Well-Being and Social Media: A Systematic Review of Bergen Addiction Scales
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
The paper presents a meta-review study on publications relating wellbeing to social media addiction. More specific, the authors performed a literature survey on publications using the Bergen addiction scale and reporting on different measures of wellbeing. From a total of 635 publications only 10 could be included in the meta-review (due to e.g. not using the Bergen scales or not having a definition of wellbeing as proposed by the authors).
The paper is very well written and I do not see any need to improve the language of the paper. The proposed relationship (addiction / wellbeing) is interesting and the result of the meta-review study is insightful (and different than I would have expected).
One general comment is that I am a bit puzzled by the author’s choice to conduct a meta-review study. The authors acknowledge that the link between addiction and wellbeing has not been systematically investigated. Additional, the authors can include only 10 publications into the meta-analysis. From this perspective I would have expected a systematic empirical study and not a meta-review study. Having said that, it could have been the intention of the authors to first explore the potential of the link between addiction and wellbeing but in that case it would have been good if the authors could include a small discussion on a well designed study to empirically explore this link.
The finding that negative formulated wellbeing relates better to addiction is perhaps not surprising as the addiction scales are indeed assessing more negative aspects than positive. This however leads to the discussion on the operationalisation of the concept of wellbeing. Could it be that the chosen operationalisation of positive and negative aspects of wellbeing are not mutually exclusive? From that perspective I would (again) have liked the authors to elaborate on an ideal / well-designed study to investigate the link between addiction and wellbeing. Give that this is a meta-review study, the authors had to use the operationalisations as used in the included publications but I am sure that the authors could recommend better operationalisations.
To conclude, I find the paper very interesting and insightful. Although the sample (10 publications included in the meta-review) is small, I did not see a problem given the careful (not over generalising) conclusions by the authors.
Author Response
Reviewer’s comment:
One general comment is that I am a bit puzzled by the author’s choice to conduct a meta-review study. The authors acknowledge that the link between addiction and wellbeing has not been systematically investigated. Additional, the authors can include only 10 publications into the meta-analysis. From this perspective I would have expected a systematic empirical study and not a meta-review study. Having said that, it could have been the intention of the authors to first explore the potential of the link between addiction and wellbeing but in that case it would have been good if the authors could include a small discussion on a well designed study to empirically explore this link.
The finding that negative formulated wellbeing relates better to addiction is perhaps not surprising as the addiction scales are indeed assessing more negative aspects than positive. This however leads to the discussion on the operationalisation of the concept of wellbeing. Could it be that the chosen operationalisation of positive and negative aspects of wellbeing are not mutually exclusive? From that perspective I would (again) have liked the authors to elaborate on an ideal / well-designed study to investigate the link between addiction and wellbeing. Give that this is a meta-review study, the authors had to use the operationalisations as used in the included publications but I am sure that the authors could recommend better operationalisations.
Authors’ answer:
Thank you very much for your comment.
Actually, as you pointed out, we decided to first explore the potential of the link between addiction and wellbeing. Following your suggestion, we added in the discussion section some lines (red colored) to define which should be the next steps for empirical research.
Added part:
Moreover, how the different motives behind a dysfunctional social media experience (e.g., excessive need for communication, leisure, belonging) affect people's well-being, should be tested by new empirical research. The same scores in terms of addiction could underlie very different experiences and thus repercussions on the well-being (Kim, 2009). The operationalization of well-being is another critical issue.
A new multidimensional and wider operationalization of well-being is needed to understand the "real" magnitude of social media addiction's effect on well-being, since social media addiction could impact well-being aspects differently, as it emerged in our work.
A factorial analysis of the current well-being measures could be useful to define new well-being areas and dimensions to study together with social media addiction measures.
Reviewer 2 Report
Thank you for inviting me to review the paper on “Well-Being and Social Media: A Systematic Review of Bergen Addiction Scales.” This is an interesting paper and deserves to be published. I have several recommendations. I hope the authors would amend based on my recommendations and I am happy to review this paper again.
Under the line 32 – 37, the authors stated “On social media such as Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, or Tik Tok, people are engaged in a whole series of activities, which encompass entertainment (e.g., playing games, passing time, fighting boredom), social activities (e.g., communicating, socializing, self-disclosing, keeping in touch with relevant virtual social communities, maintaining offline networks), and identity needs (e.g., building a virtual social identity) [4–8].” The authors should include medical applications of social media. Please amend as follows:
… identity needs (e.g., building a virtual social identity) and providing health information [4–8, Zhang et al]
Additional reference:
Zhang MW et al. Perceptions of Health-Related Information on Facebook: Cross-Sectional Study Among Vietnamese Youths. Interact J Med Res. 2017;6(2):e16. Published 2017 Sep 7. doi:10.2196/ijmr.8072
Under line 42, the authors stated “Together with the increasing usage of such media, scholars observed that an excessive Internet, gaming, or social media use could be associated with addiction [13,14].” It is important to highlight association with other psychiatric comorbidity. Please amend the statement as follows:
… gaming, or social media use could be associated with addiction [13,14] and other psychiatric comorbidity (e.g. depression, alcohol abuse) (Ho et al 2014).
Additional reference:
Ho, RC et al. The association between internet addiction and psychiatric co-morbidity: a meta-analysis. BMC psychiatry vol. 14 183. 20 Jun. 2014, doi:10.1186/1471-244X-14-183.
Line 44-45, the authors stated “Although the diagnostic framework is not entirely clear in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5) [15,16], the Internet and social media users may expect a lower quality of life and well-being [17]”. It is important to highlight criteria as DSM-5 is unclear and state how Internet addiction can affect the quality of life. Please amend the statement as follows:
…. Although the diagnostic framework is not entirely clear in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5) [15,16], other researchers define Internet and social media addiction as compulsive use and withdrawal, craving, tolerance, interpersonal and health-related problems (Mak et al 2014, Tran et al 2017a). The Internet and social media users may expect a lower quality of life and well-being [17] due to have problems with self-care, difficulty in performing daily routine, suffer from pain and discomfort, anxiety and depression (Tran et al 2017b).
Additional references
Mak KK et al. Psychometric properties of the Revised Chen Internet Addiction Scale (CIAS-R) in Chinese adolescents. J Abnorm Child Psychol. 2014;42(7):1237–1245. doi:10.1007/s10802-014-9851-3
Tran BX et al. Vietnamese validation of the short version of Internet Addiction Test. Addict Behav Rep. 2017;6:45–50. Published 2017 Jul 8. doi:10.1016/j.abrep.2017.07.001
Tran BX et al. A study on the influence of internet addiction and online interpersonal influences on health-related quality of life in young Vietnamese. BMC Public Health. 2017;17(1):138. Published 2017 Jan 31. doi:10.1186/s12889-016-3983-z
Line 103, the word “Article Methodology” should be changed to “Search Strategy”.Under Table 1, would the authors be possible to state whether the correlations are significant or not.
Author Response
Reviewer 2
Reviewer’s comment:
Under the line 32 – 37, the authors stated “On social media such as Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, or Tik Tok, people are engaged in a whole series of activities, which encompass entertainment (e.g., playing games, passing time, fighting boredom), social activities (e.g., communicating, socializing, self-disclosing, keeping in touch with relevant virtual social communities, maintaining offline networks), and identity needs (e.g., building a virtual social identity) [4–8].” The authors should include medical applications of social media. Please amend as follows:
… identity needs (e.g., building a virtual social identity) and providing health information [4–8, Zhang et al]
Additional reference:
Zhang MW et al. Perceptions of Health-Related Information on Facebook: Cross-Sectional Study Among Vietnamese Youths. Interact J Med Res. 2017;6(2):e16. Published 2017 Sep 7. doi:10.2196/ijmr.8072
Under line 42, the authors stated “Together with the increasing usage of such media, scholars observed that an excessive Internet, gaming, or social media use could be associated with addiction [13,14].” It is important to highlight association with other psychiatric comorbidity. Please amend the statement as follows:
… gaming, or social media use could be associated with addiction [13,14] and other psychiatric comorbidity (e.g. depression, alcohol abuse) (Ho et al 2014).
Additional reference:
Ho, RC et al. The association between internet addiction and psychiatric co-morbidity: a meta-analysis. BMC psychiatry vol. 14 183. 20 Jun. 2014, doi:10.1186/1471-244X-14-183.
Line 44-45, the authors stated “Although the diagnostic framework is not entirely clear in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5) [15,16], the Internet and social media users may expect a lower quality of life and well-being [17]”. It is important to highlight criteria as DSM-5 is unclear and state how Internet addiction can affect the quality of life. Please amend the statement as follows:
…. Although the diagnostic framework is not entirely clear in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5) [15,16], other researchers define Internet and social media addiction as compulsive use and withdrawal, craving, tolerance, interpersonal and health-related problems (Mak et al 2014, Tran et al 2017a). The Internet and social media users may expect a lower quality of life and well-being [17] due to have problems with self-care, difficulty in performing daily routine, suffer from pain and discomfort, anxiety and depression (Tran et al 2017b).
Additional references
Mak KK et al. Psychometric properties of the Revised Chen Internet Addiction Scale (CIAS-R) in Chinese adolescents. J Abnorm Child Psychol. 2014;42(7):1237–1245. doi:10.1007/s10802-014-9851-3
Tran BX et al. Vietnamese validation of the short version of Internet Addiction Test. Addict Behav Rep. 2017;6:45–50. Published 2017 Jul 8. doi:10.1016/j.abrep.2017.07.001
Tran BX et al. A study on the influence of internet addiction and online interpersonal influences on health-related quality of life in young Vietnamese. BMC Public Health. 2017;17(1):138. Published 2017 Jan 31. doi:10.1186/s12889-016-3983-z
Authors’ answer:
Thank you very much for allowing us to improve our work with the literature that you wisely suggested. We changed the lines accordingly with your advice. We really appreciated your contribution to merging the new literature references within the already existing work. Thank you once more.
Reviewer’s comment:
Line 103, the word “Article Methodology” should be changed to “Search Strategy”.
Authors’ answer:
We agreed with you that "Search strategy" could be more appropriate than "Article methodology". Thus, we changed accordingly.
Reviewer’s comment:
Under Table 1, would the authors be possible to state whether the correlations are significant or not.
Authors’ answer:
Thank you for your comment. We edited Table 1 highlighting correlations that are statistically significant from the others. We used the standard notation as it follows: *: p. < .05; **: p. < .01.
Round 2
Reviewer 2 Report
Thanks for the amendments. I recommend publication.
