Epidemiology of Smartphone Addiction among University Students

Abstract

Smartphone dependence can be measured through questionnaires that evaluate time of use, feelings associated with the absence of the device, and habits related to the use of this technology. Unlike gambling addiction, smartphone addiction has not yet been classified as a disease within the areas of medical knowledge, but several studies show harm to individuals who develop this addiction, such as sleep, mood, and impulsive disorders. Purpose: We aim to find out the prevalence of smartphone addiction and determine its epidemiology among university students in the city of Maceió. Methods: The smartphone dependency scale was applied among undergraduates, validated by the author Julia Khoury, from the SPAI (Smartphone Addiction Inventory) questionnaire, using the cutoff point of 9 positive answers out of 26 questions. Results: In this research, a prevalence of dependence of 31.85% was found, without gender difference, with higher incidence among individuals under 40 years old. Conclusions: Given the high proportion of smartphone addicts and the consequences of this addiction, it is appropriate to discuss strategies to promote health and assist those affected.

Share and Cite:

de Araújo Soares, F. , e Silva, D. , Cavalcante, G. , da Silva, V. , Freire, T. , Santos, T. , Ramalho, A. , do Nascimento da Silva, I. , Lima, R. and Filho, E. (2026) Epidemiology of Smartphone Addiction among University Students. World Journal of Neuroscience, 16, 104-111. doi: 10.4236/wjns.2026.162010.

1. Introduction

Currently more than 4 billion people are internet users worldwide, 90% of which use smartphones instead of computers and this is an increasing number every year [1]. The term that designates addiction to smartphone is nomophobia. It refers to the anxiety, discomfort, or distress caused by not having a smartphone or computer.

Smartphone addiction, and consequently internet addiction, is mediated by low self-control, high stress levels, and impulsivity, as indicated by Nunes et al. [2].

In several studies smartphone addiction, neuroticism, and depression have shown a positive and significant correlation [3]-[5]. A significant correlation has also been seen between addiction and poor sleep quality and anxiety [6] [7]. In addition, excessive smartphone use can result in musculoskeletal symptoms in the hands, forearms, and neck [8].

A meta-analysis was conducted with information from 31 countries to assess the correlation between internet addiction and quality of life, which showed that the prevalence of addiction was 6% and it is inversely associated with pollution, quality and also dissatisfaction with life in general especially in countries where people spend a lot of time commuting [9].

Another study observed the main causes of smartphone addiction such as, entertainment like games and social networks which were positive predictors of smartphone dependence, which clearly showed that the incidence of dependence was higher for those who used the smartphone to access social networks than to play games [10].

Due to the high prevalence of smartphone addiction found in several studies and the consequences it generates in individuals, this study aimed not only to investigate it but also its epidemiology.

2. Materials and Methods

This was an observational and cross-sectional study. The sample size consisted of 415 undergraduates based on a Brazilian study conducted by Julia Khoury [11]. 10 of these 415 undergraduates were excluded from the research for not having answered all the questions in the questionnaire. The criteria for this research included individuals of both sexes, higher education students aged 18 to 50 years old and smartphone owners. Regarding the age range of the volunteers, it was divided into three groups with a difference of 10 years between the each group age. Data collection took place between February and December 2018 after approval by the Ethics and Research Committee of State University of Health Sciences of Alagoas (UNCISAL) with number CAAE: 79813417.8.0000.5011 on 12/12/2017.

To obtain social data, a self-administered sociodemographic questionnaire was applied. To assess smartphones use by the study volunteers, the Smartphone Dependency Scale (SPAI) was applied. This scale was developed and validated in Taiwan region in 2014 and translated and validated into Portuguese with the necessary cultural adaptations by Khoury in 2016 [11]. The dependence scale is a questionnaire which consists of 26 questions divided into four domains: the first domain consists of questions related to “compulsive behavior,” the second domain contains questions about “functional impairment,” the third domain contains questions related to “withdrawal syndrome,” and the fourth and last domain evaluates questions about “tolerance syndrome.” Participants’ responses were objective in a yes/no format. The scoring was based on the number of “yes” responses on the scale. The points were then tabulated for comparison with the scale’s reference results. For each question on the scale, participants were also given the option “I do not wish to answer.” Individuals who answered yes to 9 or more out of 26 questions on the smartphone addiction screening instrument, were classified as smartphone-dependent [11].

In the descriptive analysis, the data were stored in Microsoft Excel. Quantitative data were presented as mean and standard deviation. Qualitative data were presented in the form of frequency tables while in the inferential analysis, to compare the interference of smartphone use on the performance of the scales and the demographic form—considering each response to the questionnaire and the final score of the volunteers’ the Chi-square test (χ2) scale was applied. Statistical analysis was performed using BIOESTAT software, version 5.0, considering results statistically significant when P ≤ 0.05.

3. Results

This was a sample of 405 university students, of whom 215 were female and 190 were male. Age ranged from 18 to 50 years old, with a mean of 25.34 years and a standard deviation of 6.98 years. Smartphone dependence was found in 31.85% of the participants who were classified as smartphone-dependent according to the smartphone dependence scale if there were a minimum score of 9 “yes” responses out of the 26 questions. No statistically significant difference was found between sexes regarding smartphone dependence. With respect to age group, a higher smartphone dependence was observed among individuals under 40 years of age (P < 0.05). Among individuals aged 18 to 28 years the dependence rate was 33.55% (n = 99), whereas among those over 40 years of age it was 17.39% (n = 4), Participants who answered “I do not wish to answer” on the questionnaire were not included in the analyses, as it was a personal matter and was not related to the research objectives as well, as shown in Table 1.

Table 1. Sociodemographic profile of university students. Maceió (AL, Brazil), 2018.

Variable

N

Dependent (%)

Non-dependent (%)

P

Gender

Male

190

54 (28.42)

136 (71.57)

0.44

Female

215

75 (34.88)

140 (65.11)

Age range

18 - 28

295

99 (33.55)

196 (66.44)

0.02

29 - 39

80

25 (31.25)

55 (68.75)

40 - 50

23

4 (17.39)

19 (82.60)

Marital status

Married

73

16 (21.91)

57 (78.08)

0.04

Sigle

313

106 (33.86)

207 (66.13)

Divorced

11

4 (36.36)

7 (63.63)

Employment

Working

194

57 (29.38)

137 (70.61)

0.64

Not working

202

68 (33.66)

134 (66.33)

Extracurricular activities

Have activities

48

17 (35.41)

31 (64.58)

0.65

Have no activities

354

112 (31.63)

241 (68.07)

Residence

Local residents

316

96 (30.37)

220 (69.62)

0.36

Non-local residents

89

33 (37.07)

56 (62.92)

Academic year

1st

178

64 (35.95)

114 (64.04)

0.36

2nd

54

18 (33.33)

36 (66.66)

3rd

39

11 (28.20)

28 (71.79)

4th

59

14 (23.72)

45 (76.27)

5th

58

19 (32.75)

39 (67.24)

Reason for replacing the cellphone

Replacement due to technological advancement

122

37 (30.32)

85 (69.67)

0.20

Malfunction or loss

116

33 (28.44)

83 (71.55)

Theft or robbery

28

11 (39.28)

17 (60.71)

Regarding marital status, a higher prevalence of smartphone dependence was found among single or separated individuals compared to married individuals (P < 0.05), as shown in Table 1.

There was no statistically significant difference in dependence between individuals who were employed and those who were not, nor with regard to performing or not performing any extracurricular activity other than the college/work ones. Furthermore, there was no statistically significant difference concerning the reasons for previous smartphone replacements (Table 1).

In the question regarding which application university students used most on their smartphones, among the 366 individuals who responded, the most frequent answers were: games, WhatsApp, Instagram, and Facebook. It was observed that the application most related to smartphone addiction was Instagram, with 38.88% of individuals who gave this answer presenting smartphone dependence (P < 0.0006), as shown in Table 2.

Table 2. Most frequently used smartphone application. Maceió (AL, Brazil), 2018.

Variable

N

Dependent (%)

Non-dependent (%)

P

Instagram

54

21 (38.88)

33 (61.11)

0.0006

Facebook

7

1 (14.28)

6 (85.71)

WhatsApp

272

92 (33.82)

180 (66.17)

Games

3

1 (33.33)

2 (66.66)

Unadjusted bivariate analysis

4. Discussion

In the present study, a smartphone dependence rate of 31.85% was found in the sample. Similar to our findings, a study evaluating medical students in Jeddah reported a prevalence of smartphone dependence of 36.5%, showing a directly proportional relationship with the number of hours spent using the device [12]. Other study conducted in Brazil showed a prevalence of problematic smartphone use of 37.5% [13], while another study carried out in China found a rate of 29.8% [6]. Conversely, the study by Hidalgo-Fuentes et al. found dependence in only 19.97% of participants [14], and 21.3% was reported in the study by Long et al. [15]. These differences in findings may be due to different methods used to assess smartphone dependence, as well as cultural characteristics of each studied population.

Regarding marital status, this study showed a higher prevalence of dependence among single or separated individuals. However, in the study by Aker et al., no difference was found in this aspect [16]. This may be due to differences in the questionnaire applied, associated with sociodemographic and cultural differences, since the sample age range was from 19 to 21 years old, unlike the present study, which included individuals aged 18 to 50 years old.

No gender difference in dependence was identified in this study, which is consistent with other research conducted in Jeddah [12], France [4], Lebanon [7], and China [15]. On the other hand, some studies showed a significant association between smartphone dependence and women [17] [18]. This divergence in results may be due to different assessment methods and population age ranges, since both studies used samples of young individuals, with a maximum age of 26 years old.

A significant association between smartphone dependence and younger age groups (under 40 years) was observed, in agreement with studies by Barrault et al. [4], Alhassan et al. [5] and Hidalgo-Cajo et al. [19]. Most studies included in the literature review did not include individuals over 30 years of age, which prevented a large-scale comparison regarding age groups [6].

The prevalence of social networking and communication app use was high among participants who responded to our study (97.13%), and among these 34.21% presented smartphone dependence. This finding agrees with a study conducted in South Korea, in which a significant percentage of smartphone-addicted users (36.04%) used their devices for entertainment compared to normal users (28.24%) [17]. Among the most commonly used smartphone applications, Instagram showed the highest prevalence of smartphone dependence (38.88%), which may be correlated with the brain reward mechanism triggered by “likes” on the application [20].

5. The Study Limitations

The fact that the study was conducted with a sample from a single educational institution made it difficult to generalize the results found, as well as the lack of an objective instrument for data collection, consequently requiring it to be based on self-reporting, which limited the generalization of the conclusions.

6. Conclusions

This study demonstrated a high proportion of university students with smartphone dependence. No statistically significant difference was found regarding gender; however, there was a difference related to age group, with greater relevance among younger individuals. This may be attributed to the fact that these technologies have emerged within the last 20 years and have been part of the lives of many young people since birth.

It is known that smartphone dependence has not yet been included in the DSM-5 (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders); however, given the high incidence of dependence and the possible modifiable causes, such as anxiety and mood disorders, this topic has become particularly important.

The causes that trigger addiction are amplified due to dependence, as it generates further psychosocial disorders. Therefore, the development of new studies on this topic is essential, whether through quantitative or qualitative research. Guidance, psychological support, and psychiatric care—when necessary—are also considered essential for individuals predisposed to depression, self-control reduction, and smartphone dependence, as well as to the technologies related to it.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors report there are no competing interests to declare.

References

[1] Citó, E.B.C. (2021) Vício em smartphone e qualidade de vida em estudantes da área de saúde da Universidade Federal do Ceará. Dissertação, Universidade Federal do Ceará, 63 p.
[2] Nunes, P.P.D.B., Abdon, A.P.V., Brito, C.B.D., Silva, F.V.M., Santos, I.C.A., Martins, D.D.Q., et al. (2021) Factors Related to Smartphone Addiction in Adolescents from a Region in Northeastern Brazil. Ciência & Saúde Coletiva, 26, 2749-2758.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
[3] Gao, T., Xiang, Y., Zhang, H., Zhang, Z. and Mei, S. (2017) Neuroticism and Quality of Life: Multiple Mediating Effects of Smartphone Addiction and Depression. Psychiatry Research, 258, 457-461.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
[4] Barrault, S., Durousseau, F., Ballon, N., Réveillère, C. and Brunault, P. (2019) Smartphone Addiction: French Validation of the Internet Addiction Test-Smartphone Version (IAT-Smartphone) and Associated Psychopathological Features. LEncéphale, 45, 53-59.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
[5] Alhassan, A.A., Alqadhib, E.M., Taha, N.W., Alahmari, R.A., Salam, M. and Almutairi, A.F. (2018) The Relationship between Addiction to Smartphone Usage and Depression among Adults: A Cross Sectional Study. BMC Psychiatry, 18, Article No. 148.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
[6] Chen, B., Liu, F., Ding, S., Ying, X., Wang, L. and Wen, Y. (2017) Gender Differences in Factors Associated with Smartphone Addiction: A Cross-Sectional Study among Medical College Students. BMC Psychiatry, 17, Article No. 341.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
[7] Chłoń-Domińczak, A., Sienkiewicz, Ł. and Trawińska-Konador, K. (2014) Depression, Anxiety and Smartphone Addiction. Proceedings of the European Conference on Knowledge Management, 1, 214-22.
[8] Martins, J.L. and Pereira, R. (2021) Impact of Smartphone Use on the Muscles of the Hand, Forearm and Neck of University Students: A Review Study. Anais da XII Mostra Científica da Faculdade Estácio de Vitória-FESV, 1, 335-346.
[9] Cheng, C. and Li, A.Y. (2014) Internet Addiction Prevalence and Quality of (Real) Life: A Meta-Analysis of 31 Nations across Seven World Regions. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 17, 755-760.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
[10] Jeong, S., Kim, H., Yum, J. and Hwang, Y. (2016) What Type of Content Are Smartphone Users Addicted To? SNS vs. Games. Computers in Human Behavior, 54, 10-17.[CrossRef]
[11] Khoury, J.M. (2016) Tradução, adaptação cultural e validação de uma versão brasileira do questionário Smartphone Addiction Inventory (SPAI) para o rastreamento de dependência de smartphone. Dissertação, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, 151 p.
[12] Alhazmi, A.A., Alzahrani, S.H., Baig, M., Salawati, E.M. and Alkatheri, A. (2018) Prevalence and Factors Associated with Smartphone Addiction among Medical Students at King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah. Pakistan Journal of Medical Sciences, 34, 984-988.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
[13] Modesto, J.G., Araújo Fonseca, G. and Pereira de Sousa, G. (2022) O uso da tecnologia e nomofobia em estudantes universitários. Revista Conhecimento Online, 2, 6-20.[CrossRef]
[14] Hidalgo-Fuentes, S., Llamas-Salguero, F., Martínez-Álvarez, I. and Pineda-Zelaya, I.S. (2025) Prevalencia y factores asociados al uso problemático del smartphone en estudiantes universitarios de Honduras. Revista Española de Drogodependencias, 50, 114-128.[CrossRef]
[15] Long, J., Liu, T., Liao, Y., Qi, C., He, H., Chen, S., et al. (2016) Prevalence and Correlates of Problematic Smartphone Use in a Large Random Sample of Chinese Undergraduates. BMC Psychiatry, 16, Article No. 408.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
[16] Aker, S., Şahin, M.K., Sezgin, S. and Oğuz, G. (2017) Psychosocial Factors Affecting Smartphone Addiction in University Students. Journal of Addictions Nursing, 28, 215-219.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
[17] Kim, H., Min, J., Kim, H. and Min, K. (2017) Accident Risk Associated with Smartphone Addiction: A Study on University Students in Korea. Journal of Behavioral Addictions, 6, 699-707.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
[18] Lee, H., Kim, J.W. and Choi, T.Y. (2017) Risk Factors for Smartphone Addiction in Korean Adolescents: Smartphone Use Patterns. Journal of Korean Medical Science, 32, 1674-1679.[CrossRef] [PubMed]
[19] Hidalgo Cajo, B.G., Silva Borja, G.P., Hidalgo Cajo, F.R. and Hidalgo Cajo, I.M. (2025) Uso del teléfono móvil y su Influencia en la Ansiedad, Satisfacción Personal y Rendimiento Académico en los Estudiantes Universitarios. Revista Española de Educación Médica, 6, 1-12.[CrossRef]
[20] Meshi, D., Elizarova, A., Bender, A. and Verdejo-Garcia, A. (2019) Excessive Social Media Users Demonstrate Impaired Decision Making in the Iowa Gambling Task. Journal of Behavioral Addictions, 8, 169-173.[CrossRef] [PubMed]

Copyright © 2026 by authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc.

Creative Commons License

This work and the related PDF file are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.