Trajectory of Smartphone Dependency and Associated Factors in School-Aged Children

Abstract

The study's aim was to investigate the trajectory of smartphone dependency and to find the associated factors predicting smartphone dependency. Methods: Data were obtained from the fourth (2013) to the seventh (2016) Korean Children and Youth Panel Survey studies (N = 1,248). The trajectory of smartphone dependency was analysed using the Latent Growth Curve Model with SPSS 21.0 and AMOS 20.0. Results and Conclusions: Over the four-year period, smartphone dependency showed a linear increase along with significant individual differences in intercept and slope. For girls, the trajectory of smartphone dependency, higher depression, increased computer and game time, parental abuse, affectionate and inconsistent parenting, and lower academic attitude had significant effects and showed a higher degree of intercept. Escalating trajectory patterns were associated with identification of predictors and early development of smartphone dependency. The factors identified may be useful in the development of intervention for smartphone dependency. The theoretical and practical implications of the findings are discussed.

Trajectory of problematic smartphone use among adolescents aged 10–18 years: The roles of childhood family environment and concurrent parent–child relationships

“…Using a linear function to fit the developmental trajectory of PSU in Swiss adolescents aged 12–15 years, a decreasing trend was found for this group ( Marciano, Schulz, & Camerini, 2021 ). The Korean Children and Youth Panel Survey found that the PSU of students showed an upward trend between 4th to 7th and 5th to 8th grades ( Cho, 2019 ; Kim, Park, & Park, 2021 ), while the PSU of students from different cohorts showed different trends between 7th grade and 10th grade ( Yoo, 2021 ). The traditional single cohort longitudinal design takes a long time, suffers from severe subject loss, is contaminated due to repeated measures of the same individuals, and confounds the developmental and cohort effects with each other ( Duncan, Duncan, & Hops, 1996 ; Preacher, Wichman, MacCallum, & Briggs, 2008 ).…”

AI Technology panic—is AI Dependence Bad for Mental Health? A Cross-Lagged Panel Model and the Mediating Roles of Motivations for AI Use Among Adolescents

“…37 In the AI literature on motivation, Cho et al found that motivations for using AI speakers included escaping daily problems, maintaining social relationships, accessing information and learning, entertainment and relaxation, and seeking practicality. 53 Choi and Drumwright found that motivations for AI use include social interaction, life efficiency, and access to information. 54 Ng and Lin found that hedonic gratification, social gratification, and functional gratification are the three main motivations that drive users to access controversial AI.…”