KaydedilenlerDerginizi ekleyin

Dergiler / Addicta: The Turkish Journal on Addictions / 2019 / Cilt: 6 - Sayı: 1

Genetic and Environmental Sources of Nomophobia: A Small-Scale Turkish Twin Study

Deniz DERYAKULU
Ömer Faruk URSAVAŞ
Sayfa
147–162
DOI
—
🏛️Bu makalenin bibliyografik verileri ve tam metin bağlantısı DergiPark üzerinden sağlanmıştır.
DergiPark Kaydı ↗
✨

Yapay Zeka Hızlı Bakış & Çıkarımlar

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(1 Cümlede Hızlı Çıkarım)

The results indicate the models with best fit to be the ADE models for the sub-dimensions of losing connectedness and giving up convenience, and NMP-Total scores.

📌 3 Maddede Bu Makale

🎯
Amaç & Hipotez:Nomophobia is considered to be a form of behavioral addiction, namely the fear of being out of mobile phone contact.
📊
Temel Bulgular & Veri:The participants were 125 Turkish twin-pairs.
💡
Sonuç & Katkı:The results indicate the models with best fit to be the ADE models for the sub-dimensions of losing connectedness and giving up convenience, and NMP-Total scores.
🔬Tür:Uygulamalı Anket & Alan Araştırması
📍Kapsam:Genişletilmiş Akademik Örneklem
⚙️Değişkenler:Alan Parametreleri

Özet

Nomophobia is considered to be a form of behavioral addiction, namely the fear of being out of mobile phone contact. Despite many studies on the prevalence and correlates of mobile phone addiction, not much is known about its etiological nature. The purpose of this study is to reveal the extent to which nomophobia is affected by genetic and environmental factors. The participants were 125 Turkish twin-pairs. Nomophobia was measured using the Nomophobia Questionnaire (NMP-Q). The monozygotic (MZ) twin correlations were larger than the dizygotic (DZ) twin correlations in the sub-dimensions of losing connectedness (Factor 2) and giving up convenience (Factor 4), as well as for the overall questionnaire NMP-Total, showing that genetic factors affected scores on these measures. However, the MZ twin correlations were equal to or smaller than the DZ twin correlations in the sub-dimensions of not being able to communicate (Factor 1) and not being able to access (Factor 3), demonstrating that genetic factors did not play a role in the scores on these sub-dimensions. The role of both genetic and environmental factors was investigated using modelfitting analysis. The results indicate the models with best fit to be the ADE models for the sub-dimensions of losing connectedness and giving up convenience, and NMP-Total scores.

🔖

Bu Makaleye Atıf Yap

DERYAKULU, D., URSAVAŞ, Ö. F. (2019). Genetic and Environmental Sources of Nomophobia: A Small-Scale Turkish Twin Study. Addicta: The Turkish Journal on Addictions, Cilt: 6 - Sayı: 1, 147–162. https://ajindex.com/articles/125828

📄 Tam Metin PDF Okuyucu

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

Kaynakça (14)

  1. Acharya, J. P., Acharya, I., & Waghrey, D. (2013). A study on some psychological health effects of cell-phone usage amongst college going students. International Journal of Medical Research & Health Sciences, 2(3), 388–394.
  2. Alkis, C. (2013). Mobile Internet usage as a communication channel among Turkish youth (Master’s thesis, University of Gothenburg, Sweden). Argumosa-Villar, L., Boada-Grau, J., & Vigil-Colet, A. (2017). Exploratory investigation of theoretical predictors of nomophobia using the Mobile Phone Involvement Questionnaire (MPIQ). Journal of Adolescence, 56, 127–135.
  3. Arpaci, I., Yardimci-Cetin, Y., & Turetken, O. (2015). A cross-cultural analysis of smartphone adoption by Canadian and Turkish organizations. Journal of Global Information Technology Management, 18(3), 214–238.
  4. Belk, R. W. (2013). Extended self in a digital world. Journal of Consumer Research, 40(3), 477–500.
  5. Bian, M., & Leung, L. (2015). Linking loneliness, shyness, smartphone addiction symptoms, and patterns of smartphone use to social capital. Social Science Computer Review, 33(1), 61–79.
  6. Bian, M., & Leung, L. (2014). Smartphone addiction: Linking loneliness, shyness, symptoms and patterns of use to social capital. Media Asia, 41(2), 159–176.
  7. Bianchi, A., & Phillips, J. G. (2005). Psychological predictors of problem mobile phone use. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 8(1), 39–51.
  8. Bhatia, M. S. (2008). Cell phone dependency-a new diagnostic entity. Delhi Psychiatry Journal, 11(2), 123–124.
  9. Billieux, J., Maurage, P., Lopez-Fernandez, O., Kuss, D. J., & Griffiths, M. D. (2015). Can disordered mobile phone use be considered a behavioral addiction? An update on current evidence and a comprehensive model for future research. Current Addiction Reports, 2(2), 156–162.
  10. Billieux, J., Van der Linden, M., d’Acremont, M., Ceschi, G., & Zermatten, A. (2007). Does impulsivity relate to perceived dependence on and actual use of the mobile phone? Applied Cognitive Psychology, 21(4), 527–537.
  11. Billieux, J., Van der Linden, M., & Rochat, L. (2008). The role of impulsivity in actual and problematic use of the mobile phone. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 22(9), 1195–1210.
  12. Boker, S., Neale, M. C., Maes, H., Wilde, M., Spiegel, M., Brick, T., Spies, J. … Fox, J. (2011). OpenMx: An open source extended structural equation modeling framework. Psychometrika, 76(2), 306–317.
  13. Boomsma, D. I., Busjahn, A., & Peltonen, L. (2002). Classical twin studies and beyond. Nature Reviews Genetics, 3, 872–882.
  14. Butt, S., & Ph