| Literature DB >> 23259906 |
Jian Xu1, Li-xiao Shen, Chong-huai Yan, Howard Hu, Fang Yang, Lu Wang, Sudha Rani Kotha, Li-na Zhang, Xiang-peng Liao, Jun Zhang, Feng-xiu Ouyang, Jin-song Zhang, Xiao-ming Shen.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Paralleling the rapid growth in computers and internet connections, adolescent internet addiction (AIA) is becoming an increasingly serious problem, especially in developing countries. This study aims to explore the prevalence of AIA and associated symptoms in a large population-based sample in Shanghai and identify potential predictors related to personal characteristics.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2012 PMID: 23259906 PMCID: PMC3563549 DOI: 10.1186/1471-2458-12-1106
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Public Health ISSN: 1471-2458 Impact factor: 3.295
Personal characteristics and characteristics of online behaviors of the study population of 5,122 Shanghai adolescents
| Female (ref.) | 2580 | 50.4% | 95.1% (2453 / 2580) | 117.0 ± 38.1 | 6.4% (164 / 2580) | |
| Male | 2534 | 49.6% | 92.6% (2347 / 2534)**e | 122.4 ± 43.5***e | 11.3% (285 / 2534)***e | |
| Junior high school students (ref.) | 1915 | 37.4% | 92.6% (1774 / 1915) | 110.3 ± 42.4 | 7.1% (135 / 1915) | |
| Senior high school students | 3206 | 62.6% | 94.6% (3033 / 3206)** | 125.3 ± 39.0*** | 9.8% (315 / 3206)** | |
| Junior high school (ref.) | 1907 | 37.2% | 92.7% (1768 / 1907) | 110.4 ± 42.3 | 7.1% (135 / 1907) | |
| Key senior high school | 1096 | 21.4% | 94.5% (1036 / 1096) | 120.2 ± 37.7*** | 6.1% (67 / 1096) | |
| Ordinary senior high school | 1102 | 21.5% | 93.3% (1028 / 1102) | 122.9 ± 40.9*** | 9.4% (104 / 1102)* | |
| Vocational senior high school | 1015 | 19.8% | 96.0% (974 / 1015)* | 133.1 ± 37.3*** | 14.2% (144 / 1015)*** | |
| < 100 RMB (ref.) | 3028 | 59.1% | 92.6% (2805 / 3028) | 112.2 ± 41.1 | 5.6% (168 / 3028) | |
| 100~300 RMB | 1373 | 26.8% | 95.7% (1314 / 1373)*** | 128.9 ± 38.0*** | 12.5% (172 / 1373)*** | |
| ≥300 RMB | 712 | 13.9% | 95.7% (681 / 712)*** | 133.5 ± 38.3*** | 15.3% (109 / 712)*** | |
| Commuter students (ref.) | 4667 | 91.1% | 93.7% (4372 / 4667) | 119.2 ± 41.3 | 8.7% (407 / 4667) | |
| Residential students | 451 | 8.8% | 96.0% (433 / 451)* | 125.2 ± 35.6** | 9.5% (43 / 451) | |
| Very good (ref.) | 324 | 6.3% | 92.3% (299 / 324) | 113.1 ± 42.2 | 4.0% (13 / 324) | |
| Relatively good | 1386 | 27.1% | 94.4% (1308 / 1386) | 112.9 ± 38.3 | 5.6% (78 / 1386) | |
| General | 2835 | 55.4% | 94.6% (2682 / 2835) | 122.3 ± 39.4*** | 8.9% (253 / 2835)*** | |
| Relatively &very bad | 561 | 11.0% | 89.7% (503 / 561) | 126.8 ± 50.7*** | 18.9% (106 / 561)*** | |
| Academic learning (ref.) | 720 | 14.1% | 100% | 109.3 ± 26.8 | 1.4% (10 / 720) | |
| Only browsing news or emails | 881 | 17.2% | 100% | 117.3 ± 25.7*** | 2.5% (22 / 881) | |
| Playing games | 1003 | 19.6% | 100% | 140.7 ± 28.6*** | 20.1% (202 / 1003)*** | |
| Real-time chatting | 667 | 13.0% | 100% | 132.5 ± 24.6*** | 8.1% (54 / 667)*** | |
| Wandering aimlessly online | 1546 | 30.2% | 100% | 128.9 ± 29.2*** | 10.2% (158 / 1546)*** | |
| School (ref.) | 314 | 6.1% | 100% | 115.2 ± 29.4 | 4.5% (14 / 314) | |
| Residences of classmates or relatives | 705 | 13.8% | 100% | 120.7 ± 27.6* | 5.4% (38 / 705) | |
| Home | 3586 | 70.0% | 100% | 128.5 ± 29.4*** | 10.3% (369 / 3586)** | |
| Internet bar | 203 | 4.0% | 100% | 137.6 ± 25.9*** | 14.3% (29 / 203)*** | |
| <7 hours (ref.) | 2812 | 54.9% | 100% | 117.7 ± 27.7 | 4.1% (114 / 2812) | |
| 7~14 hours | 970 | 18.9% | 100% | 133.2 ± 26.6*** | 11.8% (114 / 970)*** | |
| 14~21 hours | 414 | 8.1% | 100% | 140.9 ± 24.1*** | 15.5% (64 / 414)*** | |
| 21~28 hours | 242 | 4.7% | 100% | 145.8 ± 23.9*** | 22.3% (54 / 242)*** | |
| >28 hours | 378 | 7.4% | 100% | 151.1 ± 26.9*** | 27.3% (103 / 378)*** | |
| ≤2 hours (ref.) | 3390 | 70.5% | 100% | 121.9 ± 29.1 | 6.9%(235/3390) | |
| 2~4 hours | 756 | 15.7% | 100% | 134.3 ± 24.8*** | 10.6%(80/756)** | |
| 4~6 hours | 357 | 7.4% | 100% | 139.5 ± 26.9*** | 17.1%(61/357)*** | |
| 6~8 hours | 113 | 2.3% | 100% | 143.0 ± 28.0*** | 23.0%(26/113)*** | |
| ≥8 hours | 195 | 4.0% | 100% | 151.4 ± 26.7*** | 24.2%(47/195)*** | |
| ≤2 hours (ref.) | 1835 | 35.8% | 100% | 114.5 ± 28.1 | 3.4% (63 / 1835) | |
| 2~4 hours | 1457 | 28.5% | 100% | 125.6 ± 25.8*** | 6.3% (92 / 1457)*** | |
| 4~6 hours | 668 | 13.0% | 100% | 136.5 ± 25.2*** | 12.0% (80 / 668)*** | |
| 6~8 hours | 351 | 6.9% | 100% | 143.8 ± 24.5*** | 20.2% (71 / 351)*** | |
| ≥8 hours | 504 | 9.8% | 100% | 150.7 ± 27.5*** | 28.4% (143 / 504)*** | |
total score: total score of DRM-52 scale.
b internet addiction: defined when the total score of DRM-52 scale ≥163.
%(Ninternet use /N whole): the rates of internet use was calculated as the ratio of the numbers of internet-use adolescents to the numbers of whole adolescent samples in that group.
d %(Ninternet addiction / N whole): the rates of AIA was calculated as the ratio of the numbers of internet-addicted adolescents to the numbers of whole adolescent samples in that group.
ep values for the comparison of total scores were calculated by one-way ANOVA, p values for the comparison of the rates of AIA were calculated by chi-square.
*p-values<0.05; **p-values<0.01; ***p-values<0.001 (compared with reference groups).
Figure 1Online hours and adolescent internet addiction(AIA). (A) The relationship between the online hours per weekend or per weekday and the rates of AIA in 5,122 Shanghai adolescents. Both lines indicated that more hours online on weekdays or weekends were associated with higher rates of AIA. (B) Weekday-pattern of internet-use in 449 adolescent internet addicts. Both lines indicated that more internet addicts overused internet on weekends than on weekdays.
Impacts of adolescent personal factors on adolescent internet addiction by logistic regression analysis
| Female (ref.) | 1.0 | 1.0 | | |
| Male | 0.26(0.12) | 1.29 | 1.02-1.64 | 0.0361 |
| <100 (ref.) | 1.0 | 1.0 | | |
| ≥300 | 0.41(0.16) | 1.51 | 1.11-2.05 | 0.0092 |
| 100~299 | 0.51(0.13) | 1.66 | 1.29-2.14 | <0.0001 |
| Very good (ref.) | 1.0 | 1.0 | | |
| Very & relatively bad | 1.57(0.33) | 4.79 | 2.51-9.13 | <0.0001 |
| General | 0.87(0.31) | 2.38 | 1.29-4.41 | 0.0057 |
| Relative good | 0.52(0.33) | 1.68 | 0.88-3.20 | 0.1186 |
| <7 (ref.) | 1.0 | 1.0 | | |
| >28 | 1.45(0.17) | 4.28 | 3.06-5.99 | <0.0001 |
| 21 ~28 | 1.23(0.21) | 3.41 | 2.26-5.15 | <0.0001 |
| 14 ~21 | 0.96(0.19) | 2.61 | 1.81-3.77 | <0.0001 |
| 7~14 | 0.89(0.15) | 2.44 | 1.81-3.29 | <0.0001 |
| Academic learning (ref.) | 1.0 | 1.0 | | |
| Playing game | 1.94(0.34) | 6.98 | 3.59-13.58 | <.0.0001 |
| Real-time chatting | 0.97(0.36) | 2.64 | 1.30-5.38 | 0.0073 |
| Browsing news or e-mails only | 0.17(0.40) | 1.19 | 0.55-2.60 | 0.6625 |
a This logistic regression model was fit to model the possibility of adolescent having internet addiction, internet addiction was defined as total score ≥ 163.
b Adolescent age, gender, grade, school types, adolescent academic achievement, adolescent monthly spending levels, internet-use time, and the main purposes and places of adolescent internet use were adjusted in the models.
Impacts of personal factors on the symptom development of AIA by linear regression analyses
| | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| Boys | 3.9 (0.8)*** | 0.2(0.1) | 0.6(0.2)*** | 0.0(0.1) | 0.3 (0.1)* | 1.0(0.1)*** | 0.5 (0.1)*** | 1.5(0.3)*** |
| Junior high school students (ref.) | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| Senior high school students | 8.2 (0.9)*** | 0.7(0.1)*** | 2.5(2.3) | 1.7(1.6) | 1.7 (0.2)*** | 2.4(1.6) | 1.0 (0.1)*** | 2.0(0.3)*** |
| <100 (ref.) | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| ≥300 | 6.1(1.2)*** | 0.5(0.2)** | 1.0(0.3)*** | 0.9(0.2)** | 0.8(0.2)*** | 1.0(0.2)*** | 0.4(0.2)*** | 1.7(0.5)** |
| 100~299 | 6.4 (1.0)*** | 0.5(0.1)*** | 0.9(0.2)*** | 0.7(0.1)*** | 0.9 (0.2)*** | 0.9(0.1)*** | 0.5(0.1)*** | 1.9(0.4)*** |
| Very good (ref.) | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| Relatively & very bad | 12.6(2.0)*** | 1.3(0.3)*** | 4.0(0.4)*** | 1.6(0.3)*** | 1.3(0.3)*** | 0.2(0.3) | 1.4(0.3)*** | 2.7(0.7)*** |
| General | 4.8(1.6)** | 0.8(0.2)*** | 1.8(0.3)*** | 0.8(0.2)*** | 0.4(0.3) | 0.0(0.2) | 0.5(0.2)* | 0.9(0.5) |
| Relatively good | −1.3(1.6) | 0.1(0.2) | 0.4(0.3) | 0.2(0.2) | −0.4(0.3) | −0.4(0.2) | −0.1(0.2) | −1.1(0.6) |
| Academic learning (ref.) | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| Games | 20.7(1.4)*** | 2.0(0.2)*** | 3.6(0.3)*** | 2.6(0.2)*** | 3.0(0.3)*** | 2.0(0.2)*** | 1.5(0.2)*** | 6.5(0.5)*** |
| Real-time chatting | 13.6(1.5)*** | 1.4(0.2)*** | 2.2(0.3)*** | 1.8(0.2)*** | 1.9(0.3)*** | 1.4(0.2)*** | 1.0 (0.2)*** | 4.3(0.6)*** |
| Browsing news or e-mails | 4.0 (1.4)** | 0.4(0.2) | 0.4(0.3) | 0.7 (0.2)*** | 0.7 (0.2)** | 0.5 (0.2)* | 0.1(0.2) | 1.4 (0.5)** |
| <7 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| >28 | 19.9(1.5)*** | 0.7(0.2)*** | 3.4(0.3)*** | 2.4(0.2)*** | 2.2(0.3)*** | 3.2(0.2)*** | 3.3(0.2)*** | 5.6(0.6)*** |
| 21 ~28 | 17.1(1.8)*** | 0.9(0.3)*** | 2.6(0.4)*** | 2.1(0.3)*** | 1.9(0.3)*** | 2.1(0.3)*** | 2.7(0.2)*** | 5.5(0.7)*** |
| 14 ~21 | 14.5(1.4)*** | 0.8(0.2)*** | 2.6(0.3)*** | 1.8(0.2)*** | 1.6(0.3)*** | 1.7(0.2)*** | 2.4(0.2)*** | 4.0(0.5)*** |
| 7~14 | 10.2(1.0)*** | 0.7(0.1)*** | 1.7(0.2)*** | 1.2(0.2)*** | 1.2(0.2)*** | 1.2(0.2)*** | 1.5(0.1)*** | 2.8(0.4)*** |
| Junior high school | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| Vocational senior high school | 7.1(11.4) | 2.2(1.6) | 2.1(0.2)*** | 1.7(0.2)*** | 0.6(2.0) | 2.2(1.6) | 0.2(1.4) | 3.9(3.9) |
| Ordinary senior high school | 1.9(11.3) | 1.4(1.5) | 1.2(0.2)*** | 1.5(0.2)*** | 0.2(1.9) | 2.8(1.6) | 0.4(1.4) | 3.0(3.9) |
| Key senior high school | 2.9(11.3) | 1.6(1.6) | 0.8(0.3)** | 0.7(0.2)*** | 0.2(1.9) | 2.6(1.6) | 0.3(1.4) | 3.6(3.9) |
a Results are reported as Coefficient Estimate (SE).
b AIA: adolescent internet addiction.
c *p-values<0.05; **p-values<0.01; ***p values<0.001.
d Adolescent age, gender, grade, school types, adolescent academic achievement, adolescent monthly spending levels, internet-use time, and the main purposes and places of adolescent internet use were adjusted in the models.