A self-assessment tool for

measuring Internet anxiety

Santosh Kalwar

digital vision

Now is the age of anxiety.

W.H. Auden

hen American poet and dramatist W.H. Auden said the above line during the Great
Depression, he must have been feeling great fear and worry about his self-existence. Today,
we live in an age when there is no escape from fear, stress, frustration, and anger.
Undoubtedly, every human being suffers a great deal in one way or another. In our everyday life,
we need a variety of information from various sources, which in our age include social networking
Web sites, news, blogs, and wikis. In this present era, knowingly or unknowingly, we consume a lot
of information from these sources. We try to create, read, and write using these popular tools. Most
of the time, it is not easy for us to distinguish the good from the bad and the bad from the ugly. On
one hand, we feel happy and alive when we are connected in this age of the Internet. On the
other hand, we may be unaware of our own actions or behavior. S. Aydin suggests that the Internet
in itself does not cause anxiety; rather, it is the users participation situation that results in anxiety.

Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/MPOT.2012.2187104

Date of publication: 31 October 2012

38

0278-6648/12/$31.002012IEEE

IEEE POTENTIALS

Our behavior on the Internet is likely

to cause stress, possibly because of the
numerous sources and contents we use.
This may sometimes lead to psychological problems, mental illness, and anxiety. It is apparent that we are the victims
of the different types of information
that we use.
Preece et al., in their book HumanComputer Interaction, suggest that such
interaction has several key factors, including health and safety, that play a major
role in our daily habit of using the contents on the Internet. Based on the informal observation, we can say that the
routine tasks of sharing, Tweeting, and
posting on the Internet can be fun. However, many times the social networking
experience may turn out to be a socialnot-working experience. Therefore, to
measure users anxiety in using the
contents on the Internet, we devised set
of questionnaires and presented them
to users.
In this article, we first provide some
background of our study. Second, we
describe our study goalto measure
users anxiety on the Internet by providing them with a score sheet. Third, we
raise a research question, which we
answer by means of qualitative research
methods. Fourth, we describe our methods and procedures via a self-assessment
measurement tool. Finally, we conclude
with a brief discussion of future works.

Behavioral
(e.g., Addiction, Avoidance)

Measured anxiety
Charles Darwin and Sigmund Freud
first formulated the ideas of emotional
state and anxiety in human beings. For
centuries since then, researchers and
practitioners in the field of clinical psychology and psychoanalysis have been
working on finding effective measures of
human anxiety.
Many researchers agree that anxiety is
a very complex phenomenon to explore.
The lack of appropriate measuring instruments and the various moral or ethical
problems associated with measuring
human anxiety have made Internet anxiety an even more complicated phenomenon. For simplicity in our work, we
have categorized human behavior on the
Internet based on behavioral (e.g., addiction, avoidance), physical (e.g., headache, nausea), cultural (e.g., Asian,
Western), cognitive (e.g., lack of focus,
attention, and concentration), psychological (e.g., attitude, beliefs), emotional
(e.g., fear, frustration, anxiety), and anxiety (e.g., general anxiety, Internet anxiety) traits (see Fig. 1). A wide variety of
techniques are used to measure anxiety,
including questionnaires, rating scales,
and laboratory tests. The most well
known include the Beck Anxiety Inventory (BAI), the Spielberger State-Trait
Anxiety Inventory (STAI), the Generalized Anxiety Disorder Severity Scale
(GADSS), the Penn State Worry Ques-

Physical
(e.g., Headache, Nausea)

Anxiety
(e.g., General Anxiety,
Internal Anxiety)

Cultural
(e.g., Asian, Western)

A User
Emotion
(e.g., Fear, Frustration, Aversion)

Psychological
(e.g., Attitude, Beliefs)

Fig. 1 A user on the Internet experiencing different factors.

Cognitive
(e.g., Lack of Focus or,
Concentration)

tionnaire (PSWQ), and the Hamilton

Anxiety Scale (HAM-A). A brief summary
of these popular general anxiety measurement techniques is shown in Table 1.
From our perspective, these existing
measuring techniques suffer from two
shortcomings. First, they rarely consider
Internet anxiety measurement, and none
of them focus on the Internet. Second,
they are general anxiety measuring tools
developed a long time ago for general
use. Therefore, these shortcomings contributed to the paucity of this research.

The question is...

Based on the rationale of our study,
the following research question and
hypothesis were constructed:
RQ1: How can we measure Internet
anxiety (as distinct from other types of
anxiety)?
H1: Since users have some level of
anxiety on the Internet, a self-assessment
tool may be used to measure Internet
anxiety.
Our goal was to create questions and
measure the level of anxiety of users. For
this, we created a simple process and
came up with 35 questions with the help
of the users. First, we divided the users
into three different sets to get more feedback. The first and second sets consisted
of two users each. The final set was composed of three users. The procedure
developed for generating questions is
self-explanatory, as shown in Fig. 2. We
recruited users and asked them general
questions on Internet anxiety. We then
validated those questions through two
iterations, first with seven users and then
with 35 users. Finally, we provided the
users with a score sheet.
Our first task in this study was to hire
a select group of participants with technical expertise. We conducted a preliminary interview with these participants to
confirm that they were tech savvy. We
then asked questions about Internet
anxiety and recorded their data by a
note-taking mechanism. The appropriate
questions were developed through an
iterative mechanism. The final question
was selected only after it was found suitable enough. Finally, we came up with
questions that could be used to measure
Internet anxiety. We conducted a preliminary study using the above process and
procedure and then selected 35 questions from the discussion with the users.
In particular, 35 questions were asked,
five for each participant. During a thorough discussion with the users, the
majority of these questions were raised.

NOVEMBER/DECEMBER 201239

Create
Question

Internet Anxiety

II

35 Questions

III

Level of
Internet Anxiety

Validate Questions
1+

+...(n 1)...+ n

(Validate with n Number of Participants)

Fig. 2 The process and procedure that was used to create questions.

Thus, the Internet anxiety self-assessment

tool was developed. We asked all seven
participants to answer the questions in
two to four weeks time. We formulated a
score sheet based on the 35 questions.
There were two attributes pertaining to
each question, i.e., true and false. We
presumed that the total number of true
responses provide the level of Internet
anxiety. Our assumed score sheet looked
exactly as follows, where x is the score
obtained by the participant.
A score of 0,5x,5 5 very low anxiety.
A score of 5,5x,10 5 low anxiety
A score of 10,5x,15 5 medium anxiety
A score of 15,5x,20 5 high anxiety.
A score of 20,5x,25 5 very high anxiety.

On to the setup
The study was conducted in two iterations involving 80 participants (population size 5 80). The sample size was
seven in the first iteration and 35 in the
second iteration. The participants were
researchers, students, and our colleagues
from the Department of Information
Technology at Lappeenranta University of
Technology. The selected participants
were familiar with the Internet both technically and in general. They reported on
the severity of Internet anxiety.
In the first iteration, the research
was conducted using a semistructured

Fig. 3 An example question.

Table 1. Comparison of anxiety measuring techniques.

Measuring
Techniques

Description

Usage

Advantage

Disadvantage

Reference

Beck Anxiety
Inventory (BAI)

Developed during 1961

21 multiple choice
questionsseverity of
individual anxiety

Variety of different
groups (adult, elderly)
Used to measure panic,
depression
It has been used in over
2,000 empirical studies

Most widely used

by researchers and
clinical practioners
Easy to take test

Usually unsuitable in
social settings
Only measures very
general anxiety

Beck, T. Aaron et
al., P. Richter, et al.

Spielberger
State-Trait Anxiety
Inventory (STAI)

Developed during 1960

Two sections i.e., state
and trait, each having
20 questions

Used to measure anxiety

in adults
Only anxiety not
depression

It has been adapted

into 48 languages
Can be completed in
less than ten min.
Reliable and brief self
report

Unsuitable to measure
both depression and
anxiety

C.D. Spielberger
et al.

Generalized Anxiety
Disorder Severity
Scale (GADSS)

Focuses on general
anxiety
12 items that are
rated on a nine-point
Likert scale (08)

Used to measure anxiety

especially physical:
worry, tension mood,
satisfaction with life

Widely used
Cost efficient

Not used to measure

other categories
such as behavioral or
cognitive disorders

Carmen Andreescu
et al., T.D. Borkovec
et al.

Penn State Worry

Questionnaires
(PSWQ)

Developed during 1990

16-item inventory

Used for both clinical and Consistent and

nonclinical populations
reliable inventory

Minimal research
Specific and focuses
mainly on worry

D.M. Fresco et al.

Hamilton Anxiety
Scale (HAM-A)

First introduced during

1960
Originally 17 questions,
5-point scale

Used to measure low

mood, agitation, anxiety,
and weight loss

Mainly used for

depression

M. Hamilton

40

Focuses on those
who suffer great deal
with anxiety, and
depression
Simple to use

IEEE POTENTIALS

interview among seven participants distributed in a group. These participants

included five males and two females, as
shown in Table 2. The total population
(N 5 7), standard deviation (2.058), population variance (3.63), and population
standard deviation (1.906) were relatively very low, which indicates that the
ages of the participants were very close
to the mean age.
In the second iteration, 40 participants answered questionnaires distributed over the Internet; 35 questions
were considered valid. Two answers
were missing data on USER_ID. Another
three were considered outliers (box
plot). A simple Web-based questionnaire was created (see Fig. 3) for the
participants to select their appropriate
answers. This Web-based tool featured
a progress bar that indicated the percentage of questions answered, a simple
drop-down button for answer selection,
and another button for navigating
through the questions.

Measure Your Internet Anxiety

How much anxiety do you have on the Internet? Click True or False
according to your response to each statement.
1. True False While browsing the contents on the Internet, I find myself lost in
hyperspace.
2. True False If I were to take an anxiety test, I would worry a great deal before
taking it.
3. True False While browsing contents, I spend a great deal of time on it.
4. True False During browsing, I find myself thinking of things unrelated to the actual
browsing materials.
5. True False I get to feeling very panicky when I do not find what I am looking for on
the Internet.
6. True False During contents browsing, I find myself thinking of YouTubing,
Twittering, and Facebooking.
7. True False I sometimes feel my heart beating very fast while I am on the Internet.
8. True False I usually get depressed after I do not find what I am looking for on the
Internet.
9. True False I have an uneasy, upset feeling before browsing contents on the
Internet.
10. True False When browsing contents on the Internet, my emotional feelings
interfere with my performance.
11. True False During browsing contents on the Internet, I frequently get so nervous
that I forget facts I really know.
12. True False I seem to defeat myself while browsing contents on the Internet.

Expert validation
We recruited experts from the Journal of Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and

Fig. 4 Block 1, questions 112.

Table 2. The standard deviation of the age of participants.

Sample
Standard
Deviation

First
Iteration
Sample
Size

Population
Variance

Mean
Age

Population
Standard
Deviation

Sample
Variance

2.0587

3.6328

26.2857

1.906

4.2382

Social Networking, contacting them via

e-mail. Fifteen experts were contacted,
but only a few responded to our e-mail
query. We gave them the 35 questionnaires that were posited and asked for
their opinions. According to one expert,
the questionnaires leaned more toward
addiction than anxiety. She suggested
giving these questionnaires to a large
sample in order to allow validation using
factorial analysis.
Another expert reported that it
would be better to put anxiety in a
much broader perspective. He put forth
a prerequisite question on validity by
asking: Are we talking about pure
autonomic arousal, a foreboding sense
that something is not right, and misperceptions, reactions to the visual and
auditory stimuli being presented?
Meanwhile, another expert suggested
we use her validation questionnaires,
which we determined were unfit for
our study.

Perhaps the best analysis came from

another expert who suggested a factor
analysis to identify subscales for our
questionnaires and a test of reliability
(e.g., Cronbachs alpha) for each subscale. Finally, one expert stated that the
Kuder-Richardson formula is analogous
to Chronbachs alpha; hence, the use of

13. True False The harder I work on the Internet or study on the Internet, the more
confused I get.
14. True False As soon as Internet browsing is over, i try to stop worrying about it,
but I just cant.
15. True False During browsing contents, I sometimes wonder if III ever get back to
browsing again.
16. True False I would rather be online than offline.
17. True False I wish the Internet did not bother me so much.
18. True False I think I could do much better work on the Internet if I could be alone.
19. True False Thinking about the social networking (Facebook, Twitter, Myspace,
YouTube) I may get better performance.
20. True False If Internet is unavailable all the time, I think I would actually learn less.
21. True False On Internet I take the attitude, If I don't know it now, theres point in
worrying about it.
22. True False I feel upset while browsing the Internet.
23. True False Thoughts of my experience on the Internet, I often share with my
friends.
24. True False I study much harder on the Internet.
25. True False Even when Im well prepared on what I am looking for on the Internet,
I feel very anxious about it. I dont enjoy.
Fig. 5 Block 2, questions 1325.

NOVEMBER/DECEMBER 201241

26. True False Before browsing contents on the Internet, I find my hand or arms
trembling.
27. True False I started feeling very uneasy just after I finished browsing contents
on the Internet.
28. True False I have experienced anger when using contents on the Internet.
29. True False I extensively use contents on the Internet.
30. True False I worry a great deal if there is no Internet connection.
31. True False I have usage problems on the Internet.
32. True False During browsing contents, I sometimes wonder about particular
terminologies on the Internet.
33. True False I am often distracted by eye-catching applications on the Internet.
34. True False I have experienced fear of using contents on the Internet.
35. True False I am an Internet addict.
Fig. 6 Block 3, questions 2635.

times, I feel lost while browsing...

Thus, we formulated Q1. Similarly, we
asked them, Would you worry if you
had to take an anxiety test? One user
said, Yes, I may worry to some extent.
Another user reported that she usually
hangs out in social networking applications, which yielded Q6. With the
second set of users, we asked: Do you
feel worried after you finish browsing?
One user said she never worries. We
then formulated Q15. Similarly, one
user said, I really dont see why some
people get so upset about browsing the
Internet. Thus, we formulated Q22.

either would not make much difference

in the results.

Lets review the results

There were two sets of results obtained
from this work. In the first set of results, we
developed 35 questions that we believe
have significant contribution to humancomputer interaction (HCI). For the purpose of this discussion, the questions are
shown in three separate blocks [Block 1,
Block 2, and Block 3 (see Figures 46)].
We asked the first set of users questions such as, Do you feel lost in
hyperspace? One user said, Some-

Table 3. Statistical score sheet from the seven users.

Questions

Subjects

35

Measures

USER_ID

TRUE

FALSE

SCORE

20

15

High

20

15

High

16

19

High

26

Low

16

19

High

16

19

High

29

Low

Cronbachs Alpha

0,708263069

Split-Half (odd-even) Correlation

0,555392325

Spearman-Brown Prophecy

0,714150785

Mean for Test

14,71428571

Standard Deviation for Test

4,919764388

KR21

0,666699732

KR20

0,708263069

42

With the third set of users, we asked

questions such as, Do your hands or
legs tremble while browsing the Internet? A user said: Sometimes, it
happens We then formulated Q26.
During the discussion, one user said
he uses the contents on the Internet
every day, which was changed to: I
extensively use abusive contents on
the Internet. Similarly, one user
reported that she worries a great deal
when there is no Internet connection;
thus, we formulated Q30. The other
questions were formulated following
the same procedure.
Our second set of results consists of
the score sheet of the seven participants. The results in the score sheet
showed that the majority of the participants had a high level of anxiety; two
participants had low anxiety and the
other participants had high anxiety, as
shown in Table 3. The table also shows
that user ID 1 had high anxiety,
whereas user ID 4 had low anxiety.
The user with low anxiety said, I
know exactly what I am doing on the
Internet, and I dont see it as a fearful
or depressing thing; I have total control over my behavior on the Internet.
On the other hand, user ID 1 with
high anxiety said, I feel fearful,
depressed, and frustrated when the
Internet connection is not working, or
due to unnecessary pop-ups and
advertisements.

There are popular and standard statistical software packages used for data
mining and statistical analysis, including
SPSS from IBM. An analog open-source
software such as PSPP can also be used.
Since our sample size was relatively
smaller, Del Siegles reliability calculator
was preferred. The following measures
were calculated (see Table 4):
Cronbachs alpha for calculating
the coefficient of consistency
split-half (odd-even) correlation
for splitting the test in half (odd) and
comparing test with remaining half
(even) to test reliability
Spearman-Brown prophecy to reflect the entire test length
Kuder-Richardson formulas 21
(KR21) and 20 [KR20; see (1) and (2)]
for calculating the reliability of the selfassessment tool. It is easy to compute
and measure the reliability of items of
a true/false nature. The results illustrate a conservative estimate of the tests
reliability.
IEEE POTENTIALS

The formulas are:

KR - 21 =

n = 1 # S2 - ) X - X2
j
n
n -1 ` n

Table 4. Statistical score sheet from the 35 users.

S 2 3G

Questions

Subjects

35

35

Cronbachs Alpha

0,718490752

Split-Half (odd-even) Correlation

0,574619559

Spearman-Brown Prophecy

0,729851926

Mean for Test

13,77142857

Standard Deviation for Test

4,951684933

KR21

0,678728663

KR20

0,718490752

(1)

and
KR - 20 = 8 n B # X 6^ s 2x - pq h /s 2x@ (2)
n -1
where
n is the number of test items
X is the average score
S is the standard deviation
s 2x is the variance of scores
p is percentage answering item right
q is percentage answering item wrong
pq is the sum of pq products for all n items.

More samples
Since the first iteration consisted of
only seven users, its validity was questionable. Thus, in the second iteration,
35 Internet users were asked to answer
the questionnaires using our simple
web-based tool (see Fig. 3). The score
sheet obtained from the 35 users is
shown in Fig. 7.

Conclusion and future works

In this article, we described how
we formulated a self-assessment tool
for measuring human anxiety on the
Internet. The internal consistency,
measured by Cronbachs alpha coefficient (a 5 0.71), and the reliability
(KR-21 5 0.67) were shown to be satisfactory. The higher reliability score
indicates a higher internal consistency
among the items tested. In other
words, it indicates a stronger relationship between items, which assesses
anxiety.
In the first iteration, the results
showed that the users in the sample
possessed a high level of Internet anxiety. Similarly, in the second iteration,
31% of the sample showed a medium
level of Internet anxiety, whereas only
11% had a very low level of Internet
anxiety. These findings suggest that
Internet anxiety may be a significant
condition leading to stress, mental disorder, trauma, addiction, and behavioral disorder. Furthermore, the results
fully support the hypothesis that a selfassessment tool can be used in order to
measure Internet anxiety. Therefore, we
believe that this self-assessment tool is a
significant contribution to the measurement of users Internet anxiety level
in general.

The following points illustrate the significance of a self-assessment tool for

measuring Internet anxiety.
It is expected that a self-assessment
tool will encourage users involvement in
measuring Internet anxiety.
It can be assumed that a selfassessment tool will give users increased
responsibility, autonomy, and a deeper
understanding of their own selves.
It can be concluded that a selfassessment tool for measuring Internet anxiety gives a thorough and critical reflection.
It is presumed that a better understanding of users subjectivity, decisions,
and judgment can be investigated.
In the future, highly advanced,
automated, and effective technical tools for
the design and development of HCI can be
created using a self-assessment tool.
A self-assessment tool provides more
relevant feedback to users and generates
active discussion among user peer groups.
A self-assessment tool can pave
the way toward finding techniques to
reduce Internet anxiety.
To our utmost surprise, the majority
of the participants showed a medium
level of anxiety. The reason for our surprise was simply that we were not
expecting our participants, who had
technical expertise, to possess Internet
anxiety at all. We believe that our selfassessment tool is valid for measuring
anxiety among Internet users, but this
needs to be validated further with a
larger sample.
This work has a few limitations. The
first is the selection of participants,
who were all students; thus, a selfreport of Internet anxiety may not be
the best validation for the scale.
Although a few experts analyses were
used in validation, these might still be
insufficient. An expert third-party
observer may provide a more objective

score. Moreover, a larger and more

diverse sample should be used in the
future. Thus, in the near future, we
plan to engage more participants, e.g.,
by utilizing a self-assessment tool in a
social networking application (e.g.,
Facebook, Google+) or by conducting
a survey among a larger and more
diverse population.

Acknowledgment
The author would like to thank the
anonymous reviewers, colleagues, and
Prof. Jari Porras and Dr. Kari Heikkinen
for supervising the writing process of
this article.

Read more about it

A. T. Beck, N. Epstein, G. Brown,
and R. A. Steer, An inventory for measuring clinical anxiety: Psychometric
properties, J. Consult. Clin. Psychol.,
vol. 56, no. 6, pp. 893897, Dec. 1988.
P. Richter, J. Werner, A. Heerlein,
A. Kraus, and H. Sauer, On the validity of the Beck Depression Inventory. A
review, Psychopathology, vol. 31, no. 3,
pp. 160168, 1998.
C. D. Spielberger, R. L. Gorusch,
and R. E. Lushene. Manual for the StateTrait Anxiety Inventory. Palo Alto: Consulting Psychologist Press, 1970.
C. Andreescu, B. Herbeck Belnap,
B. L. Rollman, P. Houck, C. Ciliberti, S.
Mazumdar, M. K. Shear, and E. J. Lenze,
Generalized anxiety disorder severity
scale validation in older adults, Amer. J.
Geriatric Psychiatry, vol. 16, no. 10, pp.
813818, 2008.
T. D. Borkovec, R. Shadick, and
M. Hopkins, The nature of normal anpathological worry, in Chronic Anxiety, Generalized Anxiety Disorder, and
Mixed Anxiety Depression, R. M. Rapee
and D. H. Barlow, Eds. New York: Guilford Press, 1991, pp. 2951.

NOVEMBER/DECEMBER 201243

User_ID
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
Average

True
14
19
25
20
22
20
19
10
10
13
11
19
13
22
7
16
4
9
9
15
11
11
7
3
19
14
12
14
10
5
5
21
13
19
21
13.77142857

False
21
16
10
15
13
15
16
25
25
22
24
16
22
13
28
19
31
26
26
20
24
24
28
32
16
21
23
21
25
30
30
14
22
16
14
21.22857143

Score
Medium
High
Very High
High
Very High
High
High
Low
Low
Medium
Medium
High
Medium
Very High
Low
High
Very Low
Low
Low
Medium
Medium
Medium
Low
Very Low
High
Medium
Medium
Medium
Low
Very Low
Very Low
Very High
Medium
High
Very High
Medium

Metric Used

Level of Internet Anxiety

A Score of 0 <= x < 5 = Very Low Anxiety

A Score of 5 <= x < 10 = Low Anxiety
A Score of 10 <= x < 15 = Medium Anxiety
A Score of 15 <= x < 20 = High Anxiety
A Score of 20 <= x < 25 = Very High Anxiety

Medium-11
High-3
Very High-5
Very Low-4
Low-7

34

1
35 35

33

3
4

30

32

25

31

31%
22%
14%
11%
20%

20
30

15

29

10

28

27

10

True
False

11

26

12

25

13

24
14

23
15

22
21

20

19

18

17

16

Fig. 7 (a) Score sheet of 35 users and (b) overall response for the level of Internet anxiety.

D. M. Fresco, D. S. Mennin, R. G.
Heimberg, and C. L. Turk, Using the Penn
State Worry Questionnaire to identify individuals with generalized anxiety disorder:
A receiver operating characteristic analysis, J. Behavior Ther. Exp. Psychiatry, vol.
34, no. 34, pp. 283291, 2003.
M. Hamilton, The assessment of
anxiety states by rating, Br. J. Med. Psychol., vol. 32, no. 1, pp. 5055, 1959.
A. Osman, J. Hoffman, F. X. Barrios, B. A. Kopper, J. L. Breitenstein,
and S. K. Hahn, Factor structure, reliability, and validity of the Beck Anxiety
Inventory in adolescent psychiatric inpatients, J. Clin. Psychol., vol. 58, no. 4,
pp. 443456, 2002.
R. I. Kabacoff, D. L. Segal,
M. Hersen, and V. B. Van Hasselt,

44

Psychometric properties and diagnostic utility of the Beck Anxiety Inventory and the State-Trait Anxiety
Inventory with older adult psychiatric
outpatients, J. Anxiety Disord., vol. 11,
no. 1, pp. 3347, 1997.
C. D. Spielberger and S. J.
Sydeman, State-trait anxiety inventory
and state-trait anger expression inventory, in The Use of Psychological Testing for Treatment Planning and Outcome Assessment, M. E. Maruish, Ed.
Hillsdale, NJ: L. Eribaum Associates,
1994, pp. 292321.
D. Siegdel. (2011, June 21). Reliability calculator [Online]. Available:
http://www.gifted.uconn.edu/siegle/
research/Instrument%20Reliability%20
and%20Validity/Reliability.htm

S. Aydin, Internet anxiety among

foreign language learners, TechTrends,
vol. 55, no. 2, pp. 4654, Mar./Apr. 2011.

About the author

Santosh Kalwar (santosh.kalwar@lut.fi)
is a doctoral student at the Lappeenranta
University of Technology, Lappeenranta,
Finland. His research area is in humancomputer interaction. He is a Member
of IEEE, ACM, IADIS, and the Internet
Society Finland Chapter and also acts voluntarily as a reviewer for several international journal and conferences. He holds
an M.S. in information technology from
Lappeenranta University of Technology
and a B.E. in computer science and engineering from Visvesvaraya Technological
University, Bangalore, India.

IEEE POTENTIALS