MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3118629099 · doi:10.5539/gjhs.v13n3p8

Smartphone Addiction and Life Satisfaction: Mediating Effects of Sleep Quality and Self-Health

2021· article· en· W3118629099 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jianfei Cao, Yeongjoo Lim, Kota Kodama

Bibliographic record

VenueGlobal Journal of Health Science · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicImpact of Technology on Adolescents
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMinistry of Land, Infrastructure, Transport and TourismÉcole des Hautes Etudes en Sciences Sociales
KeywordsAffect (linguistics)PopularitySmartphone addictionAddictionIntervention (counseling)PsychologySleep (system call)Quality of life (healthcare)Sleep qualityLife satisfactionClinical psychologyGerontologyMedicinePsychiatrySocial psychologyInsomniaPsychotherapistComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As the popularity of smartphones grows, so does the number of people who are addicted to them. Although many studies have indicated that the various problems associated with smartphone addiction can negatively affect life satisfaction, this result is not absolute. This study surveyed 114 Chinese alumni of a Japanese university and analyzed the mediating effects of sleep quality and self-health on the relationship between smartphone addiction and life satisfaction. Results indicated that smartphone addiction did not affect life satisfaction, neither directly nor indirectly through sleep quality and self-health. This finding was different from those of previous studies. In addition, the results indicated that smartphone addiction directly affects sleep quality, and that smartphone addiction can affect self-health either directly or indirectly through sleep quality. Based on this finding, we believe that intervention in the excessive use of smartphones is an effective means to improve the physical fitness of people.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.020
GPT teacher head0.376
Teacher spread0.357 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations9
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGlobal Journal of Health ScienceSame topicImpact of Technology on AdolescentsFrench-language works237,207