L1 - Moral media panics
● Orben, A. (2020). The Sisyphean Cycle of Technology Panics. Perspectives on Psychological
Science, 15(5), 1143–1157.
L2 - Internet using and wellbeing I
● Masur, P. K., Veldhuis, J., & Vaate, N. B. de. (2022). There Is No Easy Answer: How the
Interaction of Content, Situation, and Person Shapes the Effects of Social Media Use on Well-
Being. In The Social Media Debate. Routledge.
L3 - Internet use and wellbeing II
● Meier, A., & Johnson, B. K. (2022). Social comparison and envy on social media: A critical
review. Current Opinion in Psychology, 45, 101302.
● Nowland, R., Necka, E.A.m & Cacioppo, J.T. (2017). Loneliness and Social Internet Use:
Pathways to Reconnection in a Digital World? Perspectives on Psychological Science, 1-18.
L4 - Virtual reality – Zie andere aantekeningen
● Slater, M. & Banakou, D. (in press). The Golden Rule as a Paradigm for Fostering Prosocial
Behavior With Virtual Reality. Current Directions in Psychological Science.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721421104695
L5 - Self-disclosure, privacy, and online social capital
● Krämer, N. C., & Schäwel, J. (2020). Mastering the challenge of balancing self-disclosure and
privacy in social media. Current Opinion in Psychology, 31, 67-71.
● Ellison, N. B., Vitak, J., Gray, R., & Lampe, C. (2014). Cultivating social resources on social
network sites: Facebook relationship maintenance behaviors and their role in social capital
processes. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 19(4), 855-870.
https://doi.org/10.1111/jcc4.12078
L6 - Phubbing and FOMO
● Beukeboom, C. J., & Pollmann, M. (2021). Partner phubbing: Why using your phone during
interactions with your partner can be detrimental for your relationship. Computers in Human
Behavior, 124, 106932. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2021.106932
● FOMO: Milyavskaya, M., Saffran, M., Hope, N., & Koestner, R. (2018). Fear of missing out:
Prevalence, dynamics, and consequences of experiencing FOMO. Motivation and Emotion,
42(5), 725–737
L7 - Cyberchondria – Zie andere aantekeningen
● Starcevic, V., Berle, D., & Arnaez, S. (2020). Recent insights into cyberchondria. Current
Psychiatry Reports, 22, 56.
L8 - Cyberloafing – Zie andere aantekeningen
● Lim, V. K. G. (2002). The IT way of loafing on the job: Cyberloafing, neutralizing and
organizational justice. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23(5), 675-694.
L9 - Online dating
● Antheunis, M.L., Schouten, A.P., & Walther, J. B. (2020). The hyperpersonal effect in online
dating: Effects of text-based CMC vs. videoconferencing before meeting face-to- face. Media
Psychology, 23(6), 820-839.
L10 - Online sexting and sexual harassment
, ● Doyle, C., Douglas, E., & O’Reilly, G. (2021). The outcomes of sexting for children and
adolescents: A systematic review of the literature. Journal of Adolescence, 92, 86–113.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2021.08.009
● Champion, A. R., Oswald, F., Khera, D., & Pedersen, C. L. (2022). Examining the Gendered
Impacts of Technology-Facilitated Sexual Violence: A Mixed Methods Approach. Archives of
Sexual Behavior, 51(3), 1607–1624. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-021-02226-y
L11 - Online pornography
● Willoughby, B. J., Leonhardt, N. D., & Augustus, R. A. (2021). Curvilinear associations
between pornography use and relationship satisfaction, sexual satisfaction, and relationship
stability in the United States. Computers in Human Behavior, 125, 106966.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2021.106966
L12 - Cyberbullying
● Chan, T. K., Cheung, C. M., & Lee, Z. W. (2020). Cyberbullying on social networking sites: A
literature review and future research directions. Information & Management, 103411.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.im.2020.103411
L1 | The Sisyphean Cycle of Technology Panics – Orben (2020)
PBMU Literature
1
,Study
● Examined the network of political population, and academic factors driving the Sisyphean
cycle of technology panics.
Moral/technology panics
● 18’s → Novels → Concerns ‘reading addiction and reading mania → Excessive risk-
taking and immoral behavior’
● 19’s and 20’s → new era for technology panics, because of:
○ Idea that adolescence is a distinct part of childhood emerged in these times, state
Involvement and general concern about this age group increased
○ More leisure time (vrije tijd)
○ Increase media time among children
○ More science and scientists that were actors trying to address societal concerns
■ Surge in importance of scientific evidence induced a massive shift
● 19’s → Radio crime and movie drama’s → Concerns ‘children more nervous,
disturbed eating/sleep, worse general health’
● 1950’s → Television → Concerns ‘high levels of violence in adolescence’
○ High-quality evidence was lacking, but still people had moral panic
Technology panics = times in which the general population is gripped by intense worry and concern
about a certain technology.
● Addressed by scientists, public commentators and policymakers until a newer form of
technology inspires the cycle to restart.
The Sisyphean Cycle of Technology Panics
● Framework which highlights diverse actors that interact to cause technology panics to
develop in repeated and almost identical cycles and outlines the consequences this has for
academic and policy progress
Characteristics
● Every new technology treated as completely separate
● Psychology is trapped in this cycle because the fabric of moral panics has become inherently
interwoven with the needs of politics, society, and our own scientific discipline
● When more use of technology → concerns start to appear
● Technological developments are rapidly linked to ongoing and complicated societal changes
1 | Panic creation
● Psychological and sociological factors lead to a society becoming worried about a new
technology
Moral panic = flurries (vlaag) of public concern, often focused on ‘the others’ (a group that doesn’t
constitute the main powerholders of society, like children, women, immigrants).
PBMU Literature
2
, Technology determinism = the idea that;
a) technologies used by a society form a basic and fundamental conditions that affect all areas
of existence, and;
b) when such technologies are innovated, these developments are the single most important
driver of changes in said society
2 | Political outsourcing to science
Politicians encourage or utilize technology panics for political gain but outsource the search for
solutions to science.
Moral panics give politicians the change to:
● Show willingness to stand up + deep concern for vulnerable populations
● Reassure the population with giving responsibility to researchers to provide answer
● Distract from interactable and uncomfortable issues (like inequality or health issues)
3 | Wheel reinvention
Scientists start working on a new technology but lack the theoretical and methodological frameworks
to efficiently guide their work.
● Each novel technology shared more similarities than differences with its predecessors – even
though it might look completely new at first glance.
Technology affordances = allows for insights to be translated between different types of technologies
by examining the activities that they allow users to perform.
Why:
● Lack of theory
○ Difficult to determine where technological changes might influence our complex social
system
● Similar progression
○ Answers the same basic questions as previous technologies
○ Broad definitions of audience and new technology
○ Generalization, because of linking technology to the outcome that is causing concern
● Lack of consensus
○ Lack of underlying theory lets different camps emerge that are in scientific
disagreement with each other, which leaves the quality of scientific output relatively
uncontrolled
4 | Progress; new panic
Scientific progress is too slow to guide effective technology policy and cycle restarts, because a new
technology gains popularity and garners public, policy, and academic attention.
Policymakers feel pressure to act on technological panics. Five types of evaluation to do that:
1) Retrospective work → Learn from the past (often to different)
2) Formative work → Test technological products before release (time
shortage)
3) Calculating risk → Balance between probabilistic judgments and cost-
benefit analysis
4) Working prospectively → Trying to forecast technologies, extremely difficult
+ inaccurate
5) Summative evaluation → As quickly possible check impact of technology on
certain groups
PBMU Literature
3
