Electronic Media Use and Addiction among Youth in Psychiatric Clinic versus School Populations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Electronic media use is highly prevalent among today's youth, and its overuse in the general population has been consistently associated with the presence of psychiatric symptoms. In contrast, little information exists about electronic media use among youth with psychiatric disorders. Our study aims to compare patterns of television and computer and gaming station use among youth in psychiatric clinic and community-based school populations. METHOD: Surveys were completed by 210 youth and parents, from school (n = 110) and psychiatric clinic (n = 100) populations. Duration and frequency of television, video gaming, and nongaming computer activities were ascertained, along with addictive features of use. Descriptive and comparative analyses were conducted, with a statistical threshold of P < 0.05. RESULTS: Quantitative and qualitative differences were identified between the patterns of use reported by the 2 groups. The mean reported daily duration of exposure to electronic media use was 6.6 hours (SD 4.1) for the clinic sample and 4.6 hours (SD 2.6) for the school sample (P < 0.01). Self-reported rates of addictive patterns related to computer and gaming station use were similar between the 2 populations. However, the clinically based sample favoured more violent games, with 29% reporting playing mature-rated games, compared with 13% reported by the school-based sample (P = 0.02). Youth with externalizing disorders expended greater time video gaming, compared with youth with internalizing disorders (P = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Clinically based samples of youth with mental illnesses spend more time engaged in electronic media activities and are more likely to play violent video games, compared with youth in the general population. Further research is needed to determine the long-term implications of these differences.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".