Family Communication Patterns And Mobile Phone Dependence

Published Date: 02 Nov 2017

Chapter 1

INTRODUCTION

Background of Study

Communication is a combination of words, gestures, facial expressions and other ways to express our meaning by involved listening and speaking (Wandberg, 2005). Through communication, people can understand each other meaning so that it can strengthen the relationship with one another. Communication is more than just a word, gesture and expression but also a sharing knowledge. Rosengren (2000) wrote that when we communicate, we make things common which can help us to gain our shared knowledge, our ‘common sense’ – the basic precondition for all communities. In everyday life, people usually communicate with their friends or family.

Family is the primary socialization agents, whereby children develop beliefs, attitudes and knowledge from their parents (Huang, 2010). Communication is the central of a family and the two primary functions of nurturing and control (Le Poire, 2005). Nurturing includes both verbal and non-verbal behaviors that are encouraging and supportive. Control is to guide, influence, and limits the types of behaviors supported by the family members. Different family has a different way of nurturing and control incorporates with communication, formed different types or patterns of family communication.

Communication helps us to share and connect with people either they are near or far (Mentor, 2011). As the science and technology develop, people found easy to communicate with others especially people who are far from us. By the use of a simple handheld device, mobile phone, the most pervasive communicative device that allows people to carry and connect people anywhere, anytime and with anybody they want (Park, 2005). Mobile phone also known as cell phones or smart-phones. Mobile Phone does give a lot beneficial to human development such as strengthen users’ social connectedness people (Wei & Lo, 2006), interpersonal relationship (Igarashi, Takai & Yoshida, 2005) and for adolescents in terms of status (Ozcan & Kocak, 2003). Mobile phones act as a life personal assistant such as timekeeping, keeps time coordinate and a reminder for important events which improves the family bonding (Ling, 2004).

Although the use of mobile phone gives a number of benefits to people, but there are still disadvantage of using mobile phone. There are cases or studies indicate that driving while using mobile phones can increase the risk of accidents such as driving while phoning (McCartt, Hellinga & Braitman, 2006; White, Eiser & Harris, 2004). Another negative impact is health risk. When excessive use of mobile phone may be cause health-compromising behaviors such as smoking or alcohol drinking (Leena, Tomi & Arja, 2005; Toda, Monden, Kubo & Morimoto, 2006). Highlye use in mobile phone can even cause sleep disturbances, stress and even depression for both men and women (Thomee, Harenstam & Hagberg, 2011). Other than usage and health risk, prosocial behavior as well will decreased after using mobile phone (Abraham, Pocheptsova & Ferraro, 2012). Researchers also considered a term which literally means no mobile phobia, Nomophobia (Dixit, Shukla, Bhagwat, Bindal, Goyal, Zaidi & Shrivastava, 2010) whereby individuals afraid to be in an area that is no network coverage, run out of battery, gets anxious and badly affects his or her concentration level while using a mobile phone. The use of mobile phone can be an advantage or disadvantage to people. However, if we misuse or overly dependence on the mobile phone, it can affects to human development as same as how individual use substance abuse.

Therefore, in this research will look into two different functions of communications, the family communication patterns and mobile phone dependence with the definitions, concepts, study of past researches and current research results.

Family Communication Pattern (FCP)

The concept of family communication patterns (FCP) was developed by Jack McLeod and Steve Chaffee (Austin, 2007). The purpose of FCP concept is to study the effect of the family communication environment on children’s attitudes and behaviors. From the family communication patterns, parents are able to teach their children in a way of how to manage and interpret the information. From FCP concept, McLeod and Chaffee divided into two dimensions: socio-oriented and concept-oriented. They categorized into four family types; protective, pluralistic, laissez-faire and consensual by evaluate the high or low of the both dimensions.

Socio-oriented communication

(Conformity Orientation)

High

Protective

Consensual

Low

Laissez-faire

Pluralistic

Low

High

Concept-oriented communication

(Conversation Orientation)

Figure 1: Four-fold typology of family communication patterns

From the four-fold typology of family communication patterns, families high in socio-oriented and low in concept–oriented are labeled as protective families. These families are high in the sense of obedience and agreement but lack in conceptual matters (Fitzpatrick & Ritchie, 1994; Ritchie & Fitzpatrick, 1990 as cited in Koerner & Fitzpatrick, 2002 & Baldwin, 2012). The second type is Consensual, whereby encourage open communication and explore new ideas as long as the discussion does not threaten or disturb the internal harmony of the family (Fitzpatrick & Ritchie, 1994; Ritchie & Fitzpatrick, 1990 as cited in Koerner & Fitzpatrick, 2002 & Baldwin, 2012). These families are high in both socio-oriented and concept-oriented communication. Another type of families which high in concept orientation but low in socio-orientation is known as pluralistic families. They are freely and regularly interact with one another and emphasis on the individual independent ideas in children rather than focus in the family system (Fitzpatrick & Ritchie, 1994; Ritchie & Fitzpatrick, 1990 as cited in Koerner & Fitzpatrick, 2002 & Baldwin, 2012). Last type of families which low in both dimensions where family members talk less frequently, discuss minimum topics openly with all family members, superior individuality, interactions focuses on the uniqueness and their independence from their families (Fitzpatrick & Ritchie, 1994; Ritchie & Fitzpatrick, 1990 as cited in Koerner & Fitzpatrick, 2002 & Baldwin, 2012). These families are known as Laissez-faire. According to Ritchie and Ftzpatrick (1990) suggested that family communication cannot ignore the influence of intrafamilial patterns of agreement and disagreement in the communication norms that defined the family. Hence, they revised the study of family communication pattern by changing the two dimensions, socio-oriented and concept oriented to conformity orientation and conversation orientation respectively. This is to improve the future study of family communication patterns.

Mobile Phone Dependence

To define dependence on mobile phone in terms of two factors: "excessive use and use of mobile phones in public places even when such use is considered to be a nuisance" (Toda, Monden, Kubo & Morimoto, 2006). High rate of cost and number of calls or messages sent, obstructs with other activities in daily life, changes in interpersonal relationships and affects user’s health or well-being such as sleep deprivation (Choliz, 2012) are examples of a person who excessive or misuse a mobile phone. These behaviors are almost the same as to define substance abuse under Diagnostic and Statistical Manual for Mental Disorders-Fourth Edition-Text Revision, DSM-IV-TR (as cited in Choliz, 2012). Hence, researchers studied the mobile phone dependence (MDP) tendency (Toda, Monden, Kubo & Morimoto, 2004) to measure the excessive and prohibited use in students (Billieux, 2012). Later, Bianchi and Phillips (2005) also developed mobile phone problem use scale (MPPUS) by using psychological predictors such as extraversion, neuroticism and self-esteem.

A study from Choliz (2012) developed a new mobile phone scale based on DSM-IV-TR criteria for dependence disorder whereby similar with Toda et al. (2004). Choliz (2012) highlighted that mobile phone dependence is not a view but a problem. It would be better if to develop more than just knowing the problem but to develop an intervention for those who had problem us on mobile phone.

Research Problems

One of the research problems is cultural perspectives in family communication patterns. In many years, family communication patterns have been studied for a long period of time. All the studies are mainly western based. Asian studies are improving such as study in Japanese families and Thai families. Malaysia has studied family communication patterns but only studied one particular race (Noh & Yussoff) since Malaysia is a multiracial country. Different race will have different types of family communication patterns. Study on different races or ethnicity, will give a longer view point on cultural perspectives in family communication patterns.

After the studies of internet (Young, 1996; Warden, Philips, Ogloff, 2004; Fortson, Scotto, Chen, Malone & Del Ben, 2010), the study of mobile phones is developed. The trends of mobile phones use are increasing (Pew Internet, 2010). This eventually causes the individual to become more dependence on the mobile phones. Hence, the mobile phone dependence or addiction started to investigate with psychological predictors. Other than that, researchers also emphasize in gender with mobile phone dependence especially the high level. Many predicted that females are the strongest user compare with males, but there is a particular study stated that there is no difference that gender has high mobile phone dependence (Toda, Monden & Kubo, 2006). Therefore, gender in mobile phone dependence is one of the research problems that actually take into account for larger point of view to determine whether gender has mobile phone dependence.

College students use mobile phones because of connecting with and get close with their families (Chen & Katz, 2009) but some seldom call their families and use mobile phones as leisure boredom, avoid face-to-face communication. The study of the relationship between the family communication patterns and mobile phone dependence is very limited. One study only noted a little part about family communication orientation relate with mobile phone dependence. Hence, the last research problems are to develop the study about this two variable relationship.

1.3 Research Question

RQ 1: What are the family communication patterns among university students of different races?

RQ 2: Is there gender difference in the high level of mobile phone dependence?

RQ 3: What is the significant relationship between conversation/conformity orientation and mobile phone dependence?

RQ 4: What is the significant difference among the family communication patterns in mobile phone dependence?

1.4 Research Objectives

To identify family communication patterns in different races.

To study the gender differences in high level of mobile phone dependence among the university students

To relate whether the family communication patterns dimension: conversation and conformity orientations and mobile phone dependence any significant.

To examine which four types of families has possibility of having mobile phone dependence.

1.5 Operational Definition

Family Communication Patterns (FCP) originally from Jack McLeod and Steve Chaffe (Austin, 2007) and later revised by Ritchie and Fitzpatrick (1990), known as Revised Family Communication Patterns (RFCP) so that it based on a suitable norms for future studies. FCP consist of two dimensions or orientations: 1. Conversation Orientation which defined as the degree to which families’ value and create a climate of open flow of communication and exchanges of ideas about attitudes, beliefs and values (Fitzpatrick & Richie, 1994; Ritchie & Fitzpatrick, 1990 as cited in Koerner & Fitzpatrick, 2002), 2. Conformity Orientation defined as the degree to which families create a climate that stresses homogeneity of attitudes, values, and beliefs (Fitzpatrick & Richie, 1994; Ritchie & Fitzpatrick, 1990 as cited in Koerner & Fitzpatrick, 2002).

Test of mobile phone dependence (TMD) is developed by Choliz (2012). TMD is based on the criteria of DSM-IV-TR dependence disorder. TMD items use three factor analyses: abstinence, lack or control and problems and tolerance and interference. Abstinence refers the feeling of discomfort without using of mobile phone and use mobile phone as psychological problems improves. The second factor indicates difficulties to stop to use mobile phone even though with effort known as lack of control and problems. Lastly, tolerance and interference where indicate use mobile phone excessive and interferes other activities. There are two groups of mobile phone dependence: normal and high dependence which is according to Toda et al. studies. Normal dependence is normal users or not highly use on mobile phones. High dependence category indicates individuals who has highly or excessive use in mobile phones.

Gender refers to the attitudes, feelings and behaviors that given culture associates with a person’s biological sex (American Psychological Association, 2011) which individuals are born male or female.

Race or racial is different culture or ethnic and religion and practices. "Race as a symbolic category, based on phenotype or ancestry and constructed according to specific social and historical contexts, that is misrecognized as a natural category" (Desmond & Emirbayer, 2009).

University students are students where seriously interested in acquiring knowledge and learn methods of study on a mature level (Znaniecki, 1994). Students who study university are people who are emerging adulthood approximately 18 to 25 years of age (Arnett, 2006, 2007 as cited in Santrock, 2009). Arnett (2006 as cited in Santrock, 2009) characterize emerging adulthood: 1. Identity exploration, 2. Instability, 3. Self-focused, 4. Feeling in between, 5. The age of possibilities, a time when individuals have an opportunity to transform their lives. Emerging adulthoods are people where they start explore their life and trying to become independent from their family and get ready being a responsible adult (Chen, 2007).

1.6 Significance of Study

There are actually very limited studies about family communication pattern and mobile phone dependence. Although debates, news paper articles mentions about mobile phone effect on family relationship especially the parenting style towards their children. Many current debates noted that parents have brought mobile devices for their only 3 years old children. Even during in a dinner table, most of the family members are focus on their mobile phones instead of having fun or chat during family dinner. It is certainty that when people depend on mobile phone it does shows impact on an interpersonal relationship or family communication.

Mobile phone dependence studies are similar with internet addiction studies which needed to be more concern on the individual usage of mobile phone as well as the psychological and physical predictors. If the study is proven that individuals suffer from mobile phone dependence, intervention, preventions or treatments programs are necessary to study so that to aware the use of mobile phone (Choliz, 2012). The preventions or treatments not just focus only in individuals but also to family and communities. Since the technology grows people are highly dependence on media and technology whether they are in schools, workplace and even at family dinner table.

Chapter 2

LITERATURE REVIEW

Previous chapter has discussed about the background, problem statements and objectives of this research. In this chapter reviews three parts of published studies relate to: Family Communication Patterns, Mobile Phone Dependence and the relationship of family communication patterns and mobile phone dependence. In addition, a review on theoretical framework in which how user depends on their mobile phone especially when comes to communicate with families.

2.1. Family Communication Pattern

The importance of the family communication pattern has lead the researchers to began the study in various aspects such as personality and locus of control. Huang (1999) studied that the undergraduate students from conversation-oriented families displayed high level of personality characteristics such as: self-esteem, self-disclosure, desire of control and sociability compare to conformity-oriented families. Nardello (2002) studied conversation-orientation and conformity orientation has positive relationship with internal locus of control and phenomenal control respectively. In Farley (2009) works investigated family communication during meal time can benefit their conversation, togetherness, learning, nutrition and family identity based on four patterns they practices. Another aspect demonstrated how sibling and adoptive promoted within families communication (Samek & Rueter, 2011). The results showed that consensual families have the greater sibling closeness including emotional and behavioral than other three families’ patterns.

There are many researchers (Dumlao & Botta, 2000; Koerner & Fitzpatrick, 2002; Lin, Rancer & Kong, 2007; Naomi, 2008; Hirabayashi, 2009; Janeja, 2011) studies how family communication patterns relate to conflicts and behaviors. For example Dumlao & Botta (1997) studied young adults conflict styles with their father and shown more collaboration and accommodation with their fathers according to their level of conformity and conversation orientation. The result was supported in later research and expanded the study with mothers and shown that young adults use collaboration and comprising with their mothers (Janeja, 2011). Surprisingly, the results shown that high conversation orientation turn out to be more accommodating with their parents. Lin, Rancer & Kong (2007) examined that trait of argumentativeness has relationship with family communication patterns and found that Chinese students from consensual and pluralistic are high argumentative than protective families and no relation with laissez-faire families. Naomi (2008) explored that the conversation and conformity experiences different types of self discrepancies.

As many aspects proved have relations with family communication pattern, researchers a cross the culture begins to examine the relation of different culture practices the different pattern of family communication. For example, Tomatani (2008) examined Japanese student’s family communication pattern with levels of communication competence and friendship networks. The Japanese students are pluralistic pattern of family due to changes from traditional to westernize values. In contrast, Shearman and Dumlao (2008) study family communication pattern and conflict styles between young adults and their parents in Japan and United States and shows that United States families are from consensual pattern but Japanese families are more to laissez-faire. Later research (Hirabayashi, 2009) about young adults’ relational maintenance behavior also supported that Japanese families are from Laissez-faire type and also protective families but not pluralistic. Other than Japanese families, Hirabayashi (2009) also look into Thai families as they are more consensual and protective pattern. On Charoenthaweesub and Hale (2011) did a research on Thai families with well-being and also shows that consensual pattern are well practices across the provinces.

In Malaysia, Noh and Yusooff (2011) conducted a research about Malay patterns of Family communication in Terengganu state. Their study involved three participants: both parents and their child together focus the effectiveness of family relationship. As the results shows Malay families from Terengganu state practices consensual and protective type. From Noh and Yussoff (2011) study only investigated one race families and the other race families are remain unknown pattern. Therefore, current study will study more about Malaysia multiracial family communication pattern based from the assessment from the university student.

RQ 1: What are the family communication patterns among university students of different races?

H0: There will be no significant association between family communication pattern and race.

H1: There will be significant association between family communication pattern and race.

2.2. Mobile Phone Dependence

The use of mobile phones has been question around whether the use of mobile phones does any relation to daily life routines and to the extent of having dependency or addiction symptoms. Palen, Salzman and Youngs (2000) studied that the behavior and practices of using mobile phone does change user’s social skills as user can use the phones while having conversation with friends or family simultaneously. Researchers (Igarashi, Takai & Yoshida, 2005; Perry & Lee, 2007; Kamran, 2010) tested with text-messaging attitude. Firstly, Igarashi, Takai and Yoshida (2005) study shows that communicate in both face to face (FTF) and mobile phone text messaging (MPTM) social network simultaneously increase the intimacy of friends compare only one way social network. Studies found that text messaging gave positive and negative impact to youth in Pakistan (Kamran, 2010). Conversely, overuse of mobile phone text messaging does shows addiction symptoms especially displacement whereby was the higher percentage of respondent among their respondent (Perry & Lee, 2007).

Due to the problematic use of mobile phone, researchers measure the problematic use of mobile phone with psychological attributes that can best fit to addiction predictors. Psychological attributes such as leisure boredom, sensation seeking, self esteem, shyness and loneliness shows that there is relationship with mobile phone use (Leung, 2008; Zulkefly & Baharuddin, 2009; Casey, 2012). One of the psychological attributes, self esteem who scores lower, indicated higher addiction to mobile phone and mobile phone usage (Butt & Phillips, 2007; Leung, 2008; Hong, Chiu & Huang, 2012; Casey, 2012). Leung (2008) estimated that high leisure boredom and sensation seeking more likely to be higher addicted to mobile phones. Extraversions, personality trait that scores high level had a positive effect on mobile phone addiction compare with other characteristics and it will be harm to themselves (Bianchi & Philips, 2005; Butt & Philips, 2007; Hong, Chiu & Huang, 2012). As the problematic use of the mobile phone arise, researchers created assessments based on the factor analysis (Billieux, 2012). Moreover, two assessments are measure the problematic use and the dependency of the mobile phone: Mobile Phone Dependence Questionnaire (MPDQ) (Toda, Monden, Kubo & Morimoto, 2006; Billieux, 2012) and Test of Mobile Dependence (Choliz, 2012).

Researchers had been predicted gender on problematic use of mobile phone. Bianchi and Philips (2005) predicted that females uses mobile phones as social reasons, whereas, males uses mobile phone for business intention. Even, in Malaysia context shows females use mobile phone due to socialize, gossips and safety device (Balakrishnan & Raj, 2011; Zulkefly & Baharudin, 2009). As the reasons given females are tend to be recorded to be higher dependence on mobile phones than males. Taiwanese females self-reported that they are heavy user for mobile phone (Chen, 2006) compare to males. Other studies also do agree that females are high dependence or use more mobile phone compare to males’ respondent (Bianchi & Philips, 2005; Geser, 2006; Takao, Takahashi & Kitamura, 2009; Hong, Chiu & Huang, 2012; Choliz, 2012). Although researchers predicted females are high dependency, there are another group of researchers found out that there is no gender differences in use of mobile phone (Toda, Monden & Kobu, 2006). Initially in Chen (2006) studies mention females self-reported heavy user, but when related both gender, both are no significant use of mobile phone. Dickson studied with psychological and physiological consequences based on gender are no significant related (Dickson, 2012). For example, the studied the measurements between cardiovascular and mobile phone dependence were non-significant when comes to gender relation.

As the studies reviewed that the probability of females may have mobile phone dependence than males even in Malaysia studies about the use of Mobile phone also shows that females use more than males. Whether or not that university female student’s record higher mobile phone dependence, hence the current study will study about university students’ mobile phone dependency based on gender.

RQ 2: Is there gender differences in the high level of mobile phone dependence?

H0: There is no significant difference between male and female in high level of mobile phone dependence category.

H1: There is a significant difference between male and female in high level of mobile phone dependence category.

2.3. Family Communication Pattern and Mobile Phone Dependence

Currently there are no studies solely about on family communication pattern (FCP) and mobile phone dependence (MPD). Nevertheless, the affect and effect of mobile phone in the family communication has been studied. Researchers participant reported that they did not share their mobile phones with their family members even though whether is purchased by own or as a free gift (Balakrishnan & Raj, 2011). Hameededdin (2010) studied three effects of cell phone on Saudi family: first, the cell phone has assisted Saudis to promote them a positive relationship with their family members. Second, cell phone calls and text messages reduce their social skills but in the mean time maintain far relationships on social relations and lastly, young people relied on cell phones due the importance of maintaining the social status among their peers and influence their verbal expressions.

Chen & Katz (2008) studies about the use of mobile phone pattern between college students’ with their family members at home. Their research shows them that the mobile phones are important for college students to communicate with their family and family roles. The college students also added that they depend on mobile phone to share experiences emotional and physical support with their parents. Researchers even compared that females tend to call home more than the males but will keep the mobile phones on so that their family calls them. Ballweg (2010) examined the mobile usage perceptions to interpersonal communication with family members and how mobile phones regulated with family members. Firstly, their respondents said that they don’t allow their teenagers to use their mobile phone at the dinner table and even after bedtime. In this study, Ballweg (2010) added that some families who appear high conformity orientation want their children to put away their mobile phones during family times. Those who low in conformity will have no rules and allowed them to use mobile phones morning or night.

At Ballweg (2010) studies emphasized family communication pattern and the use of mobile phone in the family but not the dependence. From the studies, conformity orientation will control the use of mobile phone, probability student’s use the mobile phone will be less dependence since conformity are restricted or setting the rules for the children. As assumption, conversation will be more mobile phone dependence as the family emphasizes more in conversation, the use of mobile phones will as for their mediator. On the other hand, type of family communication pattern might have a relationship with mobile phone dependence. For example, if a person high in conversation and low in conformity (Pluralistic) they might have probability of high mobile phone dependence because of high conversation. Any type of the pattern might have the probability of high mobile phone dependence. Therefore, the current study will first study on both orientation relationship with mobile phone dependence and last, the type of family communication pattern relationship in mobile phone dependence.

RQ 3: What is the significant relationship between conversation/conformity orientation and mobile phone dependence?

Ho: There is no significant relationship between conversation/conformity orientation and mobile phone dependence.

Hi: There is a significant relationship between conversation/conformity orientation and mobile phone dependence.

RQ 4: What is the significant difference among the family communication pattern in mobile phone dependence?

Ho: There is no significant difference among the type of family communication pattern in mobile phone dependence.

Hi: There is significant difference among the type of family communication pattern in mobile phone dependence.

2.4. Theoretical Framework

2.4.1. Media Dependency Theory

2.4.1a. Uses and gratifications theory

Media dependency, Media System dependency or Dependency theory are interchangeable names of one theory which were proposed by Sandra Ball-Rokeach from Uses and gratifications theory with Agenda Setting Theory (Ball-Rokeach, 1998). Uses and gratifications (U&G) defined as "a psychological communication perspective that examines how the individuals use mass media" (Papacharissi, 2009, p. 137). The U&G given an assumption that individual uses or choose a media and the content are to fulfill what he or she wants or needs (Papacharissi, 2009). An individual’s uses communication together with other environment resources to explain something that they do not know, to satisfy what their requirements and to achieve their objectives (Katz, Blumler & Gurevitch, 1974).

Katz, Haas and Gurevitch (1973) highlighted five important needs based on the social psychological: 1) cognitive needs, 2) affective needs, 3) integrative needs, 4) integrative function and 5) weakening of contact with self and other social roles. Cognitive needs which are related to strengthening information, knowledge and understanding. Affective needs are aesthetic, pleasurable and emotional experience. Integrative needs are combination of cognitive and affective needs whereby to strengthening credibility, confidence, stability and status. For integrative function, this related to strengthening contact with family, friends and the communities and lastly needs related to escape or tension-release are defined in the weakening of contact with self and one’s social roles.

Leung and Wei (2000) studied on mobile phone and outlined three motives such as sociability, instrumentality and reassurance (Chen, 2007) from Uses and Gratification theory to examine the communication motives. There are many researches has been studied by using uses and gratification theory with different factors, examples mobile phone addiction (Park, 2005), usage of mobile internet such as financial, assessing, chatting, entertainment (Chigona, Kamkwenda & Manjoo, 2008) and even in delinquency use of mobile phone (Ishii, 2011).

2.4.1.b Media Dependence Theory

Media Dependency or media system dependency received similarities from uses and gratification theory. The theory is also known as Media addiction (Chory & Banfield, 2009). Media Dependency referred "the tendency to rely so heavily on a particular communication medium for the fulfillment of needs or wants" (Papacharissi, 2009). An individual select a media for his or her needs fulfillment, are more dependent on the media until the extent of into the media (Schumann & Thorson, 2007). The theory also stated that an individual did not always depend on all media equally and might be others dependent on certain media for their resources information (Ball-Rokeach, 1998; Ball-Rokeach & DeFleur, 1976 as cited in Chen, 2005; Littlejohn & Foss, 2008).

According Littlejohn and Foss (2008) a first source is when a person will become more dependent if the media gives more needs than the media given less. For example, if a person interested on ancient history, he or she will dependent on television such as HISTORY channel, whereby a person not interested will not dependent on it (Littlejohn & Foss, 2008). The media can be television, books, radio and even internet which can serve many functions such as, weather reports, entertainments, political news and many more. The second source is the social stability (Chen, 2005; Littlejohn & Foss, 2008). It explained that when social changes and increases of conflict or crisis happening, media dependence will increase. For example, when a world economy went deflate, citizens will eventually seek for news sources such as newspaper, internet or any other media resources. Below diagram shows Ball-Rokeach and DeFleur (1976 as cited in Chen, 2007) conceptual model that explained how audience (individuals or groups), the social system and the media system relate each other (Chen, 2007).

Diagram 2: Society, Media and Audience: Reciprocal Relationship (Ball-Rokeach & DeFleur, 1976 as cited in Chen, 2007; Gupta, 2006)

Media System

(Number and centrality of information function varies)

Societal System

(Degree of structural Stability varies)

Audiences

(Degree of dependency on media information varies)

Effects

Cognitive

Affective

Behavioral

Media Dependency theory demonstrated that social system and media system interact with audiences for creates the needs, interest and even motives (Chen, 2007; Littlejohn & Foss, 2008). Media dependence theory disputed that media and non-media sources are actually will cause different dependencies. When an individual who gets dependent on a particular segment of the media, the person will ultimately affected the cognitively (thinking), affectively (emotions) and behaviorally (behaviors or actions).

Summary

Family communication patterns have studied with many aspects. Moreover, each of the patterns or dimensions were correlated with the aspects that studied such as personality (Huang, 1999), locus of control (Nardello, 2002), conflicts (Dumlao & Botta, 2000; Koerner & Fitzpatrick, 2002; Lin, Rancer & Kong, 2007) and other aspects. Even cultural aspect in different countries has different family communication pattern.

The studies of mobile phone predicted that there was problematic use of mobile phones that can interfere users behaviors and social interactions (Palen, Salzman & Youngs, 2000). Due to overly use, users dependence on mobile phones because of their leisure boredom, loneliness and self esteem (Leung, 2008; Zulkefly & Baharuddin, 2009; Casey, 2012). Such attitude user uses mobile phone has become part of their needs and dependence on mobile phone to achieve their wants. This can be explained by using the media dependence theory where individuals select a certain media to depend on it as long as it achieves what individual’s wants or needs.

Chapter 3

METHODOLOGY

Research Design

This research was conducted by using quantitative research which analyzes variables that usually vary in quantity (Gravetter & Forzano, 2011). By using quantitative research can bring researcher to understand the relationship and differences phenomenon of both variables from the data quantities. A simple random sampling was use for the participants as it can represent the population and any participants can get the equal chances to participate. Overall the research, the dependent variables are Family communication patterns and Mobile Phone Dependence and independent variables are gender and race.

Participants

There were two methods to collect the data: online questionnaire and distributed questionnaire. Online questionnaire was posted and shared at a social network, Facebook through students from Malaysia universities. Total 201 university students included aged 18-48 years, students from oversea, skip more than 1 question and submitted blank responses. For distribute questionnaire, 70 questionnaires with randomly selected was randomly distributed to students aged 18-25 years in University of Tunku Abdul Rahman (UTAR). Among overall 271 completed questionnaires, 199 students (87, 43.72% males and 112, 56.28% females) who are properly answered the questionnaire, students from Malaysia University and aged range from 18-25 years.

Mean age for overall was 20.73 years (Standard Deviation, SD = 3.99 years), for males was 20.16 years (SD = 4.72 years) and for females was 21.17 years (SD = 3.78 years). Total 53 students responded they are Malay (26.63%), 114 students are Chinese (57.29%), 22 students are Indian (11.06%) and 10 students are other race (5.03%) Among the students are from public universities (90, 45.23%) such as University of Malaya (UM) and private universities (109, 54.78%) such as University of Tunku Abdul Rahman (UTAR).

Measurements and Instruments

Revised Family Communication Pattern adapted from Huang (2010), originally from Ritchie and Fitzpatrick (Koerner & Fitzpatrick, 2002; Huang, 2010) and consists of total 26 items: 15 items measurement of conversation orientation and 11-items measurement of conformity orientation. Example conversation items: "In our family we often talked about topics like current affairs/politics and cultures/religion where some persons disagree with others", "My parents encouraged me to challenge their ideas and beliefs" and "In our family we often talked about our plans and hopes for the future". Example conformity items: "In our home, my parents usually have the last word", "My parents often say things like "You’ll know better when you grow up"" and "My parents often say things like "You should give in on arguments rather than risk making people mad". The Cronbach’s alpha for conversation orientation and conformity orientation were 0.75 and 0.87 respectively. All items in this section were use a Likert Scale type ranging from 1 (strongly disagree) to 5 (strongly agree).

Test for mobile phone dependence originally and adapted from Choliz (2012) and consists of 22 items. Example items: "I have put a limit on my mobile phone use and I couldn’t stick to it", "When I’m bored, I use my mobile phone" and "I don’t think I could stand spending a week without a mobile phone". The Cronbach’s alpha for all 22 items were 0.94. The items are divided into two parts. From item 1 to item 10 were use Likert scale type ranging from 0 (never) to 4 (frequently) and item 11 to item 22 ranging from 0 (completely disagree) to 4 (completely agree). Likert scores for each item were totaled up and to present a general mobile phone dependence score ranging 0 to 88. Highest scores indicate higher dependence.

Google Drive was use to create online questionnaire before conducting the questionnaire. Google Drive Spreadsheet was use to save online respondents responds. Facebook, a social networking was use to paste and shared online questionnaire link to all participants who are eligible to participate.

Procedure

A simple proposal of the topic was done approved under supervisor, Dr Lee Mah Ngee. Later, the questionnaire of both dependent questionnaires is approved. Both Family Communication Pattern and Mobile Phone Dependence questionnaires are combined together by using Google Drive Form and Microsoft Word 2007. The set of questionnaire consist of 3 Sections: Demographic, Family Communication Pattern and Mobile Phone Dependence. After created the questionnaire from Google Drive Form, the website link were copy and share at a social network, Facebook to get respondent. Respondent are been told to share again the link to their friends, family and relatives who is a university student in Malaysia and aged 18-25. In the meantime, photocopies of hardcopy questionnaires were also distributed randomly to UTAR students to participate. Questionnaires were distributed in different setting such as outside and inside the lecture halls and computer labs. Online questionnaire was open from February 2nd to February 26th which approximately 1 month including the distributed questionnaire.

Online data are automatic collect and save in Google Drive Summary Responses sheet and Google Drive Spreadsheet. During receiving the data responses, there are respondent who are aged above 25 years, students from overseas, unanswered more than 1 question and blank responses are deleted from the spreadsheet. However, total responses in the Summary Responses sheet does not affected after the deletion from the spreadsheet. Online data from the spreadsheet are extracted to IBM Statistical Practical for Social Sciences (SPSS) Statistics version 20 together with distributed questionnaire responses. Data collected, finalize and calculated according to the three research questions and data is analyze.

Data Analysis

To investigate the hypotheses, median split method (Koerner & Eis, 2001; Koerner & Fitzpatrick, 2002; Huang, 2010) were use to categorize family communication pattern. The median scores for both conversation and conformity orientation dimension were 48 and 34 respectively. Based on the participants responses of conversation and conformity orientation dimension were categorized into four family patterns. Total 54 participants are from consensual pattern, 44 participants are from Laisezz-faire pattern, 51 participants are from pluralistic pattern and 50 are from protective pattern.

For mobile phone dependence hypotheses, each item from the questionnaire were summed up and higher scores indicate higher mobile phone dependence (Toda, Monden, Kubo & Morimoto, 2006). Participants who score exceeding the mean +1 SD were categorize in the high dependence category.

Research question 1 use Chi-square: Test for independence to determine whether has associate significant between the family communication patterns and four different races. Research question 2 is use T-test: Independence for Sample Means to identify whether gender difference has significant with high level of mobile phone dependence. Research question 3 is using Pearson Correlation to relate the both dimensions of family communication patterns: conversation and conformity orientation with mobile phone dependence whether has any relationship. The last research question conducted with one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) to study which four types of family communication patterns has the probability having mobile phone dependence. The study of high dependence category is use only at research question 2. Research question 3 and 4 was conducted by using overall participants scores instead of using high level of dependence category.

Chapter 4

FINDINGS AND ANALYSIS

4.1 Family Communication Patterns

On research question 1, a Chi-Square:Test for Independence was calculated to examine the association between the four types of family communication patterns: Pluralistic, Laissez-faire, Protective and Consensual with different races: Malay, Chinese, Indian and other races.

Research Question 1: What are the family communication patterns among university students in difference races?

Table 4.1: Race and Family Communication Pattern Cross tabulation

Family Communication Patterns

Pluralistic

Laissez-faire

Protective

Consensual

Total

Chi-square

x2

p

n = 51

%

n = 44

%

n = 50

%

n = 54

%

n = 199

%

Race

Malay

14

7.0

14

7.0

10

5.0

15

7.5

53

26.6

5.037a

.831

Chinese

26

13.1

25

12.6

33

16.6

30

15.1

114

57.3

Indian

8

4.0

3

1.5

4

2.0

7

3.5

22

11.1

Other

3

1.5

2

1.0

3

1.5

2

1.0

10

5

Note: N = 199

p > 0.05, a5 cells (31.2%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 2.21.

H0: There will be no significant association between family communication pattern and race.

H1: There will be significant association between family communication pattern and race.

The table result of Chi-Square: Test for Independence failed to reject the null hypothesis as the p value is above 0.05. Hence, there is no significant association between the family communication pattern and difference races, x2(9) = 4.757 p > 0.05. However, the result shows that Malay student families practices more consensual pattern compare to protective which is the lowest among Malay families (7.5% vs 5.0%). Chinese students are more protective pattern, 16.1%. Indian student families’ practices more on pluralistic as compare to laissez-faire (4.0% vs 1.5%). For other races did not show any differences as both pluralistic and protective shared 1.5% and laissez-faire and consensual with 1.0%.

4.2 Mobile Phone Dependence

Below the descriptive statistics shows the total mobile phone dependence mean and standard deviation and histogram for total mobile phone dependence against frequency.

Table 4.2.1: Mean and Standard deviations for Total Mobile Phone Dependence

Mobile Phone Dependence

N

Valid

199

Missing

0

Mean

38.4271

Std. Deviation

16.18621

Participants exceeding mean + 1 SD, scoring 54 scores or more, were put under in the high level of mobile phone dependence category. The remaining participants were put under in the normal level of mobile phone dependence category. Below the table shows the normal and high level of mobile phone dependence based on gender in percentage, mean and standard deviation.

Table 4.2a: Percentage, Mean and Standard Deviation for Gender by Mobile Phone Dependence

Mobile Phone Dependence

Normal Dependence

High Dependence

n = 165

%

M

SD

n = 34

%

M

SD

Gender

71

43

34.55

14.24

16

47.1

60.63

5.27

Male

Female

94

57

32.84

11.90

18

52.9

63.17

8.39

Note: N = 199

Following the research question 2 were compute the high level of mobile phone dependence and gender by using the t-test Independence samples means. This is because is to investigate whether female and male are highly dependence or use more on mobile phone.

Research Question 2: Is there any gender in high level of mobile phone dependence?

Table 4.2b: Results of t-test and Descriptive Statistics for Gender by High Mobile Phone Dependence

Gender

95% Confidence Interval for Mean Difference

Male

Female

M

SD

n

M

SD

n

Lower

Upper

t

df

p

High Mobile Phone Dependence

60.63

5.27

16

63.17

8.39

18

-7.51

2.43

-1.042

32

.153

Note: N = 34, p>0.05

H0: There is no significant difference between male and female in high level of mobile phone dependence category

H1: There is a significant difference between male and female in high level of mobile phone dependence category.

Above the results table shows the t-test independence sample means that there is no significant difference between males (M = 60.63, SD = 5.27) and females (M = 63.17, SD = 8.39) in high mobile phone dependence, t(32) = -1.042, p > 0.05. This shows gender is not a predictor in high dependence mobile dependence.

4.3 Family Communication Patterns and Mobile Phone Dependence

Research question 3 and 4 was examined to understand the relationship between the family communication patterns and mobile phone dependence. Overall respondents’ mobile phone dependence scores will be use in respective research questions instead of using normal and high categories. This is to avoid any missing value that can cause the unequal relationship.

Research question 3 was studied at the relationship of two family communication pattern dimensions: conversation and conformity with mobile phone dependence. This question is to identify whether both dimensions and mobile phone dependence has any positive and negative relationship.

Research Question 3: What is the significant relationship between family communication pattern dimensions with mobile phone dependence?

Table 4.3.1: Bivariate Pearson Correlation between family communication pattern dimensions and Mobile Phone Dependence

1

2

3

Mobile Phone Dependence

1

.276**

.212**

Family Communication Patterns Dimensions

Conversation

-.200**

1

.276**

Conformity

.212**

-.200**

1

Note: N = 199

**. Correlation is significant at the p < 0.01 level (2-tailed).

Ho: There is no significant relationship between family communication patterns dimensions and mobile phone dependence.

Hi: There is a significant relationship between family communication patterns dimensions and mobile phone dependence.

The results of Pearson’s Correlation showed that there is a relationship between conversation orientation with mobile phone dependence r(1) = 0.276, p < 0.01 and conformity orientation with mobile phone dependency r(1) = 0.212, p < 0.01. The results also notified that a positive correlation happen in both dimensions and mobile phone dependence. It is possible that when conversation and conformity increases, the chances of dependence on mobile phone would be increases.

The last research question was conducted with one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) whereby the study analyzes the four types of family communication patterns: pluralistic, laissez-faire, protective and consensual as well as mobile phone dependence.

RQ 4: What is the significant difference among the family communication patterns in mobile phone dependence?

Table 4.3.2: Results of ONE-WAY ANOVA for Four Types of Family on Mobile Phone Dependence

Dependent Variable: Mobile Phone Dependence

Source

SS

df

MS

F

Sig.

Type of family

4745.838

3

1581.946

6.545

.000

Within Groups

47128.855

195

241.686

Total

51874.693

198

Note: N =199

p < 0.01

Ho: There is no significant difference among the four types of family communication patterns on mobile phone dependence.

Hi: There is significant difference among the four types of family communication patterns on mobile phone dependence.

The table results of ONEWAY ANOVA revealed that there was a significant difference among the four types of family communication patterns on mobile phone dependence, F(3, 195) = 6.565, p < 0.01. Below the table shows the multiple comparison of post-hoc HSD Tukey test and point out that significant differences on respondents scores on mobile phone dependence among four family types: Pluralistic (M = 37.71, SD = 15.69), Laissez-faire (M = 33.68, SD = 16.02), Protective (M = 35.04, SD = 14.97), Consensual (M = 46.07, SD = 15.55). By using consensual as comparison, there was a significant difference on respondents’ scores on mobile phone dependence among consensual with other three types of family. Unfortunately, the results also indicated that there was no significant difference among pluralistic, laissez-faire and protective families each other.

Table 4.3.3: Comparison for Mobile Phone Dependence among Four Types of Family Communication Patterns

Dependent Variable: Mobile Phone Dependence

N

M

SD

Std. Error

95% Confidence Interval for Mean

Mean Difference

(I-J)

Sig.

Lower Bound

Upper Bound

Pluralistic

51

37.71

15.69

2.20

33.33

42.16

8.33**

.033

Laissez-faire

44

33.68

16.02

2.42

28.81

38.55

12.39*

.001

Protective

50

35.04

14.97

2.12

30.79

39.29

11.03*

.002

Consensual

54

46.07

15.55

2.12

41.83

50.32

-8.33***

.033

*p <0.01 when compare to "Consensual"; **p < 0.05 when compare to "Consensual";

***p <0.05 when compare with "Pluralistic"

Below the graph is mean plots and from the graph showing that the consensual families has a greater dependence on mobile phone. This result was identical with previous research question 3 as higher both conversation and conformity (consensual pattern) the higher the mobile phone dependence.

Diagram 2: Mean Plots for Four types of Family Communication Pattern by Mean of Mobile Phone Dependence

Chapter 5

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

5.1, Discussion

Communication is a way to express our meaning by involving listen and speaking (Wandberg, 2005), which helps us to share and connect with people especially with people who lives far from a distance (Mentor, 2011). Communication can be occurred in families and friends or with a communication mediator or devices, mobile phone to communicate with people. Mobile phones help individuals to connect with people around them. As trend grows, dependence on mobile phones is increasing until the families are whether wanted to control or not to control the use of mobile phones (Ballweg, 2010).

Previous researches have found many different results with several aspects and development, especially in the studies of family communication patterns. Researchers proven that family communication patterns are important to family members, as the family patterns and the level of orientations influence individuals the way of thinking, feeling and behaviors towards family members and even to friends. An even family from different countries also has the different types of family communications and its influence. Mobile phone studies stated that highly use in mobile phone gives either in positive or negative impact to youth or teenagers (Kamran, 2010). Although the use of mobile phones seems to have advantage and disadvantage to human development, researchers yet manage to tested that mobile phone does have problematic use based on different psychological predictors especially to females users who are more dependence on mobile phones. Furthermore, the result was similar with the explanation of definition in dependence and addiction. Hence, whether putting mobile phone dependence on DSM-IV-TR is still unquestionable (Choliz, 2012).

To research the current study on family communication patterns and mobile phone dependence, firstly is to study the different types of family communication patterns. Secondly, predict whether gender differences has the high level of mobile phone dependence, to show whether gender is a part of predictors as previous researchers shown (Bianchi & Philips, 2005; Choliz, 2012; Toda, Monden & Kobu, 2006). Thirdly, is to examine the relationship of the two dimensions: conversation and conformity orientation with mobile phone dependence, to show whether has any relationship. Lastly, from the four types of families distinguish whether which type of the families has more mobile phone dependence.

The research conducted by using questionnaires from Ritchie and Fitzpatrick (as cited in Huang, 2010) Revised Family Communication Patterns and Test for Mobile Phone Dependence by Choliz (2012). The participants are from various public and private universities included University of Tunku Abdul Rahman. The questionnaire was conducted in two ways: Online Questionnaire and Random Distribution Questionnaire. Overall totaled 271 participants responded and final totaled 199 useable questionnaires and thus 199 participants (Males = 87, Females = 112) in this study.

5.1.1. Family Communication Patterns

The study of association between family communication patterns and different races: Malay, Chinese, Indian and other races showed that there is no significant. Although the study is not significant, the results found that Malay students mostly are consensual type of family which is supported by previous study, Noh and Yussoff (2011). This explained that Malay families likely to have open discussion or conversation but in the same time have to be remained the harmony between their family members. Noh and Yussoff (2011) also highlighted that the Malay families respect the norms and ethics of religion and culture; thus the families are higher in conformity. In the same study, researchers found that protective are the second highest and pluralistic is the least family type. In contrast, current study shows that protective is the least family type in Malay families and the other two types are second highest. This might be explained that the subjects for Malay race are not high as compare with Chinese race.

Chinese students show that they are more protective type of family. This can be explained that the Chinese students are more likely to keep the conversation close and being obedient and agree what their family members said. In other country studies such as Huang (2010) studied the Chinese students’ type of family and shown that they are from protective and pluralistic families. Although the race in Malaysia Chinese students and United States Chinese students maybe shared the same race, the norms and ethnics of religion and culture might be different from each other countries. That’s the reason the results of researcher United States Chinese students, some are freely to talk but less emphasize on the family system communication.

Pluralistic is the highest type of family among the Indian students. The Indian students interact with their family members as the conversation is important to be shared rather than looking at the family scheme. There are some Indian students are Laissez-faire type of family which the students does not cooperate with family members neither concerned in the family scheme. This group of students considered the least students compare with other two races: Chinese and Malay. There might be possibility that the number of Indian students is not large and influence the results to be lesser. The other races students’ types of family are more likely to same with each other. In addition, this group of students does not mention what other races and hardly to distinguish what type of family the students’ practices.

5.1.2. Mobile Phone Dependence

According to Toda, Monden, Kubo and Morimoto (2006) studied the mobile phone dependence and grouped the participants in normal dependence and high dependence. The high dependence category was tested with gender differences. In this study was done as same method as Toda et al. (2006) to determine which gender have the probability of high dependence on mobile phones. The study was conducted and the result shows that there is no significant difference between females and males. The result is identical as Toda et al. research on high dependence category in gender. Although the results stated not significant, the females somehow appear to be more dependence on mobile phone as the mean and standard deviation (M = 63.17, SD = 8.39) was higher than the males (M = 60.63, SD = 5.27). During the analyze of data, the highest score for females are 85 points compare with Male who only score up to 73 points.

Many researchers has found that females are more likely dependence on mobile phone than males but on Bianchi and Philips (2005) research stated that gender may not a good predictor for mobile phones dependence. This is because of gender is neutral. Therefore, males or females are equally exposed to mobile phone technology and may have their own purpose to dependence on mobile phones.

5.1.3. Family Communication Pattern and Mobile Phone Dependence

This relationship conducted in two perspective of family communication patterns with mobile phone dependence. Firstly, the relationship study with two dimensions of family communication patterns: conversation orientation and conformity orientation. In part of Ballweg (2010) studies stated that individuals who are high conformity orientation tend to control the usage of mobile phones in the families and for low conformity will not concern on how they use their mobile phones. In current study results show that, there was a relationship with conformity orientation and mobile phone dependence. This results is rejected Ballweg (2010) studies, that the current study explained high conformity orientation will more dependence on the use of mobile phone which is given a positive relationship. For conversation orientation also shows a positive relationship as when individuals high in conversation orientation in the meantime dependence on mobile phone are highly used.

The second or last study to investigate which type of family communication patterns are highly use in mobile phone dependence. The result shows a significant study and among the four types of family communication patterns, consensual type is the highest significant or mobile phone dependence compare with other three types of family communication patterns.

Compare with the two research questions, both are share the same results as the correlation shows the higher on both conversation and conformity orientation are more dependence on mobile phone which is actually from consensual type of family. Consensual pattern is high in both orientations. The characteristic of consensual is that families are encouraged to have open communication or interaction to explore more new ideas with the members but as long as individuals doesn’t interfered the internal harmony of the family system. This can further explain that when individuals are high conversation they tend to use more mobile phone to connect with their families but in the meantime if they are not using mobile phone, the parents or other family members will worried and might causes the family system. In other words, mobile phones act as an important family device that needed to interact with families members. Especially the participants are studying in university and probably the distance between the student and student’s family are far from each other. Chen and Katz (2008) stated that females tend to call home and males are waiting their family to calls them. This indicated that mobile phone is a mediator in a family system and without this device it can obstruct the family system such as anxious of not calling and receiving calls.

5.2. Limitations of study

This research has several limitations. Firstly, the samples conducted are not equivalent sizes, because Chinese is most majorities especially compare with Indian students which only 22 participants. Secondly, disadvantage of having online questionnaire. Online questionnaire is always the convenient and low cost but always have the same disadvantage as there are not conducted in face to face, cannot observe the participants behavior, the biasness of online questionnaire and probability of participants honesty manner are unknown.

Lastly, the resources are limited. The previous studies of researchers’ topic are very limited especially mobile phone dependence topic as there are still newly develop topic. The study of relationship between family communication patterns and mobile phone dependence is not enough supportive as due to limited resources. There are rarely topics that actually study in this relationship. Most of the studies are either the role and usage of mobile phone and the impact of mobile phone within the family. Same as the family communication patterns study in Malaysia which they didn’t study what type of family communications pattern that Malaysia practices.

5.3. Implications