Cited by 326Impact of Technology on AdolescentsChild Development and Digital TechnologyInnovative Human-Technology Interaction

Do smartphone usage scales predict behavior?

Open access
Ellis, David A., Davidson, Brittany I., Shaw, Heather, Geyer, Kristoffer·2019·International Journal of Human-Computer Studies

Published version of a preprint

Abstract

Understanding how people use technology remains important, particularly when measuring the impact this might have on individuals and society. However, despite a growing body of resources that can quantify smartphone use, research within psychology and social science overwhelmingly relies on self-reported assessments. These have yet to convincingly demonstrate an ability to predict objective behavior. Here, and for the first time, we compare a variety of smartphone use and ‘addiction’ scales with objective behaviors derived from Apple's Screen Time application. While correlations between psychometric scales and objective behavior are generally poor, single estimates and measures that attempt to frame technology use as habitual rather than ‘addictive’ correlate more favorably with subsequent behavior. We conclude that existing self-report instruments are unlikely to be sensitive enough to accurately predict basic technology use related behaviors. As a result, conclusions regarding the psychological impact of technology are unreliable when relying solely on these measures to quantify typical usage.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.ijhcs.2019.05.004

Cites

59 of 60 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Self-reported smartphone assessments have been shown to perform poorly when attempting to predict objective smartphone behaviours.

    “even though self-reported smartphone assessments have been shown to perform poorly when attempting to predict objective smartphone behaviours.29”

    From Smartphone use as a possible risk factor for myopia (2021) · cites this paper as [29]

  • The use of smartphone data as a surrogate indicator of phone use provides a better indicator of smartphone behaviour than self-reported usage data.

    “Therefore the use of smartphone data as a surrogate indicator of phone use provides a better indicator of smartphone behaviour than self-reported usage data.29”

    From Smartphone use as a possible risk factor for myopia (2021) · cites this paper as [29]

  • Retrospective self-reports of adolescents' social media use may be biased and suffer from underestimation.

    “Second, although retrospective self-reports of adolescents' social media use are most commonly employed, they may be biased and suffer from underestimation (48).”

Self-check

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

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Ellis, D. A., Davidson, B. I., Shaw, H., & Geyer, K.
Affiliations
  • Lancaster University (GB)
  • University of Bath (GB)
  • University of Lincoln (GB)
Corresponding author
Ellis, David A.
Venue
International Journal of Human-Computer Studies
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2019-10
Volume
130
Pages
86-92
ISSN
1071-5819 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2942805235
Cited by
326
References
59
Citations by year
2026: 34 · 2025: 32 · 2024: 26 · 2023: 44 · 2022: 41 · 2021: 62 · 2020: 68 · 2019: 18 · 2014: 1
FWCI
95.08
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • International Journal of Human-Computer Studies (publishedVersion)
  • Bristol Research (University of Bristol) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
  • Lancaster EPrints (Lancaster University) (submittedVersion)
  • Pure (University of Bath) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • PsyArXiv (OSF Preprints) (submittedVersion)
  • PsyArXiv (OSF Preprints) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Impact of Technology on Adolescents
  • Social Sciences › Education › Child Development and Digital Technology
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Innovative Human-Technology Interaction
Keywords
smartphone use, self-report measures, technology addiction, habit, scale validity

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