Mindfulness-based approaches to problematic technology use: A scoping review

IF 4.9 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL
Justin Thomas , Fahad Al-Beyahi , Michelle Colder Carras , Dahlia Aljuboori , Saud Alomairah , Johannes Thrul
{"title":"Mindfulness-based approaches to problematic technology use: A scoping review","authors":"Justin Thomas ,&nbsp;Fahad Al-Beyahi ,&nbsp;Michelle Colder Carras ,&nbsp;Dahlia Aljuboori ,&nbsp;Saud Alomairah ,&nbsp;Johannes Thrul","doi":"10.1016/j.chbr.2025.100653","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>The inclusion of gaming disorder within the 11th edition of the International Classification of Disease underscored a requirement for treatments targeting problematic technology use. Mindfulness-based interventions (MBIs) have shown early promise. However, questions remain concerning treatment modalities and which populations and conditions are targeted. Additionally, intervention content, effectiveness and the proposed mechanisms of action require summative exploration. This scoping review maps out the emerging literature on MBIs for problematic technology use, addressing the questions above and identifying additional knowledge gaps. Adopting a five-stage methodological framework, ten reports (8 studies) met the eligibility criteria. Positive outcomes were generally reported for MBIs targeting problematic technology use, with improved emotional self-regulation commonly cited as a mechanism of action. Group-based adaptations of existing MBI programs were the norm. There is a clear need for adequately powered randomised active-controlled trials (RCT) of MBIs outside educational settings among culturally and generationally diverse populations. Study reporting was deficient in many areas, impairing the ability to draw firm conclusions. Future research should utilise RCT designs, ensuring the reporting of the intervention content, instructor/therapist credentials, and how treatment fidelity was assured.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":72681,"journal":{"name":"Computers in human behavior reports","volume":"18 ","pages":"Article 100653"},"PeriodicalIF":4.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Computers in human behavior reports","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2451958825000685","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EXPERIMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The inclusion of gaming disorder within the 11th edition of the International Classification of Disease underscored a requirement for treatments targeting problematic technology use. Mindfulness-based interventions (MBIs) have shown early promise. However, questions remain concerning treatment modalities and which populations and conditions are targeted. Additionally, intervention content, effectiveness and the proposed mechanisms of action require summative exploration. This scoping review maps out the emerging literature on MBIs for problematic technology use, addressing the questions above and identifying additional knowledge gaps. Adopting a five-stage methodological framework, ten reports (8 studies) met the eligibility criteria. Positive outcomes were generally reported for MBIs targeting problematic technology use, with improved emotional self-regulation commonly cited as a mechanism of action. Group-based adaptations of existing MBI programs were the norm. There is a clear need for adequately powered randomised active-controlled trials (RCT) of MBIs outside educational settings among culturally and generationally diverse populations. Study reporting was deficient in many areas, impairing the ability to draw firm conclusions. Future research should utilise RCT designs, ensuring the reporting of the intervention content, instructor/therapist credentials, and how treatment fidelity was assured.
以正念为基础的问题技术使用方法:范围审查
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信