The Effect of Age, Gender, and Job on Skin Conductance Response among Smartphone Users Who are Prohibited from Using Their Smartphone.
anxiety
gender
problematic smartphone use
skin conductance response
withdrawal
Journal
International journal of environmental research and public health
ISSN: 1660-4601
Titre abrégé: Int J Environ Res Public Health
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101238455
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
30 03 2020
30 03 2020
Historique:
received:
18
02
2020
revised:
27
03
2020
accepted:
28
03
2020
entrez:
3
4
2020
pubmed:
3
4
2020
medline:
30
10
2020
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The smartphone is a widely used and rapidly growing phenomenon worldwide, and problematic smartphone use is common in our society. This study's objective was to examine the gender difference of baseline and post-intervention skin conductance response (SCR) among smartphone users and explore the relationships among problematic smartphone use level, anxiety level, and SCR changes by evaluating SCR, the Zung Self-Rating Anxiety Scale score, and the Chinese version of the Smartphone Addiction Inventory (SPAI) score in a one-group baseline and post-test design. Sixty participants were recruited from two communities, and data were collected from April to June 2017. There was a significant difference in terms of SCR changes between young males and old males and between young females and old females. Additionally, the SCR changes in young females were significantly greater than those in young males with twofold mean difference. This study provides strong evidence supporting the effectiveness of SCR measurement for assessing problematic smartphone use (PSU) anxiety when users are in a withdrawal-like state. The SCR measurement can help healthcare providers identify cases with risk factors of PSU for early intervention.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32235441
pii: ijerph17072313
doi: 10.3390/ijerph17072313
pmc: PMC7177482
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Références
Behav Res Methods. 2009 Nov;41(4):1149-60
pubmed: 19897823
J Behav Addict. 2015 Jun;4(2):85-92
pubmed: 26132913
Memory. 2015;23(3):350-64
pubmed: 24601711
Brain. 2014 Apr;137(Pt 4):1213-23
pubmed: 24531623
Acta Paediatr. 2013 Sep;102(9):e402-6
pubmed: 23782068
Pain. 2010 Feb;148(2):320-7
pubmed: 20022696
PLoS One. 2014 Jun 04;9(6):e98312
pubmed: 24896252
Kaohsiung J Med Sci. 2005 Dec;21(12):545-51
pubmed: 16670046
Addict Behav. 2017 Dec;75:70-74
pubmed: 28711746
Addiction. 1999 Mar;94(3):327-40
pubmed: 10605857
Trends Psychiatry Psychother. 2019 Oct-Dec;41(4):358-368
pubmed: 31967196
J Behav Addict. 2014 Dec;3(4):254-65
pubmed: 25595966
Behav Res Ther. 2007 Oct;45(10):2456-63
pubmed: 17462590
Behav Res Ther. 2015 Jul;70:38-46
pubmed: 25978746
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2018 Aug 06;15(8):
pubmed: 30082624
Cortex. 2016 Nov;84:124-131
pubmed: 27522603
Cyberpsychol Behav. 2005 Feb;8(1):39-51
pubmed: 15738692
J Behav Addict. 2016 Sep;5(3):465-73
pubmed: 27499228
PLoS One. 2017 Aug 4;12(8):e0182239
pubmed: 28777828
Health Psychol Open. 2018 Feb 02;5(1):2055102918755046
pubmed: 29435355
Psychosomatics. 1971 Nov-Dec;12(6):371-9
pubmed: 5172928
Neurobiol Learn Mem. 2016 Oct;134 Pt B:339-48
pubmed: 27544848
J Behav Addict. 2015 Dec;4(4):308-14
pubmed: 26690626
Cyberpsychol Behav. 2009 Apr;12(2):131-7
pubmed: 19072078
Int J Nurs Stud. 2016 Jul;59:15-26
pubmed: 27222446