Submitted:
30 January 2024
Posted:
31 January 2024
You are already at the latest version
Abstract
Keywords:
1. Introduction
1.1. Digital connectivity and excessive smartphone usage
1.2. Smartphone distraction
2. Aims and hypothesis
3. Method
3.1. Participants
3.2. Measures
- ▪
- Descriptive Internet use was assessed through a set of 14 dichotomous questions formulated based on the existing literature to discern the reasons for Internet use. Examples of items include inquiries such as "When you are online, do you use Social Networking Sites?" or "When you are online, do you use streaming services?" The items demonstrate satisfactory internal consistency, with a calculated alpha coefficient of 0.74.
- ▪
- Estimation of the perceived time spent online involved the administration of two ad hoc open-ended questions. Participants were asked to provide information regarding the time spent online during the weekdays and weekends. Respondents indicated the perceived number of hours (in minutes) dedicated to online activities.
- ▪
- Internet Addiction Test (IAT; [38]). Italian version of IAT [39] was utilized to evaluate the presence and severity of Internet and technology addiction. The IAT comprises 20 items, each associated with a 5-point Likert response scale ranging from “Never” to “Always.” Sample items include inquiries such as “Did you stay online longer than you intended?” or “Do you try to hide how much time you spend online?” A total score is computed by summing the rating for each item, with the maximum possible score being 100 points. Higher scores on the IAT indicate more substantial levels of Internet addiction, with a range of 50 to 79 indicating a moderate level of addiction, and scores from 80 to 100 indicating severe addiction. In this study, the IAT demonstrated commendable internal consistency (α = 0.86).
- ▪
- Smartphone Distraction Scale (SDS; [21]) comprises 16 items, each associated with a 5-point Likert response scale ranging from “Very rarely” to “Very often.” The scale is designed to measure the level of distraction related to smartphone use. The items are scored to generate four factors, each consisting of 4 items: Emotion Regulation (ER; e.g., “Using my phone distracts me when I’m under pressure”), Attention Impulsiveness (AI; e.g., “I get distracted by my phone even when my full attention is required on other tasks”), Online Vigilance (OV; e.g., “I get anxious if I don’t check messages immediately on my phone”), and Multitasking (MT; e.g., “I often talk to others while checking what’s on my phone”). To the best of our knowledge, validation in the Italian context has only been conducted on an adult sample [20]; thus, the factor structure was preliminarily verified with an adolescent sample in the present study. The SDS demonstrated an acceptable level of internal consistency for each sub-scale (αER = 0.78; αAI = 0.83; αOV = 0.71; and αMT = 0.69). Higher scores on the scale indicate a greater level of the measured dimensions.
- ▪
- Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ; [40]) assesses behavioural and emotional difficulties in childhood. Comprising 25 items, the questionnaire employs a 3-point Likert scale (i.e., “Not true,” “Partially true,” and “Absolutely true”) and is structured into five factors: Emotional Symptoms (ES; e.g., “Complaining of headache, stomach pain, or nausea”), Conduct Problems (CP; e.g., “Fights with other children or annoys them on purpose”), Hyperactivity-Inattention (HI; e.g., “Constantly moving or uncomfortable”), Peer Relationship Problems (PRP; e.g., “Have at least one good friend”), and Prosocial Behaviours (PB; e.g., “Respectful of the feelings of others”). The Italian version of the SDQ was developed by Marzocchi et al. (2004). In the present study, acceptable reliability was demonstrated for each sub-scale (αES = 0.76; αCP = 0.50; αHI = 0.64; αPRP = 0.55; and αPB = 0.59). Higher scores on the scale indicate a greater level of the measure dimensions.
- ▪
- Furtheremore, gender and age were gathered as demographic characteristics.
3.3. Procedure
4. Data analysis
- In the entire sample, a descriptive analysis (frequencies/percentages) was conducted to identify the primary online activities engaged in by adolescents. Additionally, an estimation of the time spent online during weekdays and weekends was performed, providing mean (M) and standard deviation (SD) values.
- A preliminary data analysis involved the verification of the factorial structure of the SDS scale, based on the Italian validation among adults con-ducted by Mascia and colleagues [20]. Confirmatory analysis was executed using Diagonally Weighted Least Squares (DWLS) estimation with the Robust Method of estimation, applied to compute ordinated categorical variables (i.e., Likert scales) [41]. Fit indices such as Goodness-of-Fit Index (GFI), Comparative Fit Index (CFI), Tucker-Lewis Index (TLI), Root-Mean-Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA), and Standardized Root Mean Square Residual (SRMR) were considered for evaluating the structural model. These indices are widely recognized in the literature pertaining to Structural Equation Models (SEM) [42,43,44]. Specifically, an acceptable model was considered if GFI, CFI, and TLI values approached 1, while values close to 0 were expected for RMSEA and SRMR [44]. All analyses were conduct-ed using the Jamovi software with the SEMLJ module [45].
- 3.
- Pearson's correlations were calculated to examine the associations between SDS and SDQ sub-scale scores with the IAT total score.
- 4.
- Concerning Internet Addiction (IA), a problem group (PG; moderate or severe addiction) and a control group (CG; normal users) were identified. The selection of the two groups adhered to the cut-offs proposed by Young [46], as outlined in Table 3. The CG was equated for gender and age with the PG, which constituted a sub-sample of participants reporting moderate or severe IA levels. Subsequently, a series of Analyses of Variances (ANOVAs) were conducted to examine differences in the mean standard scores on SDS and SDQ. Finally, a binary logistic regression was executed to discern potential predictors of IA.
5. Results
5.1. Structure of Smartphone Distraction Scale
5.2. Correlations between IA, SDS and SDQ
5.3. Problematic Internet users versus control
5.3.1. Identification of Problematic and Control Group
| Score | Frequency | % |
| Normal level (≤ 30) | 85 | 12.6 |
| Mild level (31-49) | 437 | 64.6 |
| Moderate level (50-79) | 152 | 22.5 |
| Severe addiction (80-100) | 2 | 0.3 |
| Total | 676 | 100.0 |
| Variable | Frequency (%) | ||
| PG | CG | ||
| Gender | Male | 65 (48.9) | 68 (51.1) |
| Female | 19 (52.8) | 17 (47.2) | |
| Age | 16 | 35 (50.0) | 35 (50.0) |
| 17 | 27 (51.9) | 25 (48.1) | |
| 18 | 18 (47.4) | 20 (52.6) | |
| 19 | 4 (44.4) | 5 (55.6) | |
5.4.1. Comparisons between problematic and control groups
6. Discussion
Limitations
7. Conclusion
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Anderson, M., & Jiang, J. (2018). Teens, social media & technology 2018. Pew Research Center, 31(2018), 1673-1689.
- Han, G., Zhang, J., Ma, S., Lu, R., Duan, J., Song, Y., & Lau, P. W. (2021). Prevalence of internet addiction and its relationship with combinations of physical activity and screen-based sedentary behavior among adolescents in China. Journal of Physical Activity and Health, 18(10), 1245-1252. [CrossRef]
- Smahel, D., Machackova, H., Mascheroni, G., Dedkova, L., Staksrud, E., Ólafsson, K., Livingstone, S., Hasebrink, U. (2020). EU Kids Online 2020: Survey results from 19 countries. EU Kids Online 2020. Retrieved from http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12162/5299.
- Spina, G., Bozzola, E., Ferrara, P., Zamperini, N., Marino, F., Caruso, C., Antilici, L., & Villani, A. (2021). Children and Adolescent’s perception of media device Use consequences. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18(6), 1-8. [CrossRef]
- Ingrassia, M., Cedro, G., Puccio, S., Benedetto, L. (2021). Adolescents Suspended in the Space-Time: Problematic Use of Smartphone between Dissociative Symptoms and Flow Experiences. In M. Ingrassia & L. Benedetto (eds.), Adolescences. IntechOpen. [CrossRef]
- Lozano-Blasco, R., Latorre-Martínez, M. P., Cortés-Pascual, A. (2022). Screen addicts: A meta-analysis of internet addiction in adolescence. Children and Youths Services Review,135(2022), 1-11. [CrossRef]
- Montag, C., & Reuter, M. (2017). Internet addiction. Cham, Switzerland: Springer International Publishing.
- Machimbarrena Garagorri, J. M., Gonzalez Cabrera, J., Ortega Baron, J., Beranuy Fargues, M., Alvarez Bardon, A., & Tejero, B. (2019). Profiles of Problematic Internet Use and Its Impact on Adolescents' Health-Related Quality of Life. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 16(20), 1-17. [CrossRef]
- Kliesener, T., Meigen, C., Kiess, W., Poulain, T. (2022). Associations between problematic smartphone use and behavioural difficulties, quality of life, and school performance among children and adolescents. BMC Psychiatry, 22(1),195-207. [CrossRef]
- Wang, P., Zhao, M., Wang, X., Xie, X., Wang, Y., & Lei, L. (2017). Peer relationship and adolescent smartphone addiction: The mediating role of self-esteem and the moderating role of the need to belong. Journal of Behavioral Addictions, 6(4), 708-717. [CrossRef]
- Serra, G., Lo Scalzo, L., Giuffrè, Ferrara, P., Corsello, G. (2021). Smartphone use and addiction during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic: cohort study on 184 Italian children and adolescents. Italian Journal of Pediatrics, 47, 150-160. [CrossRef]
- Burkauskas, J., Gecaite-Stonciene, J., Demetrovics, Z., Griffiths, M. D., & Király, O. (2022). Prevalence of problematic Internet use during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences, 46, 1-6. [CrossRef]
- Rollo, S., Venuleo, C., Ferrante, L., & De Luca Picione, R. (2023). What adolescents have to say about problematic internet use: a qualitative study based on focus groups. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 20(21), 1-19. [CrossRef]
- Montag, C., Wegmann, E., Sariyska, R., Demetrovics, Z., & Brand, M. (2021). How to overcome taxonomical problems in the study of Internet use disorders and what to do with “smartphone addiction”?. Journal of Behavioral Addictions, 9(4), 908-914. [CrossRef]
- Billieux, J., Maurage, P., Lopez-Fernandez, O., Kuss, D. J., & Griffiths, M. D. (2015). Can disordered mobile phone use be considered a behavioral addiction? An update on current evidence and a comprehensive model for future research. Current Addiction Reports, 2(2), 156-162. [CrossRef]
- Wacks, Y., & Weinstein, A. M. (2021). Excessive smartphone use is associated with health problems in adolescents and young adults. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 12, 762-774. [CrossRef]
- Firth, J., Torous, J., Stubbs, B., Firth, J. A., Steiner, G. Z., Smith, L., Alvarez-Jimenez, M., Gleeson, J., Vancampfort, D., Christopher, J., & Sarris, J. (2019). The “online brain”: how the Internet may be changing our cognition. World Psychiatry, 18(2), 119-129. [CrossRef]
- Liebherr, M., Schubert, P., Antons, S., Montag, C., & Brand, M. (2020). Smartphones and attention, curse or blessing?A review on the effects of smartphone usage on attention, inhibition, and working memory. Computers in Human Behavior Reports, 1, 1-8. [CrossRef]
- Skowronek, J., Seifert, A., & Lindberg, S. (2023). The mere presence of a smartphone reduces basal attentional performance. Scientific Reports, 13(1), 1-9. [CrossRef]
- Mascia, M. L., Agus, M., Tomczyk, Ł., Bonfiglio, N. S., Bellini, D., & Penna, M. P. (2023). Smartphone Distraction: Italian Validation of the Smartphone Distraction Scale (SDS). International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 20(15), 1-12. [CrossRef]
- Throuvala, M. A., Pontes, H. M., Tsaousis, I., Griffiths, M. D., Rennoldson, M., & Kuss, D. J. (2021). Exploring the dimensions of smartphone distraction: Development, validation, measurement invariance, and latent mean differences of the smartphone distraction scale (SDS). Frontiers in Psychiatry, 12, 1-21. [CrossRef]
- Zhao, X., Hu, T., Qiao, G., Li, C., Wu, M., Yang, F., & Zhou, J. (2022). Psychometric properties of the smartphone distraction scale in Chinese college students: validity, reliability and influencing factors. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 13, 1-11. [CrossRef]
- Elhai, J. D., Dvorak, R. D., Levine, J. C., & Hall, B. J. (2017). Problematic smartphone use: A conceptual overview and systematic review of relations with anxiety and depression psychopathology. Journal of Affective Disorders, 207, 251-259. [CrossRef]
- Elhai, J. D., Tiamiyu, M. F., Weeks, J. W., Levine, J. C., Picard, K. J., & Hall, B. J. (2018). Depression and emotion regulation predict objective smartphone use measured over one week. Personality and Individual Differences, 133, 21-28. [CrossRef]
- Zhitomirsky-Geffet, M., & Blau, M. (2016). Cross-generational analysis of predictive factors of addictive behavior in smartphone usage. Computers in Human Behavior, 64, 682-693. [CrossRef]
- Diotaiuti, P., Girelli, L., Mancone, S., Corrado, S., Valente, G., & Cavicchiolo, E. (2022). Impulsivity and depressive brooding in internet addiction: a study with a sample of Italian adolescents during COVID-19 lockdown. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 13, 1-12. [CrossRef]
- Yildiz, M. A. (2017). Emotion regulation strategies as predictors of internet addiction and smartphone addiction in adolescents. Journal of Educational Sciences and Psychology, 7(1), 66-78.
- Extremera, N., Quintana-Orts, C., Sánchez-Álvarez, N., & Rey, L. (2019). The role of cognitive emotion regulation strategies on problematic smartphone use: Comparison between problematic and non-problematic adolescent users. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 16(17), 1-13. [CrossRef]
- Guo, Z., Liang, S., Ren, L., Yang, T., Qiu, R., He, Y., & Zhu, X. (2022). Applying network analysis to understand the relationships between impulsivity and social media addiction and between impulsivity and problematic smartphone use. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 13, 1-11. [CrossRef]
- Gul, H., Yurumez Solmaz, E., Gul, A., & Oner, O. (2018). Facebook overuse and addiction among Turkish adolescents: Are ADHD and ADHD-related problems risk factors? Psychiatry and Clinical Psychopharmacology, 28(1), 80–90. [CrossRef]
- Bloemen, N., & De Coninck, D. (2020). Social Media and Fear of Missing Out in Adolescents: The Role of Family Characteristics. Social Media + Society, 6(4), 1-11. [CrossRef]
- Tomczyk, L., Selmanagic-Lizde, E. (2018). Fear of missing out (FOMO) among youth in Bosnia and Herzegovina—Scale and selected mechanisms. Children and Youth Services Review, 88, 541–549. [CrossRef]
- Mrazek, A. J., Mrazek, M. D., Ortega, J. R., Ji, R. R., Karimi, S. S., Brown, C. S., Alexander, C. A., Khan, M., Panahi, R., Sadoff, M., Scott, A., Tyszka, J. R. E., & Schooler, J. W. (2021). Teenagers’ smartphone use during homework: an analysis of beliefs and behaviors around digital multitasking. Education Sciences, 11(11), 713-723. [CrossRef]
- Courage, M. L., Bakhtiar, A., Fitzpatrick, C., Kenny, S., & Brandeau, K. (2015). Growing up multitasking: The costs and benefits for cognitive development. Developmental Review, 35, 5–41. [CrossRef]
- Chu, J., Qaisar, S., Shah, Z., & Jalil, A. (2021). Attention or distraction? The impact of mobile phone on users' psychological well-being. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 1-12. [CrossRef]
- Kim, S. G., Park, J., Kim, H. T., Pan, Z., Lee, Y., & McIntyre, R. S. (2019). The relationship between smartphone addiction and symptoms of depression, anxiety, and attention-deficit/hyperactivity in South Korean adolescents. Annals of General Psychiatry, 18(1), 1-8. [CrossRef]
- Zhao, X., Hu, T., Qiao, G., Li, C., Wu, M., Yang, F., & Zhou, J. (2022). Psychometric properties of the smartphone distraction scale in Chinese college students: validity, reliability and influencing factors. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 13, 1-11. [CrossRef]
- Young, K.S. (1998). Caught in the net: How to recognize the signs of internet addiction--and a winning strategy for recovery. John Wiley & Sons.
- Ferraro, G., Caci, B., D'Amico, A., & Blasi, M. D. (2006). Internet addiction disorder: an Italian study. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 10(2), 170-175. [CrossRef]
- Goodman, R. (2001). Psychometric properties of the strengths and difficulties questionnaire. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 40(11), 1337-1345. [CrossRef]
- Rhemtulla, M., Brosseau-Liard, P. É., & Savalei, V. (2012). When can categorical variables be treated as continuous? A comparison of robust continuous and categorical SEM estimation methods under suboptimal conditions. Psychological Methods, 17(3), 354–373. [CrossRef]
- Bentler, P. M. (1990). Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Psychological Bulletin, 107(2), 238–246. [CrossRef]
- Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: a Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1-55. [CrossRef]
- Pastore, M. (2012). Modelli di equazioni strutturali per variabili osservate: una nota sugli indici di adattamento. Giornale Italiano di Psicologia, 39(2), 435-440. [CrossRef]
- Gallucci, M., Jentschke, S. (2021). SEMLj: jamovi SEM Analysis. [jamovi module]. Retrieved from https://semlj.github.io/.
- Young, K. (2009). Internet addiction: Diagnosis and treatment considerations. Journal of Contemporary Psychotherapy, 39, 241-246. [CrossRef]
- Allen, K. A., Ryan, T., Gray, D. L., McInerney, D. M., & Waters, L. (2014). Social media use and social connectedness in adolescents: The positives and the potential pitfalls. The Educational and Developmental Psychologist, 31(1), 18-31. [CrossRef]
- Griffiths, M. D. (2018). Adolescent social networking: How do social media operators facilitate habitual use?. Education and Health, 36(3), 66-69.
- Fischer-Grote, L., Kothgassner, O.D., & Felnhofer, A. (2019). Risk factors for problematic smartphone use in children and adolescents: a review of existing literature. Neuropsychiatry, 33, 179–190. [CrossRef]
- Marino, C., Canale, N., Melodia, F., Spada, M. M., & Vieno, A. (2021). The overlap between problematic smartphone use and problematic social media use: a systematic review. Current Addiction Reports, 8, 1-12. [CrossRef]
- Beyens, I., Frison, E., & Eggermont, S. (2016). “I don’t want to miss a thing”: Adolescents’ fear of missing out and its relationship to adolescents’ social needs, Facebook use, and Facebook related stress. Computers in Human Behavior, 64, 1-8. [CrossRef]
- Siebers, T., Beyens, I., Pouwels, J. L., & Valkenburg, P. M. (2022). Explaining variation in adolescents’ social media-related distraction: The role of social connectivity and disconnectivity factors. Current Psychology, 1-14. [CrossRef]
- Gioia, F., Fioravanti, G., Casale, S., & Boursier, V. (2021). The effects of the fear of missing out on people's social networking sites use during the COVID-19 pandemic: the mediating role of online relational closeness and individuals' online communication attitude. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 12, 1-11. [CrossRef]
- Karaer, Y., & Akdemir, D. (2019). Parenting styles, perceived social support and emotion regulation in adolescents with internet addiction. Comprehensive psychiatry, 92, 22-27. [CrossRef]
- Willhelm, A. R., Fortes, P. M., Czermainski, F. R., Rates, A. S. A., & Almeida, R. M. M. D. (2016). Neuropsychological and behavioral assessment of impulsivity in adolescents: a systematic review. Trends in Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, 38, 128-135. [CrossRef]
- Randler, C., Wolfgang, L., Matt, K., Demirhan, E., Horzum, M. B., & Besoluk, S. (2016). Smartphone addiction proneness in relation to sleep and morningness-eveningness in German adolescents. Journal of Behavior Addiction, 5(3), 465–473. [CrossRef]
- Pérez de Albéniz Garrote, G., Rubio, L., Medina Gómez, B., & Buedo-Guirado, C. (2021). Smartphone abuse amongst adolescents: the role of impulsivity and sensation seeking. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 746626. [CrossRef]
- Poulain, T., Vogel, M., Kliesener, T., & Kiess, W. (2021). Associations between changes in behavioral difficulties and levels of problematic smartphone use in adolescents over a 1-year period. European Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 32, 1-4. [CrossRef]
- Zakaria, H., Hussain, I., Zulkifli, N. S. A., Ibrahim, N., Noriza, N. J., Wong, M., Abd Latif, M. H. (2023). Internet addiction and its relationship with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) symptoms, anxiety and stress among university students in Malaysia. PloS one, 18(7), e0283862. [CrossRef]
- Rømer Thomsen, K., Callesen, M. B., Hesse, M., Kvamme, T. L., Pedersen, M. M., Pedersen, M. U., & Voon, V. (2018). Impulsivity traits and addiction-related behaviors in youth. Journal of Behavioral Addictions, 7(2), 317-330. [CrossRef]
- Chou, W. J., Chang, Y. P., & Yen, C. F. (2018). Boredom proneness and its correlation with Internet addiction and Internet activities in adolescents with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. The Kaohsiung Journal of Medical Sciences, 34(8), 467-474. [CrossRef]
- Benedetto L., Gullotta R., Ingrassia M. (2015). ADHD, sensation seeking and problematic internet use in adolescence. Psicologia Clinica dello Sviluppo, 19(3), 511-521. [CrossRef]
- Bunford, N., Evans, S. W., & Wymbs, F. (2015). ADHD and emotion dysregulation among children and adolescents. Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review, 18, 185-217. [CrossRef]
- Balca, Y., Kardaş, B., & Kardaş, Ö. (2023). Relationship of Problematic Internet Use with Emotion Regulation in Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder. Kocaeli Üniversitesi Sağlık Bilimleri Dergisi, 9(3), 177-183. [CrossRef]
- Aydin, Ü., Cañigueral, R., Tye, C., & McLoughlin, G. (2023). Face processing in young adults with autism and ADHD: An event related potentials study. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 14, 1080681. [CrossRef]
- Coyne, P., Voth, J., & Woodruff, S. J. (2023). A comparison of self-report and objective measurements of smartphone and social media usage. Telematics and Informatics Reports, 10, 1-9. [CrossRef]
- Wallace, J., Boers, E., Ouellet, J., Afzali, M. H., & Conrod, P. (2023). Screen time, impulsivity, neuropsychological functions and their relationship to growth in adolescent attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder symptoms. Scientific Reports, 13(1), 1-14. [CrossRef]
- Mac Cárthaigh, S. (2020). The effectiveness of interventions to reduce excessive mobile device usage among adolescents: A systematic review. Neurology, Psychiatry and Brain Research, 35, 29-37. [CrossRef]
- Throuvala, M. A., Griffiths, M. D., Rennoldson, M., & Kuss, D. J. (2020). Mind over matter: testing the efficacy of an online randomized controlled trial to reduce distraction from smartphone use. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(13), 1-30. [CrossRef]
| Online activity | Frequency (n/676) |
Percentage (%) |
| Finding information | 446 | 66.0 |
| Gaming | 286 | 42.3 |
| Social Networking Site | 508 | 75.1 |
| Streaming service | 508 | 75.1 |
| Communication | 508 | 75.1 |
| Shopping | 314 | 46.4 |
| Blog/Forum | 49 | 7.2 |
| Other | 19 | 2.8 |
| Variable | Sub-dimension | Correlation (r) with IAT total score |
| SDS | Emotion Regulation | 0.249** |
| Attention Impulsiveness | 0.190** | |
| Online Vigilance | 0.204** | |
| Multitasking | 0.183** | |
| SDQ | Emotional Problems | 0.327** |
| Conduct problems | 0.356** | |
| Hyperactivity / Inattention | 0.400** | |
| Peer Relationship problems | 0.158** | |
| Prosocial Behaviour | -0.130** | |
| Note: SDS = Smartphone Addiction Scale; SDQ = Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire; IAT = Internet Addiction Test (total score). | ||
| ** The correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (two-tailed). | ||
| Variable | Mean (SD) | F | Sign. | ||
| CG | PG | ||||
| SDS | Emotion regulation | -0.196 (0.574) | 0.158 (0.636) | 13.982 | All ps < .01 |
| Attention impulsiveness | -0.201 (0.740) | 0.160 (0.808) | 8.863 | ||
| Online vigilance | -0.153 (0.652) | 0.160 (0.697) | 8.772 | ||
| Multitasking | -0.100 (0.535) | 0.152 (0.584) | 8.278 | ||
| SDQ | Emotional problems | -0.594 (0.923) | 0.101 (0.919) | 24.120 | |
| Conduct problems | -0.542 (0.834) | 0.467 (1.239) | 38.712 | ||
| Hyperactivity/Inattention | -0.696 (0.848) | 0.310 (0.987) | 50.534 | ||
| Peer relationship problems | -0.222 (0.995) | 0.338 (1,044) | 12.730 | ||
| Prosocial behaviour | 0.271 (0.954) | -0.313 (1,060) | 14.193 | ||
| Note: SDS = Smartphone Addiction Scale; SDQ: Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire; CG = Control Group; PG = Problematic Group. | |||||
| Indipendent variable | β | SE | Wald | df | p value | Exp (β) | |
| SDS | Emotion regulation | 0.831 | 0.462 | 3.242 | 1 | 0.072 | 2.296 |
| Attention impulsiveness | 0.001 | 0.620 | 0.000 | 1 | 0.998 | 1.001 | |
| Online vigilance | -0.090 | 0.600 | 0.023 | 1 | 0.880 | 0.914 | |
| Multitasking | -0.013 | 0.621 | 0.000 | 1 | 0.983 | 0.987 | |
| SDQ | Emotional problems | 0.208 | 0.248 | 0.703 | 1 | 0.402 | 1.231 |
| Conduct problems | 0.420 | 0.242 | 3.017 | 1 | 0.082 | 1.523 | |
| Hyperactivity/Inattention | 0.745 | 0.242 | 9.490 | 1 | 0.002 | 2.107 | |
| Peer relationship problems | 0.179 | 0.216 | 0.685 | 1 | 0.408 | 1.196 | |
| Prosocial behaviours | -0.187 | 0.221 | 0.720 | 1 | 0.396 | 0.829 | |
| Gender | -1.198 | 0.620 | 3.730 | 1 | 0.053 | 0.302 | |
| Constant | 0.245 | 0.210 | 1.363 | 1 | 0.243 | 1.277 | |
| Note: SDS = Smartphone Addiction Scale; SDQ: Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire; Gender (dummy; 0 = Male, 1 = Female). | |||||||
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2024 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
