Talk:Mobile phone overuse
|Ideal sources for Wikipedia's health content are defined in the guideline Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources (medicine) and are typically review articles. Here are links to possibly useful sources of information about Mobile phone overuse.
|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
I was thinking of adding File:Cell phone use while driving.jpg to the article. But the problem with that photo is that it implies that this article is about "usage of cellphones in unsafe situations". In truth, the article is about something more like "overuse of cellphones which causes a person to fail in school, fail at work, or lose friends".
A photo of a man and a woman sitting at a beautifully-set table for two, one preoccupied with text messaging, the other frustrated and sad, would be better. Though see Commons:Photographs of identifiable people. Please get permission from the participants for their likeness to be used in any context, including in articles about addictions.
Please expand the article. I did a Google search. I found that some possible CC-BY-SA-compatible Creative-Commons-licensed sources include:
- "Measuring Problematic Mobile Phone Use: Development and Preliminary Psychometric Properties of the PUMP Scale". Published by, uh, Hindawi Publishing Corporation. Luckily, though, it appears that the authors work for legitimate American institutions. Includes a reasonable working definition of problem mobile phone use that we can quote.
- "Mobile phone use and stress, sleep disturbances, and symptoms of depression among young adults - a prospective cohort study". This is in an open-access journal which says it has an impact factor of 2.08.
- Lentis. See the Portable Electronics section in the book's table of contents. Minimal quality, but can be edited to improve quality.
Various publishers might put out public domain material, including selected US federal government agencies. I haven't looked for public domain sources.
Text removed from article
Our article said:
Two Monash University researchers point out: "Mobile phone use is not without its disadvantages. There are certain mobile phone behaviors that are considered to be problematic, and as a result, there are an increasing number of legislative and societal controls seeking to govern aspects of their use. Mobile phones are consequently banned in a variety of settings, including hospitals, planes, and petrol stations." Source: Bianchi, Adriana; Phillips, James G. (2005). "Psychological Predictors of Problem Mobile Phone Use". Cyberpsychology & Behavior. New York: Mary Ann Liebert, Inc. 8 (1).
I have removed the text for now.
For one thing, it's an overquotation. Please see Wikipedia:Quotations.
For another thing: True, many calls placed in inappropriate places (like hospitals) might be placed by overusers. Perhaps even most such calls. But surely not all such calls. So I'm not sure that we should discuss the problem in an article about overusers. Instead, perhaps we should leave it up to some more-general page about cellphones and society to discuss this problem.
Possible copyright violations
This article was first created by Pivada7 (talk · contribs), who is probably a University of North Carolina student. I looked but could find no evidence that the article was created for an educational assignment. Early on, this article was entitled "Smartphone addiction". It was kind of Pivada7 to create the article. But it is clear that Pivada7 is not always careful about copyright.
S/he wrote our article's last paragraph. S/he wrote:
In the article Psychological Predictors of Problem Mobile Phone Use, the authors says that there are also concerns that some mobile phone users incur considerable debt, and that mobile phones are being used to violate privacy, and to harass others. In particular, there is increasing evidence that mobile phones are being used as a tool by children to bully other children.
Pivada7 lifted text almost word-for-word from the paper s/he mentions. (You can get a copy of the paper at <http://www.amta.org.au/amta/site/amta/downloads/pdfs.2005.web/Dr.Phillips.Monash.Cyber.Psychology.Mar.05.pdf>, even without paying.)
But anyway, that paragraph is mostly about spying, harassment, and bullying. Anyone can engage in these unkind deeds. Technology makes many tasks quicker easier, including these unkind actions, but we need not mention these deeds in an article about cellphone overuse. We should simply keep (and rewrite) the bit about debt.
Mobile Phone#Health Effects
If the page links to a sub-section of another wikipedia article ("Health Effects" section in "Mobile Phone" article), is there a way that the name can be given as something along the lines of "Health Effects, in Mobile Phone" as I don't feel the link clarifies what the page states. A revision I made was reversed (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Problem_mobile_phone_use&oldid=584261704&diff=prev), as the user felt that the change may cause confusion, leading people to think there was an article "Mobile Phone Health Effects".
If anyone knows what I should do, or if anyone can do, with this link, it'd be great, because it's actually really annoying me... the "#" in the middle of a sentence... (call my crazy...)
- While the article needs cleaning up in general, having a link contain the # key is not unusual, as it lets the reader know exactly where they'll be taken to. -- MacAddct1984 (talk • contribs) 18:11, 11 December 2013 (UTC)
The statement "People are substituting, on a grand scale, the experience of talking with people face-to-face with simply sending a text that consists of a few words and abbreviations." is absurd. It's clearly a technophobic point of view. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.108.40.206 (talk) 05:22, 31 July 2015 (UTC)
- I agree that in fact this statement could be more specific because "on grand scale" is not well defined, which could lead someone's understanding of a technophobic point of view; there is a citation for this paragraph but I still would consider the paragraph vague. I just edited including a broader perspective about connectivity issue (not only a cell phone issue), adding one citation from Sherry Turkle's work. Tell me what you think about it; my intention was to update this part of the text to a NPOV.
Proposed move to: Mobile phone addiction
Moved again, this time to "Mobile phone overuse"
I have BOLDly moved the page again, this time to the title "Mobile phone overuse".
I agree that the previous move was well-intentioned. (I didn't see the discussion in time to chip in.)
I agree that "problem mobile phone use", a term used by doctors, might imply to non-doctors that it means "the use of a broken phone as an expensive paperweight". And I agree that the related articles computer addiction, video game addiction, internet addiction disorder, and television addiction all use the word "addiction" in their titles. (Though I am not convinced that any of those conditions are true addictions.)
Still, it seems to me that reliable sources have not established any consensus that such a thing as "mobile phone addiction" exists. (See our Internet addiction disorder article's discussion of the matter. Perhaps mobile phone overuse is always a symptom of some other disorder, such as attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder or obsessive-compulsive disorder.)
This is why I have chosen the title "Mobile phone overuse".
If you would like to instead use the title "mobile phone addiction", first please establish here that the consensus of doctors and scientists is that this condition is an "addiction" instead of an overuse problem. Please cite textbooks, literature reviews, and/or meta-analyses; see WP:MEDSCI.
I am Zach, and I have made and posted a "Cell Phone Addiction" page so many times a decade ago that I am not surprised there still isn't such a page. At least this page exists. Some douche posing as Malcolm X kept deleting the posting before. It was pretentious and annoying. Now I just think that some corp is trying to keep cell addiction under wraps.
Unclear edit by User talk:220.127.116.11, I assume they were trying to reference a source, but this isn't clear, and is not even in Standard English (poor grammar/no capitilisation)
Writing in the Digital Age: Evalution
The article was very informative and the division in each subject of the overall topic on mobile phone overuse was well organized. Although the 3 effects divided were social, health and psychological but while reading the article health and psychological were both similar to each other. They were connectd because the results from both of them were from Radio frequency. Other than that, this article was very useful and related to my argument essay topic very well. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 18.104.22.168 (talk) 22:03, 2 October 2015 (UTC)
This should be merged into Nomophobia (or the other way around), they seem to be talking about the same thing, this lead states "Increased use can also lead to ... anxiety if separated from a mobile phone or sufficient signal.", whereas Nomophobia is defined as: "The fear of not having a functioning mobile phone".
∼∼∼∼ Eric0928Talk 17:01, 2 December 2016 (UTC)
- No. I respectfully disagree. The pages should definitely not be merged.
- Our article is about a possible true diagnosable illness. If a student plays cellphone games for ten hours a day and therefore flunks out of school, for example, they probably have a true diagnosable illness. On the other hand, as Permstrump and Fieari point out elsewhere, "nomophobia" is a cultural phenomenon and a normal anxiety, not a true diagnosable phobia.
- It's true that our article states that "increased use can also lead to ... anxiety if separated from a mobile phone or sufficient signal." But that sentence appears to be an unsourced point which isn't very relevant to the subject of our article. Maybe it should be removed.
- Kind regards, TealHill (talk) 16:24, 19 February 2017 (UTC)