| Literature DB >> 36203505 |
Guangjun Chen1, Yubo Zhong2, Wangyang Yu3, Jin Yan4.
Abstract
To prevent the mental health problems of college preference students effectively, this paper analyzes the influence of college students' internet media use behaviors on their mental health in the information age. We make an empirical study on the above problems by using metrology models under the condition of controlling individual factors. The result shows that the mental health of college students is significantly affected by different internet media use behaviors and shows obvious heterogeneity. Preference for games and soap operas or films has a significant negative relationship with the mental health of college students, while the preference for science, education programs, and the preference to obtain current political news comments through official media have a positive impact on the psychological security of college students. Meanwhile, the mental health of college students is also significantly influenced by individual factors. The education level, family income, and social satisfaction show a significant positive correlation with the mental health of college students.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 36203505 PMCID: PMC9532114 DOI: 10.1155/2022/2523093
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Environ Public Health ISSN: 1687-9805
Statistical description of the sample.
| Variate | Undergraduate | Masters and doctorates | Other samples | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Male | 102 | 50 | 5 | 157 |
| Female | 212 | 80 | 2 | 301 |
| Total | 314 | 137 | 7 | 458 |
Correlation matrix of college students' mental safety indicators.
| Index |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| 1 | 0.137∗∗∗ | 0.144∗∗∗ | -0.033 | -0.029 | 0.018 | 0.052 | 0.104∗∗ |
|
| 0.137∗∗∗ | 1 | 0.320∗∗∗ | 0.321∗∗∗ | 0.157∗∗∗ | 0.226∗∗∗ | 0.191∗∗∗ | 0.266∗∗∗ |
|
| 0.144∗∗∗ | 0.320∗∗∗ | 1 | 0.356∗∗∗ | 0.112∗∗∗ | 0.273∗∗∗ | 0.247∗∗∗ | 0.252∗∗∗ |
|
| -0.033 | 0.321∗∗∗ | 0.356∗∗∗ | 1 | 0.121∗∗∗ | 0.311∗∗∗ | 0.301∗∗∗ | 0.286∗∗∗ |
|
| -0.029 | 0.157∗∗∗ | 0.112∗∗∗ | 0.121∗∗∗ | 1 | 0.279∗∗∗ | 0.398∗∗∗ | 0.471∗∗∗ |
|
| 0.018 | 0.226∗∗∗ | 0.273∗∗∗ | 0.311∗∗∗ | 0.279∗∗∗ | 1 | 0.501∗∗∗ | 0.518∗∗∗ |
|
| 0.052 | 0.191∗∗∗ | 0.247∗∗∗ | 0.301∗∗∗ | 0.398∗∗∗ | 0.501∗∗∗ | 1 | 0.734∗∗∗ |
|
| 0.104∗∗ | 0.266∗∗∗ | 0.252∗∗∗ | 0.286∗∗∗ | 0.471∗∗∗ | 0.518∗∗∗ | 0.734∗∗∗ | 1 |
Note: ∗∗∗ means the significance level is 1%, ∗∗ means the significance level is 5%, and ∗ means the significance level is 10%.
KMO and Bartlett test.
| KMO | 0.77 | |
|---|---|---|
| Bartlett's sphericity test | Chi-square statistic | 891.32 |
| Degrees of freedom | 28 | |
| Salience | 0.00 | |
Principal components eigenvalues and variance contribution rate.
| Constituent | Initial eigenvalue variance | Extract the load sum of squares | Rotational load sum of squares | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Variance contribution rate % | Cumulative contribution rate % | Eigenvalues | Variance contribution rate % | Cumulative contribution rate % | Eigenvalues | Variance contribution rate % | Cumulative contribution rate % | Eigenvalues | |
| 1 | 2.988 | 37.355 | 37.355 | 2.988 | 37.355 | 37.355 | 2.414 | 30.17 | 30.17 |
| 2 | 1.241 | 15.507 | 52.862 | 1.241 | 15.507 | 52.862 | 1.774 | 22.18 | 52.35 |
| 3 | 1.016 | 12.698 | 65.560 | 1.016 | 12.698 | 65.560 | 1.057 | 13.21 | 65.56 |
| 4 | 0.760 | 9.495 | 75.055 | ||||||
| 5 | 0.647 | 8.089 | 83.144 | ||||||
| 6 | 0.587 | 7.334 | 90.479 | ||||||
| 7 | 0.508 | 6.345 | 96.824 | ||||||
| 8 | 0.254 | 3.176 | 100 | ||||||
Figure 1Distribution of Chinese college students' mental safety index.
Empirical regression estimation results.
| Variable | Model 1 | Model 2 | Model 3 | Model 4 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Behavioral variables | ||||
| | -0.097∗∗∗ | -0.097∗∗∗ | -0.087∗∗∗ | -0.343∗∗∗ |
| (-3.89) | (-3.81) | (-3.05) | (-3.89) | |
| | 0.094∗∗∗ | 0.094∗∗ | 0.087∗∗ | 0.331∗∗∗ |
| (2.72) | (2.50) | (2.08) | (2.71) | |
| | 0.073∗∗ | 0.073∗∗ | 0.071∗ | 0.361∗∗∗ |
| (2.16) | (2.10) | (1.82) | (3.01) | |
| | -0.051∗ | -0.051 | -0.042 | -0.190∗ |
| (-1.68) | (-1.67) | (-1.34) | (-1.78) | |
| Individual variables | ||||
| | 0.137∗∗ | 0.137∗∗ | 0.113∗ | 0.487∗∗ |
| (2.20) | (2.29) | (1.75) | (2.24) | |
| | 0.027 | 0.027 | 0.030∗ | 0.164∗∗∗ |
| (1.53) | (1.55) | (1.65) | (2.63) | |
| | 0.073∗∗ | 0.072∗∗ | 0.082∗∗ | 0.169 |
| (2.13) | (2.17) | (2.38) | (1.44) | |
| Constant terms | -0.767∗∗∗ | -0.767∗∗∗ | -0.643∗ | -2.174∗∗ |
| (-2.84) | (-2.84) | (-1.80) | (-2.17) | |
| | -418.54 | -418.54 | -416.46 | -284.93 |
| chi2 | 66.42 | 56.43 | ||
| | 0.09 | |||
| | 0.10 | 0.10 | ||
| | 452 | 452 | 452 | 452 |
Notes: the values in brackets are standard deviations. ∗∗∗, ∗∗, and ∗ indicate that the estimated coefficients are significant at the confidence levels of 1%, 5%, and 10%, respectively.