| Literature DB >> 28611692 |
José De-Sola1, Hernán Talledo2,3, Gabriel Rubio4, Fernando Rodríguez de Fonseca1,5.
Abstract
In some people, problematic cell phone use can lead to situations in which they lose control, similar to those observed in other cases of addiction. Although different scales have been developed to assess its severity, we lack an instrument that is able to determine the desire or craving associated with it. Thus, with the objective of evaluating craving for cell phone use, in this study, we develop and present the Mobile Phone Addiction Craving Scale (MPACS). It consists of eight Likert-style items, with 10 response options, referring to possible situations in which the interviewee is asked to evaluate the degree of restlessness that he or she feels if the cell phone is unavailable at the moment. It can be self-administered or integrated in an interview when abuse or problems are suspected. With the existence of a single dimension, reflected in the exploratory factor analysis (EFA), the scale presents adequate reliability and internal consistency (α = 0.919). Simultaneously, we are able to show significantly increased correlations (r = 0.785, p = 0.000) with the Mobile Phone Problematic Use Scale (MPPUS) and state anxiety (r = 0.330, p = 0.000). We are also able to find associations with impulsivity, measured using the urgency, premeditation, perseverance, and sensation seeking scale, particularly in the dimensions of negative urgency (r = 0.303, p = 0.000) and positive urgency (r = 0.290, p = 0.000), which confirms its construct validity. The analysis of these results conveys important discriminant validity among the MPPUS user categories that are obtained using the criteria by Chow et al. (1). The MPACS demonstrates higher levels of craving in persons up to 35 years of age, reversing with age. In contrast, we do not find significant differences among the sexes. Finally, a receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis allows us to establish the scores from which we are able to determine the different levels of craving, from the absence of craving to that referred to as addiction. Based on these results, we can conclude that this scale is a reliable tool that complements ongoing studies on problematic cell phone use.Entities:
Keywords: MPPUS; cell phone use; craving; mobile phone addiction; problem phone use
Year: 2017 PMID: 28611692 PMCID: PMC5447711 DOI: 10.3389/fpsyt.2017.00090
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Psychiatry ISSN: 1664-0640 Impact factor: 4.157
Descriptive analysis and internal consistency of the items using Cronbach’s alpha coefficient and the factor loads from exploratory factor analysis (EFA).
| Range | Minimum | Maximum | Mean | SD | Median | Cronbach’s alpha if one component was eliminated | Factorial loads in EFA | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| P32—if I wanted to turn it on right now and could not or would not be allowed to | 9 | 1 | 10 | 2.94 | 2.345 | 2.00 | 0.904 | 0.835 |
| P32—if, at this very moment, I found myself out of battery or without coverage | 9 | 1 | 10 | 2.92 | 2.351 | 2.00 | 0.906 | 0.818 |
| P32—if, at this very moment, I should be forced to turn it off because I was at the movies or at work | 9 | 1 | 10 | 1.85 | 1.717 | 1.00 | 0.916 | 0.716 |
| P32—if, at this very moment, I realized that I left it at home | 9 | 1 | 10 | 3.88 | 2.758 | 3.00 | 0.914 | 0.757 |
| P32—if, at this very moment, I could not or if they did not let me reply to a message | 9 | 1 | 10 | 2.78 | 2.285 | 2.00 | 0.906 | 0.824 |
| P32—if I was with people at the moment I was using it and it did not work for me | 9 | 1 | 10 | 2.70 | 2.298 | 1.00 | 0.907 | 0.814 |
| P32—if I was in a place or a situation in which I always used it and no longer could | 9 | 1 | 10 | 3.18 | 2.400 | 2.00 | 0.904 | 0.839 |
| P32—if, at this very moment, I was restless and needed to relax and did not have it available | 9 | 1 | 10 | 2.60 | 2.327 | 1.00 | 0.908 | 0.806 |
| Total | 72 | 8 | 80 | 22.85 | 14.85 | 18.00 |
Average values, SDs, and ranges are presented, both for the items and for the total amount. Cronbach’s alpha is presented for items assuming that one component was eliminated.
Correlations of the Mobile Phone Addiction Craving Scale (MPACS) with state anxiety, impulsivity, and the MPPUS.
| State anxiety and impulsivity with the MPACS | |
|---|---|
| State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI-S) | 0.330 |
| Total impulsivity (UPPS-S) | 0.302 |
| Negative urgency | 0.303 |
| Positive urgency | 0.290 |
| Lack of premeditation | 0.121 |
| Lack of perseverance | 0.185 |
| Search for sensations | 0.097 |
| MPPUS–total | 0.785 |
| Factor I—abuse and dependence | 0.412 |
| Factor II—craving and loss-of-control | 0.440 |
| Factor III—dependency on the social environment | 0.542 |
**Significant Pearson correlations at a level of 0.01.
Mobile Phone Addiction Craving Scale (MPACS) scores for type of user of the MPPUS.
| Casual | Regular | At-risk | Problematic | Total | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean | 9.33 | 19.98 | 37.82 | 50.57 | 22.85 |
| SD | 3.28 | 11.42 | 10.83 | 14.67 | 14.85 |
| Median | 8 | 17 | 39 | 49 | 18 |
| Minimum score | 8 | 8 | 8 | 10 | 8 |
| Maximum score | 33 | 65 | 72 | 80 | 80 |
| Sample | 153 | 742 | 173 | 58 | 1,126 |
MPACS averages, SDs, medians, and minimum and maximum scores by type of users of MPPUS are shown.
Mobile Phone Addiction Craving Scale (MPACS) scores for age categories.
| 16–25 years | 26–35 years | 36–45 years | 46–55 years | 56–65 years | Total | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mean | 26.25 | 23.21 | 20.72 | 15.65 | 19.21 | 22.85 |
| SD | 15.13 | 15.63 | 13.97 | 13.97 | 13.40 | 14.85 |
| Median | 23 | 18 | 15 | 11 | 13 | 18 |
| Minimum score | 8 | 8 | 8 | 8 | 8 | 8 |
| Maximum score | 80 | 80 | 72 | 48 | 54 | 80 |
| Sample | 461 | 271 | 191 | 147 | 56 | 1,126 |
MPACS averages, SDs, medians, and maximum and minimum scores by age groups are shown.
Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve and cutoff scores of the Mobile Phone Addiction Craving Scale for each category of user.
| Cutoff score | Significance | Sensitivity (%) | Specificity (%) | Area and upper and lower limits | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Casual users | 8.50 | 0.000 | 32.7 | 10.7 | 0.110 (0.087–0.132) |
| Regular users | 13.5 | 0.000 | 62.3 | 38.8 | 0.412 (0.371–0.454) |
| At-risk users | 30.5 | 0.000 | 79.8 | 80.7 | 0.846 (0.819–0.872) |
| Problematic users | 35.5 | 0.000 | 91.4 | 82.1 | 0.922 (0.884–0.960) |
The sensitivity, specificity, cutoff scores, area, and upper and lower limits on the ROC curve are shown.