Biosocial effects (social connectedness) of digital addictions

A 2017 Turkish study discusses the biosocial effects (social connectedness) of digital addictions (internet, cellphones, social media, and etc.). These addictions are not yet classified as a disorder in the DSM-5, which is a manual with diagnostic tools to guide health care professionals determine disorders. 201 adolescent participants (101 girls and the 100 boys) who own a smart phone, use internet, play games online or on phone, use social media and have an account for at least one whole year were included in the study.

The study used various forms of Likert form scales in order to determine the results to their objective. Likert scale is a tool for psychometric measurement of attitudes, beliefs and opinion in which multiple choice questions are presented to the respondent and they must indicate a degree of agreement or disagreement. The researchers of this study collected data in the adolescent’s classrooms with the consent and permission of the ministry they were observed under for 25-30 minutes and did not include sloppy data or non-volunteer/ non-applicable data. The study suggests research indicates that these addictions are associated with depression, impulsivity, loneliness, sleep quality, well-being, self-esteem, and academic performance, but also there’s research out there suggesting the opposite which is why internet addiction should be considered a criterion, this emphasizes on the problem with Internet usage leading to psychopathological symptoms. The intense use of technology causes a restriction on real social relations and leads to feeling of isolation, which is very profound during adolescent making them more vulnerable to addiction. Based on this study we need to limit our Internet usage and balance with real-life interactions in order to remain healthy and develop.

Using the Likert scale has both its disadvantages and advantages. The advantages of using this type of scale is that it’s a universal method for survey collection and therefore easy to comprehend for the rest of the world. The responses are easy to quantify and subject to computation for an analysis. They are quick, efficient, and inexpensive methods of data collection. Have a high versatility and can easily be sent out through mail, over the Internet and given in person. The problem with this type of measure is that it’s one-dimensional and fails to measure accurate attitudes of the respondents. The respondent is heavily influenced by the pervious question, or will heavily concentrate on one response side (agree/disagree). The respondents will avoid picking extremes options due to social desirability (answering the questions viewed favorable by peers) even if that option was the accurate one. In order to find peers for the study they used convenience non- probability sampling (where subjects easy to access and close to the researchers are selected). The advantage of this is that it’s convenient and easy to carry out, with the usage of less time and expense. The problem with this technique is the sampling bias and the fact it’s not representative of the whole population. This can result in low external validity in the study. Also, the consent of the parents was not taken making it an ethical issue for any minor included in the study. This study could have been improved by a larger sample and better ways to measure responses such as brain scans and/or observable behavioral tests over a longer period of time with a broader spectrum of participants so that the results are not biased.

Overall, we should all take note that this study brings a good point cause in today’s era this study would hold importance as everything is run by technologies and almost everyone on the planet uses the Internet and social media to communicate and feel connected.