4.5 Article

Problematic internet use and the big five personality model: an updated three-level meta-analysis

Journal

BEHAVIOUR & INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY
Volume -, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/0144929X.2023.2283201

Keywords

Meta-analysis; problematic internet use; internet addiction; personality; big five

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In recent decades, there has been a significant increase in internet use. The excessive and pathological use of the internet has become a global public health problem. This meta-analysis found that extraversion, openness, agreeableness, and conscientiousness were significantly negatively correlated with problematic internet use, while neuroticism was positively correlated. These results contribute to explaining individual differences in problematic internet use.
In recent decades, there has been a significant increase in internet use. The excessive and pathological use of this technology, conceptualised as problematic use of the internet, has become a global public health problem due to the various negative effects associated with it. The present work is an updated three-level meta-analysis of the relationship between Big Five personality traits and the problematic use of the internet. A systematic search was performed in PsycINFO, Web of Science, Scopus, ERIC, ProQuest Dissertation & Theses Global and PubMed. The risk of publication bias was evaluated using funnel plots and Egger's test. Extraversion (r = -.10, IC 95% [-.14, -.06]), openness (r = -.10, IC 95% [-.14, -.06]), agreeableness (r = -.19, IC 95% [-.22, -.15]) and conscientiousness (r = -.27, IC 95% [-.30, -.24]) were significantly negatively correlated with the problematic use of the internet, while neuroticism (r = .26, IC 95% [.22, .30]) was positively correlated. The results of this meta-analysis contribute to explaining individual differences in problematic internet use.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available