Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-wg55d Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-27T03:23:29.309Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

6 - Exposure in Cyberspace as Means of Enhancing Psychological Assessment

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 June 2012

By
Azy Barak  and
Liat Hen
Edited by
Azy Barak
Azy Barak
Affiliation:
University of Haifa
Liat Hen
Affiliation:
University of Haifa
Azy Barak
Affiliation:
University of Haifa, Israel
Get access

Summary

Introduction

For those who regularly surf through cyberspace and experience it as a parallel and not unusual social environment – whether this takes the form of online forums, chat rooms, or personal communication through instant messaging (IM) – it is customary to encounter various types and exhibitions of human behavior. Many Internet surfers, in the beginning, are convinced that most other surfers impersonate, lie, cheat, or at the very least attempt to pull your leg; later, however, it occurs to them that this basic premise is generally wrong. After spending much time in virtual communities, publicly and privately interacting with numerous anonymous individuals, many people start to realize that their behavior in cyberspace reflects their actual personalities or mood states. To their astonishment, as they observe over time other people's gestures, behavioral patterns, writing styles, frequency and intensity of involvement in group situations, personal associations, vocabulary, choice of verbal expressions, netiquette, and other features of their online behavior – all based on textual communication – laypeople realize that they can learn a great amount about themselves and about others. Moreover, it occurs to them that under these circumstances, they could learn even more about many people's personality dispositions, attitudes, moral values, sensitivities, habits, needs, and preferences than in an offline, face-to-face (F2F) environment. This intuitive recognition by many Internet users is consistent with what behavioral theorists and researchers of cyberspace have argued in regard to the emergence of self in cyberspace.

Type
Chapter
Information
Psychological Aspects of Cyberspace
Theory, Research, Applications
 , pp. 129 - 162
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2008

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Aiken, L. R. (2003). Psychological testing and assessment (11th ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.Google Scholar
Alonzo, M., & Aiken, M. (2004). Flaming in electronic communication. Decision Support Systems, 36, 205–213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Amichai-Hamburger, Y., Fine, A., & Goldstein, A. (2004). The impact of Internet interactivity and need for closure on consumer preference. Computers in Human Behavior, 20, 103–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Amichai-Hamburger, Y., Wainapel, G., & Fox, S. (2002). “On the Internet no one knows I'm an introvert”: Extroversion, neuroticism, and Internet interaction. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 5, 125–128.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Anastasi, A., & Urbina, S. (1996). Psychological testing (7th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
Anderson, N. (2003). Applicant and recruiter reactions to new technology in selection: A critical review and agenda for future research. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 11, 121–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Andersson, G., Carlbring, P., Kaldo, V., & Strom, L. (2004). Screening of psychiatric disorders via the Internet: A pilot study with tinnitus patients. Nordic Journal of Psychiatry, 58, 287–291.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Andersson, G., Westöö, J., Johansson, L., & Carlbring, P. (2006). Cognitive bias via the Internet: A comparison of Web-based and standard emotional stroop tasks in social phobia. Cognitive Behaviour Therapy, 35, 55–62.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Anthony, K. (2004). Therapy online – the therapeutic relationship in typed text. In Bolton, G., Howlett, S., Lago, C., & Wright, J. K. (Eds.), Writing cures: An introductory handbook of writing in counselling and psychotherapy (pp. 133–141). Hove, East Sussex, UK: Brunner-Routledge.Google Scholar
Arthur, W. Jr., Day, E. A., McNelly, T. L., & Edens, P. S. (2003). A meta-analysis of the criterion-related validity of assessment center dimensions. Personnel Psychology, 56, 125–154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barak, A. (2003). Ethical and professional issues in career assessment on the Internet. Journal of Career Assessment, 11, 3–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barak, A. (2006). Internet career assessment. In Greenhaus, J. & Callanan, G. (Eds.), Encyclopedia of career development (pp. 404–406). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barak, A. (2007a). Emotional support and suicide prevention through the Internet: A field project report. Computers in Human Behavior, 23, 971–984.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barak, A. (2007b). Phantom emotions: Psychological determinants of emotional experiences on the Internet. In Joinson, A., McKenna, K. Y. A., Postmes, T., & Reips, U. D. (Eds.), Oxford handbook of Internet psychology (pp. 301–327). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Barak, A., & Bloch, N. (2006). Factors related to perceived helpfulness in supporting highly distressed individuals through an online support chat. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 9, 60–68.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Barak, A., & Buchanan, T. (2004). Internet-based psychological testing and assessment. In Kraus, R., Zack, J. & Stricker, G. (Eds.), Online counseling: A handbook for mental health professionals (pp. 217–239). San Diego, CA: Elsevier Academic Press.Google Scholar
Barak, A., & Cohen, L. (2002). Empirical examination of an online version of the self-directed search. Journal of Career Assessment, 10, 387–400.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barak, A., & Dolev-Cohen, M. (2006). Does activity level in online support groups for distressed adolescents determine emotional relief. Counselling and Psychotherapy Research, 6, 186–190.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barak, A., & English, N. (2002). Prospects and limitations of psychological testing on the Internet. Journal of Technology in Human Services, 19(2/3), 65–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barak, A., & Miron, O. (2005). Writing characteristics of suicidal people on the Internet: A psychological investigation of emerging social environments. Suicide & Life-Threatening Behavior, 35, 507–524.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bargh, J. A., Fitzsimons, G. M., & McKenna, K. Y. A. (2003). The self, online. In Spencer, S. J., Fein, S., Zanna, M. P., & Olson, J. M. (Eds.), Motivated social perception (pp. 195–213). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Bargh, J. A., & McKenna, K. Y. A. (2004). The Internet and social life. Annual Review of Psychology, 55, 573–590.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bargh, J. A., McKenna, K. Y. A., & Fitzsimons, G. M. (2002). Can you see the real me? Activation and expression of the “true self” on the Internet. Journal of Social Issues, 58, 33–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bartram, D. (2004). Assessment in organisations. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 53, 237–259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bartram, D. (2006). The internationalization of testing and new models of test delivery on the Internet. International Journal of Testing, 6, 121–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bartram, D., & Brown, A. (2004). Online testing: Mode of administration and the stability of OPQ 32i scores. International Journal of Selection & Assessment, 12, 278–284.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bauer, L., & McCaffrey, R. J. (2006). Coverage of the test of memory malingering, Victoria symptom validity test, and word memory test on the Internet: Is test security threatened? Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 21, 121–126.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Beck, C. T. (2005). Benefits of participating in Internet interviews: Women helping women. Qualitative Health Research, 15, 411–422.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bischoff, R. J. (2004). Considerations in the use of telecommunications as a primary treatment medium: The application of behavioral telehealth to marriage and family therapy. American Journal of Family Therapy, 32, 173–187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bowker, N., & Tuffin, K. (2002). Disability discourses for online identities. Disability & Society, 17, 327–344.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bowker, N., & Tuffin, K. (2003). Dicing with deception: People with disabilities' strategies for managing safety and identity online. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 8(2). Retrieved October 20, 2006, from http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol8/issue2/bowker.html.Google Scholar
Bowker, N., & Tuffin, K. (2004). Using the online medium for discursive research about people with disabilities. Social Science Computer Review, 22, 228–241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bridgeman, B., Lennon, M. L., & Jackenthal, A. (2003). Effects of screen size, screen resolution, and display rate on computer-based test performance. Applied Measurement in Education, 16, 191–205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Broos, A. (2005). Gender and information and communication technologies (ICT) anxiety: Male self-assurance and female hesitation. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 8, 21–31.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Buchanan, T. (2001). Online personality assessment. In Reips, U. D. & Bosnjak, M. (Eds.), Dimensions of Internet science (pp. 57–74). Lengerich, Germany: Pabst Science Publishers.Google Scholar
Buchanan, T. (2002). Online assessment: Desirable or dangerous? Professional Psychology: Research & Practice, 33, 148–154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buchanan, T. (2007). Personality testing on the Internet: What we know, and what we do not. In Joinson, A., McKenna, K., Postmes, T. & Reips, U. (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of Internet psychology (pp. 447–460). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Buchanan, T., Ali, T., Heffernan, T. M., Ling, J., Parrott, A. C., Rodgers, J., & Scholey, A. B. (2005). Nonequivalence of on-line and paper-and-pencil psychological tests: The case of the prospective memory questionnaire. Behavior Research Methods, 37, 148–154.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Buchanan, T., Johnson, J. A., & Goldberg, L. R. (2005). Implementing a five-factor personality inventory for use on the Internet. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 21, 115–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Byham, W. C. (2006, September). What is an assessment center? The assessment center method, applications, and technologies. Paper presented at the International Congress on Assessment Center Methods, London, UK. Retrieved November 20, 2006, from http://www.assessmentcenters.org/articles/whatisassess1.asp.Google Scholar
Byham, W. C., & Thornton, G. C., III. (1986). Assessment centers. In Berk, R. A. (Ed.), Performance assessment: Methods and applications (pp. 143–166). Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Caplan, S. E. (2005). A social skill account of problematic Internet use. Journal of Communication, 55, 721–736.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carlbring, P., Brunt, S., Bohman, S., Austin, D., Richards, J., Öst, L., & Andersson, G. (2007). Internet vs. paper and pencil administration of questionnaires commonly used in panic/agoraphobia research. Computers in Human Behavior, 23, 1421–1434.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Caspi, A., & Gorsky, P. (2006). Online deception: Prevalence, motivation, and emotion. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 9, 54–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chaney, M. P., & Chang, C. Y. (2005). A trio of turmoil for Internet sexually addicted men who have sex with men: Boredom broneness, social connectedness, and dissociation. Sexual Addiction & Compulsivity, 12, 3–18.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chuah, S. C., Drasgow, F., & Roberts, B. W. (2006). Personality assessment: Does the medium matter? No. Journal of Research in Personality, 40, 359–376.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cohn, M. A., Mehl, M. R., & Pennebaker, J. W. (2004). Linguistic markers of psychological change surrounding September 11, 2001. Psychological Science, 15, 687–693.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Collins, F. E., & Jones, K. V. (2004). Investigating dissociation online: Validation of a web-based version of the Dissociative Experiences Scale. Journal of Trauma & Dissociation, 5, 133–147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cooper, A., Griffin-Shelley, E., Delmonico, D. L., & Mathy, R. M. (2001). Online sexual problems: Assessment and predictive variables. Sexual Addiction & Compulsivity, 8, 267–285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crichton, S., & Kinash, S. (2003). Virtual ethnography: Interactive interviewing online as method. Canadian Journal of Learning and Technology, 29(2). Retrieved January 22, 2007, from http://www.cjlt.ca/content/vol29.2/cjlt29-2_art-5.html.Google Scholar
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Flow: The psychology of optimal experience. New York: Harper and Row.Google Scholar
Dance, F. E. X. (2003). The digital divide. In Strate, L., Jacobson, R. L., & Gibson, S. B. (Eds.), Communication and cyberspace: Social interaction in an electronic environment (2nd ed., pp. 171–182). Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.Google Scholar
Davies, M., & Morgan, A. (2005). Using computer-assisted self-interviewing (CASI) questionnaires to facilitate consultation and participation with vulnerable young people. Child Abuse Review, 14, 389–406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davis, M., Bolding, G., Hart, G., Sherr, L., & Elford, J. (2004). Reflecting on the experience of interviewing online: Perspectives from the Internet and HIV study in London. AIDS Care, 16, 944–952.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eder, R. W., & Harris, M. M. (Eds.). (2005). The employment interview handbook. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Egan, J., Chenoweth, L., & McAuliffe, D. (2006). Email-facilitated qualitative interviews with traumatic brain injury survivors: A new and accessible method. Brain Injury, 20, 1283–1294.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Emmelkamp, P. M. G. (2005). Technological innovations in clinical assessment and psychotherapy. Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics, 74, 336–343.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Erlanger, D., Feldman, D., Kutner, K., Kaushik, T., Kroger, H., Festa, J., Barth, J., Freeman, J., Broshek, D. (2003). Development and validation of a Web-based neuropsychological test protocol for sports-related return-to-play decision-making. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 18, 293–316.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Festinger, L., Pepitone, A., & Newcomb, T. (1952). Some consequences of deindividuation in a group. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 47, 382–389.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fritsche, I., & Linneweber, V. (2006). Nonreactive methods in psychological research. In Eid, M. & Diener, E. D. (Eds.), Handbook of multimethod measurement in psychology (pp. 189–203). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gaugler, B. B., Rosenthal, D. B., Thornton, G. C. III, & Bentson, C. (1987). Meta-analysis of assessment center validity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 72, 493–511.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hamilton, R. J., & Bowers, B. J. (2006). Internet recruitment and e-mail interviews in qualitative studies. Qualitative Health Research, 16, 821–835.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hanna, R. C., Weinberg, B., Dant, R. P., & Berger, P. D. (2005). Do Internet-based surveys increase personal self-disclosure? Database Marketing & Customer Strategy Management, 12, 342–356.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harman, J. P., Hansen, C. E., Cochran, M. E., & Lindsey, C. R. (2005). Liar, liar: Internet faking but not frequency of use affects social skills, self-esteem, social anxiety, and aggression. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 8, 1–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haythornthwaite, C., & Hagar, C. (2004). The social worlds of the Web. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, 39, 311–346.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Herrero, J., & Meneses, J. (2006). Short Web-based versions of the perceived stress (PSS) and Center for Epidemiological Studies-Depression (CESD) Scales: A comparison to pencil and paper responses among Internet users. Computers in Human Behavior, 22, 830–846.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hewson, C., & Charlton, J. P. (2005). Measuring health beliefs on the Internet: A comparison of paper and Internet administrations of the multidimensional Health Locus of Control Scale. Behavior Research Methods, 37, 691–702.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hsu, M., Yen, C., Chiu, C., & Chang, C. (2006). A longitudinal investigation of continued online shopping behavior: An extension of the theory of planned behavior. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 64, 889–904.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hunt, N., & McHale, S. (2007). A practical guide to the e-mail interview. Qualitative Health Research, 17, 1415–1421.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hunter, J. E., & Hunter, R. F. (1984). Validity and utility of alternative predictors of job performance. Psychological Bulletin, 96, 72–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hyler, S. E., Gangure, D. P., & Batchelder, S. T. (2005). Can telepsychiatry replace in-person psychiatric assessments? A review and meta-analysis of comparison studies. CNS Spectrums, 10, 403–413.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
International Test Commission. (2006). International guidelines of computer-based and Internet-delivered testing. International Journal of Testing, 6, 143–171.CrossRef
Jacobson, D. (2001). Presence revisited: Imagination, competence, and activity in text-based virtual worlds. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 4, 653–673.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Johnson, J. A. (2005). Ascertaining the validity of individual protocols from Web-based personality inventories. Journal of Research in Personality, 39, 103–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Joiner, D. A. (2000). Guidelines and ethical considerations for assessment center operations: International task force on assessment center guidelines. Public Personnel Management, 29, 315–331.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Joinson, A. (1998). Causes and implication of disinhibited behavior on the Internet. In Gackenbach, J., (Ed.), Psychology and the Internet, intrapersonal, interpersonal, and transpersonal implications (pp. 43–60). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Joinson, A. (2003). Understanding the psychology of Internet behaviour. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Joinson, A. N. (2001). Self-disclosure in computer-mediated communication: The role of self-awareness and visual anonymity. European Journal of Social Psychology, 31, 177–192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Joinson, A. N., McKenna, K., Postmes, T., & Reips, U.-D. (Eds.). (2007). Oxford handbook of Internet psychology. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Joinson, A. N., & Paine, C. B. (2007). Self-disclosure, privacy, and the Internet. In Joinson, A. N., McKenna, K. Y. A., Postmes, T., & Reips, U.-D. (Eds.), Oxford handbook of Internet psychology (pp. 235–250). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Jones, W. P. (2004). Testing and counseling: A marriage saved by the Internet? In Bloom, J. W. & Walz, G. R. (Eds.), Cybercounseling & cyberlearning: An encore (pp. 183–202). Alexandria, VA: American Counseling Association.Google Scholar
Jones, W. P., Harbach, R. L., Coker, J. K., & Staples, P. A. (2002). Web-assisted vocational test interpretation. Journal of Employment Counseling, 39, 127–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Judge, S., Puckett, K., & Bell, S. M. (2006). Closing the digital divide: Update from the early childhood longitudinal study. Journal of Educational Research, 100, 52–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kiesler, S., Siegel, J., & McGuire, T. W. (1984). Social psychological aspects of computer-mediated communication. American Psychologist, 39, 1123–1134.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kleiman, T., & Gati, I. (2004). Challenges of Internet-based assessment: Measuring career decision-making difficulties. Measurement & Evaluation in Counseling & Development, 37, 41–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Konradt, U., Hertel, G., & Joder, K. (2003). Web-based assessment of call center agents: Development and validation of a computerized instrument. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 11, 184–193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Korupp, S. E., & Szydlik, M. (2005). Causes and trends of the digital divide. European Sociological Review, 21, 409–422.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kozma-Wiebe, P., Silverstein, S. M., Fehér, A., Kovács, I., Ulhaas, P., & Wilkniss, S. M. (2006). Development of a world-wide web based contour integration test. Computers in Human Behavior, 22, 971–980.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lee, H. (2005). Behavioral strategies for dealing with flaming in an online forum. Sociological Quarterly, 46, 385–403.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
LoBello, S. G., & Zachar, P. (2007). Psychological test sales and Internet auctions: Ethical considerations for dealing with obsolete or unwanted test materials. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 38, 68–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Luce, K. H., Winzelberg, A. J., Das, S., Osborne, M. I., Bryson, S. W., & Taylor, C. B. (2007). Reliability of self-report: Paper versus online administration. Computers in Human Behavior, 23, 1384–1389.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lumsden, J. (2007). Online-questionnaire design guidelines. In Reynolds, R. A., Woods, R., & Baker, J. D. (Eds.), Handbook of research on electronic surveys and measurements (pp. 44–64). Hershey, PA: Idea Group.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lumsden, J. A., Sampson, J. P. Jr., Reardon, R. C., Lenz, J. G., & Peterson, G. W. (2004). A comparison study of the paper-and-pencil, personal computer, and Internet versions of Holland's self-directed search. Measurement & Evaluation in Counseling & Development, 37, 85–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maki, W. S., & Maki, R. H. (2002). Multimedia comprehension skill predicts differential outcomes of Web-based and lecture courses. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 8, 85–98.Google ScholarPubMed
Malamuth, N., Linz, D., & Yao, M. (2005). The Internet and aggression: Motivation, disinhibitory, and opportunity aspects. In Amichai-Hamburger, Y. (Ed.), The social net: Human behavior in cyberspace (pp. 163–190). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Mandrusiak, M., Rudd, M. D., Joiner, T. E. Jr., Berman, A. L., Orden, K. A., & Witte, T. (2006). Warning signs for suicide on the Internet: A descriptive study. Suicide and Life-Threatening Behavior, 36, 263–271.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mangunkusumo, R. T., Duisterhout, J. S., Graaff, N., Maarsingh, E. J., Koning, H. J., & Raat, H. (2006). Internet versus paper mode of health and health behavior questionnaires in elementary schools: Asthma and fruit as examples. Journal of School Health, 76, 80–86.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Marcus, B., Machilek, F., & Schütz, A. (2006). Personality in cyberspace: Personal Web sites as media for personality expressions and impressions. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 90, 1014–1031.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McCoyd, J. L. M., & Kerson, Schwaber T. (2006). Conducting intensive interviews using email: A serendipitous comparative opportunity. Qualitative Social Work, 5, 389–406.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McKenna, K. Y. A. (2007). Through the Internet looking glass: Expressing and validating the true self. In Joinson, A., McKenna, K., Postmes, T., & Reips, U.-D. (Eds.), Oxford handbook of Internet psychology (pp. 203–220). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
McKenna, K. Y. A., & Bargh, J. A. (1998). Coming out in the age of the Internet: Identity “demarginalization” through virtual group participation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 75, 681–694.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McKenna, K. Y. A., & Bargh, J. A. (1999). Causes and consequences of social interaction on the Internet: A conceptual framework. Media Psychology, 1, 249–269.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McKenna, K. Y. A., & Bargh, J. A. (2000). Plan 9 from cyberspace: The implication of the Internet for personality and social psychology. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 4, 57–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McKenna, K. Y. A., & Green, A. S. (2002). Virtual group dynamics. Group Dynamics, 6, 116–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McKenna, K. Y. A., Green, A. S., & Gleason, M. E. J. (2002). Relationship formation on the Internet: What's the big attraction? Journal of Social Issues, 58, 9–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McKenna, K. Y. A., & Seidman, G. (2005a). Social identity and the self: Getting connected online. In Walker, W. R., & Herrmann, D. J. (Eds.), Cognitive technology (pp. 89–110). Jefferson, NC: McFarland.Google Scholar
McKenna, K. Y. A., & Seidman, G. (2005b). You, me, and we: Interpersonal processes in electronic groups. In Amichai-Hamburger, Y. (Ed.), The social net: Human behavior in cyberspace (pp. 191–217). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
McMillan, S. J., & Morrison, M. (2006). Coming of age with the Internet: A qualitative exploration of how the Internet has become an integral part of young people's lives. New Media & Society, 8, 73–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Medalia, A., Lim, R., & Erlanger, D. (2005). Psychometric properties of the Web-based work-readiness cognitive screen used as a neuropsychological assessment tool for schizophrenia. Computer Methods and Programs in Biomedicine, 80, 93–102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meier, A. (2004). Technology-mediated groups. In Garvin, C. D., Gutiérrez, L. M., & Galinsky, M. J. (Eds.), Handbook of social work with groups (pp. 479–503). New York: Guilford.Google Scholar
Moral-Toranzo, F., Canto-Ortiz, J., & Gómez-Jacinto, L. (2007). Anonymity effects in computer-mediated communication in the case of minority influence. Computers in Human Behavior, 23, 1660–1674.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mühlenfeld, H. U. (2005). Differences between “talking about” and “admitting” sensitive behaviour in anonymous and non-anonymous Web-based interviews. Computers in Human Behavior, 21, 993–1003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Naglieri, J. A., Drasgow, F., Schmit, M., Handler, L., Prifitera, A., Margolis, A., & Velasquez, R. (2004). Psychological testing on the Internet: New problems, old issues. American Psychologist, 59, 150–162.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nosek, B. A., Banaji, M., & Greenwald, A. G. (2002). Harvesting implicit group attitudes and beliefs from a demonstration web site. Group Dynamics, 6, 101–115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Paine, C., Reips, U.-D., Stieger, S., Joinson, A., & Buchanan, T. (2007). Internet users' perceptions of “privacy concerns” and “privacy actions.”International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 65, 526–536.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Perry, E. L., Simpson, P. A., NicDomhnaill, O. L., & Siegel, D. M. (2003). Is there a technology age gap? Associations among age, skills, and employment outcomes. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 11, 141–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pew Internet & American Life Project (2005). The future of the Internet. Retrieved October 15, 2006, from http://www.pewinternet.org/pdfs/PIP_Future_of_Internet.pdf.
Prentice-Dunn, S., & Rogers, R. W. (1982). Effects of public and private self-awareness on deindividuation and aggression. Journal of Personality ands Social Psychology, 43, 503–513.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Quayle, E., Vaughan, M., & Taylor, M. (2006). Sex offenders, Internet child abuse images and emotional avoidance: The importance of values. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 11, 1–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reid, D. J., & Reid, F. J. M. (2005). Online focus groups: An in-depth comparison of computer-mediated and conventional focus group discussions. International Journal of Market Research, 47, 131–162.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reips, U.-D. (2002). Standards for Internet-based experimenting. Experimental Psychology, 49, 243–256.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Reips, U.-D. (2006). Web-based methods. In Eid, M. & Diener, E. (Eds.), Handbook of multimethod measurement in psychology (pp. 73–85). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sale, R. (2006). International guidelines on computer-based and Internet-delivered testing: A practitioner's perspective. International Journal of Testing, 6, 181–188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schatz, P., & Browndyke, J. (2002). Applications of computer-based neuropsychological assessment. Journal of Head Trauma Rehabilitation, 17, 395–410.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schmidt, W. C. (2007). Technical considerations when implementing online research. In Joinson, A., McKenna, K., Postmes, T., and Reips, U.-D. (Eds.), Oxford handbook of Internet psychology (pp. 459–470). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Schmitt, N., Gooding, R. Z., Noe, R., A., & Kirsch, M. (1984). Meta-analysis of validity studies published between 1964 and 1982 and the investigation of study characteristics. Personnel Psychology, 37, 407–422.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Selwyn, N., Gorard, S., & Furlong, J. (2005). Whose Internet is it anyway? Exploring adults' (non)use of the Internet in everyday life. European Journal of Communication, 20, 5–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shahani, C., Dipboye, R. L., & Gehrlein, T. M. (1993). Attractiveness bias in the interview: Exploring the boundaries of an effect. Basic & Applied Social Psychology, 14, 317–328.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shaw, L. H., & Gant, L. M. (2002). Users divided? Exploring the gender gap in Internet use. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 5, 517–527.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sillence, E., & Briggs, P. (2007). Please advise: Using the Internet for health and financial advice. Computers in Human Behavior, 23, 727–748.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sommers-Flanagan, J., & Sommers-Flanagan, R. (2002). Clinical interviewing (3rd ed.). New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Spears, R., & Lea, M. (1992). Social influence and the influence of the “social” in computer-mediated communication. In Lea, M. (Ed.), Contexts of computer-mediated communication (pp. 30–65). London, UK: Harvester Wheatsheaf.Google Scholar
Spears, R., & Lea, M. (1994). Panacea or Panopticon? The hidden power in computer-mediated communication. Communication Research, 21, 427–459.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spychalski, A. C., Quinones, M. A., Gaugler, B. B., & Pohley, K. (1997). A survey of assessment center practices in organizations in the United States. Personnel Psychology, 50, 71–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stieger, S., & Göritz, A. S. (2006). Using instant messaging for Internet-based interviews. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 9, 552–559.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stone, L. D., & Pennebaker, J. W. (2002). Trauma in real time: Talking and avoiding online conversations about the death of Princess Diana. Basic & Applied Social Psychology, 24, 173–183.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Suler, J. R. (2002). Identity management in cyberspace. Journal of Applied Psychoanalytic Studies, 4, 455–460.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Suler, J. (2004a). The online disinhibition effect. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 7, 321–326.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Suler, J. (2004b). The psychology of text relationships. In Kraus, R., Zack, J., & Stricker, G. (Eds.), Online counseling: A handbook for mental health professionals (pp. 19–50). San Diego, CA: Elsevier Academic Press.Google Scholar
Suler, J. R., & Phillips, W. L. (1998). The bad boys of cyberspace: Deviant behavior in a multimedia chat community. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 1, 275–294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thompson, P. A. (2003). What's fueling the flames in cyberspace? A social influence model. In Strate, L., Jacobson, R. L., & Gibson, S. B. (Eds.), Communication and cyberspace: Social interaction in an electronic environment (2nd ed., pp. 329–347). Cresskill, NJ: Hampton Press.Google Scholar
Thornton, G. C. III, & Byham, W. C. (1982). Assessment centers and managerial performance. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Thornton, G. C. III, & Rupp, D. E. (2005). Assessment centers in human resource management: Strategies for prediction, diagnosis, and development. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Tichon, J. G., & Shapiro, M. (2003). The process of sharing social support in cyberspace. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 6, 161–170.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tippins, N. T., Beaty, J., Drasgow, F., Gibson, W. M., Pearlman, K., Segall, D. O., & Shepherd, W. (2006). Unproctored Internet testing in employment settings. Personnel Psychology, 59, 189–225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Turkle, S. (2004). Whither psychoanalysis in computer culture?Psychoanalytic Psychology, 21, 16–30.
Walther, J. B. (1996). Computer-mediated communication: Impersonal, interpersonal, and hyperpersonal interaction. Communication Research, 23, 3–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Whitaker, B. G. (2007). Internet-based attitude assessment: Does gender affect measurement equivalence? Computers in Human Behavior, 23, 1183–1194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilhelm, O., & McKnight, P. E. (2002). Ability and achievement testing on the World Wide Web. In Batinic, B., Reips, U.-D., & Bosnjak, M. (Eds.), Online social sciences (pp. 151–180). Seattle, WA: Hogrefe & Huber.Google Scholar
Williams, J. E., & McCord, D. M. (2006). Equivalence of standard and computerized versions of the Raven Progressive Matrices Test. Computers in Human Behavior, 22, 791–800.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wilson, K. R., Wallin, J. S., & Reiser, C. (2003). Social stratification and the digital divide. Social Science Computer Review, 21, 133–143.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wood, E., Willoughby, T., Specht, J., Stern-Cavalcante, W., & Child, C. (2002). Developing a computer workshop to facilitate computer skills and minimize anxiety for early childhood educators. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94, 164–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wu, S. Y., & He, Z. (2004). A dynamic Web educational assessment system. In Morgan, K., Brebbia, C. A., Sanchez, J., & Voiskounsky, A. (Eds.), Human perspectives in the Internet society: Culture, psychology and gender (pp. 449–457). Southampton, UK: WIT Press.Google Scholar
Yao, M. Z., & Flanagin, A. J. (2006). A self-awareness approach to computer-mediated communication. Computers in Human Behavior, 22, 518–544.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yoshino, A., Shigemura, J., Kobayashi, Y., Nomura, S., Shishikura, K., Den, R., Wakisaka, H., Kamata, S., & Ashida, H. (2001). Telepsychiatry: Assessment of televideo psychiatric interview reliability with present- and next-generation Internet infrastructures. Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica, 104, 223–226.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Zetin, M., & Tasha, G. (1999). Development of a computerized psychiatric diagnostic interview for use by mental health and primary care clinicians. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 2, 223–229.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×