Psychometric Properties of the Internet Addiction Test: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

2018 ◽  
Vol 21 (8) ◽  
pp. 473-484 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sun Jae Moon ◽  
Jin Seub Hwang ◽  
Jae Yup Kim ◽  
Ah Lahm Shin ◽  
Seung Min Bae ◽  
...  
2018 ◽  
Vol 17 (2) ◽  
pp. 234-246 ◽  
Author(s):  
Otilia Ioana Tudorel ◽  
Mona Vintilă ◽  
Luiza Vlaicu ◽  
Dănuț Bălăuță ◽  
Cosmin Goian ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Cristina Elena Petre

There are three hypotheses regarding the relationship between Self-Concept Clarity (SCC) and Internet use. It was argued that Internet use: 1) decreases SCC, 2) increases SCC, 3) does not relate with SCC. The present study, in the form of a systematic and meta-analytic synthesis, aimed to explore: a) the extent empirical evidence can support each hypothesis; b) how Internet use-SCC relationship was addressed across studies; c) the intensity of the Internet use –SCC relationship; d) potential moderators. Twenty-one studies (N = 8,910) met the inclusion criteria for the systematic review (i.e., being quantitative, written in English, concerned with Internet use -SCC relationship) and 11 studies (N = 3,298) met the additional criteria for meta-analysis (i.e., being correlational, using self-evaluation instruments, quantifying general Internet use and including the information needed to calculate the meta-analysis specific indicators). Results emphasized that all three hypotheses are plausible, as distinct dimensions of Internet use related differently with SCC. However, the conclusions were limited by the extensive use of cross-sectional design. For general Internet use and SCC relationship the overall effect was -0.350, p < .01. Some moderators were significant: cultural background, Internet operationalization, age homogeneity, participants rewarding. This paper outlines the complexity of SCC – Internet relationship and underlines some of the gaps that should be further addressed. Implications and limits of the study (e.g., publication bias, excluded outcomes in the meta-analysis or possible omission of moderators) are discussed.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tahereh Mokhtarian-Gilani ◽  
Nourossadat kariman ◽  
Hamid Sharif-Nia ◽  
Mahbobeh Ahmadi-Doulabi ◽  
Malihe Nasiri

Abstract Background:The postpartum quality of life refers to women's understanding of their standing in the postpartum crisis that differs depending on their health status, social support, cultural status and values, attitudes, goals and standards. The present systematic review will identify, describe, and critically assess the psychometric properties of postpartum quality of life questionnaires.Methods/Design:A systematic review will be conducted in databases including PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, PsycINFO, and CINAHL from January 2000 to January 2020. The psychometric properties (validity and reliability) of the instruments used in the primary studies will be assessed, and the selection, methodological quality assessment and data extraction processes of the studies will be independently assessed by two reviewers with expertise in conducting systematic reviews, so as to minimize potential personal bias. Eligible resources are selected after any lack of consensus is put to debate.The risk of bias is assessed using the COSMIN RISK of Bias checklist, and to evaluate the quality of the studies, the protocol is written based on the PRISMA-P1 standards. The results of the studies will be judged based on good measurement properties, and the results of all the studies are qualitatively summarized to produce a reference for the general quality of the results. The general quality of the evidence will be determined using a modified GRADE method.Discussion:This study assessed the psychometric properties of questionnaires used for assessing postpartum quality of life and its results can be used to identify the most appropriate tool for health applications in measuring postpartum quality of life. Systematic review registration: reference number in PROSPRO CRD42020166301


2019 ◽  
Vol 47 ◽  
pp. 51-61 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zainab Alimoradi ◽  
Chung-Ying Lin ◽  
Anders Broström ◽  
Pia H. Bülow ◽  
Zahra Bajalan ◽  
...  

2013 ◽  
Vol 38 (7) ◽  
pp. 794-807 ◽  
Author(s):  
C.-M. Lai ◽  
K.-K. Mak ◽  
H. Watanabe ◽  
R. P. Ang ◽  
J. S. Pang ◽  
...  

2016 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 130-134 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fatih Kaya ◽  
Erhan Delen ◽  
Kimberly S. Young

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yalin Chen ◽  
Lingrui Zhang ◽  
Yan Liu ◽  
Yan Yang ◽  
Mimi Qiu ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document