Addictive Behaviors 129 (2022) 107259

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Addictive Behaviors
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/addictbeh

Needs affordance as a key factor in likelihood of problematic social media

use: Validation, latent Profile analysis and comparison of TikTok and
Facebook problematic use measures
Troy Smith *, 1, Andy Short
Institute of Criminology and Public Safety, University of Trinidad and Tobago, Trinidad and Tobago

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Despite increasing concerns of maladaptive cognitive responses associated with social media, estimates of its
problematic social media use prevalence are lacking in the literature. Further, existing studies have disproportionately focused on Facebook,
Bergen facebook addiction scale while ignoring the penetration of TikTok and concerns of associated maladaptive behaviors. This study aims to 1)
Problematic TikTok use scale
validate scale measures for problematic Facebook and TikTok use (PFU and PTTU) 2) comparatively assess the
Caribbean psychometric studies
Latent profile analysis
underlying cognitive pathways of the PFU and PTTU among a sample of university students, 3) determine the
Cut-off score cut-off score of the PTTU assessment scale using Latent Profile Analysis (LPA) and 4) evaluate the contribution of
specific criteria in the diagnosis of PTTU. The scales used to assess PFU and PTTU were found to have appropriate
psychometric properties. The scores between the PFU and PTTU scales were found to be strongly associated,
however, the relationship was stronger in the group of Facebook users than in the group of TikTok users. Further,
the manifestation of problematic use was not consistent between TikTok and Facebook. Loneliness was positively
associated with both PFU and PTTU, while self-esteem was negatively associated with PFU only. The optimal cut-
off score of the PTTU scale was determined to be 21, giving 8.7% as the estimated prevalence of PTTU. The
criteria with the highest predictive power in the diagnosis of addiction among university students were “with­
drawal” and “relapse”. The study concludes that while the underlying addiction pathways are similar between
platforms the manifestation of maladaptive behavior and the drivers for usage intensity and problematic use are
unique.

1. Introduction
Social media usage and engagement have grown exponentially with
over 1.52 billion active Facebook users and 1.29 billion active TikTok
users since they launched in 2014 and 2017 respectively. The growth
and increase in popularity of social media have been accompanied by
negative psychosocial and psychological effects associated with its
excessive use (Andreassen, 2015). This problematic or maladaptive use
is regarded by many scholars as a behavioral addiction given current
levels of understanding provided by theoretical work and research on
problematic Internet addiction and social media use (Andreassen et al.,
2016; Balcerowska et al., 2020; Ercengiz, 2019).
The Caribbean has approximately 54 million internet users, out of
which 22.2 million are active social media users, which accounts for
approximately 61% of the population over the age of 13 (Kemp, 2020,
2021). However, in comparison to other geographic locations, the
myriad of cultural and political landscapes across the Caribbean leads to
a very diversified usage profile between countries. The penetration of
social media ranges from 50 to 75% of the population within the
Caribbean countries. For larger populations such as Jamaica and Trini­
dad and Tobago, the number of users extends to 1.25 million on average
(Kemp, 2021). In 2021, active TikTok’s users in the Caribbean amounted
to an estimated 0.87 million, which is projected to increase to 1.06
million users by 2025 (Degenhard, 2021). The Caribbean represents
0.5% of the world’s Internet users (26.3 million) and 0.6% of its Face­
book users (16.1 million) (Miniwatts Marketing Group, 2021). Further,
recent studies suggest that TikTok has an even higher penetration in the
18 to 29 age range (Auxier & Anderson, 2021).

* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: troy.smith078@we.utt.edu.tt (T. Smith).
URL: https://www.linkedin.com/in/troy-smith-ccii-ifci-cci-9a769344 (T. Smith).
1
ORCiD: 0000-0002-4196-5007.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addbeh.2022.107259
Received 17 August 2021; Received in revised form 10 January 2022; Accepted 19 January 2022
Available online 24 January 2022
0306-4603/© 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Downloaded for Anonymous User (n/a) at Industrial University of Santander from ClinicalKey.com by Elsevier on August 30,
2023. For personal use only. No other uses without permission. Copyright ©2023. Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
T. Smith and A. Short
In the United States at least 68% of the adult population actively use
Facebook and similarly 69% in Trinidad and Tobago (Auxier & Ander­
son, 2021; Napoleon Sp. z o.o. Ltd., 2020). These figures have tradi­
tionally set Facebook as the quintessential example of a social media
platform. However, in a relatively short period data suggests that TikTok
closely rivals its predecessors in number of users, downloads and usage
intensity (Marino, Gini, Vieno, & Spada, 2018; McGonagle, 2021). This
has led to increased interest by researchers and psychologists as it relates
to TikTok (Mohsin, 2021; Montag, Yang, & Elhai, 2021; Omar & Sub­
ramanian, 2013). Initial qualitative research has indicated that TikTok
may engender cyberbullying, depression, decreased academic perfor­
mance and contains content that may be addicting to adolescents (Jaf­
far, Riaz, & Mushtaq, 2019; Stokel-Walker, 2020; Swathi & Devakumar,
2020; Zhang, 2018). Montag et al. (2021) opine that TikTok has risen to
the forefront of social media usage both in the number of users and usage
intensity, yet there is limited research into the psychological mecha­
nisms associated with the platform. Further, Lu, Lu and Liu (2020),
determined that users who abstain from TikTok in China did so because
of fear of addiction. In the Caribbean, the focus shifted to TikTok and its
psychosocial effects when a nine-year-old boy died by asphyxiation
attempting a TikTok challenge (Rampersad, 2021). There were similar
cases in the United States with at least three children aged 11 to 13 years
old dying while attempting TikTok challenges (Dastagir, 2021; Morris,
2021).
Several studies have identified utility and gratification as de­
terminants of usage intensity and the likelihood of problematic use of
communication media (Chen, 2019; Wang et al, 2015; Tarafdar, Maier,
Laumer, & Weitzel, 2020; Montag, Yang, & Elhai, 2021). These studies
that reference the Technological Acceptance Model (TAM), Needs-
Affordance-Features (NAF) Model of Technology Use and the theory of
Uses and Gratification suggest that usage of communication media is a
rational choice based on psychological needs/motives, which may
evolve into a maladaptive cognitive response where the increased use is
no longer dependent on actual utility. Therefore, media that affords the
user more of their needs should theoretically be associated with higher
usage intensity and the likelihood of maladaptive cognitive responses.
While Facebook and TikTok are both social media platforms they are
unique in their implementation, specifically as it relates to the type of
engagement, content and interaction (in relation to the platform itself
and within the TikTok community). TikTok focuses on users enter­
taining each other through storyboarded skits, challenges, lip-sync and
other short-form videos. Further, it facilitates shared media or building
on the media of others through ‘duets’ and reuse of posted music or
effects, which does not require the users to be linked to each other on
TikTok. While Facebook has pictures, video posts and quizzes they are
static and do not encourage self-presentation or promotion through so­
cial entertainment. Further, similar to Instagram and YouTube the Tik­
Tok platform provides an opportunity for users to become influencers
and earn money proportional to followers. Agreements can also be made
for advertising with entities such as Amazon and Walmart by becoming
brand ambassadors, which adds a financial incentive for some users. In
the context of needs affordance, a comparison of these two platforms can
highlight the consistency or inconsistency of needs motives across
platforms and how they may lead to different maladaptive responses.
This can contribute new clarity not only to the determinants of mal­
adaptive responses but also the specific linkages between the different
Griffith addiction criteria and needs affordance.
Given the high social media usage in the Caribbean, the rise of Tik­
Tok and growing concerns of problematic social media use’s negative
psychological and psychosocial effects, this study adds to the extant
literature in several ways. First, the study seeks to present and validate a
modified version of the Bergen Facebook Addiction Scale, which can be
applied to TikTok to provide a useful measure to encourage and stan­
dardize future study of this platform. Further, through the use of Latent
Profile Analysis (LPA) and Receiver Operating Characteristics Area
Under the Curve (ROC-AUC) an empirical cut-off score will be
Downloaded for Anonymous User (n/a) at Industrial University of Santander from ClinicalKey.com by Elsevier on August 30,
2023. For personal use only. No other uses without permission. Copyright ©2023. Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Addictive Behaviors 129 (2022) 107259
determined for a problematic TikTok use (PTTU) scale. Second, in the
process of validating the PTTU scale the researcher will also validate
Bergen’s Facebook Addiction Scale (BFAS) in the Caribbean cultural
context. Third, the study provides data on Facebook and TikTok
addiction prevalence, manifestation and pathways of addiction for the
understudied Caribbean region, which adds to the validity of an estab­
lished scale and provides a new validated scale for an area of interest to
researchers. Lastly, there will be some comparison of PFU and PTTU
datasets to determine the level of similarity between the underlying
pathways of maladaptive responses and it’s correlates for the two plat­
forms. The comparison of addiction between social media platforms
provides insight into the consistency of the underlying addiction pro­
cesses related to social media and the importance of platform design in
needs affordance.
2. Literature review
2.1. Social media addiction
The literature suggests that problematic social media use (PSMU) is
increasing among adolescents globally and there is consensus that this is
an important issue due to the many adverse outcomes on a vulnerable
age group at a formative stage of development (Hou, Xiong, Jiang, Song,
& Wang, 2019; Kirik, Arslan, Çetinkaya, & Gül, 2015). The literature
suggests that PSMU affects approximately 12% of users across social
networking sites (Hou et al., 2019). The available research indicates that
age, daily time spent and daily frequency visiting social media profiles
are significantly associated with PSMU (Kirik et al., 2015). Further,
social media addiction is negatively associated with the mental health,
self-esteem and academic performance of adolescents (Hou et al., 2019;
Kirik et al., 2015). Research has also shown that the symptoms of social
media addiction affect mood, cognition, physical and emotional re­
actions, causing interpersonal and psychological problems among young
people (Atroszko et al., 2018; Hou et al., 2019; Pontes, 2017).
PSMU has been associated with the deterioration of social relation­
ships (Müller et al., 2016), low work performance (Xanidis & Brignell,
2016), low well-being, psychological distress (Atroszko et al., 2018; Hou
et al., 2019; Pontes, 2017) and sleep problems (Koc & Gulyagci, 2013).
According to the components model of addiction (Griffiths, 2005), the
maladaptive behaviors /symptoms associated with PSMU can be
grouped into six dimensions; salience, tolerance, withdrawal, mood
modification, conflict and relapse. This model has formed the founda­
tion for numerous studies on online addiction, including problematic
Internet use (PIU), Online Gaming addiction and PSMU (Griffiths,
2005). The current research will also be guided by Griffiths (2005)
assumptions.
2.2. Problematic social media use and measurement issues
An inconsistency of measures used to determine PSMU has made it
extremely difficult to attain clinical recognition and acknowledgment as
a mental health disorder. Although there is sustained clinical and aca­
demic interest in PSMU and the broader area of PIU (Cheng et al., 2019;
Montag et al., 2021) they are yet to be added to the Diagnostic and
Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5). Bányai et al. (2017)
attribute the exclusion specifically to a lack of consistency in empirical
studies related to PSMU. A review of the literature verifies that there is a
lack of standard or standardized measures for PSMU, with a myriad of
approaches that use modified versions of PIU scales (Hou, et al., 2019;
Kirik, et al., 2015; Tutgun-Ünal & Deniz, 2015). In the past decade,
several Berner’s addiction scales have been developed to evaluate the
problematic use of specific social media platforms and social media in
general (Arora, Chakraborty, & Bhatia, 2021). These scales themselves
draw from the instruments designed to assess PIU, such as the Internet
Addiction Scale, Pathological Internet use Scale and the PIU scale
(Shahnawaz et al., 2020). Even those that are not necessarily based on
T. Smith and A. Short
these previous scales, the factor analysis often leads to the same six
Griffiths (2005) criteria although identified differently (D’Souza et al.,
2018). Although these scales reliably measure PSMU, since they use
different measures, different scoring systems (scale item range and/or
total score) and often did not specify cut-off scores the results including
prevalence are not easily comparable (Bányai et al., 2017; Cheng et al.,
2019). Some effort has been made to specifically improve the compa­
rability of the Bergen Social Media Addiction Scale (BSMAS) with
Bányai et al. (2017) empirically determining 19 as an optimal cut-off
score for the scale. Further, Luo et al. (2021) determined an empirical
cut-off of 23 and a clinical cut-off of 24. It should be noted that the
studies by Bányai et al. (2017) and Luo et al. (2021) were performed in
the different cultural contexts of Hungarian and Chinese populations
respectively and that the clinical assessment of Social Media addiction
was based on the nine DSM-5 criteria for Internet Gambling Disorder
(IGD) given that PSMU has not been accepted by the Psychiatric Asso­
ciation as an addiction. Therefore, there remains a need for additional
data and analysis of cut-off scores for the classification of PSMU in
general and specific social platforms.
2.3. Problematic social media use scales
Instruments to assess PSMU have been derived from its predecessor
PIU. The PIU instruments focused on three dimensions related to
obsession, negative life impact and lack of control, which were
expanded into six criteria of addiction: salience, mood modification,
tolerance, withdrawal, conflict and relapse (Cheung, Chan, Lui, Tsui, &
Chan, 2018; Kelley & Gruber, 2010). These six criteria are known as the
Griffiths (2005) criteria and were used in the development of one of the
most widely used social media addiction scales, the Bergen Facebook
Addiction Scale (BFAS) (Andreassen, Pallesen, & Griffiths, 2017). The
BFAS was later expanded to consider the additive usage of all social
media and named the BSMAS.
Other researchers have sought to collectively assess PSMU citing that
most users are multi-site users and that given limitations in resources
this approach will be more parsimonious than individual analyses of
social media platforms. Idubor (2015) developed the Social Media Uti­
lization and Addiction Questionnaire (SMUAQ), which consisted of
socio-demographic information and two sections dealing with the level
of addiction and social media utilization. Van den Eijnden, Lemmens
and Valkenburg (2016) also developed a Social Media Disorder (SMD)
scale, however, the authors failed to define the term social media and
what it entails relative to their scale (Kuss & Griffiths, 2011). More
recently, Liu and Ma (2018) developed the Chinese Social Media
Addiction Scale (CSMAS) which, when compared to the BSMAS had two
additional dimensions namely, preference for online social interaction
and continued use regardless of being aware of its negative consequence.
While many researchers have chosen to take an additive approach
others have focused on individual platforms to develop insight on the
unique aspects of functioning, which may differ between individuals
addicted to specific social media platforms (Balcerowska et al., 2020; da
Veiga et al., 2019; Montag et al., 2021). Kircaburun (2016) presented
the Twitter Addiction Scale (TAS), which was a customized version of
the Internet Addiction Test (IAT) that was assessed satisfactorily for
reliability and validity in assessing Twitter addiction. D’Souza,
Samyukta and Bivera (2018) citing Kircaburun and Griffiths (2016)
modification of an Internet addiction scale to assess Instagram addiction
due to a lack of a validated scale developed the Test for Instagram
addiction (TIA). The TIA assessed subjects on the criteria of lack of
control, disengagement, escapism, health and interpersonal troubles,
excessive use and obsession, which were obtained via a process of factor
analysis. Monteiro et al. (2020) adapted the BFAS to create the Bergen
Instagram Addiction Scale (BIAS), which they validated in the Brazilian
context. While scales have been developed and validated for these
popular platforms, a review of the literature suggests there is currently
no validated scale for TikTok addiction.
Downloaded for Anonymous User (n/a) at Industrial University of Santander from ClinicalKey.com by Elsevier on August 30,
2023. For personal use only. No other uses without permission. Copyright ©2023. Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Addictive Behaviors 129 (2022) 107259
3. Methodology
3.1. Participants
The participants for this study were students from the Caribbean
based University of Trinidad and Tobago (UTT), which has students
from over 20 different countries. Permission was granted by the
Research Ethics Committee (REC) to distribute a self-administered
questionnaire to all students via the campus’ official email system dur­
ing the academic year 2020–2021. The study captured data from 354
respondents, of this group, there were 173 Tik Tok users and 313
Facebook users. The sample of TikTok users comprised 173 participants
with 67.3% being female. Age (M = 23.61, SD = 5.82) ranged from 18 to
64 years. While the sample of Facebook users comprised 313 partici­
pants with 62.11% being female. Age (M = 26.15, SD = 7.61) ranged
from 18 to 64 years.
3.2. Measures
3.2.1. Demographics
Information regarding age and gender were collected with the last
two questions in the questionnaire. Gender was represented as a
dichotomous variable, while age was given as ordinal (18–24, 25–34,
35–44, 45–54, 55–64, 65–74 and 75 or older).
3.2.2. Bergen Facebook Addiction Scale (BFAS)
The study utilized the BFAS, which was developed by Andreassen,
Torsheim, Brunborg, & Pallesen (2012). The BFAS consists of six items
where each representing one of Griffith’s six dimensions of addiction
(Balcerowska et al., 2020). The scale consists of six five-point Likert-type
items ranging from ‘very rarely’ to ‘very often’ with a possible overall
score of 0 to 24. The original authors and several other researchers
suggested that for the BFAS that a score of 3 or more to at least four of
the six items is an indicator of addiction (Andreassen et al., 2012;
Andreassen et al., 2016; Cuadrado, Rojas, & Tabernero, 2020; Chen,
Ahorsu, Pakpour, Griffiths, Lin, & Chen, 2020).
3.2.3. Problematic TikTok Use Scale (PTTUS)
Similar to the development of the Bergen Social Media Addiction
Scale (BSMAS; Andreassen et al., 2016) from the BFAS (Andreassen
et al., 2012), the PTTUS is a modified version of the BFAS focusing on
TikTok. The word ‘Facebook’ is replaced by ‘TikTok’ in the six items of
the self-reporting scale. The scale retained the scoring criteria from the
BFAS and as such had the possible overall score of 0 to 24.
3.2.4. Validation variables
Given that the external criteria of personality characteristics/traits
have been widely identified as being associated with problematic use of
online services the study selected three related factors to assess the
validity of the LPA classification (Bányai et al., 2017; Luo et al., 2021).
The three factors selected were loneliness, self-esteem and extraversion,
which were assessed using the University of California Los Angeles
(UCLA) three-item loneliness scale, the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale
(RSES) and the Brief Big Five Personality Inventory (BFI-10) respec­
tively. In this study, Cronbach α was 0.84 for the UCLA three-item
loneliness scale, 0.88 for the RSES and 0.42 for the BFI-10. Further,
two items were included to assess the social media usage (SMU) in­
tensity: time spent on the service per day (minutes) and frequency of use
(number of times accessing the service per day). Researchers have
highlighted that SMU intensity is a separate dimension from the
addiction-like cognitive responses exhibited in problematic social media
use (PSMU). Though multiple studies have shown that SMU intensity
and PSMU are generally correlated it is widely accepted that SMU in­
tensity does not necessarily imply PSMU and that high SMU intensity is
relative to the specific platform as it is relatable to average user intensity
(Boer, Stevens, Finkenauer, de Looze, & van den Eijnden, 2021).
T. Smith and A. Short
3.3. Statistical analysis
The internal consistency of the BFAS and PTTUS were assessed based
on four metrics, namely Cronbach’s α, McDonald’s ω, composite reli­
ability (CR) and average variance extracted (AVE). The criterion of
Fornell and Larcker (1981) has been commonly used to assess the degree
of shared variance between the latent variables of the model. According
to this criterion, the convergent validity of the measurement model can
be best assessed by the AVE and CR. CR is a measure of internal con­
sistency and is a less biased estimate of reliability than Cronbach’s α, the
acceptable value of CR is 0.7 and above. The AVE indicates the average
percentage of variation explained by the measuring items for a latent
construct, values above 0.7 are considered very good, whereas, the level
of 0.5 is acceptable (Alarcón & Sánchez, 2015; Awang, 2015).
To test the one-factor model of the BFAS and PTTUS and by extension
construct validity, confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) was performed
using maximum likelihood (ML) estimation with bootstrap confidence
intervals (1000 bootstrap samples) with Mplus emulation in JASP
version 0.14.1. ML estimation was chosen because Mardia’s Multivar­
iate Normality Test in R using MVN version 5.9 found that the data was
not multivariate normal, i.e. p-values for Mardia’s kurtosis and skewness
test were <0.05 (Korkmaz, Golsuluk, & Zararsiz, 2014). A robust ML
estimation is less impacted by the deleterious effects of non-normality as
it functionally introduces data-based corrections to the test statistic and
standard errors to offset the bias introduced by the non-normal distri­
bution (Finney & DiStefano, 2006; Gao, Mokhtarian, & Johnston, 2008).
Model fit was evaluated from three perspectives: absolute fit, incre­
mental fit and parsimonious fit. A p-value of the goodness of fit index
(GFI) higher than 0.9, root mean square error of approximation
(RMSEA) <0.05 with a probability higher than 0.05 and a standardized
root mean square residual (SRMR) <0.08 were used for the absolute fit
(Barrett, 2007; Byrne, 2013). Comparative fit index (CFI) and Tucker-
Lewis index (TLI) values over 0.90 were used for incremental fit (Ben­
tler, 1990). While χ2/df values<3.0 were used as the measure for
parsimonious fit (Marsh & Hocevar, 1985). The strength of association
of each item with the latent construct is given by their factor loadings
and R-squared values, which should be>0.6 and 0.4 respectively
(Awang, 2015).
To assess concurrent validity to gain insight as to what degree PFU
and PTTU reflect the same underlying process of maladaptive behavior,
a model with two latent variables (PFU and PTTU) was investigated
where items measuring the same dimension of problematic use were
correlated. The same measures of fit as above were used.
Latent profile analysis (LPA) was conducted on the PTTU data to
identify the latent subpopulations based on the varying levels of mal­
adaptive behavior of participants captured by the PTTUS in R using
tidyLPA version 1.0.8 (Rosenberg et al. 2018). Models with 2–6 classes
were estimated based on six metrics produced by the LPA. The metrics
examined were Akaike information criterion (AIC; Akaike, 1987),
Bayesian information criterion (BIC; Schwarz, 1978), Approximate
weight of evidence (AWE; Celeux et al., 1997), (CAIC), Sample size
adjusted BIC (SABIC; Sclove, 1987) and Entropy (Celeux & Soromenho,
1996). Further, the bootstrapped likelihood ratio test (BLRT) and its
associated p-value were used to make a definitive decision on the best
class solution (Luo et al., 2021; McLachlan & Peel, 2000; Spurk et al.,
2020). The validity of the results of the LPA identification of the classes
was assessed by comparing to external criteria (self-esteem, loneliness &
extraversion), demographics (gender and age) and relevant variables of
social media problematic use (engagement: time spent on service per
day and frequency of use per day) between the LPA classes.
To determine the optimal cut-off, score a sensitivity analysis was
performed using Receiver Operating Characteristic Area Under the
Curve (ROC-AUC) in R using cutpointr version 1.1.1 (Thiele & Hirsch­
feld, 2021). Similar to the work of Bányai et al. (2017) the ‘at-risk’ class
was used as a ‘pseudo’ gold standard to separate cases from non-cases in
place of a true gold standard derived from a clinically diagnosed group
Downloaded for Anonymous User (n/a) at Industrial University of Santander from ClinicalKey.com by Elsevier on August 30,
2023. For personal use only. No other uses without permission. Copyright ©2023. Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Addictive Behaviors 129 (2022) 107259
of problematic TikTok users. The separated data was used as the binary
outcome for the ROC-AUC assessment. The cutpointr package allows the
user to set criteria for the selection of the optimal cut-off score derived
from the ROC-AUC. In this study, the optimal cut-off score was based on
the balance between specificity and sensitivity.
To explore the contribution of specific Griffith’s criteria to the
diagnosis of PTTU, the boosting classification algorithm in JASP version
0.14.1 was used (Breiman, 1996). Boosting classification is a supervised
machine learning ensemble meta-algorithm that can determine the
relative strength of associations between predictors and an outcome
variable. This method has the advantage of reducing bias and variance,
being easy to interpret, resilient to overfitting and known to have strong
predictive power (Friedman, 2001; James, Witten, Hastie, & Tibshirani,
2021; Zou, Rosset, Zhu, & Hastie, 2009).
As other researchers have highlighted this methodology cannot
replace clinical validation, however, it removes the need to use ad hoc
cut-off values. The removal of the use of ad-hoc values will aid in
standardizing prevalence rates between studies making them more
comparable and thereby improving the field’s overall understanding of
the problem.
4. Results
4.1. Descriptive statistics
4.1.1. Distribution analysis
The normality of the two outcomes of problematic use (TikTok and
Facebook) were assessed. The Shapiro-Wilks test indicated the TikTok
problematic use scores were normally distributed, W (1 7 2) = 0.92, p <
.001. The Shapiro-Wilks test for Facebook problematic was also found to
be normally distributed, W (3 1 2) = 0.93, p < .001.
4.1.2. TikTok
The mean problematic use score was found to be 7.82 (SD = 5.29; SE
= 0.40). The mean number of hours spent on TikTok per day was 106.69
(SD = 91.64) minutes, while the number of times a user accessed TikTok
per day was 3.79 (SD = 4.01) times. Therefore, the average duration of a
session is 28.15 min.
4.1.3. Facebook
The mean problematic use score was found to be 6.27 (SD = 4.19; SE
= 0.29). The mean number of hours spent on Facebook per day was
63.82 (SD = 81.09) minutes, while the number of times a user accessed
Facebook per day was 2.67 (SD = 3.41) times. Hence, the average
duration of a session is 23.90 min.
4.1.4. Comparative analysis
The difference in the effect size between the two forms of problem­
atic use with the factors of usage intensity (duration and frequency),
gender and age were calculated and represented in terms of a t-test. All
factors except ‘gender’ were found to be statistically different: Duration
of use (p < .001); Frequency of use (p < .001); Age (p < .001); Gender (p
= .273).
4.2. Reliability and validity
4.2.1. TikTok
The reliability/internal consistency of the PTTUS was found to be
adequate (Cronbach’s α = 0.836, 95% CI [0.798 – 0.868]; McDonald’s ω
= 0.842, 95% CI [0.795 – 0.876]; CR = 0.849; AVE = 0.681).
4.2.2. Facebook
The results show that the BFAS presents adequate internal consis­
tency (Cronbach’s α = 0.853, 95% CI [0.700–0.803]; McDonald’s ω =
0.865, 95%; CI [0.716 – 0.816]; CR = 0.859; AVE = 0.525).
T. Smith and A. Short
4.3. Confirmatory factor analysis
4.3.1. TikTok
A one-factor model of the PTTUS with six dimensions (salience,
tolerance, mood modification, relapse, withdrawal and conflict) was
tested with CFA. The analysis provided the following results for mea­
sures of absolute fit to the data: χ2(9) = 51.21, RMSEA = 0.165, GFI =
0.912. Metrics for incremental fit were CFI = 0.901 and TLI = 0.836.
Standardized factor loadings ranged from 0.575 to 0.999. The χ2/df =
5.69, which was above the threshold value. Due to the lack of acceptable
model fit, modification indices were examined as was done in previous
studies, which resulted in residuals of the first and second items and the
fourth and sixth items being allowed to correlate (Atroszko et al., 2018;
Balcerowska et al., 2020; Monacis et al., 2020). The modified model
achieved an acceptable fit: χ2(7) = 17.14, CFI = 0.976, TLI = 0.949,
RMSEA = 0.091, χ2/df = 2.45, GFI = 0.956. The standardized factor
loadings on the items ranged from 0.589 to 0.923. The residual between
the first and second items was 0.306, while the residual between the
fourth and sixth was 0.220. Notably, this suggests a local dependency
between salience and tolerance and similarly between withdrawal and
relapse or rather that the pairs address a similar facet of an underlying
latent dimension (Brown, 2016; Saris & Aalberts, 2003). These re­
lationships are indicative of the derivation of these criteria of prob­
lematic social media use from the three criteria of problematic internet
use identified as obsession, neglect and control disorder (Kelly & Gruber,
2010). Therefore, the correlation of the errors of salience and tolerance
is likely due to them both addressing the latent construct of obsession.
Similarly, the correlation of the errors of withdrawal and relapse is due
to them both addressing the latent construct of control disorder.
Given that gender-based differences have been observed in prob­
lematic social media use, measurement invariance of this factor was
assessed using Multigroup Confirmatory Factor Analysis (M− CFA). This
assessment assures that comparisons across gender will be both mean­
ingful and valid (Chan, 2011). When the configural invariance was
examined the model achieved acceptable fit with GFI = 0.949 indicating
the overall factor structure holds similarly for both sexes. Metric and
Fig. 1. The factor structure of the Bergen Facebook Addiction Scale and the Problematic TikTok Use Scale for a group of Facebook users (n = 313) and TikTok users
(n = 173). Standardized loadings are indicated on the arrows. Residual variances are shown as dotted lines.
Downloaded for Anonymous User (n/a) at Industrial University of Santander from ClinicalKey.com by Elsevier on August 30,
2023. For personal use only. No other uses without permission. Copyright ©2023. Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Addictive Behaviors 129 (2022) 107259
Scalar invariances were also found to be acceptable with model fit scores
of GFI = 0.949 and GFI = 0.945 respectively i.e. there was no notable
decrease in fit when factor loadings or intercept equivalence were
constrained. Therefore, a valid comparison of variance, covariance and
factor means across genders is possible.
4.3.2. Facebook
A one-factor model of the BFAS with six dimensions serving as the
indicators of problematic use was also tested with CFA. Based on the
results of previous studies the first and second items and the fourth and
sixth items of the BFAS were allowed to correlate based on modification
indices during the CFA (Atroszko et al., 2018). The analysis provided the
following results for measures of model fit: χ2(7) = 12.38, CFI = 0.993,
TLI = 0.986, RMSEA = 0.050, χ2/df = 1.77, GFI = 0.990, CFI = 0.993,
TLI = 0.986. The standardized factor loadings on the items ranged from
0.445 to 0.893. The residual between the first and second items was
0.348, while the residual between the fourth and sixth was 0.102.
4.4. Concurrent validity
To determine concurrent validity, the PTTUS was compared to the
established BFAS using a CFA model with two latent variables (Facebook
and TikTok problematic use). The analysis provided the following re­
sults for measures of model fit after corrections for correlations based on
modification indices produced by the CFA: χ2(40) = 83.87, RMSEA =
0.059, SRMR = 0.052; GFI = 0.935, CFI = 0.968, TLI = 0.947. Factor
loadings ranged from 0.453 to 0.951. The correlation between the BFAS
and PTTU scales was found to be 0.80 (p < .01) with a covariance of 0.18
as shown in Fig. 1.
The model with two latent variables in Fig. 3 shows that there is a
relationship between the addictive processes of PFU and PTTU. How­
ever, it does not indicate if this relationship is equivalent between the
two forms of the possible unique aspects of function (difference in the
manifestation of symptoms, relationship with predictors). The differ­
ence in mean usage intensity presented earlier suggests that baseline
activity is different between the two problematic use cases. Therefore,
T. Smith and A. Short Addictive Behaviors 129 (2022) 107259

the level of activity indicative of the characteristic stages or levels of loneliness and self-esteem was identified i.e. increased self-esteem
problematic use may also differ. To assess the difference between the correlated to lower levels of feelings of loneliness.
two forms of problematic use a model with two latent variables (PFU
and PTTU) was investigated in the two samples and the identified sig­ 4.5. Latent Profile analysis of TikTok users
nificant correlations were compared (Balcerowska et al., 2020; Lenhard
& Lenhard, 2014). LPA was performed on the six items of the PTTUS, and according to
The investigation of the model with two latent variables within the the assessment of the resulting metrics and criteria set out in the liter­
two samples returned acceptable model fit in both instances. In the ature, the three-class solution was selected as the best-fitting model (see
group of the Facebook users the model had the following performance Table 2. The AIC, BIC, CAIC and SABIC decreased continuously as more
indicators: χ2 = 19.34(12), p = .08; CFI = 0.992, TLI = 0.982; RMSEA = classes were added to the analysis. However, the scale of decrease
0.044, p = .562; SRMR = 0.033 and GFI = 0.985. The group of TikTok decreased considerably after the third latent class was added. Based on
users also showed good model fit: χ2 = 15.0 (12), p = .242; CFI = 0.994, the BLR test, the three-class solution was accepted. The entropy for the
TLI = 0.986, RMSEA = 0.038, p = .585, SRMR = 0.033, GFI = 0.979. In three-class solution was also the highest for the 3 class model.
the group of Facebook users, the correlation between the BFAS and the The resulting three classes were grouped as follows: Class 1 (at-risk),
PTTUS was 0.94. While in the group of TikTok users the correlation Class 2 (low risk) and Class 3 (no risk). The ‘no risk’ class represented the
between the BFAS and the PTTUS was 0.77. The difference was statis­ majority of TikTok users (68.2% of users), followed by ‘low risk’ (25.4%
tically significant (z = 8.07, p < .001). Further, Cohen’s q, which indexes of users) and the smallest class was the ‘at-risk’ group (6.4% of users).
the difference between two correlation coefficients was 0.77 suggesting The profiles of participants grouped into the three classes are presented
a large effect. in Fig. 2. Similar to the work of Bányai et al. (2017) in the ‘at-risk’ group,
Table 1 presents correlations between Griffith’s six criteria of ‘tolerance’ and ‘withdrawal’ criteria showed elevated levels compared
addiction, two external criteria of personality characteristics (Loneliness to other dimensions.
and Self-Esteem), and two forms of problematic use (PFU and PTTU).
For both forms of addiction, all six of Griffith’s criteria were significant 4.6. Identification of an empirical cut-off score for the PTTU using ROC-
in the prediction of problematic use. However, the effects of ‘Mood AUC
Modification’, ‘Relapse’ and ‘Withdrawal’ were statistically different
between the two problematic use cases. Loneliness was found to have a From the analysis, a cut-off score of 21 was suggested as the ideal
positive significant correlation with both PFU and PTTU, while Self- threshold above which persons would be classified as ‘at-risk’. With
esteem was only found to have a negative significant correlation with scores > 0.7 all the combined metrics suggest a very good model for the
Facebook problematic use. Further, relationships between specific classification of cases of problematic use. In the case of the identified
criteria of problematic use and personality characteristics were identi­ cut-off score, the specificity is 96% and the sensitivity is 91% giving an
fied. ‘Tolerance’ and ‘Mood Modification’ are positively correlated to overall accuracy of 96% with a Youden J of 0.88. These results are
self-esteem and loneliness respectively. While ‘Mood Modification’ is comparable to values for these metrics in other attempts to identify cut-
negatively correlated to self-esteem. The relationship of self-esteem with off scores for scales associated with various forms of online problematic
‘Tolerance’ and ‘Mood Modification’ is only significant for Facebook use (Bányai et al., 2017; Li et al., 2020; Luo et al., 2021; Pontes et al.,
problematic use, while the relationship of loneliness with ‘Mood Modi­ 2016). Using the identified cut-off score the prevalence of TikTok
fication’ is significant for both forms of problematic use (correlations are addiction was found to be 8.7%.
not significantly different). Lastly, a negative correlation between
4.7. Comparison of levels of external factors between problematic/non-
problematic TikTok use groups (cut-off score 21) and among latent classes
Table 1
from LPA
Correlations between study variables.
Relationships BFAS PTTU Comparison of Participants classified as exhibiting TikTok problematic use (PTTU
correlation
score ≥ 21) were significantly more likely than those in the non-
r p- r p- z p- problematic group (PTTU score < 21) to exhibit: 1) higher usage in­
value value statistic value
tensity (higher time spent on TikTok per day and greater frequency of
Addiction ~ 0.585 < 0.616 < 0.508 0.306 use per day) 2) more likely to be female 3) greater perception of lone­
Salience 0.001 0.001 liness 4) more likely exhibit the personality trait of extraversion.
Addiction ~ 0.756 0.773 0.429 0.334
Further, the results (see Table 3 showed significant correlations between
< <
Tolerance 0.001 0.001
Addiction ~ 0.838 < 0.751 < − 2.506 0.006 the diagnosis of TikTok problematic use and gender, duration of use per
Mood 0.001 0.001 day, frequency of use per day, loneliness and extraversion. The signifi­
Modification cance of differences of external characteristics between the latent classes
Addiction ~ 0.701 0.496 − 3.408
< < <0.001
as well as associations between external characteristics and the three
Relapse 0.001 0.001
Addiction ~ 0.67 < 0.789 < 2.704 0.003 latent classes were also found (see Table 3).
Withdrawal 0.001 0.001
Addiction ~ 0.607 < 0.665 < 1.022 0.153 4.8. Endorsement of Griffith’s six criteria and their relative influence on
Conflict 0.001 0.001 the prediction of TikTok problematic use
Addiction ~ 0.199 0.003 0.245 0.006 1.005 0.158
Loneliness
Addiction ~ SE − 0.162 0.015 − 0.15 0.088 The study also explored the association between endorsement and
Loneliness ~ SE − 0.559 < − 0.582 < − 0.357 0.36 the likelihood of problematic use. The central zero point for the 5-point
0.001 0.001 Likert items was taken as 3 based on the general literature (Andreassen
Tolerance ~ SE 0.118 0.027 0.07 0.364
et al., 2012, 2016; Chyung et al., 2017). As shown in Table 4 ‘mood
Mood − 0.165 0.047 − 0.002 0.979
Modification modification’ and ‘tolerance’ were the most endorsed criteria among the
~ SE university students. The least endorsed criterion was ‘withdrawal’. To
Mood 0.177 0.034 0.18 0.054 0.032 0.487 determine the relationship between endorsement of a specific criterion
Modification and the diagnosis of TikTok problematic use Cohen’s kappa coefficients
~ Loneliness
were used (Landis & Koch, 1977). Relative to the other criterion only

Downloaded for Anonymous User (n/a) at Industrial University of Santander from ClinicalKey.com by Elsevier on August 30,
2023. For personal use only. No other uses without permission. Copyright ©2023. Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
T. Smith and A. Short Addictive Behaviors 129 (2022) 107259

Table 2
Results of the Latent Profile Analysis of TikTok users.
Model AIC AWE BIC CAIC SABIC Entropy BLRT p-value

2 Classes 2858 3241 2966 3000 2858 0.79 28 0.010

3 Classes 2743 3204 2872 2913 2742 0.91 130 0.010
4 Classes 2741 3283 2893 2941 2741 0.82 15 0.069
5 Classes 2701 3322 2875 2930 2701 0.88 54 0.010
6 Classes 2649 3349 2845 2907 2649 0.91 66 0.010

Note: AIC = Akaike Information Criterion, AWE== Approximate Weight of Evidence Criterion, CAIC=Consistent AIC, BIC=Bayesian Information Criterion, Sample
Size Adjusted BIC, BLRT = bootstrap likelihood ratio test.

To further explore the contribution of specific dimensions of prob­

Fig. 2. The relative influence of Griffith’s criteria on the classification of Tik­
Tok problematic use.
lematic use identified in Griffith’s six criteria to the classification of
TikTok the Boosting Classification algorithm was applied in JASP
version 0.14.1. The Boosting Classification generated a model with
nineteen trees, which showed a test accuracy of 97.1%, validation ac­
curacy of 82.1% and F1-score of 0.956. The results of an assessment of
the six criteria’s ability to contribute to the accurate classification of
data points are given in Table 4. The criterion ‘withdrawal’ showed the
highest predictive value for the classification of problematic use fol­
lowed by ‘relapse’. The higher importance of ‘withdrawal’ and ‘relapse’
is in line with a previous study that investigated the predictive power of
these criteria in relation to social media problematic use (Luo et al.,
2021). Similar to the results of Luo et al. (2021) these results indicated
that withdrawal has a high predictive value with ‘relapse’ giving sub­
stantial subsequent information in the diagnostic process.
5. Discussion

‘withdrawal’ (Cohen’s k > 0.50) was found to correspond well to the
diagnosis of TikTok problematic use. The association of each criterion
with the placement of users in the problematic or non-problematic use
groups was also examined using Fisher’s exact test. The Ho tested was
that users endorsing each criterion were more likely to be included in the
problematic use group than the non-problematic use group. For all six
criteria, the null hypothesis was accepted suggesting that endorsement
of these criteria indeed align with problematic use.
The present study sought to achieve four objectives 1) psychometric
validation of the BFAS and PTTUS in a sample of university students, 2)
define profiles of PTTU characterized by Griffith criteria of maladaptive
behaviors of addiction, 3) Determine an optimal cut-off score for the
PTTUS and 4) compare the maladaptive behavioral process between
Facebook and TikTok. The results confirm that the BFAS and PTTUS
instruments present adequate validity and reliability in the respective
measurement of Facebook and TikTok use in the Caribbean cultural

Fig. 3. The three classes obtained from the latent profile analysis.

Downloaded for Anonymous User (n/a) at Industrial University of Santander from ClinicalKey.com by Elsevier on August 30,
2023. For personal use only. No other uses without permission. Copyright ©2023. Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
T. Smith and A. Short Addictive Behaviors 129 (2022) 107259

Table 3
Comparison of the three latent classes: Testing Equality for latent class predictors (n = 173).
Predictors Latent Class Mean (standard deviation) Value Correlation to Positive TikTok Problematic use class

At-risk (n Low risk (n No risk (n ¼ p†

Spearman Problematic (n Non-Problematic (n p† Spearman
¼ 11) ¼ 44) 118) r ¼ 15) ¼ 158) r

Gender (female %) 100a 73.2b 62.1b 0.081 0.170* 100 64.3 <0.001 − 0.213**
Age (years) 21.8 (2.6)a 22.7 (5.1)a 24.2 (6.3)a 0.236 0.147 21.6 (2.2) 23.8 (6.1) 0.923 − 0.121
Daily TikTok use 211.4 158.9 (84.0)b 62.9 (84.8)c <0.001 − 0.559*** 219.0 (53.7) 85.1 (92.6) <0.001 − 0.367***
(minutes) (61.7)a
Frequency of TikTok 8.6 (4.0)a 6.2 (4.2)a 2.5 (3.1)b <0.001 − 0.501*** 9.27 (3.5) 3.3 (3.7) <0.001 0.401***
(times per day)
Loneliness 6.6 (2.2)a 6.4 (2.1)a 4.8 (2.4)b <0.001 − 0.321*** 6.87 (2.0) 5.2 (2.4) 0.005 0.198**
Self-esteem 16.7 (8.5)a 17.4 (6.1)a 17.3 (7.9)a 0.962 0.038 17.7 (7.6) 17.3 (7.5) 0.425 0.010
Extraversion 4.1 (1.2)a 3.8 (1.5)a 3.2 (1.7)a 0.077 − 0.170* 4.1 (1.1) 3.3 (1.7) 0.047 0.145*

Note: Different subscript letters (a, b, c) in the same row reflect significant (<0.05) difference between the means while the same subscript letters in one row reflect
non-significant differences between the means according to pairwise Mann-Whitney pairwise test.
p†: p values were obtained by chi-squared test for categorical variables, t-test for two-group continuous variables (Ho: Addicted group > Non-Addicted group) and one-
way analysis of variance for three-group continuous variables.
For Spearman r (Spearman correlation coefficients) - *: p <0.5, **: p <0.01, ***: p<0.001.

Table 4
Endorsement of diagnostic criteria overall and for problematic vs non-problematic users (n = 173).
Criterion Cohen k Overall users (n ¼ 173) Problematic users (n ¼ 15) Non-problematic users (n ¼ 158) p-value

Withdrawal 0.65 13.3 86.7 6.3 <0.001

Salience 0.15 50.9 93.3 46.8 <0.05
Tolerance 0.13 57.2 100 53.2 <0.05
Conflict 0.38 16.8 66.7 12.0 <0.001
Mood Modification 0.15 54.3 100 50.0 <0.001
Relapse 0.23 38.7 93.3 33.5 <0.001

Note: p-value derived from Fisher’s exact test, where the null-hypothesis is that the addicted users group is greater than the non-addicted users group.

context. The LPA identified three levels of TikTok use based on the
manifestation of maladaptive behavior, however, in some cases, the
external characteristics could only identify two levels. However, the
results identified several useful relationships between PTTU and
external characteristics, which were significant in the classification of
users exhibiting maladaptive responses. The optimal empirical cut-off
score for diagnosing TikTok problematic use was determined to be 21
when optimizing the balance between sensitivity and specificity. Using
the identified cut-off score the prevalence of TikTok problematic use was
identified as 8.7%. Comparison of PFU and PTTU suggested that the two
had similar underlying mechanisms. However, they differed in 1)
manifestation of problematic use, the relationship between psycholog­
ical traits and criteria of problematic use (significance and effect size).
One of the main goals of the study was the psychometric assessment
of the well-established BFAS and the PTTUS in the Caribbean cultural
context. The study found that the scales had adequate internal consis­
tency with BFAS, α = 0.85 and PTTU, α = 0.84. The BFAS score was
higher than the original study (α = 0.83) but lower than that of a Por­
tuguese sample of emerging adults (α = 0.87). Further, the adequacy of
internal consistency of the BFAS and PTTU was verified by the CR scores
of 0.85 and 0.86 respectively. The convergent validity was also found to
be adequate with AVE scores of 0.52 and 0.68 for the BFAS and PTTU
respectively. The CFA confirmed the one-factor structure proposed for
the BFAS by the original authors and replicated in two subsequent
Portuguese studies (Andreassen et al., 2012; da Veiga et al., 2019;
Pontes et al., 2016). As expected the one-factor structure was also
confirmed for the PTTU. For criterion validity, the participants’ levels of
loneliness, self-esteem and usage intensity were measured. According to
the literature higher levels of loneliness and engagement are associated
with social media problematic use (Baltaci, 2019; Luo et al., 2021).
While lower self-esteem is associated with higher social media prob­
lematic use scale scores (Bányai et al., 2017; Luo et al., 2021). The study
found empirical support for the relationship between these factors and
Facebook problematic use, as participants with higher usage intensity,
high perception of loneliness and low self-esteem obtained higher scores
on the BFAS. The PTTU showed similar results, except that self-esteem
was not found to be significantly related to an increase in PTTU
scores. The concurrent validity of the PTTU was assessed by its corre­
lation with the BFAS (0.80) and was found to be adequate (Murphy &
Davidshofer, 2014).
The findings indicate a significant difference in average usage in­
tensity, age of users, the manifestation of problematic use and rela­
tionship with personality characteristics between Facebook and TikTok.
TikTok users were found to be younger with higher average daily usage
intensity than Facebook users. The difference in the average usage in­
tensity is suggestive of a difference in the level of attraction between
platforms. Gender was not found to be significantly different between
the two platforms. However, the number of female users was found to be
significantly more than males on both platforms suggesting that gener­
ally, females are more inclined to use social media. The study’s findings
also indicate different expressions (or levels of expression) of problem­
atic use and variation in predictors between Facebook and TikTok,
which was reflective of the observations of Balcerowska et al. (2020) in
the paired examination of problematic use of Social media multi-site
users and Facebook only users. ‘Mood Modification’ and ‘Relapse’
showed greater manifestation in Facebook problematic use. This can be
explained by the relationship between self-esteem (negative correlation)
and loneliness (positive correlation) with PFU, particularly with the
criterion of ‘Mood Modification’. These relationships cumulatively
suggest a greater tendency in the use of Facebook as part of a coping
strategy for persons seeking to achieve social acceptance not acquired in
the non-digital space. However, the manifestation of withdrawal
symptoms is significantly more prominent among TikTok users. Given
that self-esteem is predictive of Facebook’s problematic use in previous
studies it is possible that the relationship between loneliness and self-
esteem (see Table 1 decreased the predictive power of self-esteem. A
similar explanation was posited by Baltaci (2019) loneliness was found
to have an inconsistent relationship with problematic use because of its
relationship with other psychosocial factors such as social anxiety and
happiness.

Downloaded for Anonymous User (n/a) at Industrial University of Santander from ClinicalKey.com by Elsevier on August 30,
2023. For personal use only. No other uses without permission. Copyright ©2023. Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
T. Smith and A. Short
While there are specific differences between the two forms of prob­
lematic use there is also a significant degree of correlation, which was
stronger in the Facebook users than the TikTok users. Similar correlation
patterns were found between multisite users and Facebook users with
significantly different relationships between the BSMAS and the BFAS
within each sample group (Balcerowska et al., 2020). These two out­
comes suggest that dependency may be determined by factors related to
the platforms themselves. Some studies have suggested the Uses and
Gratification model as an explanation for the difference in problematic
use between people using the same platforms and in the user’s choice of
platform i.e. a focus on motives for use (Andreassen & Pallesen, 2014).
Given the difference in the relationship of the BFAS and PTTUS within
each sample and the difference in the baseline average usage intensity,
the difference may lie in the presentation of the platform itself, with
specific elements acting as attractors i.e. features that contribute to
needs affordance (Chen, 2019; Kuss & Griffiths, 2017; Wang et al.,
2015). Therefore, future research should focus on these possible
attractors, giving greater consideration to technology-focused theories
such as the Technology Acceptance Model (Davis, 1989) and the Needs-
Affordance-Features (NAF) Model of Technology Use (Karahanna et al.,
2018) in addition to the Uses and Gratification Model. These models
propose that the level of use of a service is related to the way it presents
itself, ease of use, usefulness (ability to provide the expected gratifica­
tion), level of enjoyment, irreplaceability, relatedness and self-
presentation (ability to control one’s online persona).
Results from the LPA provided a nuanced understanding of the
relative contribution of each criterion on the accurate detection of ‘at
risk’ subjects. The results of the LPA lead to the TikTok sample being
divided into three groups: ‘at risk’, ‘low risk’ and ‘no risk’. Findings from
the LPA demonstrate that there are no relevant differences among the
groups with regard to age, self-esteem and extraversion, but there are
groups with low, medium and high patterns of daily use and frequency
of use. More specifically, only two profiles could be validated for gender
and loneliness. Using the ‘at risk’ group as the ‘gold standard’ an
empirical cut-off score of 21 for diagnosing TikTok problematic use in
the Caribbean context was identified. This score represents the best
balance between specificity (96%) and the sensitivity (91%), and the
highest diagnostics accuracy (96%). The empirical cut-off scores for the
BSMAS and BFAS found in previous studies have ranged from 19 to 24
(Bányai et al., 2017; Luo et al., 2021). The prevalence of problematic use
based on the cut-off score of 21 was 8.75% which is comparable to more
conservative findings in previous studies (Kuss & Griffiths, 2017; Ryan,
Chester, Reece, & Xenos, 2014). However, similar to the cases of internet
problematic use due to the inconsistency in population, sampling and
criteria for the identification the prevalence rates have ranged from 1%
to 47% (Bányai et al., 2017; Jafarkarimi, Sim, Saadatdoost, & Hee, 2016;
Li et al., 2020).
Overall gender, usage intensity (daily duration of use and frequency
of use), loneliness and extraversion were found to have significant dis­
tinguishing powers in the determination of problematic use. The
observed higher likelihood of addicted persons being female is similar to
studies examining Facebook problematic use (Bányai et al., 2017; Kuss
& Griffiths, 2017). Higher levels of loneliness were also found to be
associated with TikTok problematic use, which is consistent with find­
ings of studies examining Facebook or Social Media (multi-users)
problematic use (Baltaci, 2019). Higher usage intensity has consistently
been identified as being associated with problematic use, which was
replicated in this study (Luo et al., 2021; Bányai et al., 2017; Savci,
Ercengiz, & Aysan, 2018). However, research suggests rather than a
direct effect that usage intensity mediates the relationship between flow
experience (rational use of media to maximize utility) and problematic
use (Kara, 2021). The personality trait of extraversion was also found to
be associated with problematic use, which is replicative of the majority
of studies on PSMU (Atroszko et al., 2018; Balcerowska et al., 2020).
Given the notable affordance of TikTok for self-promotion/presentation
through social entertainment and the correlation to extraversion future
Downloaded for Anonymous User (n/a) at Industrial University of Santander from ClinicalKey.com by Elsevier on August 30,
2023. For personal use only. No other uses without permission. Copyright ©2023. Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Addictive Behaviors 129 (2022) 107259
studies should examine the complementary role of narcissism. The sys­
tematic literature review published by Casale and Banchi (2020) found
an overall positive significant correlation between narcissism and
problematic Facebook use. However, they highlighted inconsistency in
studies that generalized problematic social media use, which potentially
aligns with this study’s hypothesis that the underlying pathways to
maladaptive cognitive responses differ between platforms. The valida­
tion of such a claim would, however, require more studies looking at
different platforms independently and comparatively. Further, it should
be considered that the majority of past studies have not sought to
differentiate grandiose narcissism from vulnerable narcissism (Fegan &
Bland, 2021). It may be useful to attempt to assess both forms of trait
narcissism in relation to PTTU.
Lastly, the study found that similar to previous findings ‘salience and
‘tolerance’ were highly endorsed by participants but were weak in
classifying addicted users (Andreassen et al., 2012; Luo et al., 2021).
These results suggest that thinking about or even increasingly using
social media may represent high engagement but not necessarily pa­
thology (Kardefelt-Winther, 2015; Luo et al., 2021; Pontes et al, 2016).
The criteria ‘withdrawal’ and ‘relapse’ have been widely recognized as
core criteria in the identification of maladaptive behaviors (Charlton &
Danforth, 2007; Kuss & Griffiths, 2017). The findings of this study
indicate that these criteria provide fairly high distinguishing power
between ‘problematic’ and ‘non-problematic’ users. Therefore, the
findings suggest that PTTU use has the same overarching structure and is
defined by the same criteria as other problematic use (van den Eijnden
et al., 2016).
6. Conclusion
Although most users appear to use TikTok in a non-problematic
manner, the study demonstrates that the risk of overuse and possible
problematic use exists and is associated with maladaptive behaviors that
can potentially negatively impact the daily lives of sufferers. Therefore,
the need exists for sound psychometric instruments that allow reliable
and valid assessment of TikTok. Further, the study emphasizes while
similarities exist between the addictive process occurring in Facebook
and TikTok there are significant differences in manifestation, predictors
and usage intensity associated with average vs problematic use. This
translates to potential differences not only in the usage intensity or
symptoms associated with various stages/categories of problematic use
but also in the number of stages that precede problematic use. Further, it
indicates that a user can exhibit problematic use on a specific platform
and not have the same maladaptive response with the broader category
of social media. Therefore, the study empirically supports the need for
the study of specific platforms where feasible to enhance the under­
standing of usage intensity, likelihood of problematic use and mal­
adaptive cognitive responses developed on social media platforms.
Declaration of Competing Interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence
the work reported in this paper.
References
Akaike, H. (1987). Factor analysis and AIC. Psychometrika, 52(3), 317–332. https://doi.
org/10.1007/BF02294359
Alarcón, D., & Sánchez, J. (2015). Assessing convergent and discriminant validity in the
ADHD-R IV rating scale: User-written commands for Average Variance Extracted
(AVE). Composite Reliability (CR), and Heterotrait-Monotrait ratio of correlations
(HTMT). Presented at the Spanish STATA Meeting 2015.
Andreassen, C., Pallesen, S., & Griffiths, M. (2017). The relationship between addictive
use of social media, narcissism, and self-esteem: Findings from a large national
survey. Addictive Behaviors, 64, 287–293. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
addbeh.2016.03.006
T. Smith and A. Short
Andreassen, C. S. (2015). Online Social Network Site Addiction: A Comprehensive
Review. Current Addiction Reports, 2(2), 175–184. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40429-
015-0056-9
Andreassen, C. S., Billieux, J., Griffiths, M. D., Kuss, D. J., Demetrovics, Z., Mazzoni, E., &
Pallesen, S. (2016). The relationship between addictive use of social media and video
games and symptoms of psychiatric disorders: A large-scale cross-sectional study.
Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 30(2), 252–262. https://doi.org/10.1037/
adb0000160
Andreassen, C., & Pallesen, S. (2014). Social Network Site Addiction—An Overview.
Current Pharmaceutical Design, 20(25), 4053–4061. https://doi.org/10.2174/
13816128113199990616
Andreassen, C., Torsheim, T., Brunborg, G., & Pallesen, S. (2012). Development of a
Facebook Addiction Scale. Psychological Reports, 110(2), 501–517. https://doi.org/
10.2466/02.09.18.PR0.110.2.501-517
Arora, A., Chakraborty, P., & Bhatia, M. (2021). Problematic Use of Digital Technologies
and Its Impact on Mental Health During COVID-19 Pandemic: Assessment Using
Machine Learning. In Emerging Technologies During the Era of COVID-19 Pandemic (pp.
197–221). /z-wcorg/.
Atroszko, P., Balcerowska, J., Bereznowski, P., Biernatowska, A., Pallesen, S., &
Andreassen, C. (2018). Facebook addiction among Polish undergraduate students:
Validity of measurement and relationship with personality and well-being.
Computers in Human Behavior, 85, 329–338. 10.1016/j.chb.2018.04.001.
Auxier, B., & Anderson, M. (2021). Social Media Use in 2021. Retrieved July 11, 2021,
from Pew Research Center website: https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/2021/
04/07/social-media-use-in-2021/.
Awang, Z. (2015). Validating the Measurement Model: CFA. In SEM Made Simple: A
Gentle Approach to Learning Structural Equation Modellin (pp. 54–74).
Balcerowska, J., Bereznowski, P., Biernatowska, A., Atroszko, P., Pallesen, S., &
Andreassen, C. (2020). Is it meaningful to distinguish between Facebook addiction
and social networking sites addiction? Psychometric analysis of Facebook addiction
and social networking sites addiction scales. Current Psychology. 10.1007/s12144-
020-00625-3.
Baltaci, Ö. (2019). The Predictive Relationships between the Social Media Addiction and
Social Anxiety, Loneliness, and Happiness. International Journal of Progressive
Education, 15(4), 73–82. https://doi.org/10.29329/ijpe.2019.203.6
Bányai, F., Zsila, Á., Király, O., Maraz, A., Elekes, Z., Griffiths, M. D., … Demetrovics, Z.
(2017). Problematic Social Media Use: Results from a Large-Scale Nationally
Representative Adolescent Sample. PLOS ONE, 12(1), e0169839. 10.1371/journal.
pone.0169839.
Barrett, P. (2007). Structural equation modelling: Adjudging model fit. Personality and
Individual Differences, 42(5), 815–824. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2006.09.018
Bentler, P. M. (1990). Comparative fit indexes in structural models. Psychological Bulletin,
107(2), 238–246. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.107.2.238
Boer, M., Stevens, G. W. J. M., Finkenauer, C., de Looze, M. E., & van den
Eijnden, R. J. J. M. (2021). Social media use intensity, social media use problems,
and mental health among adolescents: Investigating directionality and mediating
processes. Computers in Human Behavior, 116, 106645. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
chb.2020.106645
Breiman, L. (1996). Bias, Variance, and] Arcing Classifiers (No. Technical Report 460).
University of California. /z-wcorg/. Retrieved from University of California website:
http://stat-reports.lib.berkeley.edu/accessPages/460.html.
Brown, T. (2015). Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research. /z-wcorg/.
Byrne, B. M. (2013). Structural Equation Modeling With AMOS: Basic Concepts,
Applications, and Programming, Second Edition (0 ed.). Routledge. 10.4324/
9780203805534.
Casale, S., & Banchi, V. (2020). Narcissism and problematic social media use: A
systematic literature review. Addictive Behaviors Reports, 11, 100252. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.abrep.2020.100252
Celeux, G., & Soromenho, G. (1996). An entropy criterion for assessing the number of
clusters in a mixture model. Journal of Classification, 13(2), 195–212. https://doi.
org/10.1007/BF01246098
Chan, D. (2011). Advances in analytical strategies. In APA handbook of industrial and
organizational psychology (Vol. 1,, 85–113.
Charlton, J. P., & Danforth, I. D. W. (2007). Distinguishing addiction and high
engagement in the context of online game playing. Computers in Human Behavior, 23
(3), 1531–1548. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2005.07.002
Chen, A. (2019). From attachment to addiction: The mediating role of need satisfaction
on social networking sites. Computers in Human Behavior, 98, 80–92. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.chb.2019.03.034
Cheng, J., Burke, M., & Davis, E. G. (2019). In Understanding Perceptions of Problematic
Facebook Use: When People Experience Negative Life Impact and a Lack of Control (pp.
1–13). Glasgow Scotland Uk: ACM. https://doi.org/10.1145/3290605.3300429.
Cheung, J.-C.-S., Chan, K.-H.-W., Lui, Y.-W., Tsui, M.-S., & Chan, C. (2018). Psychological
Well-Being and Adolescents’ Internet Addiction: A School-Based Cross-Sectional
Study in Hong Kong. Child and Adolescent Social Work Journal, 35(5), 477–487.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10560-018-0543-7
Chyung, S. Y. Y., Roberts, K., Swanson, I., & Hankinson, A. (2017). Evidence-Based
Survey Design: The Use of a Midpoint on the Likert Scale. Performance Improvement,
56(10), 15–23. https://doi.org/10.1002/pfi.2017.56.issue-1010.1002/pfi.21727
Cuadrado, E., Rojas, R., & Tabernero, C. (2020). Development and Validation of the
Social Network Addiction Scale (SNAddS-6S). European Journal of Investigation in
Health, Psychology and Education, 10(3), 763–778. https://doi.org/10.3390/
ejihpe10030056
da Veiga, G. F., Sotero, L., Pontes, H. M., Cunha, D., Portugal, A., & Relvas, A. P. (2019).
Emerging Adults and Facebook Use: The Validation of the Bergen Facebook
10
Downloaded for Anonymous User (n/a) at Industrial University of Santander from ClinicalKey.com by Elsevier on August 30,
2023. For personal use only. No other uses without permission. Copyright ©2023. Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Addictive Behaviors 129 (2022) 107259
Addiction Scale (BFAS). International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction, 17(2),
279–294. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11469-018-0018-2
Dastagir, A. (2021). A 12-year-old died after a TikTok “Blackout” challenge. USA Today:
How social media is changing peer pressure. Retrieved from https://www.usatoday.
com/story/life/health-wellness/2021/04/27/tiktok-challenge-kills-12-year-old-
how-peer-pressure-has-evolved/4853507001/.
Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use, and User Acceptance of
Information Technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319. https://doi.org/10.2307/
249008
Degenhard, J. (2021). TikTok users in the Caribbean 2017–2025. Retrieved July 11,
2021, from Statista website: https://www.statista.com/forecasts/1142708/tiktok-
users-in-the-caribbean.
D’Souza, L., Samyukta, A., & Bivera, T. (2018). Development and Validation of Test for
Instagram Addiction (TIA). International Journal of Indian Psychology, 6(3).
ERCENGIZ, M. (2019). The Effectiveness of ACT based Psycho-Education Program on
Social Media Disorder. International Online Journal of Educational Sciences, 11(1).
https://doi.org/10.15345/iojes.2016.00.00010.15345/iojes.2019.01.00010.15345/
iojes.2019.01.002
Fegan, R. B., & Bland, A. R. (2021). Social Media Use and Vulnerable Narcissism: The
Differential Roles of Oversensitivity and Egocentricity. International Journal of
Environmental Research and Public Health, 18(17), 9172. https://doi.org/10.3390/
ijerph18179172
Finney, S., & DiStefano, C. (2006). Non-normal and categorical data in structural
equation modeling. In Structural equation modeling: A second course (pp. 269–314).
Information Age Publishing.
Fornell, C., & Larcker, D. (1981). Evaluating Structural Equation Models with
Unobservable Variables and Measurement Error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18
(1), 39. https://doi.org/10.2307/3151312
Friedman, J. H. (2001). Greedy function approximation: A gradient boosting machine.
The Annals of Statistics, 29(5). https://doi.org/10.1214/aos/1013203451
Gao, S., Mokhtarian, P. L., & Johnston, R. A. (2008). Nonnormality of Data in Structural
Equation Models. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation
Research Board, 2082(1), 116–124. https://doi.org/10.3141/2082-14
Griffiths, M. (2005). A ‘components’ model of addiction within a biopsychosocial
framework. Journal of Substance Use, 10(4), 191–197. https://doi.org/10.1080/
14659890500114359
Hou, Y., Xiong, D., Jiang, T., Song, L., & Wang, Q. (2019). Social media addiction: Its
impact, mediation, and intervention. Cyberpsychology: Journal of Psychosocial
Research on Cyberspace, 13(1). https://doi.org/10.5817/CP2019-1-4
Idubor, I. (2015). Investigating Social Media Usage and Addiction Levels among
Undergraduates in University of Ibadan, Nigeria. British Journal of Education, Society
& Behavioural Science, 7(4), 291–301. https://doi.org/10.9734/BJESBS/2015/
15808
Jafarkarimi, H., Sim, A. T. H., Saadatdoost, R., & Hee, J. M. (2016). Facebook Addiction
among Malaysian Students. International Journal of Information and Education
Technology, 6(6), 465–469. https://doi.org/10.7763/IJIET.2016.V6.733
Jaffar, B., Riaz, S., & Mushtaq, A. (2019). Living in a moment: Impact of TicTok on
influencing younger generation into micro-fame. Journal of Content, Community and
Communication, 10(5), 187–194. /z-wcorg/. Retrieved from /z-wcorg/.
James, G., Witten, D., Hastie, T., & Tibshirani, R. (2021). An introduction to statistical
learning: With applications in R. /z-wcorg/.
Kara, M. (2021). High Schoolers’ Usage Intensity of Mobile Social Media and
Nomophobia: Investigating the Mediating Role of Flow Experience. Participatory.
Educational Research, 8(1), 409–422. https://doi.org/10.17275/per.21.24.8.1
Karahanna, E., Xu, S., Xu, Y., & Zhang, N. (2018). The Needs–Affordances–Features
Perspective for the Use of Social Media. MIS Quarterly, 42(3), 737–756. https://doi.
org/10.25300/MISQ/2018/11492
Kardefelt-Winther, D. (2015). A critical account of DSM-5 criteria for internet gaming
disorder. Addiction Research & Theory, 23(2), 93–98. https://doi.org/10.3109/
16066359.2014.935350
Kelley, K. J., & Gruber, E. M. (2010). Psychometric properties of the Problematic Internet
Use Questionnaire. Computers in Human Behavior, 26(6), 1838–1845. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.chb.2010.07.018
Kemp, S. (2020). Annual Global Digital Growth July 2020 DataReportal. Retrieved July
11, 2021, from https://datareportal.com/reports/more-than-half-the-world-no
w-uses-social-media.
Kemp, S. (2021). Specialist Reports. Retrieved July 11, 2021, from Datareportal website:
https://datareportal.com/reports/?tag=Specialist.
Kircaburun, K. (2016). Effects of Gender and Personality Differences on Twitter
Addiction among Turkish Undergraduates. Journal of Education and Practice, 7(24),
33–42.
Kirik, A., Arslan, A., Çetinkaya, A., & Gül, M. (2015). Türkiyedeki Gençlerin Sosyal
Medya Bağımlılık Düzeylerine Yönelik Nicel Bir Araştırma. International Journal of
Science Culture and Sport, 3(13), 108–108. 10.14486/IntJSCS444.
Koc, M., & Gulyagci, S. (2013). Facebook Addiction Among Turkish College Students:
The Role of Psychological Health, Demographic, and Usage Characteristics.
Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 16(4), 279–284. https://doi.org/
10.1089/cyber.2012.0249
Korkmaz, S., Goksuluk, D., & Zararsiz, G. (2014). MVN: An R Package for Assessing
Multivariate Normality. The R Journal, 6(2), 151. https://doi.org/10.32614/RJ-
2014-031
Kuss, D, & Griffiths, M. (2011). Excessive online social networking: Can adolescents
become addicted to Facebook? Education and Health, 29(4), 68–71. /z-wcorg/.
Retrieved from /z-wcorg/.
T. Smith and A. Short
Kuss, D., & Griffiths, M. (2017). Social Networking Sites and Addiction: Ten Lessons
Learned. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 14(3).
https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph14030311
Landis, J. R., & Koch, G. G. (1977). The Measurement of Observer Agreement for
Categorical Data. Biometrics, 33(1), 159. https://doi.org/10.2307/2529310
Lenhard, W., & Lenhard, A. (2014). Testing the Significance of Correlations. 10.13140/
RG.2.1.2954.1367.
Li, J.-B., Wu, A. M. S., Feng, L.-F., Deng, Y., Li, J.-H., Chen, Y.-X., … Lau, J. T. F. (2020).
Classification of probable online social networking addiction: A latent profile
analysis from a large-scale survey among Chinese adolescents. Journal of Behavioral
Addictions, 9(3), 698–708. https://doi.org/10.1556/2006.2020.00047
Liu, C., & Ma, J. (2018). Development and validation of the Chinese social media
addiction scale. Personality and Individual Differences, 134, 55–59. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.paid.2018.05.046
Lu, X., Lu, Z., & Liu, C. (2020). Exploring TikTok Use and Non-use Practices and
Experiences in China. In G. Meiselwitz (Ed.), Social Computing and Social Media.
Participation, User Experience, Consumer Experience, and Applications of Social
Computing (pp. 57–70). Cham: Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/
10.1007/978-3-030-49576-3_5.
Luo, T., Qin, L., Cheng, L., Wang, S., Zhu, Z., Xu, J., … Liao, Y. (2021). Determination the
cut-off point for the Bergen social media addiction (BSMAS): Diagnostic contribution
of the six criteria of the components model of addiction for social media disorder.
Journal of Behavioral Addictions, 10(2), 281–290. https://doi.org/10.1556/
2006.2021.00025
Marino, C., Gini, G., Vieno, A., & Spada, M. M. (2018). A comprehensive meta-analysis
on Problematic Facebook Use. Computers in Human Behavior, 83, 262–277. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2018.02.009
Marsh, H. W., & Hocevar, D. (1985). Application of confirmatory factor analysis to the
study of self-concept: First- and higher order factor models and their invariance
across groups. Psychological Bulletin, 97(3), 562–582. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-
2909.97.3.562
McGonagle, E. (2021). TikTok surges past Facebook in average monthly time spent per
user. Retrieved April 14, 2021, from Campaign website: https://www.campaignlive.
co.uk/article/tiktok-surges-past-facebook-average-monthly-time-spent-per-user/
1704290.
McLachlan, G., & Peel, D. (2000). Finite Mixture Models: McLachlan/Finite Mixture Models.
Hoboken, NJ, USA: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 10.1002/0471721182.
Miniwatts Marketing Group. (2021). Usage and Population Statistics. Retrieved July 11,
2021, from Internet World Stats website: https://www.internetworldstats.com/stats.
htm.
Mohsin, M. (2021). 10 Facebook Statistics Every Marketer Should Know in 2021.
Retrieved April 25, 2021, from Oberlo website: https://www.oberlo.
com/blog/facebook-statistics#:~:text=Facebook%20has%202.80%20billion%
20monthly,site%20on%20a%20daily%20basis.
Monacis, L., Griffiths, M. D., Limone, P., Sinatra, M., & Servidio, R. (2020). Selfitis
Behavior: Assessing the Italian Version of the Selfitis Behavior Scale and Its
Mediating Role in the Relationship of Dark Traits with Social Media Addiction.
International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(16), 5738.
https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17165738
Montag, C., Yang, H., & Elhai, J. D. (2021). On the Psychology of TikTok Use: A First
Glimpse From Empirical Findings. Frontiers in Public Health, 9. https://doi.org/
10.3389/fpubh.2021.641673
Monteiro, R., Monteiro, T., Cassaro, A., De Lima, M., De Souza, N., Ribeiro, T., & Arantes,
T. (2020). Vicio en Instagram: Propiedades psicométricas de la Escala Bergen de
Adicción al Instagram. Avances En Psicología Latinoamericana, 38(3). 10.12804/
revistas.urosario.edu.co/apl/a.8132.
Morris, S. (2021). 10-year-old Girl Dies in “Blackout Challenge” Circulating on TikTok.
Newsweek. Retrieved from https://www.newsweek.com/girl-dies-blackout-
challenge-circulating-tiktok-1563705.
Müller, K. W., Dreier, M., Beutel, M. E., Duven, E., Giralt, S., & Wölfling, K. (2016).
A hidden type of internet addiction? Intense and addictive use of social networking
sites in adolescents. Computers in Human Behavior, 55, 172–177. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.chb.2015.09.007
Murphy, K. R., & Davidshofer, C. O. (2014). Psychological testing: Principles and
applications. Harlow, Essex: Pearson. /z-wcorg/.
Napoleon Sp. z o.o. (2020). Facebook users in Trinidad and Tobago—January 2020.
Retrieved October 3, 2020, from NapoleanCat website: https://napoleoncat.com/
stats/facebook-users-in-trinidad_and_tobago/2020/01.
Omar, B., & Subramanian, K. (2013). Addicted to Facebook: Examining the roles of
personality characteristics, gratifications sought and Facebook exposure among
11
Downloaded for Anonymous User (n/a) at Industrial University of Santander from ClinicalKey.com by Elsevier on August 30,
2023. For personal use only. No other uses without permission. Copyright ©2023. Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Addictive Behaviors 129 (2022) 107259
youths. Journal on Media & Communications, 1(1), /z-wcorg/. Retrieved from /z-
wcorg/.
Pontes, H. (2017). Investigating the differential effects of social networking site
addiction and Internet gaming disorder on psychological health. Journal of
Behavioral Addictions, 6(4), 601–610. https://doi.org/10.1556/2006.6.2017.075
Pontes, H. M., Andreassen, C. S., & Griffiths, M. D. (2016). Portuguese Validation of the
Bergen Facebook Addiction Scale: An Empirical Study. International Journal of Mental
Health and Addiction, 14(6), 1062–1073. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11469-016-9694-
y
Rampersad, S. (2021). Boy, 9, dies attempting TikTok challenge. Trinidad and Tobago
Guardian: Retrieved from. https://www.guardian.co.tt/news/boy-9-dies-
attempting-tiktok-challenge-6.2.1281269.ae93926b65.
Rosenberg, J., Beymer, P., Anderson, D., van Lissa, C.j., & Schmidt, J. (2018). tidyLPA:
An R Package to Easily Carry Out Latent Profile Analysis (LPA) Using Open-Source or
Commercial Software. Journal of Open Source Software, 3(30), 978. https://doi.org/
10.21105/joss10.21105/joss.00978
Ryan, T., Chester, A., Reece, J., & Xenos, S. (2014). The uses and abuses of Facebook: A
review of Facebook addiction. Journal of Behavioral Addictions, 3(3), 133–148.
https://doi.org/10.1556/JBA.3.2014.016
Saris, W. E., & Aalberts, C. (2003). Different Explanations for Correlated Disturbance
Terms in MTMM Studies. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 10
(2), 193–213. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15328007SEM1002_2
Savci, M., Ercengiz, M., & Aysan, F. (2018). Turkish Adaptation of the Social Media
Disorder Scale in Adolescents. Archives of. Neuropsychiatry, 55(3), 248–255. /z-
wcorg/. Retrieved from /z-wcorg/.
Schwarz, G. (1978). Estimating the Dimension of a Model. The Annals of Statistics, 6(2),
461–464. JSTOR. Retrieved from JSTOR.
Sclove, S. L. (1987). Application of model-selection criteria to some problems in
multivariate analysis. Psychometrika, 52(3), 333–343. https://doi.org/10.1007/
BF02294360
Shahnawaz, M. G., Rehman, U., & Monacis, L. (2020). Social Networking Addiction
Scale. Cogent. Psychology, 7(1), 1832032. https://doi.org/10.1080/
23311908.2020.1832032
Spurk, D., Hirschi, A., Wang, M.o., Valero, D., & Kauffeld, S. (2020). Latent profile
analysis: A review and “how to” guide of its application within vocational behavior
research. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 120, 103445. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jvb.2020.103445
Stokel-Walker, C. (2020). TikTok influencers are telling people to stop using the app.
Retrieved from Input Mag website: https://www.inputmag.com/features/tiktok
-tips-telling-users-log-off-get-outdoors-sleep.
Swathi, G., & Devakumar, C. (2020). A Study to Analyse the Impact of TikTok App on
Students Academics and Psychology. Journal of Emerging Technologies and Innovative
Research, 7(3).
Tarafdar, M., Maier, C., Laumer, S., & Weitzel, T. (2020). Explaining the link between
technostress and technology addiction for social networking sites: A study of
distraction as a coping behavior. Information Systems Journal, 30(1), 96–124. https://
doi.org/10.1111/isj.v30.110.1111/isj.12253
Thiele, C., & Hirschfeld, G. (2021). cutpointr: Improved Estimation and Validation of
Optimal Cutpoints in R. Journal of Statistical Software, 98(11). 10.18637/jss.v098.
i11.
Tutgun-Ünal, A., & Deniz, L. (2015). Development of the Social Media Addiction Scale.
AJIT-e Online Academic Journal of Information Technology, 6(21), 51–70. https://doi.
org/10.5824/1309-1581.2015.4.004.x
van den Eijnden, R., Lemmens, J., & Valkenburg, P. (2016). The Social Media Disorder
Scale. Computers in Human Behavior, 61, 478–487. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
chb.2016.03.038
Wang, C., Lee, M. K. O., & Hua, Z. (2015). A theory of social media dependence: Evidence
from microblog users. Decision Support Systems, 69, 40–49. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.dss.2014.11.002
Xanidis, N., & Brignell, C. M. (2016). The association between the use of social network
sites, sleep quality and cognitive function during the day. Computers in Human
Behavior, 55, 121–126. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.09.004
Zhang, K. (2018). ‘I risked my life, please like!’ Mobile app TikTok has Hong Kong children
craving acceptance – and some are going to dangerous extremes. South China Morning
Post: Retrieved from. https://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong/community/
article/2146904/i-risked-my-life-please-mobile-app-tik-tok-has-hong-kong.
Zou, H., Rosset, S., Zhu, J., & Hastie, T. (2009). Multi-class AdaBoost. Statistics and Its.
Interface, 2(3), 349–360. https://doi.org/10.4310/SII.2009.v2.n3.a8