The risks of internet addiction: Structure and characteristics of perception

Introduction. Nowadays, digital transformation of society is inevitably accompanied by a set of problems and challenges. Under universal transition to an online format, it is important to analyse how parents assess internet risks for their children and themselves.

The aim of the present research is to reveal parents’ perceptions of main trends and structural features of children internet addiction.

Methodology and research methods. The research is based on the results of a mass survey. The survey was conducted in 2019 according to a multi-stage sample (by gender, age, type of settlement) consisted of the adult population of the Tyumen region. The authors carried out a detailed socio-statistical analysis of internet risks for children based on the self-assessments of all respondents (with the identification of socio-demographic groups), risk assessments for children, according to parents. The structure of “Parents” sub-sample on gender and settlement type is proportional to the structure of the main sample. Under the heading “Children”, the authors mean minor children of respondents. The risk of internet addiction is included in the structure of 12 internet risks and examined on the basis of 4 components (behavioural, cognitive, social and affective). In the course of analysis, Alpha Cronbach consistency ratings, index method, Spearman’s rank correlation coefficients, Pearson’s Goodness-of-Fit Test, F-Test for equality of several means, case classification and triangulation method were applied.

Results. The internet transformation of society can be considered an accomplished fact, since the vast majority of people of all ages spend hours online daily. Every fourth respondent notes that their children use the internet from three to four hours a day. The ambivalence of parental attitudes toward internet addiction is manifested in high estimates of its risk for children and young people “in general”, and in significantly lower estimates for own children, regardless of the amount of time children spend on the internet, whether they have friends outside the network. Parents clearly articulate negative connotations “in general”, but at the same time give very low estimates of dangers in behavioural variables.

Scientific novelty. New empirical data, classified on the basis of internet behaviour of children and their parents, as well as parental attitude to this behaviour, have been introduced into the research discourse. An important social issue is identified: in spite of parents’ declarations about the risks of dysfunctional (to the detriment of personal interaction, outdoor games and other kinds of activities) internet use by children, the consensus on the features and dangers of internet addiction in society has not been reached yet.

Practical significance. The weak articulation and ambivalence of internet addiction problem perception in Russian society is being proved. Insufficient parental awareness of potential internet addiction dangers for children is demonstrated.

1. Andryukhina L., Dorozhkin E., Kislov A., Senognoeva N., Kolobkov P. Growth of creative capital and human perspectives under the conditions of globalisation. Space and Culture, India [Internet]. 2020 [cited 2020 Jun 17]; 7 (4); 83–91. Available from: https://spaceandculture.in/index.php/spaceandculture/article/view/633 DOI: 10.20896/saci.v7i4.633

2. Davydenko V. A., Andrianova E. V., Romashkina G. F., Khuziakhmetov R. R. Interdisciplinary context of human capital study. Research program. Vestnik Tyumenskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Social’no-ekonomicheskie i pravovye issledovaniya = Tyumen State University Herald. Social, Economic, and Law Research. 2019; 5 (20): 30–51. DOI: 10.21684/2411-7897-2019-5-4-30-51 (In Russ.)

3. Longstreet P., Brooks S. Life satisfaction: A key to managing internet & social media addiction. Technology in Society. 2017; 50: 73–77. DOI: 10.1016/j.techsoc.2017.05.003

4. Kiseleva N. I., Dorozhkin E. M., Kislov A. G., Ryazanova E. L., Galushkin A. A., Koinova-Zoellner J. Philosophical analysis of information and communication environment. European Journal of Science and Theology [Internet]. 2018 [cited 2020 Jun 17]; 14 (6): 115–124. Available from: http://www.ejst.tuiasi.ro/issue14.html (In Russ.)

5. Mazzoni E., Baiocco L., Cannata D., Dimas I. Is internet the cherry on top or a crutch? Offline social support as moderator of the outcomes of online social support on Problematic Internet Use. Computers in Human Behavior. 2016; 56: 369–374. DOI: 10.1016/j.chb.2015.11.032

6. Ryding F., Kaye L. “Internet addiction”: A conceptual Minefield. International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction. 2018; 16 (1): 225–232. DOI: 10.1007/s11469-017-9811-6

7. Spada M. An overview of problematic internet use. Addictive Behaviors. 2014; 39 (1): 3–6. DOI: 10.1016/j.addbeh.2013.09.007

8. Demetrovics Z., Szeredi B., & Rózsa S. The three-factor model of Internet-addiction: The development of the Problematic Internet Use Questionnaire. Behavior Research Methods. 2008; 40 (2): 563–574. DOI: 10.3758/BRM.40.2.563

9. Davis R. A cognitive-behavioral model of pathological Internet use. Computers in Human Behavior. 2001; 17: 187–195. DOI: 10.1016/S07475632(00)00041-8

10. Wang T. H., Cheng H. Y. Problematic Internet use among elementary school students: Prevalence and risk factors. Information, Communication & Society [Internet]. 2019 [cited 2020 Jun 17]; 22 (14): 1–22. Available from: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/1369118X.2019.1645192 DOI: 10.1080/1369118X.2019.1645192

11. Agger B. iTime: Labor and life in a smartphone era. Time & Society. 2011; 20 (1): 119–136. DOI: 10.1177/0961463X10380730

12. Hygen B. W., Zahl-Thanem T., Wichstrøm L., Belsky J., Stenseng F., Kvande M. N., Skalicka V. Time spent gaming and social competence in children: Reciprocal effects across childhood. Child Development. 2019; 91 (3): 1–15. DOI: 10.1111/cdev.13243

13. Örsal Özgül, Örsal Özlem, Unsal Al., Ozalp S. Evaluation of internet addiction and depression among university students. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences. 2013; 82: 445–454. DOI: 10.1016/j.sbspro.2013.06.291

14. Johnson N., Keane H. Internet addiction? Temporality and life online in the networked society. Time and Society. 2003; 26 (3): 1–19. DOI: 10.1177/0961463X15577279

15. Leontiev A. N. Deyatel’nost’, soznanie, lichnost’ = Activity, consciousness, personality [Internet]. Moscow: Publishing House Politizdat; 1975 [cited 2020 Jun 17]. 130 p. Available from: https://marxists.catbull.com/russkij/leontiev/1975/dyeatyelnost/deyatyelnost-soznyanie-lichnost.pdf (In Russ.)

16. Benvenuti M., Mazzoni E., Piobbico G. Being online in emerging adulthood: Between problematic or functional use of the Internet. Internet and Technology Addiction. 2019; 32: 573–593. DOI: 10.4018/978-1-5225-8900-6.ch032

17. Young K. S. Internet addiction: The emergence of a new clinical disorder. CyberPsychology & Behavior. 1998; 1 (3): 237–244. DOI: 10.1089/ cpb.1998.1.237

18. Venuleo C., Rollo S., Marinaci T., Calogiuri S. Towards a cultural understanding of addictive behaviours. The image of the social environment among problem gamblers, drinkers, internet users and smokers. Addiction Research & Theory. 2016; 24 (4): 274–287. DOI: 10.3109/16066359.2015.1126257

19. Nahimova Ya. N., Romashkina G. F. Social attitudes of youth on drug use and drug prevention. Obrazovanie i nauka = The Education and Science Journal. 2017; 19 (4): 138–160. DOI: 10.17853/1994-5639-2017-6-138-160 (In Russ.)

20. Kardefelt-Winther D. The moderating role of psychosocial wellbeing on the relationship between escapism and excessive online gaming. Computing Human Behavior. 2014; 38: 68–74. DOI: 10.1016/j.chb.2014.05.020

21. Ellison N., Steinfield C., Lampe C. The benefits of Facebook “friends”: Social capital and college students’ use of online social network sites. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication. 2007; 12 (4): 1143–1168. DOI: 10.1111/j.l083-6101.2007.00367.x

22. Hyun-sic J., Euihyeon N., Kim D.-J. The relationship between smartphone addiction predisposition and impulsivity among Korean smartphone users. Addiction Research & Theory. 2017; 26 (1): 77–84. DOI: 10.1080/16066359.2017.1312356

23. Jin-Liang W., Gaskin J., Hai-Zhen W., Dong L. Life satisfaction moderates the associations between motives and excessive social networking site usage. Addiction Research & Theory. 2016; 24 (6): 450–457. DOI: 10.3109/16066359.2016.1160283

24. Vanyushina E. A., Goncharova M. A. Contemporary trends of internet addiction formation among medical university students. Byulleten’ nauki i praktiki = News Bulletin of Science and Practice. 2017; 3 (16): 134–138. DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.399182 (In Russ.)

25. Kolesnichenko M. B., Kolupaeva V. V. Social aspects of the young people’s internet addiction. Vestnik Permskogo nacional’nogo-issledovatel’skogo politekhnicheskogo universiteta. Social’no-ekonomicheskie nauki = Herald of Perm National Research Polytechnic University. Social and Economic Sciences. 2017; 1: 97–105. DOI: 10.15593/2224-9354/2017.1.8 (In Russ.)

26. Hasanova I. I., Kotova S. S. The correlations of the Internet addiction between coping and deviant behaviour of students. Obrazovanie i nauka = The Education and Science Journal. 2017; 19 (4): 146–168. DOI: 10.17853/19945639-2017-4-146-168 (In Russ.)

27. Kim Y. H., Chong Y. S. Parent-child communication, peer-relationship and internet addiction in children. Journal of the Korean Home Economics Association [Internet]. 2005 [cited 2020 Jun 17]; 43 (10): 103–114. Available from: http://www.koreascience.or.kr/article/JAKO200507523271795.page

28. Soh P. C.-H., Chew K. W., Koay K. Y., Ang P. H. Parents vs peers’ influence on teenagers’ Internet addiction and risky online activities. Telematics and Informatics. 2018; 35 (1): 225–236. DOI: 10.1016/j.tele.2017.11.003

29. Serrano-Cinca C., Munoz-Soro J., Brusca I. Multivariate study of Internet use and the Digital Divide. Social Science Quarterly. 2018; 99 (4): 1409– 1425. DOI: 10.1111/ssqu.12504

30. Yayan E., Dağ Y., Düken M., Ulutaş A. Investigation of relationship between smartphone addiction and internet addiction in working children in industry. Journal of Human Sciences [Internet]. 2019 [cited 2020 Jun 17]; 16 (1): 143–154 Available from: https://www.j-humansciences.com/ojs/index.php/IJHS/article/view/5397

31. Tserkovnikova N. G., Shchipanova D. Ye., Uskova B. A., Puzyrev V. V., Fedotovskih O. A. Psychological aspects of internet addiction of teenagers. International Journal of Environmental & Science Education [Internet]. 2016 [cited 2020 Jun 17]; 11 (16): 8846–8857. Available from: https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1118946