Printer Friendly

Translation and Validation of Facebook Jealousy Scale for Pakistani Facebook Users.

Byline: Fizza Iqbal and Humaira Jami

The impact of Facebook on interpersonal relationships is increasing in Pakistan. To study impact of Facebook, valid and reliable measures could contribute to better understanding and planning for interventions to promote marital adjustment. The aim of this study was to translate and validate Facebook Jealousy Scale (FJS; Muise, Christofides, and Desmarais, 2009) to measure Facebook related jealousy among married Pakistani population. Forward-backward translation method was used for translation. Construct validity was established on a sample which comprised of 200 married Facebook users (Age range: 20-50 years; M = 31.24, SD = 5.18). Confirmatory Factor Analysis did not confirm the original single-factor structure; thus, Exploratory Factor Analysis was performed which resulted in three factors: Insecurity, Inquisition, and Infidelity after consulting subject matter experts.

The Urdu translated version along with its factors showed high internal consistency. As indicator of discriminant validity, FJS-Urdu version was significantly negatively correlated to Comprehensive Marital Satisfaction Scale (Khan, 2006). The translated scale can help in examining the role of growing technology in romantic relationship in Pakistani context.

Keywords. Facebook; jealousy; Social Networking Site; marital satisfaction; relationship satisfaction

Now a days technology has altered the approach of developing and maintaining relationships. There is rapid progress in interpersonal communication from telephones and computers to the most recent versions of interaction which are social networking sites (SNS) including Facebook and MySpace to Twitter, Instagram, LinkedIn and many more.

It has revolutionized the way people stay in touch with each other. Worldwide, people use social media to stay in contact with friends, family, peers, and coworkers, while others use it as a way to develop new connections (Ellison, Steinfield, and Lampe, 2007). In Pakistan, Facebook is the most popular SNS that has 27 million active users and the number is still counting (Internet World Stats, 2017). Despite of connecting people, it has been accused of affecting its users' lives in various ways (Marshall, Bejanyan, Di Castro, and Lee 2012); more specifically, damaging their interpersonal or romantic relationships (Bindley, 2012). Fox and Moreland (2015) highlighted social comparison and jealousy; lack of privacy and control; and relationship tension and conflict as major Facebook stressors in their focus group based study of 44 adult Facebook users.

Evidences showed that Facebook use may be responsible for causing divorce in one out of five divorce cases (Adams, 2011; Gardner, 2013). These statistics draw attention to the potential negative impact of social networking on marriages and relationship satisfaction (Valenzuela, Halpern, and Katz, 2014).

The negative impact of SNS on relationship quality has been a subject of intense debate among scholars to encompass the rapidly evolving technological world in their research. SNS may reduce marriage well-being through a number of factors such as habituation or addiction of its usage, feelings of jealousy generated between partners, or the way development of extramarital affairs is facilitated by these sites (Valenzuela et al., 2014). SNS basically creates an environment with potential situations that may evoke feelings of jealousy between couples such as seeing spouse being friend with someone of opposite sex or commenting on rival's posts; that may harm the quality of relationship (Elphinston and Noller, 2011) and marital satisfaction (Valenzuela et al., 2014). Users found it more feasible to reconnect with a variety of people of opposite sex through SNS (Ellison et al., 2007).

Such jealousy provoking role of Facebook within marital relationships needs attention in a collectivistic culture like Pakistan where social fabric relies on institution of marriage and concept of two partners living together out of wed-lock is a rare commodity.

Romantic jealousy is a universal phenomenon that effect romantic relationships (Afifi and Reichert, 1996; Knobloch, Solomon, and Cruz, 2001). A positive and beneficial aspect is also linked with romantic jealousy such as devotion, love, and care (Andersen, Eloy, Guerrero, and Spitzberg, 1995). Nevertheless, harmful effects are also recognized by researchers (Bevan, 2008). Jealousy occurs when a pre-existing relationship is threatened by an actual or potential rival interference and the fear of losing love. Jealous individuals often mistrust their partner, think that they are being deceived, and worry about the state of their relationship (Guerrero and Andersen, 1998). Romantic jealousy is a multidimensional construct, consisting of cognitive, emotional, and behavioral components (e.g., Guerrero and Andersen, 1998; Mathes, 1992; Pines, 1998; Pfeiffer and Wong, 1989).

The negative outcomes of jealousy faced by the individuals include relational distress and conflict, depression, divorce, break-up, aggression, and violence (Andersen et al., 1995; Fleischmann, Spitzberg, Andersen, and Roesch, 2005). Previous literature has shown that marital satisfaction is negatively related to cognitive, emotional, and behavioral jealousy (Guerrero and Eloy, 1992). Andersen et al. (1995) and White and Mullen (1989) found that cognitive jealousy is negatively related to relational satisfaction. In less satisfying relationships, the thoughts which are jealous or suspicious in nature arise out of distrust in spouse which effects relationship stability (Elphinston and Noller, 2011).

So far, less attention has been paid to romantic jealousy when it transpires online. Today, social networking sites have made the term 'privacy' obsolete and much more information is accessible to individuals about their partner's other relationships and interactions than they would get from other online or offline sources. Such uncontrollable access to the partner's information may lead to a higher degree of jealousy (Muise, Christofides, and Desmarais, 2009). They also supported empirically the jealousy-provoking role of Facebook between partners. For an insecure individual, the spouse's online actions turn into a flaw which eventually has a diminishing satisfaction factor (Rau, Gao, and Ding, 2008).

In 2001, just 1.3% of the population used the Internet, while in 2012, the figure had been grown to 10.0% (U.S. Census Bureau, 2013). In Pakistan, internet use is increasing at a fast pace with growing Information and Communication Technology (ICT). With the advancement of ICT, social media has taken the country by storm and the widespread use of smartphones and broadband internet connections has led to increased dependency on social networks. The effects of SNSs can be seen at workplace, in the classroom, at home, and throughout society where 3G and 4G technology has become accessible 24/7 that enable users to stay in touch with the world irrespective of time and locality. As this modern technology is evolving rapidly, people are more occupied with the virtual world of communication (Ministry of Information and Technology, 2017, June 2).

Understanding social impact of new technologies becomes increasingly important as dependency on such communication tools is increasing without evaluating their long-term consequences. In current study, married individuals are targeted because although marriage is a life-long commitment still it is also very thin-skinned and the knot can be weakened if doubts and trust issues arise in a couple. To the best of knowledge of the researchers of current study, there is still no research on how jealousy can effect relationship in context of Facebook use in Pakistan.

Foreign researchers (Ellison et al., 2007; Valenzuela et al., 2014) are devotedly working to explore the negative consequences of new technologies including SNS on interpersonal relationships, but in Pakistan, there is dearth of research on the respective issue. Furthermore, no valid and reliable scale is available to measure Facebook related jealousy in Pakistani population. Facebook Jealousy Scale (FJS) (Muise et al., 2009) is the only valid and reliable (Cronbach's alpha = .96), 27 item unidimensional measure available in English for measuring Facebook related jealousy developed for Canadian population. It is very important to explore how Facebook related jealousy can vary within Pakistani culture because instead of an individualistic culture like Canadian one; the roots of Pakistani culture lie within collectivism where family norms and expectations regarding relationships vary greatly.

This scale was not applicable on Pakistani population because of their deficient comprehension level of English. Apart from the objective of exploring the phenomena of Facebook related jealousy in Pakistani population, the need of validating FJS was considered as an attempt to make FJS a valid Urdu translated version for Pakistani population.

The aim of the current investigation is to translate and validate FJS in order to explore the role of jealousy in marital relationship in future. The following research questions were explored: (1) Is the Urdu version of the FJS a valid measure as original? (2) Is Urdu version of the FJS reliable as original? (3) Is correlation between FJS scores and marital satisfaction of married Facebook users negative as indicator of discriminant validity of FJS?

Method

Translation of Facebook Jealousy Scale (FJS). FJU was originally developed by Muise et al. (2009) to measure Facebook related jealousy in which participants were asked to what extent they were likely to engage in the acts of each statement. The scale was composed of 27 items. Participants rated each item on a 7-point Likert scale ranging from 1 (Very unlikely) to 5 (Very likely). All the responses were summed up and higher score indicated higher levels of Facebook jealousy. The possible total scores ranged from 24 to 120. The Cronbach's alpha for the Facebook Jealousy Scale was .96 (Muise et al., 2009).

Translation and adaptation of FJS were done into Urdu by following the guidelines provided by Brislin (1976). In order to translate the scales following procedure was used: 1) obtaining permission from the authors of the scales; 2) forward translation of the scales by at least three independent translators; 3) selecting the most appropriate translation through committee approach; 4) back translation of the selected items into English by at least three independent translators; and 5) comparing the back translations with the original version of the scales through committee approach.

After obtaining permission from the original authors, Translation of the FJU was done into target language (Urdu) from the source language (English). For this purpose, six bilingual experts who were fluent in reading, speaking, and writing both Urdu and English languages were requested to translate these scales into Urdu. They were instructed to translate the items in such a way that the meaning inherent in them could be understandable in Pakistani culture. Five forward translations of the scales were received. Three of the bilinguals who translated the scales had an M.Phil degree in Psychology; while the other two had a Master's degree in Psychology. The Urdu translations received for the scales were later evaluated in a committee approach to select the most appropriate translation for each scale.

The committee comprised of three members, including the research student and two subject matter experts (PhD in Psychology) from a public university having command on both languages (i.e., Urdu and English). The committee evaluated all the received translations for each item and selected the most appropriate translation on the basis of comprehensibility and semantic equivalence with the respective original item in English version.

The selected translation was back translated into source language that is, English. For this purpose, Urdu translation of FJS was given to three independent bilinguals, different than those who translated the original scales into Urdu. One of the bilinguals had an M.Phil degree in International Relations, the other had a Master's degree in Psychology, while the third bilingual had a Master's degree in English. They were instructed to translate the items as accurately as possible, so that items should communicate the meaning to target population. Three back translations of scales were received which were evaluated later in a committee to check the compatibility of items with the original version.

The same subject matter experts who evaluated forward translations were approached to evaluate the back translations in terms of their equivalence with the original items. Emphasis was again on the conceptual and cultural relevance. All the items were found to have semantic equivalence with the original scale except, for item no. 13 that revealed grammatical error when compared with original; a bilingual expert was consulted again to translate that item again and was finalized after rephrasing the Urdu item to rectify grammatical error. Finally, the instructions of the scales were also finalized by the consent of the committee, in order to finalize the Urdu version of FJU.

Urdu version of FJU was also adapted such that the term 'partner' was replaced by 'spouse' because the concept of partner was not culturally valid as per observation of committee members and translators. The term partner reflects the concept of courtship within partners that generally do not exists in publicly declared form in Pakistan. Committee also decided to make response categories simple for the respondents, therefore, instead of 7-point, scale was changed to 5-point.

Validation of Urdu Version of FJU

Sample. Mixed sampling technique (Convenience and Snow-ball sampling) was used for collecting data. A sample of 200 married Facebook users (Age range: 20-50 years; M = 31.24, SD = 5.18) with gender equivalence, who were not couples, from capital city Islamabad, Pakistan was surveyed. The inclusion criteria was that along participant his/her husband or wife should also be active users of Facebook currently and both should have knowledge about SNS. It is reported that participants spent 2 hours and 10 minutes average on Facebook per day. Many of the participants (n = 80, 44%) were highly educated means they have qualification of MPhil and PhD, 104 (54%) have done graduation and masters, only 8 (.04%) were passed their intermediate and below. Majority were serving in private 50(25%) and educational sector 60 (30%); 38 (19%) were students; 12 (6%) were in government job; 33 (16.5%) were professionals as engineers or doctors; while, only 17 (8.5%) were not working whom were women.

Assessment Measures. Following measures were used in this phase:

Facebook Jealousy Scale-Urdu Version (FJS-U). Final Urdu version was a self-report measure with 27 items to assess the role of Facebook in the experience of jealousy. Urdu version was 5-point Likert scale (1 = very unlikely to 5 = very likely) in order to keep the response pattern simple comparing to original having 7-point scale.

Comprehensive Marital Satisfaction Scale (CMSS). The English version was originally developed by Blum and Mehrabian (1999). In the current research, Urdu translated and adapted version of CMSS by Khan (2006) was used for measuring the marital satisfaction of married individuals. This scale has 35 items, consisting of 18 positively worded and 17 negatively worded items. The total score was computed by subtracting the algebraic sum of responses of all negatively worded items from the algebraic sum of responses of all positively worded items. The test-re test reliability for CMSS was found to be .83 over a six-week interval and its alpha coefficient was .94 (Mehrabian, 2005). For Urdu version Cronbach alpha was .82 (Khan, 2006)

Procedure. Married Facebook users who volunteered to participate were requested to fill the questionnaires. Consent was taken from them in written form and they were ensured about the confidentiality and anonymity of the responses. While filling the questionnaires, all the queries of the participants were addressed satisfactorily. On completing the questionnaires, researcher appreciated and thanked them for their cooperation.

Results

Statistical analyses were performed by using AMOS 21 and SPSS 18 to estimate the suitability of FJS for the Pakistani population. The missing values were handled by mean substitution method. Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) was conducted with maximum likelihood estimation to examine the factorial validity of the Urdu translated version of FJS. Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) was conducted later in order to explore the factor structure for current sample. Item-total correlation and Cronbach alpha coefficient were calculated to see the internal consistency of FJS-U. Pearson Product-Moment Correlation between FJS-U and marital satisfaction was computed to establish the discriminant validity of FJS-U.

CFA was carried out to determine whether the factor structure of FJS-U is comparable to the single-factor structure of original English version of FJS among 200 Pakistani married Facebook users. The model obtained through CFA showed poor fit to the data with Chi (2) (324) = 1504.13, Incremental Fit Index (IFI) = .66, Comparative Fit Index (CFI) = .66, Standardize Root Mean Square Residual (SRMR) = .09, and Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA) = .13 except Chi (2) ratio = 4.64 that was within acceptable range. Thus, the model fit for FJS could not be attained in the current sample, although, all the factor loadings were satisfactory ranged from .40 to .82. Therefore, EFA was conducted.

EFA was conducted to explore the factor structure of FJS-U in Pakistani culture. As subjects-to-variables ratio should be no lower than 5 (MacCallum, Widaman, Zhang, and Hong, 1999) and the current data (N = 200) was more than 7 times greater than the total number of items, so this sample size was appropriate for EFA (Field, 2005). The Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) index obtained was .91 which is very good for conducting EFA on the data. For Bartlett's Test of Sphericity, the chi-square [2 (351) = 3682.1] is significant at p = .000 that shows some relationships between the variables (Field, 2005), thus indicating sample adequacy for factor analysis. Inter-item correlations were computed and the strength of the correlation ranged from .16 to .76 (p [?] .05 - .01).

When items are correlated with each other that reflects internal consistency of the measure then Direct Oblimin method (oblique rotation) with Principal component analysis for the extraction of meaningful factors is recommended which was used in the current study for factor extraction. It is also a recommended method for factor extraction as latent variables in social sciences are correlated to some extent (Costello and Osborne, 2005).

The scree plot favoured the three factor solution in Pakistani sample as three data points appeared above the point where the curve flattens out, thus, provided most meaningful picture of factors with three factors solution. Table 1 shows factor loadings of items on three factors solution along with eigen values more than 1 with items having factor loadings of .32 and above (Tabachnick and Fidell, 2007); 59.44% is the cumulative variance. Criterion used for item selection (Field, 2005) after EFA is:

* Loading of .40 and above in any one factor.

* No cross-loadings of .40 and above on more than one factors.

* Minimum three items in any factor.

* Face validity of the item with respective items in the factor.

EFA revealed that all items group in relevant factor on which these converge and show no cross-loadings with other factors except item number 4, 6, and 13 (see Table 1). Therefore, these 3 items having cross-loading of .40 and above on more than one factors are dropped from the final version of the FJS. Therefore, the final form of FJS-U contains 24 items.

Table 1 EFA for Facebook Jealousy Scale-Urdu Version (N = 200)

###Factor Loadings

Items in Final###Items###Insecurity###Inquisition###Infidelity

8###10###.84###.20###.04

6###8###.79###.26###.18

7###9###.79###-.15###-.10

5###7###.74###-.02###.12

11###14###.71###.23###.31

4###5###.68###-.34###-.04

1###1###.65###-.22###.02

9###11###.63###-.33###-.03

10###12###.54###.09###.34

2###2###.54###-.26###-.15

3###3###.52###-.17###.10

###13###.52###.00###.43

23###26###.22###-.76###.01

24###27###.06###-.71###.19

21###24###-.02###-.64###.17

22###25###-.05###-.63###.12

18###21###.14###-.63###.06

17###20###.04###-.59###.37

###4###.46###-.50###-.11

20###23###.40###-.45###.01

###6###.43###-.44###.10

13###16###-.04###-.26###.74

12###15###-.07###-.20###.72

14###17###.21###.35###.70

19###22###.05###-.09###.67

15###18###.11###-.16###.65

16###19###.13###-.26###.62

###Eigen Value###11.75###2.45###1.85

###Percentage of###43.51###9.08###6.85

###Variance

###Cumulative###43.51###52.6###59.44

###Variance

The newly emerged factors were named after obtaining the judgment from 7 subject matter experts (SMEs; 3 MPhil and 4 PhD Scholars in Psychology). Considering the 75% agreement among SMEs, Factor I was named as Insecurity, Factor II as Inquisition, and Factor III as Infidelity. The final form of FJS contains 24 items. Insecurity measured through item no. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, and 11 refers to the feeling fear, doubt, and threat related to relationship because of presence of someone of the opposite sex or a previous romantic or sexual partner on Facebook. Inquisition measured through item no. 17, 18, 20, 21, 22, 23, and 24 refers to the questioning and checking behaviour in response to partner's activities on Facebook. Infidelity measured through item no. 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, and 19 is defined as suspicion and mistrust for the partner for using Facebook in developing illicit relationships with someone of the opposite sex or a previous romantic or sexual partner.

Table 2 Cronbach Alpha Coefficients and Correlation Coefficients between of FJS-U and CMSS (N = 200)

Scales###k###FJS###Insecurity###Inquisition###Infidelity###a

CMSS###35###-.47**###-.39**###-.52**###-.40**###.94

FJS-U###24###-###.93**###.81**###.80**###.94

###Insecurity###11###-###.67**###.60**###.91

###Inquisition###7###-###.56**###.86

###Infidelity###6###-###.86

Table 2 indicates FJS-U to be highly reliable for married Pakistani Facebook users (a = .94) and the alpha reliability of subscales emerged is also satisfactory (.86 - .91). Table 2 also demonstrates that all the subscales of FJS-U are significantly correlated with each other and with the total score on the scale, while correlation among subscales and total scale ranges from .80 - .93. Correlation between FJS-U along with its subscales and CMSS is significantly negative showing that more jealousy in terms of feeling insecure, inquisitive, and suspicion reduces marital satisfaction and vice versa. Findings provide evidence for discriminant validity of FJS-U.

Discussion

The study attempted to translate and validate FJS for Pakistani married Facebook users. Contrary to original FJS, Urdu version demonstrated poor model fit for single-factor structure. This showed that in the current sample, the construct of jealousy has not been perceived as it was proposed by the original author (Muise et al., 2009). Three factors solution with 59.44% of cumulative variance suggest better organized structure of FJU-U in Pakistani sample and gave a meaningful picture after EFA. Final Urdu version had total 24 items. Three items (item number 4, 6, and 13) were dropped from final version because of their high cross-loadings on more than one factors that showed overlapping in content of those items as per sample's perception. Item 4 is about keeping an eye on spouse's activities on Facebook and Item 6 was about inquiring spouse about his/her Facebook friends.

These loaded equally high on Insecurity and Inquisition. This may be because that underlying feeling of insecurity makes one to be inquisitive of spouse's Facebook activities. The may be the reason it loaded equally well on both factors.

The three factors were named as Insecurity, Inquisition, and Infidelity. Romantic jealousy in literature is taken as a multidimensional construct, consisting of cognitive (negative thoughts of suspicion; infidelity); emotional (affective reaction towards rival; insecurity), and behavioural (protective measures to prevent interaction with rival; inquisition) components (e.g., Guerrero and Andersen, 1998; Mathes, 1992; Pines, 1998; Pfeiffer and Wong, 1989). These emerged factors have also been supported by the literature with overlapping conceptualization regarding relational jealousy.

Insecurity had 43.41% variance comparing to other two factors which referred to as refers to the feeling fear, doubt, and threat related to relationship because of presence of someone of the opposite sex or a previous romantic or sexual partner on Facebook. The cultural explanation of such factors can be placed in patriarchal nature of Pakistani society where men usually dominate the intimate relationship because of their strong and independent social status as compared to women. Men feel jealous because they want to control reproduction and perceived extra-marital affairs of their wives put a question mark on their manhood. Women are psychologically, religiously, and financially dependent on men and such dependency serves as a function of preserving the social hierarchy. Women often become apprehensive about the stability of their marriage as men are allowed of polygamy in Islam.

Using Facebook generate fears and threats for both men and women about their spouse's fidelity. Women feel threatened for the potential threat to their status when religion offers right to men for having four marriages. This leads to feeling of insecurity. While, men having onus of responsibility to maintain family pedigree, fear infidelity from their spouse and perceive Facebook use as a potential threat to their struggle to maintain family lineage intact and may feel insecure about wife's online friends. Relationship out of wedlock or extra-marital relationships is not endorsed in Islam. This may be leading to underlying anxieties and insecurities about spouse's use of Facebook, hence, generates jealousy where it's likely that spouse prefer someone else over oneself.

Inquisition (9.08%variance) is a general behavioural manifestations of jealousy expressions in terms of restriction that is constraining or checking a partner's interaction with a rival (Guerrero, Andersen, Jorgensen, Spitzberg, and Eloy 1995). This construct is parallel to the concept of interpersonal surveillance which is termed as use of surreptitious strategies of keeping tabs on partner's offline and/or online behaviors (Tokunaga, 2011). This is often considered as a relational maintenance strategy in response to threats of potential rivals (Guerrero and Afifi, 1999). Thus, online surveillance can be considered as an outcome of experiencing jealous feelings on Facebook, which eventually decreases the functionality of a relationship (Tosun, 2012).

Muise et al. (2009) also supported empirically the jealousy-provoking role of Facebook between partners, which creates a vicious cycle in which increased level of jealousy leads to high surveillance of a partner's Facebook page, and make partners more suspicious and jealous of each other (Helsper and Whitty, 2010). They keep on searching out for ways that could confirm their reservations where Facebook can also use as a medium. It can be said that feelings of jealousy in Facebook context are not limited to western cultures but they also exist in Pakistani society.

Since Facebook is public forum, so the knowledge about infidelity (6.85% variance) of partner in public had an impact on other partner (Afifi, Falato, andWeiner, 2001). Public display of infidelity of partner is more threatening than a private confession (Utz and Beukeboom, 2011) as perceived by the current sample regarding jealousy related to Facebook. A person perceives it more threatening when he/she apparently encounter on Facebook that his/her spouse is in contact with former or potential romantic partners and thus feel insecure. The findings of Utz and Beukeboom (2011) also support current finding.

The significant item-total correlation and high Cronbach alpha reflect the homogeneity of translated version with the original one. The scores of FJS-U were correlated with CMSS Urdu Version (Khan, 2006) in order to ensure its discriminant validity. Results demonstrated that those who scored low on Facebook related jealousy were high on marital satisfaction and vice versa. These results are in line with existing literature claiming the negative effect of Facebook related jealousy (Andersen et al., 1995; Elphinston and Noller, 2011; White and Mullen, 1989). The possible explanation of such negative consequence of Facebook related jealousy lies within the fact that individuals with low partner trust may be more likely to engage in frequent online surveillance of partner that result in feelings of jealousy (Elphinston and Noller, 2011) that eventually leads to marital dissatisfaction (Tosun, 2012). Current study confirms that FJU-U is a valid and reliable measure for measuring Facebook jealousy.

The research was an initial and essential step towards the availability of a suitable measure of Facebook related jealousy in Pakistan. Small and homogenous sample is one of the limitations of the present study as data were only collected from one city of Pakistan. Nevertheless, this study has larger implication in contributing towards the scholarly debates about the cultural change associated with new technology such as Facebook within Pakistani society, and their impact on adult's personal lives in terms of relationship dissatisfaction. This may help to plan intervention to control element of jealousy that influence marital satisfaction, as technology is ever developing; so one should start learning to live with it and do not allow jealousy to ruin sacred relationships; that plays a key role in maintaining family system and social fabric.

Conclusion. Although, Facebook jealousy is now a global phenomenon, however, in Pakistani context it is perceived as multidimensional, where feelings of insecurity take on much role in explaining jealousy followed by inquisition and infidelity about spouse's use of Facebook. FJU-U is a valid and reliable measure in Urdu for measuring jealousy about spouse in when he/she uses Facebook. Facebook related jealousy is negatively related to marital satisfaction which is an indicator of construct validity, more specifically, discriminant validity.

References

Adams, R. (2011). Facebook: A top cause of relationship trouble, say us lawyers. Retrieved from: http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2011/mar/08/facebook---us---divorces.

Afifi, W. S., Falato, W. L., and Weiner, J. L. (2001). Identity concerns following a severe relational transgression: The role of discovery method for the relational outcomes of infidelity. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 18, 291-308.

Afifi, W. A., and Reichert, T. (1996). Understanding the role of uncertainty in jealousy experience and expression. Communication Reports, 9, 93-103.

Andersen, P.A., Eloy S. V., Guerrero, L. K. and Spitzberg, B. H. (1995). Romantic jealousy and relational satisfaction: A look at the impact of jealousy experience and expression. Communication Reports, 8(2), 77-85.

Bevan, J. L. (2008). Experiencing and communicating romantic jealousy: Questioning the investment model. Southern Communication Journal, 73(1), 42-67.

Bindley, K. (2012). Facebook relationship problems: How social network and jealousy affect your love life. Retrieved from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/09/09/facebook---relationship---problems---social---networking_n_955980.html

Blum, J. S., and Mehrabian, A. (1999). Personality and temperament correlates of marital satisfaction. Journal of Personality, 67, 93-125.

Brislin, R. W. (1976). Translation, application, and research. New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc.

Costello, A. B. and Osborne, J. W. (2005). Exploratory factor analysis: Four recommendations for getting the most from your analysis. Practical Assessment, Research, and Evaluation, 10(7), 1-9. Retrieved from http://pareonline.net/pdf/v10n7.pdf

Ellison, N. B., Steinfield, C., and Lampe, C. (2007). The benefits of Facebook "friends": social capital and college students' use of online social network sites [Electronic Version]. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 12(4). Retrieved from: http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol12/iss ue4/ellison.html.

Elphinston, R. A., and Noller, P. (2011) Time to face it! Facebook intrusion and the implications for romantic jealousy and relationship satisfaction. Cyber Psychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 14(11), 631-635.

Field, A. P. (2005). Discovering statistics using SPSS (2nd edition). London: Sage publications.

Fleischmann, A. A., Spitzberg, B. H., Andersen, P. A., and Roesch, S. C. (2005). Tickling the monster: Jealousy induction in relationships. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 22(1), 49-73.

Fox, J., and Moreland, J. J. (2015). The dark side of social networking sites: A qualitative exploration of the relational and psychological stressors associated with Facebook use and affordances. Computers in Human Behavior, 45, 168-176. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2014.11.083

Gardner, D. (2013). The marriage killer: One in five American divorces now involve Facebook. Retrieved from: www.dailymail.co.uk/ news/article-1334482/The-marriage-killer-One-American-divorces-involve-Facebook.html.

Guerrero, L. K., and Afifi, W. A. (1999). Toward a goal-oriented approach for understanding communicative responses to jealousy. Western Journal of Communication, 63(2), 216-248.

Guerrero, L. K., and Andersen, P. A. (1998). Jealousy experience and expression in romantic relationships. In P. A. Andersen and L. K. Guerrero (Eds.), Handbook of communication and emotion: Research, theory, applications, and contexts (pp. 155-188). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.

Guerrero, L. K., Andersen, P. A., Jorgensen, P. F., Spitzberg, B. H., and Eloy, S. V. (1995). Coping with the green-eyed monster: Conceptualizing and measuring communicative responses to romantic jealousy. Western Journal of Communication, 59, 270-304.

Guerrero, L. K., and Eloy, S. V. (1992). Relational satisfaction and jealousy across marital types. Communication Reports, 5, 23-31. doi:10.1080=08934219209367540

Helsper, E. J., and Whitty, M. T. (2010). Netiquette within married couples: Agreement about acceptable online behavior and surveillance between partners. Computers in Human Behavior, 26(5), 916-926. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2010.02.006

Internet World Stats (2017). Internet usage in Asia: Internet users, facebook subscribers and population statistics of 35 countries and regions in Asia. Retrieved from: http://www.internetworldstats.com/stats3.htm

Khan, S. Z. (2006). Younger and elder couples, marital satisfaction and gender-role beliefs and morals. (Unpublished M.phil Dissertation). National Institute of Psychology, Quaid-i-Azam University, Islamabad, Pakistan.

Knobloch, L. K., Solomon, D. H., and Cruz, M. G. (2001). The role of relationship development and attachment in the experience of romantic jealousy. Personal Relationships, 8, 205-224.

MacCallum, R. C., Widaman, K. F., Zhang, S., and Hong, S. (1999). Sample size in factor analysis. Psychological Methods, 4, 84-99.

Marshall, T. C., Bejanyan, K., Di Castro, G., and Lee, R. A. (2012). Attachment styles as predictors of Facebook-related jealousy and surveillance in romantic relationships. Personal Relationships, 20, 1-22.

Mathes, E. W. (1992). Jealousy: The psychological data. Lanham: University Press of America.

Mehrabian, A. (2005). Manual for the Comprehensive Marital Satisfaction Scale (CMSS). Monterey, CA: Author.

Ministry of Information and Technology (2017, June 2). The power of digital Pakistan. Retrieved from http://moit.gov.pk/special-report-4year-progress.pdf

Muise, A., Christofides, E., and Desmarais, S. (2009). More information than you ever wanted: Does Facebook bring out the green-eyed monster of jealousy? Cyber Psychology and Behavior, 12(4), 441-444. doi: 10.1089=cpb.2008.0263

Pfeiffer, S. M. and Wong, P. T. P. (1989). Multidimensional jealousy. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 6(2), 181-196.

Pines, A. M. (1998). Romantic jealousy: Causes, symptoms, cures. NY: Routledge.

Rau P. P., Gao Q., and Ding Y., (2008). Relationship between the level of intimacy and lurking in online social network services. Computer Human Behavior, 24(6) 2757-2770.

Tabachnick, B. G., and Fidell, L. S. (2007). Using multivariate statistics. Boston: Pearson/Allyn and Bacon.

Tokunaga, R. S. (2011). Social networking site or social surveillance site? Understanding the use of interpersonal electronic surveillance in romantic relationships. Computers in Human Behavior, 27(2), 705-713.

Tosun, L. P. (2012). Motives for Facebook use and expressing "true self" on the internet. Computers in Human Behavior, 20(4), 1510-1517. U.S. Census Bureau, (2013). International programs: International database country rankings. Retrieved from https://www.census.gov/population/international/data/idb/rank.php

Utz, S. and Beukeboom, C. J. (2011). The role of social network sites in romantic relationships: Effects on jealousy and relationship happiness. Journal of Computer Mediated Communication, 16 (4), 511-527. doi:10.1111/j.1083-6101.2011.01552.x

Valenzuela, S., Halpern, D., and Katz, J. (2014). Social network sites, marriage well-being and divorce: Survey and state-level evidence from the United States. Computers in Human Behavior, 36, 94-101. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2014.03.034

White, G. L. and Mullen, P. E. (1989). Jealousy: Theory, research, and clinical strategies. New York: Guilford.
COPYRIGHT 2017 Knowledge Bylanes
No portion of this article can be reproduced without the express written permission from the copyright holder.
Copyright 2017 Gale, Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.

Article Details
Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback
Publication:Journal of Behavioural Sciences
Geographic Code:9PAKI
Date:Jun 30, 2017
Words:6122
Previous Article:Test-Anxiety-Provoking Stimuli Among Undergraduate Students.
Next Article:Parents' Personality, Family Environment and Pakistani Adolescents' Personality.

Terms of use | Privacy policy | Copyright © 2019 Farlex, Inc. | Feedback | For webmasters