Unregulated Internet Usage: Addiction, Habit, or Deficient Self-Regulation?

LaRose, Robert; Lin, Carolyn A.; Eastin, Matthew S.

doi:10.1207/s1532785xmep0503_01

Cited by 657 publications

(662 citation statements)

References 48 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

599

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In 2010 Caplan proposed an integrated conceptual model of GPIU that combines elements of Davis' cognitive-behavioral theory, his own works that address a preference for online social interaction (Caplan, 2003;, and the socio-cognitive model of unregulated Internet use (Kim, LaRose & Peng, 2009;LaRose, Lin, & Eastin, 2003). The updated cognitive-behavioral model of PIU includes four core components: preference for online social interaction (POSI), mood regulation, deficient self-regulation, and negative outcomes (Caplan, 2010).…”

Section: The Update Model Of Generalized Problematic Internet Usementioning

confidence: 99%

“…The central role of POSI as a key factor for the development of other GPIU dimensions is one of the distinctive features of the GPIU perspective in comparison to the IA approach. Another cognitive symptom of GPIU is the motivation to use the Internet to alleviate distressing feelings (mood regulation), which has an important role in the development of the behavioral symptoms of both GPIU (Kim et al, 2009;LaRose et al, 2003) and POSI. Indeed, both the POSI and the mood regulation dimensions have been found to be good predictors of the failure to adequately monitor one's use of the web.…”

Section: The Update Model Of Generalized Problematic Internet Usementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Finally, the names of two of the original dimensions were revised. Specifically, the mood alteration factor was renamed "mood regulation" in order to emphasize the motivation to use the Internet to alleviate and process emotions (LaRose et al, 2003;Yates, Gregor, & Haviland, 2012), and the withdrawal dimension was renamed "cognitive preoccupation" in order to more clearly reflect its emphasis on obsessive thinking about the online world.…”

Section: The Generalized Problematic Internet Use Scalementioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

14. Generalized Problematic Internet Use Scale 2: update on the psychometric properties among Italian young adults

Casale¹,

Primi²,

Fioravanti³

2015

The Psychology of Social Networking Vol.2

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Problematic Internet Use (PIU) involves cognitive distortions and dysfunctional behaviors (e.g., compulsive Internet use or using the Internet to alleviate negative emotions) that lead to negative outcomes in various areas of an individual's life. The Generalized Problematic Internet Use Scale 2 (GPIUS2) is one of the few theory-driven instruments to measure the type of PIU associated with the unique communicative context available online. The purpose of this study was to expand upon previous empirical evidence of the psychometric properties of the GPIUS) among Italian young adults. The present psychometric evaluation of the Italian version of the GPIUS2 was conducted on a sample of 748 undergraduate students (48.3% males) from 18 to 26 years old (M= 21.84 years, SD = 2.20). With regard to scale dimensionality, the four first-order factors model (i.e. preference for online social interaction, mood regulation, deficient self-regulation, and negative outcomes) was confirmed (fit indices: Satorra-Bentler scaled χ 2 /df = 3.03; Comparative Fit Index = 0.93; Tucker-Lewis index = 0.92; Root Mean Square Error of Approximation = 0.05). Internal-consistency Cronbach's alpha ranged from 0.72 to 0.89. Convergent validity is demonstrated with significant correlations between GPIUS2 and Internet Addiction Test score. Validity was also assessed by exploring the relationship between GPIUS2 and several indices of psychosocial well-being that were expected to be related to PIU on the basis of previous studies. The overall results confirm previous evidence that the GPIUS2 is an adequate measure of generalized PIU cognitions, behaviors, and outcomes among young adults.

show abstract

Section: The Update Model Of Generalized Problematic Internet Usementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Update Model Of Generalized Problematic Internet Usementioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Generalized Problematic Internet Use Scalementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

14. Generalized Problematic Internet Use Scale 2: update on the psychometric properties among Italian young adults

Casale¹,

Primi²,

Fioravanti³

2015

The Psychology of Social Networking Vol.2

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Other researchers have shown that excessive use of the Internet may result in Internet addiction (Nalwa and Anand, 2003;Greenfield, 2000;Morahan-Martin and Schumacher, 2000). LaRose, Lin, and Eastin (2003) note that what others have called Internet addiction can actually be redefined as deficient self-regulation; they say that individuals with deficient self-regulation (a failure to regulate their Internet use) use ICTs to relieve boredom, decrease loneliness, whittle away time, and enhance their social identity. Thus, this suggests that the causal ordering between technology use and addiction is not as clear-cut as some would suggest.…”

Section: Social Impacts Of Technology Use On Well-being For Young Adultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Students' technology use and the impacts on well‐being

Cotten

2008

New Drctns for Student Srvcs

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This chapter details the latest information available on the use of technology among college students and what is known about the impacts of this use on their well-being. A variety of studies examine the use of different types of technologies among individuals across the life course; however, fewer studies examine the social impacts of these technologies, particularly in relation to well-being. This chapter reviews the extent of the social impacts of technology in relation to well-being for college students. Before this can occur, however, we need a better understanding of what well-being means.Social and behavioral scientists typically think about indicators of stress, loneliness, social support, self-esteem, psychological distress, and depression as well-being outcomes. Clinicians focus more often on physical health conditions, diseases, and illnesses. The range of outcomes considered under the concept of well-being could also include such things as alcohol use and abuse, Internet addiction (excessive use of the Internet that may result in a variety of types of problems for individuals), obsessivecompulsive tendencies, and a host of other well-being outcomes. This chapter focuses primarily on the psychosocial and mental health outcomes that are most often examined in the social and behavioral sciences. One can think theoretically about how technology use might bear on some of these well-being outcomes; however, this chapter provides evidence that little empirical research has examined many of these outcomes singularly or in combination with other outcomes. 55 4

show abstract

“…LaRose and Eastin (2004) defined deficient self-regulation as a state in which conscious self-control is diminished. Although habit and deficient self-regulation have not been clearly empirically distinguished in prior research, LaRose, Lin, and Eastin (2003) proposed a possible theoretical distinction, where habit represents the failure of selfmonitoring, and deficient self-regulation represents a failure of the judgBereitgestellt von | Universitätsbibliothek Ilmenau Angemeldet Heruntergeladen am | 15.10.14 16:40 mental and self-reactive subfunctions. According to LaRose and Eastin (2004), deficient self-regulation reflects a state of mind distinct from one in which media consumers are inattentive, explaining how both might have independent effects on media attendance.…”

Section: A New Model Of Media Attendancementioning

confidence: 99%

Explaining and analyzing audiences: A social cognitive approach to selectivity and media use

Peters

Rickes

Jöckel

et al. 2006

Comm

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

"This publication is with permission of the rights owner freely accessible due to an Alliance licence and a national licence (funded by the DFG, German Research Foundation) respectively." Peters, Oscar; Rickes, Matthias; Jöckel, Sven; Criegern, Christian, von; Deursen, Alexander, van: Explaining and analyzing audiences: a social cognitive approach to selectivity and media use URN:urn:nbn:de:gbv:ilm1-2015210173Published OpenAccess: January 2015 Original published in:Communications : the European journal of communication.

show abstract

Unregulated Internet Usage: Addiction, Habit, or Deficient Self-Regulation?

Cited by 657 publications

References 48 publications

14. Generalized Problematic Internet Use Scale 2: update on the psychometric properties among Italian young adults

14. Generalized Problematic Internet Use Scale 2: update on the psychometric properties among Italian young adults

Students' technology use and the impacts on well‐being

Explaining and analyzing audiences: A social cognitive approach to selectivity and media use

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About