2015
DOI: 10.1016/j.chb.2015.04.039
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Phantom phone signals: An investigation into the prevalence and predictors of imagined cell phone signals

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
9
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 23 publications
(11 citation statements)
references
References 23 publications
2
9
0
Order By: Relevance
“…In addition, this may heighten pressure to remain “in the loop” via social media, leading adolescents to engage in increased peer surveillance and monitoring behaviors, so as not to miss out on important social information, events, or gossip. Emerging research with adults on the phenomenon of “phantom phone signals” suggests that the pressure to remain constantly accessible via social media may even cause some individuals to experience the false sensation of receiving a cell phone notification (Tanis et al 2015). Interestingly, results suggest that adults reporting higher need for popularity were more likely to experience phantom phone signals (Tanis et al 2015).…”
Section: Peer Statusmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In addition, this may heighten pressure to remain “in the loop” via social media, leading adolescents to engage in increased peer surveillance and monitoring behaviors, so as not to miss out on important social information, events, or gossip. Emerging research with adults on the phenomenon of “phantom phone signals” suggests that the pressure to remain constantly accessible via social media may even cause some individuals to experience the false sensation of receiving a cell phone notification (Tanis et al 2015). Interestingly, results suggest that adults reporting higher need for popularity were more likely to experience phantom phone signals (Tanis et al 2015).…”
Section: Peer Statusmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As an explanation for the popularity of smartphones, both the outlined usability and functionality cannot sufficiently account for behavioral patterns which have led academic and popular science to generate labels such as addiction (Samaha & Nawi, 2016;Davies, 2017), phantom vibration (Tanis, Beukeboom, Hartmann, & Vermeulen, 2015;Knapton, 2016), phubbing (neologism: 'phone' and 'snubbing'; Roberts & David, 2016), or smombies ('smartphone' and 'zombie';Hookham, Togoh, & Yeates, 2016). Psychological research so far has focused on the use of services or applications (e.g., social media in general: Blackwell, Leaman, Tramposch, Osborne, & Liss, 2017; social networking sites: Buglass, Binder, Betts, & Underwood, 2017;Facebook specifically: Beyens, Frisen, & Eggermont, 2016;Instagram: Barry, Reiter, Anderson, Schoessler, & Sidoti, 2017) thereby rather neglecting the device which 'contains' all these services.…”
Section: Being With Your Phone 24/7: Smartphones As Digital Companionsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…social anxiety and boredom (Elhai et al, 2017 ) or feeding attentional impulsiveness (Roberts et al, 2015 ). Even long-term attentional effects, the so-called phantom vibration and phantom ringing hallucinations, seem to occupy the mind of heavy mobile technology users (Lee et al, 2014 ; Tanis et al, 2015 ).…”
Section: Attentionmentioning
confidence: 99%