Shyness and problematic internet use among adolescents and young adults: A systematic review and meta‐analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examined the association between shyness and problematic internet use among adolescents and young adults. A systematic search of relevant publications in English published before September 2022 yielded 35 studies in total (n = 26,708 individuals), which were systematically reviewed. Among them, 27 studies were included in the meta-analyses. Results from random-effects models indicated that shyness was positively associated with problematic internet use (μ̂ = 0.2753; 95% CI: 0.2409 to 0.3096). Moreover, results from the moderation analyses indicated that the relationship between shyness and problematic internet use was moderated by age group. Specifically, the effect size of shyness on problematic internet use seemed to be larger for young adults than for adolescents (Z = -2.25, p < .001). Our findings indicated that shy people, particularly shy young adults, are more likely to have problematic internet use, which provided useful information for future intervention.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.022 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.010 | 0.020 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".