互联网使用与内地大学生的社会资本
|
摘要
近几年,互联网在中国内地的高速扩散,及其对社会政治、经济、文化各个领域的深入渗透和所引发的深刻变革,构成人类传播史上最壮观的图景。出生于上世纪80年代末、成于长数字新时代的青少年们,被称为“网络世代”(Net Generation)。与他们的父辈相比,“网络世代”们拥有全然不同的生存环境,网络及其衍生的数字新媒体伴随他们一同成长,并深刻影响了他们的思维方式和行为方式。本研究以“网络世代”的代表群体——青年大学生作为研究对象,从社会学的视角出发,运用量化的问卷调查法和质化的焦点小组法,探讨了互联网对大学生的以交往、信任、参与等为核心的社会资本的影响,为考察网络传播效果提供了一种新的研究视角。
本研究完成的工作主要有:(1)对青年大学生群体所拥有的社会资本进行定量描述。(2)筛选出与网络使用有关的对社会资本有显著影响的因素。(3)将网络使用形态划分为“工具性使用”与“仪式性使用”,并提出“工具性使用”的“功能补偿”效果与“仪式性使用”的“时间替代”效果,以探讨互联网对社会资本的影响机制。
本文主要包括以下三方面的内容:
第一,青年大学生群体的社会资本现状。
本研究通过量化的问卷调查法,获得了关于大学生群体的社会资本现状的量化数据。调查发现,社会资本的四个构成维度中,大学生的人际交往-特殊信任、生活满意两个指标还算较高;而普遍信任指标和社团参与指标较低。
由调查结果看,与他们的父辈相比,大学生群体的信任结构仍没有明显改观,以血缘关系为核心的特殊信任,仍是他们信任的主要形式;对于社会上大多数人,他们仍没有足够的信任。社会的发展与时代的变迁表明,对于一个国家、民族而言,普遍信任似乎应比特殊信任更具积极意义,因为在一个彼此信任、彼此真诚相待的社会系统中,政府机构将能够以较低的运行成本,获得较高的运行效率。大学生作为中国未来最主要的社会力量,如何将他们的信任进一步扩展到没有血缘和亲密关系的社会上大多数人,从而建立全社会的普遍信任,是一个严肃的时代议题。
另外,调查结果还反映出大学生群体社团参与程度不高。拥有社团组织的多寡早已成为衡量一个国家社会化程度的重要标志,参与社团组织的多寡也已成为衡量一个人社会地位的尺度。然而,作为大学生锻炼自我、培养参与与合作意识的最主要渠道——社团活动,并没有引起大学生足够的参与热情。可以想见,一个有较多社团参与的大学生,将会成长为一个积极参与社会的公民。在构建和谐社会、强调个人与社会和谐发展的时代背景下,如何增强大学生的社团参与意识,是一个相当现实的话题。
第二,与互联网使用有关的哪些因素、在何种程度上对社会资本产生了影响?
本文通过多元阶层回归分析,从研究假设中所涉及的10个自变量(因素)中,筛选出了对社会资本有显著影响的6个因素,并依据它们对社会资本影响力的相对大小进行了重要程度排序:①“新闻资讯偏好”对社会资本的四个维度均有显著的正向影响,为诸因素中最重要的因素;②“人际互动动机”与“每周上网频次”对社会资本的三个维度有显著的正向影响;③“网络依赖”对社会资本的两个维度产生显著的负向影响;④“每日上网时间”对社会资本的一个维度产生负向影响;“娱乐消遣动机”对社会资本的一个维度产生正向影响。
在所筛选出的6个有显著影响的因素中,其中有4个因素对社会资本产生了正向影响,而且就影响力的大小而言,这4个因素的排序较靠前。因此本文认为,在促进个体与社会融合方面,互联网扮演了一个积极的正面角色。根据这一结果,本文从传播技术发展的历史脉略入手,运用“技术恐惧”理论和“第三人效果”理论,对近几年关于互联网“利弊观”的争议进行分析,以期获得对网络传播功能的理性与全面认知。
第三,互联网对社会资本的影响机制。
技术本身是中性的,产生了怎样的影响,关键在于人们如何使用它。
通过质化的焦点小组法,本文进一步发现,将大学生的网络使用形态细分为“工具性使用”和“仪式性使用”,可以更好地解释网络使用对社会资本的影响机制。以寻求信息、获取新知为主要目的的工具性使用形态,更关注对网络特定内容的使用;在使用过程中,使用者获得的是“内容的满足”;由于动机具有明确的指向性,工具性使用形态不会造成使用者对网络的依赖和过度使用。与工具性使用形态相比,仪式性使用形态的使用动机不够强烈,使用者往往是出于一种固定的、或习惯性的行为而上网,常以打发时间、排遣郁闷等作为上网理由;由于使用动机的相对模糊性,仪式性使用者对网络本身的关注超过对网络内容的关注,因此仪式性使用者获得的是“过程的满足”。
藉由对网络使用形态的划分,以及焦点小组的质化结果,本文认为,由于网络兼具大众传播与人际传播的功能,网络的工具性使用形态对那些与其功能相似的传统媒体或旧活动具有“功能补偿”效果:网络所提供功能的多样性与丰富性,直接影响了人们对传统媒体的使用和对社会交往、休闲娱乐活动的参与。网络在作为一种新的大众传媒而存在的同时,亦成为一种极具影响力的“非大众传媒活动”工具。据此,本文认为,在网络的“工具性使用”的前提之下,即使人们在现实中疏远了报纸、电视、广播或者人际交往、休闲娱乐等社会活动,其社会资本总储量亦不会流失,人们在虚拟的网络空间所进行新的形态的社会交往、社团参与等,对现实中流失的社会资本有一种“补偿”作用。因此,网络的工具性使用及其所具有的“功能补偿”效果,是影响社会资本的一种积极因素。
与此相反,网络的仪式性使用形态,具有“时间替代”效果。出于打发时间的目的或排遣郁闷的目的,网络的“仪式性使用”常令使用者沉溺于网络所带来的虚幻感受而无法自主控制上网时间,结果是,上网活动本身侵占了使用者在可供自由支配时间内用于其他活动的时间,如人际交往、社会参与等(本文称之为“非大众传媒活动”);由于上网者对网络本身的迷恋远远超过对网络内容的关注,其在网上的活动往往表现为冲动而无目的浏览网页、借助网络游戏获取暂时的自我满足等,这些活动即不利于已有人际关系的维系,亦不利于在网上发展和建立新的人际关系。由此可见,网络的仪式性使用所具有的“时间替代”效果,对社会资本具有销蚀作用,是一种消极的影响因素。
本文最后指出,借助网络工具性使用的“功能补偿”效果,社会资本可实现迁移。上网者在虚拟空间所进行的人际交往、社团参与、以及由此所产生的信任等,可形成新的社会资本。为与现实中的社会资本相区别,本文称之为“网络社会资本”。随着网络在中国内地的高速扩散和对社会系统的深入渗透,对网络社会资本及相关理论的研究,或许可成为未来一个新的研究课题。
The most magnificent scenery has emerged in Mainland China with the rapid diffusion of internet and its effect on politics, economy and culture in the past several years. And adolescent who were born in the 1980s and grow up in the digital era were called“Net Generation”.Compared with their parents, the Net Generation’s life has been changed completely——they are companied with the Internet and digital media and these new media have affected their thinking and action. Based on the analysis of current situation, the relationship between Internet use and undergraduates’social capital (which is centered as interpersonal interaction, trust and social participation etc.) was researched in this thesis from the view of sociology. In addition, quantitative method of Questionnaire and qualitative method of Focus Group were used to obtain scientific data. And this research could provide a kind of new view to study computer-mediated communication for other research subsequently.
The research has fulfilled such work as follows:(1) the social capital of undergraduates were described quantitatively;(2) several factors that effect the social capital significantly in statistics were found out through multiple hierarchical regression analysis;(3) two types of Internet use——ritualized use and instrumental use and their“time displacement”and“functional supplement”respectively were put forward to explain the mechanism of how Internet use affects social capital.
1.The quantitative description of undergraduates’social capital
Quantitative method of Questionnaire were used to obtain the data about social capital of undergraduates. The results show that within 4 dimensions of social capital, the values of interpersonal interaction-special trust and life satisfaction are both more than 3(expressed by 5-point Likert Scale); however, the dimensions of universal trust and organization participation are less than 3.
The data of Questionnaire show that compared with their parents, the structure of trust of undergraduates has not been changed drastically——the people they trust most are their parents and relatives, other than those who have no consanguinity with them.
For a social system in which each other trust, and each other treats sincerely, the government could obtain high operating efficiency by low run cost, so universal trust should have the positive sense compared to the special trust. Thus it is a serious topic for us to further expand the undergraduates’trust to those without blood relationship or intimate relation, so that universal trust in the entire society could be established.
Nowadays, the number of organizations has become an important criterion to weigh the degree of a nation’s socialization and a person’s social position. But the survey results show that the undergraduates have less organization participation, which means that as a tool of self-exercises and cultivating participation and cooperation consciousness, organization participation has not aroused enough enthusiasm among undergraduates. We can image that an active-participation college student would grow up into an active-participation citizen. So under the background of constructing harmonious society, it is quite a realistic topic of cultivating the sense of organization participation of undergraduates.
2.What are these factors that related to Internet use have influenced undergraduates’social capital? To which degree?
Through multiple hierarchical regression analysis, 6 independents which influenced social capital significantly were found out from 10 independents, and then were ordered according to their influence-power: (1)News-information preference is the most important independent, and it influences 4 dimensions of social capital positively. (2)Motive of interpersonal interaction and frequency of Internet use are the second important independents which influence 3 dimensions of social capital positively.(3) Internet reliance is the third important independent which influences 2 dimensions of social capital negatively;(4) Surfer time and motive of entertainment are the forth important independents which influence one dimension of social capital respectively.
From those findings above,we can see that Internet use mainly has a positive relationship with social capital. Therefore a conclusion could be drawn that Internet has played a positive role in promoting an individual’s integration with the society. Based on this conclusion, and from the view of technological evolution, this paper analyzed the argument of“advantages and disadvantages of Internet”with the theory of technophobia and the third-person effect. These analysis could offer a rational and comprehensive explanation about the function of Internet.
3.The mechanism of the influence of Internet use on social capital
The technology itself is neutral, and how it operates dependents on how people use it.
Through the qualitative method of Focus Group, the research found that distinguishing Internet use into two types——instrumental use and ritualized use could explain well the mechanism of the influence of Internet use on social capital . For seeking information and new knowledge are the main objective of instrumental Internet users, and they concern more about the specific contents online,so they obtain“content gratifications”. As the instrumental Internet users have clear motive, they will not dependent on the Internet and abuse it. Compared to instrumental users, ritualized users do not have strong motive and surfing is a routine or a customary behavior, and killing time or alleviating depression are the excuses.Without strong or enough motive, ritualized users concern more about the Internet itself, so they obtain“process gratifications”.
Based on the two typical Internet use——instrumental use and ritualized use,and the results of Focus Group, the paper deduces that as the Internet has both mass and interpersonal communication functions, instrumental use could compensate those traditional media or“old activities”for similar functions——with the diverse and rich functions, the Internet would impact on the use of traditional media, social activities and entertainment participation. In one word, the Internet is being as a new media at the same time it has become a highly influential“non-mass media activities”tool. Accordingly, this paper argues that under the condition of instrumental use, even if the people in the real world alienated the newspapers, television, radio, interpersonal communication, entertainment or other social activities, their social capital would not be lost. For people in the virtual cyberspace, their virtue forms of social interaction, community involvement, et al. could supplement the loss of social capital in reality. Therefore, the instrumental use of Internet and its“functional supplement”effect is a positive factor for the social capital.
On the contrary, the ritualized Internet use has a function of“time displacement”. For the purpose of killing time or alleviating depression, ritualized Internet users are usually addicted to the fantasy feelings so that they could not control the time spent on surfing. As a result, surfing occupies the free time for interpersonal contact, social participation, etc.. For ritualized Internet users, they pay more attention to the Internet itself than to the content of it, and they often browse the website impulsively and purposelessly for the purpose of temporary self-satisfaction, so these online activities neither could help to maintain the existing interpersonal relations, nor could help to establish new relationships in cyberspace. Thus, the ritualized Internet use is a negative factor for the social capital and its“time displacement”function would destroy social capital.
Finally, this paper refers that with the effect of“functional supplement”, the social capital could be transferred from reality to cyberspace. In cyberspace, interpersonal contact, community participation, and trust, etc. could generate new social capital. In order to distinguish the new social capital from those in reality, this paper called it“social capital in cyberspace”. With the high-speed diffusion and in-depth penetration of Internet in Mainland Chinese, social capital in cyberspace and its related theories would be a new meaningful research topic in the future.
本研究完成的工作主要有:(1)对青年大学生群体所拥有的社会资本进行定量描述。(2)筛选出与网络使用有关的对社会资本有显著影响的因素。(3)将网络使用形态划分为“工具性使用”与“仪式性使用”,并提出“工具性使用”的“功能补偿”效果与“仪式性使用”的“时间替代”效果,以探讨互联网对社会资本的影响机制。
本文主要包括以下三方面的内容:
第一,青年大学生群体的社会资本现状。
本研究通过量化的问卷调查法,获得了关于大学生群体的社会资本现状的量化数据。调查发现,社会资本的四个构成维度中,大学生的人际交往-特殊信任、生活满意两个指标还算较高;而普遍信任指标和社团参与指标较低。
由调查结果看,与他们的父辈相比,大学生群体的信任结构仍没有明显改观,以血缘关系为核心的特殊信任,仍是他们信任的主要形式;对于社会上大多数人,他们仍没有足够的信任。社会的发展与时代的变迁表明,对于一个国家、民族而言,普遍信任似乎应比特殊信任更具积极意义,因为在一个彼此信任、彼此真诚相待的社会系统中,政府机构将能够以较低的运行成本,获得较高的运行效率。大学生作为中国未来最主要的社会力量,如何将他们的信任进一步扩展到没有血缘和亲密关系的社会上大多数人,从而建立全社会的普遍信任,是一个严肃的时代议题。
另外,调查结果还反映出大学生群体社团参与程度不高。拥有社团组织的多寡早已成为衡量一个国家社会化程度的重要标志,参与社团组织的多寡也已成为衡量一个人社会地位的尺度。然而,作为大学生锻炼自我、培养参与与合作意识的最主要渠道——社团活动,并没有引起大学生足够的参与热情。可以想见,一个有较多社团参与的大学生,将会成长为一个积极参与社会的公民。在构建和谐社会、强调个人与社会和谐发展的时代背景下,如何增强大学生的社团参与意识,是一个相当现实的话题。
第二,与互联网使用有关的哪些因素、在何种程度上对社会资本产生了影响?
本文通过多元阶层回归分析,从研究假设中所涉及的10个自变量(因素)中,筛选出了对社会资本有显著影响的6个因素,并依据它们对社会资本影响力的相对大小进行了重要程度排序:①“新闻资讯偏好”对社会资本的四个维度均有显著的正向影响,为诸因素中最重要的因素;②“人际互动动机”与“每周上网频次”对社会资本的三个维度有显著的正向影响;③“网络依赖”对社会资本的两个维度产生显著的负向影响;④“每日上网时间”对社会资本的一个维度产生负向影响;“娱乐消遣动机”对社会资本的一个维度产生正向影响。
在所筛选出的6个有显著影响的因素中,其中有4个因素对社会资本产生了正向影响,而且就影响力的大小而言,这4个因素的排序较靠前。因此本文认为,在促进个体与社会融合方面,互联网扮演了一个积极的正面角色。根据这一结果,本文从传播技术发展的历史脉略入手,运用“技术恐惧”理论和“第三人效果”理论,对近几年关于互联网“利弊观”的争议进行分析,以期获得对网络传播功能的理性与全面认知。
第三,互联网对社会资本的影响机制。
技术本身是中性的,产生了怎样的影响,关键在于人们如何使用它。
通过质化的焦点小组法,本文进一步发现,将大学生的网络使用形态细分为“工具性使用”和“仪式性使用”,可以更好地解释网络使用对社会资本的影响机制。以寻求信息、获取新知为主要目的的工具性使用形态,更关注对网络特定内容的使用;在使用过程中,使用者获得的是“内容的满足”;由于动机具有明确的指向性,工具性使用形态不会造成使用者对网络的依赖和过度使用。与工具性使用形态相比,仪式性使用形态的使用动机不够强烈,使用者往往是出于一种固定的、或习惯性的行为而上网,常以打发时间、排遣郁闷等作为上网理由;由于使用动机的相对模糊性,仪式性使用者对网络本身的关注超过对网络内容的关注,因此仪式性使用者获得的是“过程的满足”。
藉由对网络使用形态的划分,以及焦点小组的质化结果,本文认为,由于网络兼具大众传播与人际传播的功能,网络的工具性使用形态对那些与其功能相似的传统媒体或旧活动具有“功能补偿”效果:网络所提供功能的多样性与丰富性,直接影响了人们对传统媒体的使用和对社会交往、休闲娱乐活动的参与。网络在作为一种新的大众传媒而存在的同时,亦成为一种极具影响力的“非大众传媒活动”工具。据此,本文认为,在网络的“工具性使用”的前提之下,即使人们在现实中疏远了报纸、电视、广播或者人际交往、休闲娱乐等社会活动,其社会资本总储量亦不会流失,人们在虚拟的网络空间所进行新的形态的社会交往、社团参与等,对现实中流失的社会资本有一种“补偿”作用。因此,网络的工具性使用及其所具有的“功能补偿”效果,是影响社会资本的一种积极因素。
与此相反,网络的仪式性使用形态,具有“时间替代”效果。出于打发时间的目的或排遣郁闷的目的,网络的“仪式性使用”常令使用者沉溺于网络所带来的虚幻感受而无法自主控制上网时间,结果是,上网活动本身侵占了使用者在可供自由支配时间内用于其他活动的时间,如人际交往、社会参与等(本文称之为“非大众传媒活动”);由于上网者对网络本身的迷恋远远超过对网络内容的关注,其在网上的活动往往表现为冲动而无目的浏览网页、借助网络游戏获取暂时的自我满足等,这些活动即不利于已有人际关系的维系,亦不利于在网上发展和建立新的人际关系。由此可见,网络的仪式性使用所具有的“时间替代”效果,对社会资本具有销蚀作用,是一种消极的影响因素。
本文最后指出,借助网络工具性使用的“功能补偿”效果,社会资本可实现迁移。上网者在虚拟空间所进行的人际交往、社团参与、以及由此所产生的信任等,可形成新的社会资本。为与现实中的社会资本相区别,本文称之为“网络社会资本”。随着网络在中国内地的高速扩散和对社会系统的深入渗透,对网络社会资本及相关理论的研究,或许可成为未来一个新的研究课题。
The most magnificent scenery has emerged in Mainland China with the rapid diffusion of internet and its effect on politics, economy and culture in the past several years. And adolescent who were born in the 1980s and grow up in the digital era were called“Net Generation”.Compared with their parents, the Net Generation’s life has been changed completely——they are companied with the Internet and digital media and these new media have affected their thinking and action. Based on the analysis of current situation, the relationship between Internet use and undergraduates’social capital (which is centered as interpersonal interaction, trust and social participation etc.) was researched in this thesis from the view of sociology. In addition, quantitative method of Questionnaire and qualitative method of Focus Group were used to obtain scientific data. And this research could provide a kind of new view to study computer-mediated communication for other research subsequently.
The research has fulfilled such work as follows:(1) the social capital of undergraduates were described quantitatively;(2) several factors that effect the social capital significantly in statistics were found out through multiple hierarchical regression analysis;(3) two types of Internet use——ritualized use and instrumental use and their“time displacement”and“functional supplement”respectively were put forward to explain the mechanism of how Internet use affects social capital.
1.The quantitative description of undergraduates’social capital
Quantitative method of Questionnaire were used to obtain the data about social capital of undergraduates. The results show that within 4 dimensions of social capital, the values of interpersonal interaction-special trust and life satisfaction are both more than 3(expressed by 5-point Likert Scale); however, the dimensions of universal trust and organization participation are less than 3.
The data of Questionnaire show that compared with their parents, the structure of trust of undergraduates has not been changed drastically——the people they trust most are their parents and relatives, other than those who have no consanguinity with them.
For a social system in which each other trust, and each other treats sincerely, the government could obtain high operating efficiency by low run cost, so universal trust should have the positive sense compared to the special trust. Thus it is a serious topic for us to further expand the undergraduates’trust to those without blood relationship or intimate relation, so that universal trust in the entire society could be established.
Nowadays, the number of organizations has become an important criterion to weigh the degree of a nation’s socialization and a person’s social position. But the survey results show that the undergraduates have less organization participation, which means that as a tool of self-exercises and cultivating participation and cooperation consciousness, organization participation has not aroused enough enthusiasm among undergraduates. We can image that an active-participation college student would grow up into an active-participation citizen. So under the background of constructing harmonious society, it is quite a realistic topic of cultivating the sense of organization participation of undergraduates.
2.What are these factors that related to Internet use have influenced undergraduates’social capital? To which degree?
Through multiple hierarchical regression analysis, 6 independents which influenced social capital significantly were found out from 10 independents, and then were ordered according to their influence-power: (1)News-information preference is the most important independent, and it influences 4 dimensions of social capital positively. (2)Motive of interpersonal interaction and frequency of Internet use are the second important independents which influence 3 dimensions of social capital positively.(3) Internet reliance is the third important independent which influences 2 dimensions of social capital negatively;(4) Surfer time and motive of entertainment are the forth important independents which influence one dimension of social capital respectively.
From those findings above,we can see that Internet use mainly has a positive relationship with social capital. Therefore a conclusion could be drawn that Internet has played a positive role in promoting an individual’s integration with the society. Based on this conclusion, and from the view of technological evolution, this paper analyzed the argument of“advantages and disadvantages of Internet”with the theory of technophobia and the third-person effect. These analysis could offer a rational and comprehensive explanation about the function of Internet.
3.The mechanism of the influence of Internet use on social capital
The technology itself is neutral, and how it operates dependents on how people use it.
Through the qualitative method of Focus Group, the research found that distinguishing Internet use into two types——instrumental use and ritualized use could explain well the mechanism of the influence of Internet use on social capital . For seeking information and new knowledge are the main objective of instrumental Internet users, and they concern more about the specific contents online,so they obtain“content gratifications”. As the instrumental Internet users have clear motive, they will not dependent on the Internet and abuse it. Compared to instrumental users, ritualized users do not have strong motive and surfing is a routine or a customary behavior, and killing time or alleviating depression are the excuses.Without strong or enough motive, ritualized users concern more about the Internet itself, so they obtain“process gratifications”.
Based on the two typical Internet use——instrumental use and ritualized use,and the results of Focus Group, the paper deduces that as the Internet has both mass and interpersonal communication functions, instrumental use could compensate those traditional media or“old activities”for similar functions——with the diverse and rich functions, the Internet would impact on the use of traditional media, social activities and entertainment participation. In one word, the Internet is being as a new media at the same time it has become a highly influential“non-mass media activities”tool. Accordingly, this paper argues that under the condition of instrumental use, even if the people in the real world alienated the newspapers, television, radio, interpersonal communication, entertainment or other social activities, their social capital would not be lost. For people in the virtual cyberspace, their virtue forms of social interaction, community involvement, et al. could supplement the loss of social capital in reality. Therefore, the instrumental use of Internet and its“functional supplement”effect is a positive factor for the social capital.
On the contrary, the ritualized Internet use has a function of“time displacement”. For the purpose of killing time or alleviating depression, ritualized Internet users are usually addicted to the fantasy feelings so that they could not control the time spent on surfing. As a result, surfing occupies the free time for interpersonal contact, social participation, etc.. For ritualized Internet users, they pay more attention to the Internet itself than to the content of it, and they often browse the website impulsively and purposelessly for the purpose of temporary self-satisfaction, so these online activities neither could help to maintain the existing interpersonal relations, nor could help to establish new relationships in cyberspace. Thus, the ritualized Internet use is a negative factor for the social capital and its“time displacement”function would destroy social capital.
Finally, this paper refers that with the effect of“functional supplement”, the social capital could be transferred from reality to cyberspace. In cyberspace, interpersonal contact, community participation, and trust, etc. could generate new social capital. In order to distinguish the new social capital from those in reality, this paper called it“social capital in cyberspace”. With the high-speed diffusion and in-depth penetration of Internet in Mainland Chinese, social capital in cyberspace and its related theories would be a new meaningful research topic in the future.
引文
2李惠斌、杨雪冬主编:《社会资本与社会发展》,北京:社会科学文献出版社,2000年8月,第120页。
3[美]肯尼思·阿罗:《放弃社会资本》,见:曹荣湘选编《走出囚徒困境——社会资本与制度分析》,上海:三联书店,2003年版,第225—228页.
5中译本《社会资本——关于社会结构与行动的理论》,张磊译,上海人民出版社,2005
13.该数据来源于湖北省教育厅网站,http://www.hbe.gov.cn/content.php?id=3275
14王宇中:《大学生生活满意度评定量表》,见《行为医学量表手册》,中华医学电子音像出版社2005年版。
21见:http://www.66163.com/Fujian_w/news/bc/gb/20061024/tbxx105439.html
[1] [美]艾尔·巴比.社会研究方法基础.第8版.邱泽奇译.北京大学出版社,2002
[2]边燕杰.城市居民社会资本的来源及作用:网络观点与调查发现.中国社会科学,2004,(3):136~146
[3]白羽.大学生网络依赖及其团体干预方法.青年研究,2005,(5):42~49
[4]卜卫,刘晓红.中国社科院新闻与传播研究所2003年青少年与互联网报告,2003
[5]蔡骐,刘维红.对传播学中使用与满足理论的再探索.湖南大众传媒职业技术学院学报,2004,4(1):5~10
[6]陈向明.质的研究方法与社会科学研究.教育科学出版社,2000
[7]陈蓓丽,张熠.社会资本与大学生人际交往之关系探究,2006,(10):30~32
[8]陈崇山,孙五三.媒介·人·现代化.中国社会科学出版社,1997
[9]陈世敏.大众传播与社会变迁.台北:三民书局发行,民国七十二年
[10] David?E?Morrison著.寻找方法:焦点小组和大众传播研究的发展,柯惠新、王宁(译).新华出版社,2004
[11]陈红兵.国外技术恐惧研究述评,自然辩证法研究,2001,23(4):16~21
[12]代方震,高丽.大学生上网成瘾问题初探.河北师范大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2006,(1):16~21
[13] [美]戴维?波普诺著.社会学.中国人民大学出版社,1999
[14]邓建国.Web2.0时代的互联网使用行为与网民社会资本之关系考察.复旦大学博士学位论文,2007
[15]邓卓明主编.涌浪中的理性审视.重庆出版社,1999
[16]丁建洋.大学生社团开发模型研究.民办教育研究,2006,(6):65～67
[17]费孝通.乡土中国.北京;三联书店,1984
[18]福山.信任:社会德性与繁荣的创造.李宛蓉译,台湾立绪文化事业有限公司,1998
[19]龚书铎.中国近代文化概论.中华书局出版,2000
[20]高秋凤,朱秋霞,徐健,等.大学生互联网使用偏好、使用动机及病理性互联网使用(PIU)现状调查研究.考试周刊,2007,(32):17~19
[21]黄光国.人情与面子:中国人的权力游戏.见:黄光国编.中国人的权力游戏.台北:巨流图书公司,1988
[22]胡子祥,陈洁.当代大学生社会参与行为的实证研究,中国青年研究,2006,(10):38~42
[23]胡荣,李静雅.城市居民信任的构成及影响因素.社会,2006,26(6):
[24]金勇进,蒋妍.抽样技术.中国人民大学出版社,2002
[25]柯惠新,祝建华,、孙江华.传播统计学.北京广播学院出版社,2003
[26] [美]洛厄里,德弗勒.大众传播效果研究的里程碑,中国人民大学出版社,2004
[27]林南.社会资本——关于社会结构与行动的理论.上海:上海人民出版社, 2005
[28]卢纹岱.SPSS for Windows统计分析(第三版),电子工业出版社,2006
[29]刘少杰.后现代西方社会学理论.社会科学文献出版社,2002
[30]刘英.因特网与社会资本——对回龙观社区网的跟踪调查.中国人民大学国际关系学院硕士学论文,2005
[31]刘柳.虚拟社区中的人际互动.南京邮电大学学报(社会科学版),2006,8(2):36~40
[32]李惠斌.社会资本与社会发展引论.马克思主义与现实,2000,(2):35～40
[33]李伟民.梁玉成.特殊信任与普遍信任:中国人信任的结构与特征.社会学研究,2002,(3):
[34]李秀敏.互联网内容偏好与大学生人格特质关系的研究.心理科学,2004,27(3):559~562
[35]罗文辉,梁永炽,熊澄宇,等.互联网对传统媒体的时间取代效果——北京、台北、香港的比较研究.见:“全球化华文媒体的发展和机遇,第四届世界华文传媒与华夏文明传播国际学术研讨会论文集,复旦大学出版社,2007
[36]罗灿英.在线性别vs.线下性别:网路互动中的性别形构.新闻学研究,第50期
[37] E·罗杰斯.创新的扩散.北京:中央编译出版社,2002
[38]吕亚力.民主在美国导读.见:民主在美国,台北:猫头鹰出版,2000
[39]陆谷逊.英汉大词典.上海译文出版社,1998
[40]梅罗维茨.消失的地域:电子媒介对社会行为的影响.北京:清华大学出版社,2002
[41]埃里克·麦克鲁汉,弗兰克·秦格龙编.麦克鲁汉精粹.何道宽,译.南京:南京大学出版社,2000
[42]普特南.繁荣的社群——社会资本与公共生活.见:李惠斌主编.社会资本与社会发展.北京:社会科学文献出版社,2000
[43]凌霄.大学生网络内容偏好、自我同一性与网络成瘾的关系.理论界,2005,(11):109~110
[44]桑标,贡晔.网络依赖与心理健康的关系——一项以大学生为对象的调查研究.当代青年研究,2001,(5):31~35
[45]沈模卫,李鹏,徐梅,等.大学生病理性互联网使用行为模式研究.华东师范大学学报(教育科学版),2004,(4) :63~71
[46] [美]斯蒂芬?李特约翰.人类传播理论.第7版,清华大学出版社,2004
[47]谭三勤,李增庆,曾腊初,等.病理性互联网使用的研究进展.国外医学·社会医学分册,2004 ,(3) :97~103
[48]陶振超.台湾地区全球信息网使用者调查.新竹市:交通大学传播研究所硕士论文,1996
[49]唐·泰普斯科特.数字化成长:网络世代的崛起.大连:东北财经大学出版社,1999
[50] [法]托克维尔.论美国的民主.董果良译.商务印书馆,1998
[51]彭云.政治信任、社会资本与媒介行为.新闻学研究,第79期:91~133
[52]彭兰.中国网络媒体的第一个十年,清华大学出版社,2005
[53]彭泗清.信任的建立机制:关系运作与法制手段.社会学研究,1999,(2):53~66
[54]吴廷俊,屠忠俊.网络新闻传播导论.华中科技大学出版社,2002
[55]汪向东.心理卫生评定量表手册.中国心理卫生杂志增订版,1993
[56]吴喜之.从数据到结论.中国统计出版社,2004
[57]汪震国.应高度重视青少年的社会化进程,福建论坛(经济社会版),1995,(1):
[58]吴明隆.SPSS统计应用实务:问卷分析与应用统计,科学出版社,2003
[59]翁秀琪.大众传播理论与实证.台北:三民书局,1992
[60]韦伯.儒教与道教.王容芬,译.商务印书馆,1995
[61]徐梅,张锋,朱海燕.大学生互联网使用动机模式研究.应用心理学,2004,(3) :8~13
[62]萧铭钧.台湾大学生网络使用行为、使用动机、满足程度与网络成瘾现象之初探.新竹市:交通大学传播研究所硕士论文,1998
[63]徐宗国译.Strauss,A.& Cortin, J.质性研究概论,台北巨流图书公司,1997
[64]向欣.网络人际互动对大学生心理的冲击和挑战,现代教育科学,2002,(5):67~70
[65]姚洪亮,王俊舫.网络人际互动对青年心理的冲击和挑战,中国青年研究,2000,(6):44~45
[66]袁方.社会研究方法教程.北京大学出版社,2006
[67]杨雪冬.社会资本:对一种新解释范式的探索.马克思主义与现实,1999,(3) :52～60
[68]易海燕,陈锦,杜晓新.中学生网络依赖程度、内容偏好及社会性发展的研究.中国特殊教育,2006,77(11):69～73
[69]殷海光.中国文化的展望,上海三联书店,2002
[70]庄锡昌.西方文化史.高等教育出版社,2004
[71]郑杭生.社会学概论.第三版,中国人民大学出版社,2003
[72]翟学伟.人情、面子与权力的再生产——情理社会中的社会交换方式.社会学研究,2004,(5):48~57
[73]张明新.网络信息的可信度研究:网民的视角.新闻与传播研究,2005,(2):17~29
[74]祝建华.不同渠道、不同选择的竞争机制:新媒体权衡需求理论.(香港)中国传媒报告(China Media Reports),2004年第2期
[75]郑素侠.2001~2006年内地网络传播研究现状的实证分析.河南社会科学,2007,(2):89~92
[76]张广利,陈仕中.社会资本理论发展的瓶颈定义及测量问题探讨.社会科学研究,2006,(2):102~106
[77]张广利,桂勇.社会资本:渊源·理论·局限.河北学刊,2003,(3):17~23
[78]张卿卿.网络的功与过:网络使用与政治参与及社会资产关系的探讨.新闻学研究,第86期
[79]张其仔.社会资本论:社会资本与经济增长.北京:社会科学文献出版社,2002.
[80]赵延东,罗家德.如何测量社会资本:一个经验研究综述.国外社会科学,2005,(2):18~24
[81]赵延东.“社会资本”理论述评.国外社会科学,1998,(3):18～21
[82]张国良主编.20世纪传播学经典文本.上海:复旦大学出版社,2003
[83]张文宏.社会资本:理论争辩与经验研究.社会学研究,2003,(4) :23～35
[84]张文宏.城市居民社会网络资本的阶层差异.社会学研究,2005,(4):65~81
[85]赵延东,风笑天.社会资本、人力资本与下岗职工的再就业.学术季刊,2000(2):139-146
[86]张咏华.媒介分析:传播技术神化的解读.上海:复旦大学出版社,2002
[87]张其仔.社会资本与经济增长.社会科学文献出版社,1997
[88]张春兴.张氏心理学辞典.台北市:东华书局,1989
[89]詹姆斯·S·科尔曼.社会理论的基础(上、下).邓方,译.社会科学文献出版社,1990
[90]张朝,于宗富.网络成瘾:——一种新的心理障碍.中国学校卫生,2003,24(5):512~513
[1] Burt, Ronald.(1992).Structural Holes: The Social Structure of Competition, Cambridge: Harvard University Press
[2] Brosnan,M.J.(1998).Technophobia——The Psychological Impact of Information Technology. London and New York: Routledge:12
[3] Coleman,J S .(1988).Social Capital in the Creation of Human Capital. American Journal of Sociology,(Supp.),S95~S120
[4] Coleman,J S.(1990). Foundations of social theory. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.
[5] Campbell, K., Marsden, P.& Hurlbert, J.(1986).Social resources and socioeconomic status, Social Networks,8(1)
[6] Davis, R. A. (2001 ).A cognitive - behavioral model of pathological internet use(PIU) . Computers in Human Behavior , 17 :187 ~195
[7] Cunningham & Walsh(1958).Videotowm.NewYork: Cunningham & Walsh Co. 1948-1957
[8] Coffin,T.(1955).The impact of television, American Psychologist,10:630-641
[9] Ducan,O.D.(1984).Notes on Social Measurement,Historical and Critical. New York:Russell Sage Foundation,226
[10] Fukuyama,Francis.(1996).Trust: The Social Virtues and The Creation of Prosperity, NY: Free Press
[11] Hoogle,M.(2002).Watching television and civic engagement, Press/Politics,7(2),84~104
[12] Janowitz, M.(1952/1967).The community press in an urban setting. Chicago: University of Chicago Press
[13] Hans-Bernd Brosius,& Dirk Engel. (1996).The causes of third-person effects: Unrealistic optimism, impersonal impact, or generalized negative attitudes towards media influence? International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 8:142-162
[14] Johnson, T. J. & Kaye, B. K. (2000). Using is believing: The influence of reliance on the credibility of online political information among politically interested Internet users. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 77(Winter) : 865~880.
[15] James K Scott, Thomas G Johnson.(2005).Bowling Alone but Online Together: Social Capital in E-Communities.Journal of the Community Development Society. Columbus.36:9~19
[16] Kraut,R,M.Patterson,V. Lundmark, S.Kiesler, et al.(1998).Internet Paradox: A Social Technology that Reduce Social Involvement and Psychological Well-being? American Psychologist ,53(9):1017~1031
[17] Katz, E., Blumer, J. G. & Gurevitch, M. (1974). Utilization of mass communication by individual. In Blumer, J. G. & Katz, E. (eds.). The use of communication, Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
[18] Katz, J. E.,&Rice, R. E. (2002). Social consequences of Internet use: Access,involvement, and interaction. MIT Press Cambridge, MA, USA.
[19] Katz,J.E.,R.E.Rice, and P. Aspden.(2001).The Internet,1995-2000:Access,Civic Involvement, and Social Interaction. American Behavioral Scientist, 45(3):405~419
[20] Lin, N.(1999).Social networks and status attainment, Annual Review of Sociology,25
[21] Lin, C. A. (1999). Online-service adoption likelihood. Journal of Advertising Research, 39, 79-89.
[22] Lin, N. (2002). Social capital: A theory of social structure and action.Cambridge University Press.
[23] Lin, N.,&John, S. (2002). Social capital: A theory ofsocial structure and action (structural analysis in the social sciences). Cambridge University Press.
[24] LaRose, R.,M.S.Eastin, and Gregg.( 2001).Reformulating the Internet Paradox: Social Congnitive Explanations of Internet Use and Depression. Journal of Online Behavior,1(2)
[25] Luhmann,N.(1979).Trust and Power,Chichester:JohnWiley&SonsLtd.
[26] Laws, S. (2003) .Research for Development: A practical guide. London: Save the Children, 298-301.
[27] Maria Raicheva. (2001).Blowing alone in a big small city: re-examining the relationship between social capital and mass media use. A Dissertation for the Doctor of Philosophy degree .Southern Illinois University
[28] M.Weil & L.D.(1997).Rosen.Technostress,New York:17~20
[29] Norris P.(1996).Does television erode social? A reply to Putnam. Political Science and Politics, 29,474~480
[30] Norris, Pippa (Ed.). (1999). Critical Citizens: Global Support for Democratic Government, Oxford University
[31] Norris, Pippa. (2002). Social capital and the news media.Press/Politics,7(1):3~8
[32] Nie,N.H.(2001).Sociability, Interpersonal Relations, and the Internet: Reconciling Conflicting Findings. American Behavioral Scientist,45(3):420~435
[33] Nie, N. H., Hillygus, S.,&Erbring, L. (2003). Internet use, interpersonal relations and sociability: Findings from a detailed time diary study. In: The Internet ineveryday life. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers
[34] Neo-Ludditism——Ludditism today in Retrospect.. http://publish.uwo.ca/mallenl/nild.htm
[35] Putnam, R. D. (1996). The strange disappearance of civic America. American Prospect, 24,34～48
[36] Putnam, R. D. (2000). Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of American community. New York: Simon & Schuster
[37] Putnam, R. D. (1993). Making democracy work: Civic traditions in modern Italy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press
[38] Potera C.Trappedintheweb.Psychology Today,1998,31:66~68.
[39] Paxton,P.(1999). Is social capital declining in the United States? A multiple indicator assessment. American Journal of Sociology,105(1):88~127
[40] Ross,L., & Nisbett, R.E.(1991). The person and the situation: perspectives of social psychology. Philadelphia: Temple University Press
[41] Rubin, A. M. (1984). Ritualized and instrumental television viewing. Journal of Communication, 34, 66-77.
[42] Rubin, A. M., & Perse, E. M. (1987). Audience activity and television news gratifications. Communication Research, 14, 58-84.
[43] Rubin, A. M, Perse, E. M, & Powell, R.A. (1985). Loneliness, para-social interaction, and local television news viewing. Human Communication Research, 12, 155-180.
[44] Rogers,E.M.Diffusion of Innovations(5th edition). New York:Free Press,1995
[45] Rojas, H., Shah, D. V., & Faber, R. J. (1996). For the good of others: Censorship and the third-person effect. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 8, 163-186.
[46] Sherrie S. Simms (2004).Internet use social and development. A Dissertation for the Doctor of Philosophy degree .Claremont Graduate University
[47] Shah,D.V., N.Kwak, and R.L. Holbert.(2001).Connecting and Disconnecting with Civic life: Patterns of Internet Use and the Production of Social Capital. PoliticalCommunication,18(2):141~162
[48] Stamm,E.,Fortini-Campbell,L.(1983).The relationship of community ties to newspaper subscribing and use. Journalism Monographs,84
[49] Stamm, K.,Emig,A.,and Hesse,M.(1997).The contribution of local media to community involvement. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly,74(1),97~107
[50] Shah,D.V.,J.M. McLeod and S.H.Yoon.(2001).Communication, Context, and Community: An Exploration of Print, Broadcast, and Internet Influence. Communication Research,28(4):464~506
[51] Shin D C, Johnson D M.Avowed happiness as an overall assessment of the quality of life .Social indicators research,1978,5:475~492
[52] Uslaner, E.(1998). Social Capital, Television and the‘Mean World’: Trust, Optimism and Civic Participation. Political Psychology, 19, 441～469.
[53] Uphoff,N..(2000). Understanding Social Capital: Learning from the Analysis and Experience of Participation. In P. Dasgupata & I. Serageldin (Eds),Social capital:A multifaceted perspective.Washington, DC:World Bank
[54] Uslaner,E.M.(2000).social capital and the Net. Communications and the ACM,43(12):60~64
[55] Uslaner Eric M.(1998).Social capital, Television, and the mean world: trust, optimism, and civic participation. Political Psychology,12
[56] Wellman,B., A. Q.Haase, J. Witte, et al. (2001).Does the Internet increase, decrease, or supplement social capital? Social networks, participation, and community commitment. American Behavioral Scientist,45( 3):436~445
[57] Wellman,B.,&Haythornthwaite,C.A.(2002).The Internet in everyday life. Blackwell.
[58] W.Phillips Daviso.(1983).The Third-Person Effect in Communication .Public Opinion Quarterly, 47,(1):1～15
[59] Weil,M&Rosen, L.D.(1995a).Adult and Teenage lose of Consumer,Business,and Entertainment Technology:potholes on the information superhighway?Journal of Consumer Affairs,29(1):55~58
[60] Weil,M & Rosen, L. D.(1995b).A Study of Technological Sophistication and Teehnophobia in University Students From 23 Countries.Computers in Human Behavior,1(1): 95~133
[61] Weil,M & Rosen, L. D.(1997).Technostress. New York:1997
[62] Weiss,W.(1968).The Impact of Mass Media.In G. Lindsay & E.Aronson(Eds.).
[63] Young K S.(1996).Internet addiction: the emergence of a new clinical disorder. The 104th annual meeting of the American Psychological Association ,Toronto : APA
3[美]肯尼思·阿罗:《放弃社会资本》,见:曹荣湘选编《走出囚徒困境——社会资本与制度分析》,上海:三联书店,2003年版,第225—228页.
5中译本《社会资本——关于社会结构与行动的理论》,张磊译,上海人民出版社,2005
13.该数据来源于湖北省教育厅网站,http://www.hbe.gov.cn/content.php?id=3275
14王宇中:《大学生生活满意度评定量表》,见《行为医学量表手册》,中华医学电子音像出版社2005年版。
21见:http://www.66163.com/Fujian_w/news/bc/gb/20061024/tbxx105439.html
[1] [美]艾尔·巴比.社会研究方法基础.第8版.邱泽奇译.北京大学出版社,2002
[2]边燕杰.城市居民社会资本的来源及作用:网络观点与调查发现.中国社会科学,2004,(3):136~146
[3]白羽.大学生网络依赖及其团体干预方法.青年研究,2005,(5):42~49
[4]卜卫,刘晓红.中国社科院新闻与传播研究所2003年青少年与互联网报告,2003
[5]蔡骐,刘维红.对传播学中使用与满足理论的再探索.湖南大众传媒职业技术学院学报,2004,4(1):5~10
[6]陈向明.质的研究方法与社会科学研究.教育科学出版社,2000
[7]陈蓓丽,张熠.社会资本与大学生人际交往之关系探究,2006,(10):30~32
[8]陈崇山,孙五三.媒介·人·现代化.中国社会科学出版社,1997
[9]陈世敏.大众传播与社会变迁.台北:三民书局发行,民国七十二年
[10] David?E?Morrison著.寻找方法:焦点小组和大众传播研究的发展,柯惠新、王宁(译).新华出版社,2004
[11]陈红兵.国外技术恐惧研究述评,自然辩证法研究,2001,23(4):16~21
[12]代方震,高丽.大学生上网成瘾问题初探.河北师范大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2006,(1):16~21
[13] [美]戴维?波普诺著.社会学.中国人民大学出版社,1999
[14]邓建国.Web2.0时代的互联网使用行为与网民社会资本之关系考察.复旦大学博士学位论文,2007
[15]邓卓明主编.涌浪中的理性审视.重庆出版社,1999
[16]丁建洋.大学生社团开发模型研究.民办教育研究,2006,(6):65～67
[17]费孝通.乡土中国.北京;三联书店,1984
[18]福山.信任:社会德性与繁荣的创造.李宛蓉译,台湾立绪文化事业有限公司,1998
[19]龚书铎.中国近代文化概论.中华书局出版,2000
[20]高秋凤,朱秋霞,徐健,等.大学生互联网使用偏好、使用动机及病理性互联网使用(PIU)现状调查研究.考试周刊,2007,(32):17~19
[21]黄光国.人情与面子:中国人的权力游戏.见:黄光国编.中国人的权力游戏.台北:巨流图书公司,1988
[22]胡子祥,陈洁.当代大学生社会参与行为的实证研究,中国青年研究,2006,(10):38~42
[23]胡荣,李静雅.城市居民信任的构成及影响因素.社会,2006,26(6):
[24]金勇进,蒋妍.抽样技术.中国人民大学出版社,2002
[25]柯惠新,祝建华,、孙江华.传播统计学.北京广播学院出版社,2003
[26] [美]洛厄里,德弗勒.大众传播效果研究的里程碑,中国人民大学出版社,2004
[27]林南.社会资本——关于社会结构与行动的理论.上海:上海人民出版社, 2005
[28]卢纹岱.SPSS for Windows统计分析(第三版),电子工业出版社,2006
[29]刘少杰.后现代西方社会学理论.社会科学文献出版社,2002
[30]刘英.因特网与社会资本——对回龙观社区网的跟踪调查.中国人民大学国际关系学院硕士学论文,2005
[31]刘柳.虚拟社区中的人际互动.南京邮电大学学报(社会科学版),2006,8(2):36~40
[32]李惠斌.社会资本与社会发展引论.马克思主义与现实,2000,(2):35～40
[33]李伟民.梁玉成.特殊信任与普遍信任:中国人信任的结构与特征.社会学研究,2002,(3):
[34]李秀敏.互联网内容偏好与大学生人格特质关系的研究.心理科学,2004,27(3):559~562
[35]罗文辉,梁永炽,熊澄宇,等.互联网对传统媒体的时间取代效果——北京、台北、香港的比较研究.见:“全球化华文媒体的发展和机遇,第四届世界华文传媒与华夏文明传播国际学术研讨会论文集,复旦大学出版社,2007
[36]罗灿英.在线性别vs.线下性别:网路互动中的性别形构.新闻学研究,第50期
[37] E·罗杰斯.创新的扩散.北京:中央编译出版社,2002
[38]吕亚力.民主在美国导读.见:民主在美国,台北:猫头鹰出版,2000
[39]陆谷逊.英汉大词典.上海译文出版社,1998
[40]梅罗维茨.消失的地域:电子媒介对社会行为的影响.北京:清华大学出版社,2002
[41]埃里克·麦克鲁汉,弗兰克·秦格龙编.麦克鲁汉精粹.何道宽,译.南京:南京大学出版社,2000
[42]普特南.繁荣的社群——社会资本与公共生活.见:李惠斌主编.社会资本与社会发展.北京:社会科学文献出版社,2000
[43]凌霄.大学生网络内容偏好、自我同一性与网络成瘾的关系.理论界,2005,(11):109~110
[44]桑标,贡晔.网络依赖与心理健康的关系——一项以大学生为对象的调查研究.当代青年研究,2001,(5):31~35
[45]沈模卫,李鹏,徐梅,等.大学生病理性互联网使用行为模式研究.华东师范大学学报(教育科学版),2004,(4) :63~71
[46] [美]斯蒂芬?李特约翰.人类传播理论.第7版,清华大学出版社,2004
[47]谭三勤,李增庆,曾腊初,等.病理性互联网使用的研究进展.国外医学·社会医学分册,2004 ,(3) :97~103
[48]陶振超.台湾地区全球信息网使用者调查.新竹市:交通大学传播研究所硕士论文,1996
[49]唐·泰普斯科特.数字化成长:网络世代的崛起.大连:东北财经大学出版社,1999
[50] [法]托克维尔.论美国的民主.董果良译.商务印书馆,1998
[51]彭云.政治信任、社会资本与媒介行为.新闻学研究,第79期:91~133
[52]彭兰.中国网络媒体的第一个十年,清华大学出版社,2005
[53]彭泗清.信任的建立机制:关系运作与法制手段.社会学研究,1999,(2):53~66
[54]吴廷俊,屠忠俊.网络新闻传播导论.华中科技大学出版社,2002
[55]汪向东.心理卫生评定量表手册.中国心理卫生杂志增订版,1993
[56]吴喜之.从数据到结论.中国统计出版社,2004
[57]汪震国.应高度重视青少年的社会化进程,福建论坛(经济社会版),1995,(1):
[58]吴明隆.SPSS统计应用实务:问卷分析与应用统计,科学出版社,2003
[59]翁秀琪.大众传播理论与实证.台北:三民书局,1992
[60]韦伯.儒教与道教.王容芬,译.商务印书馆,1995
[61]徐梅,张锋,朱海燕.大学生互联网使用动机模式研究.应用心理学,2004,(3) :8~13
[62]萧铭钧.台湾大学生网络使用行为、使用动机、满足程度与网络成瘾现象之初探.新竹市:交通大学传播研究所硕士论文,1998
[63]徐宗国译.Strauss,A.& Cortin, J.质性研究概论,台北巨流图书公司,1997
[64]向欣.网络人际互动对大学生心理的冲击和挑战,现代教育科学,2002,(5):67~70
[65]姚洪亮,王俊舫.网络人际互动对青年心理的冲击和挑战,中国青年研究,2000,(6):44~45
[66]袁方.社会研究方法教程.北京大学出版社,2006
[67]杨雪冬.社会资本:对一种新解释范式的探索.马克思主义与现实,1999,(3) :52～60
[68]易海燕,陈锦,杜晓新.中学生网络依赖程度、内容偏好及社会性发展的研究.中国特殊教育,2006,77(11):69～73
[69]殷海光.中国文化的展望,上海三联书店,2002
[70]庄锡昌.西方文化史.高等教育出版社,2004
[71]郑杭生.社会学概论.第三版,中国人民大学出版社,2003
[72]翟学伟.人情、面子与权力的再生产——情理社会中的社会交换方式.社会学研究,2004,(5):48~57
[73]张明新.网络信息的可信度研究:网民的视角.新闻与传播研究,2005,(2):17~29
[74]祝建华.不同渠道、不同选择的竞争机制:新媒体权衡需求理论.(香港)中国传媒报告(China Media Reports),2004年第2期
[75]郑素侠.2001~2006年内地网络传播研究现状的实证分析.河南社会科学,2007,(2):89~92
[76]张广利,陈仕中.社会资本理论发展的瓶颈定义及测量问题探讨.社会科学研究,2006,(2):102~106
[77]张广利,桂勇.社会资本:渊源·理论·局限.河北学刊,2003,(3):17~23
[78]张卿卿.网络的功与过:网络使用与政治参与及社会资产关系的探讨.新闻学研究,第86期
[79]张其仔.社会资本论:社会资本与经济增长.北京:社会科学文献出版社,2002.
[80]赵延东,罗家德.如何测量社会资本:一个经验研究综述.国外社会科学,2005,(2):18~24
[81]赵延东.“社会资本”理论述评.国外社会科学,1998,(3):18～21
[82]张国良主编.20世纪传播学经典文本.上海:复旦大学出版社,2003
[83]张文宏.社会资本:理论争辩与经验研究.社会学研究,2003,(4) :23～35
[84]张文宏.城市居民社会网络资本的阶层差异.社会学研究,2005,(4):65~81
[85]赵延东,风笑天.社会资本、人力资本与下岗职工的再就业.学术季刊,2000(2):139-146
[86]张咏华.媒介分析:传播技术神化的解读.上海:复旦大学出版社,2002
[87]张其仔.社会资本与经济增长.社会科学文献出版社,1997
[88]张春兴.张氏心理学辞典.台北市:东华书局,1989
[89]詹姆斯·S·科尔曼.社会理论的基础(上、下).邓方,译.社会科学文献出版社,1990
[90]张朝,于宗富.网络成瘾:——一种新的心理障碍.中国学校卫生,2003,24(5):512~513
[1] Burt, Ronald.(1992).Structural Holes: The Social Structure of Competition, Cambridge: Harvard University Press
[2] Brosnan,M.J.(1998).Technophobia——The Psychological Impact of Information Technology. London and New York: Routledge:12
[3] Coleman,J S .(1988).Social Capital in the Creation of Human Capital. American Journal of Sociology,(Supp.),S95~S120
[4] Coleman,J S.(1990). Foundations of social theory. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.
[5] Campbell, K., Marsden, P.& Hurlbert, J.(1986).Social resources and socioeconomic status, Social Networks,8(1)
[6] Davis, R. A. (2001 ).A cognitive - behavioral model of pathological internet use(PIU) . Computers in Human Behavior , 17 :187 ~195
[7] Cunningham & Walsh(1958).Videotowm.NewYork: Cunningham & Walsh Co. 1948-1957
[8] Coffin,T.(1955).The impact of television, American Psychologist,10:630-641
[9] Ducan,O.D.(1984).Notes on Social Measurement,Historical and Critical. New York:Russell Sage Foundation,226
[10] Fukuyama,Francis.(1996).Trust: The Social Virtues and The Creation of Prosperity, NY: Free Press
[11] Hoogle,M.(2002).Watching television and civic engagement, Press/Politics,7(2),84~104
[12] Janowitz, M.(1952/1967).The community press in an urban setting. Chicago: University of Chicago Press
[13] Hans-Bernd Brosius,& Dirk Engel. (1996).The causes of third-person effects: Unrealistic optimism, impersonal impact, or generalized negative attitudes towards media influence? International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 8:142-162
[14] Johnson, T. J. & Kaye, B. K. (2000). Using is believing: The influence of reliance on the credibility of online political information among politically interested Internet users. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 77(Winter) : 865~880.
[15] James K Scott, Thomas G Johnson.(2005).Bowling Alone but Online Together: Social Capital in E-Communities.Journal of the Community Development Society. Columbus.36:9~19
[16] Kraut,R,M.Patterson,V. Lundmark, S.Kiesler, et al.(1998).Internet Paradox: A Social Technology that Reduce Social Involvement and Psychological Well-being? American Psychologist ,53(9):1017~1031
[17] Katz, E., Blumer, J. G. & Gurevitch, M. (1974). Utilization of mass communication by individual. In Blumer, J. G. & Katz, E. (eds.). The use of communication, Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
[18] Katz, J. E.,&Rice, R. E. (2002). Social consequences of Internet use: Access,involvement, and interaction. MIT Press Cambridge, MA, USA.
[19] Katz,J.E.,R.E.Rice, and P. Aspden.(2001).The Internet,1995-2000:Access,Civic Involvement, and Social Interaction. American Behavioral Scientist, 45(3):405~419
[20] Lin, N.(1999).Social networks and status attainment, Annual Review of Sociology,25
[21] Lin, C. A. (1999). Online-service adoption likelihood. Journal of Advertising Research, 39, 79-89.
[22] Lin, N. (2002). Social capital: A theory of social structure and action.Cambridge University Press.
[23] Lin, N.,&John, S. (2002). Social capital: A theory ofsocial structure and action (structural analysis in the social sciences). Cambridge University Press.
[24] LaRose, R.,M.S.Eastin, and Gregg.( 2001).Reformulating the Internet Paradox: Social Congnitive Explanations of Internet Use and Depression. Journal of Online Behavior,1(2)
[25] Luhmann,N.(1979).Trust and Power,Chichester:JohnWiley&SonsLtd.
[26] Laws, S. (2003) .Research for Development: A practical guide. London: Save the Children, 298-301.
[27] Maria Raicheva. (2001).Blowing alone in a big small city: re-examining the relationship between social capital and mass media use. A Dissertation for the Doctor of Philosophy degree .Southern Illinois University
[28] M.Weil & L.D.(1997).Rosen.Technostress,New York:17~20
[29] Norris P.(1996).Does television erode social? A reply to Putnam. Political Science and Politics, 29,474~480
[30] Norris, Pippa (Ed.). (1999). Critical Citizens: Global Support for Democratic Government, Oxford University
[31] Norris, Pippa. (2002). Social capital and the news media.Press/Politics,7(1):3~8
[32] Nie,N.H.(2001).Sociability, Interpersonal Relations, and the Internet: Reconciling Conflicting Findings. American Behavioral Scientist,45(3):420~435
[33] Nie, N. H., Hillygus, S.,&Erbring, L. (2003). Internet use, interpersonal relations and sociability: Findings from a detailed time diary study. In: The Internet ineveryday life. Oxford: Blackwell Publishers
[34] Neo-Ludditism——Ludditism today in Retrospect.. http://publish.uwo.ca/mallenl/nild.htm
[35] Putnam, R. D. (1996). The strange disappearance of civic America. American Prospect, 24,34～48
[36] Putnam, R. D. (2000). Bowling alone: The collapse and revival of American community. New York: Simon & Schuster
[37] Putnam, R. D. (1993). Making democracy work: Civic traditions in modern Italy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press
[38] Potera C.Trappedintheweb.Psychology Today,1998,31:66~68.
[39] Paxton,P.(1999). Is social capital declining in the United States? A multiple indicator assessment. American Journal of Sociology,105(1):88~127
[40] Ross,L., & Nisbett, R.E.(1991). The person and the situation: perspectives of social psychology. Philadelphia: Temple University Press
[41] Rubin, A. M. (1984). Ritualized and instrumental television viewing. Journal of Communication, 34, 66-77.
[42] Rubin, A. M., & Perse, E. M. (1987). Audience activity and television news gratifications. Communication Research, 14, 58-84.
[43] Rubin, A. M, Perse, E. M, & Powell, R.A. (1985). Loneliness, para-social interaction, and local television news viewing. Human Communication Research, 12, 155-180.
[44] Rogers,E.M.Diffusion of Innovations(5th edition). New York:Free Press,1995
[45] Rojas, H., Shah, D. V., & Faber, R. J. (1996). For the good of others: Censorship and the third-person effect. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 8, 163-186.
[46] Sherrie S. Simms (2004).Internet use social and development. A Dissertation for the Doctor of Philosophy degree .Claremont Graduate University
[47] Shah,D.V., N.Kwak, and R.L. Holbert.(2001).Connecting and Disconnecting with Civic life: Patterns of Internet Use and the Production of Social Capital. PoliticalCommunication,18(2):141~162
[48] Stamm,E.,Fortini-Campbell,L.(1983).The relationship of community ties to newspaper subscribing and use. Journalism Monographs,84
[49] Stamm, K.,Emig,A.,and Hesse,M.(1997).The contribution of local media to community involvement. Journalism and Mass Communication Quarterly,74(1),97~107
[50] Shah,D.V.,J.M. McLeod and S.H.Yoon.(2001).Communication, Context, and Community: An Exploration of Print, Broadcast, and Internet Influence. Communication Research,28(4):464~506
[51] Shin D C, Johnson D M.Avowed happiness as an overall assessment of the quality of life .Social indicators research,1978,5:475~492
[52] Uslaner, E.(1998). Social Capital, Television and the‘Mean World’: Trust, Optimism and Civic Participation. Political Psychology, 19, 441～469.
[53] Uphoff,N..(2000). Understanding Social Capital: Learning from the Analysis and Experience of Participation. In P. Dasgupata & I. Serageldin (Eds),Social capital:A multifaceted perspective.Washington, DC:World Bank
[54] Uslaner,E.M.(2000).social capital and the Net. Communications and the ACM,43(12):60~64
[55] Uslaner Eric M.(1998).Social capital, Television, and the mean world: trust, optimism, and civic participation. Political Psychology,12
[56] Wellman,B., A. Q.Haase, J. Witte, et al. (2001).Does the Internet increase, decrease, or supplement social capital? Social networks, participation, and community commitment. American Behavioral Scientist,45( 3):436~445
[57] Wellman,B.,&Haythornthwaite,C.A.(2002).The Internet in everyday life. Blackwell.
[58] W.Phillips Daviso.(1983).The Third-Person Effect in Communication .Public Opinion Quarterly, 47,(1):1～15
[59] Weil,M&Rosen, L.D.(1995a).Adult and Teenage lose of Consumer,Business,and Entertainment Technology:potholes on the information superhighway?Journal of Consumer Affairs,29(1):55~58
[60] Weil,M & Rosen, L. D.(1995b).A Study of Technological Sophistication and Teehnophobia in University Students From 23 Countries.Computers in Human Behavior,1(1): 95~133
[61] Weil,M & Rosen, L. D.(1997).Technostress. New York:1997
[62] Weiss,W.(1968).The Impact of Mass Media.In G. Lindsay & E.Aronson(Eds.).
[63] Young K S.(1996).Internet addiction: the emergence of a new clinical disorder. The 104th annual meeting of the American Psychological Association ,Toronto : APA