Changing Social Bonds among Young Adults in the Digital Age

Digital communication technologies, particularly social media platforms and instant messaging apps, have fundamentally altered how young adults develop, maintain, and interpret social ties. This study investigates the impact of digital communication on modern relationship behaviours among university-aged young adults who were raised as "digital natives." The paper investigates how digitally mediated connectivity alters patterns of intimacy, trust, emotional support, and community formation, drawing on theories of network society (Castells), mediated intimacy (Turkle), dramaturgical self-presentation (Goffman), symbolic interactionism (Blumer), and media multiplexity (Baym). Using a mixed-methods design that included a survey (N = 320) and 25 in-depth interviews with young adults aged 18-28, the findings show that digital media facilitates hybrid online-offline relationships, reconfigures emotional intimacy, intensifies surveillance and relational insecurity, enables new forms of identity and community, and generates emotional strain and digital fatigue at the same time. According to the study, digital communication significantly changes the form, meaning, and emotional texture of social bonds among young adults, rather than simply supplementing pre-existing ones. The work contributes to digital sociology by providing an empirically informed analysis of emergent relational dynamics. It also enriches sociological understandings of social connection and intimacy in the digital era.

Digital Communication; Young Adults; Social Bonds; Changing of Emotion

1. Barker, V. Older adolescents’ motivations for social network site use: The influence of gender, group identity, and collective self-esteem. Cyberpsychol. Behav. Soc. Netw. 2019, 22, 389–395. https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2018.0422 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Baym, N.K. Personal Connections in the Digital Age, 2nd ed.; Polity Press: Cambridge, UK, 2015. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Bayer, J.B.; Triệu, P.; Ellison, N.B. Social media elements, ecologies, and their effects on well-being. Curr. Opin. Psychol. 2020, 31, 82–87. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2019.08.019 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Blumer, H. Symbolic Interactionism: Perspective and Method; University of California Press: Berkeley, CA, USA, 1969. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. boyd, d. It’s Complicated: The Social Lives of Networked Teens; Yale University Press: New Haven, CT, USA, 2014. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Braun, V.; Clarke, V. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qual. Res. Psychol. 2006, 3, 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Bucher, T. Want to be on the top? Algorithmic power and the threat of invisibility on Facebook. New Media Soc. 2012, 14, 1164–1180. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444812440159 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Castells, M. Communication Power; Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK, 2009. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Dhir, A.; Yossatorn, Y.; Kaur, P.; Chen, S. Online social media fatigue and psychological wellbeing—A study of compulsive use, fear of missing out, fatigue, anxiety and depression. Int. J. Inf. Manag. 2018, 40, 141–152. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijinfomgt.2018.01.012 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Ellison, N.B.; Steinfield, C.; Lampe, C. Connection strategies: Social capital implications of Facebook-enabled communication. New Media Soc. 2011, 13, 873–892. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444810385389 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Fox, J.; Tokunaga, R.S. Romantic partner monitoring after breakups: Attachment, dependence, distress, and post-dissolution online surveillance. Cyberpsychol. Behav. Soc. Netw. 2015, 18, 491–498. https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2015.0123 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Goffman, E. The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life; Anchor Books: New York, NY, USA, 1959. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Granovetter, M. The strength of weak ties. Am. J. Sociol. 1973, 78, 1360–1380. https://doi.org/10.1086/225469 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Gregg, M. Work’s Intimacy; Polity Press: Cambridge, UK, 2011. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Herring, S. Gender and power in online communication. In The Handbook of Language and Gender; Holmes, J., Meyerhoff, M., Eds.; Blackwell: Oxford, UK, 2010; pp. 202–228. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Hogan, B. The presentation of self in the age of social media. Bull. Sci. Technol. Soc. 2010, 30, 377–386. https://doi.org/10.1177/0270467610385893 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Kanai, A. Gender and Relatable Digital Culture; Palgrave Macmillan: London, UK, 2019. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Krueger, J. Extended emotions and emotional internalism. Acta Anal. 2016, 31, 353–364. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12136-016-0301-4 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Marwick, A.E. Status Update: Celebrity, Publicity, and Branding in the Social Media Age; Yale University Press: New Haven, CT, USA, 2013. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Muscanell, N.; Guadagno, R. Make new friends or keep the old: Gender and personality differences in social networking use. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2012, 28, 107–112. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2011.08.016 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. Reichelt, J. Ambient intimacy. Fragments 2007. Available online: http://jasonreichelt.com/2007/05/18/ambient-intimacy/ (accessed on Day Month Year). [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. Tokunaga, R.S. Interpersonal surveillance on social media: Patterns and motives of Facebook stalking. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2016, 55, 179–187. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.09.009 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

23. Turkle, S. Alone Together: Why We Expect More from Technology and Less from Each Other; Basic Books: New York, NY, USA, 2011. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

24. van Dijk, J. The Digital Divide; Polity Press: Cambridge, UK, 2020. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

25. Vaterlaus, J.M.; Patten, E.V.; Roche, C.; Young, J.A. #Gettinghealthy: The perceived influence of social media on young adults’ health behaviors. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2021, 121, 106797. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2021.106797 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

26. Wellman, B. Physical place and cyberplace: The rise of personalized networking. Int. J. Urban Reg. Res. 2001, 25, 227–252. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2427.00309 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• The Impact of Ownership Structure on Dividend Payout Policy of Listed Plantation Companies in Sri Lanka
• Urban Sustainability in North-East India: A Study through the lens of NER-SDG index
• Performance Assessment of Predictive Forecasting Techniques for Enhancing Hospital Supply Chain Efficiency in Healthcare Logistics
• The Fractured Self in Julian Barnes' Postmodern Fiction: Identity Crisis and Deflation in Metroland and the Sense of an Ending
• Impact of Flood on the Employment, Labour Productivity and Migration of Agricultural Labour in North Bihar