区分数字能力与依赖对数字幸福的新视角:网络方法。

IF 5.8 2区 医学 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Si Chen, Omid V Ebrahimi, Cecilia Cheng
{"title":"区分数字能力与依赖对数字幸福的新视角:网络方法。","authors":"Si Chen, Omid V Ebrahimi, Cecilia Cheng","doi":"10.2196/70483","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>In the digital age, there is an emerging area of research focusing on digital well-being (DWB), yet conceptual frameworks of this novel construct are lacking. The current conceptualization either approaches the concept as the absence of digital ill-being, running the risk of pathologizing individual digital use, or follows the general subjective well-being framework, failing to highlight the complex digital nature at play.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This preregistered study aimed to address this gap by using a network analysis, which examined the strength of the relationships among affective (digital stress and web-based hedonic well-being), cognitive (online intrinsic needs satisfaction), and social (online social connectedness and state empathy) dimensions of DWB and their associations with some major DWB protective and risk factors (ie, emotional regulation, nomophobia, digital literacy, self-control, problematic internet use, coping styles, and online risk exposure).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The participants were 578 adults (mean age 38.7, SD 13.14 y; 277/578, 47.9% women) recruited from the United Kingdom and the United States who completed an online survey. Two network models were estimated. The first one assessed the relationships among multiple dimensions of DWB, and the second examined the relationships between DWB dimensions and related protective and risk factors.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The 2 resulting network structures demonstrated high stability, with the correlation stability coefficients being 0.67 for the first and 0.75 for the second regularized Gaussian graphical network models. The first network indicated that all DWB variables were positively related, except for digital stress, which was negatively correlated with the most central node-online intrinsic needs satisfaction. The second network revealed 2 distinct communities: digital competency and digital dependency. Emotional regulation emerged as the most central node with the highest bridge expected influence, positively associated with emotion-focused coping in the digital competency cluster and negatively associated with avoidant coping in the digital dependency cluster. In addition, some demographic differences were observed. Women scored higher on nomophobia (χ<sup>2</sup><sub>4</sub>=10.7; P=.03) and emotion-focused coping (χ<sup>2</sup><sub>4</sub>=14.9; P=.01), while men scored higher on digital literacy (χ<sup>2</sup><sub>4</sub>=15.2; P=.01). Compared with their older counterparts, younger individuals scored lower on both emotional regulation (Spearman ρ=0.27; P<.001) and digital self-control (Spearman ρ=0.35; P<.001) and higher on both digital stress (Spearman ρ=-0.14; P<.001) and problematic internet use (Spearman ρ=-0.25; P<.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The network analysis revealed how different aspects of DWB were interconnected, with the cognitive component being the most influential. Emotional regulation and adaptive coping strategies were pivotal in distinguishing digital competency from dependency.</p>","PeriodicalId":16337,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Medical Internet Research","volume":"27 ","pages":"e70483"},"PeriodicalIF":5.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"New Perspective on Digital Well-Being by Distinguishing Digital Competency From Dependency: Network Approach.\",\"authors\":\"Si Chen, Omid V Ebrahimi, Cecilia Cheng\",\"doi\":\"10.2196/70483\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>In the digital age, there is an emerging area of research focusing on digital well-being (DWB), yet conceptual frameworks of this novel construct are lacking. The current conceptualization either approaches the concept as the absence of digital ill-being, running the risk of pathologizing individual digital use, or follows the general subjective well-being framework, failing to highlight the complex digital nature at play.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This preregistered study aimed to address this gap by using a network analysis, which examined the strength of the relationships among affective (digital stress and web-based hedonic well-being), cognitive (online intrinsic needs satisfaction), and social (online social connectedness and state empathy) dimensions of DWB and their associations with some major DWB protective and risk factors (ie, emotional regulation, nomophobia, digital literacy, self-control, problematic internet use, coping styles, and online risk exposure).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The participants were 578 adults (mean age 38.7, SD 13.14 y; 277/578, 47.9% women) recruited from the United Kingdom and the United States who completed an online survey. Two network models were estimated. The first one assessed the relationships among multiple dimensions of DWB, and the second examined the relationships between DWB dimensions and related protective and risk factors.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The 2 resulting network structures demonstrated high stability, with the correlation stability coefficients being 0.67 for the first and 0.75 for the second regularized Gaussian graphical network models. The first network indicated that all DWB variables were positively related, except for digital stress, which was negatively correlated with the most central node-online intrinsic needs satisfaction. The second network revealed 2 distinct communities: digital competency and digital dependency. Emotional regulation emerged as the most central node with the highest bridge expected influence, positively associated with emotion-focused coping in the digital competency cluster and negatively associated with avoidant coping in the digital dependency cluster. In addition, some demographic differences were observed. Women scored higher on nomophobia (χ<sup>2</sup><sub>4</sub>=10.7; P=.03) and emotion-focused coping (χ<sup>2</sup><sub>4</sub>=14.9; P=.01), while men scored higher on digital literacy (χ<sup>2</sup><sub>4</sub>=15.2; P=.01). Compared with their older counterparts, younger individuals scored lower on both emotional regulation (Spearman ρ=0.27; P<.001) and digital self-control (Spearman ρ=0.35; P<.001) and higher on both digital stress (Spearman ρ=-0.14; P<.001) and problematic internet use (Spearman ρ=-0.25; P<.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The network analysis revealed how different aspects of DWB were interconnected, with the cognitive component being the most influential. Emotional regulation and adaptive coping strategies were pivotal in distinguishing digital competency from dependency.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16337,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Medical Internet Research\",\"volume\":\"27 \",\"pages\":\"e70483\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-03-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Medical Internet Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2196/70483\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Medical Internet Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2196/70483","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:在数字时代,有一个新兴的研究领域专注于数字福祉(DWB),但缺乏这种新结构的概念框架。目前的概念化要么将这个概念视为数字疾病的缺失,冒着将个人数字使用病态化的风险,要么遵循一般的主观幸福感框架,未能突出复杂的数字本质。摘要目的:本预注册研究旨在通过使用网络分析来解决这一差距,该分析检查了DWB的情感(数字压力和基于网络的享乐幸福)、认知(在线内在需求满足)和社会(在线社会联系和状态共情)维度之间的关系强度,以及它们与一些主要DWB保护和风险因素(即情绪调节、无网络恐惧症、数字素养、自我控制、有问题的互联网使用、网络安全)之间的关系。应对方式和在线风险暴露)。方法:578名成人(平均年龄38.7岁,SD 13.14 y;277/578(47.9%女性)从英国和美国招募,他们完成了在线调查。估计了两种网络模型。第一个研究评估了DWB多个维度之间的关系,第二个研究了DWB维度与相关保护因素和风险因素之间的关系。结果:得到的2种网络结构具有较高的稳定性,第一种正则化高斯图形网络模型的相关稳定性系数为0.67,第二种正则化高斯图形网络模型的相关稳定性系数为0.75。第一个网络表明,除了数字压力与最中心的节点在线内在需求满意度呈负相关外,所有DWB变量都呈正相关。第二个网络揭示了两个不同的群体:数字能力和数字依赖。情绪调节是最中心的节点,具有最高的桥式期望影响,与数字能力集群中的情绪聚焦应对呈正相关,与数字依赖集群中的回避应对负相关。此外,还观察到一些人口统计学上的差异。女性在无恐惧症上得分更高(χ24=10.7;P=.03)和以情绪为中心的应对(χ24=14.9;P= 0.01),而男性在数字素养方面得分更高(χ24=15.2;P = . 01)。与年龄较大的人相比,年轻人在情绪调节方面得分较低(Spearman ρ=0.27;结论:网络分析揭示了DWB的不同方面是如何相互联系的,其中认知成分的影响最大。情绪调节和适应性应对策略是区分数字能力与依赖的关键。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
New Perspective on Digital Well-Being by Distinguishing Digital Competency From Dependency: Network Approach.

Background: In the digital age, there is an emerging area of research focusing on digital well-being (DWB), yet conceptual frameworks of this novel construct are lacking. The current conceptualization either approaches the concept as the absence of digital ill-being, running the risk of pathologizing individual digital use, or follows the general subjective well-being framework, failing to highlight the complex digital nature at play.

Objective: This preregistered study aimed to address this gap by using a network analysis, which examined the strength of the relationships among affective (digital stress and web-based hedonic well-being), cognitive (online intrinsic needs satisfaction), and social (online social connectedness and state empathy) dimensions of DWB and their associations with some major DWB protective and risk factors (ie, emotional regulation, nomophobia, digital literacy, self-control, problematic internet use, coping styles, and online risk exposure).

Methods: The participants were 578 adults (mean age 38.7, SD 13.14 y; 277/578, 47.9% women) recruited from the United Kingdom and the United States who completed an online survey. Two network models were estimated. The first one assessed the relationships among multiple dimensions of DWB, and the second examined the relationships between DWB dimensions and related protective and risk factors.

Results: The 2 resulting network structures demonstrated high stability, with the correlation stability coefficients being 0.67 for the first and 0.75 for the second regularized Gaussian graphical network models. The first network indicated that all DWB variables were positively related, except for digital stress, which was negatively correlated with the most central node-online intrinsic needs satisfaction. The second network revealed 2 distinct communities: digital competency and digital dependency. Emotional regulation emerged as the most central node with the highest bridge expected influence, positively associated with emotion-focused coping in the digital competency cluster and negatively associated with avoidant coping in the digital dependency cluster. In addition, some demographic differences were observed. Women scored higher on nomophobia (χ24=10.7; P=.03) and emotion-focused coping (χ24=14.9; P=.01), while men scored higher on digital literacy (χ24=15.2; P=.01). Compared with their older counterparts, younger individuals scored lower on both emotional regulation (Spearman ρ=0.27; P<.001) and digital self-control (Spearman ρ=0.35; P<.001) and higher on both digital stress (Spearman ρ=-0.14; P<.001) and problematic internet use (Spearman ρ=-0.25; P<.001).

Conclusions: The network analysis revealed how different aspects of DWB were interconnected, with the cognitive component being the most influential. Emotional regulation and adaptive coping strategies were pivotal in distinguishing digital competency from dependency.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
14.40
自引率
5.40%
发文量
654
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: The Journal of Medical Internet Research (JMIR) is a highly respected publication in the field of health informatics and health services. With a founding date in 1999, JMIR has been a pioneer in the field for over two decades. As a leader in the industry, the journal focuses on digital health, data science, health informatics, and emerging technologies for health, medicine, and biomedical research. It is recognized as a top publication in these disciplines, ranking in the first quartile (Q1) by Impact Factor. Notably, JMIR holds the prestigious position of being ranked #1 on Google Scholar within the "Medical Informatics" discipline.
×
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