Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37159716›Full record

ArticleHeliyon2023

The interplay between social media use and problematic internet usage: Four behavioral patterns.

Khansa Chemnad, Maryam Aziz, Samir Brahim Belhaouari, Raian Ali

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Heliyon, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Khansa ChemnadCollege of Science and Engineering, Hamad Bin Khalifa University, Qatar.
Maryam AzizCollege of Science and Engineering, Hamad Bin Khalifa University, Qatar.
Samir Brahim BelhaouariCollege of Science and Engineering, Hamad Bin Khalifa University, Qatar.
Raian AliCollege of Science and Engineering, Hamad Bin Khalifa University, Qatar.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: The study aims to identify typical interplay between the use of social media apps on smartphones and Problematic Internet Usage (PIU). Method: Our study utilizes data from a smartphone app that objectively monitors user usage, including the apps used and the start and finish times of each app session. This study included 334 participants who declared a need to be aware of their smartphone usage and control it. Problematic Internet Usage (PIU) was measured using the Problematic Internet Use Questionnaire-Short Form-6 (PIUQ-SF6). The total PIU score can range from 6 to 30, with a score above 15 indicating that a person is at risk of PIU. Time spent on Social Media (SM) apps of Facebook, WhatsApp, and Instagram, and whether people used each of these apps were studied along with the total PIU score. K-Prototype clustering was utilized for the analysis. Results: Four distinct clusters, typifying the relationship between social media use and PIU, were identified. All the individuals in Cluster 1 ( Conclusion: The clusters indicate that those who use a particular social media app spend significantly less time on other social media apps. This indicates that problematic attachment to social media occurs primarily for one of three reasons: visual content and reels, conversations with peers, or surfing network content and news. This finding will help tailor interventions to fit each cluster, for example by strengthening interpersonal skills and resistance to peer pressure in the case of Cluster 3 and increasing impulse control in the case of Cluster 2.

Indexed as

Cyber behaviourProblematic internet usageSmartphone usageSocial media use

Identifiers

PMID37159716
PMCPMC10163648

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.