Cited by 98Impact of Technology on AdolescentsSexuality, Behavior, and TechnologyChild Development and Digital Technology

Social relationship on problematic Internet use (PIU) among adolescents in South Korea: A moderated mediation model of self-esteem and self-control

Park, Seungmin, Kang, Minchul, Kim, Eunha·2014·Computers in Human Behavior

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.chb.2014.06.005

Cites

100 of 100 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Park, S., Kang, M., & Kim, E.
Affiliations
  • Soongsil University (KR)
  • Seoul Graduate School of Counseling Psychology (KR)
  • Dankook University (KR)
Corresponding author
Kim, Eunha
Venue
Computers in Human Behavior
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2014-09
Volume
38
Pages
349-357
ISSN
0747-5632 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2071217630
Cited by
98
References
100
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 17 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 1
FWCI
15.20
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Computers in Human Behavior (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Impact of Technology on Adolescents
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Sexuality, Behavior, and Technology
  • Social Sciences › Education › Child Development and Digital Technology
Keywords
problematic internet use, adolescents, interpersonal relationships, peer relationships, mother-adolescent communication, self-esteem, self-control, moderated mediation, South Korea

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.

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