Abstract
One of the family patterns crucial for mental and physical well-being is differentiation of self. In this study, our aim was to investigate its impact on the phenomenon of phubbing—where individuals prioritize smartphones over in-person interactions. The prevalence of phubbing behavior has risen substantially in tandem with the increased adoption of smartphones. The study investigated familial, interpersonal, and personal factors that could potentially contribute to the escalation of phubbing behaviors. It was hypothesized that differentiation of self would be associated with phubbing through the mediation of fear of missing out, romantic relationship satisfaction, and loneliness in intimate relationships. We also expected gender differences in the study variables. A sample of 431 young adults, with an average age of 29 (M = 29.05, SD = 9.14), completed the DSI-R, Phubbing, FoMO, ENRICH, and LIRS questionnaires online. Results indicated that fear of missing out mediated the relationship between three dimensions of differentiation of self—emotional reactivity, emotional cutoff, and fusion with others—and phubbing behavior. However, the expected mediation by romantic relationship satisfaction and loneliness in intimate relationships did not reach significance, although these variables were found to be associated with differentiation of self. Women reported higher levels of phubbing behavior, emotional reactivity, and fusion with others, whereas men reported higher levels of I-position. We conclude that fear of missing out may serve as a catalyst, triggering anxiety in individuals, which in turn drives them to adopt phubbing as a coping mechanism. Moreover, individuals with lower levels of differentiation of self appear to be at increased risk of engaging in phubbing behaviors through the mediation of fear of missing out.
Similar content being viewed by others
Introduction
Smartphones have become ubiquitous, seamlessly integrating into every aspect of modern life1. This pervasive integration has led individuals to prioritize smartphone engagement over face-to-face interactions, a trend that has sparked significant research interest2,3. As a result, there is a critical need to understand the profound implications of this digital intrusion on personal connections and human relationships, particularly within romantic contexts4,5.
The universal use of smartphones has given rise to a new interpersonal phenomenon known as “phubbing”, a portmanteau of “phone” and “snubbing”. Phubbing describes the act of diverting attention to a smartphone during face-to-face interaction, often at the expense of immediate social engagement6. This behavior has emerged as a significant source of conflict and dissatisfaction within romantic relationships7,8. Studies have linked elevated phubbing to fear of missing out (FoMO), decreased relationship satisfaction, and increased feelings of loneliness9,10,11.
One crucial factor influencing relationship dynamics and personality characteristics is differentiation of self (DoS), which involves maintaining personal identity while fostering stable relationships12. Research has shown the significant impact of DoS on mental well-being and romantic relationship satisfaction, as well as its association with self-confidence and emotional regulation13,14. Phubbing, characterized by smartphone-induced distractions during face-to-face interactions, is linked to lower self-esteem, decreased relationship satisfaction, increased loneliness, and disrupted family dynamics1,2,3,4, as well as psychological problems15. Phubbing also strains intergenerational relationships, exacerbating tension when younger family members engage in this behavior during encounters with older adults5. Yet, the association between DoS and phubbing remains underexplored. Understanding how DoS is related to phubbing can shed light on digital communication behaviors and the familial and personality factors that may increase it. Hence, the current study explores the contribution of DoS to phubbing, as mediated by fear of missing out (FoMO), romantic relationship satisfaction, and loneliness in intimate relationships.
Exogenous variable: differentiation of self
In a broad sense, DoS entails an individual’s aptitude to define their identity without being flooded by emotions and to foster profound, stable relationships. Its theoretical construct encompasses four dimensions. I-position evaluates the capacity to uphold one’s personal needs, desires, and thoughts, even when these diverge from the viewpoints of close associates. Emotional reactivity signifies the inclination to respond to stress-inducing triggers automatically and emotionally. Emotional cutoff characterizes the tendency to isolate oneself physically, emotionally, and verbally, distancing from sharing emotions and resorting to rigid detachment from loved ones as a coping mechanism in times of stress within intimate relationships. Finally, fusion with others entails forming symbiotic connections and seeking validation from significant others. Interpersonally, DoS denotes the individual’s adeptness at harmonizing intimacy and autonomy; intrapersonally, it signifies the capacity to cope with stress calmly15.
Gender differences have been found in DoS dimensions. Higher levels of emotional reactivity and fusion with others were observed among women and elevated levels of emotional cutoff among men. It has been suggested that women often engage in closer relationships and express more emotions, while men tend to repress their feelings, particularly when under stress (e.g.12).
DoS has been identified as a pivotal personality pattern contributing to mental well-being (e.g.12). Well-differentiated individuals demonstrate proficient relationship management alongside increased levels of functioning, adaptability, and self-efficacy15,16. Poorly differentiated individuals exhibit elevated emotional distress and anxiety17 and diminished romantic relationship satisfaction18.
Numerous studies have delved into the interplay between DoS and romantic relationship satisfaction (e.g.19). Peleg’s20 study found an inverse correlation: lower emotional cutoff was linked to heightened romantic relationship satisfaction. Notably, gender differences also emerged. Men’s satisfaction was associated with I-position, emotional reactivity, and emotional cutoff, while women’s satisfaction correlated mainly with emotional cutoff. In a recent study, DoS positively predicted romantic relationship satisfaction, influencing it indirectly through touch, affirmation, quality time, and gifts21. In addition, DoS predicted improved relationship quality, stability, and reduced attachment issues in individuals in the U.S. Over time, DoS led to improved relationship quality and decreased anxious attachment for Spanish individuals, while benefiting U.S. couples with greater stability and reduced anxious and avoidant attachment16. Higher DoS in wives has also been related to lower fear of intimacy, impacting higher romantic relationship satisfaction in husbands22. Furthermore, romantic relationship satisfaction partially mediated the association between DoS and forgiveness and exit/neglect, and DoS directly impacted romantic relationship dynamics23. These findings align with Bowen’s theory, underscoring the role of DoS in intimacy and its influence on romantic relationship satisfaction14. While existing research has explored the connection between partners’ DoS and romantic relationship satisfaction, this has not been investigated in the context of phubbing.
Notably, the impact of DoS extends to various emotions and significant relationships. One study found that individuals who have difficulties establishing clear boundaries between “self” and “other” and engage in emotionally detached relationships with parents are more susceptible to parent-related loneliness24. Another study noted significant associations between DoS, loneliness, and divorce inclination. Attachment styles, mediated by DoS, predicted both loneliness and the likelihood of divorce. These results highlight the substantial mediating role of DoS in the connection between attachment styles, loneliness, and the tendency to divorce25. However, the direct relation between DoS and loneliness in intimate relationships remains unexplored.
While there is no explicit mention of a connection between DoS and FoMO, studies have established associations between parenting styles, self-esteem, and FoMO in adolescents and young adults26, as well as connections between parenting styles, self-esteem, and DoS27. Similarly, while there is no evidence of a direct association between phubbing and DoS, phubbing has been found to be linked to the parent–child relationship, which is an integral component of DoS28.
The investigation into the link between differentiation of self (DoS) and phubbing is crucial, considering the adverse effects of phubbing on aspects such as self-esteem, relationship satisfaction, loneliness, and family dynamics1,2,3,4. Phubbing has been linked to disrupted family patterns and estrangement from close relationships4. Thus, understanding how low DoS contributes to smartphone-induced distractions (i.e., phubbing) sheds light on the mechanisms shaping digital communication behaviors and their impact on individual well-being5.
Endogenous variable: phubbing
The concept of “partner phubbing” denotes how individuals allow smartphone distractions to permeate their in-person interactions with their partners. This encapsulates scenarios where one’s romantic companion frequently disrupts communication, prioritizing prolonged smartphone engagement29. Research has shown that phubbing behavior is common among adults, with prevalence rates ranging from 35.5 to 47.2%. The prevalence of phubbing varies depending on such factors as age, education level, and cultural context. Overall, research suggests that phubbing is a widespread behavior that can have negative consequences on relationships and mental health30. Such behavior will likely erode couple dynamics, leaving individuals feeling undervalued31. As for gender differences in phubbing behavior, a study of 243 male and female college students aged 17–26 found that males tended to engage in phubbing more than females32. These findings are supported by additional studies (e.g.33).
The association between phubbing and personality characteristics can be elucidated through the framework of Uses and Gratifications Theory. This theory posits that individuals fulfil certain needs by using social media. From this perspective, individuals resort to social media to address such needs as sustaining interpersonal relationships, seeking entertainment, and garnering admiration34,35,36.
Several studies have linked phubbing to various psychological dimensions. For instance, partner phubbing has been shown to affect relationship satisfaction both positively and negatively in romantic relationships29. While smartphones and social media aid long-distance partners in staying connected37, excessive smartphone use has been associated with reduced intimacy and emotional sharing in long-distance relationships31,38, and escalating smartphone presence in romantic contexts can lead to frustration, alienation, and decreased relationship satisfaction, potentially triggering depressive symptoms1. Experimental studies have demonstrated that increased phubbing diminishes the perceived quality of communication33 and negatively impacts romantic relationship satisfaction31.
Notwithstanding the recent focus on partner phubbing, there is still uncertainty about the drivers of phubbing behaviors and the potential susceptibility of specific individuals to its more severe forms39. Research has shown that the connection between romantic relationship satisfaction and phubbing gains significance when influenced or moderated by variables such as family patterns29. Moreover, it has been observed that individuals may resort to phubbing their partners in response to heightened anxiety stress and FoMO7, aiming to alleviate negative emotions40,41.
Mediating variables: fear of missing out, romantic relationship satisfaction, and loneliness in intimate relationships
FoMO, romantic relationship satisfaction, and loneliness in intimate relationships are proposed as mediating variables in the relationship between DoS and phubbing. FoMO is characterized by a persistent apprehension that others are engaging in enjoyable experiences from which one is excluded. Essentially, it signifies the anxiety stemming from not participating in meaningful and pleasurable activities in which others are currently involved42. Research has underscored that FoMO encapsulates apprehension of being disconnected and left out from various events, predominantly within social spheres43. The pervasive use of social media, providing real-time access to a wealth of information, has stoked this anxiety, propelling heightened smartphone and social media engagement and consequently fostering an increase in phubbing behavior44. Results regarding the association between FoMO and gender are varied. Earlier studies indicated small effects on gender differences, with women scoring higher than men (e.g.45,46). However, a recent study investigating the relationships between FoMO, age, and gender found no gender differences in FoMO47.
The association between FoMO and phubbing has been a focal point in a few studies. For instance, Davey et al.7 identified FoMO as a significant predictor of phubbing behavior among young adults in India. They suggested that passive engagement with social media applications could contribute to this connection. Similarly, it was observed that FoMO precedes phubbing tendencies among adolescents48,49. These study findings indicate that FoMO might act as a catalyst, prompting individuals to experience anxiety and leading them to resort to phubbing as a coping mechanism. Yet, the act of phubbing can engender a sense of detachment from reality, transporting individuals into a virtual realm. This tendency can impact an individual’s psychological well-being, particularly if they struggle to navigate this phenomenon50. FoMO is posited to mediate the relationship between DoS and phubbing due to its role in driving smartphone use and social media engagement1. Given that this taps into anxiety, and DoS has been related to various anxieties12, FoMO is expected to amplify this association.
Phubbing may also be related to satisfaction with romantic relationships. A stable and healthy relationship is often perceived as the cornerstone of happy individuals and well-adjusted families. Romantic relationship satisfaction refers to individuals’ favorable or unfavorable experiences within their romantic relationships51. It also encompasses “the degree to which spouses perceive that their partners meet their needs and desires”21, p. 388. In order to cultivate a mutually satisfying relationship, physical presence is insufficient; a meaningful connection between partners is essential, and both must be fully engaged52.
In a review of gender differences in the development of relationship satisfaction, Bühler et al.53 emphasize the need to consider gender as a moderator. However, findings are mixed; a meta-analysis by Jackson et al.54 suggests slightly lower satisfaction for women, but longitudinal studies (e.g.55) show varied trajectories, with some studies56 reporting no significant gender disparities.
A suitable framework for examining the impact of phubbing on human relationships and romantic relationship satisfaction is Media Displacement Theory57, which posits that individuals have limited time and attention, and that engaging in one communication activity can curtail engagement in other interpersonal interactions. This effectively reduces the time available for communication as new communication technologies emerge. This theory can explain scenarios where individuals have restricted time and attention for their daily routines58, such that devoting time to devices like cell phones may diminish opportunities for meaningful interactions between partners and potentially lower the overall quality of the relationship.
The disruptions caused by phubbing have the potential to undermine essential human needs for both personal agency and emotional attachment, consequently leading to a decline in the quality of romantic relationships among couples. This occurs as individuals perceive their partners to be emotionally distant. Indeed, phubbing has been found to impact closeness, connection, and the quality of conversations, as well as to be detrimental to interpersonal relationships, particularly when conversations involve personal topics59. Romantic relationship satisfaction is proposed as a mediating variable between DoS and phubbing because research has indicated that individuals with higher levels of relationship satisfaction tend to engage less in phubbing behaviors, prioritizing meaningful interactions with their partners over smartphone use5,6, and typically exhibit higher levels of DoS20.
It has been reported that lonely individuals tend to perceive lower partner regard and responsiveness, leading to lower relationship satisfaction and commitment60. Loneliness is the degree to which an individual lives in solitude and lacks significant interpersonal connections with others61. This distressing and subjective emotion arises when individuals perceive their social interactions as unsatisfactory and insufficient. In contrast to the past stereotype associating loneliness with older people, recent research suggests the experience encompasses a broad spectrum of age groups, including young adults, who often seek support through their smartphones62. It was reported that when individuals experience loneliness, they often seek ways to alleviate this emotion, such as social media applications (e.g., Facebook and Instagram) and messaging platforms (e.g., WhatsApp). While these devices offer a means to alleviate isolation, their excessive usage can be detrimental to the quality of human interactions63.
Gender differences in loneliness in intimate relationships have been explored in several studies. Schobin64 found that women tend to experience more relational loneliness (loneliness within the broader peer group), while men tend to experience more intimate loneliness (within a dyadic relationship with a friend). Another study, conducted among married individuals between the ages of 20 and 4965, tested the assumption that women more willingly acknowledge their loneliness, but this assumption was refuted. Overall, gender differences in loneliness in intimate relationships vary depending on the specific context and age group under study.
Evidence indicates that loneliness is also associated with biased perceptions of partner regard, communal motivation, and support provision, which in turn contribute to lower relationship satisfaction, commitment, disclosure, support, and happiness66. Loneliness and rejection sensitivity were found to be positively associated with threat sensitivity in romantic relationships, and rejection sensitivity mediated the relationship between loneliness and threat sensitivity67. Overall, these findings suggest that loneliness can compromise the quality of romantic relationships and contribute to mental health problems68.
Loneliness has been associated with elevated levels of FoMO, especially among those extensively involved in social media activities69, leading individuals to check their smartphones frequently to avoid social exclusion70. The fear of loneliness within relationships drives smartphone use, potentially increasing FoMO and phubbing behaviors5,71. Loneliness in intimate relationships is suggested as another mediating variable due to its potential to drive excessive smartphone use as a coping mechanism for social isolation7, inadvertently increasing phubbing behaviors8,9. It stands to reason that lower levels of DoS may exacerbate feelings of loneliness in light of the link between loneliness, phubbing, and distant family and marital relationships, coupled with findings that highlight the significant impact of the family environment on adolescent loneliness—with family functioning, parenting style, and the parent–child relationship all negatively predicting it72. Such exacerbated feelings of loneliness could ultimately contribute to elevated levels of phubbing in intimate relationships.
Young adulthood
The current study focused on young adults, a demographic of particular significance in developmental psychology. Recent research underscores a notable shift in the understanding of the transition from childhood to adulthood by developmental psychologists, with societal and economic changes leading to delays in achieving traditional adult milestones, such as marriage, parenthood, and homeownership73,74. Arnett75 highlights the diverse experiences encountered during this transition period, as young individuals explore different paths before establishing a clear life direction. Furthermore, individuals in this phase often face challenges in emotional, interpersonal, familial, and romantic realms, sometimes resulting in various emotional disorders.
Research on this age group is also important due to their extensive use of the Internet and high dependence on smartphones—a phenomenon that has received less attention in this context13. Exploring phubbing in this age group can play a pivotal role in increasing awareness about the issue and promoting responsible smartphone use.
The current study
Based on the theories and empirical results discussed, sufficient evidence suggests that a partner’s use of a smartphone while in the company of their romantic partner may impact relationship satisfaction. With the increasing prevalence of cell phone usage among young adult couples76, it is crucial to examine the family, romantic relationship, and personal factors contributing to the rise of phubbing. FoMO, romantic relationship satisfaction, and loneliness in intimate relationships are proposed as mediating variables in the relationship between DoS and phubbing, with each variable playing a distinct role in amplifying the association between these constructs. This proposed mediation model seeks to provide a comprehensive understanding of the mechanisms underlying the relationship between DoS and phubbing behavior. Consequently, our primary objective was to explore whether a low level of DoS could augment FoMO, erode romantic relationship satisfaction, and amplify feelings of loneliness within intimate relationships, and subsequently increase phubbing behavior. Notably, each of the three mediating variables may contribute to phubbing. Exploring all three together may offer a more complete, in-depth picture that helps to discern and understand the relationship between DoS and phubbing. Hence, we hypothesized that DoS (I-position, emotional reactivity, emotional cutoff, and fusion with others) would be associated with phubbing through the mediation of FoMO, romantic relationship satisfaction, and loneliness in intimate relationships (Hypothesis 1, Fig. 1). Furthermore, drawing from previous findings, we anticipated that women would report higher levels of emotional reactivity, fusion with others, and FoMO, while men would report higher levels of emotional cutoff and phubbing (Hypothesis 2).
Research hypotheses model.
Methods
Participants
Study participants were 431 Israeli adults, about two-thirds of whom were females, with a mean age of 29 years (M = 29.05, SD = 9.14). We selected young adults for our sample because, at this age, they tend to be involved in romantic relationships, and many of them have established stable partnerships. Most were Jewish, heterosexual, secular, and employed. About a third were married, while the rest were cohabiting. Close to 25% had children. About 70% had a college education. The inclusion criteria were that all participants possessed smartphones and were involved in a romantic relationship. See Table 1 for more details.
Instruments
The Differentiation of Self-Revised scale (DSI-R77,78) was translated into Hebrew and adapted to the Israeli context20,79. The questionnaire comprises 46 items distributed across four subscales: I-position, emotional reactivity, emotional cutoff, and fusion with others (sample item for emotional reactivity: “People have remarked that I’m overly emotional”). Respondents rate each item on a Likert scale ranging from 1 (not at all like me) to 6 (very much like me). Subscale scores are derived by averaging mean scores. Higher DoS is indicated by higher means for I-position and lower means for emotional reactivity, emotional cutoff, and fusion with others. Cronbach’s alpha coefficient demonstrated strong reliability for I-position (0.81), emotional reactivity (0.88), and emotional cutoff (0.81), and acceptable reliability for the fusion with others subscale (0.79).
The Phubbing Questionnaire80 was translated into Hebrew for the current study, using back translation. The questionnaire comprises ten items and two scales. The first scale pertains to communication disorders and is composed of five items (sample item: “People complain that I mess with my cell phone”). The second scale concerns obsession with the mobile phone (sample item: “I feel anxious if my phone is not nearby”). Answers are rated on a Likert scale ranging from 1 (never) to 5 (always). Cronbach’s alpha for the entire sample in the current study was 0.78.
The Fear of Missing Out (FoMO) scale81 was translated into Hebrew and adapted to Israel49. It comprises ten items rated on a Likert scale ranging from 1 (definitely not true) to 5 (definitely true). A sample item is: “I worry that others have more positive experiences than me.” Scores are computed as the mean of the items, resulting in a range of 1 to 5. In the present study, Cronbach’s alpha for the total score was 0.83.
The ENRICH Romantic Relationship Satisfaction Inventory82 was translated into Hebrew and adapted to the Israeli context83. The questionnaire is used to measure romantic relationship satisfaction. The Hebrew instrument, which consists of ten items, evaluates challenges and strengths within the relationship across nine dimensions (personality issues, communication, conflict resolution, financial management, leisure activities, sexual relationships, children and parenting, extended family and friends, and gender role attitudes). A sample item is: “I’m very pleased with my partner’s personality and personal habits.” Participants respond on a Likert scale spanning from 1 (not at all true for me) to 7 (very true for me). A higher score reflects greater satisfaction. Scores are computed as the mean of the items. Research has demonstrated test–retest reliability and internal consistency of the subscales and overall assessment82. In the current study, Cronbach’s alpha for the entire sample was 0.82.
The Loneliness in Intimate Relationships (LIRS) scale68 was initially developed in Hebrew and comprises 14 items. Respondents are prompted to evaluate the degree to which they experience feelings of loneliness within their romantic relationship (sample item: “I feel hurt.”) The instrument is divided into three subscales: detachment (6 items), harm (4 items), and guilt (4 items). Subscale scores are generated by calculating the mean of the corresponding item ratings, where higher scores indicate heightened sensations of detachment, hurt, and guilt. Given substantial intercorrelations among the subscales, a total mean score was computed in the present study. Respondents’ answers are appraised along a Likert scale, spanning from 1 (does not describe my experience at all) to 6 (totally describes my experience). Internal consistency, assessed by Cronbach’s alpha, was notably robust (0.93).
Demographic questionnaire A questionnaire was crafted for the current study, encompassing pertinent background details such as gender, age, relationship status, and level of education.
Procedure
After obtaining ethics approval from the ethics committee of the college (IRB) (YVC EMEK 63-2023), a survey company was employed to distribute the questionnaires to an online systematic sample. The survey was performed in accordance with the guidelines and regulations. Informed consent was obtained from all participants by signing the initial page of the first questionnaire. Questionnaire completion was voluntary, with participants assured of anonymity and confidentiality. They were also informed of their right to cease participation at any point.
Statistical analyses
Data were analyzed using SPSS version 29. The examination of internal consistencies led to the construction of variables through item means. Descriptive statistics, including means and standard deviations, were employed to portray the study variables. Pearson correlations were computed to assess relationships among variables. Similarly, Pearson correlations and independent t-tests were executed to explore connections between the study variables and demographic characteristics.
To evaluate the study model, path analysis was employed, utilizing AMOS version 29. Model fit was evaluated using metrics including Chi-square, cmin/df, NFI, NNFI, CFI, and RMSEA. The independent variables were gender and the DoS dimensions. Age and level of education were controlled for. Correlations among demographic variables, DoS dimensions, and mediators were examined within each group of variables. The mediation analysis was integrated into the path analysis, employing 5,000 bootstrap samples with bias-corrected 95% confidence intervals. Variables were standardized. Finally, the interactions between gender and the study variables were examined, with multiple regression analyses, to assess whether the model associations differed by gender.
Ethical approval
Ethics committee approval was obtained for the study. All procedures in this study involving human participants were conducted in accordance with the ethical standards of the 1975 Helsinki Declaration and were approved by the research team’s college ethics committee.
Informed consent
Informed consent for participation was obtained before completion of the survey. Participants were sent a form containing information regarding the purpose of the study and voluntary participation.
Results
Descriptive results
Table 2 shows mean scores and correlations for the study variables. Average scores hovered near midpoint for all variables, although they were somewhat higher for romantic relationship satisfaction and I-position and relatively low for emotional cutoff. Most correlations were significant. Phubbing was positively associated with FoMO, emotional reactivity and fusion with others, and negatively associated with I-position. FoMO was positively related to loneliness in intimate relationships, emotional reactivity, emotional cutoff, and fusion with others, and negatively related to I-position. Romantic relationship satisfaction was negatively associated with loneliness and emotional cutoff, and positively associated with I-position. Loneliness in intimate relationship was positively associated with all three negative dimensions of DoS.
Several gender differences emerged, as shown in Table 3. Females exhibited higher levels of phubbing than males, as well as higher levels of emotional reactivity and fusion with others, while males exhibited higher levels of I-position than females.
In addition, two demographic factors were found to be associated with the study variables (see supplementary material). Age was negatively associated with FoMO, romantic relationship satisfaction, loneliness in intimate relationships, and fusion with others. Participants with a college education exhibited higher levels of phubbing and lower levels of loneliness in intimate relationships and emotional cutoff than those with only a high school diploma. Consequently, these two demographic factors were employed as control variables in subsequent analyses.
Analyses of the study model
Path analysis of the study model used gender (1—males, 0—females) and the four DoS dimensions as independent variables. FoMO, romantic relationship satisfaction, and loneliness in intimate relationships were the mediators, and phubbing was the dependent variable. Age and level of education (1—college, 0—high school) were controlled for. Mediation was examined within the path analysis, with a bootstrapping of 5,000 samples and a bias-corrected 95% confidence interval. For enhanced clarity, significant path values are presented in Fig. 2. The model was found to fit the data: χ2(9) = 9.97, p = .353, cmin/df = 1.11, NFI = .991, NNFI = .995, CFI = .999, RMSEA = .016.
Path Analysis for FoMO, romantic relationship satisfaction, and loneliness in intimate relationships as mediating between differentiation of self and phubbing. Note R2 values appear within rectangles; significant β values (standardized regression coefficients) appear above arrows. Solid lines indicate significant associations; dotted lines display non-significant associations. *p < .05; **p < .01; ***p < .001.
The path analysis results (Fig. 2) revealed several significant associations. First, males scored higher than females on I-position, while females scored higher than males on emotional reactivity and fusion with others. Higher emotional reactivity, emotional cutoff, and fusion with others were associated with higher FoMO. Higher I-position and lower emotional cutoff were associated with higher romantic relationship satisfaction. Higher emotional reactivity and emotional cutoff were associated with a higher level of loneliness in intimate relationships. Finally, increased FoMO was associated with higher phubbing. However, romantic relationship satisfaction and loneliness in intimate relationships had non-significant associations with phubbing (β = .09, p = .107 and β = .04, p = .487, respectively; not shown in figure).
Results of the path analysis thus suggest that FoMO acts as a mediator in associations between the dimensions of DoS and phubbing. However, associations between romantic relationship satisfaction and phubbing, as well as loneliness in intimate relationships and phubbing, were non-significant, indicating no apparent indirect effects involving them.
The indirect effects observed for FoMO are detailed in Table 4. Notably, higher emotional reactivity, emotional cutoff, and fusion with others were associated with heightened FoMO, which in turn was connected to increased phubbing behavior. This indirect effect was non-significant for I-position, as there was no discernible link between I-position and FoMO. Finally, all interactions between gender and the study variables in predicting phubbing were non-significant (p = .069 to p = .860), as were all interactions between gender and the study variables in predicting the mediating variables (p = .132 to p = .909). Thus, the results for the study model may be regarded as quite similar for males and females.
Discussion
In this study, we have delved into the mediating roles of FoMO, romantic relationship satisfaction, and loneliness in intimate relationships in the connection between DoS and phubbing behavior. On the whole, findings indicate that FoMO indeed served as a mediator in the link between three dimensions of DoS (emotional reactivity, emotional cutoff, and fusion with others) and phubbing behavior. However, the hypothesized mediating role of romantic relationship satisfaction and loneliness in intimate relationships did not reach statistical significance. Nonetheless, these latter two variables did yield associations with DoS.
The findings provide partial support for Hypothesis 1, suggesting that FoMO mediates the relationship between DoS and phubbing. This aligns with research suggesting that FoMO mediates the association between personality characteristics and phubbing (e.g.30). The present results provide novel insights into how the association between DoS and FoMO impacts the misuse of social media (i.e., phubbing), suggesting that uncertainties about interpersonal relationships can intensify apprehension about missing out on opportunities, motivating a heightened reliance on social media to alleviate such unease. The heightened FoMO might, in turn, contribute to increased utilization of online platforms, leading to a rise in phubbing behavior.
The association between phubbing and personality traits can also be elucidated through the framework of the Uses and Gratifications Theory. This theory suggests that people use social media to fulfill various needs, including maintaining relationships, seeking entertainment, and gaining admiration34,35,36. Considering the inherent uncertainty within interpersonal relationships and in self-perception among individuals with lower levels of DoS, such people might find themselves spending prolonged periods navigating social networks and intensifying their Internet and social media usage, experiencing high FoMO levels. Our findings align with the assumption that individuals characterized by poor DoS often exhibit traits like self-doubt, anxiety, and uncertainty in interpersonal relationships. These traits are likely to contribute to an increased sense of FoMO. Such individuals may thus use social media platforms to decrease their anxiety and fulfil their desires84. Furthermore, as individuals with high FoMO are prone to anxiety about missing out on others’ activities85 and tend to engage in frequent self-comparisons86, they may extensively incorporate social media into their daily lives87, potentially increasing instances of phubbing34.
Contrary to research that established a link between romantic relationship satisfaction and phubbing (e.g.1,29,88,89), the current study did not find such satisfaction to be a mediating factor or directly associated with phubbing, similar to recent findings that 429 adults in China reported a lack of significant connection between relationship satisfaction and partner phubbing90. Wang and colleagues proposed that this link might be influenced by self-esteem, suggesting a potential moderating role of self-esteem within this particular context.
While the reasons underlying the lack of significant association between romantic relationship satisfaction and phubbing in this study require further investigation, several explanations can be tentatively offered. The first concerns diverse coping strategies. People employ a range of coping mechanisms when facing relationship difficulties; while some might resort to phubbing, others might seek alternative solutions, such as engaging in activities with family and friends or preferring solitude. This diversity in coping styles could lead to varied expressions of romantic relationship satisfaction and phubbing behavior among couples, making the relationship between these factors less clear cut.
A second possibility is related to the duration of the relationship. As most participants in the current study were young adults, it is conceivable that their relationships were still in the early stages and relatively free from strain. This could impact phubbing behaviors.
Finally, another possible explanation concerns a unique shift in the study focus. Unlike existing research, this study had participants report their own phubbing behavior, rather than focusing on instances of being phubbed. Moreover, whereas prior studies primarily investigated the effect of phubbing on romantic relationship satisfaction, the current one explored the lack of romantic relationship satisfaction as a possible contributor to phubbing. All of this could have implications for the observed outcomes.
While romantic relationship satisfaction and loneliness in intimate relationships were not directly related to phubbing or play a mediating role, our findings do underscore their connection to DoS, supporting previous studies22,91. These findings corroborate Bowen’s14,92 theoretical arguments that well-differentiated individuals can maintain stable and fulfilling intimate connections without compromising their basic selves, while poorly differentiated individuals may grapple with feelings of isolation due to difficulties in effectively balancing intimacy and autonomy20. The two dimensions of DoS that predicted romantic relationship satisfaction, i.e., I-position and emotional cutoff, reflect (from two different sides of the coin) the capacity for open communication, expressing emotions, desires, and needs directly. It is possible that dissatisfied partners have difficulty engaging in sincere communication, which inhibits both the expression of their own feelings and their ability to listen to their partner’s feelings.
Our second hypothesis suggested that women would report higher levels of emotional reactivity, fusion with others, and FoMO, while men would report higher levels of emotional cutoff and phubbing. This hypothesis was partially supported: females did report higher levels of emotional reactivity, fusion with others, and phubbing, while males reported higher levels of I-position, partially supporting previous studies (e.g.12,93). It should be noted that no gender difference was found for FoMO. It has been suggested20 that, due to distinct socialization processes, there are differences in how women and men express their emotions. Women may feel more comfortable discussing and displaying feelings of anxiety and fear, as societal norms generally permit and even encourage this kind of emotional expression. In our study, men reported higher levels of I-position, indicating that they perceive themselves as more capable of standing up for their own desires than women do. Societal norms are thought to promote assertiveness in men while discouraging it in women, resulting in observed differences. From a young age, children are frequently exposed to gender-based societal norms that prescribe specific behaviors. These expectations can shape the development of assertiveness.
In addition to the above, men reported greater loneliness within intimate relationships than women. This may suggest that men’s reluctance to seek help might contribute to higher levels of loneliness94.
Contrary to earlier research (e.g.95,96) and to the second hypothesis, women reported higher levels of phubbing than men. It is possible that women are more likely to recognize and report specific behaviors. This finding may also reflect a change in cultural expectations about phone use in social settings, impacting reporting tendencies, especially among young women. A comprehensive investigation that considers these factors, as well as qualitative insights and cultural context, is essential for a more profound understanding of this issue.
Limitations
This study has several limitations. Firstly, the sample primarily consists of young adults, which may hinder the extent to which the findings can be generalized to other age groups. While young adults have a greater propensity for smartphone use, expanding the age range of the sample would be prudent to ensure a more diverse representation. Secondly, given that the study has a cross-sectional design, the obtained results do not establish a definitive causal connection among the examined variables. To enhance comprehension and rigor, future investigations employing alternative methodologies, such as semi-structured interviews, or longitudinal designs, may provide more comprehensive insights. Furthermore, it is possible that the use of different data collection methods would have avoided the common method bias. Thirdly, the inclusion of additional variables, such as ethnicity and socioeconomic status, which might influence or moderate the relationships among the study variables, could yield valuable insights into the phenomenon of phubbing. Finally, it should be noted that, as participants filled out questionnaires for all independent, mediating, and dependent variables, the possibility of a common method bias was created.
Contributions
Notwithstanding its limitations, the study makes important contributions to the literature. Given the massive global increase of smartphone usage29, the significance of phubbing will continue to grow, increasing the need for comprehensive research to better understand the impact of this behavior and its underlying factors. The current study contributes to a deeper comprehension of the psychological factors underlying phubbing behaviors, which remains a relatively novel concept.
The established link between DoS and phubbing is also noteworthy. Poorly differentiated individuals seem to be at higher risk of engaging in phubbing behaviors through the mediation of FoMO. This outcome is pivotal for identifying focus groups for future research aimed at reducing phubbing behaviors. Furthermore, the finding that FoMO predicts phubbing has crucial implications for understanding the diverse motivations driving phubbing. We propose that FoMO might act as a catalyst, prompting individuals to experience anxiety, which in turn leads them to resort to phubbing as a coping mechanism.
In addition, the current study contributes to the literature because of its unique focus—namely, examining participants’ phubbing behavior, rather than whether they themselves were being phubbed. Thus, our findings illuminate the characteristics of individuals who engage in phubbing.
The research also has some practical implications. By comprehending factors that may escalate phubbing behavior, psychologists, psychiatrics, educational counselors, and family therapists can offer assistance to couples with high levels of phubbing. For instance, interventions aimed at enhancing DoS, which may reduce FoMO, could potentially lead to a reduction in phubbing. This knowledge may generate practical strategies for improving the quality of relationships in the context of digital device usage. At the same time, it is crucial to customize counseling specifically for women and men, considering the gender differences identified in the current study.
Data availability
The datasets generated during and analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.
References
Yam, F. C. The relationship between partner phubbing and life satisfaction: The mediating role of relationship satisfaction and perceived romantic relationship quality. Soc. Personal. Psychol. 126, 303–331. https://doi.org/10.1177/00332941221144611 (2023).
Błachnio, A. et al. Measurement invariance of the Phubbing Scale across 20 countries. IJP 5, 885–894. https://doi.org/10.1002/ijop.12790 (2021).
Randler, C., Wolfgang, L., Matt, K. & Demirhan, E. Smartphone addiction proneness in relation to sleep and morningness–eveningness in German adolescents. J. Behav. Addict. 5, 465–473. https://doi.org/10.1556/2006.5.2016.056 (2016).
Al-Saggaf, Y. & O’Donnell, S. B. Phubbing: Perceptions, reasons behind, predictors, and impacts. Hum. Behav. Emerg. Technol. 1, 132–140. https://doi.org/10.1002/hbe2.137 (2019).
Karadağ, E. et al. The virtual world’s current addiction: Phubbing. Addicta Turk. J. Addict. 3, 250–269 (2016).
Yam, F. C. & Kumcagız, H. Adaptation of General Phubbing Scale to Turkish culture and investigation of phubbing levels of university students in terms of various variables. Addicta 7, 48–60. https://doi.org/10.5152/addicta.2020.19061 (2020).
Davey, S. et al. Predictors and consequences of “Phubbing” among adolescents and youth in India: An impact evaluation study. JFCM. 25, 35–42. https://doi.org/10.4103/jfcm.JFCM_71_17 (2018).
Aagaard, J. Digital akrasia: A qualitative study of phubbing. AI Soc. 35, 237–244. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-019-00876-0 (2020).
Bröning, S. & Wartberg, L. Attached to your smartphone? A dyadic perspective on perceived partner phubbing and attachment in long-term couple relationships. Comput. Hum. Behav. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2021.106996 (2022).
Li, Y. X. et al. Relationship between perceived social norms and phubbing: Individual control and fear of missing out as mediators. Int. J. Ment. Health Addict. 21, 1898–1913. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11469-021-00696-8 (2023).
Carvajal, E. T. Families and technologies. What about the phubbing in Mexico?. Horyzonty Wychowania 16, 59–69. https://doi.org/10.17399/HW.2017.163704 (2017).
Peleg, M. & Peleg, O. Personality and family risk factors for poor mental well-being. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health. 20, 839. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph20010839 (2023).
Yam, F. C. & Kumcagiz, H. Investigation psychological factors effecting the phubbing behavior of young adults with different structural equation models. MANAS Sosyal Araştırmalar Dergisi. 12, 1087–1105. https://doi.org/10.33206/mjss.1231104 (2023).
Kerr, M. E. & Bowen, M. Family evaluation: An approach based on Bowen theory (Norton, 1988).
Peleg, O. & Idan Biton, M. Assessing satisfaction with differentiation of self through circle drawing (SFI-R): Development and initial validation of a self-report instrument. GJRA 4, 71–77. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.1.4677.1921 (2015).
Rodríguez-González, M. et al. Differentiation of self and relationship attachment, quality, and stability: A path analysis of dyadic and longitudinal data from Spanish and U.S. couples. PLoS One https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0282482 (2023).
Hosack, L. L., Welton, G. L. & Homan, K. J. Differentiation of self and internal distress: The mediating roles of vulnerable narcissism and maladaptive perfectionism. Clin. Soc. Work J. 51, 65–75. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10615-022-00851-1 (2023).
Calatrava, M., Martins, M. V., Schweer-Collins, M., Duch-Ceballos, C. & Rodríguez-González, M. Differentiation of self: A scoping review of Bowen Family Systems Theory’s core construct. Clin. Psychol. Rev. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2021.102101 (2022).
Mozas-Alonso, M., Oliver, J. & Berástegui, A. Differentiation of self and its relationship with marital satisfaction and parenting styles in a Spanish sample of adolescents’ parents. PLoS On. 17(3), e0265436 (2022).
Peleg, O. The relation of differentiation of self and marital satisfaction: What can be learned from married people over the life course?. Am. J. Fam. Ther. 36, 388–401. https://doi.org/10.1080/01926180701804634 (2008).
Şanel, I. & Erkan, I. The mediating role of five love languages between differentiation of self and marital satisfaction. Am. J. Fam. Ther. 50, 407–423. https://doi.org/10.29173/cjfy29489 (2022).
Finzi-Dottan, R. The role of fear of intimacy as mediator between self-differentiation and marital relationship satisfaction: A dyadic model. Fam. J. 31, 392–398. https://doi.org/10.1177/10664807231163254 (2023).
Telli, A. & Yavuz Güler, Ç. Differentiation of self, forgiveness, jealousy, and conflict resolution responses among married individuals: The mediating role of relationship satisfaction, relationship adjustment, and emotional dependency. Contemp. Fam. Ther. 45, 157–171. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10591-021-09603-8 (2023).
Guarnera, J., Yuen, E. & Macpherson, H. The impact of loneliness and social isolation on cognitive aging: A narrative review. J. Alzheimer’s Dis. Rep. 29, 699–714. https://doi.org/10.3233/ADR-230011 (2023).
Samadikashan, S., Jafari, F., Mahmodpour, A. B. & Ghasemzadeh, S. Prediction of divorce and loneliness tendency based on attachment styles with respect to the role of mediation self-differentiation. J. Couns. Res. 17, 128–151 (2019).
van der Schyff, K. & Flowerday, S. The mediating role of perceived risks and benefits when self-disclosing: A study of social media trust and FoMO. Comput. Secur. 126, 103071. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cose.2022.103071 (2023).
Bogomolsky, Y. & Peleg, O. Differentiation of self and parental self-efficacy among mothers who suffered from sexual abuse during childhood. Sch. Couns. 17, 66–85 (2012).
Avgustis, I. Respecifying phubbing: Video-based analysis of smartphone use in co-present interactions. In Proceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems 1–15 (2023).
Wang, X. & Zhao, K. Partner phubbing and marital satisfaction: The mediating roles of marital interaction and marital conflict. Soc. Sci. Comput. Rev. 41, 1126–1139. https://doi.org/10.1177/08944393211072231 (2023).
Akat, M., Arslan, C. & Hamarta, E. Dark triad personality and phubbing: The mediator role of fomo. Psychol. Rep. 126, 1803–1821. https://doi.org/10.1177/00332941221109119 (2023).
Grieve, R. & March, E. “Just checking”: Vulnerable and grandiose narcissism subtypes as predictors of phubbing. Mob. Media Commun. 9, 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1177/2050157920942276 (2020).
Ledford, H. Who exactly counts as an adolescent?. Nature. 554(7690), 429–432 (2018).
Ergün, N., Göksu, İ & Sakız, H. Effects of phubbing: Relationships with psychodemographic variables. Psychol. Rep. 123(5), 1578–1613. https://doi.org/10.1177/0033294119889581 (2020).
Menon, D. & Meghana, H. R. Unpacking the uses and gratifications of Facebook: A study among college teachers in India. Comput. Hum. Behav. Rep. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chbr.2021.100066 (2021).
Baishya, U., & Neustaedter, C. In your eyes: Anytime, anywhere video and audio streaming for couples. In Proceedings of the 2017 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing 84–97. https://doi.org/10.1145/2998181.2998200 (2017).
Abeele, V. V., Spiel, K., Nacke, L., Johnson, D. & Gerling, K. Development and validation of the player experience inventory: A scale to measure player experiences at the level of functional and psychosocial consequences. Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhcs.2019.102370 (2020).
Chotpitayasunondh, V. & Douglas, K. M. Measuring phone snubbing behavior: Development and validation of the Generic Scale of Phubbing (GSP) and the Generic Scale of Being Phubbed (GSBP). Comput. Hum. Behav. 88, 5–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2018.06.020 (2018).
Chemielik, M. M. & Blachnio, A. Till phone do us part: The role of phubbing in relationship satisfaction and self-esteem. J. Perspect. Econ. Polit. Soc. Integr. https://doi.org/10.18290/pepsi-2021-0009 (2021).
Frackowiak, M., Hilpert, P. & Russell, P. S. Impact of partner phubbing on negative emotions: A daily diary study of mitigating factors. Curr. Psychol. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-023-04401-x (2023).
Escalera-Chávez, M. E., García-Santillán, A. & Molchanova, V. S. Phubbing behavior: Is there a gender difference in college students?. Eur. J. Contemp. Educ. 9, 546–551. https://doi.org/10.13187/ejced.2020.3.546 (2020).
Schokkenbroek, J. M., Hardyns, W. & Ponnet, K. Phubbed and curious: The relation between partner phubbing and electronic partner surveillance. Comput. Hum. Behav. 137, 107425. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2022.107425 (2022).
Abel, J. P., Buff, C. L. & Burr, S. A. Social media and the fear of missing out: Scale development and assessment. JBER. 14, 33–44. https://doi.org/10.19030/jber.v14i1.9554 (2016).
Hitcham, L., Jackson, H. & James, R. J. E. The relationship between smartphone use and smartphone addiction: An examination of logged and self-reported behavior in a pre-registered, two-wave sample. Comput. Hum. Behav. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2023.107822 (2023).
Tandon, A., Dhir, A., Almugren, I., AlNemer, G. N. & Mäntymäki, M. Fear of missing out (FoMO) among social media users: A systematic literature review, synthesis and framework for future research. Internet Res. 31, 782–821. https://doi.org/10.1108/INTR-11-2019-0455 (2021).
Elhai, J. D. et al. Fear of missing out: Testing relationships with negative affectivity, online social engagement, and problematic smartphone use. Comput. Hum. Behav. 89, 289–298. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2018.08.020 (2018).
Alt, D. & Boniel-Nissim, M. Using multidimensional scaling and PLS-SEM to assess the relationships between personality traits, problematic Internet use, and fear of missing out. BIT. 37, 1157–1176. https://doi.org/10.1080/0144929X.2018.1502353 (2018).
Rozgonjuk, D., Sindermann, C., Elhai, J. D. & Montag, C. Individual differences in Fear of missing out (FoMO): Age, gender, and the Big Five personality trait domains, facets, and items. Pers. Individ. Differ. 171, 110546. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2020.110546 (2021).
Tandon, A., Dhir, A., Talwar, S., Kaur, P. & Mäntymäki, M. Social media induced fear of missing out (FoMO) and phubbing: Behavioural, relational and psychological outcomes. Technol. Forecast. Soc. Change https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2021.121149 (2022).
Franchina, V., Vanden Abeele, M., Van Rooij, A. J., Lo Coco, G. & De Marez, L. Fear of missing out as a predictor of problematic social media use and phubbing behavior among Flemish adolescents. ISDE 15, 2319. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph15102319 (2018).
Çikrikci, Ö., Griffiths, M. D. & Erzen, E. Testing the mediating role of phubbing in the relationship between the big five personality traits and satisfaction with life. IJMH. 20, 44–56. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11469-019-00115-z (2022).
Hendrick, S. S. & Hendrick, C. Measuring respect in close relationships. JSPR 2, 881–899. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407506070471 (2006).
Patrick, H., Knee, C. R., Canevello, A. & Lonsbary, C. The role of need fulfillment in relationship functioning and well-being: A self-determination theory perspective. JPSP. 92, 434–457. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.92.3.434 (2007).
Bühler, J. L., Krauss, S. & Orth, U. Development of relationship satisfaction across the life span: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Psychol. Bull. 147, 1012–1053. https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000342 (2021).
Jackson, J. B., Miller, R. B., Oka, M. & Henry, R. G. Gender differences in marital satisfaction: A meta-analysis. JMF. 76, 105–129. https://doi.org/10.1111/jomf.12077 (2014).
Lavner, J. A. & Bradbury, T. N. Patterns of change in marital satisfaction over the newlywed years. JMF. 72, 1171–1187. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3737.2010.00757.x (2010).
Kurdek, L. A. Gender and marital satisfaction early in marriage: A growth curve approach. JMF. 67, 68–84. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0022-2445.2005.00006.x (2005).
McCombs, M. E. Mass media in the marketplace. In Journalism and communication monographs, Vol. 24 (Association for Education in Journalism, 1972).
Sin, S. C. J. & Vakkari, P. Information repertoires: Media use patterns in various gratification contexts. J. Doc. 73, 1102–1118. https://doi.org/10.1108/JD-10-2016-0117 (2017).
Przybylski, A. K. & Weinstein, N. Can you connect with me now? How the presence of mobile communication technology influences face-to-face conversation quality. JSPR. 30, 237–246. https://doi.org/10.1177/026540751245382 (2013).
Lemay, E., Cutri, J. & Teneva, N. How loneliness undermines close relationships and persists over time: the role of perceived regard and care. Personal. Soc. Psychol. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/dghe7 (2022).
Karapetsas, A. V., Karapetsas, V. A., Zygouris, N. C. & Fotis, A. I. Internet addiction and loneliness. Encephalos 52, 4–9 (2015).
Matthews, T. et al. Social isolation, loneliness and depression in young adulthood: A behavioural genetic analysis. SPPE. 51, 339–348. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00127-016-1178-7 (2016).
Stead, H. & Bibby, P. A. Personality, fear of missing out and problematic internet use and their relationship to subjective well-being. Comput. Hum. Behav. 76, 534–540. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.08.016 (2017).
Schobin, J. Loneliness and emancipation: A multilevel analysis of the connection between gender inequality, loneliness, and social isolation in the ISSP 2017. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health. 19, 7428. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19127428 (2022).
Maes, M., Vanhalst, J., Van den Noortgate, W. & Goossence, L. Intimate and relational loneliness in adolescence. J. Child Fam. Stud. 26, 2059–2069. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10826-017-0722-8 (2017).
Marinescu, V., Fox, B., Marinache, R., Rovența-Frumușani, D., & Branea, S. Generational Differences in Interpersonal Relationships of Users (Routledge, eBook, ISBN9781003254287, 2022)
Anyan, F., Morote, R. & Hjemdal, O. Prospective relations between loneliness in different relationships, metacognitive beliefs, worry and common mental health problems. Ment. Health Prev. 19, 200186. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mhp.2020.200186 (2020).
Rokach, A., Shaked, A. & Ben-Artzi, E. Loneliness in Intimate Relationships Scale (LIRS): Development and validation. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph191912970 (2022).
Barry, C. T. & Wong, M. Y. Fear of missing out (FoMO): A generational phenomenon or an individual difference?. J. Soc. Pers. Relationsh. 37, 2952–2966. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407520945394 (2020).
Beyens, I., Frison, E. & Eggermont, S. “I don’t want to miss a thing”: Adolescents’ fear of missing out and its relationship to adolescents’ social needs, Facebook use, and Facebook related stress. Comput. Hum. Behav. 64, 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.05.083 (2016).
Xie, X. & Xie, J. Parental phubbing accelerates depression in late childhood and adolescence: A two-path model. J. Adolescenc. 78, 43–52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.adolescence.2019.12.004 (2020).
Ying, M. Family influences on adolescent loneliness. SHS Web Conf. 171, 01011 (2023).
Roberts, J. A. & David, M. E. My life has become a major distraction from my cell phone: Partner phubbing and relationship satisfaction among romantic partners. Comput. Hum. Behav. 54, 134–141. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2015.07.058 (2016).
Dahl, R. E., Allen, N. B., Wilbrecht, L. & Suleiman, A. B. Importance of investing in adolescence from a developmental science perspective. Nature. 554, 441–450 (2018).
Arnett, J. J. Emerging Adulthood: The Winding Road from the Late Teens Through the Twenties (Oxford University Press, 2023).
Luo, S. & Tuney, S. Can texting be used to improve romantic relationships? The effects of sending positive text messages on relationship satisfaction. Comput. Hum. Behav. 49, 670–678. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2014.11.035 (2015).
Skowron, E. A. & Friedlander, M. The differentiation of self inventory: Development and initial validation. J. Couns. Psychol. 28, 235–246. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0016709 (1998).
Skowron, E. A. & Schmitt, T. A. Assessing interpersonal fusion: Reliability and validity of a new DSI Fusion with Others subscale. MFT. 29, 209–222. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1752-0606.2003.tb01201.x (2003).
Peleg, O. Bowen theory: A study of differentiation of self and students’ social anxiety and physiological symptoms. COFT. 24, 355–369. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1015355509866 (2002).
Karadağ, E. et al. Determinants of phubbing, which is the sum of many virtual addictions: A structural equation model. J. Behav. Addict. 4, 60–74. https://doi.org/10.1556/2006.4.2015.005 (2015).
Przybylski, A. K., Murayama, K., DeHaan, C. R. & Gladwell, V. Motivational, emotional, and behavioral correlates of fear of missing out. Comput. Hum. Behav. 29, 1841–1848. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2013.02.014 (2013).
Olson, D. H. Commentary: Struggling with congruence across theoretical models and methods. Fam. Process. 24, 203–207. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1545-5300.1985.00203.x (1985).
Lavee, Y. Marital Quality Inventory: Research and clinical issues. In Paper presented at the Scientific Conference of the Psychologist Association (Ben Gurion University, 1995).
Fox, J. & Rooney, M. C. The dark triad and trait self-objectification as predictors of men’s use and self-presentation behaviors on social networking sites. Personal. Individ. Differ. 76, 161–165. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2014.12.017 (2015).
Gokler, M. E., Aydin, R., Unal, E. & Metintas, S. Determining validity and reliability of Turkish version of Fear of Missing out Scale. Anatol. J. Psychiatry 17, 53–59. https://doi.org/10.5455/apd.195843 (2016).
Burnell, K., George, M. J., Vollet, J. W., Ehrenreich, S. E. & Underwood, M. K. Passive social networking site use and well-being: The mediating roles of social comparison and the fear of missing out. Cyberpsychol. J. Psychosoc. Res. Cyberspace https://doi.org/10.5817/CP2019-3-5 (2019).
Casale, S., Rugai, L. & Fioravanti, G. Exploring the role of positive metacognitions in explaining the association between the fear of missing out and social media addiction. Addict. Behav. 85, 83–87. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addbeh.2018.05.020 (2018).
Roberts, J. A. & David, M. E. Partner phubbing and relationship satisfaction through the lens of social allergy theory. Personal. Individ. Differ. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2022.111676 (2022).
Wang, X., Zhao, F. & Lei, L. Partner phubbing and relationship satisfaction: Self-esteem and marital status as moderators. Curr. Psychol. 40, 3365–3375. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-019-00275-0 (2021).
Wang, P. et al. Problematic smartphone use: The mediating role of FoMO and the moderating role of student-student relationship. Personal. Individ. Differ. 146, 136–142. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2019.04.013 (2019).
Keles, E., Bilge, Y., Kumru, P., Celik, Z. & Cokeliler, I. Association between perceived social support, marital satisfaction, differentiation of self and perinatal depression. North. Clin. Istanbul 10, 181–188. https://doi.org/10.14744/nci.2023.79923 (2023).
Bowen, M. Family Therapy in Clinical Practice (Jason Aronson, 1978).
Sadeghi, M., Barahmand, U. & Roshannia, S. Differentiation of self and hope mediated by resilience: Gender differences. Can. J. Fam. Youth. 12, 20–43. https://doi.org/10.29173/cjfy29489 (2020).
Ratcliffe, J., Kanaan, M. & Galdas, P. Reconceptualising men’s loneliness: An interpretivist interview study of UK-based men. Soc. Sci. Med. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2023.116129 (2023).
Aljasir, S. Present but absent in the digital age: Testing a conceptual model of phubbing and relationship satisfaction among married couples. Hum. Behav. Emerg. Technol. https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/1402751 (2022).
Zonash, N. Phubbing behavior and romantic relationship: Mechanism of mental health among married couples. Found. Univ. J. Psychol. 4, 103–137. https://doi.org/10.33897/fujp.v4i1.70 (2020).
Acknowledgements
We extend our gratitude to Helene Hogri for her invaluable assistance in editing the article. We would also like to acknowledge Dr. Edna Gutman for her significant contribution to the statistical analyses. Finally, special thanks to Lior Gendelman for her valuable assistance in participant recruitment.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
O.P. and M.B.-N. collected the data, analyzed the results, and contributed to the main manuscript text. Both authors reviewed the manuscript.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing interests.
Additional information
Publisher's note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Supplementary Information
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
Peleg, O., Boniel-Nissim, M. Exploring the personality and relationship factors that mediate the connection between differentiation of self and phubbing. Sci Rep 14, 6572 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-55560-1
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-55560-1
Keywords
Comments
By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.
