Cited by 190Impact of Technology on AdolescentsSexuality, Behavior, and TechnologyChild Development and Digital Technology

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 48 of the 51 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Relationships among smartphone addiction, anxiety, and family relations

Hawi, Nazir S., Samaha, Maya·2017·Behaviour & Information Technology

Abstract

Smartphones have become ubiquitous in people’s lives to an extent that necessitates the investigation of their negative impact. The scarcity of such investigations triggered our interest in examining the relationships among smartphone addiction, anxiety, and family relations. A total of 381 university students participated in an online survey composed of demographic information, the Smartphone Addiction Scale – Short Version, and the Beck Anxiety Inventory. Binary logistic regression analysis and structural equation modelling showed that undergraduate students who had smartphone addiction demonstrated greater odds of having high anxiety compared to those who were not addicted, and students who had high anxiety exhibited greater odds of having clinically significant problems in their family relations. Nevertheless, path analysis showed that anxiety mediated a positive relationship between smartphone addiction and problematic family relations.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/0144929x.2017.1336254

Cites

48 of 48 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, 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?

Citations

Cites

Show all 51 references

Research works printed but not linked: 7

  1. Beck, A. T., and R. A. Steer. 1990. Manual for the Beck Anxiety Inventory. San Antonio, TX: Psychological Corporation.
  2. Browne, M. W., R. Cudeck, K. A. Bollen, and J. S. Long. 1993. “Alternative Ways of Assessing Model Fit.” Sage Focus Editions 154: 136–136.
  3. Dahlstrom, E., and J. Bichsel. 2014. ECAR Study of Undergraduate Students and Information Technology, 2014. Educause. Louisville, CO: ECAR.
  4. Hawi N. S. and M. Samaha. 2016a. Effects of Technologies on 9-Year Old Children. In International Arab Conference on Information Technology Yassmine Hammamet Tunisia.
  5. 10.1177/0894439316660340 · DOI · Paper page
  6. Hudson, W. W. 1992. The WALMYR Assessment Scales Scoring Manual. Tempe, AZ: WALMYR Pub. Co.
  7. Kibona, L., and G. Mgaya. 2015. “Smartphones’ Effects on Academic Performance of Higher Learning Students.” Journal of Multidisciplinary Engineering Science and Technology 2 (4): 777–784.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 101–178 of 178

Metadata

Authors
Hawi, N. S., & Samaha, M.
Affiliations
Notre Dame University – Louaize (LB)
Corresponding author
Samaha, Maya
Venue
Behaviour & Information Technology
Published
2017-06-07
Volume
36
Issue
10
Pages
1046-1052
ISSN
  • 0144-929X (ISSN-L)
  • 1362-3001
OpenAlex
W2622657021
Cited by
190
References
51
Citations by year
2026: 13 · 2025: 20 · 2024: 22 · 2023: 20 · 2022: 29 · 2021: 26 · 2020: 24 · 2019: 18 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 6
FWCI
39.21
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Behaviour and Information Technology (publishedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
Funders
National Council for Scientific Research (3661/S)
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
smartphone addiction, anxiety, family relationships, mediation, university students

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