4.5 Article

Peer victimization, self-compassion, gender and adolescent mobile phone addiction: Unique and interactive effects

Journal

CHILDREN AND YOUTH SERVICES REVIEW
Volume 118, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.childyouth.2020.105397

Keywords

Peer victimization; Mobile phone addiction; Self-compassion; Gender differences; Adolescents

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Prior studies on the influencing factors of mobile phone addiction have mainly focused on the individual factors and family-related environmental factors. Few studies, however, have investigated the roles of peer factors, especially the interactive roles of peer factors and individual factors in adolescent mobile phone addiction. The present study examined the relationship between peer victimization and mobile phone addiction and the moderating roles of self-compassion and gender. In two high schools, cluster random sampling method was used to choose two classes in each grade from grade 7 to grade 12. A sample of 1265 adolescents completed the anonymous self-report survey. Results showed that peer victimization was positively associated with mobile phone addiction. Self-compassion moderated the association between peer victimization and mobile phone addiction, with this association being weaker for adolescents with higher levels of self-compassion. Gender also moderated the association between peer victimization and mobile phone addiction, with this association being stronger in girls than in boys. Moreover, there were significant gender differences in the protective effect of self-compassion, in that the moderating effect of self-compassion was stronger in boys than in girls. The findings highlight the unique and interactive roles of peer victimization, self-compassion, and gender in predicting adolescent mobile phone addiction. Limitations and implications are discussed.

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