4.7 Article

Self-Esteem and Problematic Smartphone Use Among Adolescents: A Moderated Mediation Model of Depression and Interpersonal Trust

期刊

FRONTIERS IN PSYCHOLOGY
卷 10, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

FRONTIERS MEDIA SA
DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02872

关键词

problematic smartphone use; self-esteem; interpersonal trust; depression; moderated mediation model; adolescents; smartphone addiction

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [31500905]
  2. National Social Science Fund of China [19BSH130]
  3. Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities [19XNLG20]
  4. Research Funds of Renmin University of China [19XNLG20]
  5. project of Journalism and Marxism Research Center, Renmin University of China [RMXW2018A005]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Research has found that self-esteem is negatively associated with problematic smartphone use (PSU). However, the internal mechanisms underlying that relationship need further investigation. The purpose of this study was to investigate the roles of depression and interpersonal trust in the relationship between self-esteem and PSU among adolescents. A questionnaire comprised of the Rosenberg Self-esteem Scale, Inclusive General Trust Scale (IGTS), Self-rating Depression Scale (SDS), and personal questions was administered to 637 students (female = 355) at two middle schools in Shanghai, China. Correlation analyses, mediation analysis, and moderated mediation analysis were performed. A moderated mediation model was established, which revealed: (1) a significant negative association between self-esteem and PSU, (2) depression mediated the relationship between self-esteem and PSU, and (3) the influence of depression on the relationship between self-esteem and PSU was moderated by interpersonal trust. The results indicated that low self-esteem was a risk factor, and interpersonal trust was a moderating factor for PSU among adolescents in the sample. Building adolescents' self-esteem and increasing their interpersonal trust might decrease their PSU.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据