Comparing the prevalence of nomophobia and smartphone addiction among university students pre-COVID-19 and during COVID-19
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background This study aimed to: (a) explore differences in the prevalence of nomophobia and smartphone addiction (SA) from pre- to during COVID-19; (b) identify students’ self-reported changes in smartphone reliance and screen time during COVID-19; and (c) examine whether self-perceived changes in smartphone usage predicted nomophobia and SA scores.Methods Scores on the Nomophobia Questionnaire and Smartphone Addiction Scale between two surveys administered at two timepoints were compared: Sample 1 (September 2019–January 2020; N = 878) and Sample 2 (May-June 2020; N = 258).Results No significant differences were found between samples on nomophobia or SA. Nearly all of Sample 2 reported using some type of app more, using their smartphone a little more, and about the same perceived smartphone reliance during COVID-19. Increased screen time, smartphone reliance, and social media significantly predicted nomophobia and SA.Conclusion COVID-19 does not appear to have exacerbated the prevalence of nomophobia or SA.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".