| Literature DB >> 25582809 |
Jacqueline M Vink1, Toos C E M van Beijsterveldt1, Charlotte Huppertz1, Meike Bartels1, Dorret I Boomsma1.
Abstract
Over the past decades, Internet use has grown substantially, and it now serves people as a supportive tool that is used regularly and-in large parts of the world-inevitably. Some people develop problematic Internet use, which may lead to addictive behavior and it is becoming important to explore the risk factors for compulsive Internet use. Data were analyzed on compulsive Internet use [with the Compulsive Internet Use Scale (CIUS)] from 5247 monozygotic (MZ) and dizygotic (DZ) adolescent twins registered with the Netherlands Twin Register. The participants form a sample that is informative for genetic analyses, allowing the investigation of the causes of individual differences in compulsive Internet use. The internal consistency of the instrument was high and the 1.6-year test-retest correlation in a subsample (n = 902) was 0.55. CIUS scores increased slightly with age. Remarkably, gender did not explain variation in CIUS scores, as mean scores on the CIUS were the same in boys and girls. However, the time spent on specific Internet activities differed: boys spent more time on gaming, whereas girls spent more time on social network sites and chatting. The heritability estimates were the same for boys and girls: 48 percent of the individual differences in CIUS score were influenced by genetic factors. The remaining variance (52 percent) was due to environmental influences that were not shared between family members. Because a life without Internet is almost impossible nowadays, it is important to further explore the determinants of compulsive Internet use, including genetic risk factors.Entities:
Keywords: Addictive behavior; Internet addiction; adolescents; compulsive Internet use; heritability
Mesh:
Year: 2015 PMID: 25582809 PMCID: PMC5006854 DOI: 10.1111/adb.12218
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Addict Biol ISSN: 1355-6215 Impact factor: 4.280
Figure 1(a) Time (hours/day) spent on gaming, split in boys with a Compulsive Internet Use Scale (CIUS) ≤ 28 (n = 1744) and boys with a CIUS > 28 (n = 63). (b) Time (hours/day) spent on gaming, split in girls with a CIUS ≤ 28 (n = 2601) and girls with a CIUS > 28 (n = 98)
Figure 2(a) Time (hours/day) spent on YouTube, split in boys with a Compulsive Internet Use Scale (CIUS) ≤ 28 (n = 1733) and boys with a CIUS > 28 (n = 62). (b) Time (hours/day) spent on YouTube, split in girls with a CIUS ≤ 28 (n = 2594) and girls with a CIUS > 28 (n = 100)
Figure 3(a) Time (hours/day) spent on social network sites, chatting and skyping, split for boys with a Compulsive Internet Use Scale (CIUS) ≤ 28 (n = 1731) and boys with a CIUS > 28 (n = 63). (b) Time (hours/day) spent on social network sites, chatting and skyping, split for girls with a CIUS ≤ 28 (n = 2592) and girls with a CIUS > 28 (n = 100)
Figure 4(a) Time (hours/day) spent on computer/Internet, split for boys with a Compulsive Internet Use Scale (CIUS) ≤ 28 (n = 1744) and boys with a CIUS > 28 (n = 63). (b) Time (hours/day) spent computer/Internet, split for girls with a CIUS ≤ 28 (n = 2601) and girls with a CIUS > 28 (n = 98)
Figure 5(a) Time (hours/day) spent on watching television/DVD/video, split for boys with a CIUS ≤ 28 (n = 1743) and boys with a CIUS > 28 (n = 63). (b) Time (hours/day) spent on watching television/DVD/video, split for girls with a CIUS ≤ 28 (n = 2598) and girls with a CIUS > 28 (n = 98)
Model fit parameters from a full model (model 1) which included 10 parameters: intercept, standard deviation for males and females, a regression coefficient for age and sex (0 = female, 1 = male) on CIUS score, and the correlations between: monozygotic male (MZM) twin pairs, dizygotic male (DZM) twin pairs, monozygotic female (MZF) twin pairs, dizygotic female (DZF) twin pairs, dizygotic opposite sex (DOS) twin pairs
| −2LL | d.f. | versus | Δd.f. | χ2 |
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. Saturated model | 37 408.512 | 5237 | ||||
| 2. as 1, standard deviation males = females | 37 410.574 | 5238 | 1 | 1 | 2.062 | |
| 3. as 2, and no sex effect on mean | 37 411.992 | 5239 | 2 | 1 | 1.417 | 0.234 |
| 4. as 3, and no age effect on mean | 37 421.349 | 5240 | 3 | 1 | 10.774 | 0.005 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Best model is printed in bold. −2LL = −2 log likelihood; d.f. = degrees of freedom; versus = model is tested versus more general model; χ2 = difference in −2LL (by subtracting the −2LL for the more restricted model from the −2LL of the more general model); P = P‐value for χ2 (if the test yields a P‐value higher than the P‐value threshold of 0.05, the constrained model is kept as the most parsimonious one).
Parameter estimates from twin model. Full model = parameter estimates in the fully saturated model (model 1), and best model = estimates in the most parsimonious model (model 5). ADE model
| Full model | Best Model | |
|---|---|---|
|
| ||
|
| 0.45 (0.36–0.55) | 0.49 (0.44–0.54) |
|
| 0.51 (0.44–0.56) | |
|
| 0.20 (0.07–0.31) | 0.21 (0.15–0.26) |
|
| 0.21 (0.12–0.30) | |
|
| 0.21 (0.13–0.28) | |
| ß1 (effect of sex on CIUS) | 0.31 | – |
| ß2 (effect of age on CIUS) | 0.30 | 0.30 |
| CIUS | 10.76 | 10.54 |
| CIUS | 10.45 | |
| Standard deviation males | 8.61 | 8.76 |
| Standard deviation females | 8.86 | |
|
| ||
| Proportion of variance explained by | 0.33 (0.32–0.50) | 0.48 (0.43–0.52) |
| Proportion of variance explained by | 0.16 (0.16–0.16) | – |
| Proportion of variance explained by | 0.51 (0.46–0.56) | 0.52 (0.48–0.57) |
aCIUS score = intercept + ß1 × sex + ß2 × age. CI = confidence interval; CIUS = Compulsive Internet Use Scale; DOS = dizygotic twins from opposite‐sex pairs; DZF = dizygotic female; DZM = dizygotic male; MZF = monozygotic female; MZM = monozygotic male.