research-article

Cyberloafing and social desirability bias among students and employees

Authors:

zcan zgr DursunAuthors Info & Claims

Computers in Human Behavior, Volume 72, Issue C

Pages 87 - 95

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.02.043

Published: 01 July 2017 Publication History

Abstract

This study addressed the prevalence of cyberloafing and social desirability bias among 1339 students and 996 jobholders. An online survey was administered which included a five-factor cyberloafing scale and a two-factor social desirability scale. Each measure revealed acceptable fit values in confirmatory factor analyses. Findings showed that different types of cyberloafing had different prevalence rates. Students surpassed employees and males surpassed females with regard to overall cyberloafing scores. However, different types of cyberloafing revealed different patterns in individual comparisons. Employees surpassed students in terms of the impression management component of social desirability. Cyberloafing and social desirability were positively related, which implied the need for including social desirability as a covariate in further research. A recent cyberloafing scale was confirmed across students and employees.Different types of cyberloafing had different prevalence rates.Males and females demonstrated different cyberloafing patterns.Students and employees differed with regard to cyberloafing.Employees surpassed students in terms of impression management.

References

[1]

A. Aghaz, A. Sheikh, Cyberloafing and job burnout: An investigation in the knowledge intensive sector, Computers in Human Behavior, 62 (2016) 51-60.

Digital Library

[2]

I. Ajzen, From intentions to actions: A theory of planned behavior, in: Action control: From cognition to behavior, Springer, Berlin Heidelberg, 1985, pp. 11-39.

[3]

I. Ajzen, M. Fishbein, From intentions to actions: A theory of planned behavior, in: Actioncontrol: From cognitions to behavior, Springer, Heidelberg, 1985, pp. 11-39.

[4]

Y. Akbulut, Exploration of the antecedents of digital piracy through a structural equation model, Computers & Education, 78 (2014) 294-305.

Digital Library

[5]

Y. Akbulut, Predictors of inconsistent responding in web surveys, Internet Research, 25 (2015) 131-147.

[6]

Y. Akbulut, .. Dursun, O. Dnmez, Y.L. ahin, In search of a measure to investigate cyberloafing in educational settings, Computers in Human Behavior, 55 (2016) 616-625.

Digital Library

[7]

A. Akn, ki boyutlu sosyal istenirlik leinin gelitirilmesi ve psikometrik zelliklerinin aratrlmas (Two-dimensional social desirability scale: The study of validity and reliability), Gazi niversitesi Eitim Fakltesi Dergisi, 30 (2010) 771-784.

[8]

G.S. Alder, M. Schminke, T.W. Noel, M. Kuenzi, Employee reactions to internet monitoring: The moderating role of ethical orientation, Journal of Business Ethics, 80 (2008) 481-498.

[9]

C.S. Andreassen, T. Torsheim, S. Pallesen, Predictors of use of social network sites at work - a specific type of cyberloafing, Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 19 (2014) 906-921.

Digital Library

[10]

H.J. Arnold, D.C. Feldman, Social desirability response bias in self-report choice situations, Academy of Management Journal, 24 (1981) 377-385.

[11]

K. Askew, J.E. Buckner, M.U. Taing, A. Ilie, J.A. Bauer, M.D. Coovert, Explaining cyberloafing: The role of the theory of planned behavior, Computers in Human Behavior, 36 (2014) 510-519.

Digital Library

[12]

G. Avcolu, Internet survey applications in social sciences: Response rate, data quality, sample problems and solutions, International Journal of Human Science, 11 (2014) 89-113.

[13]

F. Awwad, A. Ayesh, S. Awwad, Are laptops distracting educational tools in classrooms, Social and Behavioural Sciences, 103 (2013) 154-160.

[14]

F. Baltar, I. Brunet, Social research 2.0: Virtual snowball sampling method using Facebook, Internet Research, 22 (2012) 57-74.

[15]

M.H. Baturay, S. Toker, An investigation of the impact of demographics on cyberloafing from an educational setting angle, Computers in Human Behavior, 50 (2015) 358-366.

Digital Library

[16]

R.F. Baumeister, M. Muraven, D.M. Tice, Ego depletion: A resource model of volition, self-regulation, and controlled processing, Social Cognition, 18 (2000) 130-150.

[17]

S.M. Bianchi, M.A. Milkie, L.C. Sayer, J.P. Robinson, Is anyone doing the housework? Trends in the gender division of household labor, Social Forces, 79 (2000) 191-228.

[18]

A.L. Blanchard, C.A. Henle, Correlates of different forms of cyberloafing: The role of norms and external locus of control, Computers in Human Behavior, 24 (2008) 1067-1084.

Digital Library

[19]

F.D. Blau, L.M. Kahn, Gender differences in pay, Journal of Economic Perspectives, 14 (2000) 75-99.

[20]

G. Blau, Y. Yang, K. Ward-Cook, Testing a measure of cyberloafing, Journal of Allied Health, 35 (2006) 9-17.

[21]

W. Block, Cyberslacking, business ethics and managerial economics, Journal of Business Ethics, 33 (2001) 225-231.

[22]

M. Bosnjak, T.L. Tuten, Prepaid and promised incentives in web surveys: An experiment, Social Science Computer Review, 21 (2003) 208-217.

Digital Library

[23]

R.L. Brock, R.A. Barry, E. Lawrence, J. Dey, J. Rolffs, Internet administration of paper-and-pencil questionnaires used in couple research: Assessing psychometric equivalence, Assessment, 19 (2012) 226-242.

[24]

R. Castro, Inconsistent respondents and sensitive questions, Field Methods, 25 (2013) 283-298.

[25]

D. Dalton, M. Ortegren, Gender differences in ethics research: The importance of controlling for the social desirability response bias, Journal of Business Ethics, 103 (2011) 73-93.

[26]

M.F. Davies, Socially desirable responding and impression management in the endorsement of love styles, The Journal of Psychology Interdisciplinary and Applied., 135 (2001) 562-570.

[27]

M.M. Denniston, N.D. Brener, L. Kann, D.K. Eaton, T. McManus, T.M. Kyle, Comparison of paper-and-pencil versus Web administration of the Youth Risk Behavior Survey (YRBS): Participation, data quality, and perceived privacy and anonymity, Computers in Human Behavior, 26 (2010) 1054-1060.

Digital Library

[28]

R.F. DeVellis, Scale development: Theory and applications, Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA, 2003.

[29]

R.F. DeVellis, Scale development: Theory and applications, Sage, London, 2012.

[30]

J.P. Dickson, Improving survey questions: Design and evaluation, Journal of Marketing Research, 34 (1997) 296-298.

[31]

A. Doane, M.L. Kelley, E.S. Chiang, M.A. ve Padilla, Development of the cyberbullying experiences survey, Emerging Adulthood, 1 (2013) 207-218.

[32]

O. Dnmez, Y. Akbulut, Social desirability bias in cyberbullying research, Educational Technology: Theory and Practice, 6 (2016) 1-18.

[33]

R.J. Fisher, J.E. Katz, Social desirability bias and the validity of self-reported values, Psychology & Marketing, 17 (2000) 105-120.

[34]

R. Gambles, S. Lewis, R. Rapoport, The myth of work-life balance: The challenge of our time for men, women and societies, John Wiley & Sons, West Sussex, 2006.

[35]

R.K. Garrett, J.N. Danziger, On cyberslacking: Workplace status and personal Internet use at work, Cyberpsychology & Behavior, 11 (2008) 287-292.

[36]

J. Glassman, M. Prosch, B.B.M. Shao, To monitor or not to monitor: Effectiveness of a cyberloafing countermeasure, Information & Management, 52 (2015) 170-182.

[37]

S. Greengard, The high cost of cyberslacking, Workforce, 79 (2000) 22-24.

[38]

E. Hedman, B. Ljtsson, C. Rck, T. Furmark, P. Carlbring, N. Lindefors, Internet administration of self-report measures commonly used in research on social anxiety disorder: A psychometric evaluation, Computers in Human Behavior, 26 (2010) 736-740.

Digital Library

[39]

D. Hooper, J. Coughlan, M.R. Mullen, Structural equation modelling: Guidelines for determining model fit, The Electronic Journal of Business Research Methods, 6 (2008) 53-60.

[40]

L.T. Hu, P.M. Bentler, Cutoff criteria for fit indices in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives, Structural Equation Modeling, 6 (1999) 1-55.

[41]

S.W. Huck, Reading statistics and research (, Pearson, Boston, 2012.

[42]

A. Joinson, Social desirability, anonymity, and Internet-based questionnaires, Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 31 (1999) 433-438.

[43]

R. Junco, In-class multitasking and academic performance, Computers in Human Behavior, 28 (2012) 2236-2243.

Digital Library

[44]

F.G. Karaoglan-Ylmaz, R. Ylmaz, H.T. ztrk, B. Sezer, T. Karademir, Cyberloafing as a barrier to the successful integration of information and communication technologies into teaching and learning environments, Computers in Human Behavior, 45 (2015) 290-298.

Digital Library

[45]

R.A. Kass, H.E.A. Tinsley, Factor analysis, Journal of Leisure Research, 11 (1979) 120-138.

[46]

M.F. King, G.C. Bruner, Social desirability bias: A neglected aspect of validity testing, Psychology and Marketing, 17 (2000) 79-103.

[47]

R.B. Kline, Principles and practice of structural equation modeling, The Guilford Press, New York, 2011.

[48]

I. Krumpal, Determinants of social desirability bias in sensitive surveys: A literature review, Quality & Quantity, 47 (2013) 2025-2047.

[49]

P.Z.M. de Lara, Relationship between organizational justice and cyberloafing in the workplace: Has anomia a say in the matter?, CyberPsychology & Behavior, 10 (2007) 464-470.

[50]

R.M. Lee, C.M. Renzetti, The problems of researching sensitive topics an overview and introduction, The American Behavioral Scientist, 33 (1990) 510-528.

[51]

B. Liberman, G. Seidman, K.Y.A. McKenna, L.E. Buffardi, Employee job attitudes and organizational characteristics as predictors of cyberloafing, Computers in Human Behavior, 27 (2011) 2192-2199.

Digital Library

[52]

V.K.G. Lim, The IT way of loafing on the job: Cyberloafing, neutralizing and organizational justice, Journal of Organizational Behavior, 23 (2002) 675-694.

[53]

V.K.G. Lim, D.J.Q. Chen, Cyberloafing at the workplace: Gain or drain on work?, Behaviour & Information Technology, 31 (2009) 343-353.

Digital Library

[54]

V.K. Lim, T.S. Teo, Prevalence, perceived seriousness, justification and regulation of cyberloafing in Singapore: An exploratory study, Information & Management, 42 (2005) 1081-1093.

Digital Library

[55]

J. McBride, J. Milligan, J. Nichols, Cyberslacking" in the classroom: The reactions of classroom teachers, College Student Journal, 47 (2013) 212-218.

[56]

S.P. Merydith, H.T. Prout, J. Blaha, Social desirability and behavior rating scales: An exploratory study with the child behavior checklist/418, Psychology in the Schools, 40 (2003) 225-235.

[57]

A.L. Miller, Investigating social desirability bias in student self-report surveys, Educational Research Quarterly, 36 (2012) 30-47.

[58]

G.D. Moody, M. Siponen, Using the theory of interpersonal behavior to explain non-work related personal use of the Internet at work, Information & Management, 50 (2013) 322-335.

Digital Library

[59]

M.J. O'Fallon, K.D. Butterfield, Areview of the empirical ethical decision-making literature: 19962003, Journal of Business Ethics, 59 (2005) 375-413.

[60]

T.A. O'Neill, L.A. Hambley, A. Bercovich, Prediction of cyberslacking when employees are working away from the office, Computers in Human Behavior, 34 (2014) 291-298.

[61]

T.A. O'Neill, L.A. Hambley, G.S. Chatellier, Cyberslacking, engagement, and personality in distributed work environments, Computers in Human Behavior, 40 (2014) 152-160.

Digital Library

[62]

D. Page, Teachers' personal web use at work, Behaviour & Information Technology, 34 (2015) 443-453.

Digital Library

[63]

J. Pallant, SPSS survival manual: A step by step guide to data analysis using SPSS, Allen & Unwin, Crows Nest NSW, Australia, 2011.

[64]

D.L. Paulhus, Self-deception and impression management in test responses, in: Personality assessment via questionnaires, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1986.

[65]

E.D. Ragan, S.R. Jennings, J.D. Massey, P.E. Doolittle, Unregulated use of laptops over time in large lecture classes, Computers & Education, 78 (2014) 78-86.

[66]

S.L.D. Restubog, P.R.J.M. Garcia, L.S. Toledano, R.K. Amarnani, L.R. Tolentino, R.L. Tang, Yielding to (cyber)-temptation: Exploring the buffering role of self-control in the relationship between organizational justice and cyberloafing behavior in the workplace, Journal of Research in Personality, 45 (2011) 247-251.

[67]

S.L. Robinson, R.J. Bennett, Atypology of deviant workplace behaviors: A multidimensional scaling, Academy of Management Journal, 38 (1995) 555-572.

[68]

R.E. Schumacker, R.G. Lomax, Abeginner's guide to structural equation modeling, LEA, NJ, 1996.

[69]

A. Sheikh, M.S. Atashgah, M. Adibzadegan, The antecedents of cyberloafing: A case study in an Iranian copper industry, Computers in Human Behavior, 51 (2015) 172-179.

Digital Library

[70]

E. Singer, Confidentiality, risk perception, and survey participation, Chance, 17 (2004) 30-34.

[71]

E. Singer, N. Mathiowetz, M.P. Couper, The role of privacy and confidentiality as factors in response to the 1990 census, Public Opinion Quarterly, 57 (1993) 465-482.

[72]

E. Singer, J. Van Hoewyk, R.J. Neugebauer, Attitudes and behavior: The impact of privacy and confidentiality concerns on survey participation: The case of the 2000 census, Public Opinion Quarterly, 67 (2003) 368-384.

[73]

J.C. Sipior, B.T. Ward, Astrategic response to the broad spectrum of Internet abuse, Information Systems Management, 19 (2002) 71-79.

[74]

L. Sproull, S. Kiesler, Connections: New ways of working in the networked organization, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1991.

Digital Library

[75]

G.M. Sykes, D. Matza, Techniques of neutralization: A theory of delinquency, American SociologicalReview, 22 (1957) 664-670.

[76]

J.S. Tanaka, A.T. Panter, W.C. Winborne, G.J. Huba, Theory testing in personality and social psychology with structural equation models, in: Research methods in personality and social psychology, Sage, Newbury Park, CA, 1990, pp. 217-243.

[77]

A. Taneja, V. Fiore, B. Fischer, Cyber-slacking in the classroom: Potential for digital distraction in the new age, Computers & Education, 82 (2015) 141-151.

Digital Library

[78]

R. Tourangeau, T. Yan, Sensitive questions in surveys, Psychological bulletin, 133 (2007) 859-883.

[79]

H.C. Triandis, Interpersonal behaviour, Brook/Cole, Monterey, C.A, 1977.

[80]

J.C. Ugrin, J.M. Pearson, The effects of sanctions and stigmas on cyberloafing, Computers in Human Behavior, 29 (2013) 812-820.

Digital Library

[81]

J. Vitak, J. Crouse, R. LaRose, Personal Internet use at work: Understanding cyberslacking, Computers in Human Behavior, 27 (2011) 1751-1759.

Digital Library

[82]

D.T. Wagner, C.M. Barnes, V.K.G. Lim, D.L. Ferris, Lost sleep and cyberloafing: Evidence from the laboratory and a daylight saving time quasi-experiment, Journal of Applied Psychology, 97 (2012) 1068-1076.

[83]

R.L. Worthington, T.A. Whittaker, Scale development research: A content analysis and recommendations for best practices, The Counseling Psychologist, 34 (2006) 806-838.

[84]

W.J. Zerbe, D.L. Paulhus, Socially desirable responding in organizational behavior: A reconception, Academy of Management Review, 12 (1987) 250-264.

[85]

P. Zoghbi-Manrique-de-Lara, Reconsidering the boundaries of the cyberloafing activity: The case of a university, Behaviour & Information Technology, 31 (2012) 469-479.

Digital Library

Cited By

Iravani MJafarpour Boroujeni AHashemian M(2024)EFL teachers’ cyberloafing behaviors: Can burnout predict them?Education and Information Technologies10.1007/s10639-024-12804-x29:18(25035-25068)Online publication date: 1-Dec-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/s10639-024-12804-x
Muhanad AAbuelezz IKhan KAli R(2024)On How Cialdini’s Persuasion Principles Influence Individuals in the Context of Social Engineering: A Qualitative StudyWeb Information Systems Engineering – WISE 202410.1007/978-981-96-0570-5_27(373-388)Online publication date: 2-Dec-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/978-981-96-0570-5_27
Heidari EMoghaddam ASalimi G(2022)Cyberloafing in academia: a sequential exploration into students’ perceptionsEducation and Information Technologies10.1007/s10639-022-11524-428:7(8113-8133)Online publication date: 15-Dec-2022
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/s10639-022-11524-4
Show More Cited By

Cyberloafing and social desirability bias among students and employees
1. Applied computing

Recommendations

Employee job attitudes and organizational characteristics as predictors of cyberloafing

Cyberloafing is the personal use of the Internet by employees while at work. The purpose of this study is to examine whether employee job attitudes, organizational characteristics, attitudes towards cyberloafing, and other non-Internet loafing behaviors ...
Participative leadership and employees’ cyberloafing: A self-concept-based theory perspective
Abstract
The antecedents of employees’ cyberloafing (internet use for nonwork purposes during office hours) have become a burgeoning research topic. This research therefore explores how and when participative leadership serves as an important antecedent ...
Cyberloafing at the workplace: gain or drain on work?

This study examined the impact of cyberloafing on employees' emotion and work. We also examined gender differences in employees' perception towards cyberloafing. In general, respondents felt that some form of cyberloafing at work was acceptable. Men ...

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image Computers in Human Behavior

Computers in Human Behavior Volume 72, Issue C

July 2017

816 pages

ISSN:0747-5632

Issue’s Table of Contents

Copyright © Elsevier Ltd.

Publisher

Elsevier Science Publishers B. V.

Netherlands

Publication History

Published: 01 July 2017

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Research-article

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

7
Total Citations
View Citations
0
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)0
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0

Reflects downloads up to 11 Feb 2025

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Iravani MJafarpour Boroujeni AHashemian M(2024)EFL teachers’ cyberloafing behaviors: Can burnout predict them?Education and Information Technologies10.1007/s10639-024-12804-x29:18(25035-25068)Online publication date: 1-Dec-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/s10639-024-12804-x
Muhanad AAbuelezz IKhan KAli R(2024)On How Cialdini’s Persuasion Principles Influence Individuals in the Context of Social Engineering: A Qualitative StudyWeb Information Systems Engineering – WISE 202410.1007/978-981-96-0570-5_27(373-388)Online publication date: 2-Dec-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/978-981-96-0570-5_27
Heidari EMoghaddam ASalimi G(2022)Cyberloafing in academia: a sequential exploration into students’ perceptionsEducation and Information Technologies10.1007/s10639-022-11524-428:7(8113-8133)Online publication date: 15-Dec-2022
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/s10639-022-11524-4
Hanif MAbdul Hamid AKhurshid AButt M(2022)What leads to cyberslacking intentions among students in PakistanThe Electronic Journal of Information Systems in Developing Countries10.1002/isd2.1222488:6Online publication date: 9-Nov-2022
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1002/isd2.12224
Saritepeci M(2020)Predictors of cyberloafing among high school students: unauthorized access to school network, metacognitive awareness and smartphone addictionEducation and Information Technologies10.1007/s10639-019-10042-025:3(2201-2219)Online publication date: 1-May-2020
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/s10639-019-10042-0
Santos AFerreira Ada Costa Ferreira P(2020)The impact of cyberloafing and physical exercise on performance: a quasi-experimental study on the consonant and dissonant effects of breaks at workCognition, Technology and Work10.1007/s10111-019-00575-222:2(357-371)Online publication date: 1-May-2020
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1007/s10111-019-00575-2
Lankton NMcKnight DTripp J(2017)Facebook privacy management strategiesComputers in Human Behavior10.1016/j.chb.2017.07.01576:C(149-163)Online publication date: 1-Nov-2017
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1016/j.chb.2017.07.015

View Options

View options

Figures

Tables

Media

View Issue’s Table of Contents