Person-Specific Analyses of Smartphone Use and Mental Health: Intensive Longitudinal Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Contrary to popular concerns about the harmful effects of media use on mental health, research on this relationship is ambiguous, stalling advances in theory, interventions, and policy. Scientific explorations of the relationship between media and mental health have mostly been found null or have small associations, with the results often blamed on the use of cross-sectional study designs or imprecise measures of media use and mental health. OBJECTIVE: This exploratory empirical demonstration aims to answer whether mental health effects are associated with media use experiences by (1) redirecting research investments to granular and intensive longitudinal recordings of digital experiences to build models of media use and mental health for single individuals over the course of 1 year, (2) using new metrics of fragmented media use to propose explanations of mental health effects that will advance person-specific theorizing in media psychology, and (3) identifying combinations of media behaviors and mental health symptoms that may be more useful for studying media effects than single measures of dosage and affect or assessments of clinical symptoms related to specific disorders. METHODS: The activity on individuals' smartphone screens was recorded every 5 seconds when devices were in use over 1 year, resulting in a dataset of 6,744,013 screenshots and 123 fortnightly surveys from 5 adult participants. Each participant contributed between 0.8 and 2.7 million screens. Six media use metrics were derived from smartphone metadata. Fortnightly surveys captured symptoms of depression, attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, state anxiety, and positive affect. Idiographic filter models (p-technique canonical correlation analyses) were applied to explore person-specific associations. RESULTS: Canonical correlations revealed substantial person-specific associations between media use and mental health, ranging from r=0.82 (P=.008) to r=0.92 (P=.03). The specific combinations of media use metrics and mental health dimensions were different for each person, reflecting significant individual variability. For instance, the media use canonical variate for 1 participant was characterized by higher loadings for app-switching, which, in combination with other behaviors, correlated strongly with a mental health variate emphasizing anxiety symptoms. For another, prolonged screen time, alongside other media use behaviors, contributed to a mental health variate weighted more heavily toward depression symptoms. These within-person correlations are among the strongest reported in this literature. CONCLUSIONS: Results suggest that the relationships between media use and mental health are highly individualized, with implications for the development of personalized models and precision smartphone-informed interventions in mental health. We discuss how our approach can be extended generally, while still emphasizing the importance of idiographic approaches. This study highlights the potential for granular, longitudinal data to reveal person-specific patterns that can inform theory development, personalized screening, diagnosis, and interventions in mental health.
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 | 0.011 | 0.024 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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".