The Relationship Between Alexithymia and Mobile Phone Addiction Among Mainland Chinese Students: A Meta-Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Alexithymia and mobile phone addiction are common phenomena in daily life. Many studies have explored the internal relationship between them based on different theoretical perspectives, but the extent of the exact correlation is still controversial. To address this controversy and clarify the reasons for the divergence, a meta-analysis of 26 articles comprising 23,387 Chinese students was conducted. The results show that alexithymia was highly positively correlated with mobile phone addiction (r = 0.41, 95% CI = [0.37, 0.45]). Furthermore, the relationship was moderated by mobile phone addiction measurement tool and year of publication, with studies using the Mobile Phone Addiction Tendency Scale (MPATS) having higher correlation coefficients than those using the Mobile Phone Addiction Index (MPAI) or other measurement tools. Studies published in 2020-2021 yielded higher correlations than those published in 2014-2016 and 2017-2019. However, the relationship was not moderated by gender, region, or measures of alexithymia. Therefore, our meta-analysis of available published data indicated that alexithymia and mobile phone addiction in Chinese students are not only highly positively correlated but also affected by mobile phone addiction measurement tools and publication year. Longitudinal studies or experimental studies should be strengthened in the future to further establish the direction(s) of causality for the relation between alexithymia and mobile phone addiction.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".