Discussion and Conclusions

  • Qiaolei Jiang


As an emerging health risk, Internet addiction has caused wide public concern in many places of the world. Previous studies were conducted by researchers from various disciplines. Inspired by the theory and analysis of risk, the research explored the construction of Internet addiction as a new risk in the Chinese context by examining the staging of and the coping with this risk. This chapter provides a conclusion to the book. The key objective of this chapter is to present conclusions from the findings of this research, based on the conceptual framework and the research question proposed accordingly. Another objective is to provide the theoretical contributions that the current research has made to the risk analysis in general and the studies of Internet addiction in particular. The third objective is to illustrate the implications of findings for Internet users, families, Internet addiction clinics, governmental policy makers, Internet related industries, and other relevant research and teaching institutions. The fourth objective is to discuss the limitations of this research and offer some suggestions for further studies.


  1. Beck, U. (1992). Risk society: Towards a new modernity. London/Newbury Park: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  2. Entman, R. M. (1993). Framing: Toward clarification of a fractured paradigm. Journal of Communication, 43(4), 51–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Irwin, A., Simmons, P., & Walker, G. (1999). Faulty environments and risk reasoning: The local understanding of industrial hazards. Environment and Planning A, 31, 1311–1326.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Jiang, Q., & Leung, L. (2012). Lifestyles, gratifications-sought, and narrative appeal: American and Korean TV drama viewing among internet users in urban China. The International Communication Gazette, 74(2), 159–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Kim, J., LaRose, R., & Peng, W. (2009). Loneliness as the cause and the effect of problematic internet use: The relationship between internet use and psychological well-being. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 12(4), 451–455.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Lievrouw, L. A., & Livingstone, S. (2006). Handbook of new media: Social shaping and social consequences of ICTs. London/Thousand Oaks: SAGE.Google Scholar
  7. Livingstone, S. (2002). Young people and new media: Childhood and the changing media environment. London: SAGE.Google Scholar
  8. Livingstone, S. (2009). Children and the internet: Great expectations, challenging realities. Cambridge: Polity.Google Scholar
  9. Livingstone, S., & Drotner, K. (2008). International handbook of children, media and culture. London: SAGE.Google Scholar
  10. Livingstone, S., & Haddon, L. (2009). Kids online: Opportunities and risks for children. Bristol: Policy.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. McQueen, R., & Knussen, C. (2002). Research methods for social science: An introduction. New York: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  12. Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diffusion of innovations. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  13. Schoenbach, K., & Becker, L. B. (1995). Origins and consequences of mediated public opinion. In T. L. Glasser & C. T. Salmon (Eds.), Public opinion and the communication of consent (pp. 323–347). New York: Guilford.Google Scholar
  14. Wilkinson, I. (2001). Social theories of risk perception: At once indispensable and insufficient. Current Sociology, 49(1), 1–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Wilkinson, I. (2010). Risk, vulnerability and everyday life. London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  16. Williams, F., Rice, R. E., & Rogers, E. M. (1988). Research methods and the new media. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
  17. Zhou, Y., & Moy, P. (2007). Parsing framing processes: The interplay between online public opinion and media coverage. Journal of Communication, 57, 79–98.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Qiaolei Jiang
    • 1
  1. 1.Tsinghua UniversityBeijingChina

Personalised recommendations