. And I don’t know if I grew up with a time when it wasn’t instant, like instant messaging or chat I think like that I would not be where I am now in terms of being able to communicate to other people in person….And looking back at it I mean, this is all coming, this is me thinking about it right now, it’s the first time I actually thought about this. It probably did play a major role into why I am the way I am now in terms of being able to communicate. Participants recognized the prevalence of using their cell phones to access social media and texting people in their life to the point of normalcy. For many, the current social climate condones using, looking at, and having a cell phone in social settings with friends and family. Not only is this behavior acceptable but is almost expected behavior. Because communicating electronically is embedded in the lives of emerging adults, many participants were unaware of the unintended experiences created and experienced through

this communication format. Some were experienced negatively by participants and others growth promoting. By discussing their experiences and usage of electronic interactions, participants became aware of how they may have unintentionally affected others or how they unknowingly developed into the person they are today.

Sharing News of Life: I Want to Put My Best Foot Forward “That’s when you see these ridiculous things that get trending because it catches like wildfire. It goes quote un-quote viral….It’s just ridiculous to think how fast communication and resources can travel digitally in 24 hours from person to person.” Social media have become the promotion of private and personal life experiences into public news. This category, Sharing News of Life: I want to put My Best Foot Forward, describes the meaning and experiences of emerging adults as they disseminate information about their lives, who they are, what they are doing, and with whom they share their social and personal lives. All of what is shared through social media becomes part of the information highway. Communicating through an electronic device, phone, tablet, or computer, can promote “keyboard courage” to comment, post, and write to and about others anonymously. This can be a dissociative experience as the typed words are no longer connected to a person permitting harsh comments to be made without regard for how the other person might feel or react. Also included in this category is the experience of being the recipient of personal, social, and political information posted on social media. Participants identified news that is shared through social media was typically positive life experiences. The explanation for this refers to the idea that everyone wants to be

happy and wants others to know what great things are going on in their life. The idea of putting one’s best foot forward and showing the best part of oneself was a recurring theme for participants. “Nobody wants to hear the bad stuff. We all just want to, I just want to show you the good stuff about my life. Nobody wants to see the bad and nasty…. Everything that is happy is on Facebook.” I think everybody wants to think that everybody’s happy. I’m happy in my life even though last night my husband and I had an argument. I think that’s what it is, at least for me. I want everyone to know I’m happy even though my husband and I may have had an argument or whatever. So I think everybody wants to show everybody that I’m happy in my life and where I am.

So you choose your profile picture and your cover photo and your wall post really, really carefully. What’s going to get likes and what’s going to look good for a long stretch of time because only jerk-faces change their profiles every two days. Whereas on Instagram, every photo you choose is really important because it’s much more finite amount of pictures that you have.

If I be the quote “the perfect” [used air quotes] woman then I’ll have more men talk to me [in online dating] and then even with friends, I’m the friend who is fun and exciting and everything is always going on, then my friends want to hang out with me.

They [other people] control the extent to which they can kind of embellish, I think literally spend maybe up to a few hours putting this picture together, you really don’t know. I mean that would be awful if someone did something like that. I think it also has a lot to do with our society about getting and continuing to always be in the pursuit of something as opposed to just being happy with what you have and appreciating what you have. “It’s interesting the things we edit because we’re afraid of the way someone’s going to view it.” I’m thinking to myself “oh, I don’t do that anymore” but I did, recently. My fiancé and I just met online and how much of what I actually put on there was my best foot forward, you know. Everything! Are you kidding? I want to put my absolute best foot forward. Participants also expressed the benefit of delaying a response or post electronically to compose the perfect or best response. This resulted in presenting the best of themselves. The ability to think one’s thoughts out and not have to reply immediately, it changes everything….Like providing intense emotional support for someone who is not in a good place….I could take enough time to type out a long or short meaningful message. “I can double check and triple check everything I say.” I would rather text than talk to someone on the phone that I don’t know that well or email. I’d rather do that because it’s much easier for me to plan out what I’m going to say than having to talk on the phone.

I don’t even text my teachers. I’ll email them if I have a question. I don’t feel comfortable talking to them through a phone call. I feel more comfortable writing it out because I feel like I’ll say exactly what I need to say and not mess up. “You send me a text, I can look at that text and I can just think about what to say for several minutes. Many participants explained their disapproval of sharing feelings and unpleasant aspects of life. They experienced the news of life challenges as uncomfortable, difficult to view, and did not want that posted on social media. When hardships in life were posted by others, they were experienced as attention seeking individuals. “You shouldn’t just lay your dirty laundry out online.” Some people don’t like everyone in their business. That’s what I think it boils down to. You have those select few who will post them [negatives in life] but at the end of the day I don’t think people care. Or you don’t want everyone in your business, like certain stuff does not belong on social media … some people I think live on attention.

So usually people post stuff on Facebook to either show you how great their life is or they’ll post like a mediocre status in order to get comments on it. So I think that’s an interesting conundrum. Do I post the really good stuff that makes people insanely jealous of all the things that I’m doing or do I post these pity type things that I’m looking for people’s sympathy and want to know who’s really paying attention to all the trials and tribulations of my life?

“Being so connected makes me [paused while thinking] dislike people more. Being able to go on Facebook and see how many people are whining so much and I don’t think I deal with this anymore.” People don’t share things online about themselves that makes them look bad. Like it’s incredibly rare, only the most honest people do it. And either that or it’s people who are looking for attention. It’s sort of difficult to understand which it is. Either it’s someone who undermines themselves because there are people who say “oh I’m trash, I’m this and that” and they may have self esteem issues but at the same time some people do that just because they want people to pay attention to them.

I think sometimes it is a pity party, “like this status so you get to know how miserable I am and please give me attention.” But I’m sure there’s people out there too that use it to share their feelings and people have a tendency to like “whoa, like real feelings, hold off, this is not the place for that.”

On Facebook people post things and I’m just like, I hate looking at this. I understand the importance of it and what they stand for but I don’t want to be demoralized because I’m looking at something and I can’t really do anything about it. However, the desire to be appealing to others was more compelling for participants to post and share the positive aspects of their lives. I think that as an American society or at least the American society as I understand it, we are not really comfortable with the negatives … and so I think on a smaller scale it’s the same thing. The less dignified events we don’t want to talk about that so it’s

kind of shying away from things that are not good and perfect and happy. And then additionally as people we want to, I mean humans are intended to connect with each other which is why we have these things at all because people are trying to connect with each other. So I think to make ourselves more appealing to connect with that, we show appealing sides. Distributing the news of their lives through interesting and engaging social media formats was important to many participants. So much so that they acknowledged spending time selecting the best photo and creating an interesting and captivating profile page, post, or comment to share through social media. Some participants interpreted this as bragging. Sometimes the intentions behind it and a particular post are purely to kind of show off. There is only so much you can see, you see it and right away you think this person’s life is perfect or something like that. It could be a fine line between sharing and I guess showing off.

Like in high school it was kind of bragging, it’s just you want to show everyone. I guess it still is kind of bragging if you think about it. You’re posting photos about what you do and that you think are cool stuff. But I don’t know now on Instagram you can like photos so it’s kind of a competition. I don’t know why it’s a big deal and why I can’t name it but it’s like you want to have at least 11 likes. It will list all the individual likes up until 11 and then at 11 it groups it together and it says “look, 11 likes” so you always want to hit that mark.

As the above participant explained, receiving feedback in the form of likes, followers, or thumbs up contributed to the desire to display their best qualities and aspects of life. Although it was more important to receive larger numbers of likes during their adolescent years, emerging adults in this study also described the impact on their sense of self when someone liked their post, requested to follow them, or wrote a positive response. They were disappointed when feedback was minimal or absent. These social media posts and behaviors engendered comparisons and competition in many participants. “I guess in today’s world of social media and everything, the more likes you get on a photo or a tweet, the more you kind of feel good about yourself.” “I would be a little disappointed if no one liked my picture.” To me posting something based on likes would raise your hopes to a point you’d probably just get disappointed almost. If you’re like “I have to get 100 likes,” if you don’t get 100 likes you’re gonna be really sad. What’s the point in doing that to yourself? But I definitely know there are some people that are like “oh man, I got 100 likes for this thing” and it means the world to them. “If I’m really proud of a picture then I’m gonna want people to see it, I’m going to put it on Instagram so I can maybe one day get millions of likes.” The number of likes on Facebook and the content of messages, comments, or likes participants received were often experienced as supportive and meaningful to participants. “More people are just building up your self esteem like they’re just making you feel even better.”

I want that little moment where they’re like “oh, this, it’s working out for them!” And I want to feel that way, I want people to know that I am doing something with my life like they were doing something with their life and I felt kind of negative about it but I want that moment. “In today’s world of social media, the more likes you get on a photo or a tweet, the more you kind of feel good about yourself.” By creating a newsfeed on social media about their lives, participants recognized that people often project a different image online. Posting primarily positive life events and celebrations is only one aspect of a person. Instead, participants reported many people project “how they want to be seen” in the digital world. This portrayal of the best part of themselves broadcasted on social media often times is an online persona only. I feel like people put a face, a persona on and I feel like a lot of people fake who they are because you never hear about their fighting or who they’re de-friending … you don’t see that on their Facebook.

Who I am and I think my online identity is not my real life identity. I don’t post my bad days at work…. I guess in reality it is a more positive version of my day to day life because it’s not day to day, only the big, good events.

I know I’m this person but sitting behind a computer, not like I’m a completely different person but it’s just I could like “oh my god, that girl who loves donuts” and won’t get called fat butt or a girl who really likes giraffes and won’t be like “oh that’s childish.”

Participants discussed the trend of unconsciously and purposefully broadcasting a different persona in the digital world for a variety of reasons. Some of the reasons identified by participants included feeling uncomfortable, avoiding emotional experiences, attempting to impress an individual or group of people, and getting attention. According to participants, social media makes it easy to hide the unpleasant aspects of life. When people get used to the online, they start to present themselves how they want to be seen [in online dating]. So basically they do in public what some people do online and that ends up leaving people falling more so for the idea of that person rather than the actual being.

It’s such a big deal to look a certain way or do this. Some people do anything to get that picture or make people think that about them. So Facebook, I feel like that’s happened a lot because it’s so easy to make yourself look like a different person than, not even your looks but even like your personality and stuff than you actually are.

That’s who they’re trying to put out there because you want to impress them in a way. But then on Facebook you might want to impress guys…so I think that it definitely is so easy to, even if you don’t even know you’re doing it, it’s so easy to make yourself do that just because that’s whoever you’re trying to be is like you’re going you make it look like that….But it’s so easy to do because it’s through words and not through

verbal communication and like how you’re presenting yourself. So I think it’s so easy to get lost in that.

They’ll post pictures that they’ll look one way but then in person it’s like you don’t actually look like that person so I think that’s a way social media, you can see someone differently, not even their actions but just even pictures. Like you’re communicating in a way almost because you’re saying, you’re showing yourself as that when you’re not…if they’re not like comfortable with themselves or trying to get attention.

People have no idea. Maybe your home life is absolutely horrible, like you’re making yourself look like all this positive stuff like “oh, look at this new phone I got, look at how happy I am going to the city” and it’s like, that’s totally different then how you actually feel maybe because it’ just so easy to hide that stuff because you can. Not even because you want to but just because you can.

So I think that it definitely is so easy to, even if you don’t even know you’re doing it, it’s so easy to make yourself do that just because that’s who, whoever you’re trying to be like you’re going to make it look like.

By representing only the best part of life or projecting how they want to be seen by others on social media, one participant raised this question:

I wonder, I don’t know, I wonder if that impacts like what I put forward, this is who I really am. And I wonder if that brings any component of like denial and ego to us as people and makes us more ego driven like I need to be the best and show the best and have the best. And I wonder if that carries over into the real life. I can’t imagine it wouldn’t but I wonder if that is then impacting our interpersonal, real life interactions. Reading and looking at the positive news posted by other people on social media affected how many participants felt about themselves. The public format of posting personal triumphs and announcements social media left some participants feeling badly or questioning themselves and their relationships. “Sometimes it is a struggle; I do feel sad … sometimes their happy stuff makes me sad because it’s something that I wanted.” That could be a disadvantage like getting down on yourself if you see people way more successful than you … it’s just like a bad feeling, like you’re upset, you’re feeling worse about your own situation because you’re not there.

I guess their positives can be my negatives and then their positives can also be like “I’m really happy for you,” kind of thing. But I could also be thinking to myself, more of a selfish thing I guess, “dang, what am I doing right now?” like “what’s happening in my life? Why is this happening to me?”

I would see all these updates from people at other schools who liked their schools and they would be like “I’m having such a great time at university of, fill in the blank” and I’d be like “wow, I’m not having a good time” and so I’m just sitting on Facebook

looking at these people’s updates and it’s making me more depressed about my own situation because it’s being compared to those people’s situation.

The 18 to 25ish age, there’s all this new stuff happening and so what’s posted, the great, fun, wonderful things. And a lot that is happening but a lot of the downs are happening too that don’t get posted. And so you might get married, engaged, get a new baby, get a new dog, get a new relationship but then you are in debt, your parent dies, your relationship breaks up, you have a bad day at work and those things don’t get posted. So by having a bad day at work or a relative dies or something and then I think like, “oh, my life is so much worse than all these other people’s lives who are so fabulous and wonderful.” “I agree that positive things for other people make you feel worse, [chuckled] which is so dumb. It’s like you should feel happy for other people but it’s hard to if you don’t have that too.” “The fact that you can go on Facebook and be judged and feel so poorly over something that shouldn’t make you feel that way.” Participants also questioned themselves and their relationships when friends posted social get-togethers on social media to which they had not been invited. Sometimes I think Facebook creates more issues. You go on Facebook and you see soand-so hung out last night and why didn’t they call you? And what does that say about you as a person? And then I’m starting to realize that this is not something that’s making me feel better; it’s not what’s making others feel better. It’s not something I need to be a part of.

It happens over Snapchat when my friends are together and I didn’t realize they were going to be together and they’re Snapchatting me together. And did you do that on purpose to show me that you’re hanging out to make me jealous? Or are you just doing that to say “hi, wished I was there?” Because if you wish I was there, why didn’t you call me?

If it’s one of your friends who’s hanging out with another friend, you’re like “why wasn’t I invited?” or something along those lines of that like, well I guess we’re not really good friends anymore. It’s easy to do that too.

If someone you know post a picture like with people and you’re like “why are they with them?” it’s not like you just, you can’t just ask because you’re not with them … and you just have to wonder. And then it can lead you to thoughts that aren’t even true because you don’t even know and you’re just thinking just because you saw it. Like your mind wants to think, not even necessarily what actually happened so I think that’s one thing that’s really bad and probably happens a lot. Social media allows individuals the opportunity to anonymously contribute to the information highway. People can hide their true identities behind a computer screen and a screen name. Even through texting, people can communicate information they would not say face-to-face.

My friend will say anything over text; I get her on this cell phone she won’t say a word….It’s their way of saying it without physically saying it. But to me that’s physically saying it anyways. It’s out there. It’s done. Some people think it doesn’t hurt as bad or it’s not really connected to them if it was said in person, like they kind of dissociate it. “You’re able to hide behind it or use the ambiguity of the format of the interaction to convey a different message than you can, want to convey.” It would be much different face to face. People can hide all they want behind their computer or phone and just be like “yeah, I got you.” Whereas face to face you know, people would get intimidated and fights actually happened. As these participants suggested, the technology seems to allow people to hide and detach themselves from their own words. This detachment also results in the absence of feedback from others that occur in face-to-face interactions. No one would think about doing that to someone like finding them in person and doing that [calling someone a vulgar name]. But it’s fine to say that online because you’re hidden behind this cloak of the digital world and so people anonymously comment on blogs with like horrible things … so they want it to be public, they want their opinion to be public but they don’t want themselves to be public. They don’t want to be associated with that. Or it’s kind of weird, detached way of looking at things because people can say whatever they want and they don’t have to like take personal responsibilities for that.

I don’t like social media in that sense because people call it troll, internet trolls, will just go around making fun of people just blatantly ... just for posting something you might be proud of and these people that don’t know you and you don’t know them, they’re affecting your life. You’re going to get down if you’re really proud about a picture you post or a song you post on You Tube and someone says “oh, you suck.” You know “you’re horrible, stop doing what you’re doing.” That would hurt.

You wouldn’t just call someone a lying slut, whore, or terrible person, like screaming that to their face because if you did, other people would be like “stop!” And there’s none of the same sense of responsibility or opportunity for outside intervention in that case….It’s a public forum but still that person doesn’t have responsibility for what they’re saying because it’s their account name, it’s like 123Ihatewomen or whatever.

When you have a screen in front of you, you’re not always thinking about the person who’s reading it. You’re thinking about yourself and you’re thinking about yourself typing this and what you need to say and how it’s going to make you look versus how this is going to make someone else look. Social media are the promotion of personal life into a public forum. People broadcast the best parts of themselves and their lives through profiles, pictures, posts, tweets, and comments. Receiving likes, re-posts, and thumbs up, led participants to feel good. Although sharing their life was a way to stay connected with important people when separated, the pervasiveness of positive posting on social media led many participants to compare themselves to others and created competition. When participants reflected on

these experiences, they felt badly about themselves and their relationships. They also expressed the harmful effects of anonymous posting which allows people to be critical, cruel, judgmental, and opinionated without repercussions, feedback, or care for others’ feelings or reactions.

What’s Going On: Don’t Leave Me Hanging I have very unrealistic ideas about what’s going on the other end. I think when I don’t get a response, if it’s like a guy I’m dating or interested in or if the relationship is not solid then I’m thinking he’s not into me, he doesn’t like you, he doesn’t want to talk to you, he’s avoiding you. The fourth category, What’s Going On: Don’t Leave Me Hanging, describes the expectation of receiving an electronic communication and the explanation participants imagined when responses were delayed or ignored. Depending on the urgency of the initial electronic message, participants expected a response within a reasonable amount of time from an hour to a day. This category encompasses the rational explanations participants presented when electronic responses were delayed or absent such as being at work, in class or busy with personal responsibilities. Even with legitimate reasons, the lack of responsiveness generated self criticism and avoidance of people, intimacy, relationships, and conflicts. Depending on the relationship, participants identified plausible reasons to understand and make sense of a delayed electronic response from another person. When participants knew the other person well enough to be familiar with their schedule and pattern of relating to one another, they could rationally account for a delayed response.

I really think about the audience of the person that I’m sending it to. I think that really dictates what I think is going on. If I know more about their schedule and their day, I usually assume that they’re busy or they’re at work or they’re driving or maybe they’re at dinner and I totally respect that. But if it’s like the nature of it and I know that they’ve looked at it, I think that if it’s a dinner and it’s been an hour or 2, maybe they could have been a break and a time, or could have gone to the bathroom or you could have checked your purse, just send something really quickly.

It depends on the person….for email I think maybe they’re ignoring it or maybe they didn’t see it or they didn’t pay attention to it. If it’s a text to someone, maybe they’re busy or they’re thinking about their response. “You can see if someone opens your Snapchat and doesn’t Snapchat you back. You’re like “oh, whatever. I’m not a good friend to you.” It just feels like being ignored.” As these participants indicated, a delay or no electronic response was also experienced as being ignored even when they were well acquainted with the other person. In addition to feeling ignored, many participants became self critical, upset, angry, disappointed, and annoyed. Participants questioned their own behaviors and interactions, fearing they were at fault. The time that you expected them to respond and they don’t then you send a question mark….if it was a good friend, I would assume they’re mad at me so I’d call them.

I would either think that something else that doesn’t even concern you happened that changed their mood or maybe depending on what you were talking about, maybe it was something you said. Maybe that made them get upset or something. “I start to worry like what did I say or are you going to take it this way, or are they going to take it that way. So when they don’t text me back at all, I do get a little concerned.” “One, they don’t like me. That’s the first thing that comes to my head like ‘what did I do that you don’t like me?’ or ‘what did I do, did I do anything to offend you?’” When sending an electronic message through email, text message, or social media, technology affords the sender an opportunity to know if the message was sent. Several participants were aware of these features. In an attempt to understand the lapse of responsiveness, participants constructed their own inner narrative, again questioning how they were responsible. If I notice you have read receipt but you didn’t text me back and it’s 3 hours later, I’m kind of wondering, did you not like the message? Do you not want to talk to me today? What’s going on? Does somebody else have your phone? Like a lot of stuff goes on in my head if I’ve seen that you read it but didn’t text back yet because I’m like, “okay, what happened?”

On the iPhone there’s such a thing as a read receipt and you can see when someone reads your message. And then you know they’ve read the message and they’re not responding and why aren’t they responding [said in a disappointed, hurt way]. I get more annoyed when I know that someone has opened my message.

I’ll happen to check my phone and see if they did respond, see the dots and then see them go away and never get a text. I’m like “What! Why?” Just say something, don’t leave me hanging like that. And so I think that those dots are part of the problem. Not a huge problem. It creates anxiety and stress that’s unnecessary. They do more harm than good basically is what I’m trying to say.

Usually the biggest one is email. If I email a teacher and I don’t get a response back in a day, I actually get kind of upset because they should be looking at their email, I think twice a day…so if someone hasn’t looked at it, I usually either question if they don’t know what I’m saying or if they don’t the answer to my question through the email or if they just pushed it aside and I don’t know which one it is because they don’t respond.

If it was the next day and you still hadn’t heard from them then I would be wondering if something were maybe wrong just because I’m so used to talking to people that way and if they didn’t respond, then it would be like a worry. The lack of responsiveness in the digital world influenced how many participants felt about themselves and their relationships. The uncertainty that emerged for many participants as they waited for a response was a common experience. Participants questioned the behavior of others, particularly from significant people in their lives. Not only was it difficult to understand the lack of or delayed response, but it was often experienced as hurt and disappointment.

I guess overall if I’m left hanging then that’s disappointing. That tells me they’re not very responsive or responsible taking the other person’s message into consideration. If I find it continuous where they take their time to respond then I just may intentionally not respond to them.

My ex-boyfriend, I could see that he was reading my messages and not responding and I had never been so hurt because how could he do that? It was one of those things where I couldn’t believe that was happening. If depends on who it is. If it’s my friend and I know what they’re doing, I’m like “you’re just ignoring me. Come on, just respond. What are you doing? Who are you hanging out with?” I know my boyfriend, he only checks his phone a few times a day so I have to be patient….I know that I’m not always going to get a response instantaneously and that’s hard sometimes because we are losing patience. It’s easy to imagine horrible things like they’re really mad at me or things like that. Our brains like to do that. “My mom, when she doesn’t text me back it’s kind of like “come on.” Is teaching a class more important than talking to me?” “It depends on who it is. If it’s my friend and I know what they’re doing, I’m like ‘you’re just ignoring me. Come on, just respond. What are you doing? Who are you hanging out with?’”

I know my boyfriend, he only checks his phone a few times a day so I have to be patient….I know that I’m not always going to get a response instantaneously and that’s hard sometimes because we are losing patience. It’s easy to imagine horrible things like they’re just really mad at me or things like that. Our brains like to do that. As participants attempted to understand the experience of receiving a delayed response or none at all, many worried, felt ignored and unimportant. Electronic communications occur over a period of time while in-person interactions take place in the present moment. Participants described spontaneity in face to face interchanges that include responding to emotional reactions, conflicts, or their own anxieties. Many participants discussed using social media and text messages as an approach to avoid uncomfortable situations, feelings, people, and oneself. The decision to communicate electronically allowed many participants to evade in-person interactions. This protected them from the experience of potentially hurting, disappointing, or making the other person angry as described by these participants: “Because in person you’re completely vulnerable. But online you always have somewhere, like if you feel you’re being targeted you can always retreat and just avoid conversational conflict.” Like my mom…she loves to text my siblings and me when she feels like we have bullied her…but she can only says it through text. She could never say it in person to us. She wouldn’t have the balls to do it. She’ll feel very vulnerable so it’s her way of having a voice.

With the internet you can always close it or not respond. You can, if it’s a post you may even delete the post or you can block them or you can report them or you know, a variety of tool at your disposal that in a person-to-person conversation turned confrontation, maybe you don’t have that kind of agency because of the physicality of it changes.

I feel like that’s people’s easy way out if you ask me because I feel like if you don’t have enough heart and soul to tell me what you have to say face-to-face, then it’s just an easy way out like, I can send you this over text message and then I don’t have to see how she feels or what she has to say. So she just texts me back and I can easily not reply or easily ignore her message.

I think a lot of people who do it over text think like, you know, how you always think something but never say it, it’s their way of saying it without physically saying it….Some people think it doesn’t hurt as bad or it’s not really connected to them if it was said in person, like they kind of dissociate it.

I think that the reason why that happens is because it’s an uncomfortable conversation to have so those people turn to texting because they don’t want to talk about it in person because it’s so uncomfortable. Maybe they know the person is going to get upset and they don’t want to see them cry or don’t want to cry themselves then it’s just easier to text. But it’s not the right thing to do but I think that’s why you would because it just makes you feel more comfortable … because if you’re not seeing

someone cry, then you’re not going to feel as bad, so it’s easier on you which is such a rude thing but, I mean I can see why people would want to do that … it’s a good thing.

Just avoiding that responsibility of being mature enough to meet with that person and just deal with that uncomfortable, being uncomfortable having to hurt someone. Maybe that’s the thinking behind that, I don’t want to feel bad for causing that person to feel upset. I don’t want to take the responsibility so I’m going to do it this way. “But then I just kind of stopped responding because it’s tough. You don’t want to let people down, you know … I think I felt bad; I didn’t want to tell him.” Technology provides a channel to avoid uncomfortable situations, conflicts, or being direct with people. These participants also suggested another type of avoidance, avoiding their own feelings that become activated in conversations with other people. According to these participants, social media and text messages made it easier to avoid rejecting people by not responding or de-friending them. “But because of technology I basically am able to be a coward and tap out of that conversation because I didn’t want to have it…. It gives people a way to opt out of things that are tough.” “Rejection is evasive online. You can avoid it. Same thing if somebody is calling you out or something on the internet, you can un-friend them. I don’t want to be with you, unfriend.”

If it really becomes obnoxious and people post like stupid memos sometimes, now I’m starting to sound cynical, but it’s just like sometimes people can irritate me with what they post on Facebook so I de-friend. The format of online dating apps, such as Tinder, Hinge, and Grinder, allow people to swipe them away if they do not like how the person presented themselves in their picture or description. These dating apps are constructed to reject people based on a quick judgment. Participants who utilized these dating apps discussed their experiences of detachment in rejecting others and their own rationalization and justification when they were not selected. Media sometimes allows you to do that but you get chastised for it. It allows you the space and ability to do those things. Tinder you can left swipe and right swipe all you want and they don’t need to know and it’s pretty great. It’s pretty great because you’re not rejecting them to their face and then you don’t feel bad, you’re not at a bar saying “no you can’t buy me a drink” or “where are my girlfriends, this is awful.”

You only hear about the positives, you only get a notification that says “hey, this person that you liked, they liked you back. Why don’t you guys start talking?” That person that you thought was really attractive doesn’t think you’re attractive, you know because you got a big red X … you might go on there and you might feel bad because the person you thought was attractive didn’t like you back but you don’t even know, you don’t even know and then, by the time that would even happen, you’ve already swiped through 30 other people that you’re wondering what their response is going to be.

Whether it is dating apps, texting, or other social media, electronic interactions can create a barrier to communication according to many participants. As meaningful as it is utilizing technology to maintain relationships with significant people, participants also expressed feeling disconnected to others at times. The ease of interacting electronically resulted in some participants becoming less inclined to talk to people in person. But what if that really isn’t helping out the situation because I do like seeing periodically what they’re doing and what’s going on through some of their statuses and that basically maybe discourages me not, that’s a bad word, but maybe makes me less inclined to call them and actually meet up.

My friends and I are texting each other throughout the day, that’s our break to be able to communicate with one another, being able to say “oh my gosh, my boss is driving me crazy” so I don’t turn to my co-workers to say that to them, I can turn to my girlfriends and say it to them.

I think because we have that option it’s easier to lose our social skills that way because it’s easier to be an introvert and you don’t have to actually go out there and talk to them face to face especially if you don’t know them…. The technology allows you to be more introvert, it’s easier to be by yourself than go out there and find friends, make an actual lasting relationship.

But I don’t know, maybe I’m just scared to leave a voicemail. I don’t know what to say, I guess it’s easier to text nowadays. Sometimes I feel like I don’t know how to do it anymore….I feel like also in my life I have lost how to introduce myself to people. Social media and technology also allows people to create distance from present situations and experiences. The technology allowed participants to avoid intimate connections with other people and their own feelings. “I keep myself shunned off from, I guess you could say, the real world, sort of. Like I don’t concern myself with political issues or whatever issues that are going on in real time.” Being with each other but not with each other because you’re just on your phones together so I guess hanging out, that kind of changes the meaning of what hanging of is now. Rather than doing something together, rather than just sitting together and just be on your phones together. It is. There is a separation there rather than being involved or on your phones separately together.

Because everybody’s on it [cell phone], I mean the sort of Zombie. Like you go on the bus, there’s like two people that are actually looking up or anywhere. You miss a lot of communication.

Like people just walking down the sidewalk staring at their phone they almost run into you or you’re like trying to get around them because they’re going the same way, they’re going really slow and there’s people coming the other way and it’s pretty hard that way…. I try to smile at people as I walk by but not many people really notice you.

I’ve got one [an app] that you can just view so I guess I’m not really communicating though. But I’m reading other people’s stories.

Really enjoy the online relationship because it isn’t risky and they can have all these people that want to talk to them and there’s lots of attention but they never really have to commit to … you can kind of just hide in the app.

I think we don’t go for emotions. We go with deep intellectual; we don’t go with deep emotional. I think that we’re kind of scared of the deep emotions, those are scary. So we don’t want to talk about them….Don’t show all that depth because that scares people off whether that’s on my profile or on a date or whatever it is.

For many participants, boredom was an explanation for checking phones and social media. Sometimes this occurred while in the presence of others and sometimes this occurred when alone. Boredom is another aspect of avoiding uncomfortable emotions, other people, and intimacy. Mostly I’m sitting around waiting for something, or I’m sitting at home or I have a spare minute or I’m waiting for someone at a coffee shop and I just kind of peruse through Facebook or Instagram to waste time, or fill time, or otherwise fill idle time.

If I’m bored I like to just go on and just read, even though it doesn’t really mean anything [talking about Twitter]…. I can see why because it’s fun if you’re bored.

I check my phone when I’m bored too. It’s actually when I’m alone but I think it’s, like I said, a distraction. It’s something to do when there’s nothing else to do. “Like even at work I found just like, something to do if you’re bored or don’t have anything to do or you want a distraction.” You’re bored or you’re in a situation when you don’t know many people, you’re just like “I’m going to be here with these people but I don’t know really know how to talk to them about so I’m just going to go on my phone and be isolated that way so I’m still with them but I don’t really want to, I don’t know what to say to them. Communicating electronically has many benefits in established relationships to remain connected when physically separated. However, as participants have indicated in this study, there are also disadvantages that they have experienced as avoidance. The technology has the capacity to allow people to avoid or reject people by not responding, blocking, or de-friending them without their knowledge. Social media and text messages can also create distance not only within a relationship but also from the physical world as these participants summarized: “We don’t know how to just talk to people anymore. In fact, we avoid people.” People just don’t understand and I don’t know if it’s connected to technology or not but just don’t understand what’s appropriate and what’s not. If you live in an apartment and share it with somebody, it is not appropriate to sit on your couch naked and masturbate in the common area. And like duh! But some people don’t get that because at first you’re like what are they doing? But after talking to some of these

people you realize that it’s not that they’re being offensive on purpose but they just don’t understand why that’s inappropriate.

They’re basically renouncing what they went through and un-friended a ton of people basically who disagree with them which is nice if you want to have a short click into utopia and everybody agrees with you but it really doesn’t do anything for developing skills and dealing with people with opposing views and maybe checking your own views.

If Facebook didn’t exist I think I would pick up the phone and call them much more often because I would feel a need to because otherwise I wouldn’t feel connected to them at all. But because there is Facebook and I can have these glimpses of what they’re doing and I feel like I’m kind of seeing into their life a little bit, like it feels less necessary to pick up the phone or plan a trip or whatever because I don’t, maybe I’d plan a trip because I think that’s different.

I was looking at all these things that I could have gone to and I ended up just going to bed because I was like I just don’t want to do any of it…. I ended up just going to sleep and like, but it’s sort of because there’s like all this overload of information and overload of choices that that was the easiest to opt out. For participants in this study, they struggled to understand the meaning and function of social media and electronic communications in their lives. Because technology is embedded in the lives and culture of emerging adults, participants tended to make sense

of technological unresponsiveness of others by self-criticism and self-blame. In order to avoid emotionally charged situations and people, participants became unresponsive to others and â&#x20AC;&#x153;opt outâ&#x20AC;? of addressing the situation, people, and their own affective response.

Chapter VI

Discussion The purpose of this study was to explore the experience of using electronic forms of communication, such as social media and text messages, in the lives of emerging adults. All participants used electronic technology daily to communicate with people in their lives. Their usage of the technology created paradoxical relational experiences. Four categories emerged: It’s Important to Actually Interact: I Want to Be with Them InPerson, A Double Edged Sword: It’s the Best and the Worst, Sharing the News of Life: I Want to Put My Best Foot Forward, and What’s Going On: Don’t Leave Me Hanging.

It’s Important to Actually Interact: I Want to Be with Them In-Person It’s Important to Actually Interact: I Want to Be with Them In-Person, is the first category for discussion that describes the need and desire for in-person interactions and relationships by emerging adults. Despite the benefits of using electronic forms of communication for the ease of interacting with others when separated and maintaining established relationships, what had meaning in the lives of emerging adults was having shared experiences and human interactions. Every participant in this study had daily interactions with people in their lives through various electronic formats. They recognized benefits and disadvantages in their

relationships with others and for themselves. Some of the benefits noted by participants included the ability to stay in touch with friends and family when physically separated, easily sending a quick message, receiving support at any time of the day or night, obtaining news and information from around the world about a multitude of issues, concerns, and cultures, being able to see what others are doing, receiving online invitations and social event notifications, and the ability to communicate with selfselected groups supports previous research (Ellison, Steinfield, & Lampe, 2007; Hortsmanshof & Power, 2005; Jin & Park, 2010; McMillan & Morrison, 2006; Sheldon, 2008; Subrahmanya, Reich, Waechter, & Espinoza, 2008, Young, 2011). Despite the many benefits of communicating electronically, participants also identified disadvantages that affected their lives such as wasting time looking at social media, being distracted, worrying about social skills deteriorating, feeling disconnected, alone, and overwhelmed by the number of notifications, and the expectation of a quick response. Many participants described their use of social media as a love hate relationship. Although they found value in communicating electronically, they also recognized aspects that were unhealthy to them and their relationships. In contrast to Turkleâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s (2011) assertion that communicating face-to-face is too time consuming and electronic communication â&#x20AC;&#x153;offers substitutes for connecting with each other face to faceâ&#x20AC;? (Turkle, p. 11), participants in this study clearly wanted and needed in-person interactions and relationships. The emerging adults in this study expressed their desire and need to have meaningful in-person contact with other people, especially significant friends and family members. One aspect of this need was to have a shared emotional experience that created a sense of connection, safety, and feeling valued. To feel understood by another person on a level

100

that supports oneâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s emotional and psychological experience and development is a central tenet of self psychology (Kohut, 1959). Understanding and feeling connected to another person occurs through empathic resonance by others in their environment throughout life that provides selfobject functions at times of uncertainty and stress. Kohut (1984) wrote: Throughout his life a person will experience himself as a cohesive harmonious firm unit in time and space, connected with his past and pointing meaningfully into a creative-productive future, only as long as, at each stage in his life, he experiences certain representatives of his human surroundings as joyfully responding to him, as available to him as sources of idealized strength and calmness, as being silently present but in essence like him, and, at any rate, able to grasp his inner life more or less accurately so that their responses are attuned to his needs and allow him to grasp their inner life when his is in need of such sustenance (p. 52). The experience with an important other through support, validation, and the sharing of similar ideals, beliefs, and values reinforce a sense of self in the individual. This requires emotional awareness and presence of both people in the interaction. Palombo (1988) emphasized in adolescent development the need for mirroring, recognition, and validating experiences that resonate deeply for the adolescent as a valued person is crucial in supporting a cohesive sense of self. Superficial acknowledgement from others lacks the depth of meaning necessary for feeling truly valued and important. This continued to be important for the emerging adults in this study who expressed a desire to be in the physical presence with others to share experiences and feel happy, fulfilled, and connected to them. The significance in mutually, authentically, and emotionally sharing experiences with others created a sense of togetherness. These participants were

101

experiencing a twinship selfobject that Kohut (1984) described as “an overall alikeness” that confirms “the feeling that one is a human being among other human beings” (p. 200). A twinship can occur in silence when two people are able to feel connected (Togashi & Kottler, 2012) “without verbal or cognitive confirmation, they can experience similarities (and probably differences) and sense they are affectively connected in a special form” (p. 341). Participants conveyed that emotional closeness, intimacy, and trust occurred most often in the course of in-person interactions that were difficult to replicate electronically. This suggests that understanding, empathic attunement, and being similar to another person required in-person interactions. Communicating electronically was indicated as a convenient, quick way to acknowledge others, to let them know you are thinking of them, and was less intrusive than phone calls or meeting in person according to a study by Young, (2011). Although participants in this study expressed the impersonal aspect of interacting this way, they often experienced misattunment with others when communicating electronically. This occurred most frequently when participants wanted to share important news, needed support, felt lonely, sad, or homesick, or wanted a meaningful discussion. When friends or family wrote a text message, posted, or sent a picture instead of calling on the phone or meeting in-person, participants were often disappointed and felt rejected or abandoned. The need and desire for human connection was lost or unavailable. The need for individual connection and attention was missing. The need to be seen, understood, and valued was not experienced in the same meaningful way through typed words or pictures. Spontaneous interactions with a stranger while doing nothing more than being oneself when shopping or taking public transportation was not only enjoyed and appreciated but

102

was welcomed by some participants. For emerging adults in this study, the value of interacting and being in the presence of others face-to-face provides necessary confirmation of being human in a twinship, valued, understood, and important for sustaining a cohesive sense of self. The experience of feeling important seems to be absent in some electronic formats. Notifications or reminders of special events or birthdays can be helpful, but for some emerging adults the reminders minimized the other person and the relationship. The ease of sending a Facebook birthday greeting does not take much time or effort. For some participants, this was experienced as a rupture in the relationship. Receiving these electronic greetings resulted in participants feeling disappointed and devalued. Instead, when friends had taken time to call, sent a birthday card, or a birthday treat, participants experienced these as more personal and affirming. These personal interactions required more thought and time than quickly responding to an electronic notification or reminder. As the saying goes “it’s the thought that matters” was not true for the emerging adults in this study. Instead, being remembered was meaningful. Participants felt recognized as a valued human, creating a twinship experience and felt that the relationship was also valued, creating a mirroring selfobject experience. According to Kohut (1984), selfobject functions are needed throughout life “in the context of the normal experiences of support, indeed, the continuous stream of supportive that we need to maintain the self during all periods of life” (p. 199). This is particularly true at times of internal vulnerability to the self when others are needed to provide mirroring, idealized, and twinship selfobject functions. The emerging adults in this study described electronic interactions as lacking

103

connection and empathic understanding due to the absence of facial expressions, gestures, and tone of voice. Nonverbal aspects of communication, facial expressions, body language, and hand gestures, convey additional affective components of the intended message. Facial expressions have universal meanings (Ekman, 2007) and hand gestures also communicate intentions and meanings (Goldin-Meadow, 2003). Without these nonverbal components of communication in their electronic interactions, participants felt disconnected and empathic understanding was absent. Kohut (1982) emphasized “empathy as a powerful emotional bond between people” (p. 397) that allows people to understand and be attuned to the internal experience of another person. The ability to resonate affectively can be expressed through words however, the experience of “silent affective resonance” (Teicholz, 2000, p. 46), sharing an emotional connection in the presence of another person, was important for the emerging adults in this study. They were not satisfied in sharing words or pictures, they yearned for empathic understanding, to be appreciated, known, and understood deeply and meaningfully. In striving for a cohesive, joyful, growth promoting self (Kohut, 1982), face-to-face interactions provide direct access to nonverbal elements of communication. These nonverbal interactions offer direct empathic experiences and connections that were imperative for participants and their relationships. Participants reported frequent misunderstandings, conflicts, and online drama in the absence of voice inflection, body language, and facial expressions. They described written words in text messages, online posts and comments as “flat,” making it impossible to recognize sarcasm. Participants were expressing the difficulty in decoding

104

the full meaning and emotional content of messages when only typed words were provided (Palombo, 2006). In verbal and written communication, language has rules such as vocabulary and how to use words to construct meaning (Palombo, 2006). However, nonverbal communication is inferred and learned through direct in-person interactions between human beings. Over time, an electronic language has emerged that includes rules and vocabulary such as abbreviations and emojis. Abbreviations such as LOL, laugh out loud and BFF, best friends forever, are used partially to reduce typing out full words and emojis are used to insert some emotional context. There are so many abbreviations that an online reference is available at www.webopedia.com. For participants in this study, even some universal abbreviations did not necessarily convey an authentic message as both people typed LOL, laughing out loud, but were not actually laughing at the same time, leading to emotional misattunment and a lack of connection. Contrary to findings that children and adolescents prefer to interact electronically (Turkle, 2011), the emerging adults in this study found the experience of reading words electronically did not provide full emotional content, understanding, or a meaningful connection to the other person. Despite the emergence of an electronic language, miscommunications, misunderstandings, and reduced spontaneous interactions frequently occurred for participants in their electronic interactions. In the absence of prosody, tone of voice, facial expressions, hand gestures, and body language, participants interpreted and projected their own meaning of the electronic communication based on how they perceived the message. Without the ability to read nonverbal cues or tone of voice, participants missed the nuance of the message and most often were unable to recognize

105

sarcasm particularly with people they did not know. Turkle (2011) found the lack of spontaneity “cheats people out of learning how to read a person’s face” (p. 271). This was also the experience of the emerging adults in this study. They were not only cheated out of the nonverbal facial expressions but cheated out of a shared emotional experience or twinship. As Kohut (1971) indicated, a cohesive sense of self is rooted in verbal and nonverbal interactions that provide needed psychological functions throughout life, particularly at times of internal vulnerability. The concept of mindsharing developed by Palombo (2006) expands Kohut’s development of a cohesive sense of self, identity, and feeling connected to others by incorporating a social context. Interpersonal and social interactions are key elements in the experience of being with another person according to Palombo (2006), “we feel connected to others within our community by our shared language, values, and beliefs” (pp. 147). These shared experiences also include emotional or affective states that accompany these experiences and are associated with the person or people involved. The experience of being with another person can lead to emotional intimacy and closeness that participants in this study realized was important for their own sense of self and in their relationships. The emerging adults in this study were describing the need and desire for twinship selfobject experiences. Late in Kohut’s (1984) career, he indicated the importance of the twinship selfobject transference to express the shared experience of feeling human among humans. Togashi and Kottler (2012) further expanded twinship as more intricate. They contend that twinship has multiple experiences including a sense of belonging and a sense of being human among humans (Togashi & Kottler, 2012). The emerging adults in this study indicated their need and desire for these types of twinship

106

experiences that they experienced when interacting in-person. The ability to feel â&#x20AC;&#x153;a vague but intense and pervasive sense of security as he feels himself to be human among humansâ&#x20AC;? (Kohut, 1984, p. 200) when engaged in parallel experiences was significantly important for participants. This was the shared experience that occurred most frequently when participants could see, hear, and be in the presence of another person. Although written words had the capacity to convey a message and information, they lacked depth of experience, emotional connectedness, and empathic responsiveness due to missing nonverbal components of communication and voice inflection. Facial expressions are a significant component by which emotions are communicated in face-toface interactions. Some emotions are universally communicated through facial expressions transmitting emotional information in the context of the interaction (Ekman, 2007). In addition to facial expressions, body movements and in particular hand gestures contribute to the implied meaning of a message that can only be communicated in faceto-face interactions (Goldin-Meadow, 2003). In order to fully understand an electronic communication, participants needed facial expressions that helped mitigate misunderstandings. However, in order to experience a shared emotional experience, participants needed and wanted in-person interactions that contained verbal and nonverbal aspects of communication. If there was a miscommunication, they were able to see the confusion, anger, or other emotional reaction and intervene by asking for clarification. Though the experience of connecting emotionally provided affirmation, feeling special, valued, and bond with the other person, electronic interactions were experienced by some participants as dehumanizing as their experiences were reduced to

107

written words. Although they did not feel lonely as Turkle (2011) suggests, the emerging adults in this study most often felt emotionally disconnected. The emerging adults in this study were seeking more than just casual companionship and friendships. They were seeking meaningful connections with others who shared similar values, beliefs, and emotions that involved in-person, face-to-face contact. They wanted to see, hear, and feel the experience of the people in their lives and wanted to be seen, heard, and emotionally understood by these people, not just with written words, but through verbal and nonverbal interactions. However, understanding their affective experience through empathic responses could be experienced through electronic communications when participants had an existing in-person relationship. For most participants in this study, relationships with family members and close friends were emotionally sustaining through text messages and social media when they needed emotional sustenance from a loved one. These electronic interactions mitigated feeling homesick and allowed them to feel inclusion in their lives when separated from others for extended periods of time. Being affirmed, valued, and deeply understood through electronic interactions was contingent on an emotionally close, longstanding, in-person, relational history. For participants, birthday greetings received from Facebook friends that were identified primarily as acquaintances were not experienced as affirming or meaningful. The quality of relationships and interactions offline can be mirrored and strengthened (Young, 2011) through electronic formats when face-to-face relationships have been established. Although using social media and text messages as a method to remain connected and involved in the lives of family and friends, participants also wondered if the technology

108

contributes to declining human in-person interactions. With the ability to read and see what friends and family members are doing through various social media sites such as Facebook, Snapchat, and Instagram, participants were less inclined at times to visit or even call them. The exposure of life events through social media posts, comments, and likes brings into question what constitutes a connected relationship when the desire to speak on the phone or visit in-person is diminished by being up to date on the lives of friends and family. Participants reported knowing, or actually seeing pictures and posts about marriages, new babies, dating escapades, academic or work accomplishments, and social gatherings. What is there to talk about when all is known about the lives of family and friends? Is this justification to speak with or make time to visit people? As participants in this study expressed, electronic communication provided them with a shared experience where the technology functioned as the medium for a vicarious emotional connection. What emerged for participants as a potential consequence of electronic communication was whether the technology created the illusion of a sustained relationship that existed electronically that no longer necessitates in-person, interpersonal encounters. Electronic forms of communication and interaction create the experience of being alone together according to Turkle (2011). The engagement of robotic toys, online gaming, video games, texting, email, online chat rooms and websites, create the illusion of connectivity, but the experience she found created isolation and feeling alone. Contrary to this concept, the emerging adults in this study did not feel alone when they used electronic technology to communicate and interact with others, but did experience feeling emotionally disconnected. Instead, the desire and need to have in-person, face-to-

109

face contact with other people was an essential component for their significant relationships in feeling a sense of belonging and twinship. Their use of social media, particularly Facebook, was less contingent on the number of friends, followers, or fans they had but more as a means of sustaining in-person relationships with friends and family. This was possibly due to the fact that 19 participants were either in college, graduated college, or employed resulting in an established friendship network. From a developmental perspective, twelve of the participants were involved in significant relationships, six were employed full-time, and ten were 23 years old or older.

A Double Edged Sword: Itâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s the Best and the Worst The second category, A Double Edged Sword: Itâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s the Best and the Worst, discusses participantsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; use of electronic technology to interact with others and the unintentional behaviors they engaged in through electronic communications. Ownership of electronic devices and usage has increasingly become embedded in the culture of emerging adults as indicated by a 2014 Pew report citing 98% of young adults age 18 to 29 owned a cell phone and 67% of all cell phone owners checked their phones automatically for text messages, notifications, alerts, and calls without a ringtone or vibration prompt. The emerging adults in this study were also compelled to use their cell phones often comparing the experience to an addiction. In a 2015 Pew report on mobile messaging and social media usage, 82% of emerging adults ages 18 to 29 used Facebook on their Smartphones, 55% used Instagram, 49% used mobile messaging apps, 37% Pinterest, and 32% Twitter. For the emerging adults in this study, owning and using a cell phone had been a part of their lives since their adolescence. As technology advanced and these

110

participants acquired a smartphone, they used the technology more frequently to communicate and interact with the people in their lives. What emerged during interviews as participants talked about their electronic interactions were unintended or unconscious behaviors they engaged in and the effects these experiences had on participants and their relationships. All 20 participants in this study owned a cell phone and used it daily as a communication device. The ease of connecting electronically through social media, text messages, and emails was frequently noted by participants as an advantage in communicating with people. Of the 20 participants, only one consciously decided not to own a smartphone, due to the ease of being lured into social media, text messages, and emails. This participant resolved to limit the amount of time devoted to social media by using a laptop versus a smartphone. The advancement in electronic technology occurred simultaneously during the early and adolescent development years of emerging adult participants in this study. The technology has been part of their lives, described as “it’s a way of life” and makes it difficult to consider life without technology as this participant remarked “it’s so bizarre to think of going to college without the internet.” The ability to talk, text, post, tweet, Snapchat, email and communicate electronically any time of the day or night has been normalized in the social culture of emerging adults. The normalization of electronic communication seems to have an effect on young people. In Turkle’s (2011) work with adolescents, being plugged into their electronic devices and always on through constant availability online induced anxiety, “fears of isolation and abandonment” (p. 178). Separating from parents and beginning to develop independence is part of adolescent development. However, the opportunity to connect

111

electronically via social media or text messages interrupts the development of independence. Adolescents do not need to be alone to problem solve, mitigate their emotions, or learn to self-reflect. Perpetual availability also comes with expectations for timely posts and responses to minimize being left out of the communication loop. These expectations also created anxiety for adolescents (Turkle, 2011) that can interfere with tolerating frustration and empathic ruptures of responsiveness that activates earlier selfobject failures (Kohut, 1984). Technology creates the illusion of immediate, perfect responsiveness, and attunement, like a perfectly attuned mirroring and idealized selfobject to mitigate any insecurities or threats to a vulnerable, insecure sense of self. The emerging adults in this study were similarly drawn to their cell phones and social media which is an extension of the adolescent experiences described by Turkle (2011). Their identity and sense of self is situated within the electronic social culture they grew up in. In addition, the culture in higher education and many employment areas have adopted electronic technology for communication. Not only have they used the technology to interact with their friends and family but most colleges and universities use email as the official method of communication. Employers also use email and text messages and often expect employees to be available or at least reachable for emergencies around the clock. This need and expectation for electronic devices has been termed a tethered self by Turkle (2011). The culture of using and needing technology has created this physical, social, and psychological attachment to the devices. Similar to Turkleâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s (2011) tethered self, the emerging adults in this study described their devices as â&#x20AC;&#x153;an extra limbâ&#x20AC;? that also captured their dependence on the devices.

112

Whether electronic devices are tethered or an extra limb, the undeniable experience for all the participants in this study were the benefits of technology in their lives and relationships. However, what emerged during interviews was the unconscious aspect of using technology that effected their social relationships and psychological vulnerabilities. The emerging adults in this study had used the technology as a form of electronic communication for 6 to 12 years, depending on the age they began using social media on home computers or owned a cell phone. After years of interacting electronically through social media and text messages, electronic communication rules and language were established and became embedded in the social culture. During interviews, many participants had not considered if, or how, electronic interactions may have influenced them personally or relationally. Some participants needed time to consider the meaning and function of their electronic interactions on their identity and relationships, some struggled to articulate their thoughts or became confused as they spoke, while others were surprised and shocked at the revelation of their own uncharacteristic mean and cruel treatment of others. These participants became aware of their electronic behavior and the impact on others only when they described their reactions of disappointment and annoyance in electronic interactions by others. It seems that discussing their experiences during the interviews, participants became aware of disavowed shame and embarrassment as they recognized their narcissistically motivated mistreatment of others through electronic formats. The realization of their behavior resulted in acknowledging their own narcissistic needs that had been split off. This awareness had an effect on participants similar to the integration of a vertical split in therapy noted by Kohut (1971) as â&#x20AC;&#x153;the true acceptance of the reality of the split-off sector is often accompanied by a

113

feeling of astonished estrangement. ‘Is this really me?’ the patient asks” (p. 184). Although none of the participants in this study asked themselves this question directly, they were surprised by their behavior when they spoke about it out loud and became aware of how they could be affecting other people. One participant stated, “I do it to people too, so I try not to think about it” as a strategy to disavow their own behavior, the responsibility of seeing the impact their actions had on others, and shame associated with their uncaring behavior and own narcissistic needs. The 20 participants in this study were open to share and discuss their experiences interacting electronically with family, friends, and online acquaintances. Although social media was used by participants, this medium seemed to create a vertical split from discordant behavior and their feelings of shame and embarrassment associated with relating electronically. The years of interacting electronically may have impacted development as communication patterns and behaviors are normalized in the culture of American adolescents and emerging adults (Palombo, 2006). For the emerging adults in this study, definitions and attachments to online friends became ambiguous. The majority of Facebook friends were considered acquaintances by participants and were unlikely to meet in-person. During the years of adolescent and emerging adult development, relating electronically may contribute to the dehumanization of others turning them into faceless Facebook friends to be discarded or de-friended. This supports Turkle’s (2011) assertion that people are treated as objects to be used for what is needed. In this study, the participants were unaware of the decisions and relational behaviors that were motivated by their own needs, unconcerned if their actions emotionally injured others.

114

All 20 participants were courteous, thoughtful, and caring during the interviews for this study. The absence of empathy in some of their self-identified mean, rude, and cruel electronic treatment of others was not only surprising to participants but to the researcher. It is possible that the unconscious disclosures of their behaviors could only occur in a face-to-face interaction where they no longer were able to disavow their shame and were able to show and experience a more cohesive self. In the verbal telling of their experience, the researcher may have provided mirroring selfobject transference by actively listening and empathically resonating without judgment or criticism. The discrepancy between the in-person experience with the researcher and the unintended effect of their online behavior underscores a vestige of potential misattunement, unempathic responsiveness, and disavowed emotions. In these electronic exchanges, participantsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; ability for empathy was absent. They were unable to â&#x20AC;&#x153;think and feel oneself into the inner life of another personâ&#x20AC;? (Kohut, 1984, p. 82). There is some evidence of declining empathy over the past 30 years (Konrath, 2010), along with speculation that increased involvement in online communication and activities may be the culprit. However, every participant openly shared their experiences with the researcher, yet their empathy for others was disconnected when communicating electronically. An empathic connection was experienced between the researcher and participants during the interview process. Each participant had a cell phone with them during the interview, had it silenced, and only looked at their phone to show the researcher an app, their Facebook page, or a text message. They were not distracted by their electronic devices and were fully present in discussing their experiences throughout the interview. The lack of in-person human contact by communicating electronically paradoxically

115

functions to connect and disconnect from people. Using electronic devices to communicate through social media, text messages, emails, chat rooms, and online gaming seems to disconnect behavior from emotional consequences. The acquaintances of Facebook friends described by participants in this study may lead to dealing “with the part of the person you see in your game world or social network” (Turkle, 2011) and not with the whole person as they would with close connections and twinship experiences (Kohut, 1984; Toghasi & Kottler, 2012) with family and friends.

Sharing the News of Life: I Want to Put My Best Foot Forward The third category, Sharing the News of Life: I Want to Put My Best Foot Forward, describes the public forum that provides the experience of contributing to the information highway for emerging adults. Social media “is news; people are the news,” and even have their own newsfeed. Comments, posts, Facebook likes, and thumbs-up are all examples of individual contributions to personal, political, social, current or world news shared on social media. Through the public venue of social media, the collective online culture is for positive posts or sharing only positive news, resulting in limited online outlets for expressions of disappointments. For emerging adults, either they conform to this online social norm or become the target of ridicule or are isolated and abandoned when others fail to respond. In addition, the ability to hide behind a computer or cell phone screen creates the opportunity for keyboard courage, to type anything without any consequences, receiving feedback from others, or taking responsibility for their actions. Since the launching of the first iPhone in 2007, a Pew Report in 2015 indicated 64% of American adults owned cell phones with internet capability, or a smartphone. Since

116

that time, a multitude of social media sites have developed and usage has exploded. Facebook (2015) has over 1 billion daily active users and 894 million mobile daily users as of September 2015. Twitter (2015) has 320 million active monthly users. Instagram (2015) has 182.5 million users with 58 million photos uploaded daily and 28% of users ranging from 18 to 29 years of age. Snapchat (2015) has 115 million users with 410 million Snapchats a day and 32.9% of account holders ranging from 18 to 34 years of age. Every participant in this study used at least one of these social media platforms to communicate with people in their lives. In addition, they were well aware that despite privacy options, social media are open for public viewing by any person that subscribes to the site. According to participants, what is posted and shared through social media was expected to be positive news. Interacting, sharing, and showing life events through social media have created a culture of normative behavior, expectations, and rules. Describing the relationship between people and technology, online life is a place to explore identity at any time of life through the creation of profiles, avatars, and self-presentation through online activities (Turkle, 2011). Although emerging adults in this study did not create profiles under different names, they did report a cultural norm in social media to share positive aspects of life. Part of the need to produce positive news and cast a positive light on oneâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s self was due to social media expectations and social culture supported in a recent study by Mango, Taylor, & Greenfield, (2012). They found emerging adults used Facebook and other social media sites as a platform â&#x20AC;&#x153;for individualistic self-displaysâ&#x20AC;? (p. 378) in a public space. Negative posts on social media, including life challenges, deaths, or daily hardships, were perceived by others as attention seeking behavior. Individuals who

117

posted these socially unacceptable circumstances were often ridiculed, criticized, and typically ignored by others, contrary to a study by Kim and Lee (2011) that found when individuals honestly self-disclosed on Facebook, support was received by their Facebook friends. However, if the person had few Facebook friends, social support was less likely to occur (Kim & Lee, 2011). This seems to indicate intolerance for emotionally unpleasant aspects of life and individual problems and distress on social media. Although the mission of Facebook (2015) is to â&#x20AC;&#x153;share and express what matters to them,â&#x20AC;? the accepted collective social culture on social media is sharing primarily optimistic and life affirming experiences. The emerging adults in this study adopted this cultural norm as described by Palombo (2013) but it is unclear whether they did so as a merger with social media groups as a social or cultural twinship transference or as a strategy to avoid rejection or exclusion. Due to the public nature of social media with the potential of hundreds of people paying attention to what news is posted by whom, who commented on what, and who liked or re-posted the news, the opportunity for criticism and rejection was great. According to a study by Forest & Wood (2012), people with lower self-esteem tended to self-disclose negative or pessimistic content on social media. As a result, these individuals were typically liked less by strangers and were more likely to receive unfavorable responses by others on Facebook. The emerging adults in this study responded similarly toward others by avoiding both them and situations that did not feel good to them online. Is this evidence of declining empathy (Konrath, 2010, Twenge, 2013) or an attempt to remain tied to the social media culture by adopting the values of

118

the group as an adaptive strategy to avoid rejection (Palombo, 2013) or is this an indication of a vulnerability in regulating painful emotions? Participants in this study were experienced by this researcher as thoughtful, kind, and caring individuals during the in-person interviews. They described their electronic interactions with family and close friends as supportive, understanding, and sustaining, particularly when physically separated (Young, 2011). Maintaining relationships through social media and text messages with significant others also provided a twinship experience based on the in-person relational history between participants and the significant people in their lives (Togashi & Kottler, 2012). There is empathic responsiveness and understanding experienced in the relational in-person dyad that continues through electronic interactions as a sense of connection in the absence of spoken words. Togashi and Kottler (2012) refer to this as “twinship in silent communication” (p. 341). The capacity to respond empathically toward others occurred between participants and their family and friends. The desire to put one’s “best foot forward” seemed to be the expectation from the social media audience according to participants in this study. When people post negative or more pessimistic aspects of life on social media, they are neither accepted nor welcomed; as one participant said, “I don’t want to see that.” The promotion of a positive social media self is the cultural norm that is reinforced by receiving comments, re-posts, and likes from others. Positive self-presentation on Facebook is commonly used to convey the best of one’s self and has been shown to receive more validation, attention, and be perceived favorably by others (Forest & Wood, 2012; Gonzales & Hancock, 2011: Kim & Lee, 2011; Panek, Nardis, & Konrath, 2013). Theses favorable social media

119

responses serve as a mirroring selfobject function by validating and affirming “the best” of others and valuing funny, attractive images of people (Blease, 2015; Stefanone, Lackaff, & Rosen, 2011). In addition, there is a twinship transference described by Togashi and Kottler (2012) as “mutual recognition and mutual finding” (p. 335) as the individual is found on social media and recognized through a like or a comment. In this moment, participants experienced sharing themselves by being acknowledged individually and publically. These affirmations did function to promote self cohesion, regulating self-worth, as participants described feeling “good” about themselves. However, mirroring only a part of the self, the “best part,” leaves the embarrassing or shameful aspects of the self disavowed or split off. Participants described disavowing people they experienced as sharing their warts, unpleasant feelings, and experiences. They were uncomfortable being witness to the struggles and challenges others experienced, possibly due to activating their own internal reactions. By ignoring and disavowing others online, participants have engaged a compensatory structure to potentially preserve weaknesses in the self structure that threatened insecurities, safety, or emotional stability (Kohut, 1984). There may be deficits in their ability to tolerate or mitigate their affective experiences. It is possible that earlier idealized selfobject mergers were deficient through inconsistent or overwhelming emotional experiences. Without adequate calming and soothing provided through an idealized selfobject experience, the capacity to regulate affect and self-soothe is underdeveloped and can create anxiety (Kohut, 1984). Social media and electronic communications lend themselves as a medium to easily ignore, reject, and avoid

120

intolerable feelings, experiences, and people by focusing on and accepting optimistic, encouraging, and positive experiences and people. According to Turkle (2011), people can be seen as part objects through social media, text messages, and email messages. This technology creates the experience of perpetual connection with the assumption that someone will always be available on the other side of the device. If no one is available, adolescents continue searching through their contact or friend list to find someone when they need a response or to share their experience. According to Turkle (2011) they are searching for what is “useful, comforting, or amusing” (p. 154). This may be a function of adolescent development as the emerging adults in this study did not search incessantly for an available selfobject. Instead, they tended to disavow their own personal challenges by posting personal news of the fun and happy aspects of themselves and their lives. This seemed to be a function of the acceptable social media culture. Participants’ reported a common attitude that negative and pessimistic social media posts were viewed as an attempt to garner pity and attention from others. When people did post pessimistically online, they received public rejection and shaming. Attempting to avoid online public judgment or rejection, participants avoided vulnerabilities and needs from both others and themselves as a compensatory method “to maintain the remnants of the self” (Kohut, 1984, p. 132). The public nature of social media increases personal vulnerability to public shaming, humiliation, and disappointment. People can post hurtful, disrespectful, and hostile comments anonymously through keyboard courage without taking any responsibility for their words. Social media invites comments from others in the network and is a format for name calling, harsh judgment, and criticism to be typed and left for electronic eternity. It

121

is a word bomb thrown at a specific person, but witnessed by a public community without feedback or consequences resulting in social anxiety (Levinson, Langer, & Rodebaugh, 2013). As a collective community, the participants in social media disavow words and behaviors that are hurtful and disrespectful as well as people who display unpleasant life experiences. Social media are mirroring selfobject functions (Palombo, 1988), reflecting and affirming the social norm of positive self-promotion as well as fulfilling individual exhibitionistic needs (Panek, Nardis, & Konrath, 2013). According to participants in this study, they avoided social media isolation and abandonment by adopting the collective group norms and values, sharing the best of themselves. In order to read about and see friends, family, and other people online, they needed to adopt the cultural norms and social expectations of social media in order to participate in the various formats. Does this mean that a social media persona is a false self, a creation of the person they want to be seen as rather than who they really are? For participants in this study, they seemed to use social media to broadcast and share news about their lives as a means to be part of a larger community as a twinship selfobject, “to experience the presence of essential alikeness” (Kohut, 1984, p. 194). The social and cultural norms of social media require self-representation with a positive outlook (Forest & Wood, 2012) in order to be effectively engaged in this online community. The emerging adults in this study were aware they withheld portions of their daily lives that could be considered boring, unflattering, or “bad.” This led participants to question if their online identity their real identity, the whole self they project when in-person. This online persona of projecting a positive self was not used as an opportunity to explore their emerging adult identity in relationships, love, or vocation (Arnett, 2006, Erikson, 1963). Only through dating apps

122

did participants express their intention of crafting the most favorable profile and photo selection to construct the best version of themselves as a method to attract a relationship partner. Otherwise, their positive self-presentation on social media was a function of adhering to the accepted social culture and expectations created on social media. By joining in the rules and norms of social media, participants became part of a worldwide community in a twinship selfobject experience defined as â&#x20AC;&#x153;a psychological state in which a person feels an emotional tie with others and makes sense of temporal continuity in his beingâ&#x20AC;? (Togashi, 2014, p. 276). There is no self psychology emerging adult developmental theory. This study highlights the transitional time for emerging adults in the 21st century outlined by Arnett (2000) by additional social, cultural, and relational stressors of postponed employment, extended college and post secondary higher education, and instability in independent living. According to Tanner (2006), this transitional period for emerging adults is a time of self-sufficiency within the context of relationships with others to assume responsibility for themselves in an independent and self-directed manner. Tanner (2006) terms this process as recentering which includes the capacity for sustained commitment to others, to make life choices, regulate experiences and establish a career, all within a system that supports and sustains the emerging adult, similar to Kohutâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s (1984) selfobject functions. For emerging adults in this study, distributing personal news that included accomplishments and status updates, particularly marriages, job promotions, and pregnancies, had an effect on their ability to regulate experiences through social media. Although participants wanted to be happy for the success of others, they also reported feeling badly about themselves, especially if the achievement of the other person was a

123

goal they set for themselves. From a developmental perspective, when the emerging adults in this study recognized not yet achieving some of the developmental tasks as other people their age, such as significant relationships with friends and a life partner, starting a family, or financial stability (Arnett, 2000; Erikson, 1963; Tanner, 2006), they became upset with their lack of developmental achievements. At these times, participants were reminded of their own unfulfilled aspirations or the reality of daily life that is not always “fabulous and wonderful.” There seems to be a difference in viewing pictures and comments on social media newsfeeds, particularly weddings, babies, new homes, and new relationships that activated disappointments in participants. Prior to social media and smartphones, news of life celebrations and accomplishments were shared face-to-face or through a telephone conversation. At these times, there was an opportunity for mirroring selfobject experiences by expressing excitement and joy through tone of voice, facial expressions, and body language. In addition, both people could engage in discussing statuses regarding life goals, opportunities, and relationships. However, viewing social media newsfeeds, especially Facebook (Blease, 2015), tends to be a solitary activity that leads to comparisons, negative self-evaluation, and disappointment. Participants are then alone with their device, the newsfeed, and information about the lives of other people, witnessing friends socializing without them. Turkle (2011) identifies this experience as being alone with the illusion of being connected through the technology. The connectivity of technology often left emerging adults in this study empty, alone, and in need of selfobject functions. This supports the findings of Hu (2009) of increased loneliness following online interaction. When participants noticed friends “hanging out”

124

together on social media but had not been invited to join them, participants experienced a rupture in the relationship. The relationship that once was experienced as twinship, “an authentic and honest relationship with others” (Togashi, 2014, p. 275) had been damaged. The emerging adults were either sent messages or able to see on social media that they had been excluded by their friends, resulting in self-doubt and feeling anxious (Levinson, Langer, & Rodebaugh, 2013). Being physically alone with an electronic device, looking through social media, text messages, and emails can be emotionally isolating. The emerging adults in this study were affected by the news posted on social media, especially when excluded from activities with friends. It may be they had not fully internalized the strength and calming experience from an idealized other, leaving them vulnerable to a loss of self worth and cohesion in that they were unable or struggled to modulate feelings and experiences (Kohut, 1984). The electronic technology creates the illusion of being able to reach someone at any time of the day or night. Although this was the reality experienced by the emerging adults in this study, the illusion is the possibility of connecting with an available other as a protective strategy to mitigate complex, challenging, or uncomfortable experiences, thoughts, or feelings. Without a mirroring or idealized selfobject experience at times of internal vulnerabilities, the empathic failure will reverberate with previously misattuned experiences. In order to preserve the self from fragmentation, participants disavowed their own grandiose need and desire to be included in social events by blaming themselves or creating explanations for their friend’s decision to exclude them from the fun social activity. It seems that the experience of being “always on” (Turkle, 2011, p. 151) created by electronic communication, interferes with

125

the ability to be alone with unpleasant experiences and the capacity to tolerate uncomfortable feelings. For adolescents, the speed and availability of finding someone in their network of friends to reach via text message or social media, becomes the mediating factor that Turkle (2011) describes as cultivating “a collaborative self” (p. 176). In order to develop the capacity for self-soothing, small failures in responsiveness, disappointments, or rejections need to occur within an idealized, calming, selfobject environment (Kohut, 1984). Otherwise, when emotions and situations arise, anxiety is generated, making it difficult to endure being alone with one’s thoughts and feelings. Focusing on posting positive news by participants seemed to be a compensatory structure, a protective strategy to avoid experiencing critical retribution from social media comments and minimize reflecting on their own perceived flaws and shortcomings in comparison to the accomplishments of others. As participants in this study posted their news on social media, they followed the cultural social norm of posting “the best” of themselves. Their news posts were not necessarily narcissistically motivated to show off or brag about themselves (Blease, 2015; Panek, Nardis, Konrath, 2013) but instead were a function of conventionalization (Palombo, 2013), adopting the social norm and expectation of posting good news, fun social events, and life achievements on media social. Without adhering to the collective expectation of posting positive aspects of life or the “best” pictures, participants would be ostracized, rejected, abandoned, or ignored online. In an effort to maintain a cultural selfobject relationship that provides affirmation, validation, and a sense of belonging, emerging adults adopted the social norms of social media. Although it would seem that posting challenges out to the public could garner support from a wider audience,

126

unfortunately, this was seen as attention seeking and dramatic behavior, causing the individual to be ignored or not liked online (Forest & Wood, 2012). Therefore, it seems prudent to adhere to the rules of posting positive news and projecting a positive self on social media to avoid isolation, rejection, and admonishments.

What’s Going on: Don’t Leave Me Hanging What’s Going On: Don’t Leave Me Hanging is the final category that describes the emerging adult’s attempt to make sense of their experiences when responses were delayed or absent in electronic interactions. The lack of responsiveness was better understood and tolerated by participants when it occurred in established relationships. They constructed explanations that justified the lapse in responsiveness and tended to blame themselves by questioning how they may have offended the other person. Despite the explanations imagined by participants, many felt disappointed, angry, or ignored. What became apparent as participants discussed their experiences was a struggle to tolerate and modulate affective responses within the context of relationships. The emerging adults in this study were inclined to avoid awkward and uncomfortable situations, feelings, and relationships by using electronic forms of communication. During the life of emerging adults in this study, communication options have expanded beyond in-person interactions, phone calls, or handwritten letters. The internet, social media, and the advancement of cell phone technology have not only changed how communication occurs but the speed of these interactions (Turkle, 2011). Today, cell phones are primarily smartphones with internet accessibility that affords easy and quick access to people and information. This was evident as participants in this study assumed

127

electronic interactions would be prompt as one participant stated “it’s always expected to be right away.” The immediacy of electronic communications encourages and reinforces the need and desire for attuned responsiveness. This perpetual expectation of availability and responsiveness seems to re-create the narcissistic blissful state experienced in early childhood between the child and caregiver (Kohut, 1971), expecting the person on the other end of the electronic device to be immediately available and perfectly attuned to their need. In self psychology, the central tenet is a developmental trajectory toward healthy narcissism (Kohut, 1971) through nonverbal and verbal responsive attunement by caregivers to the physical and emotional needs of children. Caregivers provide needed psychological functions Kohut termed selfobject functions. Turkle (2011) equates Kohut’s selfobject functions as an object, a kind of spare part, providing psychological functions that the individual has yet to fully integrate. According to Kohut (1971), a cohesive sense of self is the development of healthy narcissism across two development lines, the grandiose self and idealized parental imago. Along the grandiose development line, are the experiences of being seen, valued, noticed, and affirmed by acknowledging emotions, accomplishments, and behaviors by caregivers. This occurs when the caregiver verbally and nonverbally matches and responds to the child’s feelings and experiences. It is through this process of mirroring a child’s perfection or greatness along with gradual failures in attentive responsiveness does a child internalize a healthy sense of self (Kohut, 1971). However, when children experience prolonged, traumatic, or inconsistent attunement from a caregiver, feeling overwhelmed by emotions can result in a self that is

128

vulnerable to disappointments, empathic failures, and difficulty regulating emotional states. For participants in this study, a lack of or delayed electronic response resulted in feeling disappointed, angry, and ignored, indicating empathic failures. The expected response time for participants ranged from immediate to 24 hours depending on the quality of the relationship. Social media, text messages, and email messages offer a false sense of immediate gratification in the form of responsiveness. This immediacy is an archaic selfobject deficit in the grandiose self, vulnerable to failures of being valued, responded to, and perfect attunement, requiring a mirroring selfobject experience (Kohut, 1984). Turkle (2011) refers to this experience as provoking anxiety, a need to know, get a response, or fear of missing out (Przybylski, Murayama, DeHaan, & Gladwell, 2013). The ability to tolerate being alone with thoughts, feelings, or questions is difficult to tolerate. However, when participants had longstanding, face-to-face, personal relationships with friends, family, and co-workers, they had an established relational pattern of interacting in-person and electronically. In addition, participants knew more about the daily lives of these people, such as their work or school schedule, that provided a framework to understand the other personâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s inability to respond immediately. This seemed to provide enough information and understanding that the lapses in responsiveness were experienced as temporary empathic failures or optimal failures (Kohut, 1984) within the selfobject relationship that can function in sustaining and building the capacity to regulate self-esteem. However, in situations when participants were in need of a quick or instantaneous electronic response and responses were delayed, they often felt disappointed, angry, and ignored. Study participants rationalized this

129

behavior in an attempt to maintain the relationship and mitigate their own uncomfortable feelings often through self-blame. This can be a compensatory structure (Kohut, 1984) in an attempt to maintain and preserve the self at times of needed mirroring, affirmation, support, and recognition, when an electronic response is not forthcoming. Self psychology does not include adolescent or emerging adult development, however; Palombo (1988, 2013) outlined an adolescent development theory from a self psychological viewpoint that is pertinent to the experiences of the emerging adults in this study. According to Palombo, (2013) a cohesive self is reflected in a cohesive self narrative. These self narratives represent life themes, relational and affective patterns that are repeated, or enacted in current relationships. Not only are the responsive experiences between caregivers and children incorporated into the self narratives of adolescents but so are the self narratives of parents and other contexts of life; including school systems, peer groups, and social norms. As adolescents begin to explore the world outside their family, they are exposed to a wider variety of people, cultural values, expectations, societal norms, and ideals. These experiences beyond the familial also become incorporated into adolescent self narratives, termed â&#x20AC;&#x153;conventionalizationâ&#x20AC;? (Palombo, 2013). Over the past 30 years, social media and other forms of electronic communication have become socially integrated into the lives and culture of emerging adults. The expectation of immediate responsiveness in electronic communications was the social norm and expectation reported by the emerging adults in this study and is now incorporated in their self narratives. These narratives offer insight into the function of communicating electronically and the sense of self for the emerging adults in this study.

130

The self narratives shared by many participants indicated vulnerability to disappointments when electronic responses were delayed or absent. Participants explained their disappointment by either rationalizing the personâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s behavior or self-doubt and self-criticism in an attempt to understand what was happening. With the cultural and social expectation for near immediate electronic responsiveness, this technology may contribute to deficits in the development of a cohesive self. The vulnerability of feeling hurt, ignored, and disappointed experienced by participants can suggest these individuals had disruptions at times in their early developing self or that the technology intensifies the need for idealized, affirming, or twinship selfobject functions (Kohut,1971). Even when the other personâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s schedule was known to participants, they often needed or wanted a response and were disappointed when none came in part because electronic technology provides a digital footprint. The current technology provides a written history of interactions that are permanent records of conversations and relationships that created challenges for the emerging adults in this study in understanding delayed electronic responses. They noted electronic communications have a time stamp, indicating what day and time messages were sent and received. For text messages on the iPhone, dots appear on the screen that indicates the other person is typing a reply to a message. The ability to know exactly the length of time it took for the other person to respond, or that the person is on social media and has not responded seems to create experiences of feeling unimportant, ignored, and anger in participants. A digital presence allowed participants to only see one dimension of the person, through typed words on another social media site or the dots indicating a text response that never comes, leaving participants no other information to help understand

131

or explain the lack of responsiveness. Many attempted to nudge an electronic response by sending another message, a question mark, or an emoji, hoping this might elicit a response. Sometimes a response appeared but when it did not, participants again felt ignored, hurt, disappointed, and angry. The knowledge that people were online and were not responding to them seemed to cause a traumatic empathic failure or narcissistic injury, as the need to be affirmed, understood, and connected through a sense of belonging was missing. These experiences of electronic misattunment during emerging adult development can replicate earlier experiences of an unreliable or inconsistent caregiver. As a result, the repetition of this experience resonates with earlier relational disappointments that perpetuate internal vulnerability to fear, shame, and fragmentation of the self. These individuals are susceptible to misattuned interactions that can lead to emotional upset, anger, or withdrawal (Kohut, 1971). Participants in this study reported similar reactions when electronic responses were absent or delayed that seemed to leave them alone with their emotional experiences and unanswered questions. The lack of or delayed responsiveness through social media, text messages, and emails not only perpetuates misattunment but amplifies it due to the expectation of a quick and immediate response time available through these formats. According to Turkle (2011), technology creates anxieties for adolescents as part of the developmental phase that includes separation from parents. Today, many adolescents and emerging adults have cell phones in their hands with immediate access and connection to parents and other people, therefore, they are never really alone. This technology of constant, and now expected, always on (Turkle, 2011) connection and responsiveness seems to inhibit the development of learning to be alone with thoughts and feelings as a time of self

132

reflection, the capacity to regulating oneâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s own emotions and needs, and delay gratification. Developmentally, emerging adults seem to struggle with being alone and the ability to regulate affect. This may be indicative of the 21st century emerging adult developmental phase outlined by Arnett (2006) â&#x20AC;&#x153;as a critical period of life span adjustmentâ&#x20AC;? (Tanner, 2006, p. 24) and a period of gaining control of life responsibilities. Because of the extended period of higher education and postponement of employment during this time period, emerging adults tend to maintain closer connection to parents as they are not yet financially independent. The dependence on parents is lengthened as is the identification with parents, significant people, and societal values and morals (Blaine & Farnsworth, 1980; Palombo, 2013; Staples & Smear, 1980). Added to the ease of communicating with parents and other family members and friends through electronic technology, participants in this study seemed to become overwhelmed, felt ignored, disappointed, angry, and invalidated when electronic responses were delayed or absent. These experiences led many participants in this study to purposefully avoid feeling embarrassed (Blaine & Farnsworth, 1980) or avoid other people online, possibly as a defensive strategy to protect themselves from further disappointment and hurt. Social media, text messages, and emails create a relatively painless approach to avoid a variety of uncomfortable relational feelings and experiences such as being emotionally present with others and alone with oneself. Due to the rise in electronic communications, participants in this study reported feeling more vulnerable in-person. In electronic interactions, there is time to construct a response or a profile that is witty, demonstrates thoughtfulness, insight, and knowledge. The spontaneity of face-to-face interactions

133

exposed their vulnerability by exposing their feelings, the feelings of others, conflicts, and disagreements. The spontaneity and emotional vulnerability experienced by participants in face-to-face interactions is similar to adolescent’s experience of feeling emotionally overwhelmed, provoking anxiety. This led to conscious decisions regarding what electronic format should be used as the communication tool by adolescents (Turkle, 2011). Similarly, in order to avoid or disavow these experiences, emerging adults in this study used electronic forms of communication as a defense to protect themselves from emotionally laden experiences, resulting in a vertical split (Kohut, 1971) that disconnected feelings from behaviors. Social media, text messages, and emails became the medium for participants to split off disavowed affect, unable to tolerate or regulate the feelings associated with the situation. Some of the difficulties experienced by face-to-face interaction included fears of not knowing what to say in the moment as well as being aware of the impact of their interaction on the other person through witnessing facial expressions. Using technology allowed participants to divorce themselves from experiencing the consequences of their words. As with the adolescents in Turkle’s (2011) studies, some emerging adults in this study also decisively chose to communicate electronically. Using social media, text messages, or emails allowed them to emotionally disconnect and dissociate themselves from the person and the emotional content of the electronic communication. It also became a way to avoid disappointing or rejecting others by not responding to difficult situations; “rejection is elusive online” as one participant referred to ending a relationship by ignoring all electronic communications from the person. Technology allowed emerging adults to evade responsibility for their actions and words. But this experience

134

contributed to shame and embarrassment as emerging adults were faced with the desire to be caring, empathic people, yet “because of technology I basically am able to be a coward and tap out of that conversation because I didn’t want to have it.” The emerging adults were often confronted by the social and cultural norms and rules of social media and electronic interactions that accept and encourage rejection and abandonment through avoidant electronic behavior. Parents can be more engaged with their electronic devices than spending time with children (Turkle, 2011) and friends and families “hang out” together while each is on their tablet or smartphone. The technology allows others to become dehumanized and treated like objects (Turkle, 2011) that are easily discarded through de-friending, blocking, and ignoring messages or posts. Dating apps literally swipe people into piles of rejected or accepted objects based on a picture or with little personal information. The lack of regard, compassion and empathy for others seems to be diminishing (Konrath, 2010; Twenge, 2013). On one hand, it was acceptable to ignore the needs of others, yet when they became aware of the impact in their own experiences of being disappointed and ignored by others, emerging adults were confronted with their own narcissistic vulnerabilities and needs. As a compensatory structure in the service of “safeguarding the self, however weak and defensive it may be, against destruction and invasion” (Kohut, 1984, p. 141), participants disavowed treating others as objects along with their needs and feelings to be responded to in a quick and timely manner. Unlike adolescent behavior of constructing a collective self (Turkle, 2011) by a continual online search for an available person when responses to electronic interactions were unanswered, the emerging adults in this study did not report a continual search for an empathic response or connection. Instead they withdrew or “tapped out.”

135

Withdrawing or avoiding uncomfortable feelings and situations was only partially experienced by emerging adults in this study. In established relationships, communicating electronically was a valued experience for participants yet they also recognized that connecting electronically could result in feeling disconnected and less inclined to interact with people in person in their lives. The technological advances in communication produced a relational paradox. While the technology aids in maintaining relational connections through sharing life experiences with one another, knowing details of each other’s life can also inhibit the desire for in-person connection. The details include pictures of people and events, posts about occurrences in life, weddings, babies, and job promotions. These details are part of a newsfeed that reduce people and life events to words and pictures. Although participants knew about a friend’s life, they were “less inclined to call them and meet up.” The emerging adults in this study recognized that people can become “phone zombies,” checking messages, social media posts while walking, shopping, at work, and in class avoiding in-person human connectedness and intimacy. Many participants admitted to looking at their phones when bored, when alone, and with others, similar to a recent study on the social media phenomenon of fear of missing out (Przybylski, Murayama, DeHaan, & Gladwell, 2013). The focus of looking at the handheld smartphone, computer, or tablet, checking Facebook, other social media, emails, and text messages, was also a distraction from the present real world and current emotional state. Turkle (2011) describes this phenomenon as a “tethered self” with a lack of differentiation between a self separate from technology and the electronic device. Boredom identified by participants in this study may also indicate difficulty tolerating

136

affective experiences, possible feelings of loneliness, depression, isolation, or anxiety. A stable sense of self, the ability to feel strength, calmness, and healthy self-esteem provides the capacity to be alone with one’s thoughts and feelings without overstimulation or a collapse of the self (Kohut, 1984). It is possible that the emerging adults needed to seek out selfobject experiences as sustenance when overly anxious, bored, or lonely by checking their phones and social media, that provided the means to disengage from their emotional experiences. Participants can see and read about other people, sometimes garnering intimate details about their lives yet never having to commit to a relationship of any kind. They can choose to isolate themselves and “hide in the app.” The lack of interacting with others, either online or in person, limits the opportunity for mirroring or idealizing selfobject functions, necessary for the development of a healthy self. A more vulnerable self can emerge, fearful of judgment and criticism if responses cannot be pre-planned and perfectly crafted. It is possible that participants in this study were narcissistically vulnerable to misattuned responsiveness and the need for immediate idealization and mirror selfobject functions. On the other hand, the lived experience through the current social norm of “always on” (Turkle, 2011), always connected to each other electronically, always available to gather information, play games, or communicate with others may interrupt or impede the development of a cohesive sense of self, the ability to tolerate being with oneself, and developing the ability to regulate one’s internal feelings and experiences. From this study, it is unclear whether participants were continuing to develop a cohesive sense of self as emerging adults or if the influence of communicating electronically throughout the majority of their lives is an impediment to a cohesive self.

137

Implications Within the theoretical framework of self psychology and the developmental phase of emerging adulthood, this study explored the experience of using electronic forms of communication in the lives of emerging adults. The need for selfobject experiences throughout the life span as specified by Kohut (1984) was supported by participants in this study. They not only valued in-person relationships but found them to be vitally important to have shared emotional experiences. The need and desire for important others to share their emotional experiences provided selfobject functions of mirroring, idealization, and twinship that resulted in participants feeling understood, valued, and important, all contributing to the growth and stability of a cohesive self (Kohut, 1984, Palombo, 2008). When separated and unable to physically be in the presence of their family and friends, the use of electronic forms of communication not only maintained and sustained these relationships (Turkle, 2012, Young, 2011) but also contributed to emotional connectedness, feeling safe, calm, and reduced loneliness (Lemieux, Lajoie, & Trainor, 2013; Przybylski, Murayama, DeHaan, & Gladwell, 2013). The written words in text messages, social media, and emails conveyed emotional meaning for emerging adults based on the relational history with the family member or friend that provided an online sustaining selfobject experience (Kohut, 1984). Not only could they be comforted and understood by these people but there were fewer miscommunications, misunderstandings, and misattunements through the electronic interactions. Participants described the importance and necessity of nonverbal communication in understanding the full meaning of messages. The experience of being understood is

138

communicated not only in words, spoken or written, but through emotional responsiveness that included facial expressions, body language, gestures, physical touch, and voice inflection (Goldin-Meadow, 2003; Palombo, 2006). From birth, communication transpires through affect and was an essential component underscored by the emerging adults in this study. The shared emotional experience described by participants included the nonverbal and verbal responsiveness of “essential others” (Galatzer-Levy, Cohler, 1993) that created for them “the experience of being accurately empathized with, the feeling that others are emotionally in tune, provides a validation of one’s sense of self and a feeling of security” (p. 62). Without established and continual in-person relationships that provided emotional support, empathic understanding, and shared values, beliefs, emotional, and social experiences, electronic interactions and relationships were experienced as less connected and superficial for participants in this study. During the interview process, participants became aware of their own unintentional and uncharacteristic behavior and treatment of others through electronic interactions. They discovered that some of their behaviors lacked empathy and understanding and considered them to be mean or cruel. They were startled by their revelation of this behavior, as was this researcher. All of the participants in this study were kind, thoughtful, and compassionate individuals that were easy to interact and connect with during the research process and interviews. They also described their experiences in significant in-person relationships similarly. Yet online, the capacity to be hurtful toward others emerged and which up to that point was unconscious. The technology may be a conduit for several psychological processes. First, the unconscious hurtful behavior may

139

be disavowed feelings as a vertical split (Kohut, 1971) where discordant behaviors of participants were separated or walled-off from the affect. When participants interacted face-to-face, the additional information that was communicated nonverbally through tone of voice, hand gestures, body language, and the ability to see and read the other person’s reaction mitigated their mean or cruel behavior. Electronically, immediate nonverbal feedback cues were absent, which left them unable to realize the effect their words and behaviors had on others. In-person, participants literally saw the person as another human being with emotions, who can be hurt, and were less likely to dehumanize or treat others like objects. In the absence of face-to-face interactions, the capacity or ability to fully understand the emotional content, experience, and situation of another person seemed to be interrupted and potentially led to decreased empathy and impaired social skills. Over the past 30 years, empathy has diminished according to a meta-analysis conducted by Konrath (2010). Empathy is “the capacity to understand the overall emotional configurations of others” (Galatzer-Levy & Cohler, 1993, p. 62). Turkle (2015) addresses the impact of computers and electronic technology as “implicated in an assault on empathy” (p. 4) due to the distractibility and experience of being pulled into the electronic world whether through online gaming, social media, test messages, or emails. Online interactions and relationships remove human contact that participants in this study recognized as significant for relationships. At times of emotional vulnerability or to share important news or a life experience, participants searched for an empathic response, validation, support, guidance, and a sense of belonging from people in their lives. They are referring to a desired relational and environmental surround that is attentive and responsive to their physical, emotional, and psychological needs that began

140

during early childhood development (Galatzer-Levy & Cohler, 1993; Kohut, 1959; Stern, 1985). During times of needed emotional sustenance, adults seek out mature selfobject experiences that resonate with earlier experiences of soothing, strength, admiration, or joy (Kohut, 1984) to regain cohesion, a sense of wholeness, and emotional safety with a capacity to regulate affect. Participants did experience attuned emotional responses with significant people with whom they had in-person relationships through electronic forms of communication however, they also experienced empathic failures. These occurred when electronic responses were absent or delayed and when friends or family used or looked at their phones while engaged in face-to-face social activities. These emotionally misattuned times left participants feeling hurt and disappointed leading to worry, self-doubt, and feelings of inadequacy. According to Kohut (1984), “temporary empathic failure leads to the acquisition of self-esteem-regulating psychological structure” (p. 67) however, for participants in this study, the technological paradox of “always on” (Turkle, 2011, p. 151) and the ability to respond when ready or able, contributed to heightened vulnerability and disappointments. Self-doubt and feelings of inadequacy also surfaced for participants when viewing positive posts by comparing themselves to the personal and professional accomplishments of others. Technology also supplies information about others, such as when they read a text message, when they are online and have yet to comment on a Facebook post, or have viewed a Snapchat photo of friends hanging out when participants were not invited. These visual reminders resulted in participants feeling rejected and isolated from the people in their lives. For participants in this study, these empathic failures did not lead to

141

growth promoting self-esteem, instead the needed mirroring selfobject function, the experience of being valued and important, was not only absent but visibly witnessed and experienced as other people and activities being more important. Participants experienced abrupt devaluation not only due to the lack of an electronic response but the awareness that someone or something else was worthy of the person’s time and attention. When this occurred, the emerging adults in this study were vulnerable to self-doubt and self-blame, possibly “to maintain the remnants of the self” (Kohut, 1984, p. 132) as an adaptive strategy to preserve the self at these visually empathic failures. The question arises whether the self-selected participants in this study had deficits in their self-structure that made them vulnerable to disappointment when emphatic failures occurred, or if interacting through electronic technology impeded selfobject functions at times of needed emotional responsiveness, or if the technology created disconnectedness that leads to a lack of empathy. Participants also used the electronic technology as potential protection against their own vulnerable sense of self “to safeguard the self, however weak and defensive it may be, against destruction and invasion” (Kohut, 1984, p. 141). Emerging adults in this study reported using electronic forms of communication as a means to pre-plan a text message, construct the perfect profile, email, post, or comment to protect them from being publically judged, shamed, or criticized by others. Participants spoke of “keyboard courage” that permitted critical, opinionated, and sometimes cruel electronic comments or interactions. Participants were concerned about “not looking smart enough” or “good enough” in face-to-face interactions that required spontaneity and self-confidence while speaking. The ability to take time to craft an intelligent or witty written response seemed

142

to maintain self cohesion by minimizing external criticism while garnering support from others through Facebook likes, thumbs-up, comments, re-posting, and sharing. This support was often by people that participants referred to as acquaintances. Participants showed only the best part of who they were online, not a complete self. This is the cultural online norm, what Turkle (2011) calls a â&#x20AC;&#x153;collaborative selfâ&#x20AC;? (p. 176) which is constructed via constant electronic availability, attention, and feedback provided through social media and text messaging. A self is constructed online that is culturally and socially accepted based on the norms and rituals of the social group and culture of electronic platforms. Participants in this study explained that people on social media that neither tolerated nor encouraged the sharing of personal challenges or life struggles. If they did, they were perceived negatively as attention seekers. The question becomes, is a cohesive or whole self a reality online? Palombo (2013) contends that the rituals, norms, values, and expectations of the larger social and cultural arena, if accepted as a strategy to avoid rejection or being ostracized, may lead to a false self. On the other hand, rejecting the social norms of social media by presenting a cohesive self, with flaws, emotionality, life challenges, and bad hair days, can lead to isolation and abandonment by social and cultural groups. This may suggest that emerging adults also employ the same strategy in their online, electronic lives. Although Palombo (2013) was referring to adolescent development, emerging adults are also in a transitional period of development, exploring identity through a variety of educational and life experiences that offer a wider world view. Emerging adulthood, as described by the social psychologist Jeffery Arnett (2000), is considered a separate

143

developmental period between 18 and mid-20s. Although similar to Eriksonâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s (1963) sequential psychosocial developmental stage of intimacy versus isolation, Arnett (2000) incorporated changes in social and cultural norms in the 21st century but did not include an understanding of the internal structure in the development of a sense of self. Using technology as a communication tool not only is a cultural and social norm for emerging adults but the internet makes the world available to explore without leaving home. For some participants in this study, using the internet to connect with different people, cultures, and experiences beyond the boundaries of their community provided exposure and alternate experiences, particularly during adolescence. This allowed some participants to safely explore their identity and their sexual orientation, by entering an online community, protecting the self from shame and ridicule. They could enter chat rooms under a screen name, read, and participate in online conversations without exposing themselves. In doing so, they could experience mirroring selfobjects through the collective norms and values of the gay community, finding support and adopting the cultural values in a cultural twinship that provided the experience of belonging (Palombo, 2013; Shelby, 1994; Togashi & Kottler, 2012). Social media acts as a mirror, reflecting the best aspects of the person (Turkle, 2011) particularly for emerging adults using Facebook (Panek, Nardis, & Konrath, 2013). It is important to note that developing a sense a self and identity in no way leads to complete independence where selfobjects are no longer needed. The emerging adults in this study were seeking mirroring selfobject ties with people online as a way to feel valued through likes, followers, re-tweets, or fans. Developmentally, during adolescence participants were more concerned about the number of friends, followers, and likes they received as

144

the number correlated to popularity and self-confidence. Currently, the emerging adults in this study identified that their self worth was still affected by likes and comments. They also recognized this as superficial, which led participants to minimize or became self-critical of their healthy narcissistic grandiose needs. Many participants were compelled to use technology in an addicted-like manner to read and respond to electronic messages. Turkle (2011) addresses the addictive-like quality of technology as seductive, drawing adolescents into another world of opportunities and adventures to create multiple versions of oneself through profiles, avatars, and gaming characters. The emerging adults in this study described their own electronic behavior as a need to know or fear of missing out. The “need to know what’s going on” was partially explained by participants as boredom but there seems to be a psychological explanation for this need or addiction for perpetual electronic connection. The need to look, check, and re-check for messages may be an adaptive function to preserve “the fear of the return of former insecurities and imbalances” (Kohut, 1984, p. 161) of an earlier developmental narcissistic need. The disappointment experienced by participants when an absence or break in electronic responsiveness occurred, may be understood as a re-activation of earlier deficits in calming selfobject experiences that resulted in an insufficient ability to self-soothe and regulate affective experiences (Kohut, 1984). Therefore, the incessant behavior of checking an electronic device may serve as a search for an idealizing selfobject to relieve the fears and insecurities the participant is unable to provide internally. In addition, the technology afforded the opportunity for the emerging adults in this study to be attached to their devices and electronically available and plugged in much, if

145

not all the time. This left limited time to be with oneâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s self, to tolerate affective responses, or to self-reflect. This became apparent during interviews when many participants had not reflected on the meaning or function communicating electronically had in their lives or their own uncharacteristic behaviors. The participants in this study made reference to this phenomenon akin to â&#x20AC;&#x153;a love-hate relationshipâ&#x20AC;? aware of the benefits technology affords but also of the impediments in relating to people face-to-face and limitations in providing their selfobject needs. Perhaps this reference is indicative of the hoped for or needed selfobject tie for a sustaining sense of feeling affirmed, safe, or secure but were ashamed of the need.

Implications for Clinical Practice The purpose of this study was to explore the usage and meaning of communicating electronically in the lives of emerging adults. The first clinical consideration addresses the issue that current psychodynamic theories pre-date the era of electronic technology and communication. The participants in this study all had access to home computers and cell phones as early as 11 or 12 years old. However, participants with younger siblings commented on the early age their siblings received a smartphone, some as early as 8 years old. In addition, there are robotic toys, interactive early learning toys for toddlers, and computer touch screens, tablets, and smartphones are simple enough that two year olds can play video games and find You Tube videos without parental assistance. From a self psychology perspective, internal psychological structures occur within an environmental and relational surround that includes verbal and nonverbal experiences and interactions between human beings. The premise of self psychology is the understanding

146

that caregivers provide the psychological supplement that the baby does not yet possess in developing healthy narcissism and a cohesive self. As younger and younger children utilize interactive robotic toys, electronic learning games, and tablets to access childrenâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s programs and You Tube videos, does interacting electronically impact the development of a cohesive self? Computer programs and robotic toys have advanced technologically to respond to children, however; is a hug from electronic Elmo the same as a hug from mom? Is an electronic voice that supports the achievement of a completed electronic matching game the same as dad clapping, smiling, and praising his child? It is not clear whether the early electronic interactive reactions of these games and toys provide the same psychological sustenance that in-person verbal and nonverbal human responsiveness can, providing internal experiences of feeling safe, secure, and valued. However, parents and caregivers can be distracted and preoccupied with their electronic devices while attending to their children. According to Turkle (2011), children and adolescents reported feeling disappointed and cheated in their relationships with parents when their attention was on their devices. When parents and caregivers are preoccupied with their electronic devices and less attentive and emotionally present to their children, deficits in the development of a cohesive self may occur. Perhaps our theories will need to be amended to include the impact of technology on psychological development, attachment, and relational theory. Technology has a pull to be always on (Turkle, 2011), to be available to others, and the tendency is to have an electronic device close at hand. Clinically, this behavior may be a symptom of other psychological deficits and challenges, particularly for emerging adults. The need and pull to be occupied all the time may be a function to preserve the

147

self from experiencing uncomfortable or overwhelming affect in an addicted-like fashion. The ability to regulate affect and tolerate frustration may be impaired. Looking at a cell phone, checking Facebook or other social media sites may serve as a way to disavow insecurities, and fears by seeking approval or distracting oneself from self-reflection, feelings, or experiences. In order to understand the function and meaning of communicating electronically, including emerging adultâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s usage, parental and significant otherâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s usage in the developmental history may illuminate selfobject deficits and challenges. For the participants in this study, they were aware of the limitations in providing selfobject needs through social media and electronic communications despite adapting to the perpetual usage of electronic interactions. As therapists, we need to be aware of our decisions to communicate electronically with our clients or patients as participants in this study experienced frequent miscommunications due to brief responses, abbreviations, and shorthand messages. The experience of a more complete interaction that included body language, facial expressions, gestures, and tone of voice, not only minimized misunderstandings but created a shared emotional experience. In addition, we need to be cognizant of the ever increasing role social media, text messages, and email exchanges play in the lives of emerging adults, including the complexity of the function it may have in the psychological development and sustenance in a cohesive sense of self. For clinicians treating emerging adults, it may be useful to explore and understand their experiences in using technology to maintain close relationships when physically separated from others. Usage may manifest in feeling connected, valued, understood, having a shared emotional experience with another person in a twinship, or calming from a parent or significant

148

other at times of uncertainty. Electronic interactions may also function to isolate and withdraw from people and situations to disavow or avoid distressing feelings. It may important to ask if the virtual world mitigates anxiety as a distraction from their internal psychological deficits leading to difficulty regulating affect, tolerating frustration, and interfering with the capacity for self-reflection.

Limitations This small, self-selected sample is not representative of the emerging adult population. Nineteen of 20 participants socioeconomically were middle to upper middle class. Sixteen were Caucasian, two African American, one bi-racial, and one Hispanic. All 20 participants were educated. One was a senior in high school, nine were completing their undergraduate education, four were in graduate programs, and six graduated from a college or university with a minimum of a bachelorâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s degree. Of the 20 participants, five were living independently, had completed their education, and were employed full time. In addition, the initial recruitment method of placing flyers in coffee shops, public libraries, train stations, and university bulletin boards was not an effective recruitment strategy. A possible explanation for this could be that emerging adults in these different locales were more focused on their electronic devices and did not look at or read the community information boards at the various university student centers, Starbucks, or public libraries. It is also possible that these potential research participants preferred to interact electronically and were either less interested or uncomfortable talking face-toface than the emerging adults that did self-select to participate in this study.

149

The self-selected participants who did respond were recruited through flyers posted by classmates and friends of the researcher at their workplace and places of worship. Every participant was not only interested in the topic, but interested in talking about their experiences face-to-face. They were all articulate, educated, and willing to discuss their use of technology that may explain the finding Itâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Important to Actually Interact: I Want to be with Them In-Person, and may not represent the experience of other emerging adults. Although they grew up with technology, they were not initially tethered to electronic devices earlier in their adolescent years. They had limited access to their home computer that was shared with other family members before Facebook and social media and was initially used to interact with middle school and high school friends through instant messaging. They also remembered playing and interacting face-to-face with friends and family prior to owning their own cell phones that were primarily used to call parents when needed and had a very limited texting capability. Because of these early technological experiences, the participants in this study may have influenced how they value in-person communication and relationships. This study was not designed to inquire about the psychological development of participants. Instead, I was interested in understanding the usage and meaning of communicating electronically in their lives. The vulnerability to disappointments and misattunements experienced by the emerging adults in this study is limited to this study. It is unknown if the self-selected participants were vulnerable to narcissistic injuries due to selfobject deficits earlier in their lives or if the delayed, absent, or interruptions in immediate electronic responsiveness experienced through social media, text messages,

150

and email messages created or exacerbated empathic failures, disappointments, and narcissistic vulnerabilities.

Future Research This study explored the experience of communication using nonverbal electronic forms of communication in the lives of emerging adults. Other than the 30 years of qualitative research done with children, adolescents, adults, and geriatrics by Sherry Turkle, (2011), this study specifically focused on emerging adults age 18 to 25. Although this age group did grow up with expanding technology of electronic devices, the next generation, the siblings of participants in this study, have had smartphones in their hands years before participants in this study. It would be prudent for qualitative research to address psychological development of children as they interact with electronic technology and people in their young lives. More research needs to explore the impact electronic communication and interactive devices have on early development as parents can be distracted by their electronic devices and relate and react less directly and immediately to the developing psychological needs of their children. Electronic toys, devices, and educational games are increasingly available to toddlers and children. Their ability to utilize a touch screen and interact with voice activated robotic toys may have an impact on internalizing early selfobject experiences of idealized calming, emotionally attuned excitement and pleasure, or a sense of belonging. Including developmental history of emerging adults in future qualitative research could provide a broader understanding of their sense of self and their experience of using electronic communication. The additional component of developmental history could

151

illuminate deficits in the self due to early failures or disruptions in selfobject functions and surround. This information may identify weaknesses or vulnerabilities in the self that lead to more frequent empathic failures and misunderstandings through electronic interactions than emerging adults with a stable or cohesive sense of self.

152

Appendix A Participant Informed Consent

153

Institute for Clinical Social Work Research Information and Consent for Participation in Social Behavioral Research The Experience of Using Non Face to Face and Nonverbal Electronic Forms of Communication in the Lives of Emerging Adults I,______________________________________ , acting for myself, agree to take part in the research entitled: The experience of using non face-to-face and nonverbal electronic forms of communication in the lives of emerging adults. This work will be carried out by Carrie Torgerson under the supervision of Dr. Joan DiLeonardi, PhD. This work is sponsored by and conducted under the auspices of the Institute for Clinical Social Work; At Robert Morris Center, 401 South State Street; Suite 822, Chicago, IL 60605; (312) 935-4232. Purpose The purpose of this study involves research interested in understanding the meaning of using electronic forms of communication, including cell phones, tablets, social media, and computers in the lives of young adults. Results of this research will be published as the final dissertation in fulfillment of the academic requirement for the doctoral degree at the Institute for Clinical Social Work. PROCEDURES USED IN THE STUDY AND THE DURATION You are being asked to participate in an individual interview. The purpose of this interview is to understand how you use various electronic forms of communication such as text messaging, email, social networking sites, to interact with your family and friends. Your participation in the interview will take approximately 90 minutes of your time. You interview will be digitally recorded to ensure your words and experience will be accurately understood. Your participation in this research will help provide a better understanding of how using electronic forms of communication enhance and/or detract from relationships and life experiences. Because your time is important, you will be given a choice of receiving a $10 ITunes or Starbucks gift card. Benefits There are no direct benefits to you for your participation in this study. However, we hope sharing your experience will help to better understand the experience of young adults communicating electronically with people in their lives. Costs There are no monetary costs to you as a participant in this study. Possible Risks and/or Side Effects The interview is not expected to cause any distress. However, if you experience any distress at any point during the research process, you can skip questions, take a break, end

154

the interview, or withdraw from the research at any time. If needed, a list of therapists will provided to you in your area. Privacy and Confidentiality The only person who will know you are participating in this research is the principal investigator, Carrie Torgerson. No information about you or provided by you during this study will be disclosed to others without your written permission, except: 1. If necessary to protect your rights or welfare (for example, if you are injured and need immediate emergency care or when the ICSW Institutional Review Board monitors the research or consent process); of 2. If required by law (for example, if you indicate plans to harm yourself or others). Your interview will be digitally recorded. After your interview, the digital recording will be transcribed. Your name will be removed from transcribed interviews and you will be assigned an identification number. The list connecting your name and identification number will be kept separately in a locked file cabinet. The consent form with your name will be placed in a locked file cabinet separate from any papers with your identification information. When data collection and analysis is complete, the master list will be shredded. All electronic forms of data, such as an electronic database will be kept in a password protected file on a password protected computer. Your digital interview recording will be kept in a locked file cabinet. Your digital recording will be erased after completion of data analysis in the event it is necessary to listen to the recording during data analysis for clarification or illuminating the context of the transcription. Your transcribed interview will be kept in a numerical file kept in a locked file cabinet, separate from the master list with participant names and identification numbers for the period of five years and then shredded. All statistical data, matrices, and coded masters will be kept in a locked file cabinet for the period of five years post graduation and then shredded. Subject Assurances By signing this consent form, I agree to take part in this study. I have not given up any of my rights or released this institution from responsibility for carelessness. I may cancel my consent and refuse to continue in this study at any time without penalty or loss of benefits. My relationship with the staff of ICSW will not be affected in any way, now or in the future, if I refuse to take part, or if I begin the study and then withdraw. If I have any questions about the research methods, I can contact Carrie Torgerson or Joan DiLeonardi, at this phone number 847-924-1720 day or evening. If I have any questions about my rights as a research subject, I may contact Dr. John Ridings, Chair of Institutional Review Board; ICSW; At Robert Morris Center, 401 South State Street; Suite 822, Chicago, IL 60605; (312) 935-4232.

155

Signatures I have read this consent form and I agree to take part in this study as it is explained in this consent form. ___________________________________ Signature of Participant

____________ Date

I certify that I have explained the research to _________________________________ and believe that they understand and that they have agreed to participate freely. I agree to answer any additional questions when they arise during the research or afterward.

___________________________________ Signature of Researcher

____________ Date

156

Appendix B Participant Recruitment Flyer 1

157

158

Appendix C Revised Participant Recruitment Flyer

159

160

Appendix D Interview Protocol

161

Interview Questions/Probes Tell me what electronic forms of communication you use and how you use it. Under what circumstances is using electronic forms of communication preferable? When is communicating face-to-face important? When is talking on the phone important? Have you ever misinterpreted a text/email/Facebook/tweet? If so, can you tell me about this experience? What does it mean to communicate electronically while in the presence of others? If you don’t get a response within a reasonable amount of time, what do think is happening? What do you imagine the other person is doing when communicating through electronic means such as texting, tweeting, posting on Facebook? What is an explanation for not responding to an electronic communication? What do you share with friends, family, co-workers? Have you shared something with a lot of people? If so, can you share that with me?  Talk about why, what it means How often do you post or share with other?  Can you show me? Facebook: Who in your family are in your friends on Facebook? What are your privacy settings? What does it mean to have “likes” or “fans”? What does it mean to share or post in group/social media?  Are you concerned about who sees your posts? Has there been a time someone misunderstood your electronic message? If so, can you tell me what happened? Has there been a time you misunderstood a message from a friend or family? If so, can you tell me what happened? Have you ever been angry or hurt by someone’s post/comment/text? If so, can you tell me what happened?

162

Have you ever hurt or made someone angry by something you posted/commented/texted? If so, can you tell what happened? When angry or upset, which form of communication is most helpful? And why? Does anyone influence you online that might mediate your behavior? If so, can you tell me who and why they influence you? How does communicating electronically benefit you in your relationships with others? How does it limit you? Do you experience your interactions and relationships the same or differently when interacting in person or electronically? Can you tell me about your experiences? Is there any additional information you want to tell me about? Do you have any questions for me? Demographics: Marital Status: How identify self ethnically: Highest level of education:

Inquires as interviews progressed: Any changes in how you use electronic communication/social media over time? If a negative comment was posted about you online, why do you think they do it rather than talk to you face-to-face? Define friends online/virtual world and face to face: How do you think electronic/online interaction influences how you see yourself/who you are?

163

References

Adatto, C. P. (1980). Late adolescence to early adulthood. In Greenspan, S. I. & Pollock, G. H. (eds.), The course of life: Psychoanalytic contributions toward understanding personality development: Vol. II. Latency, adolescence and youth (NIMH Publication No. (ADM) 80-999, pp.463-476). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Arnett, J. J., & Tanner, J. L. (Eds.). (2006). Emerging adults in America: Coming of age in the 21st century. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. Arnett, J. (2000). Emerging adulthood: A theory of development from the late teens through the twenties. American Psychologist, 55(5), 469-480. doi:10.1037/0003066X.55.5.469 Battestini, A., Setlur, V., & Sohn, T. (2010, September). A large scale study of textmessaging use. In Proceedings of the 12th international conference on Human computer interaction with mobile devices and services. Retrieved from http://www.battestini.net/blog/wp-content/uploads/fp217-battestini.pdf Becker, M. W., Alzahabi, R., & Hopwood, C. J. (2013). Media multitasking is associated with symptoms of depression and social anxiety. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 16(2), 132-135. doi:10.1089/cyber.2012.0291

164

Blaine, Jr., G.B. & Farnsworth, D.L. (1980). Personality development in the young adult. In Greenspan, S. I. & Pollock, G. H. (eds.), The course of life: Psychoanalytic contributions toward understanding personality development: Vol. II. Latency, adolescence and youth (NIMH Publication No. (ADM) 80-999, pp.463-476). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Blease, C.R. (2015). Too many ‘friends,’ too few ‘likes’? Evolutionary psychology and ‘Facebook depression.’ Review of General Psychology, 19(1), 1-13. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/gpr0000030 Blos, P. (1967). The second individuation process of adolescence. The Psychoanalytic Study of the Child, 22, 162-186. Charmaz, K. (2006). Constructing grounded theory: A practical guide through qualitative analysis. London: Sage Publications, Inc. Chen, W., & Lee, K. H. (2013). Sharing, liking, commenting, and distressed? The pathway between Facebook interaction and psychological distress. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking. doi:10.1089/cyber.2012.0272 Corbin, J. & Strauss, A. (2008). Basics of qualitative research. (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc. Dilthey, W. (1986). The hermeneutics of the human sciences. In K. Mueller-Vollmer (Ed.), The hermeneutic reader: Texts of the German tradition from the enlightenment to the present (pp. 148-164). Oxford: Basil Blackwell. Ekman, P. (2007). Emotions revealed: Recognizing faces and feelings to improve communication and emotional life. (2nd ed.). New York, NY: Holt Paperbacks.

165

Ellison, N. B., Steinfield, C., Lampe, C. (2007). The benefits of Facebook “friends:” Social capital and college students’ use of online social network sites. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 12(4), 1143-1168. Erickson, E.H. (1956). The problem of ego identity. Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association, 4, 56-121. Erikson, E. H. (1963). Childhood and society. (2d ed.). New York, NY: Norton. Facebook. (2005) Statistics. Retrieved December 23, 2015 from https://newsroom.fb.com/company-info/ Farahani, H.A., Aghamohamadi, S., Kazemi, Z., Bakhtiarvand, F., and Ansari, M. (2011). Examining the relationship between sensitivity to rejection and using Facebook in university students. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 28, 807-810. doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2011.11.147 Forest, A.L. & Wood, J.V. (2012). When social networking is not working: Individuals with low self-esteem recognize but do not reap the benefits of self-disclosure on Facebook. Psychological Science, 23(3), 295-302. doi:10.1177/0956797611429709 Galatzer-Levy, R.M., & Cohler, B.J. (1993). The essential other: A developmental psychology of the self. New York, NY: Basic Books. Goldin-Meadow, S. (2003). Hearing gesture: How our hands help us think. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press. Gonzales, A.L. & Hancock, J.T. (2011). Mirror, mirror on my Facebook wall: Effects of exposure to Facebook on self-esteem. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 14(1-2), 79-83.

166

Hortsmanshof, L. & Power, M.R. (2005). Mobile phones, SMS, and relationships. Australian Journal of Communication, 32(1). Retrieved from http://epublications.bond.edu.au/hss_pubs/75 Hu, M. (2007). Social use of the internet and loneliness. (Doctoral dissertation, Ohio State University). Retrieved from https://etd.ohiolink.edu/rws_etd/document/get/osu1186168233/inline Hu, M. (2009). Will online chat help alleviate mood loneliness? CyberPsychology & Behavior, 12(2), 219-223. doi:10.1089/cpb.2008.0134 Hu, Y., Wood, J.F., Smith, V., Westbrook, N. (2004). Friendships through IM: Examining the relationship between instant messaging and intimacy [electronic version]. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 10(1). Instagram. (2015). Retrieved December 23, 2015 from http://www.statisticbrain.com/instagram-company-statistics/. Isay, R.A. (1980). Late adolescence: The second separation stage of adolescence. In Greenspan, S. I. & Pollock, G. H. (eds.), The course of life: Psychoanalytic contributions toward understanding personality development: Vol. II. Latency, adolescence and youth (NIMH Publication No. (ADM) 80-999, pp.463-476). Washington, DC: U.S Department of Health and Human Services. Ishii, K. (2006). Implications of mobility: The uses of personal communication media in everyday life. Journal of Communication, 56, 346-365. doi:10.111/j.14602466.2006.00023.x

167

ITU (2013). Mobile subscriptions near 7-billion mark. Does almost everyone have a phone? Retrieved from https://itunews.itu.int/En/3741-Mobile-subscriptions-near-the-78209billionmarkbrDoes-almost-everyone-have-a-phone.note.aspx Jin, B., & Park, N. (2010). In-person contact begets calling and texting: Interpersonal motives for cell phone use, face-to-face interaction, and loneliness. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 13(6), 611-618. Kim, J. & Lee, J.R. (2011). The Facebook paths to happiness: Effects of the number of Facebook friends and self-presentation on subjective well-being. Cyberpsychology, Behaviour, and Social Networking, 14(6), 359-364. doi:10.1089/cyber.2010.0374 Kohut, H. (1959). Introspection, empathy, and psychoanalysis—an examination of the relationship between mode of observation and theory. Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association, 7, 459-483. Kohut, H. (1971). The analysis of the self: A systematic approach to the psychoanalytic treatment of narcissistic personality disorders. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Kohut, H. (1982). Introspection, empathy, and the semi-circle of mental health. The International journal of Psychoanalysis, 63, 395-407. Kohut, H. (1984). How does analysis cure? A. Goldberg & P.E. Stepansky (Eds.). Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Kohut, H. & Wolf, E. S. (1978). Disorders of the self and their treatment: An outline. The International Journal of Psychoanalysis, 59, 413-425. Konrath, S. (2010, May). Empathy: College students don’t have as much as they used to’. In meeting of the Association for Psychological Science, Boston, MA.

168

Kraut, R., Patterson, M. Lundmark, V., Kiesler, S., Mukopadhyay, T., Scherlis, W. (1998). Internet paradox: A social technology that reduces social involvement and Psychological well-being? American Psychologist, 9, 1017-1031. Kross, E., Verduyn, P., Demiralp, E., Park, J.,Lee, D.S., Lin, N., et al. (2013). Facebook use predicts declines in subjective well-being in young adults. Retrieved November 11, 2013, from http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0069841 Lemieux, R., Lajoie, S., & Trainor, N.E. (2013) Affinity-seeking, social loneliness, and social avoidance among Facebook users. Psychological Reports: Mental & Physical Health. doi:10.2466/07.PR0.112.2.545.552 Levinson, C.A., Langer, J.K., Rodebaugh, T.L. (2013). Reactivity to exclusion prospectively predicts social anxiety symptoms in young adults. Behavior Therapy, 44, 470-478. Retrieved from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3770144/ Manago, A. M., Taylor, T., & Greenfield, P. M. (2012). Me and my 400 friends: The anatomy of college students' Facebook networks, their communication patterns, and well-being. Developmental psychology, 48(2), 369. doi:10.10.1037/a0026338 Mahler, M.S. (1963).Thoughts about development and individuation. The Psychoanalytic Study of the Child, 18, 307-324. Mahler, M.S. (1967). On human symbiosis and the vicissitudes of individuation. Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association, 15, 740-763. 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 peopleâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s lives. New media & society, 8(1), 73-95. doi:10.1177/1461444806059871

169

Palombo, J. (1988). Adolescent development: A view from self psychology. Child and Adolescent Social Work, 5(3), 171-186. Palombo, J. (1996). Chapter 2: Paradigms, metaphors, and narratives: Stories we tell about development. Psychoanalytic Social Work, 3, 31-59. Palombo, J. (2006). Nonverbal learning disabilities: A clinical perspective. New York, NY: W.W. Norton. Palombo, J. (2008). Self Psychology Theory. In B.A. Thyer (ed.), Comprehensive Handbook of Social Work and Social Welfare, (Vol. 2, pp. 163- 205). Palombo, J. (2013). Two themes of the self-narrative. Unpublished manuscript. Palombo, J., Bendicsen, H.K., & Koch, B.J. (2009). Heinz Kohut (1913-1981): Publishing era (1950-1984). Guide to psychoanalytic developmental theories (pp.257281). New York, NY: Springer. Panek, E.T., Nardis, Y., & Konrath, S. (2013). Mirror or megaphone?: How relationships between narcissism and social networking site use differ on Facebook and Twitter. Computers in Human Behavior, 29, 2004-2012. Doi:10.1016/j.chb.2013.04.012 PewResearchCenter. (2015) Demographics of key social networking platforms. Retrieved December 29, 2015 from http://www.pewinternet.org/2015/01/09/demographics-ofkey-social-networking-platforms-2/ PewResearchCenter. (2015) Social media update 2014. Retrieved December 29, 2015 from http://www.pewinternet.org/2015/01/09/social-media-update-2014/ PewResearchCenter. (2015, April). U.S. smartphone use in 2015. Retrieved December 29, 2015 from http://www.pewinternet.org/2015/04/01/us-smartphone-use-in-2015/

170

PewResearchCenter. (2015, August). Mobile messaging and social media 2015. Retrieved December 29, 2015 from http://www.pewinternet.org/2015/08/19/mobile-messaging-and-social-media-2015/ PewResearchCenter (2015, August). Americansâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; view on mobile etiquette. Retrieved December 29, 2015from http://www.pewinternet.org/2015/08/26/americans-views-onmobile-etiquette/ PewResearchCenter. (2014, October). Mobile technology fact sheet. Retrieved from http://www.pewinternet.org/fact-sheets/mobile-technology-fact-sheet/ Pinterest. (2015). Statistics. Retrieved December 28, 2015 from http://www.pinterest.com/pin/4932847915366212742/ Przybylski, A.K., Murayama, K., DeHaan, C.R., & Gladwell, V. (2013). Motivational, emotional, and behavioral correlates of fear of mission out. Computers in Human Behavior, 29, 1841-1848. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2013.02.014 Reid, D. J., & Reid, F. J. M. (2007). Text or talk? Social anxiety, loneliness, and divergent preferences for cell phone use. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 3, 424-435. doi:10.1089/cpb.2006.9936 Schwandt, T.A. (2000). Three epistemological stances for qualitative inquiry: Interpretivism, hermeneutics, and social constructivism. In N.K. Denzin & Y.S. Lincoln (eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed., pp. 189-213). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Shelby, R.D. (1994). Chapter 5: Homosexuality and the struggle foe coherence. Progress in Self Psychology, 10, 55-78. Retrieved from http://www.pep-web.org/document.php

171

Sheldon, P. (2008). The relationship between unwillingness-to-communicate and studentsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; Facebook use. Journal of Media Psychology, 20(2), 67-75. doi:10.1027/1864-1105.20.2.67 Siegel, A.M. (1996). Heinz Kohut and the psychology of the self. New York: NY: Routledge. Smith, A. (2011). Pew Research Center: Pew Internet Americans and text messaging. Retrieved July 13, 2013 from http://pewinternet.org/Reports/2011/Cell-PhoneTexting-2011/Main-Report.aspx Snapchat. (2015). Statistics. Retrieved December 23, 2015 from http://www.statisticbrain.com/snapchat-company-statistics/ Spears, R., Postmes, T., Lea, M., & Wolbert, A. (2002). When are net effects gross products? The power of influence and the influence of power in computer-mediated communication. Journal of Social Issues, 58, 91-107. Staples, H.D. & Smarr, E.R. (1980). Bridge to adulthood: Years from eighteen to twenty-three. In Greenspan, S. I. & Pollock, G. H. (eds.), The course of life: Psychoanalytic contributions toward understanding personality development: Vol. II. Latency, adolescence and youth (NIMH Publication No. (ADM) 80-999, pp.463-476). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Stefanone, M. A., Lackaff, D., & Rosen, D. (2011). Contingencies of self-worth and social-networking-site behavior. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 14(1-2), 41-49. doi:10.1089/cyber.2010.0049

172

Stern, D. (1985). The interpersonal world of the infant. New York: Basic Books. Subrahmanyam, K., Reich, S. M., Waechter, N., & Espinoza, G. (2008). Online and offline social networks: Use of social networking sites by emerging adults. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 29(6), 420-433. Takao, M., Takahashi, S. & Kitamura, M. (2009). Addictive personality and problematic mobile phone use. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 12(X), 1-7. doi:10.1089/cpb.2009.0022 Tandoc Jr., E.C., Ferrucci, P., & Duffy, M. (2015). Facebook use, envy, and depression among college students: Is Facebook depressing? Computers in Human Behavior, 43, 139-146. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.10.053 Tanner, J.L. (2006) Recentering during emerging adulthood: A critical turning point in life span human development. In J.J. Arnett & J.L. Tanner (Eds.), Emerging adults in America: Coming of age in the 21st century (pp.21-55). Teicholz, J.G. (2000). The analyst’s empathy, subjectivity, and authenticity: Affect as a common denominator. Progress in Self Psychology, 16, 33-53. Togashi, K. (2014). A sense of “being human” and twinship experience. International Journal of Psychoanalytic Self Psychology, 9, 265-281. doi:10.1080/15551024.2014.947676 Togashi, K. & Kottler, A. (2012). The many faces of twinship: From the psychology of the self to the psychology of being human. International Journal of Psychoanalytic Self Psychology, 7, 331-351. doi:10.1080/15551024.2012.686158 Tonsun, L.P. (2012). Motives for Facebook use and expressing “true self” on the internet. Computers in Human Behavior, 28, 1510-1517. doi:10.1016/j.chb2012.03.018

173

Tumblr. (2015). User statistics. Retrieved December 28, 2015 from http://graphs.net/tumblr-user-statistics.html Turkle, S. (2011). Alone together: Why we expect more from technology and less from each other. New York, NY: Basic Books. Turkle, S. (2015). Reclaiming conversation: The power of talk in a digital age. New York: NY: Penguin Press. Twenge, J.M. (2013). The evidence for generation me and against generation we. Emerging Adulthood, 1(1), 11-16. doi:10.1177/2167696812466548 Twitter. (2015) Statistics. Retrieved December 23, 2015 from http://about.twitter.com/company Verduyn, P., Lee, D.S., Park, J., Shablack, H., Orvell, A., Bayer, J., Ybarra, O., Jonides, J., & Kross, E. (2015). Passive Facebook usage undermines affective well-being: Experimental and longitudinal evidence. Journal of Experikental Psychology: General, 144(2), 480-488. Retrieved from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/xge0000057 Wang, S.S. (2013). â&#x20AC;&#x153;I share, therefore I am:â&#x20AC;? Personality traits, life satisfaction, and Facebook check-ins. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 16, (12), 870-877. doi:10.1089/cyber.2012.0395 Young, K. (2011). Social ties, social networks and Facebook experience. International Journal of Emerging Technologies and Society, 9(1), 20-34. Retrieved from http://www.swin.edu.au/ijets.