{"title":"Examining the Association Between Digital Stress Components and Psychological Wellbeing: A Meta-Analysis.","authors":"Devanshi Khetawat, Ric G Steele","doi":"10.1007/s10567-023-00440-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Extant research suggests that digital stress (DS) and its various components (Hall et al. in Psychol Assess 33(3):230-242, 2021) may mediate the association between social media use and psychosocial distress among adolescents and young adults. Yet no systematic review and meta-analysis has been conducted to examine the direct associations among DS components (i.e., approval anxiety, availability stress, fear of missing out [FOMO], connection overload, and online vigilance) and psychological outcomes. Thus, we aimed to comprehensively synthesize and quantify the association between these five DS components and psychosocial distress, and to examine whether these associations were statistically different from one another. Our search of PubMed, PsycINFO, and Communication and Mass Media Complete yielded a wide range of article abstracts across the five DS components. After reviewing inclusion and exclusion criteria, 7, 73, 60, 19, and 16 studies were included for availability stress, approval anxiety, FOMO, connection overload, and online vigilance, respectively. The results suggested that all five digital stress components had significant medium association with psychosocial distress (r = .26 to .34; p < .001). Age and sex did not significantly moderate the association between most digital stress components and psychosocial distress. However, age moderated the association between connection overload and psychosocial distress. Our findings further suggested no statistical differences among the associations between the five digital stress components and psychosocial distress. Notwithstanding its limitations, our outcomes help integrate the disparate effect sizes in the literature, indicate the strength of associations, and suggest directions for clinical intervention and future research.</p>","PeriodicalId":51399,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10567-023-00440-9","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/7/11 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
Abstract
Extant research suggests that digital stress (DS) and its various components (Hall et al. in Psychol Assess 33(3):230-242, 2021) may mediate the association between social media use and psychosocial distress among adolescents and young adults. Yet no systematic review and meta-analysis has been conducted to examine the direct associations among DS components (i.e., approval anxiety, availability stress, fear of missing out [FOMO], connection overload, and online vigilance) and psychological outcomes. Thus, we aimed to comprehensively synthesize and quantify the association between these five DS components and psychosocial distress, and to examine whether these associations were statistically different from one another. Our search of PubMed, PsycINFO, and Communication and Mass Media Complete yielded a wide range of article abstracts across the five DS components. After reviewing inclusion and exclusion criteria, 7, 73, 60, 19, and 16 studies were included for availability stress, approval anxiety, FOMO, connection overload, and online vigilance, respectively. The results suggested that all five digital stress components had significant medium association with psychosocial distress (r = .26 to .34; p < .001). Age and sex did not significantly moderate the association between most digital stress components and psychosocial distress. However, age moderated the association between connection overload and psychosocial distress. Our findings further suggested no statistical differences among the associations between the five digital stress components and psychosocial distress. Notwithstanding its limitations, our outcomes help integrate the disparate effect sizes in the literature, indicate the strength of associations, and suggest directions for clinical intervention and future research.
现有研究表明,数字压力(DS)及其各个组成部分(Hall et al. in Psychol assessment 33(3):230- 242,2021)可能在青少年和年轻人的社交媒体使用与社会心理困扰之间起中介作用。然而,还没有进行系统的回顾和荟萃分析来检验DS组成部分(即批准焦虑、可用性压力、害怕错过[FOMO]、连接过载和在线警惕)与心理结果之间的直接关联。因此,我们的目的是综合和量化这五个DS成分与社会心理困扰之间的关联,并检查这些关联是否在统计上彼此不同。我们对PubMed、PsycINFO和Communication and Mass Media Complete进行了搜索,得到了5个DS组成部分的大量文章摘要。在审查纳入和排除标准后,分别纳入了7、73、60、19和16项研究,涉及可用性压力、认可焦虑、FOMO、连接过载和在线警惕性。结果表明,所有五个数字应激成分与心理社会困扰有显著的中等相关性(r =。26至0.34;p
期刊介绍:
Editors-in-Chief: Dr. Ronald J. Prinz, University of South Carolina and Dr. Thomas H. Ollendick, Virginia Polytechnic Institute Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review is a quarterly, peer-reviewed journal that provides an international, interdisciplinary forum in which important and new developments in this field are identified and in-depth reviews on current thought and practices are published. The Journal publishes original research reviews, conceptual and theoretical papers, and related work in the broad area of the behavioral sciences that pertains to infants, children, adolescents, and families. Contributions originate from a wide array of disciplines including, but not limited to, psychology (e.g., clinical, community, developmental, family, school), medicine (e.g., family practice, pediatrics, psychiatry), public health, social work, and education. Topical content includes science and application and covers facets of etiology, assessment, description, treatment and intervention, prevention, methodology, and public policy. Submissions are by invitation only and undergo peer review. The Editors, in consultation with the Editorial Board, invite highly qualified experts to contribute original papers on topics of timely interest and significance.