| Literature DB >> 32829311 |
Ji-Bin Li1,2,3, Anise M S Wu4, Li-Fen Feng5, Yang Deng6, Jing-Hua Li6, Yu-Xia Chen7, Jin-Chen Mai7, Phoenix K H Mo3, Joseph T F Lau3.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Problematic online social networking use is prevalent among adolescents, but consensus about the instruments and their optimal cut-off points is lacking. This study derived an optimal cut-off point for the validated Online Social Networking Addiction (OSNA) scale to identify probable OSNA cases among Chinese adolescents.Entities:
Keywords: adolescents; classification; latent profile analysis; online social networking addiction
Mesh:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32829311 PMCID: PMC8943659 DOI: 10.1556/2006.2020.00047
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Behav Addict ISSN: 2062-5871 Impact factor: 6.756
Sample characteristics
| Total ( | Online social networking users | ||
| Yes ( |
| ||
|
| |||
| Male | 2,533 (47.2) | 2,394 (48.4) | <0.001 |
| Female | 2,832 (52.8) | 2,557 (51.6) | |
|
| |||
| Seven | 2,592 (48.3) | 2,379 (48.1) | 0.184 |
| Eight | 2,773 (51.7) | 2,572 (51.9) | |
|
| |||
| Primary school or below | 356 (6.6) | 317 (6.4) | 0.140 |
| Junior middle school | 1,816 (33.9) | 1,683 (34.0) | |
| Senior middle school | 1,646 (30.7) | 1,529 (30.9) | |
| University or above | 1,317 (24.5) | 1,212 (24.5) | |
| Unknown | 230 (4.3) | 210 (4.2) | |
|
| |||
| Primary school or below | 588 (11.0) | 532 (10.7) | 0.222 |
| Junior middle school | 1,909 (35.6) | 1,761 (35.6) | |
| Senior middle school | 1,497 (27.9) | 1,398 (28.2) | |
| University or above | 1,143 (21.3) | 1,052 (21.2) | |
| Unknown | 228 (4.3) | 208 (4.2) | |
|
| |||
| Very good/good | 2,519 (47.0) | 2,357 (47.6) | <0.001 |
| Average | 2,664 (49.6) | 2,441 (49.3) | |
| Poor/very poor | 182 (3.4) | 153 (3.1) | |
|
| |||
| Yes | 4,712 (87.8) | 4,351 (87.9) | 0.683 |
| No | 653 (12.2) | 600 (12.1) | |
|
| |||
| Upper | 1,817 (33.9) | 1,679 (33.9) | 0.193 |
| Medium | 2,396 (44.6) | 2,223 (44.9) | |
| Lower | 1,152 (21.5) | 1,049 (21.2) | |
|
| |||
| Nil | 205 (3.8) | 186 (3.8) | 0.042 |
| Light | 829 (15.5) | 753 (15.2) | |
| Average | 3,052 (56.9) | 2,836 (57.3) | |
| Heavy | 1,001 (18.7) | 929 (18.8) | |
| Very heavy | 278 (5.2) | 247 (5.0) | |
All P values were obtained by χ2 test.
Fig. 1.Scree plot of AIC, BIC and ssaBIC versus number of latent class. AIC: Akaike Information Criterion; BIC: Bayesian Information Criterion; ssaBIC: sample size adjusted BIC
Fig. 2.Distributions of items means in three (a) and five (b) latent class models in the whole sample. Item 1: I have difficulties for focusing on my academic work due to my online social networking use; Item 2: The first thing on my mind when I get up is to log into online social networking; Item 3: I lose sleep over spending more time on online social networking; Item 4: My online social networking use interferes with doing social activities; Item 5: I log into online social networking to make myself feel better when I am down; Item 6: My family or friends think that I spend too much time on online social networking; Item 7: I feel anxious if I cannot access to online social networking; Item 8: I have attempted to spend less time on online social networking but have not succeeded
Summary of latent profile analysis
| No. of classes | Log-likelihood | Degree of freedom | AIC | BIC | ssaBIC | Entropy | BLRT | Probability of classes (%) (from low risk to high risk) |
| 1 | −56,629.709 | 16 | 113,291.42 | 113,395.535 | 113,344.692 | – | – | – |
| 2 | −51,683.614 | 25 | 103,417.23 | 103,579.911 | 103,500.47 | 0.801 | <0.001 | 61.0/39.0 |
| 3 | −49,547.014 | 34 | 99,162.03 | 99,383.277 | 99,275.237 | 0.870 | <0.001 | 36.4/50.4/13.2 |
| 4 | −48,856.359 | 43 | 97,798.72 | 98,078.535 | 97,941.896 | 0.875 | <0.001 | 36.6/43.6/8.8/11.0 |
| 5 | −44,561.266 | 52 | 89,226.53 | 89,564.914 | 89,399.677 | 0.966 | <0.001 | 36.3/11.6/38.0/10.0/4.1 |
| 6 | −44,044.074 | 61 | 88,210.15 | 88,607.096 | 88,413.26 | 0.942 | <0.001 | 36.1/11.8/10.0/31.7/6.3/4.1 |
–:Not applicable. AIC: Akaike Information Criterion; BIC: Bayesian Information Criterion; ssaBIC: sample size adjusted BIC; BLRT: Bootstrapping Likelihood Ratio Test.
ROC analysis of the online social networking addiction scale using the high-risk class derived from latent profile model as gold standard
| Cut-off point | True positive | False negative | True negative | False positive | Sensitivity (%) | Specificity (%) | PPV (%) | NPV (%) | Accuracy (%) | Youden index |
| 19 | 653 | 0 | 3,125 | 1,173 | 100.0 | 72.7 | 35.8 | 100.0 | 76.3 | 72.7 |
| 20 | 653 | 0 | 3,449 | 849 | 100.0 | 80.2 | 43.5 | 100.0 | 82.9 | 80.2 |
| 21 | 652 | 1 | 3,714 | 584 | 99.8 | 86.4 | 52.8 | 100.0 | 88.2 | 86.3 |
| 22 | 649 | 4 | 3,937 | 361 | 99.4 | 91.6 | 64.3 | 99.9 | 92.6 | 91.0 |
| 23 | 635 | 18 | 4,092 | 206 | 97.2 | 95.2 | 75.5 | 99.6 | 95.5 | 92.5 |
| 24 | 590 | 63 | 4,193 | 105 | 90.4 | 97.6 | 84.9 | 98.5 | 96.6 | 87.9 |
| 25 | 409 | 244 | 4,248 | 50 | 62.6 | 98.8 | 89.1 | 94.6 | 94.1 | 61.5 |
| 26 | 331 | 322 | 4,283 | 15 | 50.7 | 99.7 | 95.7 | 93.0 | 93.2 | 50.3 |
| 27 | 257 | 396 | 4,296 | 2 | 39.4 | 100.0 | 99.2 | 91.6 | 92.0 | 39.3 |
| 28 | 196 | 457 | 4,297 | 1 | 30.0 | 100.0 | 99.5 | 90.4 | 90.7 | 30.0 |
PPV: Positive predictive value; NPV: Negative predictive value.
Comparison of external factors between three latent classes, and between OSNA positive and negative groups
| Total ( | The three latent classes | Spearman | OSNA classification (cut-off: ≥23 for positive cases) | Spearman | ||||||
| Low risk ( | Average-risk ( | High-risk ( |
| Negative ( | Positive ( |
| ||||
|
| ||||||||||
| <1 year | 1,018 (20.6) | 485 (26.9) | 430 (17.2) | 103 (15.8) | <0.001 | 0.093*** | 893 (21.7) | 125 (14.9) | <0.001 | 0.086*** |
| 1–2 years | 995 (20.1) | 332 (18.4) | 538 (21.6) | 125 (19.1) | 838 (20.4) | 157 (18.7) | ||||
| 2–3 years | 855 (17.3) | 292 (16.2) | 458 (18.4) | 105 (16.1) | 717 (17.4) | 138 (16.4) | ||||
| 3–4 years | 803 (16.2) | 263 (14.6) | 434 (17.4) | 106 (16.2) | 661 (16.1) | 142 (16.9) | ||||
| >4 years | 1,280 (25.8) | 433 (24.0) | 633 (25.4) | 214 (32.8) | 1,001 (24.4) | 279 (33.2) | ||||
|
| ||||||||||
| ≤1 | 1,141 (23.0) | 642 (35.6) | 424 (17.0) | 75 (11.5) | <0.001 | 0.252*** | 1,057 (25.7) | 84 (10.0) | <0.001 | 0.183*** |
| 2–3 days | 1,913 (38.6) | 678 (37.6) | 1,018 (40.8) | 217 (33.2) | 1,614 (39.3) | 299 (35.6) | ||||
| 4–5 days | 616 (12.4) | 187 (10.4) | 343 (13.8) | 86 (13.2) | 506 (12.3) | 110 (13.1) | ||||
| ≥6 days | 1,281 (25.9) | 298 (16.5) | 708 (28.4) | 275 (42.1) | 933 (22.7) | 348 (41.4) | ||||
|
| ||||||||||
| <30 mins | 840 (17.0) | 514 (28.5) | 278 (11.2) | 48 (7.4) | <0.001 | 0.311*** | 782 (19.0) | 58 (6.9) | <0.001 | 0.245*** |
| 31–60 mins | 1,517 (30.6) | 628 (34.8) | 776 (31.1) | 113 (17.3) | 1,367 (33.3) | 150 (17.8) | ||||
| 1–2 hours | 1,289 (26.0) | 397 (22.0) | 727 (29.2) | 165 (25.3) | 1,063 (25.9) | 226 (26.9) | ||||
| 2–3 hours | 727 (14.7) | 155 (8.6) | 422 (16.9) | 150 (23.0) | 535 (13.0) | 192 (22.8) | ||||
| >3 hours | 578 (11.7) | 111 (6.1) | 290 (11.6) | 177 (27.1) | 363 (8.8) | 215 (25.6) | ||||
|
| ||||||||||
| ≤50 | 1,869 (37.7) | 807 (44.7) | 861 (34.5) | 201 (30.8) | <0.001 | 0.127*** | 1,618 (39.4) | 251 (29.8) | <0.001 | 0.104*** |
| 51–100 | 1,203 (24.3) | 429 (23.8) | 624 (25.0) | 150 (23.0) | 1,011 (24.6) | 192 (22.8) | ||||
| 101–200 | 1,079 (21.8) | 340 (18.8) | 601 (24.1) | 138 (21.1) | 887 (21.6) | 192 (22.8) | ||||
| 201–400 | 494 (10.0) | 131 (7.3) | 276 (11.1) | 87 (13.3) | 382 (9.3) | 112 (13.3) | ||||
| >400 | 306 (6.2) | 98 (5.4) | 131 (5.3) | 77 (11.8) | 212 (5.2) | 94 (11.2) | ||||
|
| ||||||||||
| Never | 1,438 (29.0) | 827 (45.8) | 522 (20.9) | 89 (13.6) | <0.001 | 0.329*** | 1,333 (32.4) | 105 (12.5) | <0.001 | 0.265*** |
| Few | 1,954 (39.5) | 666 (36.9) | 1,098 (44.0) | 190 (29.1) | 1,708 (41.6) | 246 (29.3) | ||||
| Occasional | 1,190 (24.0) | 249 (13.8) | 683 (27.4) | 258 (39.5) | 863 (21.0) | 327 (38.9) | ||||
| Always | 369 (7.5) | 63 (3.5) | 190 (7.6) | 116 (17.8) | 206 (5.0) | 163 (19.4) | ||||
|
| ||||||||||
| SFUI | 18.1 ± 8.5 | 15.9 ± 8.8 | 18.7 ± 7.8 | 21.6 ± 8.8 | <0.001 | 0.218*** | 17.3 ± 8.2 | 22.0 ± 8.8 | <0.001 | 0.199*** |
| EFUI | 8.2 ± 3.2 | 7.4 ± 3.3 | 8.4 ± 2.9 | 9.4 ± 3.3 | <0.001 | 0.194*** | 7.9 ± 3.1 | 9.5 ± 3.3 | <0.001 | 0.178*** |
|
| ||||||||||
| No | 4,621 (93.3) | 1,770 (98.1) | 2,356 (94.5) | 495 (75.8) | <0.001 | 0.227*** | 3,937 (96.6) | 650 (77.3) | <0.001 | 0.291*** |
| Yes | 330 (6.7) | 35 (1.9) | 137 (5.5) | 158 (24.2) | 139 (3.4) | 191 (22.7) | ||||
OSNA: Online Social Networking Addiction; OSNAI: Online Social Networking Activity Intensity; SFUI: Social Function Use Intensity; EFUI: Entertainment Function Use Intensity.
Spearman r: Spearman correlation coefficients.
†: P values were obtained by χ2 test for categorical variables, independent-sample t-test for two-group continuous variables, and one-way analysis of variance for three-group continuous variables.
***: P < 0.001 for Spearman correlation coefficients.