More Than Just Gaze: An Experimental Vignette Study Examining How Phone-Gazing and Newspaper-Gazing and Phubbing-While-Speaking and Phubbing-While-Listening Compare in Their Effect on Affiliation

References

• Aguinis, H., & Bradley, K. J. (2014). Best practice recommendations for designing and implementing experimental vignette methodology studies. Organizational Research Methods, 17(4), 351–371. doi:10.1177/1094428114547952
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bavelas, J. B., Coates, L., & Johnson, T. (2012). Listener responses as a collaborative process: The role of gaze. Journal of Communication, 52, 566–580. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.2002.tb02562.x
   Google Scholar
• Burgoon, J. K., & Hale, J. L. (1988). Nonverbal expectancy violations: Model elaboration and application to immediacy behaviors. Communication Monographs, 55, 58–79. doi:10.1080/03637758809376158
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chartrand, T., & Bargh, J. (1999). The chameleon effect: The perception-behavior link and social interaction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76, 893–910.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chotpitayasunondh, V., & Douglas, K. M. (2018). The effects of “phubbing” on social interaction. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 48, 304–316. https://doi.org/10.1111/jasp.12506
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ellsworth, P., & Ross, L. (1975). Intimacy in response to direct gaze. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 11, 592–613. doi:10.1016/0022-1031(75)90010-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fortunati, L. (2002). The mobile phone: Towards new categories and social relations. Information, communication & society, 5(4), 513–528. https://doi.org/10.1080/13691180208538803
   Google Scholar
• Freeth, M., Foulham, T., & Kingstone, A. (2013). What affects social attention? Social presence, eye contact and autistic traits. PloS One, 8(1), e53286. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0053286
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gergen, K. J. (2002). The challenge of absent presence. In J. E. Katz & M. Aakhus (Eds.), Perpetual contact: Mobile communication, private talk, public performance (pp. 227–241). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Halpern, D., & Katz, J. E. (2017). Texting’s consequences for romantic relationships: A cross-lagged analysis highlights its risks. Computers in Human Behavior, 71, 386–394. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2017.01.051
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Karadağ, E., Tosuntaş, Ş. B., Erzen, E., Duru, P., Bostan, N., Şahin, B. M., … Babadağ, B. (2016). The virtual world’s current addiction: Phubbing. Addicta: Turkish Journal on Addictions, 3(2), 252–269. doi:10.15805/addicta.2016.3.0013
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Krasnova, H., Abramova, O., Notter, I., & Baumann, A. (2016, June). Why phubbing is toxic for your relationship: Understanding the role of Smartphone Jealousy among “Generation y” users. Paper presented at the European Conference on Information Systems, Istanbul, Turkey.
   Google Scholar
• Marci, C. D., & Orr, S. P. (2006). The effect of emotional distance on psychological concordance and perceived empathy between patient and interviewer. Applied Psychophysiology and Biofeedback, 31, 115–128. doi:10.1007/s10484-006-9008-4
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mehrabian, A. (1968). Inference of attitudes from the posture, orientation, and distance of a communicator. Journal of consulting and clinical psychology, 32(3), 296. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/h0025906
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Miller-Ott, A. E., & Kelly, L. (2015). The presence of cell phones in romantic partner face-to-face interactions: An expectancy violation theory approach. Southern Communication Journal, 80, 253–270. doi:10.1080/1041794X.2015.1055371
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Miller-Ott, A. E., & Kelly, L. (2017). A Politeness theory analysis of cell-phone usage in the presence of friends. Communication Studies, 68, 190–207. doi:10.1080/10510974.2017.1299024
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Misra, S., Cheng, L., Genevie, J., & Yuan, M. (2016). The iPhone effect: the quality of in-person social interactions in the presence of mobile devices. Environment and Behavior, 48(2), 275–298.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Paunonen, S. V., & Jackson, D. N. (1996). The Jackson Personality Inventory and the Five Factor model of personality. Journal of Research in Personality, 30(1), 42–59. doi:10.1006/jrpe.1996.0003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Przybylski, A. K., & Weinstein, N. (2013). Can you connect with me now? How the presence of mobile communication technology influences face-to-face conversation quality. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 30(3), 237–246. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407512453827
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shepherd, S. V. (2010). Following gaze: Gaze-following behavior as a window into social cognition. Frontiers in Integrative Neuroscience, 4, 5.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Vanden Abeele, M. M., Antheunis, M. L., & Schouten, A. P. (2016). The effect of mobile messaging during a conversation on impression formation and interaction quality. Computers in Human Behavior, 62, 562–569. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2016.04.005
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vorderer, P., Krömer, N., & Schneider, F. M. (2016). Permanently online–Permanently connected: Explorations into university students’ use of social media and mobile smart devices. Computers in Human Behavior, 63, 694–703. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.05.085
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang, Y., Ramsey, R., & Hamilton, A. (2011). The control of mimicry by eye contact is mediated by medial prefrontal cortex. The Journal of Neuroscience, 31, 12001–12010. doi:10.1523/JNEUROSCI.0845-11.2011
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wiggins, J. S. (1979). A psychological taxonomy of trait-descriptive terms: The interpersonal domain. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37(3), 395. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.37.3.395
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wykowska, A., Wiese, E., Prosser, A., & Müller, H. J. (2014). Beliefs about the minds of others influence how we process sensory information. PLoS One, 9(4), e94339. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0094339
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar