a – Class 1 – “Healthy user group” (58,31%), b – Class 2 – “Most vulnerable group” (25,56%) and c – Class 3 - “Engaged group” (16,13%). Note: BSMAS = Bergen Social Media Addiction Scale; Instagram = Time spent on Instagram (hours in a day); TikTok = Time spent on TikTok (hours in a day).

<p>a – Class 1 – “Healthy user group” (58,31%), b – Class 2 – “Most vulnerable group” (25,56%) and c – Class 3 - “Engaged group” (16,13%). Note: BSMAS = Bergen Social Media Addiction Scale; Instagram = Time spent on Instagram (hours in a day); TikTok = Time spent on TikTok (hours in a day).<...

Full description

Saved in:

Bibliographic Details
Main Author:	Laura Salerno (8718588) (author)
Other Authors:	Lucia Fortunato (21567442) (author), Vivian Ostwald (21567445) (author), Arianna Muscolino (21567448) (author), Gianluca Lo Coco (6559820) (author)
Published:	2025
Subjects:	Evolutionary Biology Sociology Cancer Science Policy Mental Health Biological Sciences not elsewhere classified impaired functioning profile different empirical profiles 56 %) showed social media use social media addiction social media activities social comparison tendencies perceived social support low social support adolescents &# 8217 stable problematic pattern identify common trajectories div >< p psychological factors associated adolescents ’ well participants provided demographic social support psychological factors factors associated social interactions three classes study aims smu intensity scientific consensus negative consequences findings suggest females ). emotion dysregulation categorised participants age range
Tags:	Add Tag No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!

Be the first to leave a comment!

Similar Items