Temporal focus, dual-system self-control, and college students' short-video addiction: a variable-centered and person-centered approach
Liu Y, Huang Y, Wen L, Chen P, Zhang S
Frontiers in psychology · 15 citations
How it was studied
- Design
- Cross-sectional study (classified by our AI screen)
- Studied in
- People
- Main outcome
- Health markers and function
Who paid for it
- Funding
- Independent funding
Based on full-text disclosure statement.
Publication
- Published
- 2025-03-24 · Front Psychol · vol. 16 · p. 1538948
- Publisher
- Frontiers Media
- Cited
- 17 citations · more than 99% of similar papers · 14.7× the field average
- Impact
- Top 10% most cited in its field
- References
- 70 works
- Access
- Open access (journal) · CC-BY
- Research areas
- Psychological and Temporal Perspectives Research · Behavioral Health and Interventions · Mind wandering and attention
- Keywords
- short video addiction, inhibitory control, university students, time orientation, only children, gender differences
5 authors
From CN
- Yang LiuGuangxi Normal University; Beibu Gulf University
- Yaqing HuangGuangxi Normal University
- Lan WenGuangdong University of Foreign Studies
- Peng Chen
- Shuyue Zhang · correspondingGuangxi Normal University
Abstract
Background
Short video addiction has become increasingly prevalent among college students. It can negatively impact their physical and mental health, yet its influencing factors and underlying mechanisms require further exploration. Time focus and self-control are recognized as critical determinants in shaping addictive behaviors.
Objective
Grounded in the I-PACE theory, this study examines the relationship between emotional and cognitive responses (various temporal focuses and dual systems of self-control) and short video addiction, while also investigating the mediating roles of inhibitory and initiation control.
Methods
Methodologically, it integrates both variable-centered and person-centered approaches, utilizing the Time Focus Scale, Multidimensional Self-Control Scale, and Short Video Addiction Scale. A total of 2,239 university students participated in the survey.
Results
The results revealed the following: (1) Past and present time focus were positively correlated with short video addiction, while future time focus showed a negative correlation. Inhibitory self-control was positively associated with short video addiction, whereas initiatory self-control was negatively correlated. Variable-centered analysis demonstrated that past and present time focus positively predicted short video addiction, with inhibitory self-control mediating the relationship between these time orientations and addiction. Conversely, initiatory self-control played a mediating role between future time focus and addiction risk, with a negative predictive effect on the likelihood of short video addiction. (2) Person-centered analysis identified four categories of short video addiction: non-addicted (12.68%), low-risk addiction (34.21%), moderate-risk addiction (42.20%), and high-risk addiction (10.89%). (3) Logistic regression analysis indicated that students with excessive past and present time focus were more likely to fall into the high-risk addiction category, while those employing inhibitory self-control strategies were more likely to be categorized into low, moderate, or high-risk addiction groups. Students utilizing initiatory self-control were less likely to develop high-risk addiction. Female students were more likely than male students to fall into the low, moderate, or high addiction categories, and only children were more likely to belong to the moderate or high-risk addiction categories than non-only children.
Conclusion
This study emphasizes the pivotal role of time focus and dual-system self-control in the intervention and prevention of short video addiction,further highlighting the role of emotional and cognitive responses in the development of short-video addiction. The implications of the findings, as well as the limitations of the study, are also discussed.
Abstract via Europe PMC. Copyright remains with the authors or publisher (CC BY).
Community trust
Loading…
How much do you trust this study's findings?
Comments
Sign in to rate, comment on or flag this study.Sign inSomething wrong here?
Flag this study if its information, labels or funding look wrong. An editor reviews every flag.
Sign in to rate, comment on or flag this study.Sign inEducational information about published research. Not medical advice, and not a recommendation to start or stop anything.