ArticleBMC psychology2025
The role of FoMO and nomophobia in explaining the relationship between doomscrolling and poor sleep quality.
Article in BMC psychology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The increasing use of technology in daily life can significantly affect individuals' habits and lifestyles. With the widespread use of digital devices, sleep quality has become one of the key areas influenced by technological change. This study aims to examine the mediating roles of FoMO and nomophobia in the relationship between doomscrolling and poor sleep quality. The hypotheses were tested using a descriptive-correlational design with a sample of 663 adults, including 531 women and 132 men, aged between 18 and 77 (Mean = 25.00, SD = 7.53). PROCESS Macro 4.1 (Model 6) was applied to assess multiple mediation effects. According to the results, doomscrolling was positively associated with poor sleep quality (b = .059, 95% CI [.028, .089]). Doomscrolling also significantly predicted FoMO (b = .279, 95% CI [.211, .346]) and nomophobia (b = .092, 95% CI [.056, .129]). FoMO significantly predicted nomophobia (b = .343, 95% CI [.304, .382]). However, FoMO did not significantly predict poor sleep quality (b = -.014, 95% CI [-.053, .024]). Nomophobia, on the other hand, was a significant predictor of poor sleep quality (b = .219, 95% CI [.156, .281]). Mediation analysis showed that nomophobia had a significant mediating role in the relationship between doomscrolling and poor sleep quality (b = .020, 95% CI [.011, .031]). Although FoMO alone was not a significant mediator (b = -.004, 95% CI [-.015, .007]), FoMO and nomophobia together showed a positive combined mediation effect (b = .021, 95% CI [.013, .030]). These findings suggest that increasing awareness of smartphone and social media use may contribute to improving sleep quality. Including strategies to reduce nomophobia, FoMO, and doomscrolling in sleep-related psychoeducational programs may be beneficial.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.