| Literature DB >> 33192635 |
Li Li1, Mark D Griffiths2, Songli Mei3, Zhimin Niu1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: The widespread use of social media on smartphones has lead to the fear of missing out (FoMO) and smartphone addiction among a minority of adolescents and adults. However, few studies have investigated the impact of trait affect on sleep quality via FoMO and smartphone addiction. The present study examined whether FoMO (trait-FoMO and state-FoMO) and smartphone addiction mediated the relationship between positive affect (PA)/negative affect (NA) and sleep quality, and the prevalence of sleep disturbance among Chinese university students.Entities:
Keywords: negative affect; positive affect; sleep quality; smartphone addiction; state-fear of missing out; trait-fear of missing out
Year: 2020 PMID: 33192635 PMCID: PMC7481466 DOI: 10.3389/fpsyt.2020.00877
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Psychiatry ISSN: 1664-0640 Impact factor: 4.157
Figure 1The proposed series multiple mediation model.
Descriptive statistics and correlation analysis of the study variables.
| Skewness | Kurtosis | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1. | Sleep quality | 5.26 | 2.29 | 0.279 | -0.051 | 1.00 | ||||||
| 2. | Positive affect | 14.12 | 3.13 | -0.206 | 0.504 | -0.09** | 1.00 | |||||
| 3. | Negative affect | 10.69 | 3.37 | 0.389 | -0.176 | 0.42** | 0.07* | 1.00 | ||||
| 4. | FoMO | 29.07 | 6.95 | -0.160 | 0.151 | 0.25** | 0.05 | 0.24** | 1.00 | |||
| 5. | Trait-FoMO | 12.19 | 3.63 | 0.008 | -0.170 | 0.23** | -0.02 | 0.26** | 0.79** | 1.00 | ||
| 6 | State-FoMO | 16.88 | 4.63 | 0.121 | -0.007 | 0.19** | 0.09** | 0.16** | 0.88** | 0.41** | 1.00 | |
| 7 | Smartphone addiction | 42.09 | 10.24 | 0.052 | -0.116 | 0.32** | -0.06* | 0.31** | 0.45** | 0.33** | 0.42** | 1.00 |
∗∗p < .01, ∗p < .05.
Total effect, direct effect, and mediation effects of PA/NA on sleep quality via trait-FoMO/state-FoMO and smartphone addiction.
| Path (PA➔trait-FoMO) | B | SE | 95%CI | Path (PA➔state-FoMO) | B | SE | 95%CI |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Total effect | -0.079 | 0.028 | -0.134, -0.024 | Total effect | -0.079 | 0.028 | -0.134, -0.024 |
| Direct effect | -0.062 | 0.026 | -0.114, -0.010 | Direct effect | -0.070 | 0.027 | -0.122, -0.018 |
| Total mediation effect | -0.018 | 0.012 | Total mediation effect | -0.009 | 0.012 | ||
| Ind1 | -0.003 | 0.004 | -0.012, 0.006 | Ind1 | 0.006 | 0.004 | 0.000, 0.015 |
| Ind2 | -0.014 | 0.009 | -0.032, 0.003 | Ind2 | -0.024 | 0.009 | -0.042, -0.008 |
| Ind3 | -0.002 | 0.003 | -0.007, 0.004 | Ind3 | 0.008 | 0.004 | 0.000, 0.017 |
| Path (NA➔trait-FoMO) | B | SE | 95%CI | Path (NA➔state-FoMO) | B | SE | 95%CI |
| Total effect | 0.414 | 0.027 | 0.362, 0.466 | Total effect | 0.414 | 0.027 | 0.362, 0.466 |
| Direct effect | 0.336 | 0.028 | 0.282, 0.391 | Direct effect | 0.348 | 0.027 | 0.295, 0.402 |
| Total mediation effect | 0.078 | 0.012 | Total mediation effect | 0.066 | 0.011 | ||
| Ind1 | 0.021 | 0.008 | 0.006, 0.037 | Ind1 | 0.012 | 0.005 | 0.002, 0.024 |
| Ind2 | 0.045 | 0.009 | 0.028, 0.063 | Ind2 | 0.044 | 0.009 | 0.027, 0.062 |
| Ind3 | 0.013 | 0.003 | 0.007, 0.019 | Ind3 | 0.011 | 0.003 | 0.006, 0.017 |
| C1 | -0.024 | 0.013 | -0.050, 0.002 | C1 | -0.032 | 0.012 | -0.056, -0.009 |
| C2 | 0.008 | 0.009 | -0.009, 0.026 | C2 | 0.001 | 0.006 | -0.011, 0.014 |
| C3 | 0.032 | 0.008 | 0.017, 0.049 | C3 | 0.033 | 0.008 | 0.018, 0.049 |
| Effect ratio (%) | 19.1 | Effect ratio (%) | 16.2 |
Confidence intervals for effects are bias corrected based on 5,000 bootstrap samples. a1. PA/NA to Trait-FoMO/State-FoMO, a2. PA/NA to smartphone addiction, b1. Trait-FoMO/State-FoMO to sleep quality, b2. Smartphone addiction to sleep quality, d1. Trait-FoMO/State-FoMO to smartphone addiction. Ind1 = PA/NA➔Trait-FoMO/State-FoMO➔Sleep quality, Ind2 = PA/NA➔Smartphone addiction➔Sleep quality, Ind3 = PA/NA➔Trait-FoMO/State-FoMO➔Smartphone addiction➔Sleep quality. CI = Ind1 minus Ind2, C2 = Ind1 minus Ind3, C3 = Ind2 minus Ind3. Effect ratio = Total mediation effect/Total effect. Bold values are highlighted to show where the 95% confidence interval (CI) contains zero, then the effect will not be significant at the 0.05 level..
Figure 2The serial multiple mediation model of fear of missing out and smartphone addiction on negative affect and sleep quality (n=1164). Coefficients are standardized and t-statistics are in parentheses. ***p < .001; **p < .01.
Figure 3The serial multiple mediation model of fear of missing out and smartphone addiction on negative affect and sleep quality (n=1164). Coefficients are standardized and t-statistics are in parentheses. ***p < .001; *p < .05.