Abstract
This meta-analysis quantified the relationship between the five-factor model of personality and problematic social media use and identified moderators of this relationship. The analysis used a random-effects model to calculate a correlation for each factor and included 113 samples, with a total of 53,913 participants, identified from systematic searches of four databases. Moderator analyses were used to investigate potential causes of heterogeneity. The meta-analysis found that high neuroticism (r = .21, p < .001, 95% CI [.19, .23]), low conscientiousness (r = -.16, p < .001, 95% CI [-.19, -.13]), low agreeableness (r = -.07, p < .001, 95% CI [-.10, -.05]), and low openness (r = -.04, p = .001, 95% CI [-.06, -.02]) were significantly associated with problematic social media use. Several significant moderator effects were found. The meta-analysis contributes to the understanding of the relationship between individual characteristics and problematic social media use and provides information that might be useful in preventing and treating this behaviour.
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
Introduction
Social media sites are online platforms that allow users to share messages and other content. Commonly used social media sites (also called social networking sites) include Facebook, Instagram, LinkedIn, Snapchat, YouTube, TikTok, WeChat, and Reddit. Research into the psychological consequences of social media use has grown exponentially over the past decade as Facebook and other platforms have gained huge popularity, becoming ubiquitous in the daily lives of many people worldwide (Kuss & Griffiths, 2017).
Conceptualisation and measurement of problematic social media use
There is a growing base of empirical evidence suggesting that excessive social media use may lead to symptoms traditionally associated with substance-related addictions and gambling disorder (Andreassen, 2015). However, since social media addiction lacks proper diagnostic criteria, there is a lack of consistency in how this concept is defined and measured, making it hard to provide a single definition of the phenomena (Kuss & Griffiths, 2017). Additionally, there is debate regarding whether addiction nomenclature can be appropriately applied to problematic social media use (Kardefelt-Winther et al., 2017). Due to these concerns, we will use problematic social media use to refer to a pattern of social media use that is characterised by the occurrence of addiction-like symptoms that lead to negative consequences.
Many studies measure problematic social media use using the following six components of addiction in a biopsychosocial model proposed by Griffiths (2005): salience, mood modification, tolerance, withdrawal, relapse, and conflict. Kuss and Griffiths (2017) presented evidence that all of these components may be present in some excessive social media users. Kuss and Griffiths stated that some individuals are intensely preoccupied with using or thinking about social media (salience). They use these platforms to induce mood alterations, pleasurable feelings, or a numbing effect (mood modification). An increasing amount of time using social media is required to experience the same feelings that occurred during the initial phases of usage (tolerance). When social media use is reduced, these individuals experience negative psychological and sometimes physiological symptoms (withdrawal), often leading to a reinstatement of their social media use (relapse). Finally, intrapsychic or interpersonal conflicts occur due to excessive social media use (conflict). The Bergen Facebook Addiction Scale (Andreassen et al., 2012) and Bergen Social Media Addiction Scale (Andreassen et al., 2017) are common scales for measuring problematic social media use that assess Griffiths’ (2005) six components of addiction.
Other researchers have adopted different conceptualisations of problematic social media use. For example, researchers adapted the Internet Addiction Test (IAT) proposed by Young (1998) to measure addiction to social media specifically (Kircaburun & Griffiths, 2018). The conceptualisation underlying the IAT is based on the criteria for pathological gambling, with test items assessing factors such as preoccupation with Internet use and concealment of use (Young, 1998). Other studies refrain from employing addiction nomenclature and refer to the phenomenon as problematic social media use (Marino et al., 2018). A common conceptualisation of problematic social media use is based on the cognitive-behavioural aspects of problematic Internet use in a model proposed by Caplan (2010). Problematic social media use in this model includes the dimensions of preference for online social interaction (over in-person interaction), mood regulation, cognitive preoccupation, compulsive use, and negative outcomes (Caplan, 2010). Researchers typically adapt Young’s (1998) IAT or Caplan’s (2010) Problematic Internet Use Scale to specifically measure problematic social media use by replacing the word “Internet” in scale items with the type of social media they are interested in, such as “Instagram” (Kircaburun & Griffiths, 2018).
Relationships between five-factor traits and problematic social media use
Researchers have investigated how the five-factor trait model of personality is related to problematic social media use (Marino et al., 2018). This model describes five dimensions in human personality: extraversion (being energetic, enthusiastic, outgoing, and talkative), agreeableness (being generous, kind, trusting, and sympathetic), conscientiousness (being efficient, organised, reliable, and responsible), neuroticism (being anxious, touchy, and unstable), and openness (being curious, imaginative, insightful, and original; McCrae & John, 1992).
The majority of studies investigating problematic social media use have focused on problematic Facebook use; less is known about personality factors associated with problematic use of social media in general, and whether these traits differ from those associated with problematic use of Facebook specifically (Balcerowska et al., 2022). Marino et al.’s (2018) meta-analysis of five-factor traits associated with problematic Facebook use found that neuroticism and conscientiousness had the strongest associations with problematic Facebook use, with the remaining traits being weakly associated. Previous research on the associations between five-factor personality traits and problematic social media use have produced inconsistent findings for openness, agreeableness, and extraversion, with significant variations in the strength and direction of the associations (Atroszko et al., 2018; Dong et al., 2018). Some researchers have theorised that these inconsistent findings could be due to cultural factors that vary depending on the country in which the study is conducted (Błachnio et al., 2016; Błachnio et al., 2017). Błachnio et al. (2016) conducted a cross-cultural study across eight countries including 2628 participants and found that high neuroticism and low conscientiousness was significantly associated with greater problematic social media use in each sample; however, the correlations for the remaining five-factor traits were inconsistent across the eight samples, varying in strength, direction, and significance. Błachnio et al. (2017) reported similar findings across three countries and 1011 participants, finding that only neuroticism and conscientiousness were significantly associated across the three countries studied. A meta-analysis would allow the consolidation of effect sizes found regarding problematic social media use in a wider range of locations and settings and would allow investigation of whether characteristics of studies such as the scales used, mean sample age, and other demographic characteristics moderate the effect sizes.
Aim and hypotheses
The aim of this meta-analysis was to synthesise and quantify the findings of studies reporting associations between five-factor personality traits and problematic social media use. A key objective of this meta-analysis was to provide a comprehensive review of research in this field by adopting a broader conceptualisation of problematic social media use compared to previous reviews focusing on problematic Facebook use specifically. Additionally, this meta-analysis aimed to evaluate a broad range of moderators that might explain the heterogeneity in effect sizes, namely sex, age, geographical location, type of problematic social media use measured, type of scale used to measure problematic social media use, and type of scale used to measure personality. Based on meta-analytic findings regarding a subcomponent of problematic social media use, namely problematic Facebook use (Akbari et al., 2023; Marino et al., 2018), as well as cross-cultural research on problematic Facebook use (Błachnio et al., 2016; Błachnio et al., 2017), the hypotheses for this meta-analysis were that higher neuroticism and lower conscientiousness, openness, agreeableness, and extraversion would be associated with greater problematic social media use.
Method
Search strategy
The protocol for this meta-analysis was published in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews, registration number CRD42021267184. We systematically searched the following databases: EBSCO, EBSCO Open Dissertations, ProQuest, and PubMed. Keywords used were Big-Five, five-factor, neuroticism, “emotional stability”, extraversion, introversion, openness, agreeableness, conscientiousness, addict*, abuse, misuse, overuse, intrusion, “excessive use”, “compulsive use”, “problem* use”, “social media”, “social network* site”, “online social network*”, and the names of several social networking sites (Facebook, Instagram, WhatsApp, YouTube, Twitter, Reddit, TikTok, Snapchat, LinkedIn, WeChat, and Weibo). No restrictions were placed on publication date or language. Reference lists of included articles were searched to identify additional relevant research, and then the “cited by” function in Google Scholar was used on included articles to identify further relevant research. Studies were screened by title and abstract, and then full text. This literature search was completed in October 2023.
Eligibility criteria
One requisite for inclusion in the meta-analysis was use of a valid measure for the measurement of addictive or problematic social media use. Studies were excluded if they only measured social media use rather than problematic use or if they measured problematic Internet use in general rather than problematic social media use.
Data extraction and coding
Data extracted to calculate effect sizes were the Pearson correlation r and the sample size. The following sample characteristics were coded: gender distribution (% of female participants), mean participant age, country in which the study was conducted, scale used to measure problematic social media use, type of problematic social media use measured, and scale used to measure personality. When studies did not report correlations, we contacted the corresponding author of the study to obtain the missing information. Missing correlations were obtained for eight studies. A third of the studies were checked by two independent coders and the agreement between the two independent coders was 97%.
Data analysis
Analyses were performed using Comprehensive Meta-Analysis Software (CMA; version 3.3.070), using the Hedges and Olkin approach to calculate effect sizes for meta-analysis. A separate meta-analysis was conducted for each five-factor trait, using r as the effect size. Meta-analyses were performed using a random-effects model, as the true effect size likely varies across studies due to significant heterogeneity in sample characteristics and the questionnaires used to assess personality and problematic social media use. Heterogeneity of effect sizes was evaluated using (i) Cochran’s Q to test heterogeneity, (ii) the I2 statistic of proportion of true variation in observed effects not due to sampling bias, and (iii) tau2 to estimate variance of underlying true effects across studies.
A relative weight analysis (Johnson, 2000) was used to examine the incremental predictive validity of each five-factor trait for predicting problematic social media use. To conduct this analysis, we constructed a meta-analytic correlation matrix using the meta-analytic correlations reported in the present meta-analysis between five-factor personality traits and problematic social media use, as well as previously reported meta-analytic correlations between five-factor traits. We followed the recommendations of Park et al. (2020) and used the meta-analytic correlations between five-factor traits reported in Steel et al. (2018), since these appeared to have the largest k and N out of the reported meta-analytic estimates.
We conducted sensitivity analyses for our primary analyses of the meta-analytic effect size for each five-factor trait, using the one-study removed method. This involved running the meta-analysis for each trait multiple times with a different single study removed to evaluate whether the meta-analytic effect size was heavily influenced by any single study. Additionally, we used selection models (Vevea & Hedges, 1995; Vevea & Woods, 2005) to evaluate whether the results of the meta-analysis are distorted by publication bias. A selection model adjusts the estimated meta-analytic effect size to account for the fact that not all effect sizes are equally likely to be published. This adjusted estimate can then be compared to the unadjusted estimate to evaluate publication bias, using a likelihood ratio test (LRT).
Sex-related effects were evaluated using a continuous measure of the percentage of female participants in each sample. Age-related effects were evaluated using the mean age in each sample. The effect of sex and age on the effect size for each five-factor trait was measured using multivariate mixed-effect meta-regression models (van Houwelingen et al., 2002). Additionally, we evaluated the effects of the following categorical moderators: type of social media, type of addiction scale, type of personality scale, location (country), and location (continent).
Potential publication bias was evaluated with rank correlation Kendall tau, Egger’s regression test, and the trim and fill method. The Kendall tau method was used to analyse the correlation between effect sizes and variances of these effects, for which the lack of a significant correlation can be interpreted as absence of publication bias (Begg & Mazumdar, 1994). Egger’s regression test was used to test for asymmetry of the funnel plot, for which the lack of significant asymmetry can be interpreted as absence of publication bias (Egger et al., 1997). We used the trim and fill method (Duval & Tweedie, 2000) to check whether additional studies needed to be imputed and to measure how imputed studies would change the effect size estimate.
Results
Results of literature search
Studies were identified through database searches using keywords, searching reference lists, and using the “cited by” function on Google Scholar. Several of the studies included in the meta-analysis contained multiple independent samples (Błachnio et al., 2017), resulting in a total of 113 independent samples. Figure 1 presents a PRISMA Flow Diagram (Moher et al., 2009) containing information about the study selection process. The final data file for these 113 samples is at https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/EF59J.
PRISMA flow diagram of study selection
Sample characteristics
Table 1 provides summary information for each study. The 113 independent samples analysed in the meta-analysis included data on 53,913 participants (60% females, Mage = 24 years, SDage = 7 years). Samples measured problematic social media use in general (k = 42), or problematic use of specific social media sites: Facebook (k = 64), Instagram (k = 5), WeChat (k = 3), Snapchat (k = 1), Twitter (k = 1), QQ (k = 1) and WhatsApp (k = 1). Two studies measured three different types of problematic social media use (Sheldon et al., 2020; Sindermann et al., 2020b), and one study measured problematic social media use by assessing both problematic Facebook use and problematic social media use in general (Balcerowska et al., 2022). For studies that administered multiple measures of problematic social media use, the effect size of the correlation between problematic social media use and each personality trait was calculated by averaging the outcomes across the different measures of problematic social media use.
Measures used in the studies
The scales used to measure problematic social media use in the included studies are listed in Table 2. Most samples used either the Bergen Facebook Addiction Scale or the Bergen Social Media Addiction Scale (k = 59) as a measure of problematic social media use, with the remaining samples using the Facebook Intrusion Questionnaire (k = 10), adapted versions of the General Problematic Internet Use Scale (k = 5), adapted versions of the Internet Addiction Test (k = 5), the Psycho-Social Aspects of Facebook Use scale (k = 6), the Social Media Disorder Scale (k = 5), the Social Media Use Questionnaire (k = 3), or other measures of problematic social media use (k = 20).
The scales used to measure five-factor personality traits in the included studies are listed in Table 2. Approximately half of the samples (k = 51) used the Big Five Inventory to measure five-factor traits, followed by the Ten Item Personality Inventory (k = 33), the International Personality Item Pool (k = 7), and the NEO Five-Factor Inventory (k = 5).
Meta-analytic effect size
Table 3 presents the meta-analytic correlations, along with Q tests for heterogeneity, I2, and tau2. Forest plots of effect sizes included in the meta-analyses are presented in Figures S1-S5 in the online supplementary information. High neuroticism had the strongest correlation with problematic social media use, followed by low conscientiousness. Small but significant correlations were found between problematic social media use and low openness and low agreeableness. Extraversion was not significantly correlated with problematic social media use. Q tests were significant for each trait, indicating significant heterogeneity in the effect size for each trait across different studies. This heterogeneity indicated by the Q tests and the high I2 values justified moderator analyses.
Relative weight analysis
A relative weight analysis was conducted to evaluate the degree to which each five-factor trait uniquely predicts problematic social media use. The results of this analysis are reported in Table 4. In addition to the raw relative weights, we reported the rescaled relative weights (% of R2), which represent the percentage of explained variance in problematic social media use that is attributable to each predictor.
Moderator analyses
Table 5 presents the results of the continuous moderator analyses. Mean age was not reported by 22 samples that were therefore excluded from the continuous moderator analyses, which included the remaining 91 samples. None of the meta-analytic effect sizes were moderated by the percentage of females in the sample. However, the meta-analytic effect sizes for openness and extraversion were moderated by the mean age of the sample. For openness, a meta-regression showed a significant association between a higher mean age of the sample and a weaker effect size for the negative association with problematic social media use, after controlling for percentage of females. For extraversion, a meta-regression showed a significant association between a higher mean age of the sample and a stronger effect size for the positive association with problematic social media use, after controlling for percentage of females.
Tables 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10 present the results of the categorical moderator analyses. For openness, the effect size significantly differed depending on the type of personality scale used, with studies using the BFI and NEO-FFI reporting weaker correlations in comparison to studies using the other scales.
For conscientiousness, the effect size significantly differed depending on the type of addiction scale used, with studies using the GPIUS and IAT reporting weaker correlations in comparison to studies using the other scales.
For extraversion, the effect size significantly differed depending on the type of addiction scale used, and the location of the study (both country and continent). Estimates varied widely depending on the type of addiction scale used: from -0.178 for studies using the GPIUS to 0.042 for studies using the Bergen Facebook Addiction Scale and the Bergen Social Media Addiction Scale.
For agreeableness, the effect size did not significantly differ depending on any of the moderators we examined.
For neuroticism, the effect size significantly differed depending on the country in which the study was conducted, with estimates ranging from 0.097 for Pakistan to 0.303 for the UK.
Sensitivity analyses
One-study-removed analyses for each five-factor trait revealed that none of the included studies substantially influenced the meta-analytic effect size. For each trait, when any study was removed from the analysis, the meta-analytic effect size remained within the 95% confidence interval of the meta-analytic effect size calculated by including all studies.
The LRTs comparing the adjusted and unadjusted models (using p-value cut points of 0.05, 0.01, and 0.001) were not significant for conscientiousness (p = 0.60), extraversion (p = 0.20), agreeableness (p = 0.78), and neuroticism (p = 0.25). This result suggests that the meta-analytic estimates for these traits were not significantly affected by publication bias. However, the LRT for openness was significant (p = 0.001), and the adjusted estimate for openness (r = -0.005) was considerably weaker than the unadjusted estimate (r = -0.04), suggesting that the meta-analytic estimate for openness may be inflated due to publication bias.
Publication bias
Results of calculations for Kendall tau, Egger’s intercept test, and imputed studies using the trim and fill method (Duval & Tweedie, 2000) are shown in Table 11. For the most part, these tests suggested that the meta-analytic correlation estimates for openness and agreeableness were likely impacted by publication bias. However, these tests suggest that estimates for conscientiousness, extraversion, and neuroticism were not significantly impacted by publication bias.
For openness, the trim and fill method (Duval & Tweedie, 2000) recommended imputing 13 studies to the right side of the mean, changing the effect size to r = -0.01, 95% CI [-0.04, 0.01]. For agreeableness, the trim and fill method recommended imputing 18 studies to the right of the mean, changing the effect size to r = -0.04, 95% CI [-0.07, -0.01].
Discussion
The present meta-analysis provides a synthesis of research on the association between the five-factor model of personality and problematic social media use. The findings from 113 samples support the hypotheses that higher neuroticism and lower conscientiousness, openness, and agreeableness would be associated with problematic social media use. No support was found for the hypothesis that lower extraversion would be associated with problematic social media use. The effect sizes yielded by the present meta-analysis for neuroticism and conscientiousness can be considered small to medium according to Cohen’s (1992) criteria, while the effect sizes for agreeableness and openness are small. The relative weight analysis suggests that neuroticism and conscientiousness together account for almost all (91%) of the variance in problematic social media use predicted by the five-factor traits. In comparison, the incremental predictive power offered by openness, agreeableness, and extraversion is negligible. Additionally, the relative weight analysis revealed that the total variance in problematic social media use predicted by five-factor traits is low (6%), which suggests the importance of investigating other factors in addition to these traits in research on predictors of problematic social media use.
The meta-analytic effect sizes are similar to those reported in the review conducted by Marino et al. (2018) on five-factor personality traits associated with problematic Facebook use. However, in comparison to Marino et al. (2018), the present meta-analysis provides a more comprehensive review of research on five-factor traits associated with problematic social media use by including more than five times as many studies for each five-factor trait. During the peer-review process prior to the publication of this meta-analysis, another meta-analysis with identical aims to the present paper was published, and also found similar results (Huang, 2022). However, in comparison to Huang (2022), the present meta-analysis provides a more comprehensive review of the relevant research by including approximately 40 additional samples, considering the relative weight of predictors, considering a wider range of potential moderators, and evaluating potential influences of publication bias.
To some degree, the findings of the present review are similar to those of previous meta-analyses of associations between five-factor personality traits and Internet addiction (Kayiş et al., 2016), smartphone addiction (Marengo et al., 2020), nicotine use disorder (Malouff et al., 2006), and problematic alcohol use (Malouff et al., 2007), which all reported a personality profile of high neuroticism, low conscientiousness, and low agreeableness.
The findings of this meta-analysis are consistent with possible causes of problematic social media use that have been identified in previous research. Individuals with high neuroticism tend to be anxious, tense, touchy, and unstable (McCrae & John, 1992). Researchers have hypothesised that individuals with high neuroticism may use social media frequently as a strategy to regulate the various negative emotions they experience (Andreassen et al., 2012).
Individuals with high conscientiousness are organised and industrious (McCrae & John, 1992). Researchers have speculated that conscientiousness may act as a protective factor against the development of problematic social media use (Andreassen et al., 2013). This analysis is in line with research findings showing that high conscientiousness is associated with lower levels of other problematic behaviour such as addictive use of tobacco (Malouff et al., 2006) and alcohol (Malouff et al., 2007). The present set of findings suggests that individuals with low conscientiousness may be less occupied with important duties and deadlines and therefore more likely to use social media in a problematic or addictive manner for short-term gratification (Marino et al., 2018).
Low agreeableness is characterised by tendencies toward being antisocial and inconsiderate (McCrae & John, 1992). Low agreeableness has been found to be associated with higher levels of dark triad personality traits such as narcissism (O'Boyle et al., 2015), which are associated with problematic social media use (Lee, 2019). Therefore, low agreeableness may be associated with other traits that might lead to problematic engagement in social media use.
Individuals with low openness tend to be closed-minded and change-avoidant (McCrae & John, 1992). Research has found that individuals higher on openness have a lower risk of mortality and physical ailment (Lee, 2019). Therefore, high openness may be a protective factor against developing maladaptive patterns of behaviour like problematic social media use (Lee, 2019), making it more likely for individuals with low openness to develop this behaviour.
The association between problematic social media use and extraversion appeared to be almost null, consistent with the findings of Marino et al. (2018), and suggesting that extraversion may not be relevant for predicting problematic social media use.
Age was found to have a small association with the effect size for openness and extraversion, offering a possible explanation for some of the heterogeneity found between studies in the effect sizes for these traits. The negative association between openness and problematic social media use was weaker in studies with a higher mean age.
This meta-analysis has significant advantages over any single study in that it included results from many researchers in different countries, using different measures and participants. The variety and number of participants included in this meta-analysis increases the generalisability of the findings.
Implications for treatment
Low conscientiousness and high neuroticism may create difficulties when treating problematic social media use since this personality profile predicts lower treatment adherence and poorer treatment outcomes (Bagby et al., 2016; Hooten et al., 2005). Efforts to treat or prevent problematic social media use might focus on increasing conscientiousness and lowering neuroticism to improve treatment adherence and outcomes. Effective treatment might include providing strategies to reduce negative emotions and providing strategies to improve organisation and productivity. However, since the relative weight analysis suggested that only approximately 5% of the variance in problematic social media use can be attributed to neuroticism and conscientiousness, practitioners should consider also targeting other factors in treatment that are responsible for more of the variance in problematic social media use than the small portion attributable to these personality traits. Interventions aiming to reduce problematic social media use may be more effective if they target conscientiousness and neuroticism alongside psychosocial factors strongly associated with problematic social media use such as social anxiety, loneliness, and fear of missing out (see Wegmann & Brand, 2019).
While the present meta-analysis found that openness and agreeableness were significantly negatively associated with problematic social media use, the relative weight analysis suggests that these traits have very little incremental predictive validity for predicting problematic social media use when accounting for neuroticism and conscientiousness, which together predicted almost all of the variance observed in problematic social media use. This result suggests that openness and agreeableness may not be as relevant to consider as neuroticism and conscientiousness in order to obtain positive treatment outcomes. This conclusion is further supported by the trim-and-fill analyses, which suggested that the meta-analytic correlations estimated for openness and agreeableness may be overinflated due to publication bias, with the recommended adjusted correlation for agreeableness decreasing in strength considerably to r = -0.04, and the recommended adjusted correlation for openness no longer significant, r = -0.01, 95% CI [-0.04, 0.01].
Limitations
Limitations of the findings include the following: (1) only correlational (cross-sectional) studies were included in this meta-analysis, and correlation does not imply causation; (2) the included studies relied entirely on self-report measures of problematic social media use; and (3) we did not measure differences in effect sizes between different types of social media because few studies measured problematic use of social networking platforms other than Facebook. We created the “not Facebook” group to have a valid comparison group to Facebook other than general social media.
Future research
Longitudinal studies on the relationship between five-factor traits and problematic social media use could help identify long-term relationships between the traits and problematic social media use. Future research could investigate five-factor traits associated with social networking sites other than Facebook. Researchers could consider using measures of problematic social media use other than self-report. For example, objective measures of problematic social media use could be created by recording use times (see Ryding & Kuss, 2020). Once more studies are published on problematic use of social media platforms other than Facebook, future meta-analyses could evaluate whether the type of social media platform used is a significant moderator of the relationship between problematic social media use and five-factor traits. Future research should evaluate interventions for problematic social media use that target neuroticism and conscientiousness in addition to psychosocial factors strongly correlated with problematic social media use.
Data availability
The datafile that was generated and analysed in the current study is available in the OSF repository, https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/EF59J.
References
*Indicates studies included in the meta-analysis.
*Abbasi, I., & Drouin, M. (2019). Neuroticism and Facebook addiction: How social media can affect mood? The American Journal of Family Therapy, 47(4), 199?215. https://doi.org/10.1080/01926187.2019.1624223
*Ahmad, G., & Iqbal, H. (2021). Personality traits: Facebook addiction among teenagers and young adults. Academic Journal of Social Sciences, 5(1), 143?161. https://doi.org/10.54692/ajss.2021.05011211
Akbari, M., Seydavi, M., Jamshidi, S., Marino, C., & Spada, M. M. (2023). The Big-five personality traits and their link to problematic and compensatory Facebook use: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Addictive Behaviors,139, 107603. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addbeh.2022.107603
*Akdeniz, S. (2022). Personality traits and narcissism in social media predict social media addiction. Ahmet Keleşoğlu Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 4(2), 224–237. https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/akef/issue/72486/1179304
*Alshakhsi, S., Babiker, A., Montag, C., & Ali, R. (2023). On the association between personality, fear of missing out (FoMO) and problematic social media use tendencies in European and Arabian samples. Acta Psychologica, 240, 104026. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2023.104026
Andreassen, C. S. (2015). Online social network site addiction: A comprehensive review. Current Addiction Reports,2(2), 175–184. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40429-015-0056-9
*Andreassen, C. S., Griffiths, M. D., Gjertsen, S. R., Krossbakken, E., Kvam, S., & Pallesen, S. (2013). The relationships between behavioral addictions and the five-factor model of personality. Journal of Behavioral Addictions, 2(2), 90?99. https://doi.org/10.1556/JBA.2.2013.003
Andreassen, C. S., Pallesen, S., & Griffiths, M. D. (2017). The relationship between addictive use of social media, narcissism, and self-esteem: Findings from a large national survey. Addictive Behaviors,64, 287–293. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addbeh.2016.03.006
Andreassen, C. S., Torsheim, T., Brunborg, G. S., & Pallesen, S. (2012). Development of a Facebook addiction scale. Psychological Reports,110(2), 501–517. https://doi.org/10.2466/02.09.18.Pr0.110.2.501-517
Ashton, M. C., & Lee, K. (2009). The HEXACO–60: A short measure of the major dimensions of personality. Journal of Personality Assessment,91(4), 340–345. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223890902935878
*Assunção, R., & Matos, P. M. (2017). Adolescents' profiles of problematic Facebook use and associations with developmental variables. Computers in Human Behavior, 75, 396?403. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.05.034
*Atroszko, P. A., Atroszko, B., & Charzyńska, E. (2021). Subpopulations of addictive behaviors in different sample types and their relationships with gender, personality, and well-being: Latent profile vs. latent class analysis. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 18(16). https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18168590
*Atroszko, P. A., Balcerowska, J. M., Bereznowski, P., Biernatowska, A., Pallesen, S., & Andreassen, C. S. (2018). Facebook addiction among Polish undergraduate students: Validity of measurement and relationship with personality and well-being. Computers in Human Behavior, 85, 329?338. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2018.04.001
Bacanlı, H., İlhan, T., & Aslan, S. (2009). Development of a personality scale based on five factor theory: adjective based personality test (ABPT). Journal of Turkish Educational Sciences,7(2), 261–279.
Bagby, R. M., Gralnick, T. M., Al-Dajani, N., & Uliaszek, A. A. (2016). The role of the five-factor model in personality assessment and treatment planning. Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice,23(4), 365–381. https://doi.org/10.1111/cpsp.12175
*Balcerowska, J., Biernatowska, A., Golińska, P., & Barańska, J. (2019). Relationship between dimensions of grandiose narcissism and Facebook addiction among university students. Current Issues in Personality Psychology, 7(4), 313?323. https://doi.org/10.5114/cipp.2019.92957
*Balcerowska, J. M., Bereznowski, P., Biernatowska, A., Atroszko, P. A., Pallesen, S., & Andreassen, C. S. (2022). Is it meaningful to distinguish between Facebook addiction and social networking sites addiction? Psychometric analysis of Facebook addiction and social networking sites addiction scales. Current Psychology, 41(2), 949?962. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-020-00625-3
*Balta, S., Emirtekin, E., Kircaburun, K., & Griffiths, M. D. (2020). Neuroticism, trait fear of missing out, and phubbing: The mediating role of state fear of missing out and problematic Instagram use. International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction, 18(3), 628?639. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11469-018-9959-8
Begg, C. B., & Mazumdar, M. (1994). Operating characteristics of a rank correlation test for publication bias. Biometrics,50(4), 1088–1101. https://doi.org/10.2307/2533446
*Biolcati, R., Mancini, G., Pupi, V., & Mugheddu, V. (2018). Facebook addiction: Onset predictors. Journal of Clinical Medicine, 7(6), 118. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm7060118
*Błachnio, A., & Przepiorka, A. (2016). Personality and positive orientation in Internet and Facebook addiction. An empirical report from Poland. Computers in Human Behavior, 59, 230?236. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.02.018
*Błachnio, A., Przepiorka, A., Benvenuti, M., Cannata, D., Ciobanu, A. M., Senol-Durak, E., Durak, M., Giannakos, M. N., Mazzoni, E., Pappas, I. O., Popa, C., Seidman, G., Yu, S., Wu, A. M. S., & Ben-Ezra, M. (2016). Cultural and personality predictors of Facebook intrusion: A cross-cultural study. Frontiers in Psychology, 7. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01895
*Błachnio, A., Przepiorka, A., Senol-Durak, E., Durak, M., & Sherstyuk, L. (2017). The role of personality traits in Facebook and Internet addictions: A study on Polish, Turkish, and Ukrainian samples. Computers in Human Behavior, 68, 269?275. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.11.037
*Blackwell, D., Leaman, C., Tramposch, R., Osborne, C., & Liss, M. (2017). Extraversion, neuroticism, attachment style and fear of missing out as predictors of social media use and addiction. Personality and Individual Differences, 116, 69?72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2017.04.039
*Bodroža, B., & Jovanović, T. (2016). Validation of the new scale for measuring behaviors of Facebook users: Psycho-Social Aspects of Facebook Use (PSAFU). Computers in Human Behavior, 54, 425?435. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.07.032
*Boudreaux, M. M. (2022). Is Facebook use helping or hurting your healthcare employees during COVID? (Publication No. 28965559) [Doctoral dissertation, University of South Alabama]. ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global.
*Büttner, C. M., Lalot, F., & Rudert, S. C. (2023). Showing with whom I belong: The desire to belong publicly on social media. Computers in Human Behavior, 139, 107535. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2022.107535
*Caci, B., Cardaci, M., Scrima, F., & Tabacchi, M. E. (2017). The dimensions of Facebook addiction as measured by Facebook Addiction Italian Questionnaire and their relationships with individual differences. Cyberpsychology Behavior, and Social Networking, 20(4), 251?258. https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2016.0073
Caci, B., Cardaci, M., Tabacchi, M. E., & Scrima, F. (2014). Personality variables as predictors of Facebook usage. Psychological Reports,114(2), 528–539. https://doi.org/10.2466/21.09.PR0.114k23w6
Caplan, S. E. (2010). Theory and measurement of generalized problematic Internet use: A two-step approach. Computers in Human Behavior,26(5), 1089–1097. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2010.03.012
Caprara, G. V., Barbaranelli, C., Borgogni, L., & Perugini, M. (1993). The “big five questionnaire”: A new questionnaire to assess the five factor model. Personality and Individual Differences,15(3), 281–288. https://doi.org/10.1016/0191-8869(93)90218-R
Charlton, J. P. (2002). A factor-analytic investigation of computer ‘addiction’ and engagement. British Journal of Psychology,93(3), 329–344. https://doi.org/10.1348/000712602760146242
*Charzyńska, E., Sussman, S., & Atroszko, P. A. (2021). Profiles of potential behavioral addictions' severity and their associations with gender, personality, and well-being: A person-centered approach. Addictive Behaviors, 119, 106941. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addbeh.2021.106941
*Chen, A. (2019). From attachment to addiction: The mediating role of need satisfaction on social networking sites. Computers in Human Behavior, 98, 80?92. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2019.03.034
*Chen, A., & Roberts, N. (2020). Connecting personality traits to social networking site addiction: The mediating role of motives. Information Technology & People, 33(2), 633?656. https://doi.org/10.1108/ITP-01-2019-0025
*Chi, L.-C., Tang, T.-C., & Tang, E. (2023). Psychometric properties of the Utrecht Work Engagement Scale for Students (UWES-S) in the Taiwanese context. Current Psychology, 42(31), 27428?27441. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-022-03737-0
*Chung, K. P. (2018). Instagram use and college students' adjustment (Publication No. 10826186) [Master's thesis, Middle Tennessee State University]. ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global. https://www.proquest.com/docview/2111350842?pq-origsite=gscholar&fromopenview=true
Cohen, J. (1992). A power primer. Psychological Bulletin,112(1), 155. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.112.1.155
Corulla, W. J. (1990). A revised version of the Psychoticism scale for children. Personality and Individual Differences,11(1), 65–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/0191-8869(90)90169-R
Costa, P. T., & McCrae, R. R. (1992). Revised NEO personality inventory (NEO-PI-R) and NEO five-factor inventory (NEO-FFI) professional manual. Psychological Assessment Resources.
*Dailey, S. L., Howard, K., Roming, S. M. P., Ceballos, N., & Grimes, T. (2020). A biopsychosocial approach to understanding social media addiction. Human Behavior and Emerging Technologies, 2(2), 158?167. https://doi.org/10.1002/hbe2.182
*De Cock, R., Vangeel, J., Klein, A., Minotte, P., Rosas, O., & Meerkerk, G.-J. (2013). Compulsive use of social networking sites in Belgium: Prevalence, profile, and the role of attitude toward work and school. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 17(3), 166?171. https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2013.0029
*Dong, Y., Xue, Y., Luo, M., Mo, D., Dong, W., Zhang, Z., & Liang, H. (2018). Investigating the impact of mobile SNS addiction on individual’s self-rated health. Internet Research, 28(2), 278?292. https://doi.org/10.1108/IntR-05-2017-0198
Dunbar, C. J. (2020). Understanding how attachment anxiety is associated with phone snubbing (phubbing) behaviour [Unpublished honours thesis]. Queensland University of Technology.
*Ďuricová, L., & Poliach, V. (2023). Personality traits and the risky use of social media in Slovak adolescents. Individual and Society [Človek a spoločnosť], 26(1). https://doi.org/10.31577/cas.2023.01.614
Duval, S., & Tweedie, R. (2000). Trim and fill: A simple funnel-plot–based method of testing and adjusting for publication bias in meta-analysis. Biometrics,56(2), 455–463. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0006-341X.2000.00455.x
Egger, M., Smith, G. D., Schneider, M., & Minder, C. (1997). Bias in meta-analysis detected by a simple, graphical test. BMJ,315(7109), 629–634. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.315.7109.629
Elphinston, R. A., & Noller, P. (2011). Time to face it! Facebook intrusion and the implications for romantic jealousy and relationship satisfaction. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking,14(11), 631–635. https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2010.0318
Escurra Mayaute, M., & Salas Blas, E. (2014). Construcción y validación del cuestionario de adicción a redes sociales (ARS). Liberabit, 20, 73–91. http://www.scielo.org.pe/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1729-48272014000100007&nrm=iso
Ferraro, G., Di Blasi, M., D’Amico, A., & Caci, B. (2006). Internet addiction disorder: Un contributo di ricerca. Psicotech,1, 7–25. https://doi.org/10.1400/70829
*Ghos, A., Dasgupta, S., & Basu, J. (2018). Role of personality and narcissism in Facebook addiction among male and female college students. Indian Journal of Community Psychology, 14(1), 116–124. https://link.gale.com/apps/doc/A567426493/AONE?u=anon~5a98694d&sid=googleScholar&xid=1ab11a47
*Gingras, M.-P., Brendgen, M., Beauchamp, M. H., Séguin, J. R., Tremblay, R. E., Côté, S. M., & Herba, C. M. (2023). Adolescents and social media: Longitudinal links between types of use, problematic use and internalizing symptoms. Research on Child and Adolescent Psychopathology, 51(11), 1641?1655. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10802-023-01084-7
*Giota, K. G., & Kleftaras, G. (2013). The role of personality and depression in problematic use of social networking sites in Greece. Cyberpsychology: Journal of Psychosocial Research on Cyberspace, 7(3), Article 6. https://doi.org/10.5817/CP2013-3-6
Goldberg, L. R. (1999). A broad-bandwidth, public domain, personality inventory measuring the lower-level facets of several five-factor models. Personality Psychology in Europe, 7, 7–28. https://cir.nii.ac.jp/crid/1573950400442099328
Goldberg, L. R., Johnson, J. A., Eber, H. W., Hogan, R., Ashton, M. C., Cloninger, C. R., & Gough, H. G. (2006). The international personality item pool and the future of public-domain personality measures. Journal of Research in Personality,40(1), 84–96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2005.08.007
*Gomez, M., Klare, D., Ceballos, N., Dailey, S., Kaiser, S., & Howard, K. (2022a). Do you dare to compare? The key characteristics of social media users who frequently make online upward social comparisons. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 38(10), 938?948. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2021.1976510
*Gomez, R., Stavropoulos, V., Brown, T., & Griffiths, M. D. (2022b). Factor structure of ten psychoactive substance addictions and behavioural addictions. Psychiatry Research, 313, 114605. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2022.114605
Gosling, S. D., Rentfrow, P. J., & Swann, W. B. (2003). A very brief measure of the Big-Five personality domains. Journal of Research in Personality,37(6), 504–528. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0092-6566(03)00046-1
Griffiths, M. (2005). A ‘components’ model of addiction within a biopsychosocial framework. Journal of Substance Use,10(4), 191–197. https://doi.org/10.1080/14659890500114359
*Gugushvili, N., Täht, K., Ruiter, R. A. C., & Verduyn, P. (2022). Facebook use intensity and depressive symptoms: A moderated mediation model of problematic Facebook use, age, neuroticism, and extraversion. BMC Psychology, 10(1), 279. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40359-022-00990-7
*Hasan, T., & Yasir, H. (2016). Am I a Facebook addict? An investigation of Facebook addiction using personality traits through SEM. Journal of Organisational Studies & Innovation, 3(4), 15?30.
*Hawi, N., & Samaha, M. (2019). Identifying commonalities and differences in personality characteristics of Internet and social media addiction profiles: Traits, self-esteem, and self-construal. Behaviour & Information Technology, 38(2), 110?119. https://doi.org/10.1080/0144929X.2018.1515984
*Hong, F.-Y., Huang, D.-H., Lin, H.-Y., & Chiu, S.-L. (2014). Analysis of the psychological traits, Facebook usage, and Facebook addiction model of Taiwanese university students. Telematics and Informatics, 31(4), 597?606. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2014.01.001
Hooten, W. M., Wolter, T. D., Ames, S. C., Hurt, R. D., Vickers, K. S., Offord, K. P., & Hays, J. T. (2005). Personality correlates related to tobacco abstinence following treatment. The International Journal of Psychiatry in Medicine,35(1), 59–74. https://doi.org/10.2190/N9F1-1R9G-6EDW-9BFL
*Horzum, M. B., Canan Güngören, Ö., & Gür Erdoğan, D. (2022). The influence of chronotype, personality, sex, and sleep duration on Facebook addiction of university students in Turkey. Biological Rhythm Research, 53(7), 1105?1115. https://doi.org/10.1080/09291016.2021.1907508
Hou, J., Ndasauka, Y., Jiang, Y., Ye, Z., Wang, Y., Yang, L., Li, X., Zhang, Y., Pang, L., Kong, Y., Xu, F., & Zhang, X. (2017). Excessive use of WeChat, social interaction and locus of control among college students in China. PLoS ONE,12(8), e0183633. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0183633
*Hou, J., Ndasauka, Y., Pan, X., Chen, S., Xu, F., & Zhang, X. (2018). Weibo or WeChat? Assessing preference for social networking sites and role of personality traits and psychological factors. Frontiers in Psychology, 9. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.00545
Huang, C. (2022). Social media addiction and personality: A meta-analysis. Asian Journal of Social Psychology,25(4), 747–761. https://doi.org/10.1111/ajsp.12531
*Hussain, Z., Simonovic, B., Stupple, E. J., & Austin, M. (2019). Using eye tracking to explore Facebook use and associations with Facebook addiction, mental well-being, and personality. Behavioral Sciences, 9(2), 19. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs9020019
*Jaradat, M.-I., & Jebreen, A. (2017). Do personality traits play a role in social media addiction? Key considerations for successful optimized model to avoid social networking sites addiction: A developing country perspective. International Journal of Computer Science and Network Security, 17(8), 120–131. http://paper.ijcsns.org/07_book/201708/20170817.pdf
Jiang, Y. (2018). Development of problematic mobile social media usage assessment questionnaire for adolescents. Psychology: Techniques and Applications,6(10), 613–621. https://doi.org/10.16842/j.cnki.issn2095-5588.2018.10.004
*Jijina, P. V. (2021). Equanimity and its psychosocial health concomitants (Publication No. 29064966) [Doctoral dissertation, Maharaja Sayajirao University of Baroda]. ProQuest One Academic. https://www.proquest.com/docview/2645878090?pq-origsite=gscholar&fromopenview=true
John, O. P. (1991). The Big Five Inventory - Versions 4a and 54. University of California. Berkeley, Institute of Personality and Social Research.
Johnson, J. W. (2000). A heuristic method for estimating the relative weight of predictor variables in multiple regression. Multivariate Behavioral Research,35(1), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327906MBR3501_1
*Jovanović, T., Bodroža, B., Orchard, L., Fullwood, C., Kermani, H., Casale, S., Fioravanti, G., Buljan, I., & Hren, D. (2023). Cross-cultural validity of the Psycho-Social Aspects of Facebook Use (PSAFU) scale. Psihologija, 56(1), 31?62. https://doi.org/10.2298/PSI210702013J
*Kanat-Maymon, Y., Almog, L., Cohen, R., & Amichai-Hamburger, Y. (2018). Contingent self-worth and Facebook addiction. Computers in Human Behavior, 88, 227?235. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2018.07.011
*Kanwal, S., Pitafi, A. H., Akhtar, S., & Irfan, M. (2019). Online self-disclosure through social networking sites addiction: A case study of Pakistani university students. Interdisciplinary Description of Complex Systems, 17(1-B). https://ideas.repec.org/a/zna/indecs/v17y2019i1-bp187-208.html
Karadağ, E., Tosuntaş, ŞB., Erzen, E., Duru, P., Bostan, N., Şahin, B. M., Çulha, İ, & Babadağ, B. (2015). Determinants of phubbing, which is the sum of many virtual addictions: A structural equation model. Journal of Behavioral Addictions,4(2), 60–74. https://doi.org/10.1556/2006.4.2015.005
Kardefelt-Winther, D., Heeren, A., Schimmenti, A., van Rooij, A., Maurage, P., Carras, M., Edman, J., Blaszczynski, A., Khazaal, Y., & Billieux, J. (2017). How can we conceptualize behavioural addiction without pathologizing common behaviours? Addiction,112(10), 1709–1715. https://doi.org/10.1111/add.13763
*Kavčič, T., Puklek Levpušček, M., Zupančič, M., Poredoš, M., & Bjornsen, C. (2019). Personal correlates of problematic types of social media and mobile phone use in emerging adults. Human Technology, 15(2), 256?278. https://doi.org/10.17011/ht/urn.201906123158
Kayiş, A. R., Satici, S. A., Yilmaz, M. F., Şimşek, D., Ceyhan, E., & Bakioğlu, F. (2016). Big five-personality trait and internet addiction: A meta-analytic review. Computers in Human Behavior,63, 35–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.05.012
*Kircaburun, K. (2016). Effects of gender and personality differences on Twitter addiction among Turkish undergraduates. Journal of Education and Practice, 7(24), 33?42.
*Kircaburun, K., Alhabash, S., Tosuntaş, Ş. B., & Griffiths, M. D. (2020). Uses and gratifications of problematic social media use among university students: A simultaneous examination of the Big Five of personality traits, social media platforms, and social media use motives. International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction, 18(3), 525?547. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11469-018-9940-6
*Kircaburun, K., & Griffiths, M. D. (2018). Instagram addiction and the Big Five of personality: The mediating role of self-liking. Journal of Behavioral Addictions 7(1), 158?170. https://doi.org/10.1556/2006.7.2018.15
*Kiziloglu, M., Dluhopolskyi, O., Koziuk, V., Vitvitskyi, S., & Kozlovskyi, S. (2021). Dark personality traits and job performance of employees: The mediating role of perfectionism, stress, and social media addiction. Problems and Perspectives in Management, 19(3), 533?544. https://doi.org/10.21511/ppm.19(3).2021.43
Koc, M., & Gulyagci, S. (2013). Facebook addiction among Turkish college students: The role of psychological health, demographic, and usage characteristics. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking,16(4), 279–284. https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2012.0249
Kuss, D. J., & Griffiths, M. D. (2017). Social networking sites and addiction: Ten lessons learned. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health,14(3), 311. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph14030311
Lai, B., & Lai, M. (2003). New Lai’s Personality Scale guide handbook. Chian Hua.
*Lee-Won, R. J., Herzog, L., & Park, S. G. (2015). Hooked on Facebook: The role of social anxiety and need for social assurance in problematic use of Facebook. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 18(10), 567?574. https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2015.0002
*Lee, E. B. (2015). Too much information: Heavy smartphone and Facebook utilization by African American young adults. Journal of Black Studies, 46(1), 44?61. https://doi.org/10.1177/0021934714557034
*Lee, S.-L. (2019). Predicting SNS addiction with the Big Five and the dark triad. Cyberpsychology: Journal of Psychosocial Research on Cyberspace, 13(1), Article 3. https://doi.org/10.5817/CP2019-1-3
Leung, L. (2011). Loneliness, social support, and preference for online social interaction: The mediating effects of identity experimentation online among children and adolescents. Chinese Journal of Communication,4(4), 381–399. https://doi.org/10.1080/17544750.2011.616285
*Li, J., Zhou, Y., Lv, X., Leng, X., Jiang, X., & Gao, X. (2023). A network analysis approach to core symptoms and symptom relationships of problematic social media use among young adults. Information, Communication & Society, 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2023.2245870
*Lontos, E. (2018). Fear of missing out (on myself?) An empirical study of narcissism in relation to problematic Facebook use [Undergraduate honours thesis, The University of Adelaide https://hdl.handle.net/2440/129247
*López Rosales, F., Becerra Guajardo, J. R., & Jasso Medrano, J. L. (2021). Addictive behavior to social networks and five personality traits in young people. Psychological Studies, 66(1), 92?96. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12646-020-00591-7
*Maepa, M. P., & Wheeler, A. (2022). The relationship between personality traits and Facebook addiction among adolescents in an urban, rural and semi-rural secondary school. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19(20), 13365. https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/20/13365
Malouff, J. M., Thorsteinsson, E. B., Rooke, S. E., & Schutte, N. S. (2007). Alcohol involvement and the five-factor model of personality: A meta-analysis. Journal of Drug Education,37(3), 277–294. https://doi.org/10.2190/DE.37.3.d
Malouff, J. M., Thorsteinsson, E. B., & Schutte, N. S. (2006). The five-factor model of personality and smoking: A meta-analysis. Journal of Drug Education,36(1), 47–58. https://doi.org/10.2190/9EP8-17P8-EKG7-66AD
*Mangalagiri, H., & Kadiyala, P. K. (2019). "I am, how I (use) Facebook": Relationship between personality traits, life satisfaction, and Facebook use. MedPulse - International Journal of Psychology, 12(1), 6?12. https://doi.org/10.26611/1071212
Marengo, D., Sindermann, C., Häckel, D., Settanni, M., Elhai, J. D., & Montag, C. (2020). The association between the Big Five personality traits and smartphone use disorder: A meta-analysis. Journal of Behavioral Addictions,9(3), 534–550. https://doi.org/10.1556/2006.2020.00069
Marino, C., Gini, G., Vieno, A., & Spada, M. M. (2018). A comprehensive meta-analysis on problematic Facebook use. Computers in Human Behavior,83, 262–277. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2018.02.009
*Marino, C., Vieno, A., Moss, A. C., Caselli, G., Nikčević, A. V., & Spada, M. M. (2016a). Personality, motives and metacognitions as predictors of problematic Facebook use in university students. Personality and Individual Differences, 101, 70?77. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2016.05.053
*Marino, C., Vieno, A., Pastore, M., Albery, I. P., Frings, D., & Spada, M. M. (2016b). Modeling the contribution of personality, social identity and social norms to problematic Facebook use in adolescents. Addictive Behaviors, 63, 51?56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addbeh.2016.07.001
McCrae, R. R., & Costa, P. T. (2004). A contemplated revision of the NEO Five-Factor Inventory. Personality and Individual Differences,36(3), 587–596. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0191-8869(03)00118-1
McCrae, R. R., & John, O. P. (1992). An introduction to the five-factor model and its applications. Journal of Personality,60(2), 175–215. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-6494.1992.tb00970.x
*Mercan, N., & Uysal, B. (2023). The relationship of social media addiction with interpersonal problem-solving and personality traits in university students. Archives of Psychiatric Nursing, 43, 50?56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apnu.2022.12.025
*Miceli, S., Cardaci, M., Scrima, F., & Caci, B. (2022). Time perspective and Facebook addiction: The moderating role of neuroticism. Current Psychology, 41(12), 8811?8820. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-021-01355-w
*Milošević-Đorđević, J. S., & Žeželj, I. L. (2014). Psychological predictors of addictive social networking sites use: The case of Serbia. Computers in Human Behavior, 32, 229?234. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2013.12.018
Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., Altman, D. G., & The, P. G. (2009). Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement. PLoS Medicine,6(7), e1000097. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097
*Montag, C., Sindermann, C., Rozgonjuk, D., Yang, S., Elhai, J. D., & Yang, H. (2021). Investigating links between fear of COVID-19, neuroticism, social networks use disorder, and smartphone use disorder tendencies. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 682837. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.682837
*Moore, K., & Craciun, G. (2020). Fear of missing out and personality as predictors of social networking sites usage: The Instagram case. Psychological Reports, 124(4), 1761?1787. https://doi.org/10.1177/0033294120936184
Morizot, J. (2014). Construct validity of adolescents’ self-reported Big Five personality traits: Importance of conceptual breadth and initial validation of a short measure. Assessment,21(5), 580–606. https://doi.org/10.1177/1073191114524015
*Mu, W., Zhu, D., Wang, Y., Li, F., Ye, L., Wang, K., & Zhou, M. (2020). Three-wave longitudinal survey on the relationship between neuroticism and depressive symptoms of first-year college students: Addictive use of social media as a moderated mediator. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(17), 6074. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17176074
*Mulyani, I., Rahardjo, W., Citra, A., Damariyanti, M., Saputra, M., Ayuningsih, A., & Siahay, M. (2018). The effect of neuroticism and loneliness to SNS addiction on social media users [Conference session]. The 6th ARUPS Congress: Driving Mental Revolution in the Psychology Century: Enhancing Psychological Services for a Better Future, Bali, Indonesia.
O’Boyle, E. H., Forsyth, D. R., Banks, G. C., Story, P. A., & White, C. D. (2015). A meta-analytic test of redundancy and relative importance of the dark triad and five-factor model of personality. Journal of Personality,83(6), 644–664. https://doi.org/10.1111/jopy.12126
*Orosz, G., Tóth-Király, I., & Bőthe, B. (2016). Four facets of Facebook intensity — The development of the Multidimensional Facebook Intensity Scale. Personality and Individual Differences, 100, 95?104. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2015.11.038
*Ortiz de Gortari, A. B., & Gackenbach, J. (2021). Game transfer phenomena and problematic interactive media use: Dispositional and media habit factors. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, Article 585547. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.585547
*Packer, J., & Flack, M. (2023). The role of self-esteem, depressive symptoms, extraversion, neuroticism and FOMO in problematic social media use: Exploring user profiles. International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11469-023-01094-y
Park, H., Wiernik, B. M., Oh, I.-S., Gonzalez-Mulé, E., Ones, D. S., & Lee, Y. (2020). Meta-analytic five-factor model personality intercorrelations: Eeny, meeny, miney, moe, how, which, why, and where to go. Journal of Applied Psychology,105(12), 1490–1529. https://doi.org/10.1037/apl0000476
*Qahri-Saremi, H., Vaghefi, I., & Turel, O. (2022). Addiction to social networking sites and user sesponses: Toward a typological theory and its relation to users' personality traits. SIGMIS Database, 52(4), 65–91. https://doi.org/10.1145/3508484.3508489
*Rachubińska, K., Cybulska, A., Owsianowska, J., Śniegocka, M., Zair, L., & Grochans, E. (2022). The relationship between women’s personality traits and addiction to social networking sites on the example of Facebook. European Review for Medical and Pharmacological Sciences, 26, 1809?1815. https://doi.org/10.26355/eurrev_202203_28324
*Rajesh, T., & Rangaiah, B. (2019). The influence of personality traits among ordinary, problematic and addicted Facebook users. A study on university students in India. PsyArXiv. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/kymsq
*Rajesh, T., & Rangaiah, B. (2020). Facebook addiction and personality. Heliyon, 6(1), e03184. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2020.e03184
Rammstedt, B., & John, O. P. (2007). Measuring personality in one minute or less: A 10-item short version of the Big Five Inventory in English and German. Journal of Research in Personality,41(1), 203–212. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrp.2006.02.001
Ryding, F. C., & Kuss, D. J. (2020). Passive objective measures in the assessment of problematic smartphone use: A systematic review. Addictive Behaviors Reports,11, 100257. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.abrep.2020.100257
*Saini, V. K., Baniya, G. C., Verma, K. K., Soni, A., & Kesharwani, S. K. (2017). A study on relationship of Facebook and game addictive behaviour with personality traits among medical students. International Journal of Research in Medical Sciences, 4(8), 3492?3497. https://doi.org/10.18203/2320-6012.ijrms20162318
Saucier, G. (1994). Mini-markers: A brief version of Goldberg’s unipolar Big-Five markers. Journal of Personality Assessment,63(3), 506–516. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327752jpa6303_8
*Sheldon, P., Antony, M. G., & Sykes, B. (2020). Predictors of problematic social media use: Personality and life-position indicators. Psychological Reports, 124(3), 1110?1133. https://doi.org/10.1177/0033294120934706
*Sindermann, C., Duke, É., & Montag, C. (2020a). Personality associations with Facebook use and tendencies towards Facebook use disorder. Addictive Behaviors Reports, 11, 100264. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.abrep.2020.100264
*Sindermann, C., Elhai, J. D., & Montag, C. (2020b). Predicting tendencies towards the disordered use of Facebook's social media platforms: On the role of personality, impulsivity, and social anxiety. Psychiatry Research, 285, 112793. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2020.112793
*Sindermann, C., Montag, C., & Elhai, J. D. (2022a). The design of social media platforms—Initial evidence on relations between personality, fear of missing out, design element-driven increased social media use, and problematic social media use. Technology, Mind, and Behavior, 3(4). https://doi.org/10.1037/tmb0000096
*Sindermann, C., Yang, H., Yang, S., Elhai, J. D., & Montag, C. (2022b). Willingness to accept (WTA), willingness to pay (WTP), and the WTA/WTP disparity in Chinese social media platforms: Descriptive statistics and associations with personality and social media use. Acta Psychologica, 223, 103462. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2021.103462
Soto, C. J., & John, O. P. (2017). The next Big Five Inventory (BFI-2): Developing and assessing a hierarchical model with 15 facets to enhance bandwidth, fidelity, and predictive power. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,113(1), 117–143. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000096
*Stead, H., & Bibby, P. A. (2017). Personality, fear of missing out and problematic internet use and their relationship to subjective well-being. Computers in Human Behavior, 76, 534?540. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.08.016
Steel, P., Schmidt, J., Bosco, F., & Uggerslev, K. (2018). The effects of personality on job satisfaction and life satisfaction: A meta-analytic investigation accounting for bandwidth–fidelity and commensurability. Human Relations,72(2), 217–247. https://doi.org/10.1177/0018726718771465
*Sumaryanti, I. U., Azizah, S., Diantina, F. P., & Nawangsih, E. (2020). Personality and social media addiction among college students. In 2nd Social and Humaniora Research Symposium (SoRes 2019) (pp. 376–379). Atlantis Press. https://doi.org/10.2991/assehr.k.200225.079
*Tang, J.-H., Chen, M.-C., Yang, C.-Y., Chung, T.-Y., & Lee, Y.-A. (2016). Personality traits, interpersonal relationships, online social support, and Facebook addiction. Telematics and Informatics, 33(1), 102?108. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tele.2015.06.003
*Tanrikulu, G. (2018). “I need to be updated”: Fear of missing out and its antecedents as predictors of adolescents’ and emerging adults’ aspects of social media addiction (Publication No. 30289839) [Master's thesis, TED University ]. ProQuest One Academic. https://www.proquest.com/docview/2761108682?pq-origsite=gscholar&fromopenview=true
Tatar, A. (2017). Translation of Big-Five Personality Questionnaire into Turkish and comparing it with Five Factor Personality Inventory Short Form/Buyuk Bes-50 Kisilik Testinin Turkceye cevirisi ve Bes Faktor Kisilik Envanteri Kisa Formu ile karsilastirilmasi. Anadolu Psikiyatri Dergisi,18, 51–61. https://doi.org/10.5455/apd.220580
*Tesi, A. (2018). Social network sites addiction, internet addiction and individual differences: The role of Big-Five personality traits, behavioral inhibition/activation systems and loneliness. Applied Psychology Bulletin, 282(66), 32?44. https://doi.org/10.26387/bpa.282.3
*Tobin, S. J., & Graham, S. (2020). Feedback sensitivity as a mediator of the relationship between attachment anxiety and problematic Facebook use. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 23(8), 562?566. https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2019.0560
*Toma, C.-M. (2018). Living on a virtual planet. Predictors of Facebook addiction. Romanian Journal of Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy & Hypnosis, 5(1/2), 1?11. https://www.rjcbth.ro/image/data/v5-12/V5I1-2_Article%201_RJCBTH_2018.pdf
Turel, O. (2015). Quitting the use of a habituated hedonic information system: A theoretical model and empirical examination of Facebook users. European Journal of Information Systems,24(4), 431–446. https://doi.org/10.1057/ejis.2014.19
*Turel, O., Poppa, N. T., & Gil-Or, O. (2018). Neuroticism magnifies the detrimental association between social media addiction symptoms and wellbeing in women, but not in men: A three-way moderation model. Psychiatric Quarterly, 89(3), 605?619. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11126-018-9563-x
Tutgun-Ünal, A., & Deniz, L. (2015). Development of the Social Media Addiction Scale. Academic Journal of Information Technology,6(21), 51–70. https://doi.org/10.5824/1309-1581.2015.4.004.x
*Vaghefi, I., & Qahri-Saremi, H. (2018). Personality predictors of IT addiction. 51st Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. https://doi.org/10.24251/HICSS.2018.657
van den Eijnden, R. J. J. M., Lemmens, J. S., & Valkenburg, P. M. (2016). The Social Media Disorder Scale. Computers in Human Behavior,61, 478–487. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.03.038
van Houwelingen, H. C., Arends, L. R., & Stijnen, T. (2002). Advanced methods in meta-analysis: Multivariate approach and meta-regression. Statistics in Medicine,21(4), 589–624. https://doi.org/10.1002/sim.1040
*Vangeel, J., De Cock, R., Klein, A., Minotte, P., Rosas, O., & Meerkerk, G.-J. (2016). Compulsive use of social networking sites among secondary school adolescents in Belgium. In Walrave, M., Ponnet, K., Vanderhoven, E., Haers, J., & Segaert, B. (Eds.), Youth 2.0: Social media and adolescence: Connecting, sharing and empowering (pp. 179–191). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-27893-3_10
Vermulst, A., & Gerris, J. (2005). QBF: Quick Big Five personality test manual. LDC Publications.
Vevea, J. L., & Hedges, L. V. (1995). A general linear model for estimating effect size in the presence of publication bias. Psychometrika,60(3), 419–435. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02294384
Vevea, J. L., & Woods, C. M. (2005). Publication bias in research synthesis: Sensitivity analysis using a priori weight functions. Psychological Methods,10(4), 428–443. https://doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.10.4.428
*Visconte, S. R. (2016). Personality traits related to problematic Facebook use (Publication No. 10300687) [Doctoral dissertation, Louisiana Tech University]. ProQuest One Academic. https://www.proquest.com/docview/1857423139?pq-origsite=gscholar&fromopenview=true
Wang, M.-C., Dai, X., & Yao, S. (2011). Development of the Chinese Big Five Personality Inventory (CBF-PI) III: Psychometric properties of CBF-PI brief version. Chinese Journal of Clinical Psycholgy,19(4), 454–457. https://doi.org/10.16128/j.cnki.1005-3611.2011.04.004
*Wartberg, L., Potzel, K., Spindler, C., & Kammerl, R. (2023). The Big Five personality domains and their facets: Empirical relations to problematic use of video games, social media and alcohol. Behavioral Sciences, 13(6), 444. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs13060444
*Wilson, K., Fornasier, S., & White, K. M. (2010). Psychological predictors of young adults' use of social networking sites. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 13(2), 173?177. https://doi.org/10.1089/cyber.2009.0094
*Wong, J., Ho, K. K. W., Leung, T. N., & Chiu, D. K. W. (2023). Exploring the associations of youth Facebook addiction with social capital perceptions. Online Information Review, 47(2), 283?298. https://doi.org/10.1108/OIR-06-2021-0300
Wegmann, E., & Brand, M. (2019). A narrative overview about psychosocial characteristics as risk factors of a problematic social networks use. Current Addiction Reports,6(4), 402–409. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40429-019-00286-8
Xanidis, N., & Brignell, C. M. (2016). The association between the use of social network sites, sleep quality and cognitive function during the day. Computers in Human Behavior,55, 121–126. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.09.004
Young, K. S. (1998). Internet addiction: The emergence of a new clinical disorder. CyberPsychology & Behavior,1(3), 237–244. https://doi.org/10.1089/cpb.1998.1.237
*Zafar, M. S. (2018). Perception of public and private universities students regarding academic quality assurance standards. Journal of Research in Social Sciences, 6(1), 193?205.
Funding
Open Access funding enabled and organized by CAUL and its Member Institutions. No funds, grants, or other support was received.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
All authors contributed to the study conception and design. The first draft of the manuscript was written by Jai Meynadier and all authors commented on previous versions of the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author states that there is no conflict of interest.
Additional information
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Supplementary Information
Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
Meynadier, J., Malouff, J.M., Schutte, N.S. et al. Meta-analysis of associations between five-factor personality traits and problematic social media use. Curr Psychol (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-024-06052-y
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-024-06052-y