Maartje Boer

THE COMPLEX ASSOCIATION BETWEEN SMU AND WELLBEING 253 8 power of upward social comparison in the variance of the association between SNS liking and life satisfaction is negligible. The associations between the other SMU activities and life satisfaction were not moderated by upward social comparison (M7/8a,b,d-f). Overall, we did not find (strong) evidence that individual differences in the association between SMU intensity and wellbeing were explained by adolescents’ tendency to engage in upward social comparisons ( RQ3b ). Table 8.6 Summary Results of Random Effects Models with Upward Social Comparison as Moderator, Life Satisfaction Not controlled for SMU problems (M7) Controlled for SMU problems (M8) Level 1 ( n = 1,419) Model B SE p B SE p SNS viewing a -0.002 0.011 0.862 0.013 0.013 0.339 SNS posting b -0.012 0.008 0.159 -0.008 0.009 0.389 SNS liking c -0.005 0 .007 0.509 0.003 0.007 0.709 SNS responding d -0.021 0.012 0.076 -0.011 0.013 0.403 IM viewing e -0.011 0.011 0.320 0.008 0.012 0.472 IM sending f -0.024 0.012 0.051 -0.011 0.013 0.388 Level 2 ( n = 5,676) Model B SE p B SE p SNS viewing a 0.005 0.017 0.785 0.031* 0.016 0.046 SNS posting b -0.014 0.024 0.558 0.014 0.026 0.599 SNS liking c 0.019 0.013 0.136 0.031* 0.013 0.021 SNS responding d 0.023 0.016 0.139 0.040** 0.015 0.009 IM viewing e <0 .001 0.015 0.992 0.028 0.015 0.059 IM sending f 0.003 0.013 0.842 0.023 0.014 0.103 Cross-level interactions Model B SE p B SE p SNS viewing * upward social comparison a -0.006 0.019 0.745 0.002 0.018 0.926 SNS posting * upward social comparison b -0.013 0.015 0.377 -0.011 0.016 0.481 SNS liking * upward social comparison c -0.030* 0.013 0.025 -0.027* 0.013 0.035 SNS responding * upward social comparison d -0.025 0.019 0.185 -0.023 0.018 0.217 IM viewing * upward social comparison e -0 .007 0.018 0.684 0.002 0.018 0.929 IM sending * upward social comparison f -0.024 0.017 0.153 -0.019 0.017 0.263 Notes. SNS = social network sites; IM = instant messengers; SMU = social media use; Level 1 = yearly measurements; Level 2 = adolescents; B = unstandardized coefficient; SE = standard error, p = p- value; Variables with the same letter (a-f) were included in the same model. Models 7a-f were controlled by wave (level 1) and gender, educational level, and immigrant background (level 2). Also the main effect of upward social comparison was included (level 2). Models 8a-f extended model 7a-f with SMU problems as additional control variable on the first and second level. All models included a covariance between the random slope and random intercept. *** p < 0.001, ** p < 0.01, * p < 0.05.