Internet use and Problematic Internet Use: a systematic review of longitudinal research trends in adolescence and emergent adulthood

Abstract

The aim of this systematic literature review is to map the longitudinal research in the field of Internet Use (IU) and Problematic Internet Use (PIU) in adolescents and emergent adults. Further, this study endeavours to examine the terminology and instruments utilized in longitudinal IU and PIU research and investigate whether statistically significant results have arisen from the areas of research focus. In a total of 29 studies, trends in the research of adolescent/emergent adult IU and PIU were discovered. These trends were conceptualized into individual, contextual and activity-related factors. Findings suggested that individual factors are the most researched and have demonstrated significant relationships with adolescent/young adult PIU. However, more research on contextual and activity-related factors is needed in order to achieve a clearer understanding of young people's IU and PIU behaviours, and to incorporate into a comprehensive model that will guide future research in this growing field.

Flow on the Internet: a longitudinal study of Internet addiction symptoms during adolescence

“…At this point it it should be noted that in line with the above, the international literature has consistently conceptualized flow as a precursor of IA behaviors and not the opposite (Anderson et al, 2016;Stavropoulos et al, 2013;Douglas et al, 2008;Kim & Davis, 2009;Rettie, 2001). Particulalry, it has been postulated that the experience of online "flow", as an emotional state, defines the quality/intensity (e.g., absorbance, length of time and the level of disconnection from the offline world) of Internet use, and therefore, the potential emergence of IA behaviors (e.g., it is the level of flow experience that may result to IA and not the other way around; Anderson et al, 2016;Stavropoulos et al, 2013;Douglas et al, 2008;Kim & Davis, 2009;Rettie, 2001).…”

“…More specifically, longitudinal findings have shown that males are more inclined to develop problems with impulse-control and sensation-seeking behaviors than females, and these symptoms have been associated with IA (Kuss et al, 2014;Shulman, Harden, Chein, & Steinberg, 2015). Additionally, cross-sectional studies of Internet use have indicated adolescent males being at higher risk of IA than adolescent females (Shi, Wang, & Zou, 2017;Karacic & Oreskovic, 2017;Ostovar et al, 2016;Anderson et al, 2016;Chen et al, 2015;Choo et al, 2015;Gentile et al, 2011;Haagsma et al, 2013;Hong et al, 2014;Willoughby, 2008;Yu & Shek, 2013;Stavropoulos et al, 2013a;Yen et al, 2009;Shaw & Black, 2008;Johansson & Götestam, 2004). Higher digital skills and preference for more addictive applications (such as gaming) have been suggested to explain these findings (Kuss & Griffiths, 2012).…”

“…Overall though, it has been acknowledged that there is a dearth of longitudinal research considering gender-related variations in IA symptoms over the life span, during adolescence in general, and the time period between 16 and 18 years in particular (Anderson et al, 2016). This is important provided that gender-related trajectories (with males being at higher risk) have been demonstrated in relation to other forms of addictive behaviors (e.g., illicit drug use) during the transition from adolescence to young adulthood (Foster et al, 2015).…”

“…However, the abuse of the medium constitutes an ongoing risk for a minority of adolescents in terms of achievement of developmental tasks and general adaptation (Anderson, Steen, & Stavropoulos, 2016). Furthermore, there appears to be a continuum between adaptive and maladaptive Internet use which needs to be carefully considered (Stavropoulos, Alexandraki & Motti-Stefanidi, 2013a).…”

“…Push factors include age-related changes (maturation), gender, characteristics of the individual and factors within the individual's close personal context, which may contribute to their vulnerability to IA (Anderson et al, 2016). Indicatively, past empirical studies have illustrated among others the significance of low conscientiousness and the presence of obsessive-compulsive and anxious manifestations as individual level push factors, as well as the higher average levels of classroom hostility and extraversion as contextual level push factors (Stavropoulos, Kuss, Griffiths & Motti-Stefanidi, 2016b;Stavropoulos, Gentile & MottiStefanidi, 2016b;Stavropoulos et al, 2017b).…”