| Literature DB >> 33990181 |
Xue Yang1, Huahua Hu1, Chengjia Zhao2, Huihui Xu2, Xiaolian Tu3, Guohua Zhang4,5.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The current study aims to track the changes in the levels of smart phone addiction (SPA) and depressive symptoms between pre and during COVID-19 and potential risk factors of among Chinese college students in a four-wave longitudinal study.Entities:
Keywords: COVID-19; Depressive symptoms; Longitudinal; Smart phone addiction; Young adults
Mesh:
Year: 2021 PMID: 33990181 PMCID: PMC8120756 DOI: 10.1186/s12888-021-03265-4
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Psychiatry ISSN: 1471-244X Impact factor: 3.630
Background characteristics of the participants (N = 195)
| n | % | |
|---|---|---|
| Sex | ||
| Female | 114 | 58.5% |
| Male | 81 | 41.5% |
| Residence | ||
| Urban | 102 | 52.3% |
| Rural | 93 | 47.7% |
| One-child familya | ||
| Yes | 94 | 48.2% |
| No | 100 | 51.3% |
| Hours of smart phone use per day | ||
| > 0–4 | 81 | 41.6% |
| > 4–8 | 104 | 53.3% |
| > 8 | 10 | 5.1% |
| Major | ||
| Anesthesia | 27 | 13.8% |
| Forensic Medicine | 29 | 14.9% |
| Stomatology | 54 | 27.7% |
| Chinese Medicine | 85 | 43.6% |
a1(0.5%) missing value
Levels of smart phone addiction and depressive symptoms at T1, T2, T3 and T4
| T1 | T2 | T3 | T4 | Group comparison | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| SPA | |||||
| Mean | 48.22 | 44.65 | 45.99 | 45.72 | |
| SD | 10.60 | 11.31 | 12.71 | 11.63 | |
| DS | |||||
| Mean | 14.61 | 15.31 | 15.93 | 19.08 | |
| SD | 8.35 | 9.30 | 9.97 | 6.63 | |
| r between SPA and DS | .39* | .45* | .51* | .44* |
One-way repeated measures ANOVA analyses; Pearson’s correlation analyses; SPA Smart phone addiction, DS Depressive symptoms; *p < .001
Fig. 1Levels of smart phone addiction at T1, T2, T3 and T4. Note: Level data are the mean scores of smart phone addiction among the 195 college students; Post hoc tests showed that the level of smart phone addiction at T1 (48.22) was significantly higher than that at T2, T3, or T4 (44.65, 45.99, 45.72) (p < .05). The levels of SPA at T2, T3 and T4 were not significantly different (p > .05)
Fig. 2Levels of depressive symptoms at T1, T2, T3 and T4. Note: Level data are the mean scores of depressive symptoms among the 195 college students; Post hoc tests showed that the level of depressive symptoms at T4 (19.08) was significantly higher than that at T1, T2, or T3 (14.61, 15.31, 15.93) (p < .001). The levels of depressive symptoms at T1, T2, and T3 were not significantly different (p > .05)
Fig. 3Prevalence and conversion rate of probable depression (CES-D ≥ 16) at T1, T2, T3 and T4
Correlations among COVID-related factors, smart phone addiction and depressive symptoms at T4
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 Quarantine | 1 | ||||||
| 2 Lockdown | .01 | 1 | |||||
| 3 Boredom | .11 | .15* | 1 | ||||
| 4 Emotional loneliness | −.03 | .01 | .39*** | 1 | |||
| 5 Social loneliness | −.03 | .05 | −.00 | .13 | 1 | ||
| 6 SPA | .11 | .10 | .38*** | .32*** | .01 | 1 | |
| 7 DS | .01 | .09 | .31*** | .29*** | .20** | .44*** | 1 |
Spearman/Pearson’s correlation analyses; Quarantine and lockdown were dummy coded in the analyses; SPA Smart phone addiction, DS Depressive symptoms; p < .05; p < .01; *p < .001
Linear regression model on smart phone addiction at T4
| Variables | Block 1 | Block 2 | Block 3 | Block 4 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| β | t | β | t | β | t | β | t | |
| Quarantine | .10 | 1.37 | .10 | 1.86 | .08 | 1.74 | .09 | 1.84 |
| Lockdown | .11 | 1.52 | .06 | 1.22 | .03 | .66 | .03 | .57 |
| Boredom | .38 | 5.62*** | .26 | 5.25*** | .19 | 3.59*** | .15 | 2.93** |
| Emotional loneliness | .32 | 4.63*** | .22 | 4.38*** | .15 | 2.79** | .12 | 2.28* |
| Social loneliness | .01 | .17 | .02 | .45 | .01 | .13 | −.03 | −.58 |
| .58 | .60 | |||||||
| 6/193 | 7/193 | |||||||
| 42.18*** | 39.90*** | |||||||
SPA Smart phone addiction; Block 1: simple regression analyses; Block 2: simple regression analyses adjusting for SPA at T3; Block 3: multiple regression analysis with multiple independent variables (all the COVID-related factors and the level of SPA at T3) being included; Block 4: multiple regression analysis with multiple independent variables (all the COVID-related factors, the level of SPA at T3 and depressive symptoms at T4) being included; p < .05; p < .01; *p < .001
Linear regression model on depressive symptoms at T4
| Variables | Block 1 | Block 2 | Block 3 | Block 4 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| β | t | β | t | β | t | β | t | |
| Quarantine | −.01 | −.14 | .00 | .00 | .00 | −.04 | −.02 | −.32 |
| Lockdown | .09 | 1.27 | .00 | −.01 | −.04 | −.71 | −.05 | −.78 |
| Boredom | .31 | 4.55*** | .24 | 4.13*** | .19 | 2.95** | .14 | 2.20* |
| Emotional loneliness | .29 | 4.28*** | .25 | 4.18*** | .17 | 2.65** | .13 | 2.09* |
| Social loneliness | .20 | 2.87** | .15 | 2.43* | .14 | 2.42* | .15 | 2.64** |
| .40 | .42 | |||||||
| 7/193 | 8/193 | |||||||
| 17.68*** | 16.98*** | |||||||
SPA Smart phone addiction; Block 1: simple analyses; Block 2: simple analyses adjusting for gender and depressive symptoms at T3; Block 3: multiple regression analysis with multiple independent variables (all the COVID-related factors and the level of depressive symptoms at T3) being included; Block 4: multiple regression analysis with multiple independent variables (all the COVID-related factors, the level of depressive symptoms at T3 and SPA at T4) being included; p < .05; p < .01; *p < .001