\documentclass[11pt,twoside]{article}\makeatletter

\IfFileExists{xcolor.sty}%
  {\RequirePackage{xcolor}}%
  {\RequirePackage{color}}
\usepackage{colortbl}
\usepackage{wrapfig}
\usepackage{ifxetex}
\ifxetex
  \usepackage{fontspec}
  \usepackage{xunicode}
  \catcode`⃥=\active \def⃥{\textbackslash}
  \catcode`❴=\active \def❴{\{}
  \catcode`❵=\active \def❵{\}}
  \def\textJapanese{\fontspec{Noto Sans CJK JP}}
  \def\textChinese{\fontspec{Noto Sans CJK SC}}
  \def\textKorean{\fontspec{Noto Sans CJK KR}}
  \setmonofont{DejaVu Sans Mono}
  
\else
  \IfFileExists{utf8x.def}%
   {\usepackage[utf8x]{inputenc}
      \PrerenderUnicode{–}
    }%
   {\usepackage[utf8]{inputenc}}
  \usepackage[english]{babel}
  \usepackage[T1]{fontenc}
  \usepackage{float}
  \usepackage[]{ucs}
  \uc@dclc{8421}{default}{\textbackslash }
  \uc@dclc{10100}{default}{\{}
  \uc@dclc{10101}{default}{\}}
  \uc@dclc{8491}{default}{\AA{}}
  \uc@dclc{8239}{default}{\,}
  \uc@dclc{20154}{default}{ }
  \uc@dclc{10148}{default}{>}
  \def\textschwa{\rotatebox{-90}{e}}
  \def\textJapanese{}
  \def\textChinese{}
  \IfFileExists{tipa.sty}{\usepackage{tipa}}{}
\fi
\def\exampleFont{\ttfamily\small}
\DeclareTextSymbol{\textpi}{OML}{25}
\usepackage{relsize}
\RequirePackage{array}
\def\@testpach{\@chclass
 \ifnum \@lastchclass=6 \@ne \@chnum \@ne \else
  \ifnum \@lastchclass=7 5 \else
   \ifnum \@lastchclass=8 \tw@ \else
    \ifnum \@lastchclass=9 \thr@@
   \else \z@
   \ifnum \@lastchclass = 10 \else
   \edef\@nextchar{\expandafter\string\@nextchar}%
   \@chnum
   \if \@nextchar c\z@ \else
    \if \@nextchar l\@ne \else
     \if \@nextchar r\tw@ \else
   \z@ \@chclass
   \if\@nextchar |\@ne \else
    \if \@nextchar !6 \else
     \if \@nextchar @7 \else
      \if \@nextchar (8 \else
       \if \@nextchar )9 \else
  10
  \@chnum
  \if \@nextchar m\thr@@\else
   \if \@nextchar p4 \else
    \if \@nextchar b5 \else
   \z@ \@chclass \z@ \@preamerr \z@ \fi \fi \fi \fi
   \fi \fi  \fi  \fi  \fi  \fi  \fi \fi \fi \fi \fi \fi}
\gdef\arraybackslash{\let\\=\@arraycr}
\def\@textsubscript#1{{\m@th\ensuremath{_{\mbox{\fontsize\sf@size\z@#1}}}}}
\def\Panel#1#2#3#4{\multicolumn{#3}{){\columncolor{#2}}#4}{#1}}
\def\abbr{}
\def\corr{}
\def\expan{}
\def\gap{}
\def\orig{}
\def\reg{}
\def\ref{}
\def\sic{}
\def\persName{}\def\name{}
\def\placeName{}
\def\orgName{}
\def\textcal#1{{\fontspec{Lucida Calligraphy}#1}}
\def\textgothic#1{{\fontspec{Lucida Blackletter}#1}}
\def\textlarge#1{{\large #1}}
\def\textoverbar#1{\ensuremath{\overline{#1}}}
\def\textquoted#1{‘#1’}
\def\textsmall#1{{\small #1}}
\def\textsubscript#1{\@textsubscript{\selectfont#1}}
\def\textxi{\ensuremath{\xi}}
\def\titlem{\itshape}
\newenvironment{biblfree}{}{\ifvmode\par\fi }
\newenvironment{bibl}{}{}
\newenvironment{byline}{\vskip6pt\itshape\fontsize{16pt}{18pt}\selectfont}{\par }
\newenvironment{citbibl}{}{\ifvmode\par\fi }
\newenvironment{docAuthor}{\ifvmode\vskip4pt\fontsize{16pt}{18pt}\selectfont\fi\itshape}{\ifvmode\par\fi }
\newenvironment{docDate}{}{\ifvmode\par\fi }
\newenvironment{docImprint}{\vskip 6pt}{\ifvmode\par\fi }
\newenvironment{docTitle}{\vskip6pt\bfseries\fontsize{22pt}{25pt}\selectfont}{\par }
\newenvironment{msHead}{\vskip 6pt}{\par}
\newenvironment{msItem}{\vskip 6pt}{\par}
\newenvironment{rubric}{}{}
\newenvironment{titlePart}{}{\par }

\newcolumntype{L}[1]{){\raggedright\arraybackslash}p{#1}}
\newcolumntype{C}[1]{){\centering\arraybackslash}p{#1}}
\newcolumntype{R}[1]{){\raggedleft\arraybackslash}p{#1}}
\newcolumntype{P}[1]{){\arraybackslash}p{#1}}
\newcolumntype{B}[1]{){\arraybackslash}b{#1}}
\newcolumntype{M}[1]{){\arraybackslash}m{#1}}
\definecolor{label}{gray}{0.75}
\def\unusedattribute#1{\sout{\textcolor{label}{#1}}}
\DeclareRobustCommand*{\xref}{\hyper@normalise\xref@}
\def\xref@#1#2{\hyper@linkurl{#2}{#1}}
\begingroup
\catcode`\_=\active
\gdef_#1{\ensuremath{\sb{\mathrm{#1}}}}
\endgroup
\mathcode`\_=\string"8000
\catcode`\_=12\relax

\usepackage[a4paper,twoside,lmargin=1in,rmargin=1in,tmargin=1in,bmargin=1in,marginparwidth=0.75in]{geometry}
\usepackage{framed}

\definecolor{shadecolor}{gray}{0.95}
\usepackage{longtable}
\usepackage[normalem]{ulem}
\usepackage{fancyvrb}
\usepackage{fancyhdr}
\usepackage{graphicx}
\usepackage{marginnote}

\renewcommand{\@cite}[1]{#1}


\renewcommand*{\marginfont}{\itshape\footnotesize}

\def\Gin@extensions{.pdf,.png,.jpg,.mps,.tif}

  \pagestyle{fancy}

\usepackage[pdftitle={Facebook Addiction: A Study of Big-Five Factors and Academic Performance amongst Students of IUB},
 pdfauthor={}]{hyperref}
\hyperbaseurl{}

	 \paperwidth210mm
	 \paperheight297mm
              
\def\@pnumwidth{1.55em}
\def\@tocrmarg {2.55em}
\def\@dotsep{4.5}
\setcounter{tocdepth}{3}
\clubpenalty=8000
\emergencystretch 3em
\hbadness=4000
\hyphenpenalty=400
\pretolerance=750
\tolerance=2000
\vbadness=4000
\widowpenalty=10000

\renewcommand\section{\@startsection {section}{1}{\z@}%
     {-1.75ex \@plus -0.5ex \@minus -.2ex}%
     {0.5ex \@plus .2ex}%
     {\reset@font\Large\bfseries}}
\renewcommand\subsection{\@startsection{subsection}{2}{\z@}%
     {-1.75ex\@plus -0.5ex \@minus- .2ex}%
     {0.5ex \@plus .2ex}%
     {\reset@font\Large}}
\renewcommand\subsubsection{\@startsection{subsubsection}{3}{\z@}%
     {-1.5ex\@plus -0.35ex \@minus -.2ex}%
     {0.5ex \@plus .2ex}%
     {\reset@font\large}}
\renewcommand\paragraph{\@startsection{paragraph}{4}{\z@}%
     {-1ex \@plus-0.35ex \@minus -0.2ex}%
     {0.5ex \@plus .2ex}%
     {\reset@font\normalsize}}
\renewcommand\subparagraph{\@startsection{subparagraph}{5}{\parindent}%
     {1.5ex \@plus1ex \@minus .2ex}%
     {-1em}%
     {\reset@font\normalsize\bfseries}}


\def\l@section#1#2{\addpenalty{\@secpenalty} \addvspace{1.0em plus 1pt}
 \@tempdima 1.5em \begingroup
 \parindent \z@ \rightskip \@pnumwidth 
 \parfillskip -\@pnumwidth 
 \bfseries \leavevmode #1\hfil \hbox to\@pnumwidth{\hss #2}\par
 \endgroup}
\def\l@subsection{\@dottedtocline{2}{1.5em}{2.3em}}
\def\l@subsubsection{\@dottedtocline{3}{3.8em}{3.2em}}
\def\l@paragraph{\@dottedtocline{4}{7.0em}{4.1em}}
\def\l@subparagraph{\@dottedtocline{5}{10em}{5em}}
\@ifundefined{c@section}{\newcounter{section}}{}
\@ifundefined{c@chapter}{\newcounter{chapter}}{}
\newif\if@mainmatter 
\@mainmattertrue
\def\chaptername{Chapter}
\def\frontmatter{%
  \pagenumbering{roman}
  \def\thechapter{\@roman\c@chapter}
  \def\theHchapter{\roman{chapter}}
  \def\thesection{\@roman\c@section}
  \def\theHsection{\roman{section}}
  \def\@chapapp{}%
}
\def\mainmatter{%
  \cleardoublepage
  \def\thechapter{\@arabic\c@chapter}
  \setcounter{chapter}{0}
  \setcounter{section}{0}
  \pagenumbering{arabic}
  \setcounter{secnumdepth}{6}
  \def\@chapapp{\chaptername}%
  \def\theHchapter{\arabic{chapter}}
  \def\thesection{\@arabic\c@section}
  \def\theHsection{\arabic{section}}
}
\def\backmatter{%
  \cleardoublepage
  \setcounter{chapter}{0}
  \setcounter{section}{0}
  \setcounter{secnumdepth}{2}
  \def\@chapapp{\appendixname}%
  \def\thechapter{\@Alph\c@chapter}
  \def\theHchapter{\Alph{chapter}}
  \appendix
}
\newenvironment{bibitemlist}[1]{%
   \list{\@biblabel{\@arabic\c@enumiv}}%
       {\settowidth\labelwidth{\@biblabel{#1}}%
        \leftmargin\labelwidth
        \advance\leftmargin\labelsep
        \@openbib@code
        \usecounter{enumiv}%
        \let\p@enumiv\@empty
        \renewcommand\theenumiv{\@arabic\c@enumiv}%
	}%
  \sloppy
  \clubpenalty4000
  \@clubpenalty \clubpenalty
  \widowpenalty4000%
  \sfcode`\.\@m}%
  {\def\@noitemerr
    {\@latex@warning{Empty `bibitemlist' environment}}%
    \endlist}

\def\tableofcontents{\section*{\contentsname}\@starttoc{toc}}
\parskip0pt
\parindent1em
\def\Panel#1#2#3#4{\multicolumn{#3}{){\columncolor{#2}}#4}{#1}}
\newenvironment{reflist}{%
  \begin{raggedright}\begin{list}{}
  {%
   \setlength{\topsep}{0pt}%
   \setlength{\rightmargin}{0.25in}%
   \setlength{\itemsep}{0pt}%
   \setlength{\itemindent}{0pt}%
   \setlength{\parskip}{0pt}%
   \setlength{\parsep}{2pt}%
   \def\makelabel##1{\itshape ##1}}%
  }
  {\end{list}\end{raggedright}}
\newenvironment{sansreflist}{%
  \begin{raggedright}\begin{list}{}
  {%
   \setlength{\topsep}{0pt}%
   \setlength{\rightmargin}{0.25in}%
   \setlength{\itemindent}{0pt}%
   \setlength{\parskip}{0pt}%
   \setlength{\itemsep}{0pt}%
   \setlength{\parsep}{2pt}%
   \def\makelabel##1{\upshape ##1}}%
  }
  {\end{list}\end{raggedright}}
\newenvironment{specHead}[2]%
 {\vspace{20pt}\hrule\vspace{10pt}%
  \phantomsection\label{#1}\markright{#2}%

  \pdfbookmark[2]{#2}{#1}%
  \hspace{-0.75in}{\bfseries\fontsize{16pt}{18pt}\selectfont#2}%
  }{}
      \def\TheFullDate{2014-01-15 (revised: 15 January 2014)}
\def\TheID{\makeatother }
\def\TheDate{2014-01-15}
\title{Facebook Addiction: A Study of Big-Five Factors and Academic Performance amongst Students of IUB}
\author{}\makeatletter 
\makeatletter
\newcommand*{\cleartoleftpage}{%
  \clearpage
    \if@twoside
    \ifodd\c@page
      \hbox{}\newpage
      \if@twocolumn
        \hbox{}\newpage
      \fi
    \fi
  \fi
}
\makeatother
\makeatletter
\thispagestyle{empty}
\markright{\@title}\markboth{\@title}{\@author}
\renewcommand\small{\@setfontsize\small{9pt}{11pt}\abovedisplayskip 8.5\p@ plus3\p@ minus4\p@
\belowdisplayskip \abovedisplayskip
\abovedisplayshortskip \z@ plus2\p@
\belowdisplayshortskip 4\p@ plus2\p@ minus2\p@
\def\@listi{\leftmargin\leftmargini
               \topsep 2\p@ plus1\p@ minus1\p@
               \parsep 2\p@ plus\p@ minus\p@
               \itemsep 1pt}
}
\makeatother
\fvset{frame=single,numberblanklines=false,xleftmargin=5mm,xrightmargin=5mm}
\fancyhf{} 
\setlength{\headheight}{14pt}
\fancyhead[LE]{\bfseries\leftmark} 
\fancyhead[RO]{\bfseries\rightmark} 
\fancyfoot[RO]{}
\fancyfoot[CO]{\thepage}
\fancyfoot[LO]{\TheID}
\fancyfoot[LE]{}
\fancyfoot[CE]{\thepage}
\fancyfoot[RE]{\TheID}
\hypersetup{citebordercolor=0.75 0.75 0.75,linkbordercolor=0.75 0.75 0.75,urlbordercolor=0.75 0.75 0.75,bookmarksnumbered=true}
\fancypagestyle{plain}{\fancyhead{}\renewcommand{\headrulewidth}{0pt}}

\date{}
\usepackage{authblk}

\providecommand{\keywords}[1]
{
\footnotesize
  \textbf{\textit{Index terms---}} #1
}

\usepackage{graphicx,xcolor}
\definecolor{GJBlue}{HTML}{273B81}
\definecolor{GJLightBlue}{HTML}{0A9DD9}
\definecolor{GJMediumGrey}{HTML}{6D6E70}
\definecolor{GJLightGrey}{HTML}{929497} 

\renewenvironment{abstract}{%
   \setlength{\parindent}{0pt}\raggedright
   \textcolor{GJMediumGrey}{\rule{\textwidth}{2pt}}
   \vskip16pt
   \textcolor{GJBlue}{\large\bfseries\abstractname\space}
}{%   
   \vskip8pt
   \textcolor{GJMediumGrey}{\rule{\textwidth}{2pt}}
   \vskip16pt
}

\usepackage[absolute,overlay]{textpos}

\makeatother 
      \usepackage{lineno}
      \linenumbers
      
\begin{document}

             \author[1]{Shanayyara  Mahmood}

             \affil[1]{  The Islamia University of Bahawalpur}

\renewcommand\Authands{ and }

\date{\small \em Received: 10 December 2013 Accepted: 31 December 2013 Published: 15 January 2014}

\maketitle


\begin{abstract}
        


Purpose of study: Social networking sites have gained fame over the past few years.People have started to use them regularly. One Such site is Facebook which has become the centre of attention and has created an urge to explore certain issue among the researchers. This study investigates the affect of personality variables on face book addiction and if it has any negative effect on the student academic performance.Methodology Applied: Survey research method was employed. Questionnaires were distributed among students using in the department of Management Sciences. Valid questionnaires (n=150) were filled and returned.Findings and results: Regression analysis was used to analyze the data. Extroversion, neuroticism and Openness to experiences are all positively correlated to FBA. Also, there is negative relationship between FBA and Academic performance.

\end{abstract}


\keywords{big five factor model, facebook addiction, academic performance.}

\begin{textblock*}{18cm}(1cm,1cm) % {block width} (coords) 
\textcolor{GJBlue}{\LARGE Global Journals \LaTeX\ JournalKaleidoscope\texttrademark}
\end{textblock*}

\begin{textblock*}{18cm}(1.4cm,1.5cm) % {block width} (coords) 
\textcolor{GJBlue}{\footnotesize \\ Artificial Intelligence formulated this projection for compatibility purposes from the original article published at Global Journals. However, this technology is currently in beta. \emph{Therefore, kindly ignore odd layouts, missed formulae, text, tables, or figures.}}
\end{textblock*}


\let\tabcellsep& 	 	 		 \par
Abstract-Purpose of study: Social networking sites have gained fame over the past few years. People have started to use them regularly. One Such site is Facebook which has become the centre of attention and has created an urge to explore certain issue among the researchers. This study investigates the affect of personality variables on face book addiction and if it has any negative effect on the student academic performance.\par
Methodology Applied: Survey research method was employed. Questionnaires were distributed among students using in the department of Management Sciences. Valid questionnaires (n=150) were filled and returned.\par
Findings and results: Regression analysis was used to analyze the data. Extroversion, neuroticism and Openness to experiences are all positively correlated to FBA. Also, there is negative relationship between FBA and Academic performance. 
\section[{Introduction}]{Introduction}\par
he web has considerably enhanced the capacity for people to interact with one another without the limitations of their location. Also, it has widened the amount of associations that any person may keep on at a time. For free and accessible interaction over the web, social networking sites (SNS) have gained significant importance. One of the fastest growing SNS site is Face book, it has over one billion active users around the globe and 584 million people use it daily on the average. Ellison and others suggest that the basic statistical portion of people ranging between eighteen to twentyfour years is increasing at a rate of seventy-four percent annually.\par
Facebook has gained unparalleled fame and is presently the 2 nd most often used and visited website on the web, capturing an audience of over 606 million according to  {\ref Gonzalez (2011)}. In Australia, the zeal to use face book is noticeable, almost half the population is reported to be active users.  {\ref (Gonzalez, 2011)}. It is not Author ? ?: The Islamia University of Bahawalpur, Pakistan. e-mail: shanyfazal@gmail.com shocking to find that face book has impacted the socialnetworking of the people, keeping these figures in mind.\par
As an example, a variety of studies have evaluated that Face book use is related to enhance sociability.  {\ref (} Although face book use has its implications, there is a definite gap of thorough empirical research in the area. One of the reasons could be that face book is comparatively a new social advent and intrinsically, there has been restricted chance for preliminary analysis. However, within the last 2 years, a growing range of analyzers have recognized the importance of this kind of research, and are finding measures towards distinguishing the categories of individuals who are facebook users.  {\ref (Hargittai, 2008;} Raacke \& Bonds-Raacke, 2008; Sheldon, 2009; \hyperref[b49]{Tufekci, 2008)}. So as to effectively come through this objective, some researchhers have centered on the link between Facebook use and varied aspects of personality traits. (Amichai-Hamburger, 2002; \hyperref[b10]{Buffardi \& Campbell, 2008;} {\ref , Mehdizadeh, 2010;} {\ref Ross et al., 2009;} {\ref Sheldon, 2008)}. In keeping with \hyperref[b4]{Amichai-Hamburger (2002)}, this type of analysis is important as ''personality may be extremely pertinent in deciding behavior on the web.''\par
The actual purpose behind the creation of face book was to provide a social tool for students to maintain their relationships related to university. But today, high school and college students have preferred Facebook as the priority social-networking site. Among college students, looking for someone who does not use face book is a formidable task Ellison et al reports that in 2007, 94\% of Undergraduate students in the United States accounted for being face book users. In addition to the large scale use of face book by college students, the average time they spend on face book is also on the rise. In January 2012 a total of more than ten billion min/day were amassed by users logged on to facebook on their personal computers. In comparison to January 2011, and January 2012 the accumulated min/day and the average min/user per day escalated by 57\% and 14\% respectively. With the growing fame of Facebook among students, many of the researchers have started to focus on the reasons that can be relevant to the excessive use of Face book. One of the approaches used it to see the affect of personality traits on using face book. One objective of this research is to examine if there is a relation between personality variables and face book. (Ryan,T and Xenos S, 2011).\par
Known that a large number of students use Facebook and the quantity of time that they are spending logged on to Facebook, the issue raised is whether using Facebook negatively affects the performance of students at their academic level. The question arises as whether Facebook use negatively impacts academic performance. Till now, the research on the association between time devoted to Face book and academic performance has generated differentiated results. Another purpose of the sudyis to investigate if there is a negative association between Facebook addiction and academic performance as investigated by Ryan and Xenos in 2011.\par
The key objectives of this study are:  
\section[{Literature Review a) Social-networking sites and Facebook}]{Literature Review a) Social-networking sites and Facebook}\par
Internet socializing has come to the forefront as an integral aspect of young adult life Within the public, the highest ratio of computer and internet users belongs to the adolescent and young adult group, their usage constituting mainly of academic purposes (46\%), emaling/Instant Messaging (36\%) and PC gaming (38\%)  {\ref (De Bell \& Chapman 2006)}. Boyd and  {\ref Ellison (2008)} investigated that Social Networking Sites have provided the most recent platform for fashioning up of public or private profiles and using them for connecting with people in their networks.\par
SNS have emerged as online services letting people to 1) be part of a system and to fabricate a public or semi-public profile within it 2) make up a list including other people with a common connection 3) track their own and others' connection lists within the setup.\par
Facebook, a Mark Zuckerberg innovation for aiding residential college and university students to interact with other residence hall occupants is a notable example. It is described as ''an online directory that interacts students through social networking at college  
\section[{b) Facebook}]{b) Facebook}\par
With over 800 million users, face book is one of the most famous SNS. As much as seventy languages are provided on the website. Recently, with the advent of smart phones, people are always on the go, they log on to Face book without needing a personal computer and check their profiles. There are almost 475 mobile operators worldwide that are involved in the promotion of face book. According to Facebook Press 2012, presently, 350 million people access face book through their phones. c) Why the Temptation? Levy (2010), investigated that face book has been growing amazingly from 2008 to June 2009. He stated that face book grew at a rate of 157\% with approximately 208 million active users. If face book were a country, it would have been the fifth largest with respect to population, even bigger than Russia and Japan, this comparison was given when it hit the mark of two hundred million users while a video was also launched showing this race.\par
An online profile is made on face book where users can 'add' friends and can post or comment on each others' profiles. Also, personal information is required while creating an account including information like religious and political views, relationship status and favorite music etc. Every individual has the capacity to upload photos they like on their profiles. This creates a variety of profile showing some private information as well. \hyperref[b20]{(Ellison, Steinfield and Lampe, 2007)}.\par
With numerous individuals utilizing these destinations, showing data and pictures which could be seen as private to a lot of people, businesses have begun to exploit this. Numerous managements now utilize long range informal communication destinations like an educational module vitae to figure out if the competitor is suitable for the occupation. It is clear that a ton more could be told around an individual than essentially having photographs and status' on an informal communication site.\par
d) The Big Five and Facebook Use A person's characteristics can be seen as their inclinations or preferences producing a specific mindset when faced with different scenarios. Ajzen, J. (1988) The generally acknowledged model of personality is the Five-Factor Model (FFM), coming out as the most agreed upon postulation on this matter.  {\ref John} Extraversion refers to a person's degree of sociability and outgoingness. A hallmark of extraverts is their enthusiastic attitude for the outside world, and can be put forward as friendly, energetic, confident and showing optimism. On the other hand, introverts are reserved, lack enthusiasm and are less optimistic. The link between Facebook usage and extraversion has seen two contrary suggestions being brought forward. The first state that as Facebook is a way to reach out to contacts made off-line, extraverts are likely to spend more time on it. The second proposition suggests that because introverts do not communicate as effectively in person, Facebook enables them to make up for this as explained by Moore, K. and McElroy, J. C.,  {\ref (2012)}.\par
Openness to experience is concerned with the degree of a person's desire to look into new circumstances or conditions. Individuals who display a liking to experiences show affinity for diversity, fresh encounters and curiosity of the mind. Those who are not very intrigued by new experiences are likely to be cautious, prefer stability and do not have the same mental curiosity. The provision of fresh ideas about connecting to people and opportunities for additional experiences may be why people scoring high in openness favor spending more time on Facebook. (Amichai-Hamburger, Y., and Vinitzky, G. (2010).\par
Agreeableness refers to the magnitude to which a person favors and practices collaboration with others. Those who are agreeable have been noticed to be more cordial, social, and affectionate and trusting while disagreeable individuals show harshness, are less cooperative and more likely to engage in arguments. Individuals with high scores on agreeableness have more chances of involvement in relationships but there is a lack of conclusive evidence that they would do the same online. Less Facebook use decreases the likelihood of having to interact with people, so those scoring low on agreeableness prefer to spend less time online.(Ross, C., Orr, E., Sisic, M., Arseneault, M., Simmering,M., and Orr, R.(2009).\par
Conscientiousness signifies the traits of being disciplined, cautious and having strong willpower. Such people show restraint over their desires and are structured, hard-working and strain to achieve their targets. Unconscientious individuals on the other hand are more susceptible towards acting on their impulses, are disordered and often delay their work. High scorers on conscientiousness are not likely to spend a lot of time on Facebook as they might see this as a diversion from their path to complete the goals set out for them. (Moore, K. and McElroy, J. C.,  {\ref (2012)}. Despite Facebook's widespread popularity, the topic of Facebook usage and its correlation to personality types has seen considerable research just in 
\section[{Global Journal of Management and Business Research}]{Global Journal of Management and Business Research}\par
Volume XIV Issue V Version I Year ( ) the previous few years. A high number of these studies have prioritized the various activities performed on Facebook instead of the time spent online.\par
When assessing students of Undergraduate and graduate levels, Ross et al. proposed that there was a link between personality variables and a few features of Facebook usage. According to them extraverts were more inclined to join Facebook groups as opposed to introverts. People high on neuroticism declared the Wall as their most favoured part of the website. Openness to experience was linked to a greater degree of socializing via Facebook. The authors themselves expressed their surprise at the lack of notable conclusions associated with personality variables in the recent study. Amichai, Hamburger and Vinitsky observed that extravert students had more Facebook friends but differed with Ross et al., by stating there was no appreciable relationship between being an extravert and joining more groups.\par
Ross et al. and Amichai Hamburger Vinitsky were unable to detect a link between the amount of time spent online and personality variations. Ryan and Xenos proposed that extraverts tend to spend more time on Facebook. Moore and McElroy supposed that the kinds of Facebook usage are strongly connected to personality variations. Introverts are assumed to have smaller social networks. Highly conscientious people are inclined to utilize the Wall far less often, whereas agreeable persons seek to post material about them on it.\par
The single component having a significant link to usage time was neuroticism. Hughes et al. stated that the likelihood of using Facebook was more in high neuroticism. Extraversion, conscientiousness and openness had no pronounced effect on Facebook usage. Any affiliation between particular activities on social networking websites and degree of neuroticism was ruled out by Muscanell and Guadagno. However, they proposed a relationship of particular types of usage with openness, agreeableness, conscientiousnes and extraversion. Their discoveries demonstrated that extroverted individuals reported more elevated amounts of Facebook use and addictive tendencies as stated by wilson et al, (2010) These results indicate that socializes need boundless contact with the virtual world and "companions" for a high incitement and a huge informal community. It additionally demonstrated members who scored low on principled invested an expanded measure of time on Facebook, this is thought to be down to the way that rather than study they are stalling on Facebook. The openness attribute had no impact on SNS utilization and this is thought so in light of the fact that interpersonal organizations are no more "another" creation. Suitability and neuroticism were found to have no effect on Facebook use stated by Wilson and others (2010).\par
In the study by Amichai-Hamburger and Vinitzky (2010), they discovered a critical correspondence between identity and Facebook utilization. They found that social butterflies emphatically related with the amount of Facebook companions the client has and that "individuals with low or abnormal amounts of neuroticism were slanted to impart more essential data than individuals to direct levels of neurocitism".(amichai-Hamburger et al, 2010).\par
Besides to this they uncovered that people with more excellent openness to encounter utilized a greater number of characteristics from the individual data area than people with easier levels of openness to encounter. Ten Traits connected with "extraversion" incorporate amiability, emphaticness, garrulity and being dynamic. Those high in extraversion have a tendency to show an inclination for interpersonal connection and social movement as investigated by Borman \& Motowidle, 1993). In the study by Davies, French and Keogh (1998) they discovered extraversion to absolutely correspond to self-beguiling improvement which is "having a swelled, yet sincerely held Self-portrayal". (Davies et al, 1998) Findings by Kristof-Brown, Barrick and Franke (2002) indicated that extraverted people make more amazing utilization of self advancement. This connections once again to Wilson et al (2010) discoveries that extravert identities have a noteworthy positive association with Facebook use, socializers use Facebook as an outlet for headway toward oneself. f) Technological Advancement, Social networking and Academic Performance\par
Studies have investigated the common effect of innovation on scholastic accomplishment and improvement of youngsters and adolescents. Positive and negative impacts of innovation on accomplishment have been archived. Espinosa, Laffey, Whittaker, and Sheng (2006) explored the part of engineering in right on time youth improvement utilizing information from the Early Childhood Longitudinal Study. The findings showed that get to help the taking in capability of the learners, yet the creators forewarn that folks ought to support the instructive utilization of engineering to enhance scholarly accomplishment. \hyperref[b35]{Lei and Zhao (2005)} examined the specifics of access, recognizing that amount is not as essential as quality regarding innovation utilization and person accomplishment. When the nature of innovation utilization is not nearly observed or guaranteed specifically, machine utilization may accomplish more damage than great to understudy accomplishment in school. Also, innovation that was found to have a positive effect on scholastic accomplishment, or engineering with instructive worth, was not prominent and utilized less every now and again. Studies have likewise reported no connection between workstation utilization and scholarly accomplishment. Case in point, no relationship was found between time used on the workstation at home and GPA in an example of young people  {\ref (Hunley, 2005)}.\par
Different authors have discovered that recreational Internet utilization is emphatically associateed with hindered scholarly execution (Kubey, Lavin, \& Barrows, 2001). More or less 10-15\% of study members reported feeling not being in complete control of their Internet utilization, and that it has harmed their schoolwork. People who reported Internet-brought on schoolwork issues were found to have used five times a bigger number of hours online than the individuals who did not, and they were likewise fundamentally more inclined to report that their Internet use made them stay up late, get less rest, and miss classes. Despite the fact that not particularly specifying FB, the creators presume that it is less the Internet that causes these issues as the new social chances of the Internet. Understudies who reported scholarly issues were more inclined to utilize the Internet for constant social exercises, for example, IM and visit rooms. Kubey and partners note that this social utilization are what hold people hostage, particularly late around evening time. Particular to FB use, Vanden  {\ref Boogart (2006)}, in an unpublished Master's proposition, discovered that substantial FB use (i.e., more of an opportunity used on FB) is seen around learners with easier GPA's, albeit no control variables were executed in the study.\par
Then again, Kolek and Saunders (2008) found that there was no connection between Facebook utilizes and GPA as a part of a specimen of learners from an open North-east research college. All the more as of late, an exploratory study reported a negative relationship between FB utilization and scholastic accomplishhment as measured without anyone else's input reported GPA and hours used contemplating for every week  {\ref (Karpinski \& Duberstein, 2009)}. Once more, this study just executed one control variable (i.e., learner status as either undergrad or graduate), and neglected to control for other bewildering variables, for example, college major. This information from the study will be reexamined and displayed in the momentum paper focused around proposals and criticism from different analysts. In light of the previously stated study, an alternate gathering of specialists utilized the exploratory discoveries as a springboard for a production where no relationship was found between FB use and GPA (Pasek, More, \& Hargittai, 2009). Notwithstanding, the general agreement is that more research needs to be carried out, and that the addressed relationship between SNS and scholastic execution remains generally unreturned. 
\section[{g) Facebook and Academic Performance}]{g) Facebook and Academic Performance}\par
Compelled examination has been headed related to the association between Facebook usage and academic execution. A critical some piece of the work that does exist may be found in unpublished unique duplicates. For example, Vanden Boogart in a Master's hypothesis uncovered that staggering Facebook usage is seen in individuals with less demanding Gpa's.\par
Karpinski and Duberstein and Kirschner and Karpinski reporting findings on studies using the same data set, investigated whether bigger measures of Facebook usage may be related to a diminishment in academic execution around school understudies. They uncovered a negative relationship between Facebook utilizes and reported to oneself measures of GPA and hours utilized inspecting for consistently as a part of an example of student and graduate researchers heading off to a considerable state financed school in the Midwest United States. Amazingly, they found that the time deployed on the web did not fluctuate much around individuals and that contrary to the confirmation; learners acknowledged that time devoted to Facebook did not influence their academic execution. The delayed consequences of their study set off a media stir and their proposal that "the negative aftereffects of Facebook use can caution administrators to uncover methodlogies to purpose of repression access realizing better educational execution." Kirschner and Karpinski perceive that there are a lot of hindrances with their study and call for more careful studies to be guided using diverse dismemberment strategies, for instance, backslide or structural scientific proclamation exhibiting.\par
Kolek and Saunders suggested that they discovered no association between Facebook utilization and scholastic execution. Pasek et al. were extremely 
\section[{Global Journal of Management and Business Research}]{Global Journal of Management and Business Research}\par
Volume XIV Issue V Version I Year ( ) incredulous of past examination indicating to discover a negative relationship between Facebook utilize and GPA because the specimen was not illustrative of school learners on the loose, the measure of utilization were inclined and the studies did not mull over control variables. They led three multiple studies that incorporated a cross-sectional instance of one thousand and sixty freshmen at a vast University in Illinois. They were unable to discover a hearty negative assocation between evaluation points and the usage of Facebook in any of the three studies. They presume that "rather than late staggering and unverified news reports that Facebook utilization brings down scholarly execution, results show that the two variables are possibly relevant. 
\section[{III.}]{III.} 
\section[{Research Methodology a) Research Design}]{Research Methodology a) Research Design}\par
Malhotra and Birks, (2007), explain the procedural framework within which a research is conducted as a research methodology. Survey approach was used through the use of questionnaire. Quantitative approach was adopted while developing the questionnaire. This choice was imperative necessity in this research design not only due to the exploratory nature of the study itself but also because, to thoroughly understand and analyze a phenomenon, circumstance, or issue by sampling a cross-section of the overall population at a certain point in time, it is the most suitable method (Robson 1993).  
\section[{i. Theoretical framework}]{i. Theoretical framework}\par
The theoretical framework depicted in Figure \hyperref[fig_5]{1}, shown below, depicts that Big Five Factors will have an influence on Facebook Addiction that will be negatively related to academic performance. The current study uses a non-probability sampling technique that is convenience sampling. A sampling technique that collects the significant information from the conveniently available sample study is known as convenience sampling  {\ref (Zikmund, 1997)}. This type of sampling is normally helps in collecting large number of completed surveys speedily and with economy (Lym et al., 2010). 
\section[{d) Instrument and Measures}]{d) Instrument and Measures}\par
The survey instrument contains two sections. Section 1 includes different personal and demographic variables. This section will obtain the respondent's information about gender, age, income, education and status. Section 2 includes the latent variables that are important in the current study. This section of the study is developed based on the past literature and already used questionnaires (Annexure).\par
The scales of the study were adopted from the previous literature and published studies. The first five variables of the study were Neuroticism, Extroversion, Agreeableness, Openness to Experience and Conscientiousness, commonly known as the Big Five Factor Model. The second variable was Facebook Addiction and the third variable used was Academic Performance measured by the total percentages. 
\section[{e) Data Analysis Techniques}]{e) Data Analysis Techniques}\par
A lot many researches on relationship marketing have based their study on quantitative technique and by analyzing the statistical results they present upon analysis. The recent times however have seen the latest studies being based on both qualitative and quantitative data analysis  {\ref (Burke and Onwuegbuzie, 2004)}. This is a more integrated way and is convenient for dealing with the respondents who are often busy and have a short span of free time to fill out research questionnaires. Data was entered, edited and analyzed by using Software's, SPSS version 16 and Microsoft Excel 2007 by applying following techniques: mean, standard deviations, frequency, percentages, Cronbach"s alpha, Correlation and Multiple Regression. 
\section[{i. Mean}]{i. Mean}\par
Used as a measure of central tendency, arithmetic mean is equivalent to the total of all the values divided by the total number of vales.\par
ii. Standard Deviation A measure of the dispersion of a set of data from its mean. The extra distance between the data, the more is the deviation. SD is calculated as the square root of variance.\par
iii. Cronbach's Alpha This was run to investigate the internal reliability of the instrument. The value of Cronbach's Alpha was 0.845 which is above the standard value suggested by (Nummally, 1978) of 0.70. It means that our instrument is reliable and we can apply different statistical tests and interpret the results with confidence. 
\section[{iv. Correlation Analysis}]{iv. Correlation Analysis}\par
Pearson correlation was run to check the association of variables with each other and if any observed variable has perfect covariance with any other variables, which are observed in the study. 
\section[{v. Correlation Coefficient}]{v. Correlation Coefficient}\par
The Coefficient of Correlation, also known as the Correlation Coefficient, is the strength of a relationship, measured linearly, between two variables. This measure can range from -1 to 1. If the Coefficient of Correlation is equal to:\par
? 1 -Suggests a perfectly negative correlation.\par
? 0 -No correlation either positive or negative.\par
? 1 -Suggests a perfectly positive correlation. 
\section[{vi. Regression Analysis}]{vi. Regression Analysis}\par
A statistical tool for approving the associations amongst variables. Moreover, regression analysis helps one understand how the specific value of the dependent variable changes when any one of the independent variables is varied, while the other independent variables are constant -that is, the average value of the dependent variable when the independent variables are fixed. Linear regression is used as the tool for analysis.\par
IV. 
\section[{Results and Analysis a) Profile of the Respondents}]{Results and Analysis a) Profile of the Respondents}\par
The following table presents the personal and demographic information such as gender, age, education level and status. A total of 150 valuable responses were received. It was tried to have equal representation of both the genders. 79 males while 71 females responded well. One of the reasons is that in Pakistan, a higher number of males attend university more than females due to the setup of our society. 
\section[{Global Journal of Management and Business Research}]{Global Journal of Management and Business Research}\par
Volume XIV Issue V Version I Year ( )    It could be noted from the above table that the highest frequency is of the students doing bachelors, that is 106 out of a total of 150 respondents. This could be because people in Pakistan prefer studying till Bachelors than any other level of education. 22 respondents are doing masters and only 12 are enrolled in MS/Mphill programs. It could be seen in the above table that majority of the students have income below Rs.10,000 that is around 45\% as students in Pakistan do not have a separate e means of earning and they majorly depend on pocket money or their savings. To check the internal reliability of the instrument, Cronbach's alpha was run. The value of Cronbach's Alpha comes to 0.845. Which is above the standard value proposed by (Nummally, 1978) of 0.70 this shows that our instrument is reliable and we can confidently apply different statistical tests and interpret the results with confidence (table \hyperref[tab_7]{5}).    
\section[{b) Reliability analysis}]{b) Reliability analysis} 
\section[{i. Interpretation of correlation}]{i. Interpretation of correlation}\par
To check the relationship between variables and to find whether any observed variable has covariance with any other variables, Pearson correlation was applied. The correlations are showing the relationships between variables of the Big Five Factors and Face book Addiction. Extroversion is significant at r (150) = .240, p < 0.05, Agreeableness and Conscientiousness are both negatively correlated to FBA at r (150) = -0.067 and -.027, p > 0.05 respectively. Neuroticism is significant at r (150) = 0.218, p = 0.007.\par
ii. Linear regression analysis The hypotheses postulate that Face book Addiction is positively correlated to extroversion. High extroversion has high chances of being addicted to Facebook. The hypothesis developed is as below: H1: Face book Addiction is positively correlated with extroversion.\par
Here, the value of R2 is 0.051, depicting 5.1\% of variance in overall evaluation of Facebook Addiction which is described by predictor variable (Extroversion). The value of f-test is 9.063 showing the model goodness of fit. T value is greater than +2 indicating a positive relationship between variables. Hence H1 is accepted (?=0.240, p <0.05). The results show there is a positive, significant relationship between extroversion and Face book Addiction. (Hughes, D.J., Rowe, M., Batey, M. and Lee A.,  {\ref (2012)} ii. Hypotheses 2\par
The second hypothesis developed is as follow: 
\section[{H2: Agreeableness negatively affects Face book Addiction}]{H2: Agreeableness negatively affects Face book Addiction}\par
According to the results of the study, there is a negative, insignificant relationship between agreea- iii. Hypotheses 3 H3: High Openness to experience positively affects Face book Addiction.\par
Results depict that there is a positive significant relationship between openness to experience and Facebook addiction (?=0.204, p< 0.05). The value of t is greater than +2 indicate that there is a positive relationship between variables and thus, H3 is validated. This is in accordance with the previous researches as  The measure of academic performance taken was the academic percentage of students of the department of Management Sciences, IUB. The results depict that there is no relationship between Face book (. ?= -1.07, p>0.05). The hypothesis is statistically insignificant This result supports the findings of Vanden Boogart, Karpinski and Duberstein, Kirschner and Karpinski and Junco, (2010).\par
V. 
\section[{Discussion}]{Discussion}\par
This paper measured the affect of the Big Five Factor Model on student Facebook addiction and the affect of that on Academic performance. It was measured by providing the respondents a semantic differential type of questionnaire and the Bergen Facebook Addiction Scale. Of the traits variables incorporated in the BFFM, extraversion was found to be highly significant to FBA suggesting that people who are extroverts and outgoing spend a lot of time using and thinking about Facebook. This is supported by the results of Ryan and Xenos and Moore and McElroy who also found a positive association between extraversion and Facebook use but is opposing to the findings of Ross et al, Amichai-Hamburger and Vinitisky and Hughes et al. who found no association involving Extraversion and Facebook use. People who are social, cheerful, talkative and active are referred to as extroverts. Our study confirms the possibility of such people being prone to use excessive facebook and become addicted to it. Furthermore, our results also show the positive relationship between facebook addiction and both neuroticism and openness to experience. It is quite true that users who are not emotionally stable tend to be more engaged in such activities in order to get rid of their problems. Also, those who are looking for newness and innovation are engaged in more Facebook use which is understandable. Conscientiousness was also found to have no significant relationship with FBA. As people who are conscience are closer to the ethical and moral values of the world and have the knowledge of right and wrong thus, the hypothesis was not accepted. However, there was no relationship found between student's academic performance and Facebook Addiction. This is supported by the research done by Vanden Boogart, Karpinski and Duberstein, Kirschner and Karpinski and Junco and is dissimilar to the results of Kolek and Saunders and Pasek et al.,. The verity that the answers in this study lend support to the negative relationship between Facebook Addiction and Academic performance suggests that more research is reasonable to not only authenticate these findings but to gain a better insight of how Facebook Addiction affects academic performance. No relationship between personality variables and academic performance was found. 
\section[{VI.}]{VI.} 
\section[{Limitations}]{Limitations}\par
While the reason for this research was exploratory in character, there remain various constraints.\par
? First, the respondents were selected from a solitary scholarly foundation and may not be illustrative of the bigger scholar populace. Self-report measures scholastic exhibitions were gathered. ? A more steady system might be to gain real learner GPA and an exact measure of Facebook utilization. ? A better measure might be to record the time used on genuine exercises on Facebook and explore how these exercises are identified with scholastic execution. ? Other data, for example, how frequently the scholars were on Facebook while concentrating on may shed all the more light on why scholastic execution was easier for people who invested more of a chance on Facebook. ? There were cost constraints as being a student it was not possible to conduct research on a vast scale. ? Also, limited time was provided for conducting the research and we had to finish it within a specified time frame. ? The sample size was limited, only 150, which may have resulted in the inability to collect a large pool of people with varying personalities. ? Variations in the results could be because no such previous research has been done on Pakistani nationals and there was limited resource material available. ? Respondents were not from other areas of interest which may have affected the results somehow.\par
VII. 
\section[{Recommendations and Conclusion}]{Recommendations and Conclusion}\par
The research could be conducted on a major scale in order to get some valuable results. Also, a validate measure of BFF should be used which is easily 
\section[{Global Journal of Management and Business Research}]{Global Journal of Management and Business Research}\par
Volume XIV Issue V Version I Year ( ) comprehended by the respondents Ample time should be provided to the research scholar to conduct such type of research. The study should be carried on a vast scale using a large sample size in order to validate results and analysis. It should not be restricted to the boundaries of any city or institution as every individual has a separate identity and personality traits that differentiate them so it might also affect the findings of the research.\par
Academic performance could be measured in terms of other variables apart from just percentage to increase the validity. It is seen that with the passage of time, the use and demand for social networking sites increasing thus, there is a constant need to explore and work on this area as it is of significant importance in the demanding world of today. Also, there is a growing concern among parents about their children scoring low on tests due to excessive Facebook use so such as study should not just be confined to one country rather it should also be implemented in Pakistan.\par
The real ramifications of this study are the finding that Facebook use is adversely identified with scholastic execution. The way of the relationship may be significantly more perplexing than the basic supposition that learners who invest more of a chance on Facebook likewise invest less time considering and finishing scholarly work. Time on Facebook may supplant exercises that are not of a scholastic nature however none the less may have an effect on scholarly execution, for example, up close and personal correspondences with associates or the amount of hours that people rest. More research ought to be led to investigate how time used on Facebook is identified with the life style of scholars and how the different aspects of a learner's life style are identified with scholarly execution. This may shed light on what sort of mediations may be taken to help understudies whose association with Facebook may put them at scholarly hazard.\par
Additional research is required to figure out what exercises people participate in while on Facebook, the amount time they use on every movement and whether those distinctive exercises impact scholastic execution. It may not be the aggregate time used on Facebook that is the most vital measure but instead the time used on specific exercises on Facebook that have a more straightforward impact on scholastic execution. Recognizing the distinct exercises might likewise give a wealthier environment to study how identity variables influence Facebook use.\par
The trouble directing this exploration is that most studies depend on report toward oneself measures of time used on Facebook and the sorts of exercises that the subjects participate in. With current innovation, the capacity exists to catch this information electronically additionally raises significant security issues.\par
All in all, the finding that the time used on Facebook is adversely identified with people's scholastic execution is of noteworthy imperativeness. The use of Facebook is broad among people and reviews recommend that the measure of time that scholars use occupied with social networking is expanding every year. In the event that this relationship holds, it may be normal that numerous people won't perform at their scholastic potential. A superior understanding of the elements that impact Facebook use and the part that This study is being conducted by Ms. Shanayyara Mahmood, BBA 8 th student at Department of Management Sciences, The Islamia University of Bahawalpur. The major objective of the study is to explore the impact of different variables on academic performance. Students from the Department of Management sciences, IUB are selected for the said study. I assure you that any response you make will remain confidential and only used for study purpose.\par
Please read the following statements and mark accordingly. \begin{figure}[htbp]
\noindent\textbf{}\includegraphics[]{image-2.png}
\caption{\label{fig_0}Facebook}\end{figure}
 \begin{figure}[htbp]
\noindent\textbf{}\includegraphics[]{image-3.png}
\caption{\label{fig_2}}\end{figure}
 \begin{figure}[htbp]
\noindent\textbf{}\includegraphics[]{image-4.png}
\caption{\label{fig_3}}\end{figure}
 \begin{figure}[htbp]
\noindent\textbf{}\includegraphics[]{image-5.png}
\caption{\label{fig_4}}\end{figure}
 \begin{figure}[htbp]
\noindent\textbf{1}\includegraphics[]{image-6.png}
\caption{\label{fig_5}Figure 1 :}\end{figure}
 \begin{figure}[htbp]
\noindent\textbf{}\includegraphics[]{image-7.png}
\caption{\label{fig_6}}\end{figure}
      \begin{figure}[htbp]
\noindent\textbf{} \par 
\begin{longtable}{}
\end{longtable} \par
 
\caption{\label{tab_0}}\end{figure}
 \begin{figure}[htbp]
\noindent\textbf{} \par 
\begin{longtable}{P{0.85\textwidth}}
b) Hypotheses\\
H1: Face book Addiction is positively correlated with\\
extroversion.\\
H2: Agreeableness negatively affects Face book\\
Addiction.\\
H3: High Openness to experience positively affects\\
Face book Addiction\\
H4: Conscientiousness is positively associated to Face\\
book Addiction.\\
H5: Neuroticism positively affects level of Face book\\
addiction.\\
H6: Face book Addiction and Academic Performance\\
are negatively correlated.\\
c) Outline Of The Study\\
This study consists of 7 chapters. The design of\\
the study has started with the start of research\\
questions:\\
II.\end{longtable} \par
 
\caption{\label{tab_1}?}\end{figure}
 \begin{figure}[htbp]
\noindent\textbf{1} \par 
\begin{longtable}{P{0.28936170212765955\textwidth}P{0.2351063829787234\textwidth}P{0.325531914893617\textwidth}}
Gender\tabcellsep Frequency\tabcellsep Percentage\\
Male\tabcellsep 79\tabcellsep 52.7\\
Female\tabcellsep 71\tabcellsep 47.3\end{longtable} \par
 
\caption{\label{tab_3}Table 1 :}\end{figure}
 \begin{figure}[htbp]
\noindent\textbf{2} \par 
\begin{longtable}{P{0.46690140845070427\textwidth}P{0.16760563380281687\textwidth}P{0.21549295774647886\textwidth}}
Age\tabcellsep Frequency\tabcellsep Percentage\\
Below 20 Years\tabcellsep 26\tabcellsep 17.3\\
20-30 Years\tabcellsep 115\tabcellsep 76.7\\
30-40 Years\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \end{longtable} \par
 
\caption{\label{tab_4}Table 2 :}\end{figure}
 \begin{figure}[htbp]
\noindent\textbf{3} \par 
\begin{longtable}{P{0.4346590909090909\textwidth}P{0.28011363636363634\textwidth}P{0.13522727272727272\textwidth}}
Education\tabcellsep \multicolumn{2}{l}{Frequency Percentage}\\
Intermediate\tabcellsep 10\tabcellsep 6.7\\
Bachelors\tabcellsep 106\tabcellsep 70.7\\
Masters\tabcellsep 22\tabcellsep 14.7\\
MS/MPhil\tabcellsep 12\tabcellsep 8.0\end{longtable} \par
 
\caption{\label{tab_5}Table 3 :}\end{figure}
 \begin{figure}[htbp]
\noindent\textbf{4} \par 
\begin{longtable}{P{0.5207207207207206\textwidth}P{0.13018018018018016\textwidth}P{0.1990990990990991\textwidth}}
Income\tabcellsep Frequency\tabcellsep Percentage\\
Below Rs 10,000\tabcellsep 67\tabcellsep 44.7\\
Rs.10,000-15,000\tabcellsep 34\tabcellsep 22.7\\
Rs.15,000-20,000\tabcellsep 15\tabcellsep 10.0\\
Above Rs.20,000\tabcellsep 34\tabcellsep 22.7\end{longtable} \par
 
\caption{\label{tab_6}Table 4 :}\end{figure}
 \begin{figure}[htbp]
\noindent\textbf{5} \par 
\begin{longtable}{P{0.48939393939393944\textwidth}P{0.3606060606060606\textwidth}}
Cronbach Alpha\tabcellsep No. of items\\
o.845\tabcellsep 43\end{longtable} \par
 
\caption{\label{tab_7}Table 5 :}\end{figure}
 \begin{figure}[htbp]
\noindent\textbf{6} \par 
\begin{longtable}{P{0.527\textwidth}P{0.14450000000000002\textwidth}P{0.12466666666666666\textwidth}P{0.05383333333333334\textwidth}}
\tabcellsep \multicolumn{2}{l}{Descriptive Statistics}\tabcellsep \\
\tabcellsep Mean\tabcellsep Std. Deviation\tabcellsep N\\
Extroversion\tabcellsep 2.99\tabcellsep 0.625\tabcellsep 150\\
Agreeableness\tabcellsep 3.43\tabcellsep 0.665\tabcellsep 150\\
Openness\tabcellsep to\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\
experience\tabcellsep 3.1\tabcellsep 0.655\tabcellsep 150\\
Conscientiousness\tabcellsep 3.43\tabcellsep 0.658\tabcellsep 150\\
Neuroticism\tabcellsep 2.95\tabcellsep 0.634\tabcellsep 150\\
Average Face book\tabcellsep 2.84\tabcellsep 0.777\tabcellsep 150\\
\multicolumn{2}{l}{The table describes the mean and standard}\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\
\multicolumn{2}{l}{deviation of the Big five factors and Face book}\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\
Addiction.\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \end{longtable} \par
 
\caption{\label{tab_8}Table 6 :}\end{figure}
 \begin{figure}[htbp]
\noindent\textbf{7} \par 
\begin{longtable}{P{0.10792019347037485\textwidth}P{0.19528415961305923\textwidth}P{0.10278113663845224\textwidth}P{0.08530834340991535\textwidth}P{0.12539298669891172\textwidth}P{0.07400241837968562\textwidth}P{0.0729746070133011\textwidth}P{0.08633615477629988\textwidth}}
\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \multicolumn{2}{l}{: Correlations}\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\
\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep Openness\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\
\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep to\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep average\\
\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \multicolumn{2}{l}{Extroversion Agreeableness}\tabcellsep \multicolumn{3}{l}{experience Conscientiousness Adjustment}\tabcellsep facebook\\
Extroversion\tabcellsep Pearson\tabcellsep 1\tabcellsep .259 **\tabcellsep .449 **\tabcellsep .307 **\tabcellsep .418 **\tabcellsep .240 **\\
\tabcellsep Correlation\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\
\tabcellsep Sig. (2-tailed)\tabcellsep \tabcellsep .001\tabcellsep .000\tabcellsep .000\tabcellsep .000\tabcellsep .003\\
\tabcellsep N\tabcellsep 150\tabcellsep 150\tabcellsep 150\tabcellsep 150\tabcellsep 150\tabcellsep 150\\
Agreeableness\tabcellsep Pearson\tabcellsep .259 **\tabcellsep 1\tabcellsep .325 **\tabcellsep .376 **\tabcellsep .068\tabcellsep -.067\\
\tabcellsep Correlation\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\
\tabcellsep Sig. (2-tailed)\tabcellsep .001\tabcellsep \tabcellsep .000\tabcellsep .000\tabcellsep .407\tabcellsep .417\\
\tabcellsep N\tabcellsep 150\tabcellsep 150\tabcellsep 150\tabcellsep 150\tabcellsep 150\tabcellsep 150\\
Openness to\tabcellsep Pearson\tabcellsep .449 **\tabcellsep .325 **\tabcellsep 1\tabcellsep .295 **\tabcellsep .416 **\tabcellsep .204 *\\
experience\tabcellsep Correlation\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\
\tabcellsep Sig. (2-tailed)\tabcellsep .000\tabcellsep .000\tabcellsep \tabcellsep .000\tabcellsep .000\tabcellsep .012\\
\tabcellsep N\tabcellsep 150\tabcellsep 150\tabcellsep 150\tabcellsep 150\tabcellsep 150\tabcellsep 150\\
\multicolumn{2}{l}{Conscientiousness Pearson}\tabcellsep .307 **\tabcellsep .376 **\tabcellsep .295 **\tabcellsep 1\tabcellsep .264 **\tabcellsep -.027\\
\tabcellsep Correlation\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\
\tabcellsep Sig. (2-tailed)\tabcellsep .000\tabcellsep .000\tabcellsep .000\tabcellsep \tabcellsep .001\tabcellsep .742\\
\tabcellsep N\tabcellsep 150\tabcellsep 150\tabcellsep 150\tabcellsep 150\tabcellsep 150\tabcellsep 150\\
Adjustment\tabcellsep Pearson\tabcellsep .418 **\tabcellsep .068\tabcellsep .416 **\tabcellsep .264 **\tabcellsep 1\tabcellsep .218 **\\
\tabcellsep Correlation\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\
\tabcellsep Sig. (2-tailed)\tabcellsep .000\tabcellsep .407\tabcellsep .000\tabcellsep .001\tabcellsep \tabcellsep .007\\
\tabcellsep N\tabcellsep 150\tabcellsep 150\tabcellsep 150\tabcellsep 150\tabcellsep 150\tabcellsep 150\\
\multicolumn{2}{l}{average facebook Pearson}\tabcellsep .240 **\tabcellsep -.067\tabcellsep .204 *\tabcellsep -.027\tabcellsep .218 **\tabcellsep 1\\
\tabcellsep Correlation\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \\
\tabcellsep Sig. (2-tailed)\tabcellsep .003\tabcellsep .417\tabcellsep .012\tabcellsep .742\tabcellsep .007\tabcellsep \\
\tabcellsep N\tabcellsep 150\tabcellsep 150\tabcellsep 150\tabcellsep 150\tabcellsep 150\tabcellsep 150\end{longtable} \par
  {\small\itshape [Note: **. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed). *. Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed).]} 
\caption{\label{tab_9}Table 7}\end{figure}
 \begin{figure}[htbp]
\noindent\textbf{8} \par 
\begin{longtable}{P{0.14638888888888887\textwidth}P{0.04958333333333333\textwidth}P{0.05194444444444444\textwidth}P{0.08027777777777777\textwidth}P{0.07319444444444444\textwidth}P{0.08263888888888889\textwidth}P{0.09208333333333334\textwidth}P{0.08736111111111111\textwidth}P{0.18652777777777776\textwidth}}
\multicolumn{3}{l}{Hypothesis Model Variables}\tabcellsep Adj R 2\tabcellsep F\tabcellsep Beta\tabcellsep t-value\tabcellsep P-value\tabcellsep Results\\
H1\tabcellsep Ext\tabcellsep FBA\tabcellsep 0.051\tabcellsep 0.051\tabcellsep .240\tabcellsep 3.010\tabcellsep 0.003\tabcellsep Significant\\
H2\tabcellsep Agr\tabcellsep FBA\tabcellsep -.002\tabcellsep 0.663\tabcellsep -0.067\tabcellsep -.814\tabcellsep 0.417\tabcellsep Insignificant\\
H3\tabcellsep Open\tabcellsep FBA\tabcellsep .035\tabcellsep 6.429\tabcellsep 0.204\tabcellsep 2.536\tabcellsep 0.012\tabcellsep Significant\\
H4\tabcellsep Consc\tabcellsep FBA\tabcellsep -.006\tabcellsep 0.109\tabcellsep -0.027\tabcellsep -0.027\tabcellsep 0.742\tabcellsep Insignificant\\
H5\tabcellsep Neu\tabcellsep FBA\tabcellsep .041\tabcellsep 7.368\tabcellsep 0.218\tabcellsep 2.714\tabcellsep 0.007\tabcellsep Significant\\
H6\tabcellsep FBA\tabcellsep Acd.Per\tabcellsep .005\tabcellsep 1.727\tabcellsep -.107\tabcellsep -1.314\tabcellsep 0.191\tabcellsep Insignificant\\
\multicolumn{3}{l}{(FBA=FACEBOOK ADDICTION)}\tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \tabcellsep \end{longtable} \par
 
\caption{\label{tab_10}Table 8 :}\end{figure}
 			\footnote{© 2014 Global Journals Inc. (US)} 		 		\backmatter  			  				\begin{bibitemlist}{1}
\bibitem[Costs]{b0}\label{b0} 	 		\textit{},  		 			Multitasking = Switching Costs 		.  		 \url{http://www.apa.org/research/action/multitask.aspx}  		 	 
\bibitem[Strayer et al. ()]{b45}\label{b45} 	 		‘A comparison of the cell phone driver and the drunk driver’.  		 			D L Strayer 		,  		 			F A Drews 		,  		 			D L Crouch 		.  	 	 		\textit{Human Factors}  		2006. 48 p. .  	 
\bibitem[Alexa top 500 global sites Alexa Internet Inc ()]{b3}\label{b3} 	 		‘Alexa top 500 global sites’.  		 \url{<http://www.alexa.com/topsites>Accessed03.02.11}  	 	 		\textit{Alexa Internet Inc}  		2011.  	 
\bibitem[Margaryan and Littlejohn (2008)]{b37}\label{b37} 	 		\textit{Are digital natives a myth or reality? Students' use of technologies for learning},  		 			A Margaryan 		,  		 			A Littlejohn 		.  		 \url{http://www.academy.gcal.ac.uk/anoush/documents/DigitalNativesMythOrReality-MargaryanAndLittlejohn-draft-111208.pdf}  		2008. December 11. 2008.  	 	 (Final draft) 
\bibitem[Strayer et al. ()]{b46}\label{b46} 	 		‘Cell phone induced failures of visual attention during simulated driving’.  		 			D L Strayer 		,  		 			F A Drews 		,  		 			W A Johnston 		.  	 	 		\textit{Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied}  		2003. 9 p. .  	 
\bibitem[Kramer et al. ()]{b31}\label{b31} 	 		\textit{Changes in academic major among undergraduate students},  		 			G L Kramer 		,  		 			H B Higley 		,  		 			D Olsen 		.  		1994. 69 p. .  		 			College and University 		 	 
\bibitem[Ellison et al. ()]{b21}\label{b21} 	 		‘Connection strategies: Social capital implications of Facebook-enabled communication practices’.  		 			N B Ellison 		,  		 			C Steinfield 		,  		 			C Lampe 		.  		 \xref{http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1461444810385389}{10.1177/1461444810385389}.  	 	 		\textit{New Media \& Society}  		2011.  	 
\bibitem[Kvavik ()]{b33}\label{b33} 	 		\textit{Convenience, communications, and control: How students usetechnology},  		 			R Kvavik 		.  		2005.  	 	 (In D) 
\bibitem[Dimaggio et al. ()]{b19}\label{b19} 	 		‘Digital inequality: From unequal access to differentiated use’.  		 			P Dimaggio 		,  		 			E Hargittai 		,  		 			C Celeste 		,  		 			S Shafer 		.  	 	 		\textit{Social inequality},  				 			K Neckerman 		 (ed.)  		 (New York)  		2004. Russell Sage Foundation. p. .  	 
\bibitem[Tosun and Lajunen ()]{b48}\label{b48} 	 		‘Does Internet use reflect your personality? Relationship between Eysenk's personality dimensions and Internet use’.  		 			L P Tosun 		,  		 			T Lajunen 		.  		 \xref{http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2009.10.010}{10.1016/j.chb.2009.10.010}.  	 	 		\textit{Computers in Human Behavior}  		2010. 26 p. .  	 
\bibitem[Oblinger Oblinger (ed.)]{b34}\label{b34} 	 		\textit{Educating the next generation},  				 			\& J Oblinger,  			Oblinger 		 (ed.)  		 	 	 (e-book) 
\bibitem[Beastall ()]{b14}\label{b14} 	 		‘Enchanting a disenchanted child: Revolutionizing the means ofeducation using information and communication technology and elearning’.  		 			L Beastall 		.  	 	 		\textit{British Journal of Sociology of Education}  		2008. 27  (1)  p. .  	 
\bibitem[Weaver ()]{b51}\label{b51} 	 		‘Exploring the links between personality and media preferences’.  		 			J B Weaver 		.  		 \xref{http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0191-8869(91)90203-N}{10.1016/0191-8869(91)90203-N}.  	 	 		\textit{Personality and Individual Differences}  		1991. 12 p. .  	 
\bibitem[Owen et al. (2004)]{b41}\label{b41} 	 		‘Facebook and academic performance: 42. Reconciling a media sensation with data’.  		 			M ; J Owen 		,  		 			E More 		,  		 			E Hargittai 		.  		 \url{http://www.uic.edu/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/2498/2181}  	 	 		\textit{First Monday}  		2004b. May, 2009.  (5)  p. 14.  	 	 (Available from www.futurelab.org.uk/viewpoint/art 26. htm. Pasek,) 
\bibitem[Lipsman (2007)]{b36}\label{b36} 	 		‘Facebook sees flood of new traffic from teenagers and adults’.  		 			A Lipsman 		.  		 \url{http://www.comscore.com/press/release.asp?press=1519}  	 	 		\textit{Com Score}  		2007a. November 13. 2009.  	 
\bibitem[Falling through the Net: Defining the digital divide: A report on the telecommunications and information technology gap in America. US Department of Commerce. National Telecommunications and Information Administration ()]{b39}\label{b39} 	 		\textit{Falling through the Net: Defining the digital divide: A report on the telecommunications and information technology gap in America. US Department of Commerce. National Telecommunications and Information Administration},  		 \url{http://search.ntia.doc.gov/pdf/fttn00.pdf}  		2000. Washington, DC.  		 			National Telecommunications and Information Administration-NTIA 		 	 
\bibitem[Jones and Fox ()]{b27}\label{b27} 	 		‘Generations online in 2009. Data memo’.  		 			S Jones 		,  		 			S Fox 		.  		 \url{<http://www.pewinternet.org}  	 	 		\textit{Pew Internet and American Life Project},  				 (Washington, DC)  		2009.  	 	 (PIP\textunderscore Generations\textunderscore 2 009.pdf>Retrieved 7.03.10) 
\bibitem[Tufekci ()]{b49}\label{b49} 	 		\textit{Grooming, gossip, Facebook and Myspace. Information, Communication, and Society},  		 			Z Tufekci 		.  		 \xref{http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13691180801999050}{10.1080/13691180801999050}.  		2008. 11 p. .  	 
\bibitem[Higher Education Research Institute (HERI; 2007) College freshmen and online social networking sites]{b26}\label{b26} 	 		\textit{Higher Education Research Institute (HERI; 2007) College freshmen and online social networking sites},  		 \url{<http://www.gseis.ucla.edu/heri/PDFs/pubs/briefs/brief-091107-SocialNetworking.pdf>Retrie-ved1.03.11}  		 	 
\bibitem[Amiel and Sargent ()]{b7}\label{b7} 	 		‘Individual differences in Internet usage motives’.  		 			T Amiel 		,  		 			S L Sargent 		.  		 doi: 10.1016/ j.chb.2004.09.002.  	 	 		\textit{Computers in Human Behavior}  		2004. 20 p. .  	 
\bibitem[Amichai-Hamburger ()]{b4}\label{b4} 	 		‘Internet and personality’.  		 			Y Amichai-Hamburger 		.  		 \xref{http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0747-5632(01)00034-6}{10.1016/S0747-5632(01)00034-6}.  	 	 		\textit{Computers in Human Behavior}  		2002. 18 p. .  	 
\bibitem[Kubey et al. ()]{b32}\label{b32} 	 		‘Internet use and collegiate academic performance decrements: Early findings’.  		 			R W Kubey 		,  		 			M J Lavin 		,  		 			J R Barrows 		.  	 	 		\textit{Journal of Communication}  		2001. 51 p. .  	 
\bibitem[Owen ()]{b40}\label{b40} 	 		‘Just a tool’.  		 			M Owen 		.  	 	 		\textit{ICT for curriculum enhancement},  				 			M Monteith 		 (ed.)  		 (Bristol, UK)  		2004a. Intellect.  	 
\bibitem[Bartlett and Wasley ()]{b13}\label{b13} 	 		\textit{Just say 'A': Grade inflation undergoes reality check. The Chronicle of Higher Education},  		 			T Bartlett 		,  		 			P Wasley 		.  		2008. 55 p. .  	 
\bibitem[Prenksy ()]{b42}\label{b42} 	 		‘Me, MySpace, and I: Parenting the next generation’.  		 			M Prenksy 		.  	 	 		\textit{Digital natives, digital immigrants. On the Horizon},  				 			L D Rosen 		 (ed.)  		 (New York)  		2001. 2003. 2007. Palgrave Macmillan. 9 p. .  	 	 (Digital game-based learning) 
\bibitem[Strayer and Drews ()]{b44}\label{b44} 	 		‘Multi-tasking in the automobile’.  		 			D L Strayer 		,  		 			F A Drews 		.  	 	 		\textit{Applied attention: From theory to pract ice},  				 			A Kramer,  			D Wiegmann,  			\& A Kirlik 		 (ed.)  		 (New York)  		2007. Oxford University Press. p. .  	 
\bibitem[Kim ()]{b28}\label{b28} 	 		‘Multivariate analysis of ordinal variables’.  		 			J O Kim 		.  	 	 		\textit{American Journal of Sociology}  		1975. 81 p. .  	 
\bibitem[Buffardi and Campbell ()]{b10}\label{b10} 	 		‘Narcissism and social networking Websites’.  		 			L E Buffardi 		,  		 			W K Campbell 		.  		 \xref{http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0146167208320061}{10.1177/0146167208320061}.  	 	 		\textit{Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin}  		2008. 34 p. .  	 
\bibitem[Amichai-Hamburger et al. ()]{b6}\label{b6} 	 		‘On the Internet no one knows I'm an introvert: Extroversion, neuroticism, and Internet interaction’.  		 			Y Amichai-Hamburger 		,  		 			G Wainapel 		,  		 			S Fox 		.  		 \xref{http://dx.doi.org/10.1089/109493102753770507}{10.1089/109493102753770507}.  	 	 		\textit{Cyber Psychology and Behavior}  		2002. 5 p. .  	 
\bibitem[Thayer and Ray ()]{b47}\label{b47} 	 		‘Online communication preferences across age, gender, and duration of Internet use’.  		 			S E Thayer 		,  		 			S Ray 		.  		 \xref{http://dx.doi.org/10.1089/cpb.2006.9.432}{10.1089/cpb.2006.9.432}.  	 	 		\textit{Cyber Psychology and Behavior}  		2006. 9 p. .  	 
\bibitem[Kolek and Saunders ()]{b30}\label{b30} 	 		‘Online disclosure: An empirical examination of undergradduate Facebook profiles’.  		 			E A Kolek 		,  		 			D Saunders 		.  	 	 		\textit{NASPA Journal}  		2008. 45  (1)  p. .  	 
\bibitem[Aspendorpf and Wilpers ()]{b8}\label{b8} 	 		‘Personality effects on social relationships’.  		 			J B Aspendorpf 		,  		 			S Wilpers 		.  		 doi:10.1037 /0022-3514.74.6.1531.  	 	 		\textit{Journal of Personality and Social Psychology}  		1998. 74 p. .  	 
\bibitem[Deberard et al. ()]{b17}\label{b17} 	 		‘Predictors of academic achievement and retention among college freshmen: A longitudinal study’.  		 			M S Deberard 		,  		 			G I Speilmans 		,  		 			D L Julka 		.  	 	 		\textit{College Student Journal}  		2004. 38  (1)  p. .  	 
\bibitem[Birnie and Horvath ()]{b9}\label{b9} 	 		‘Psychological predictors of Internet social communication’.  		 			S A Birnie 		,  		 			P Horvath 		.  		 \xref{http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.10836101.2002.tb00154.x}{10.1111/j.10836101.2002.tb00154.x}.  	 	 		\textit{Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication}  		2002. 7 p. .  	 
\bibitem[Burke et al. (2010)]{b11}\label{b11} 	 		‘Social network activity and social well-being’.  		 			M Burke 		,  		 			C Marlow 		,  		 			T Lento 		.  		 \url{<http://www.thoughtrumbs.com/publications/burke\textunderscore chi2010\textunderscore sns\textunderscore and\textunderscore wellbeing.pdf>}  	 	 		\textit{Paper presented at the conference on human factors in computing systems},  				2010. April.  	 
\bibitem[Amichai-Hamburger and Vinitzky ()]{b5}\label{b5} 	 		‘Social network use and personality’.  		 			Y Amichai-Hamburger 		,  		 			G Vinitzky 		.  		 \xref{http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2010.03.018}{10.1016/j.chb.2010.03.018}.  	 	 		\textit{Computers in Human Behavior}  		2010. 26 p. .  	 
\bibitem[Statistical Packages for the Social Sciences 17.0 for Windows ()]{b43}\label{b43} 	 		\textit{Statistical Packages for the Social Sciences 17.0 for Windows},  		2009. Chicago, IL: SPSS, Inc.  	 
\bibitem[Cotten (ed.) ()]{b15}\label{b15} 	 		\textit{Students' technology use and the impacts on well-being},  		 			S R Cotten 		.  		R. Junco \& D. M (ed.)  		2008.  	 
\bibitem[Lei and Zhao ()]{b35}\label{b35} 	 		‘Technology uses and student achievement: A longitudinal study’.  		 			J Lei 		,  		 			Y Zhao 		.  	 	 		\textit{Computers \& Education}  		2005. 49 p. .  	 
\bibitem[Austin ()]{b2}\label{b2} 	 		\textit{Texting while driving: How dangerous is it? Car and Driver},  		 			M Austin 		.  		 \url{http://editorial.autos.msn.com/article.aspx?cp-document-id=1076338\&topart=safetyviahttp://www.carand-driver.com}  		2009.  	 
\bibitem[Ellison et al. ()]{b20}\label{b20} 	 		‘The benefits of Facebook ''friends:'' Social capital and college students' use of online social network sites’.  		 			N B Ellison 		,  		 			C Steinfield 		,  		 			C Lampe 		.  	 	 		\textit{Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication}  		2007. 12  (4)  p. .  	 
\bibitem[Astin ()]{b1}\label{b1} 	 		\textit{The changing American college student: Thirty-year trends, 1966-1996. The Review of Higher Education},  		 			A W Astin 		.  		1998. 21 p. .  	 
\bibitem[Mark et al. (2008)]{b38}\label{b38} 	 		‘The cost of interrupted work: More speed and stress’.  		 			G Mark 		,  		 			D Gudith 		,  		 			U Klocke 		.  		 \xref{http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/1357054.1357072}{10.1145/1357054.1357072}.  	 	 		\textit{Proceeding of the twenty-sixth annual SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems association for computing machinery},  				 (eeding of the twenty-sixth annual SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems association for computing machineryFlorence, Italy)  		2008. April 5-10, 2008.  	 
\bibitem[Hargittai ()]{b23}\label{b23} 	 		‘The digital reproduction of inequality’.  		 			E Hargittai 		.  	 	 		\textit{Social stratification},  				 			D Grusky 		 (ed.)  		 (Boulder, CO)  		2008a. Westview Press. p. .  	 
\bibitem[Digregorio and Sobel-Lojeski ()]{b18}\label{b18} 	 		‘The effects of interactive whiteboards (IWBs) on student performance and learning: A literature review’.  		 			P Digregorio 		,  		 			K Sobel-Lojeski 		.  	 	 		\textit{Journal of Educational Technology Systems}  		2010. 38  (3)  p. .  	 
\bibitem[Barratt et al. ()]{b12}\label{b12} 	 		‘Thefacebook.com: Computer mediated social networking’.  		 			W Barratt 		,  		 			M Hendrickson 		,  		 			A Stephens 		,  		 			J Torres 		.  	 	 		\textit{Student Affairs Online}  		2005. 6  (1)  p. .  	 
\bibitem[Tuten and Bosnjak ()]{b50}\label{b50} 	 		‘Understanding differences in Web usage: The role of need for cognition and the Five Factor model of personality’.  		 			T L Tuten 		,  		 			M Bosnjak 		.  		 \xref{http://dx.doi.org/10.2224/sbp.2001.29.4.391}{10.2224/sbp.2001.29.4.391}.  	 	 		\textit{Social Behaviour and Personality}  		2001. 29 p. .  	 
\bibitem[Timm]{b16}\label{b16} 	 		\textit{Using emerging technologies to enhance student engagement. New directions for student services},  		 			Timm 		.  		San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. p. .  	 
\bibitem[Heiberger and Harper (ed.) ()]{b25}\label{b25} 	 		\textit{Using emerging technologies to enhance student engagement. New directions for student services},  		 			G Heiberger 		,  		 			R Harper 		.  		R. Junco \& D. M. Timm (ed.)  		2008. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. p. .  	 	 (Have you Facebooked Astin lately? Using technology to increase student involvement) 
\bibitem[Geiser and Santelices ()]{b22}\label{b22} 	 		‘Validity of highschool grades in predicting student success beyo nd the freshman year: High-school record vs. standardized tests as indicators of four-year college outcomes’.  		 			S Geiser 		,  		 			M Santelices 		.  	 	 		\textit{Berkeley Center for Studies in Higher Education Research \& Occasional Paper Series}  		CSHE.6.07. 23. Gordon, C. F., Juang, L. P., \& Syed, M. (ed.)  		2007. 2007. 48  (6)  p. .  		 			University of California 		 	 	 (Journal of College Student Development) 
\bibitem[Hargittai ()]{b24}\label{b24} 	 		‘Whose space? Differences among users and non-users of social network sites’.  		 			E Hargittai 		.  	 	 		\textit{Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication}  		2008b. 13  (1)  p. .  	 
\bibitem[Kirschner et al. ()]{b29}\label{b29} 	 		‘Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work: An analysis of the failure of the constructivist, discovery, problem-base, experiential, and inquirybased teaching’.  		 			P A Kirschner 		,  		 			J Sweller 		,  		 			R E Clark 		.  	 	 		\textit{Educational Psychologist}  		2006. 14  (2)  p. .  	 
\end{bibitemlist}
 			 		 	 
\end{document}
