Exploring individual differences in online addictions: The role of identity and attachment

113Citations
Citations of this article
244Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Research examining the development of online addictions has grown greatly over the last decade with many studies suggesting both risk factors and protective factors. In an attempt to integrate the theories of attachment and identity formation, the present study investigated the extent to which identity styles and attachment orientations account for three types of online addiction (i.e., internet addiction, online gaming addiction, and social media addiction). The sample comprised 712 Italian students (381 males and 331 females) recruited from schools and universities who completed an offline self-report questionnaire. The findings showed that addictions to the internet, online gaming, and social media were interrelated and were predicted by common underlying risk and protective factors. Among identity styles, ‘informational’ and ‘diffuse-avoidant’ styles were risk factors, whereas ʼnormative’ style was a protective factor. Among attachment dimensions, the ‘secure’ attachment orientation negatively predicted the three online addictions, and a different pattern of causal relationships were observed between the styles underlying ‘anxious’ and ‘avoidant’ attachment orientations. Hierarchical multiple regressions demonstrated that identity styles explained between 21.2 and 30% of the variance in online addictions, whereas attachment styles incrementally explained between 9.2 and 14% of the variance in the scores on the three addiction scales. These findings highlight the important role played by identity formation in the development of online addictions.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Monacis, L., De Palo, V., Griffiths, M. D., & Sinatra, M. (2017). Exploring individual differences in online addictions: The role of identity and attachment. International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction, 15(4), 853–868. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11469-017-9768-5

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free