Needing to Connect: Detecting Problematic Mobile Phone Use. Driving Social Responsibility

Transcription

1 15. Sustainability and Social Issues in Management Competitive Session Needing to Connect: Detecting Problematic Mobile Phone Use Driving Social Responsibility Clare T. Bond School of Business & Law CQUniversity, Gladstone, Australia 1

2 Needing to connect: Problematic Mobile Phone Use Driving Social Responsibility ABSTRACT: Mobile phones, feature phones and smartphones are all devices with which people use to communicate. Having virtually unlimited access to multiple forms of technology on the one device may have the potential to encourage problematic, dangerous or excessive mobile phone use. This study sought to understand if increased risk of problematic behaviour is attributed to smartphones incorporating internet access. Negative affect states such as depression and anxiety were also considered. The data provided strong support relating problematic behaviour with smartphones. This information is essential for car manufacturers to consider when producing new cars to ensure appropriate marketing strategies that will enhance consumer acceptance of social innovations, corporate social responsibility and ethics relating to the use of smartphones in cars. Keywords: Corporate social responsibility, social innovation, ethics Mobile phones, feature phones, and smartphones are all devices with which people use to communicate. Since their introduction to consumers, mobile phones have become a ubiquitous part of Australian life and are perceived by many to be essential. However, as these phones have evolved, so too has problematic use. There are a number of significant studies pertaining to problematic use of mobile phones, each citing different categories, causes and theories. To date however, there is no uniform consensus regarding a designated category for problematic mobile phone use with researchers labelling it as habitual, problematic, and even an addiction. The term problematic also has many different definitions, ranging from dangerous use, such as texting while driving, overuse, irresponsible use (e.g., talking on your mobile while being served at the shops or using your phone during a lecture), as well as links to conditions such as depression, anxiety and sleep disorders. Understanding the symptomology of problematic mobile phone use, ways in which to detect this problem, and the resultant consequences will help to better consolidate knowledge and awareness. This in turn will help develop strategies to prevent new problems arising and work on ways to alleviate ones that already exist. COMORBID RISKS FOR MOBILE SMARTPHONE USAGE Having virtually unlimited access to multiple forms of technology on the one device may have the potential to encourage problematic or excessive mobile phone use in susceptible people. Previous studies have attempted to classify the over-use of modern technologies (specifically the internet and mobile phones) as either a form of excessive or compulsive behaviour or a form of 2

3 behavioural addiction (Bianchi & Phillips, 2005; James & Drennan, 2005). Other studies report high levels of stress, the potential for symptoms of depression, and sleep disturbances (Lepp, Barkley, & Karpinski, 2014; Thomee, Harensta, & Hagberg, 2011; Yen et al., 2009) are common issues from mobile phone usage. Srivastava (2005) and Wilska (2003) also found people experienced anxiety and discomfort when unable to use their mobile phone. However, the links between depression, anxiety, and levels of mobile phone use has not been well articulated in previous studies. For instance, some studies have suggested a correlation between depression and mobile phone behaviour but have not yet identified the causal relationship. Many studies have been conducted to try to find a relationship as to why some people develop problematic mobile phone behaviour and others do not; none have specifically focused on smartphones as opposed to standard mobile phones. These studies have attempted to examine underlying psychopathology focusing on, for instance, personality variables and other pathological behaviours such as substance abuse dependency and gambling addiction. Other studies caution that labelling such behaviours would create a negative stigma and that the issue does not appear to significantly impact on people s lives enough to warrant it being pathologically classified as an addictive behaviour (Yellowlees & Marks, 2007). As some studies suggest, it lacks the requisite criteria of involving risk to self and others (Leena, Tomi, & Arja, 2005). A distinction is drawn between smartphone behaviours that are socially acceptable behaviours and those that fall outside the realm of social and legal norms of society (Jessor, 1987). Using a smartphone in itself is not a socially unacceptable behaviour. However, texting, accessing social networking sites and the internet while driving are all considered unconventional behaviours (Cook & Jones, 2011), as is constantly checking or using one s phone during a lecture or at the movies. While social networking is asynchronous and texting behaviour is considered as synchronous, using social networking sites requires constant checking for updates and texting is thought to be similar as it is using the same means of tactile communication. This is evidenced in a study by Salehan and Negahban (2013) that confirmed that the more friends or followers one has on their social networking site, the greater the chance of 3

4 problematic smartphone behaviour, regardless of the actual intensity of these ties. When researching mobile phone behaviour in young Australians, Walsh, White, and Young (2010) confirmed that the most popular form of mobile phone use was texting, with more people stating that they were responding rather than initiating contact. The purpose of this study is to examine the relationship between peoples problematic behaviours with smartphones and other aspects of psychological well-being. This may contribute to future developments in mobile technology and assist with planning and developing public awareness campaigns incorporating consumer satisfaction and corporate social responsibility. Problem behaviours emanating from mobile phone use and smartphone use will be referred to as problematic or problem behaviours. Problematic mobile phone use is potentially more widespread with the introduction of smartphones, the advancement of technology, and improvement of the mobile network area. Nevertheless, little research specifically addresses whether smartphones contribute to more problematic behaviours than older non-internet enabled mobile phones. Talking, Texting and Driving Smartphones have been classified as mini computers because of their ability to connect to the internet, download apps, access social networking sites, and perform almost everything that a full size computer is capable of doing. Having this ability at your fingertips to use almost anywhere and anytime is considered a major contributor to problematic use resulting in road accidents (White, Walsh, Hyde, & Watson, 2012). It has been established that the act of talking on a mobile phone while driving is classified as a dual-task condition involving spatial computations associated with driving and spatial attention (Just, Keller, & Cynkar, 2008). Talking on a mobile phone while driving requires a combination of auditory and visual functioning which are both automatic functions. Neither of these automatic functions individually or when performed together, activate the executive process in the same way as conscious functions do. To confirm this, Just et al., (2008), using medical imaging were able to detect that, if an incident occurred when driving while having a mobile phone conversation, activation of the executive processes took longer than when compared to listening to a radio while driving. Thus, talking on a mobile phone while operating a vehicle has a greater propensity for a 4

5 slower reaction time in an emergency, and greater chance of having an accident compared to when driving and listening to the radio. Similarly, conversing on a mobile phone while driving affects foveal attention to visual information which can cause an impairment referred to as inattention blindness (Just et al., 2008). Therefore, the act of talking on a mobile phone while driving is considered problematic because cognitive and neural constraints being imposed can and do compromise performance (Just et al., 2008). Other studies linking problematic mobile phone use to driving have also related the condition to cognitive impairment. Holland and Rathod (2013), established that before answering a mobile phone while driving, just having it ring, was enough to distract the driver, and raised the likelihood of an accident. Drivers distracted by mobile phones and/or their ring tone were also at greater risk of exceeding the speed limit, crossing the centre line, leaving the road, and colliding with pedestrians, and other vehicles (Holland & Rathod, 2013). Another outcome of their study involving intention to use a mobile phone or not, while driving, found that drivers who normally answer their phone when hearing the ring tone, but did not, were more at risk of having an accident by inhibiting normal behaviour, compared to those not normally compelled to answer every time their phone rings (Holland & Rathod, 2013). Problematic mobile phone use therefore, is not always the act of using the phone; it can also relate to the period before answering a call. Similarly, in their study, Nasar and Troyer, (2013), established that reaching for a mobile phone related to more driver injuries than talking and texting. It can be a habitual instinct to answer a mobile phone when it rings but as these studies have shown, it can also be considered problematic behaviour. With the advancement of smartphones, car manufacturers are using social innovation by designing integrated systems allowing drivers to perform more tasks under safer conditions while driving the majority of new cars already have Bluetooth built into them so facilitation of integrated internet and texting functionality is being developed (Hall, 2014). To date high end car makers (e.g., BMW, Audi) already offer built in facilities to search the web and process dictation, with Apple and Google developing software CarPlay (Apple) or Android Auto (Google) for other car manufacturers (Hall, 2014). According to the car manufacturers, this new software will ensure drivers 5

6 have everything at their fingertips so they will spend less time with their eyes off the road when performing functions such as texting the car will respond to a voice command, and text accordingly (Hall, 2014). In their study comparing sending text messages while driving using a hand held mobile phone and in-vehicle system, Owens, McLaughlin and Sudweeks (2011) established that sending and receiving messages on hand held devices still presented significant safety concerns. When receiving messages via in-vehicle text-to-speech functionality, risk was decreased to baseline, however, sending pre-determined messages again presented safety concerns (Owens et al., 2011). Also, when White, Hyde, Walsh and Watson (2010), explored beliefs influencing drivers hand held and hands free mobile phone use, they established that regardless of consequences, more people use hand held mobile phones when driving than hands free, with only half the owners of hands free kits using them. To counteract these problems some car manufacturers (e.g., Chrysler) have installed systems to prevent mobile phone signals being emitted or received while the car is in motion; eliminating distraction and problematic mobile phone use while driving (Hall, 2014). These firms are thereby ensuring customer safety by incorporating corporate social responsibility and business ethics into the car manufacturing industry (Galbreath, 2008). METHODOLOGY This current cross-sectional, survey design focused on examining whether smartphone users who text and access social networking sites are at greater risk of problematic behaviours (e.g., mobile use while driving) compared to people who predominantly use their phone to talk. It also examined whether smartphone users or mobile-phone users are at greater risk of problematic behaviours when responding to calls or messages rather than initiating use of the devices. This study also investigated the presence of a dose-response relationship between problem usage and negative affective states. Establishing problematic use of mobile phone in conjunction with driving will enable car manufacturers to enhance advertising that educates prospective customers on their corporate social responsibilities to all road users through improved safety features. This in turn should improve customer satisfaction and improve company financial performance (Galbreath, 2008). 6

7 Hypotheses After reviewing the literature, it was hypothesised that: H1. People with smartphones would be more at risk of problematic mobile phone use than people with standard mobile phones. H2. There is a stronger relationship between social networking (and texting) and problematic smartphone use than talking and problematic smartphone use. H3. Problematic mobile phone use will be associated with negative affective states such as depression and anxiety. Participants In order to detect a medium effect size, a total of 445 participants were recruited. It was also determined that a minimum of 400 participants were required to perform a multiple regression analysis. Participants were recruited through the CQUniversity Psychology website, via word of mouth, and social networking. Of these, 25 did not meet the criteria of identifying as Australian, were underage, did not own a mobile phone or answered less than 80% of the questions. The remaining, 440 participants consisted of 323 (77%) female and 97 (23%) male respondents; with ages ranging from 18 to 76 years, (M = 33.7, SD = 13.0). Materials and Procedure Participants were provided with a link to complete a questionnaire on SurveyMonkey (2014) consisting of an information and consent section, demographic questions, the MPPUS, and the DASS-21. The demographic data comprised 17 questions relating to age, gender, kind of mobile phone owned (smartphone/standard mobile phone), plan type (small, medium, large or extra-large) and usage over a one-week period. Problematic mobile phone use was measured by The Mobile Phone Problem Use Scale (Bianchi & Phillips, 2005; Dickson, 2012) [MPPUS]. The MPPUS is a 27-item questionnaire covering issues of withdrawal, craving, tolerance, and escape from other problems, negative life consequences in the areas of family, work and finance along with social difficulties such as low selfesteem. Included in this scale are some questions relating to the social motivational aspects of mobile 7

8 phone use such as My friends don t like it when my mobile phone is switched off. All questions on the MPPUS are rated on Likert-type scales (1 = not true at all through to 5 = extremely true). Totals were calculated by summing the scores of each item (1 = not true at all; 2 = somewhat true; 3 = true; 4 = very true; 5 = extremely true) per participant (Dickson, 2012) with scores ranging from 27 to 135. Excellent internal reliability of the MPPUS is supported in a study by Bianchi and Phillips (2005) with the level of internal consistency among items having a Cronbach s alpha of.93. In the current study, the Cronbach alpha coefficient for the MPPUS was also.93. The negative emotional states of anxiety, general stress and depression were measured by the DASS-21 (Appendix C) (Lovibond & Lovibond, 1995). For the purposes of this study, the DASS-21 is not being used as a diagnostic tool but merely as a measure to determine non-clinical levels of depression, stress and anxiety. Questions on the DASS-21 are on Likert-type scales (0 = never through to 3 = almost always). An excellent to high level of consistency also exists for the DASS-21 with Cronbach s alpha of.94 for depression,.87 for anxiety and.91 for stress (Antony, Bieling, Cox, Enns, & Swinson, 1998). Although the current study did not produce Cronbach alphas as high except for depression which was.91; the remaining two levels were still considered good with anxiety.81 and stress.85. This is consistent with normative data based on samples from the Australian adult population (Crawford, Cayley, Lovibond, Wilson, & Hartley, 2011). RESULTS A basic descriptive analysis was performed for the transformed variables, the outcomes of which are described in Table 1. This analysis informed the clarification of subsequent analyses. Insert Table 1 about here To address the first hypothesis that people who own smartphones are at greater risk of problematic mobile phone use compared to those who own standard mobile phones a non-parametric test was performed due to significant results in the Kolmogorov-Smirnov and Levene s tests. The results of the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test revealed the data for smartphone ownership, D(387) = 0.06,p <.001 was not normally distributed. For Levene s test the MPPUS variances were significantly 8

9 different for both owning and not owning a smartphone, F(1,418) = 10.6, p <.001 indicating that the homogeneity of variance assumption was violated. A Mann-Whitney U Test revealed a significant difference in problematic phone use for people who own smartphones (n = 378, Mdn = 1.7), compared to those who own standard mobile phones (n = 33, Mdn = 1.5), U = , z = -6.04, p <.001. This effect can be described as medium (r = -.30). The second hypothesis states that there is a stronger relationship between social networking, texting and problematic smartphone use compared to talking and problematic smartphone use. In order to assess this, Levene s test was performed on talk F(4, 415) =.78, ns, text F(4, 415) =.40, ns, and social network F(4, 415) = 2.28, ns, with equal variances. These results along with the large sample size and the central limit theorem provided enough evidence that the sample was normal. An ANCOVA was run to detect the existence of any relationships. The covariate, talking, was significantly related to problematic smartphone use, F(4, 372) = 3.35, p <.05, partial ƞ 2 =.04 as was social networking, F(4, 372) = 18.71, p <.001, partial ƞ 2 =.17, however, there was no significant effect for texting, F(4, 372) = 1.02, partial ƞ 2 =.01. The results indicate that in relation to problematic smartphone usage, social networking explained a bigger proportion of the variance not attributable to the other variables of talking, which explained a small proportion and texting which was insignificant. For the third hypothesis, the relationship between problematic mobile phone use (as measured by the MPPUS) and anxiety (as measured by the DASS-21 Anxiety Scale) and depression (as measured by the DASS-21 Depression Scale) was investigated using Spearman s correlation coefficient, as the data violated parametric assumptions. This was established by running a Kolmogorov-Smirnov test where problematic mobile phone use D(420) = 0.06, p <.001, DASS Anxiety measurements, D(420) = 0.19, p = <.001, and DASS Depression measurements, D(420) = 0.17, p= <.001 were all highly significant. In conjunction with the Kolmogorov-Smirnov finding, scatterplots revealed heterogeneous variances. The Spearman s correlation coefficient produced a medium, positive correlation between all variables with high levels of problematic phone use associated with high levels of both stress and depression. Outcomes of this are described in Table 2, following. 9

10 Insert Table 2 about here DISCUSSION The primary aim of this cross-sectional study was to determine what factors had the most influence on producing problematic mobile phone use; including whether this was linked to the type of phone being used (e.g., standard mobile phone or smartphone). The results of the present study provided support to the hypothesis that problematic phone use is predominantly associated with smartphone use, rather than standard mobile phone use. Specifically, smartphone users scored significantly higher on the Mobile Phone Problem Usage Scale (MPPUS) than standard mobile phone users. This result adds evidence to a review by Billieux (2012), where he concluded that mobile phones with the ability to access all internet functions (i.e., smartphones) share the same risk factors for people suffering from problematic internet use and other behavioural problems such as disordered gambling and compulsive shopping. The fact that standard mobile phones (so-called feature-phones) do not possess advanced internet functions is considered a major factor preventing them from contributing to problematic usage (Billieux, 2012). This should also be considered an important factor for car manufacturers as the popularity of smartphones increases (Frost & Sullivan, 2013). Results from the second hypothesis provided only partial support to the view that time spent social networking and texting would have a stronger relationship with problematic smartphone use, than time spent using the standard talk function. Results indicated that both time spent social networking and time spent talking were significantly related to problem smartphone usage, whereas time spent texting was not. This is in contrast to other studies that have determined texting to be a problematic behaviour (Hosking, Young, & Regan 2006; Nasar & Troyer, 2013) however, the research designs in which this was supported were different to the current study. Hosking et al. (2006) and Nasar and Troyer (2013) did not use surveys to determine if texting was problematic. Instead, situational data texting while driving in a simulator (Hosking et al., 2006) and using data from the National Electronic Injury Surveillance System (NEISS) (Nasar and Troyer, 2013) was how texting 10

11 was determined to be problematic. Another reason that the current study s finding differed from other studies is that only smartphones were included; standard mobile phones and feature phones were excluded. Most previous studies were conducted prior to the widespread ownership of smartphones; and thus, social networking was not included in these studies or in contrast with talk and text. Previous studies have not specifically focused on talking as being problematic; rather they have focused on problematic consequences that involve talking such as distracted driving. The same applies to studies linking depression, anxiety, stress and sleep disorders to mobile phone use use is not broken down into individual components of talk, text, internet, and social networking (Smetaniuk, 2014). This study on the other hand looked for specific usage modes (i.e., talk, text and or social networking) as opposed to smartphone use in general. Another reason this study could have found a significant effect for talking, but not for texting, is the range in age from 18 to 76 years, (Mdn = 30). Other studies have focused on school or university students who are generally teenagers or in their early twenties and more adept at texting (Beranuy, Oberst, Carbonell, & Chamarro, 2009) compared to older mobile phone users who prefer to talk rather than text. Rather than focusing on specific instances where smartphone use is considered problematic, the current study focused on a broader overall perspective with results suggesting that talking is problematic; whereas texting does not lead to inappropriate behaviours as often. Most people feel that they have to answer their phone when it rings regardless of where they are; however, they can leave a text to read and answer later. Most modern day cars have blue-tooth functionality built into them so talking while driving is not considered problematic and happens on a regular basis. Texting while driving, on the other hand is recognised by many as dangerous because it clearly takes their eyes off the road, whereas talking is a hidden danger. Distraction is not as well appreciated when talking, compared to texting where your eyes, fingers, and focus are away from another important and competing task such as driving. Social networking on the other hand, was considered a highly significant predictor of problematic smartphone use, as anticipated in the second hypothesis. According to the Yellow TM Social Media Report 2014 (Sensis, 2014), 69% of the Australian population access social networking 11

12 sites with each person having an average of 328 fans or followers. Of the people who access social media, 71% use their smartphone. Unlike texting, social networking is user friendly to all ages and is often a simple transition from the home desk top to a portable smartphone. It is also inexpensive to use so ideal for keeping in contact with friends and family when traveling or living away from home. This could however become problematic for people who are homesick, procrastinating, or who constantly crave social interactions. The third hypothesis that problematic mobile phone use is associated with negative affective states such as depression and anxiety was supported in the current study. As these are correlational findings, it is not possible to predict if anxiety and depression cause you to use mobile phones in problematic ways, or if the problem behaviours cause depression and anxiety. What these findings do tell us is that there is a positive relationship between problem usage and the symptoms of depression and anxiety. So as either variable increases, so too will it s counterpart, thereby indicating a dose response relationship. The results were consistent with a dose response study on adolescents in Southern Taiwan, where Yen et al. (2009) found that problem mobile phone usage was significantly related to adolescents with depression. In line with the current study, Ha, Chin, Park, Ryu, and Yu (2008) also confirmed that excessive users, of mobile phones, while not clinically identified, recorded higher results in depression and anxiety compared to their control group. Limitations Mobile phone questionnaires relating to smartphone use were considered to be a limitation because the majority have been developed for non-english speaking countries. Those available and validated for English studies were designed before smartphones had the penetration they currently enjoy, or the questionnaires are trying to predict addiction, which to date is not a recognised related mobile phone condition because it does not meet the required criteria of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (5 th ed.; DSM 5; American Psychiatric Association [APA], 2013). CONCLUSION The current study investigated general causes that were indicative of problematic behaviour. An area in which future research would be beneficial, relates to attitudes that people have towards 12

13 where, when and how they use their smartphones especially since talking and social networking are related to problematic usage. Many people are willing to acknowledge that smartphones are related to problematic behaviour however, not everyone agrees on what problematic behaviour is. Car manufacturers are constantly developing methods to bypass known problematic behaviour such as texting while driving in order to fool people into believing that they are no longer performing a dangerous act (Hall, 2014). However, people are still distracted and diverting their attention away from the task of driving and concentrating on what they want to put into the text that the car will be sending. The distraction is the true problematic agent regardless of whether a person is looking at the road or their mobile phone pad; the latter simply adds to the danger. We have learnt from this study that smartphones and their associated ability to access social networking sites potentially increase consumers problematic usage. In terms of their social responsibility requirements car manufacturers must educate and better inform clients about risks of smartphone use. Manufacturers must ensure that drivers cannot text or access social networks while driving. There is no message that is so important that profits should be considered more important than customer safety. 13

14 REFERENCES Ajzen, I. (1985). Action control: From cognition to behaviour [Springer Digital Edition version]. doi: / _2 American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (5 th ed.) Washington, DC: Author Antony, M. M., Bieling, P. J., Cox, B. J., Enns, M. W., & Swinson, R. P. (1998).Psychometric properties of the 42-item and 21-item versions of the Depression Anxiety Stress Scales in clinical groups and a community sample. Psychological Assessment,10(2), Arnett, J. J. (2004). Emerging adulthood. New York: Oxford University Press. Australian Communications and Media Authority, (2013). Australia s mobile digital economy ACMA confirms usage, choice, mobility and intensity on the rise. Retrieved March from Australian Communications and Media Authority, (2014a). Communications report Retrieved March from Australian Communications and Media Authority, (2014b). Regional Australia in the digital economy. Retrieved August from Baumeister, R. F., & Bushman, B. J. (2008). Social Psychology and human nature. Belmont, CA: Thomson Wadsworth. Beranuy, M., Oberst, U., Carbonell, X., & Chamarro, A. (2009). Problematic internet and mobile phone use and clinical symptoms in college students: The role of emotionalintelligence. Computers in Human Behavior, 25, doi: /j.chb Bianchi, A., & Phillips, J. G. (2005). Psychological predictors of problem mobile phone use. Cyber Psychology & Behavior, 8(1),

15 Billieux, J. (2012). Problematic use of the mobile phone: A literature review and a pathways model. Current Psychiatry Reviews, 8(4), 1 9. Blair, B. L., & Fletcher, A. C. (2011). The only 13-year-old on planet Earth without a cell phone : meanings of cell phones in early adolescents everyday lives. Journal of Adolescent Research, 26(2), doi: / Chen, Y. F., & Katz, J. E. (2009). Extending family to school life: College students use of the mobile phone. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies, 67, doi: /j.ijhcs Cook, J. L., & Jones, R. M. (2011). Texting and accessing the web while driving: Traffic citations and crashes among young adult drivers. Traffic Injury Prevention, 12(6), doi: / Crawford, J., Cayley, C., Lovibond, P. F., Wilson, P. H., & Hartley, C. (2011). Percentile norms and accompanying interval estimates from an Australian general adult population sample for selfreport mood scales (BAI, BDI, CRSD, CES-D, DASS, DASS-21, STAI-X, STAI-Y, SRDS, and SRAS). Australian Psychologist, 46, doi: /j x Dickson, D. M. (2012). Physiological and psychological consequences of forced mobile phone abstention (Master s thesis). Retrieved from Field, A. (2009). Discovering statistics using SPSS (3rd ed.). London, England: SAGE Publications. Frost, & Sullivan. (2013). Frost & Sullivan: 73% of Australians aged currently own a smartphone; 93% by Retrieved from Frost & Sullivan Press Release Galbreath, J. (2008, December). The benefits of corporate social responsibility: An empirical study. Paper presented at the 22nd Australian and New Zealand Academy of Management, Auckland, N.Z. Retrieved from 15

16 Ha, J. H., Chin, B., Park, D-H., Ryu, S-H.,& Yu, J. (2008). Characteristics of excessive cellular phone use in Korean adolescents. Cyber Psychology & Behavior, 11(6), doi: /cpb Hall, S. (2014, September). Apple vs android: The new automotive rivalry. Drive. Retrieved from i28z.html Holland, C., & Rathod, V. (2013). Influence of personal mobile phone ringing and usual intention to answer on driver error. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 50, Hosking, S., Young, K., & Regan, M. (2006). The effects of text messaging on young novice driver performance. (Research Report No. 246). Retrieved from Monash University Accident Research Centre website: Messaging.pdf James, D., & Drennan, J. (2005). Exploring addictive consumption of mobile phone technology. Paper presented at the Australian and New Zealand Marketing Academy conference, Perth, Australia. Jessor, R. (1987). Problem-behavior theory, psychosocial development, and adolescent problem drinking. British Journal of Addiction, 82, Jessor, R., & Jessor, S. L. (1977). Problem behaviour and psychosocial development: A longitudinal study of youth. New York, NY: Academic Press. Just, M. A., Keller, T. A., & Cynkar, J. (2008). A decrease in brain activation associated with driving when listening to someone speak. Brain Research, 1205, doi: /j.brainres Kalogeraki, S., & Papdaki, M. (2010). The impact of mobile use on teenagers socialization. The International Journal of Interdisciplinary Social Sciences, 5(4), Klasnja, P., & Pratt, W. (2012). Healthcare in the pocket: Mapping the space of mobile phone health interventions. Journal of Biomedical Informatics, 45, doi: /j.jbi

17 Krishna, S., Boren, S. A., & Balas, E. A. (2009). Healthcare via cell phones: A systematic review. Telemed Journal e-health, 15(3), doi: /tmj Leena, K., Tomi, L., & Arja, A. (2005). Intensity of mobile phone use and health compromising behaviours how is communication technology connected to health-related lifestyle in adolescence? Journal of Adolescence, 28, doi: /j/adolescence Lepp, A. Barkley, J. E., & Karpinski, A. C. (2014). The relationship between cell phone use, academic performance, anxiety, and satisfaction with life in college students. Computers in Human Behaviour, 31, doi: /j.chb Lovibond, P. F.,& Lovibond, S. H. (1995). The structure of negative emotional states: Comparison of the Depression Anxiety Stress Scale (DASS) with the Beck Depression and Anxiety Inventories. Behavior Research and Therapy, 33, Mackay, M. M., & Weidlich, O. (2007). Australian mobile phone index. 3rd Edition Special topic: Advertising on the mobile phone. Sydney: Australian Interactive Media Industry Association. Merlo, L. J., Stone, A. M., & Bibbey, A. (2013).Measuring problematic mobile phone use: Development and preliminary psychometric properties of the PUMP Scale. Journal of Addiction, 2013, 1 7. doi: /2013/ Nasar, J. L., & Troyer, D. (2013). Pedestrian injuries due to mobile phone use in public places. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 57, Olson, R. L.,Hanowski, J., Hickman,J. S., & Bocanegra, R. J. (2009). Driver distraction in commercial vehicle operations. (Report No.FMCSA-RRR ).Washington, DC: US Department of Transportation. Retrieved from Files/Driver-Distraction-Commercial-Vehicle-Operations.pdf. Optus. (2014).Optus network mobile coverage. Retrieved from Oulasvirta, A., Rattenbury, T., Ma, L., & Raita, E. (2012). Habits make smartphone use more pervasive. Pers Ubiquit Comput, 16, doi: /s

18 Owens, J. M., McLaughlin, S. B., & Sudweeks, J. (2011). Driver performance while text messaging using handheld and in-vehicle systems. Accident Analysis and Prevention, 43, doi: /j.aap Ribak, R. (2009). Remote control, umbilical cord and beyond: The mobile phone as a transitional object. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 27, doi: / x Salehan, M., & Negahban, A. (2013). Social networking on smartphones: When mobile phones become addictive. Computers in Human Behavior, 29, doi: /j.chb Sensis. (2014). Yellow TM Social Media Report: What Australian people and businesses are doing with social media. (2014). Retrieved September, 2014 from Sensis.com.au/html/corporate/pdf/yellow-social-media-report-2014.pdf Smetana, J. G., Campione-Barr, N., & Metzger, A. (2006). Adolescent development in interpersonal and societal contexts. Annual Review of Psychology, 57, Smetaniuk, P. (2014). A preliminary investigation into the prevalence and prediction of problematic cell phone use. Journal of Behavioral Addictions, 3(1) doi: /jba Srivastava, L. (2005). Mobile phones and the evolution of social behaviour. Behaviour and Information Technology, 24(2), SurveyMonkey, (last visited 11th August, 2014). Telstra. (2014). Telstra mobile phones coverage-networks. Retrieved from The Nielsen Company. (2011). Telstra Smartphone Index June Retrieved from _Presentation.pdf Thomee, S., Harenstam, A., & Hagberg, M. (2011). Mobile phone use and stress, sleep disturbances, and symptoms of depression among young adults a prospective cohort study. BMC Public Health, 11, doi: /

19 Tian, L., Shi, J., & Yang, Z. (2009). Why does half the world s population have a mobile phone? An examination of consumers attitudes towards mobile phones. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 12(5), doi: /cpb Vodafone. (2013). Vodafone extends regional coverage. Retrieved from Waddell, L. P., & Wiener, K. K. K. (2014). What s driving illegal mobile phone use? Psychosocial influences on drivers intentions to use hand-held mobile phones. Transportation Research Part F, 22, doi: /j.trf Walsh, S. P., White, K. M., & Young, R. M. (2008). Over-connected? A qualitative exploration of the relationship between Australian youth and their mobile phones. Journal of Adolescence, 31, doi: /j.adolescence Walsh, S. P., White, K. M., & Young, R. M. (2010). Needing to connect: The effect of self and others on young people s involvement with their mobile phones. Australian Journal of Psychology, 62(4), doi: / White, K. M., Walsh, S. P., Hyde, M. K., & Watson, B. C. (2012). Connection without caution? The role of mobile phone involvement in predicting young people s intentions to use a mobile phone while driving. Journal of the Australasian College of Road Safety, 23(1), Wilska, T.-A. (2003). Mobile phone use as part of young people's consumption styles. Journal of Consumer Policy, 26, Yellowlees, P. M., & Marks, S. (2007). Problematic internet use or internet addiction? Computers in Human Behaviour. 23(3), doi: /j.chb Yen, C., Tang, T., Yen, J., Lin, H., Huang, C., Liu, S., & Ko, C. (2009). Symptoms of problematic cellular phone use, functional impairment and its association with depression among adolescents in Southern Taiwan. Journal of Adolescence, 32, doi: /j.adolescence

20 Table 1: Descriptive Results of Transformed Data Measure n M (SD) 95% CI LogMPPUS (.13) [1.65, 1.68] LogDASS Stress (.12) [ ] LogDASS Anxiety (.11) [0.95, 0.97] LogDASS Depression (.14) [0.99, 1.01] Note. CI = confidence interval. MPPUS = Mobile Phone Problem Usage Scale; DASS Stress = Depression Anxiety Stress Scale Stress; DASS Anxiety = Depression Anxiety Stress Scale Anxiety; DASS Depression = Depression Anxiety Stress Scale Depression. Table 2: Spearman s Correlation Coefficient Between Measures of Mobile Phone Problem Usage, Anxiety and Depression Measure MPPUS DASS-A DASS-D MPPUS.41**.34** DASS-A.63** DASS-D Note: MPPUS = Mobile Phone Problem Usage Scale; DASS-A = Depression, Anxiety, Stress Scale- 21 Anxiety; DASS-D = Depression, Anxiety, Stress Scale-21 Depression. **p <.01 (1-tailed). 20