Mobile Phone Addiction

Addition refers to the feeling and the attitude that one cannot survive without doing something. Most of the people trust that addition can only be of substance abuse. However, this is not true. Anything that a person becomes used to can cause addiction frequently. In the contemporary technological world, cell-phone or mobile phone is causing addiction to the users. Cell phone addiction is perceived to be the problematic usage of the phone, especially smartphone. Phone addition is a social disorder equated to the addiction to gambling, video games, and shopping. Phone addiction can lead to severe impairment or social upheaval. The two selected articles are both addressing the nature, influence, and mitigations of mobile/cell phone addiction. Mobile and cell phone overdo is a dependence disorder/syndrome exhibiting among the users of mobile phones and is associated with problematic behaviors connected to substance and drug abuse disorders.

The first article addresses the invisible addiction of cell phone and mobile phone usage activities and addiction as exhibited among the college students (both male and female). The underlying objective of the Roberts, Yaya & Manolis (2014) study is to research on which type of activity performed by the cell-phone cause’s cell-phone addiction. In a broader perspective, no one so far has investigated various phone activities and their connectivity to mobile addiction for both male and female users of cell-phones. After conducting the research, Roberts, Yaya & Manolis (2014) discovered several findings and results. For instance, the research findings reveal that cell-phone activities connected to the cell-phone addiction include Instagram, Twittering, Facebooking and messaging. Gender factor is critically impactful in the discovery of the cell phone addiction. The phone activities causing addiction among the cell phone uses vary depending on gender (either female or male). According to Roberts, Yaya & Manolis (2014), cell phone addiction as depicted from the samples that participated in the survey results from the desire of people to connect socially. The activities influencing mobile phone addiction varied based on gender; male or female. For instance, women are found to use more than 600 minutes a day in cell phone compared to men who are perceived to take approximate 459 minutes a day. With the constant growing avenues of the technological world, the problem of cell phone addiction becomes a real and realistic social problem (Roberts, Yaya & Manolis, 2014).

The second article presents the addictive temperament resulting from the problematic or excessive application of mobile phone (Takao, Takahashi & Kitamura, 2009). As suggested by this article, mobile phone usage has been prescribed and regulated in some conditions. However, regardless of such recognized and outstanding safety concerns related to legal regulations, some mobile phone users are unable to quit or refrain from using cell phones. Takao, Takahashi & Kitamura (2009) considers these problematic mobile phone application as an addictive behavior towards cell phone usage. To discover the prospective clairvoyants of cell phone addictive behavior, the article investigated the relationship between the problematic usage of cell phones and the personality characteristics that are described in obsession prose work. The study finds that mobile phone addiction is influenced by gender, self-monitoring and approval motivation. Therefore, the measurements of such addictive personalities are primarily crucial in screening as well as intervention approaches for potential problematic mobile phone users (Takao, Takahashi & Kitamura, 2009).

The two articles are similar in some ways. The two articles have investigated the form of addiction associated with phone use. Although the first article had addressed the cell-phone addiction while the second article addressed mobile phone problematic behaviors, the two concepts are similar. The two are aiming at understanding how excessive use of mobile or cell phones are becoming a problem in society. Some of the findings of the two discoveries have some similarities. For instance, both research studies have found that mobile phone addiction varies depending on sex (either a male or a female). Also, the result suggests that mobile phone addiction is proving to be a problematic social disorder.

The two articles have subjected some differences. Roberts, Yaya & Manolis (2014) article is a peer-reviewed journal while Takao, Takahashi & Kitamura (2009) is an investigative article. The first article has conducted a fieldwork survey to come up with the findings; however, the second article has reflected the ideas by reviewing the literature work about cell phone addiction to make inferences. However, even though there is a significantly influential social element that facilitates cell phone addiction for both genders, the specific mobile phone activity connected to cell phone addiction differs considerably.

Conclusively, the usage of a cell phone in contemporary society is a perfect example of a technological paradox. The application of the smartphones can be both detrimental and useful. The use of smartphone assists in the acquisition of information, communication and socialization; however, smartphone usage can cause addiction that influences social phone disorder/dependence. Mobile and cell phone overdo is a dependence disorder/syndrome exhibiting among the users of mobile phones and is associated with problematic behaviors connected to substance and drug abuse disorders. In the contemporary technological world, cell-phone or mobile phone is causing addiction to the users. For instance, phone addiction can lead to serious impairment or social disorder.

References

Roberts, J., Yaya, L., & Manolis, C. (2014). The invisible addiction: Cell-phone activities and addiction among male and female college students. Journal of behavioral addictions, 3(4), 254-265.

Takao, M., Takahashi, S., & Kitamura, M. (2009). Addictive personality and problematic mobile phone use. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 12(5), 501-507.