International Journal of Advanced and Applied Sciences

Int. j. adv. appl. sci.

EISSN: 2313-3724

Print ISSN: 2313-626X

Volume 4, Issue 8  (August 2017), Pages:  123-128

Title: Understanding who cyberloafs from the self-control perspective: A study in the public service sector

Author(s):  Aminah Ahmad ¹, Zoharah Omar 1, 2, *


1Institute for Social Science Studies, Universiti Putra Malaysia, Serdang, Selangor, Malaysia
2Department of Professional Development and Continuing Education, Faculty of Educational Studies, Universiti Putra Malaysia, Serdang, Selangor, Malaysia

Full Text - PDF          XML


The aim of this study is to understand cyberloafing behavior of employees from the self-control perspective, and to examine differences in cyberloafing according to gender and age, and the gender-age interaction effect. We used survey questionnaires to collect data from 260 Malaysian employees in the public service sector. Our results indicate that the employees engage in cyberloafing with males cyberloafing more than females, irrespective of age. This study contributes to cyberloafing behavior literature by providing an explanation of gender difference in cyberloafing using the self-control theory. The non-significant results on difference in cyberloafing according to age and gender-age interaction effect are discussed. Implications of these results for research and organizational Internet policies and practices are presented. 

© 2017 The Authors. Published by IASE.

This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (

Keywords: Cyberloafing, Gender, Age, Self-control theory, Public service sector

Article History: Received 14 March 2017, Received in revised form 15 June 2017, Accepted 15 July 2017

Digital Object Identifier:


Ahmad A and Omar Z (2017). Understanding who cyberloafs from the self-control perspective: A study in the public service sector. International Journal of Advanced and Applied Sciences, 4(8): 123-128


  1. Ahmad A, Omar Z, Radzali FM, and Saidu MB (2016). Religiosity and emotional stability as determinants of citizenship and deviant behavior at work. The Social Sciences, 11(22): 5520-5525.
  2. Anandarajan M, Paravastu N, and Simmers CA (2006). Perceptions of personal Web usage in the workplace: A Q-methodology approach. Cyber Psychology Behavior, 9(3): 325-335.   PMid:16780400
  3. Baturay MH and Toker S (2015). An investigation of the impact of demographics on cyberloafing from an educational setting angle. Computers in Human Behavior, 50: 358-366.
  4. Blanchard A and Henle C (2008). Correlates of different forms of cyberloafing: The role of norms and external locus of control. Computers in Human Behavior, 24(3): 1067-1084.
  5. Bock GW and Ho SL (2009). Non-work related computing (NWRC). Communications of the ACM, 52(4): 124-128.
  6. Chen DJ and Lim VK (2012). Strength in adversity: The influence of psychological capital on job search. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 33(6): 811-839.
  7. Coker BL (2013). Workplace Internet leisure browsing. Human Performance, 26(2): 114-125.
  8. Crowne DP and Marlowe D (1960). A new scale of social desirability independent of psychopathology. Journal of Consulting Psychology, 24(4): 349-354.     PMid:13813058
  9. Farrington DP, Piquero AR, and Jennings WG (2013). Offending from childhood to late middle age: Recent results from the Cambridge Study in delinquent development. Springer Science and Business Media, Berlin, Germany.
  10. Glassman J, Prosch M, and Shao BBM (2015). To monitor or not to monitor: Effectiveness of a cyberloafing countermeasure. Information and Management, 52(2): 170-182.
  11. Gottfredson MR and Hirschi T (1990). A general theory of crime. Stanford University Press, Palo Alto, USA.    PMid:2278954    
  12. Hargittai E and Shafer S (2006). Differences in actual and perceived online skills: The role of gender. Social Science Quarterly, 87(2): 432-448.
  13. Hayer SE and Ray S (2006). Online communication preferences across age, gender, and duration of internet use. CyberPsychology and Behavior, 9(4): 432-440.     PMid:16901247
  14. Helsper EJ (2010). Gendered internet use across generations and life stages. Communication Research, 37(3): 352-374.
  15. Huma ZE and Hussain S, Thurasamy R, and Malik MI (2017). Determinants of cyberloafing: A comparative study of a public and private sector organization. Internet Research, 27(1): 97-117.
  16. Jia H, Jia R, and Karau S (2013). Cyberloafing and personality: The impact of the big five traits and workplace situational factors. Journal of Leadership and Organizational Studies, 20(3): 358-365.
  17. Liberman B, Seidman G, McKenna K, and Buffardi L (2011). Employee job attitudes and organizational characteristics as predictors of cyberloafing. Computers in Human Behavior, 27(6): 2192-2199.
  18. Lim VK (2002). The IT way of loafing on the job: Cyberloafing, neutralizing and organizational justice. Journal of Organizational Behaviour, 23(5): 675-694.
  19. Lim VK and Chen DJ (2012). Cyberloafing at the workplace: gain or drain on work?. Behaviour and Information Technology, 31(4): 343-353.
  20. Loeber R and Farrington DP (2014). Age-crime curve. In: Bruinsma G and Weisburd D (Eds.), Encyclopedia of criminology and criminal justice: 12-18. Springer, New York, USA.
  21. Mastrangelo P, Everton W, and Jolton JA (2006). Personal use of work computers: Distraction versus destruction. CyberPsychology and Behaviour, 9(6): 730-741.     PMid:17201599
  22. Nasurdin AM, Ahmad NH, and Razalli AA (2014). Politics, justice, stress, and deviant behaviour in organizations: An empirical analysis. International Journal of Business and Society, 15(2): 235-254.    
  23. O'Neill TA, Hambley LA, and Chatelier GS (2014). Cyberslacking, engagement, and personality in distributed work environments. Computers in Human Behavior, 40: 152-160.
  24. Reed K, Doty DH, and May DR (2005). The impact of aging on self-efficacy and computer skill acquisition. Journal of Managerial Issues, 17(2): 212-228.    
  25. Restubog SLD, Garcia PRJM, Toledano LS, Amarnani RK, Tolentino LR, and Tang RL (2011). Yielding to (cyber)-temptation: Exploring the buffering role of selfcontrol in the relationship between organizational justice and cyberloafing behavior in the workplace. Journal of Research in Personality, 45(2): 247-251.
  26. Robinson SL and Bennett RJ (1995). A typology of deviant workplace behaviors: A multidimensional scaling study. Academy of Management Journal, 38(2): 555-572.
  27. Siddiquee NA (2006). Public management reform in Malaysia. International Journal of Public Sector Management, 19(4): 339-358.
  28. Spector PE (2006). Method variance in organizational research truth or urban legend?. Organizational Research Methods, 9(2): 221-232.
  29. Stavropoulos V, Alexandraki K, and Motti-Stefanid F (2013). Flow and telepresence contributing to internet abuse: Differences according to gender and age. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(5): 1941-1948.
  30. Tittle CR, David WA, and Grasmick HG (2003). Gender, age, and crime/deviance: A challenge to self-control theory. Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency, 40(4): 426-453.
  31. Ugrin JC and Pearson JM (2013). The effects of sanctions and stigmas on cyberloafing. Computers in Human Behavior, 29(3): 812-820.
  32. Vazsonyi AT and Belliston LM (2007). The family→ low self-control→ deviance: A cross-cultural and cross-national test of self-control theory. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 34(4): 505-530.
  33. Vitak J, Crouse J, and LaRouse R (2011). Personal Internet use at work: Understanding cyberslacking. Computers in Human Behavior, 27(5): 1751-1759.
  34. Weatherbee DE (2014). International relations in Southeast Asia: The struggle for autonomy. Rowman and Littlefield, Lanham, Maryland, USA.     PMCid:PMC4246289    
  35. Weiser EB (2000). Gender differences in Internet use pattern and Internet application preferences: A two sample comparison. CyberPsychology and Behavior, 3(2): 167-178.