Cited by 290Impact of Technology on AdolescentsPsychometric Methodologies and TestingGambling Behavior and Treatments

Measurement invariance across young adults from Hong Kong and Taiwan among three internet-related addiction scales: Bergen social media addiction scale (BSMAS), smartphone application-based addiction scale (SABAS), and internet gaming disorder scale-short form (IGDS-SF9) (study Part A)

Open access
Leung, Hildie, Pakpour, Amir H., Strong, Carol, Lin, Yi-Ching, Tsai, Meng-Che, Griffiths, Mark D., Lin, Chung-Ying, Chen, I-Hua·2020·Addictive Behaviors

Abstract

Internet addiction has been found to be prevalent worldwide, including Asian countries, and related to several negative outcomes and other behavioral addictions. The Bergen Social Media Addiction Scale (BSMAS), Smartphone Application-Based Addiction Scale (SABAS), and nine-item Internet Gaming Disorder Scale-Short Form (IGDS-SF9) have been extensively used to assess internet-related addictions. However, the three aforementioned instruments have rarely been used in Asian countries. The aim of the present study was to investigate whether the BSMAS, SABAS, and IGDS-SF9 were appropriate for use in heterogeneous subsamples from Hong Kong and Taiwan. University students from Hong Kong (n = 306) and Taiwan (n = 336) were recruited via an online survey. Multigroup confirmatory factor analysis (MGCFA) was used to assess measurement invariance of the BSMAS, SABAS, and IGDS-SF9 across the two subcultures. The original unidimensional structures of BSMAS, SABAS and IGDS-SF9 were confirmed through confirmatory factorial analysis in both subcultures. The MGCFA results showed that the unidimensional structures of the BSMAS and IGDS-SF9 were invariant across the two Chinese cultural areas (Hong Kong and Taiwan). However, the measurement invariance of the SABAS was established after some model modifications. In conclusion, the present study found that the Chinese BSMAS, SABAS, and IGDS-SF9 were all adequate instruments to validly assess internet-related addictions among university students. The three brief instruments used for assessing addictions to social media, smartphone applications, and online gaming are valid and psychometrically robust across two Chinese subcultures and can be used by healthcare professionals in these regions.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.addbeh.2019.04.027

Cites

59 of 59 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

The text we found for this paper looks like another document, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The text we found for this paper looks like another document, so the self-check wasn’t run.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

5 of the 64 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Arıcak, 2018, Adapting the short form of the internet gaming disorder scale into Turkish: validity and reliability, Addicta
  2. Csibi, 2016, Hungarian adaptation and psychometric characteristics of Brief Addiction to Smartphone Scale (BASS), Psychiatria Hungarica, 31, 71
  3. de Palo, 2018, Measurement invariance of the nine-item Internet Gaming Disorder Scale across Albania, United States of America, United Kingdom, and Italy, International Journal of Mental Health and Addictions

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Leung, H., Pakpour, A. H., Strong, C., Lin, Y.-C., Tsai, M.-C., Griffiths, M. D., Lin, C.-Y., & Chen, I.-H.
Affiliations
  • Hong Kong Polytechnic University (HK)
  • Qazvin University of Medical Sciences (IR)
  • National Cheng Kung University Hospital (TW)
  • National Taipei University of Education (TW)
  • Nottingham Trent University (GB)
  • Qufu Normal University (CN)
Corresponding author
Lin, Chung-Ying
Venue
Addictive Behaviors
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2020-02
Volume
101
Pages
105969
ISSN
0306-4603 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2941523253
Cited by
290
References
64
Citations by year
2026: 36 · 2025: 56 · 2024: 42 · 2023: 48 · 2022: 50 · 2021: 32 · 2020: 20 · 2019: 6
FWCI
54.38
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Addictive Behaviors (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Nottingham Trent University's Institutional Repository (Nottingham Trent Repository) (acceptedVersion)
  • Diva portal (Dalarna University Library) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
Hong Kong Polytechnic University
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Impact of Technology on Adolescents
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Gambling Behavior and Treatments
Keywords
social media addiction, smartphone addiction, internet gaming disorder, Bergen Social Media Addiction Scale, measurement invariance, cross-cultural validation, Hong Kong, Taiwan, university students, behavioral addiction
MeSH terms
Internet Addiction Disorder, Adult, Factor Analysis, Statistical, Female, Hong Kong, Humans, Male, Psychiatric Status Rating Scales, Psychometrics, Students, Taiwan, Reproducibility of Results, Young Adult

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Classified by jev-1.13-20260917 (gold-guideline-v0.2) on 2026-10-10.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review