Received: 10 June 2020 Revised: 14 July 2020 Accepted: 25 July 2020

DOI: 10.1002/pa.2331

ACADEMIC PAPER

Evaluating the use of social media in escalating conflicts

in romantic relationships

Abdulgaffar Olawale Arikewuyo Ph.D.1 | Taiwo Temitope Lasisi Ph.D.2,3 |

Saudat Salah Abdulbaqi Ph.D.1 | Aisha Imam Omoloso Ph.D.1 |
Halima Oluwaseyi Arikewuyo MD.4

1
Department of Mass Communication, Faculty
of Communication and Information Sciences, Conflict in romantic relationships is a natural phenomenon. However, the use of
University of Ilorin, Ilorin, Nigeria
social media by romantic partners has been described as a means of escalating con-
2
South Ural State University (National
Research University), Management, Prospekt flicts in romantic relationships. This study sought to find out the effects of social
Lenina, Russia media use on conflict in romantic relationships through the mediating variables of
3
Eastern Mediterranean University, Tourism
jealousy, infidelity, and monitoring The study recruited 373 individuals who are in
Famagusta, Famagusta, Turkey
4
Department of Epidemiology and Community
romantic relationships. The findings of this study revealed a significant relationship
Medicine, University of Ilorin, Ilorin, Nigeria between social media use and conflict in romantic relationships. This study also affi-

Correspondence
rmed that jealousy, infidelity, and monitoring romantic partners are significant media-
Abdulgaffar Olawale Arikewuyo, Department tors between social media use and conflict in romantic relationships. Importantly, the
of Mass Communication, Faculty of
Communication and Information Sciences,
study revealed that social media use is not a predictor of infidelity in romantic
University of Ilorin, Ilorin, Nigeria. relationships.
Email: [email protected]

Conflict may be classified as a form of disagreement or contradiction Therefore, conflict in romantic relationships may be classified as
that exists due to difference in goals, aspirations, values, and everyday the existence of dialectic opinion, views, belief, and ideology, which
life issues (Azim, 2017). Conflict may arise due to many natural and may generate disagreement between the romantic partners. However,
artificial reasons (Humphreys, 2005). For instance, natural resources suspicion and doubt in romantic relationships may also be increased
like oil may infuse conflict among the people of a community while through the partner's use of social media. As such, the ultimate aim of
inappropriate or ineffective communication may spring up a conflict this study is to investigate how social media use may exacerbate con-
between two people. Nonetheless, conflict has been ascribed to influ- flict in romantic relationships.
ence people's attitude, lifestyle, comportment, and societal associa-
tions/interactions (Desender, Opstal, & Bussche, 2014). The degree,
approach, and skills in handling conflict, however, vary from person to 1 | LI T E RA T U R E RE V I E W
person (Greer, Jehn, & Mannix, 2008). Furthermore, when two people
experience a form of disagreement, or variance in opinion and none of 1.1 | Social media use and conflict in romantic
the individuals involved is ready to give in, interpersonal conflict may relationships
occur (Huang, 2010).
Interpersonal conflict may occur between colleagues at work, within a Over the years, romantic relationships have been conceptually
family, community, or romantic partners. Meanwhile, the conflict that defined in many different ways (Arikewuyo, Bahire, & Lasisi, 2019;
occurs among partners in romantic relationships is one of the most com- Arikewuyo, Efe-Özad, & Owolabi, 2020; Arikewuyo, Eluwole, &
mon types of interpersonal conflict. When individuals in a relationship Ozad, 2020). However, a romantic relationship may be classified as
become unduly suspicious, jealous, or sensitive to their romantic partner or the sexual, emotional, physical, and psychological attraction between
close ally's activities, conflict may arise. However, romantic relationships two people with mutual consent (Len-Ríos et al., 2016; (Arikewuyo,
may thrive when individuals involved are able to manage the disagree- Efe-Özad, Dambo, Abdulbaqi, & Arikewuyo, 2020; Arikewuyo, Ozad, &
ments and contradictions therein (Yarnell & Neff, 2013). Saidu, 2018). Individuals may develop from mere friendship, grow to

J Public Affairs. 2020;e2331. wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/pa © 2020 John Wiley & Sons Ltd 1 of 10
https://doi.org/10.1002/pa.2331
2 of 10 ARIKEWUYO ET AL.

become close allies, and then physical, psychological, emotional, and Montgomery, 1997). As such, tension may arise from the variance in
sexual attraction gradually sets in until it fully becomes a romantic opinion or ideology.
relationship (O'Mahen, Beach, & Tesser, 2000). RDT illuminates our understanding of personal relationships, stat-
Communication may be described as an essential part of romantic ing that relationships may not be categorized as a straight jacket, as
relationships as it may enhance the relationship or otherwise such, there is no relationship without hiccups (Rogan, Piacentini, &
(Abdulbaqi & Arikewuyo, 2015; Burke & Segrin, 2014). For instance, Hopkinson, 2018). Interestingly, this facilitates our understanding that
romantic partners must be able to know when, where, and how to romantic partners are bound to experience a certain form of tension
communicate with their partners to achieve desired and purposeful in their relationship at one point or another. When ideas, opinions,
results (Abdulbaqi & Arikewuyo, 2013; Alola, Arikewuyo, Ozad, and perceptions to issues contradict one another, most especially in a
Alola, & Arikewuyo, 2019; Kwol, Eluwole, Avci, & Lasisi, 2020). This relationship, relational dialectics may to occur (Linton & Budds, 2014).
has over the time, become quite important as romantic partners However, the tension that arises from the dialectics may sometimes
expect a required level of decorum for their relationship to thrive lead to a breakup in the relationship if not well managed.
(Bippus, Boren, & Worsham, 2008). Additionally, technological devel- The RDT may also be categorized into four concepts
opments have further strengthened the bond between romantic part- (Montgomery & Baxter, 2013). The first is “contradiction,” which may
ners, most especially in long-distance romantic relationships be classified as a process of opposition (Suter, Baxter, Seurer, &
(Arikewuyo & Udende, 2017; Eluwole, Lasisi, Elidemir, & Guzel, 2019; Thomas, 2014). This occurs when individuals in the relationship have
Janning, Gao, & Snyder, 2018; Lasisi, Eluwole, Ozturen, & Avci, 2019). entirely opposing views, opinions, and perceptions about certain
This is due to its ability to facilitate ease in communication and inter- issues. For example, while a romantic partner believes there is nothing
action between romantic partners. wrong in posting sexually explicit pictures on social media, the other
The role of social media in romantic relationships cannot be over- partner may be entirely opposing to such.
emphasized (Arikewuyo, Ozad, Abdulbaki, Okoji, & Oloyede, 2019). The second concept of RDT is “totality”; this involves the process
Morey, Gentzler, Creasy, Oberhauser, and Westerman (2013) state where individuals in the relationship unite even though they are of dif-
that the dynamism in technology and most importantly social media ferent opinion (Baxter & Montgomery, 1996). In the third concept,
has facilitated effective communication in romantic relationships. which is classified as “process,” it explains that relationships may thrive
However, the online presence of romantic partners may cause more based on different social processes (Baxter & Montgomery, 1997). This
conflict in the relationship (Halpern, Katz, & Carril, 2017; Ogunmokun, processes, though presents itself in different forms, however, they may
Unverdi-Creig, Said, Avci, & Eluwole, 2020; Rahimizhian, Avci, & facilitate understanding in the relationship. Even though tension in a
Eluwole, 2019). relationship may be inevitable, the fourth concept of the RDT, which is
called “praxis,” explains that the longer the relationship, the more likely
the relationship will progress based on experience (Baxter, 2004). As
1.2 | Relational dialectics theory such, individuals in the relationship may be opportune to learn how to
manage each other over time, thereby reducing the frequency of ten-
Relational dialectics theory expounds the communication pattern sion or conflict as the case may be.
adopted by individuals in a relationship (Baxter & Montgomery, 1996). The relational dialectics theory focuses on contradictions and
The theory explicates the issues of tension, conflicts, and differences conflicts (Braithwaite & Baxter, 2006). This is a process where two
that exist between individuals in a relationship (Sing-Bik Ngai & individuals are of a different opinion, however, they remain a single
Singh, 2018). For example, it explains how conflict arises or is esca- entity.
lated between romantic partners. The RDT further elucidates the The RDT is premised on four basic concepts. First, contradiction;
importance of communication in a relationship as well as its negative which is the main course of the theory and states that views in rela-
effects if not essentially managed. As such, it recognizes that commu- tionships exist at its opposing ends (Baxter et al., 1997). For instance,
nication is one of the most important attributes of a prosperous rela- with the use of social media in romantic relationships, individuals may
tionship, however, communication may also become the cause of a develop an opposing view, opinion, or perception on certain issues
conflict driven relationship (Fox, Osborn, & Warber, 2014). and actions, which may invariably result to conflicts. Second, totality
wThe RDT classifies its dialectics into internal and external. The states that relationships become stronger after a disagreement has
internal dialectics may be categorized as the state of tension been resolved, as such; it reaches its totality (Baxter, Braithwaite,
between two individuals' that is, romantic partners, while the exter- Golish, & Olson, 2002). Third, process; this explains that social pro-
nal dialectics is the tension between an individual and a larger circle cesses help create a clearer understanding of relational dialectics
that is, the society (Suter & Norwood, 2017). The theory further (Baxter, Braithwaite, & Nicholson, 1999). Fourth, praxis; this enhances
explains that difference in communication attributes and skills our knowledge that when individuals in a relationship have the
between individuals in a relationship my facilitate tension and con- required knowledge and understanding about each other, communica-
flict. One of the arguments of the RDT states that the individuals in tion will most likely be seamless (Baxter & Montgomery, 1996). Based
the relationship are from an entirely different background and are on the concept of contradictions, this study, therefore, formulates the
bound to see things from different perspectives (Baxter & following hypothesis:
ARIKEWUYO ET AL. 3 of 10

H1: Social media use will be positively associated with conflicts in Verhofstadt, 2018). This infers that when romantic partners are not
romantic relationships. satisfied with their relationship, they tend to engage in various forms
Furthermore, social media has further progressed from a mere tool of conflict-driven activities.
of communication and information to a platform that facilitate infidelity, According to Moyano, Sánchez-Fuentes, Chiriboga, and Flórez-
jealousy, and monitoring online and offline activities of romantic part- Donado (2017) jealousy may be attributed to facilitating conflict in
ners (Elphinston & Noller, 2011). Quite a number of studies have inves- romantic relationships. Rueda et al. (2015) further affirm that females
tigated the relationship between social media use and conflict in though are quite seductive on social media, they are mostly jealous
romantic relationships (Fox & Moreland, 2015; McDanie, Drouin, & when their partners interact with the opposite sex on social media.
Cravens, 2017; Rueda, Lindsay, & Williams, 2015). This research, there- Facebook, for instance, is a major social media platform that contrib-
fore, formulates the following hypothesis: utes to the development and escalation of social media violence
H2: Social media use in romantic relationships will be positively asso- among romantic partners (Fox et al., 2014).
ciated with (a) jealousy, (b) monitoring romantic partner, and (c) infidelity. Jealousy in romantic relationships is a product of various factors
such as insecurity and lack of trust; however, due to the mode in
which it presents itself in relationships, it usually evolves conflict
1.3 | Relational dialectics on social media and (Bevan & Hale, 2006). As such, the following hypothesis is formulated:
conflicts in romantic relationships H3: Jealousy over partner's activities on social media will be posi-
tively associated with conflict in romantic relationships.
Conflict in romantic relationship originates due to various reasons. For Various factors such as unpleasant experience with a previous
instance, when romantic partners exhibit less concern, care, love, and romantic partner or conflict-driven relationship may also contribute to
empathy towards each other, conflict may set in (Gordon & individuals monitoring their romantic partner on social media (Reed,
Chen, 2014). These factors may arise when romantic partners become Tolman, & Ward, 2017). Muıse (2014) elucidates that partner monitor-
less attracted or interested in each other, as such, becoming dissatis- ing on social media may also occur due to jealousy and insecurity
fied with their relationship (Sinclair & Fehr, 2005). issues, stating that this has significantly contributed to conflict in
Nonetheless, dissatisfaction in a romantic relationship may occur romantic relationships. In an attempt to monitor romantic partner's
when either of the romantic partners begin to exhibit insecurity or social media activities, individuals, sometimes open fake social media
jealousy (DiBello, Rodriguez, Hadden, & Neighbors, 2015), monitor account, this is in order to avoid suspicion by their partner
partner's activities (Darvell, Walsh, & White, 2011), or begin to indulge (Nongpong & Charoensukmongkol, 2016). However, this trend has
in infidelity (Hall & Fincham, 2006). As such, relationship dissatisfac- caused a series of conflict in relationships. Therefore, this study for-
tion may be associated with conflict (Vanhee, Lemmens, Stas, Loeys, & mulates the following hypothesis:

FIGURE 1 Proposed research model

4 of 10 ARIKEWUYO ET AL.

H4: Monitoring romantic partner on social media will be positively SD = 0.73). Participants' relationship status varied between single
associated with conflicts in romantic relationships. but in a romantic relationship (67.37%) and Engaged (32.63%).
Nelson and Salawu (2017) argue that infidelity is one of the major
causes of conflict in romantic relationships, and this often lead to divorce
or break up in such relationships. When individuals become active users 2.2 | Measures
of social media, they may also begin to engage in sexually explicit activi-
ties with other users other than their partners (Schneider, Weiss, & The measures of the variables understudied in this study were adopted
Sam, 2012). This has become a major cause of emotional trauma as it from previous studies. The measures adopted were reported to be reli-
may elicit conflict between romantic partners (Clayton, 2014). The study, able and valid however, further tests were carried out on them. The fol-
therefore, postulated the following hypothesis: lowing sections present the individual measures for each variable.
H5: Infidelity on social media will be positively associated with con-
flict in romantic relationships.
Over time, social media use has been associated with jealousy in 2.2.1 | Social media use in romantic relationships
romantic relationships, which apparently may lead to different forms
of disagreements or conflict (Elphinston & Noller, 2011). When indi- The study adopted a nine-item scale to measure social media use. Sample
viduals become jealous of their partner's social media presence and items were adopted from the study of (Song, Larose, Eastın, & Lın, 2004).
activities, it may facilitate some form of insecurity and dissatisfaction The subscale included, “Use social media to develop a romantic relation-
in the relationship. Literature has also attenuated that jealousy ship”, “To facilitate meeting someone in person whom I met on the Inter-
(Moyano et al., 2017), infidelity (Clayton, 2014), and monitoring net”, “ Find more interesting people than in real life.” Likert scale ranged
romantic partners (Muıse, 2014), are activities on social media that from (1 = “strongly disagree” to 5 = “strongly agree”).
escalate conflict in romantic relationships. Therefore, this following
hypothesis is postulated:
H6: (a) Jealousy, (b) monitoring, and (c) infidelity mediate the associa- 2.2.2 | Jealousy over partner's social media
tion between social media use and conflict in romantic relationships. activities

To measure jealousy in romantic relationships, the study adopted a

2 | METHOD 27-item scale developed by (Muise, Christofides, & Desmarais, 2009). The
Likert scale ranged from (1 = very unlikely to 7 = very likely). The items
2.1 | Participants helped measure the activates of romantic partners on social media and its
likelihood of eliciting jealousy in the relationship. Sample items included
All questionnaires were written in English and were filled online by “Jealous over partner posting message on the page of the opposite-sex
373 undergraduate students using Survey Monkey. The question- friend,” “Partner posts picture with previous boyfriend/girlfriend.”
naire began with clear instructions stating that respondent must
currently be in a romantic relationship. Participants were then
asked, “Are you in a romantic relationship” only respondents who 2.2.3 | Monitoring partner on social media
answer “yes” could continue with answering the main questions. In
all, 567 students attempted to fill the questionnaire however, only Monitoring in romantic relationships was assessed by using the scales
373 were currently in a relationship. Respondents' length of rela- developed by Tokunaga (2011). Likert scale for the 15-items scale
tionship ranged between within 8 and 60 months. The study con- ranged from (1 = “strongly disagree” to 5 = “strongly agree”). Sample
sisted of female 221 (59.2%) and male 152 (40.8%). The items from the Monitoring subscale included “When visiting my part-
respondents' age group ranged within 18–35 years (M = 1.93; ner's social media page, I read the new posts of his/her friends”, “I

TABLE 1 Correlations among social media use, jealousy, monitoring, infidelity, and conflict in romantic relationships

Social media use Jealousy Monitoring Infidelity Conflict Mean SD

Social media use 1 0.501** 0.406** 0.057 0.586** 3.32 0.692
Jealousy 1 0.682** 0.425** 0.665** 3.00 1.045
Monitoring 1 0.399** 0.520** 2.87 0.779
Infidelity 1 0.556** 3.71 0.936
Conflict 1 2.50 0.988

Abbreviations: AVE, average variance extracted; CONF: conflicts in romantic relationship; CR, composite reliability; INF: infidelity; JEL: jealousy; MON:
monitoring; OL: outer loading; SD, standard deviation; SMU: social media use; α, Cronbach's alpha.
Note: **p < .001.
ARIKEWUYO ET AL. 5 of 10

notice when my partner updates his/her social media page,” “I peruse Jealousy over partner's activities on social media was positively asso-
my partner's social media page to see what s/he's up to.” ciated with conflicts in romantic relationship (β = .442, SE = 0.030,
p < .001), monitoring romantic partner on social media had a direct effect
with conflicts in romantic relationship (β = .289, SE = 0.066, p < .001),
2.2.4 | Infidelity in romantic relationships while infidelity on social media also had a direct effect with conflicts in
romantic relationship (β = .160, SE = 0.054, p < .001) (Table 2).
The study adopted Whıtty's (2003) 14-item scale in measuring infidel- Moreover, H6a, H6b, and H6c proposed that the relationship
ity in romantic relationships. The Likert scale ranged from (1 = very between social media use and conflicts in romantic relationships would
unlikely to 7 = very likely). Sample items from the Infidelity subscale be mediated by jealousy, monitoring, and infidelity respectively. A 95%
included “Engaging in hot chat with a stranger,” “Sharing deep emo- bias-corrected and accelerated confidence interval (BCa CI) bootstrap
tional and or intimate information with a person of the opposite sex with 5,000 resamples provided statistical significance for the indirect
(same sex if homosexual) online,” “Just the once, engaging in cybersex effects. As reported in Table 3, the direct path between social media use
with strangers online.” and conflicts in romantic relationships remain significant in the presence
of the mediating variables and the indirect effects were also signification,
indicating a partial mediation, thus providing support for H6.
2.2.5 | Conflicts in romantic relationships In addition, we used variance accounted for (VAF), which is the
ratio for indirect-to-total effects in scrutinizing the magnitude of the
To measure conflicts in romantic relationships, the study adopted a six- indirect effects. Particularly, jealousy in romantic relationships
item scale, which was developed by (Creasey, Kershaw, & explained 14.4% of the effect of social media use and conflicts in
Boston, 1999). Items are answered on a five-point scale (1 = “strongly romantic relationships, monitoring romantic partner explained 15.8%
disagree” to 5 = “strongly agree”). Sample items included “My partner of the effect of social media use and conflicts in romantic relation-
and I have frequent conflicts,” “I suffer a lot from conflict with my ships while infidelity explained 4.0% of the effect.
partner,” “My partner and I often argue because I do not trust him/her.”

2.5 | Discussion
2.3 | Measurement model
The purpose of the current study was to evaluate if there is a signifi-
We used SmartPLS 3 to conduct a factor-focused consistent boot- cant relationship between social media use and conflict in romantic
strap; this was used in accessing the measurement model of the data. relationships. Furthermore, the study explored if jealousy, monitoring
Much relevance has been accorded this approach due to its relevance romantic partner and infidelity serve as mediating mechanisms that
in scholarly literature, as it has proved to be highly reliable in estimat- provide a clearer explanation of the negative effects of social media
ing data set of varying qualities such as sample size, model complexi- use in romantic relationships, which may result in conflicts. Interest-
ties among others (Hair, Hult, Ringle, & Sarstedt, 2013). Convergent ingly, findings in this study also shed more light on the Relational Dia-
validity of our data were carried out as all items were loaded under lectics Theory, based on the concept of contradiction. This study has
their corresponding constructs, and loadings were above 0.6 (Chin, been able to establish a further understanding that social media use in
Peterson, & Brown, 2008). Composite reliability, average variance romantic relationships may bring about a contradiction between
extracted, and Cronbach's alpha were all greater than their rec- romantic partners and ultimately lead to conflicts. For example,
ommended thresholds. (See Table 1). expression and privacy may be associated with the level of informa-
tion an individual shares on social media. While a romantic partner
sees such as normal or an individual choice, the other may begin to
2.4 | Hypotheses testing infer certain negative interpretations to the act. In this case, their
views, opinion, and perception may contradict each other thereby
Haye's (2013) Process Model 4 was run in order to test our hypo- leading to conflict. Also while one of the partners may decide to keep
thesised relationships. All constructs were entered together as a par- his/her Facebook status as “single/not in a relationship” or not share
allel mediation model. Social media use served as a significant romantic pictures of their partners online, the other partner may view
predictor of conflicts in romantic relationships (β = .837, SE = 0.060, such action as a means of attracting the opposite sex, which may ulti-
p < .001), thereby confirming H1. Result also confirms a direct effect mately escalate conflict in the relationship. In this case, there is a con-
of social media use in romantic relationships with (a) jealousy tradiction in their perception of the use of social media as well as
(β = .757, SE = 0.068, p < .001) and (b) monitoring romantic partner what information they share with the public.
(β = .457, SE = 0.053, p < .001). However and quite interestingly, According to findings in the study, when romantic partners use
result did not show any direct relationship between social media use social media there is a high tendency of engaging in various activities
and infidelity in romantic relationships (β = .076, SE = 0.070, that may lead to conflict in such relationships. Individuals may become
p = .269) Figures 1 and 2. distracted and pay significant attention to activities and events on
6 of 10 ARIKEWUYO ET AL.

TABLE 2 Indicator outer loading and construct reliability TABLE 2 (Continued)

OL CR α AVE OL CR α AVE
SMU 0.87 0.97 0.790 JEL_20 0.768
SMU_1 0.937 JEL_21 0.765
SMU_2 0.906 JEL_22 0.762
SMU_3 0.905 JEL_23 0.761
SMU_4 0.883 JEL_24 0.753
SMU_5 0.876 JEL_25 0.746
SMU_6 0.758 JEL_26 0.732
SMU_7 0.874 JEL_27 0.718
SMU_8 0.885 INF_1 0.849
SMU_9 0.869 INF_2 0.748
MON 0.94 0.97 0.783 INF_3 0.700
MON_1 0.875 INF_4 0.841
MON_2 0.863 INF_5 0.791
MON_3 0.861 INF_6 0.798
MON_4 0.861 INF_7 0.688
MON_5 0.851 INF_8 0.858
MON_6 0.846 INF_9 0.796
MON_7 0.842 INF_10 0.795
MON_8 0.835 INF_11 0.745
MON_9 0.833 INF_12 0.759
MON_10 0.824 INF_13 0.714
MON_11 0.807 INF_14 0.779
MON_12 0.801 CONF 0.90 0.91 0.985
MON_13 0.798 CONF_1 0.788
MON_14 0.793 CONF_2 0.675
MON_15 0.788 CONF_3 0.874
JEL 0.87 0.92 0.795 CONF_4 0.886
JEL_1 0.717 CONF_5 0.821
JEL_2 0.714 CONF_6 0.701
JEL_3 0.802 Abbreviations: AVE, average variance extracted; CONF: conflicts in
JEL_4 0.792 romantic relationship; CR, composite reliability; INF: infidelity; JEL: jeal-
ousy; MON: monitoring; OL: outer loading; SMU: social media use; α,
JEL_5 0.782
Cronbach's alpha.
JEL_6 0.782
JEL_7 0.780
JEL_8 0.780 social media such as chatting, reading news feeds, and commenting
JEL_9 0.812 on pictures. Some individuals may also become attached to their social
JEL_10 0.785 media platforms, as such pay little or no attention to their partner's

JEL_11 0.752 emotional, physical, and psychological needs. This ultimately may
result in conflicts. In addition, the dialectic interpretation of contents
JEL_12 0.741
on social media may also generate a significant increase in conflicts.
JEL_13 0.916
As corroborated by Fox et al. (2014), when individuals for instance like
JEL_14 0.835
the pictures of the opposite sex, it may create a dialectic meaning with
JEL_15 0.800
conflict as its result.
JEL_16 0.758
Findings in this study established that social media use in roman-
JEL_17 0.780 tic relationships might facilitate individuals becoming jealous of their
JEL_18 0.778 partners' activities on social media. For instance, when an individual
JEL_19 0.778 does not post his/her partner's pictures on Instagram with attractive
comments, such partner may become jealous. This finding is also
ARIKEWUYO ET AL. 7 of 10

supported by (Utz, Muscanell, & Khalid, 2015). The study also found predictor of infidelity by romantic partners. Therefore, the use social
out that when individuals in a romantic relationship use social media, media by individuals in a romantic relationship does not necessarily
it might also facilitate monitoring by their romantic partner. Such indi- mean it will lead to infidelity. This also infers that though individuals
viduals may spend significant time scrolling through their partner's may interact with the opposite sex online, it may not necessarily bring
social media page to read and interpret messages, look out for whose about infidelity. This finding is quite important as it is contrast with
pictures their partners like as well as monitor the friends their partners the findings of (McDanie et al., 2017; Nelson & Salawu, 2017). How-
keep on social media. These findings are consistent with other litera- ever, infidelity was a partial mediator between social media use and
ture in these areas (Elphinston & Noller, 2011; Fox et al., 2014; Muise conflict in romantic relationships.
et al., 2009; Papp, Danielewicz, & Cayemberg, 2012). Furthermore, findings revealed that jealousy significantly medi-
One of the most important findings in the study reveals that ated between social media use and conflict in romantic relationships.
social media use in romantic relationships also is not necessarily a As such, if a romantic partner exhibit a high level of jealousy in the

TABLE 3 Effect of social media use on conflicts in romantic relationship (Direct paths, indirect paths, total, and direct effects)

β SE t p Conclusion
Direct paths
a1 SMU!JEL .757 0.068 11.159 .000 R2 = .251, F = 124.527, p = .000 H2a: Supported
a2 SMU!MON .457 0.053 8.563 .000 R2 = .165, F = 73.318, p = .000 H2b: Supported
2
a3 SMU!INF .076 0.070 1.106 .269 R = .003, F = 1.224, p = .269 H2c: Not supported
b1 JEL!CONF .442 0.030 14.535 .000 R2 = .780, F = 325.893, p = .000 H3: Supported
b1 MON!CONF .289 0.066 4.357 .000 H4: Supported
b1 INF!CONF .160 0.054 2.944 .000 H5: Supported
Total effect
c - SMU!CONF .837 0.060 13.945 .000 H1: Supported
1
c - SMU!CONF .619 0.043 14.348 .000
Indirect effect Coeff Boot SE LLCI ULCI VAF
(M1) SMU!JEL!CONF .1210 0.047 0.022 0.205 14.4%
(M2) SMU!MON!CONF .1329 0.037 0.068 0.211 15.8%
(M3) SMU!INF!CONF .0343 0.031 0.099 0.022 4.0%

Abbreviations: 95%BcaCI, bias-corrected confidence interval; CONF, conflicts in romantic relationship; INF, infidelity; JEL, jealousy; LLCI, lower level confi-
dence interval; MON, monitoring; SMU, social media use; ULCI, upper level confidence interval.
Note: p < .001.

FIGURE 2 Proposed model with result of empirical analysis. Note: Variables that are nonsignificant are broken lines
8 of 10 ARIKEWUYO ET AL.

relationship, it can enhance conflict in the relationship due to social (Eds.), History, culture and lessons of peaceful co-existence, Ilorin: Centre
media use. However, romantic partners may become jealous due to for Ilorin Studies.
Abdulbaqi, S. S., & Arikewuyo, A. O. (2015). ICT as vehicles for interaction
various reasons such as insecurity and lack of trust among others.
among Muslim women in Ilorin: An appraisal of social media for Islamic
However, jealousy in romantic relationships may be online or offline, propagation. In Z. I. Oseni, A. G. A. S. Oladosu, & M. A. Adedimeji
with the aid of social media platforms, individuals may consciously or (Eds.), ILORIN: As a Beacon of learning and culture in West Africa
unconsciously receive updates about the online activities of their (pp. 149–166). Ilorin: Centre for Ilorin Studies.
Alola, A. A., Arikewuyo, A. O., Ozad, B., Alola, U. V., & Arikewuyo, H. O.
romantic partners. Ultimately, jealousy is a major factor that triggers
(2019). A drain or drench on biocapacity? Environmental account of
conflict in romantic relationships and this has been supported by fertility, marriage, and ICT in the USA and Canada. Environmental Sci-
other studies (Montes-Berges, 2008). ence and Pollution Research, 1(45), 1–12.
This study has been able to verify that when romantic partners Arikewuyo, A., Ozad, B., Abdulbaki, S. S., Okoji, T., & Oloyede, D. (2019).
Social media pornography consumption in achieving satisfaction in
monitor the activities of their partner on social media, we can predict
romantic relationships. International Journal of Information Processing
that there will be conflict in such relationships. Therefore, stating that and Communication, 7(1), 60–71. Available from. https://www.ijipc.
monitoring has an indirect relationship between social media use and com.ng/index.php/ijipc/article/view/260/149
conflict in relationships. Sometimes, romantic partners open fake Arikewuyo, A. O., Bahire, O., & Lasisi, T. (2019). Erotic use of social media
pornography in gratifying romantic relationship desires. The Spanish
social media accounts in order to hide their identity, avoid suspicion,
Journal of Psychology, 1(2), 1–20.
and intensify the level at which they monitor the activities of their
Arikewuyo, A. O., Efe-Özad, B., Dambo, T. H., Abdulbaqi, S. S., &
partners. Individuals thereby monitor what messages, pictures, videos, Arikewuyo, H. O. (2020). An examination of how multiple social media
and graphics their partner post. However, messages may be mis- platforms influence romantic relationships. Journal of Public Affairs.
interpreted and ultimately this may result in conflict in the relation- Arikewuyo, A. O., Efe-Özad, B., & Owolabi, A. S. (2020) 9:‘I U’: A semiotic
analysis of romantic relationship Bitmojis on social media. It Hap-
ships. Lack of privacy on social media has also facilitated ease in the
pened, 134.
level at which romantic partners monitor each other. Findings in this Arikewuyo, A. O., Eluwole, K. K., & Ozad, B. (2020). Influence of lack of
study have shown that monitoring romantic partners on social media trust on romantic relationship problems: The mediating role of partner
is a cause of conflicts in romantic relationships; this is also corrobo- cell phone snooping. Psychological Reports, 12(10), 1–10.
Arikewuyo, A. O., Ozad, B., & Saidu, A. (2018). Use of social Media in Esta-
rated by Muıse (2014).
blishing Virtual Relationship among select university students. Novena
Journal of Communication, 6, 30–43. https://www.njc.com.ng/
reviewed/volume6-255173983.pdf
3 | CONCLUSION AND LIMITATION Arikewuyo, A. O., & Udende, P. (2017). (In) validating Cohen's assertion on
agenda setting theory using media coverage and what people think
about Muhammadu Buhari's 2015. Novena Journal of Communication,
Ultimately, this study has been able to verify that the higher the jeal- 3, 64–77. Available from. https://www.njc.com.ng/reviewed/
ousy, infidelity, and monitoring of romantic partners the higher the volume3-1279092698.pdf
conflict in a romantic relationship due to social media use. Although Azim, M. T. (2017). Interpersonal conflict-handling styles: An Islamic per-
spective. South Asian Journal of Human Resources Management, 4(2),
this study consists of a majority of single participants who are in a
225–234.
relationship that is regarded as a limitation, however, further studies Baxter, L. A. (2004). A tale of two voices: Relational dialectics theory. Jour-
may focus on romantic partners who are married. This will provide nal of Family Communication, 4(3–4), 181–192.
further findings on the conflicts that arise due to social media use in Baxter, L. A., Braithwaite, D. O., Golish, T. D., & Olson, L. N. (2002). Con-
tradictions of interaction for wives of elderly husbands with adult
marriages. Mediating variables were limited to jealousy, infidelity, and
dementia. Journal of Applied Communication Research, 30(1), 1–26.
monitoring romantic partners, future studies may look at more general
Baxter, L. A., Braithwaite, D. O., & Nicholson, J. H. (1999). Turning points
issues such as resentment, uncertainty, religious, and cultural in the development of blended families. Journal of Social and Personal
differences. Despite the limitations, however, this study reports con- Relationships, 16(3), 291–313.
structive findings concerning social media use and conflict in romantic Baxter, L. A., Mazanec, M., Nicholson, J., Pittman, G., Smith, K., & West, L.
(1997). Everyday loyalties and betrayals in personal relationships. Jour-
relationships. The study also enhances the understanding of the dia-
nal of Social and Personal Relationships, 14(5), 655–678.
lectic relational theory, most especially with the use of social media Baxter, L. A., & Montgomery, B. M. (1996). Relating: Dialogues and dialec-
for romantic relationships. tics. New York City: Guilford Press.
Baxter, L. A., & Montgomery, B. M. (1997). Rethinking communication in
personal relationships from a dialectical perspective. In S. Duck (Ed.),
ORCID
Handbook of personal relationships: Theory, research and interventions
Abdulgaffar Olawale Arikewuyo https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5266- (pp. 325–349). NJ, US: John Wiley & Sons Inc.
6478 Bevan, J. L., & Hale, J. L. (2006). Negative jealousy-related emotion rumi-
Taiwo Temitope Lasisi https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1912-5391 nation as consequences of romantic partner, cross-sex friend, and sib-
ling jealousy expression. Communication Studies, 57(4), 363–379.
Bippus, A. M., Boren, J. P., & Worsham, S. (2008). Social exchange orienta-
RE FE R ENC E S tion and conflict communication in romantic relationships. Communica-
Abdulbaqi, S. S., & Arikewuyo, A. O. (2013). The broadcast media and sus- tion Research Reports, 25(3), 227–234.
tainability of peace in ılorin: An assessment of the ımpact of radio and Braithwaite, D. O., & Baxter, L. A. (2006). “You're my parent but you're
television. ın Ilorin. In A. A. Oladosu, Z. I. Oseni, M. A. Adedimeji, et al. not”: Dialectical tensions in stepchildren's perceptions about
ARIKEWUYO ET AL. 9 of 10

communicating with the nonresidential parent. Journal of Applied Com- Janning, M., Gao, W., & Snyder, E. (2018). Constructing shared “space”:
munication Research, 34(1), 30–48. Meaningfulness in long-distance romantic relationship communication
Burke, T. J., & Segrin, C. (2014). Examining diet- and exercise-related com- formats. Journal of Family Issues, 39(5), 1281–1303.
munication in romantic relationships: Associations with health behav- Kwol, V. S., Eluwole, K. K., Avci, T., & Lasisi, T. T. (2020). Another look into
iors. Health Communication, 29, 877–887. the knowledge attitude practice (KAP) model for food control: An
Chin, W. W., Peterson, R. A., & Brown, S. P. (2008). Structural equation investigation of the mediating role of food handlers' attitudes. Food
modeling in marketing: Some practical reminders. Journal of marketing Control, 110, 107025.
theory and practice, 16(4), 287–298. Lasisi, T. T., Eluwole, K. K., Ozturen, A., & Avci, T. (2019). Explanatory
Clayton, R. B. (2014). The third wheel: The impact of twitter use on rela- investigation of the moderating role of employee proactivity on the
tionship infidelity and divorce. Cyberpsychology, Behavior and Social causal relationship between innovation-based human resource man-
Networking, 17(7), 245–430. agement and employee satisfaction. Journal of Public Affairs, 20(2),
Creasey, G., Kershaw, K., & Boston, A. (1999). Conflict management with e2051.
friends and romantic partners: The role of attachment and negative Len-Ríos, M. E., Streit, C., Killoren, S., Deutsch, A., Cooper, M. L., &
mood regulation expectancies. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 28(5), Carlo, G. (2016). US Latino adolescents' use of mass media and medi-
523–543. ated communication in romantic relationships. Journal of Children and
Darvell, M. J., Walsh, S. P., & White, K. M. (2011). Facebook tells me so: Media, 10(4), 395–410.
Applying the theory of planned behavior to understand partner- Linton, J., & Budds, J. (2014). The Hydrosocial cycle: Defining and mobiliz-
monitoring behavior on Facebook. Cyberpsychology, Behavior and ing a relational-dialectical approach to water. Geoforum, 57, 170–180.
Social Networking, 14(12), 717–722. McDanie, B. T., Drouin, M., & Cravens, J. D. (2017). Do you have anything
Desender, K., Opstal, F. V., & Bussche, E. (2014). Feeling the conflict: The to hide? Infidelity-related behaviors on social media sites and marital
crucial role of conflict experience in adaptation. Psychological Science, satisfaction. Computers in Human Behavior, 66, 88–95.
25(3), 675–683. Montes-Berges, B. (2008). Conflict solving strategies and romantic jeal-
DiBello, A. M., Rodriguez, L. M., Hadden, B. W., & Neighbors, C. (2015). ousy in intimate relationships: Adaptation and analysis of CTS2 and
The green-eyed monster in the bottle: Relationship contingent self- CR scales. Estudios de Psicología: Studies in Psychology, 29(2), 221–234.
esteem, romantic jealousy, and alcohol-related problems. Addictive Montgomery, B. M., & Baxter, L. A. (2013). Dialectical approaches to study-
Behaviors, 49, 52–58. ing personal relationships. NYC: Psychology Press.
Elphinston, R. A., & Noller, P. (2011). Time to face it! Facebook intrusion Morey, J. N., Gentzler, A. L., Creasy, B., Oberhauser, A. M., &
and the implications for romantic jealousy and relationship satisfac- Westerman, D. (2013). Young adults' use of communication technol-
tion. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 14(11), ogy within their romantic relationships and associations with attach-
631–635. ment style. Computers in Human Behavior, 29, 1771–1778.
Eluwole, K. K., Lasisi, T. T., Elidemir, S. N., & Guzel, E. (2019). Qualitative Moyano, N., Sánchez-Fuentes, M., Chiriboga, A., & Flórez-Donado, J.
investigation of the impact of internationalization of education on host (2017). Factors associated with Facebook jealousy in three Spanish-
community's eating habit. Journal of Public Affairs, 20(2), e2036. speaking countries. Sexual and Relationship Therapy, 32(3–4), 309–322.
Fox, J., & Moreland, J. J. (2015). The dark side of social networking sites: Muıse, A. (2014). "Creeping" or just _Information seeking? Gender differ-
An exploration of the relational and psychological stressors associated ences in partner monitoring in response to jealousy on Facebook. Per-
with Facebook use and affordances. Computers in Human Behavior, 45, sonal Relationships, 21(1), 35–50.
168–176. Muise, A., Christofides, E., & Desmarais, S. (2009). More information than
Fox, J., Osborn, J. L., & Warber, K. M. (2014). Relational dialectics and you ever wanted: Does Facebook bring out the green-eyed monster
social networking sites: The role of Facebook in romantic relationship of jealousy? Cyberpsychology and Behavior, 12(4), 441–444.
escalation, maintenance, conflict, and dissolution. Computers in Human Nelson, O., & Salawu, A. (2017). Can my wife be virtual-adulterous? An
Behavior, 35, 527–534. experiential study on Facebook, emotional infidelity and self-disclo-
Gordon, A. M., & Chen, S. (2014). The role of sleep in interpersonal con- sure. Journal of International Women's Studies, 18(2), 166–179.
flict: Do sleepless nights mean worse fights? Social Psychological and Nongpong, S., & Charoensukmongkol, P. (2016). I Don't care much as long
Personality Science, 5(2), 168–175. as I am also on Facebook: Impacts of social media use of both partners
Greer, L. L., Jehn, K. A., & Mannix, E. A. (2008). Conflict transformation a on romantic relationship problems. The Family Journal: Counseling and
longitudinal investigation of the relationships between different types Therapy for Couples and Families, 24(4), 351–358.
of intragroup conflict and the moderating role of conflict resolution. O'Mahen, H. A., Beach, S. R., & Tesser, A. (2000). Relationship ecology and
Small Group Research, 39(3), 278–302. negative communication in romantic relationships: A self-evaluation
Hair, J. F., Jr., Hult, G. T. M., Ringle, C., & Sarstedt, M. (2013). A primer on maintenance perspective. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 26
partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM). Sage (11), 1343–1352.
publications. Ogunmokun, O. A., Unverdi-Creig, G. I., Said, H., Avci, T., & Eluwole, K. K.
Hall, J. H., & Fincham, F. D. (2006). Relationship dissolution following infi- (2020). Consumer well-being through engagement and innovation in
delity: The roles of attributions and forgiveness. Journal of Social and higher education: A conceptual model and research propositions. Jour-
Clinical Psychology, 25(2), 508–522. nal of Public Affairs, e2100.
Halpern, D., Katz, J. E., & Carril, C. (2017). The online ideal persona vs. the Papp, L. M., Danielewicz, J., & Cayemberg, C. (2012). “Are we Facebook
jealousy effect: Two explanations of why selfies are associated with official?” implications of dating partners' Facebook use and profiles for
lower-quality romantic relationships. Telematics and Informatics, 34, intimate relationship satisfaction. Cyberpsychology, Behavior and Social
114–123. Networking, 15(2), 85–90.
Hayes, A. F. (2013). Model templates for PROCESS for SPSS and SAS. Rahimizhian, S., Avci, T., & Eluwole, K. K. (2019). A conceptual model
Huang, J.-C. (2010). Unbundling task conflict and relationship conflict: The development of the impact of higher education service quality in
moderating role of team goal orientation and conflict management. guaranteeing edu-tourists' satisfaction and behavioral intentions. Jour-
International Journal of Conflict Management, 21(3), 334–355. nal of Public Affairs, e2085.
Humphreys, M. (2005). Natural resources, conflict, and conflict resolution: Reed, L. A., Tolman, R. M., & Ward, L. M. (2017). Gender matters: Experi-
Uncovering the mechanisms. The Journal of Conflict Resolution, 49(4), ences and consequences of digital dating abuse victimization in ado-
508–537. lescent dating relationships. Journal of Adolescence, 59, 79–89.
10 of 10 ARIKEWUYO ET AL.

Rogan, D., Piacentini, M., & Hopkinson, G. (2018). Intercultural house-

hold food tensions: A relational dialectics analysis. European Journal platforms facilitate satisfaction and dissatisfaction in romantic
of Marketing, 52, 2289–2311. https://doi.org/10.1108/EJM-10- relationships. He is currently a researcher at the Department of
2017-0778 Mass Communication, University of Ilorin, Nigeria.
Rueda, H. A., Lindsay, M., & Williams, L. R. (2015). “She posted it on
Facebook”: Mexican American adolescents' experiences with technol- Taiwo Temitope Lasisi is a Ph.D. graduate of Faculty of Tourism
ogy and romantic relationship conflict. Journal of Adolescent Research, Eastern Mediterranean University (Gazimagusa, TRNC, via Mersin
30(4), 419–445.
10, 99628, TURKEY) and a senior researcher at South Ural State
Schneider, J. P., Weiss, R., & Sam, C. (2012). Is it really cheating? Under-
standing the emotional reactions and clinical treatment of spouses and University, Russia. Her research interest includes brand manage-
partners affected by cybersex infidelity. Sexual Addiction & Compulsiv- ment, organization behavior, human resource management, crea-
ity, 19, 123–139. tive working environment, environmental sustainability, economic
Sinclair, L., & Fehr, B. (2005). Voice versus loyalty: Self-Construals and
modeling, and policies. She has published in several journals like
responses to dissatisfaction in romantic relationships. Journal of Experi-
mental Social Psychology, 41, 298–304. Current Issues in Tourism, Journal of Hospitality and Tourism
Sing-Bik Ngai, C., & Singh, R. G. (2018). Using dialectics to build leader- Management, among others. Email is [email protected]
stakeholder relationships: An exploratory study on relational dialectics
in Chinese corporate leaders' web-based messages. International Jour- Dr. Saudat Salah AbdulBaqi is an Associate Professor of Mass
nal of Business Communication, 55(1), 3–29. Communication, University of Ilorin. She has close to three
Song, I., Larose, R., Eastın, M. S., & Lın, C. A. (2004). Internet gratifications decades of experience in teaching and researching communication
and internet addiction: On the uses and abuses of new media.
courses as well as industry-based experiences in broadcasting and
Cyberpsychology and Behavior, 7(4), 384–394.
Suter, E. A., Baxter, L. A., Seurer, L. M., & Thomas, L. J. (2014). Discursive public relation practices. Her research interests cover health com-
constructions of the meaning of “family” in online narratives of foster munication, emotional communication, gender communication,
adoptive parents. Communication Monographs, 81(1), 59–78. https:// public relations, and public speaking. She is well known for her
doi.org/10.1080/03637751.2014.880791 communication skills in solving marital crises and abating domestic
Suter, E. A., & Norwood, K. M. (2017). Critical theorizing in family commu-
violence. She is currently the ag. Chairman of the Nigerian Insti-
nication studies: (re)Reading relational dialectics theory 2.0. Communi-
cation Theory, 27(3), 290–308. tute of Public Relations. Kwara State Chapter.
Tokunaga, R. S. (2011). Social networking site or social surveillance site?
Understanding the use of interpersonal electronic surveillance in Dr. Aisha Imam Omoloso is a lecturer at the department of mass
romantic relationships. Computers in Human Behavior, 27, 705–713. communication, University of Ilorin, Nigeria. Her research inter-
Utz, S., Muscanell, N., & Khalid, C. (2015). Snapchat elicits more jealousy ests include health communication, audience research, and media
than Facebook: A comparison of Snapchat and Facebook use. impact. She has authored and co-authored research articles in
Cyberpsychology, Behavior and Social Networking, 18(3), 141–146.
local and international journals. She also has journalism and broad-
Vanhee, G., Lemmens, G. M., Stas, L., Loeys, T., & Verhofstadt, L. L. (2018).
Why are couples fighting? A need frustration perspective on relation- cast production experience as reporter, newscaster, and pro-
ship conflict and dissatisfaction. Journal of Family Therapy, 40, S4–S23. gramme anchor with the Kwara Television Service and Taraba
Whıtty, M. T. (2003). Pushing the wrong buttons: men's and women's atti- Television both in Nigeria.
tudes toward online and offline infidelity. Cyberpsychology and Behav-
ior, 6(6), 569–579. Dr. Halima Arikewuyo is a community health physician and
Yarnell, L. M., & Neff, K. D. (2013). Self-compassion, interpersonal conflict
researcher. She has an interest in women's health-related studies
resolutions, and well-being. Self and Identity, 12, 146–159.
including rape. She is a well-practiced practitioner and has
attended conferences in deferent capacities. She is well known
AUTHOR BIOGRAPHI ES
for her communication skills and ability to counsel patients who
need help.
Abdulgaffar Olawale Arikewuyo holds a Ph.D. in Communication
and Media Studies at Eastern Mediterranean University, Northern
Cyprus. His research combines aspects of Communication Psy-
chology, Interpersonal Communication, Romantic Relationships,
How to cite this article: Arikewuyo AO, Lasisi TT,
Sexual Communication and Gratification, Family Relations while
Abdulbaqi SS, Omoloso AI, Arikewuyo HO MD.. Evaluating
focusing on communication patterns individuals in intimate (sex-
the use of social media in escalating conflicts in romantic
ual and romantic) relationships. He also examines the impact of
relationships. J Public Affairs. 2020;e2331. https://doi.org/10.
communication apparatus such as mainstream and social media
1002/pa.2331
on human relationships, with emphasis on how social media