MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3204082179 · doi:10.1111/add.15709

Cross‐national validation of the social media disorder scale: findings from adolescents from 44 countries

2021· article· en· W3204082179 on OpenAlex
Maartje Boer, Regina J. J. M. van den Eijnden, Catrin Finkenauer, Meyran Boniel‐Nissim, Claudia Marino, Jo Inchley, Alina Cosma, Leena Paakkari, Gonneke W. J. M. Stevens

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueAddiction · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicImpact of Technology on Adolescents
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersEuropean Regional Development FundMedical Research CouncilVlaamse regeringUniversitetet i BergenTechnology Agency of the Czech RepublicUniversity of GlasgowChief Scientist Office, Scottish Government Health and Social Care DirectorateJuho Vainion Säätiö
KeywordsScale (ratio)Social mediaPsychologyClinical psychologyPsychiatryEnvironmental healthMedicinePolitical scienceGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background and aims There is currently no cross‐national validation of a scale that measures problematic social media use (SMU). The present study investigated and compared the psychometric properties of the social media disorder (SMD) scale among young adolescents from different countries. Design Validation study. Setting and participants Data came from 222 532 adolescents from 44 countries participating in the health behaviour in school‐aged children (HBSC) survey (2017/2018). The HBSC survey was conducted in the European region and Canada. Participants were on average aged 13.54 years (standard deviation = 1.63) and 51.24% were girls. Measurement Problematic SMU was measured using the nine‐item SMD scale with dichotomous response options. Findings Confirmatory factor analyses (CFA) showed good model fit for a one‐factor model across all countries (minimum comparative fit index (CFI) and Tucker–Lewis index (TLI) = 0.963 and 0.951, maximum root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) and standardized root mean square residual (SRMR) = 0.057 and 0.060), confirming structural validity. The internal consistency of the items was adequate in all countries (minimum alpha = 0.840), indicating that the scale provides reliable scores. Multi‐group CFA showed that the factor structure was measurement invariant across countries (ΔCFI = −0.010, ΔRMSEA = 0.003), suggesting that adolescents’ level of problematic SMU can be reliably compared cross‐nationally. In all countries, gender and socio‐economic invariance was established, and age invariance was found in 43 of 44 countries. In line with prior research, in almost all countries, problematic SMU related to poorer mental wellbeing (range β STDY = 0.193–0.924, P < 0.05) and higher intensity of online communication (range β STDY = 0.163–0.635, P < 0.05), confirming appropriate criterion validity. Conclusions The social media disorder scale appears to be suitable for measuring and comparing problematic social media use among young adolescents across many national contexts.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.825

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.287 · 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