Abstract
A high rate of personality disorders (PD) was found in individuals with Internet addiction
(IA) in previous studies using clinical and limited sample sizes. The present study further made
comparisons between gender, and incorporated a control group to compare the frequencies of PD
between individuals with IA and those without IA. Five hundred and fifty-six college students
(341 females) completed self-report surveys, and were later given diagnostic interviews to assess
for a personality disorder diagnosis. Males with IA showed a higher frequency of narcissistic PD,
while females with IA showed a higher frequency of borderline, narcissistic, avoidant or
dependent PD when compared to those without IA. The high rate of PD among Internet addicts
may be associated with the core features of specific PD psychopathology. Gender differences in
the PD frequencies among IA individuals provide indications for understanding the
psychopathological characteristics of personality disorders in Internet addicts.
Key Words: Internet addiction; Personality disorders; College students; Gender differences
1
Introduction
With the growing importance of the Internet in everyday life, Internet addiction (IA) has
been greatly researched and often referred to base on its superficial similarity to common
addictive disorders such as drugs, alcohol, or impulse control disorders such as pathological
gambling (Morahan-Martin and Schumacher, 2000; Shapira et al., 2000; Shaw and Black, 2008;
Young, 1998). Although IA prevalence may vary according to age, sex and ethnicity, studies
have found it to prevail more commonly among college students (Morahan-Martin and
Schumacher, 2000; Young, 2004). Encouraged by professors and administrators to make full use
of the vast resources on the Internet, while access is possible anytime via computer labs, wired
dorms, and around campus (Kandell, 1998), college students are also susceptible to IA due to the
amount of leisure time, and a newly experienced freedom from parental control and monitoring
(Young, 2004). Worldwide prevalence of IA ranged from 1.6% to 18% (Shaw and Black, 2008).
In Taiwan, 19.8% of adolescents (Ko et al., 2005) and 15.3-17.9% college students were
identified as having IA (Lin et al., 2011; Tsai et al., 2009). Having trouble going about their
normal schedules, many students spend too much time online and have trouble logging off,
frequently not recognizing the problem when it is happening.
Previous studies investigated personality characteristics that are vulnerable to the
development of IA (Black et al., 1999; Morahan-Martin and Schumacher, 2000; Shapira et al.,
2000; Yang et al., 2005). Studies using self-reports have found an association between borderline
personality features (Dalbudak et al., 2014) and IA, as well as narcissistic personality traits (Kim
et al., 2008) and online game addiction. Using advertisement and word-of mouth, Black and
colleagues (1999) recruited 21 individuals who reported excessive computer use and found that
52% of the participants met criteria for at least one personality disorder (PD), the most frequent
2
being borderline (24%), narcissistic (19%), and antisocial (19%) PD. They speculated that those
with borderline personality disorder (BPD) use the computer and Internet out of impulsivity and
as a tool to relieve boredom and loneliness, antisocial PD may crave the novelty and excitement
of computer use, and narcissistic PD may use the computer to satisfy their self-absorbing
characteristics. With a sample size of 21 individuals and a lack of control group, it served as the
first study to look into the relationship between PD and IA, yet it only examined the total time
spent on the Internet and lacked a precise IA assessment. Bernardi and Pallanti (2009) surveyed
50 self-referred psychiatric outpatients using the Internet Addiction Scale. Examination was
conducted to the 15 individuals who had IA and found 14% with BPD, 7% with
obsessive-compulsive PD (OCPD), and 7% with avoidant PD. A cross-sectional study on 50
college students with IA indicated 22% with narcissistic PD, 10% with BPD, 4% with OCPD,
2% with schizotypal PD, and 2% with antisocial PD, and were presented with a higher
psychopathology than those without a comorbidity (Floros et al., 2014).
Internet has become a significant source of information and communication for
individuals. The characteristics shared between certain PD features and IA illuminated the
possible vulnerabilities of particular PD characteristics in the online environment (Shaw and
Black, 2008). Previous studies focused on clinically IA samples and lacked a control group
comparison on individuals without IA. Thus, using a larger sample and a well-controlled study,
it is worthy to examine the frequency of PD between college students with IA compared to those
without IA. Additionally, due to the high association found between males and IA (Lin et al.,
2011; Mok et al., 2014), the present study analyses will be stratified by gender for further
comparisons.
3
Methods
Participants and Procedures
This study was approved by the institutional review board for the protection of human
participants, and written informed consent was obtained for survey administration and interview.
Participants were recruited from five technical colleges located in Southern Taiwan by cluster
sampling and then by department. 577 college students were sampled during phase one. A total
of 562 students completed the survey and were incorporated into the study (response
rate=97.4%). Students filled out informed consent and were invited to participate voluntarily;
confidentiality was stressed. At phase two, diagnostic interviews using the Chinese version of the
Modified Schedule of Affective Disorders and Schizophrenia-Lifetime (CMSADS-L) short form
were given independently and in private to the 562 participants. Administration was conducted
by trained graduate-level clinical psychology students, and licensed clinical psychologists.
In order to diagnose IA in college students, Ko and colleagues (Ko et al., 2009) proposed
to exclude those with psychotic disorders and bipolar disorder. Thus, six participants in the
present study with schizophrenia and/or bipolar disorder were excluded from the analysis
(N=556).
Instruments
Demographic Questionnaire
Participants filled out demographic information, such as gender, age, grade level, residential
location, family economic status, parental education level, Internet usage time, etc.
Personality Disorder Features Scale (PDFS)
4
Personality disorder features were assessed through a self-reported questionnaire based
on the personality disorder diagnosis from DSM-IV, the Personality Diagnostic Questionnaire 4+
and the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-III-R (SCID-II) (Ko et al., 1997). The PDFS has
a total of 108 questions answered on a yes or no basis. The Cronbach’s alpha for the paranoid
personality features subscale was 0.68, schizoid personality features subscale was 0.75,
schizotypal personality features subscale was 0.64, antisocial personality features subscale was
0.80, borderline personality features subscale was 0.70, histrionic personality features subscale
was 0.58, narcissistic personality features subscale was 0.70, avoidant personality features
subscale was 0.65, dependent personality features subscale was 0.61, and obsessive-compulsive
personality features subscale was 0.53.
Chen’s Internet Addiction scale (CIAS)
The CIAS (Chen et al., 2003) has 26 items and responses are made from rarely/never (1)
to almost always (4). Total scores ranged from 26 to 104 with higher scores indicating a greater
IA severity. The two-week split-half reliability was 0.83 with an internal consistency of 0.79 to
0.93. In reference to the diagnostic criteria of IA, the 67/68 cut-off had a high diagnostic
accuracy (81.5%), Cohen κ value (0.61), DOR (18.22), and specificity (92.6%), indicating 67/68
as the best cut-off point to differentiate individuals with and without IA among college students
(Ko et al., 2009). Accordingly, students in the present study with a CIAS score ≥68 were
categorized with IA.
Chinese version of the Modified Schedule of Affective Disorders and Schizophrenia-Lifetime
Short form (CMSADS-L)
5
Interviews were conducted by trained graduate-level examiners using the CMSADS-L
short form, a semi-structured diagnostic interview based on SADS-L, and personality disorders
were incorporated in reference to Structured Clinical Interviews for DSM-IV (SCID II). The
inter-rater reliability of the CMSADS-L was good (Huang et al., 2004). Familiarity of the
CMSADS-L was a requirement by each interviewers. Each trainee had to view a minimum of 6
CMSADS-L training videos of case vignettes, which was followed by consensus ratings. To be
certified, the trainee had to achieve good to excellent agreement with the consensus diagnosis,
and inter-rater reliability was good. During the actual diagnostic interview, in order to confirm a
PD diagnosis, participants were asked a series of PD core symptoms. Questions were asked
pertaining to how they behaved, felt or thought most of the time throughout their lifetime. These
symptoms had to be long-termed and stably presented in the individual. Participants were asked
not to include symptoms occurring only when they were in certain situations (e.g. when
depressed, under substance use, having a medical condition, etc.). A PD diagnosis was fulfilled
when participants endorsed the minimum criteria pertaining to the DSM-IV standards, and
expressed to have caused social or occupational dysfunction. The final diagnosis of each
participant was reviewed, cross-referenced with the participants’ PDFS score, and best-estimate
diagnoses were made by consensus of project staff.
Statistical Analysis
All statistical calculations and analyses were done using the Statistical Package for the
Social Science, Version 19.0. t-test was conducted to compare the age, Internet usage time, IA
severity, and IA subscales between the IA and non-IA groups. Finally, chi-square analyses
analyzed the difference in frequencies of personality disorders between the IA and non-IA
6
groups. A P<.05 was considered as significant.
Results
Demographic data and IA severity among IA, and non-IA.
A total of 215 males and 341 females were incorporated into the study analyses. Participants
who scored ≥68 on the CIAS were classified into the IA group (N=73) and those who scored <68
on the CIAS were categorized into the non-IA group (N=483). In females, 32 (9.4%) were
categorized with IA, and in males, 41 (19.1%) met the IA cut-off.
The IA group reported a significantly increased Internet usage time per week in IA
compared to the non-IA group; and the IA group showed significantly higher scores in IA
severity (CIAS total score) as well as all five subscales (e.g. Compulsive Internet use,
Withdrawal Symptoms, Tolerance Symptoms, Interpersonal & Health Related Problems, Time
Management Problems) among both genders. (Table 1)
Frequencies of personality disorders among IA and non-IA
We further examined and compared the rate of all the personality disorders in the IA and
non-IA group. For the entire sample as a whole, 20 of the 73 in the IA group (27.4%) and 67 of
the 483 in the non-IA group (13.9%) were diagnosed with at least one PD. The IA group showed
a higher PD frequency compared to the non-IA group (χ2=8.79, P<.01). In particularly, the IA
group showed a significantly higher frequency of borderline (N=9, 12.3%; χ2=15.50, P<.001),
narcissistic (N=4, 5.5%; χ2=15.12, P<.001), avoidant (N=12, 16.4%; χ2=12.07, P<.01), and
dependent PD (N=7, 9.6%; χ2=7.74, P<.01) when compared to the non-IA group. Compared
separately, 11 of the 32 females in the IA group (34.4%) and 41 of the 309 in the non-IA group
7
(13.3%) were diagnosed with at least one PD. The female IA group showed a higher PD
frequency compared to the females non-IA group (χ2=10.00, P<.01); on the other hand, 9 of the
41 males in the IA group (22.0%) and 26 of the 174 in the non-IA group (14.9%) were diagnosed
with at least one PD, showing no significant difference between the IA and non-IA group in
overall PD frequency among males.
Gender differences in the rate of each personality disorders were observed when females
and males were analyzed separately (Table 2). For males, the IA group showed a significantly
higher frequency of narcissistic PD (N=3, 7.3%; χ2=8.26, P<.01) when compared to the non-IA
group. For females, the IA group showed a significantly higher frequency of borderline (N=7,
21.9%; χ2=25.65, P<.001), narcissistic (N=1, 3.1%; χ2=3.90, P<.05), avoidant (N=8, 25.0%;
χ2=14.22, P<.001), and dependent PD (N=5, 15.6%; χ2=9.49, P<.01) when compared to the
non-IA group.
Discussion
The present study examined the rate of IA in male and female college students, and
explored the association of personality disorders among individuals with IA. The rate of IA was
found to be 19.1% in males and 9.4% in females, which was in accordance with previous studies
showing males to be highly associated with IA (Lin et al., 2011).
We found that both genders showed a higher frequency of narcissistic PD in the IA group
compared to the non-IA group. Narcissistic PD is a pervasive pattern of grandiosity, require for
admiration, and an inflated sense of self-importance (American Psychiatric Association, 2013).
The anonymity of the online environment empowers users to control the information projected
about them, and serves as a self-promoting platform to enhance a sense of self. Social
8
networking sites, such a Facebook, can further increase one’s self-esteem through the feedbacks
of public glory (Mehdizadeh, 2010). It is also possible to speculate that perhaps individuals with
Narcissistic PD may value the Internet platform to gain recognition and admiration from other
users such that online gaming can be reinforcing due to its bolstering of self-esteem (Kim et al.,
2008). However, due to the small sample sizes and heterogeneity found in the PD group,
expanding a larger sample size is necessary for future studies to make further comparisons.
In the present study, a higher frequency of borderline was found in female students with
IA compared to those without IA. Examining the differences in how gender may experience
BPD symptoms, data from the National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and Related
Conditions (NESARC) found that chronic feelings of emptiness and affective instability
appeared to be two of the BPD symptoms most significantly discriminant in women than in men.
The authors further suggested that women might respond with greater levels of self-focus in
response to negative affect (Hoertel et al., 2014). Affective dysregulations have been described
as a core element of BPD, and those who are more prone to it are often more susceptible to
developing depressive symptoms and anxiety (Zanarini, 2005). Similarly, findings in IA have
shown a significant correlation between IA and depressive symptoms (Lin et al., 2011). Korean
high school students who reported excessive Internet use had traits that were easily affected by
feelings, and were more emotionally unstable (Yang et al., 2005). Thus, we might speculate that
female BPD individuals who are burdened with the sense of dysphoric feelings can now make
rapid attempts on the Internet in expect to make up for this unfavorable perception, and thus be
motivated to become Internet addicted. Further studies can attempt to examine the specific types
of outcome expectancies that may lure BPD individuals with dysphoric feelings of loneliness to
want to spend an excessive time online.
9
We found that female students with IA showed a higher frequency of avoidant PD
compared to those without IA. Individuals with avoidant PD, which is often associated with
interpersonal dysfunction, often report having difficulties with being assertive and are socially
inhibited (Cummings et al., 2013). Avoidant PD has a high symptom similarity with generalized
social anxiety disorder, and on a continuum, may represent a more severe form of social anxiety
disorder (Marques et al., 2012). Social anxiety and associated symptoms have been found to be
more associated with women than in men (Hofmann et al., 2010; Kuusikko-Gauffin et al., 2012).
Thus, it is probable that high anxiety features towards real-world social interactions may allow
females to use the Internet for more interpersonal communication purposes. Internet
communication seems especially appealing to women (Weiser, 2000) and social networking sites,
such as Facebook, was found to be a more important part of daily interactions among women
when compared to men (Lemieux et al., 2013). Thus, females with social anxiety may perceive
social-networking sites as a comfortable way to interact with others. Consequently, those who
are socially inhibited, and who have limited real-life networks, might find social networking
sites to be beneficial due to the easy access to interpersonal interaction without the demands of
face-to-face proximity and intimacy (Kuss and Griffiths, 2011). This simple door to
interpersonal communication may cause an increased time commitment for females with
avoidant PD, possibility resulting in excessive or addictive Internet use.
In the present study, a higher frequency of dependent PD was found in female students
with IA compared to those without IA. Individuals with dependent PD have been reported to
occur more frequently in women than in men and are described as having a pervasive need to be
taken care of, and requires assurance from others that often leads to submissiveness (American
Psychiatric Association, 2013), viewing self as helpless and others as strong and competent
10
(Disney, 2013). The need to seek for reassurance in offline relationships was correlated with
Facebook reassurance seeking, and predicted a decrease in self-esteem which in turn predicted
increased feelings that one does not belong and is a burden (Clerkin et al., 2013). The vast
information and support-web of networks provided by the Internet may provide a sense of
empowerment and refuge for females who feel themselves inept. Social networking sites such as
Facebook may serve as a valuable avenue for females with low self-esteem to construct and
benefit from online interpersonal relationships. Thus, individuals with dependent PD who
constantly need the reassurance of others and seek the support of a relationship (Wang and Wang,
2013) will crave Internet use as means of fulfilling what they cannot in real life.
Additionally, it is worthy to note the limited participants with cluster A PDs that have IA
compared to cluster B and cluster C PDs. The frequency of cluster A PDs found in the present
study was small compared to the number of students reported in cluster B and C (cluster A = 9;
cluster B = 41; cluster C = 76). The present study findings are consistent with previous literature,
showing that Internet addicts have a low frequency of cluster A PDs (Bernardi and Pallanti, 2009;
Black et al., 1999; Floros et al., 2014). Individuals with cluster A PDs have been found to be
more detached from society, and are ego-syntonic (Triebwasser et al., 2012 & 2013), many of
which are indifferent to the interaction with others and are affect constricted (such as in schizoid
PD; Triebwasser et al., 2012). On the other hand, the nature of the Internet makes for fast
communication and interconnections that provides platforms to satisfy those in need. Thus, it
may not be surprising to find individuals with certain PD features, who may not feel as
integrated as they want to be in real life, to instead, find themselves lured to the pleasures of
cyberspace. Those with cluster B “dramatic” personality features are clinically characterized by
affect dysregulation and impulsivity, and may use the Internet in a similar fashion as in alcohol
11
addiction, such as for disinhibition, sensation seeking, and psychoticism (Douzenis et al., 2012).
Individuals with cluster C personality features are generally depicted by anxiety and
interpersonal problems, and exhibit traits of high harm avoidance (Jylha et al., 2013) and thus
may use the Internet to seek interpersonal interactions (Caplan, 2007). Finally, the small sample
size in the cluster A PD group may explain the limited IA found among this group. Expanding a
larger sample size is necessary for future studies to make further comparisons.
In our study, a higher frequency of narcissistic PD was found in males with IA, and a
higher frequency of borderline, narcissistic, avoidant or dependent PD was reported in females
with IA. Pathologies related to online mechanisms are given a greater attention in psychiatry and
clinical psychology (King and Delfabbro; 2013). Findings from the present study highlight that
IA is linked to an enduring pattern of personal experience that deviates from the cultural
expectations, is inflexible and pervasive across situations, and may cause functioning
impairment in daily life. Thus, the high co-occurrence between PD and IA found in the present
study may provide empirical evidence and valuable reference supporting the inclusion of IA in
the DSM.
Some limitations need to be noted. First, we did not consider the comorbidity of other
psychiatric disorders, such as ADHD, and substance abuse, which might influence findings.
Additionally, this study adopted a cross-sectional design. To obtain more substantial results to
the underlying relationship between PD and IA, longitudinal designs should be applied in the
future to examine the stability of PD frequencies among individuals with IA.
Conclusions
Despite the limitations, the present research was the first study to incorporate a control
12
group and make comparison between genders to examine the relationship of PD to IA. We found
that males with IA showed a higher frequency of narcissistic PD, while females with IA showed
a higher frequency of borderline, narcissistic, avoidant or dependent PD when compared to those
without IA. Further studies should incorporate possible mediating or moderating factors, such as
the role of outcome expectancy of Internet use, affective dysregulation, or interpersonal
interaction, in the association of PD and IA.
Conflicts of Interest: None
13
References
American Psychiatric Association (2013) Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders
(5th ed). Washington DC: American Psychiatric Association.
Bernardi S, Pallanti S (2009) Internet addiction: a descriptive clinical study focusing on
comorbidities and dissociative symptoms. Compr Psychiatry. 50(6):510-516.
Black DW, Belsare G, Schlosser S (1999) Clinical features, psychiatric comorbidity, and
health-related quality of life in persons reporting compulsive computer use behavior. J Clin
Psychiatry. 60(12):839-844.
Caplan SE (2007) Relations among loneliness, social anxiety, and problematic Internet use.
Cyberpsychol Behav. 10(2):234-242.
Chen SH, Weng LC, Su YJ, Wu HM, Yang PF (2003) Development of Chinese Internet
addiction scale and its psychometric study. Chinese J Psychol. 45:279–294.
Clerkin EM, Smith AR, Hames JL (2013) The interpersonal effects of Facebook reassurance
seeking. J Affect Disord. 151:525-530.
Cummings JA, Hayes AM, Cohen LH, Laurenceau JP, Saint DS, Gricol K (2013) Interpersonal
competence and daily stress generation in individuals with avoidant personality disorder
symptoms. J Soc Clin Psychol. 32(2):135-158.
Dalbudak E, Evren C, Aldemir S, Evren B (2014) The severity of Internet addiction risk and its
relationship with severity of borderline personality features, childhood traumas, dissociative
experiences, depression and anxiety symptoms among Turkish university students. Psychiatry
Res. 219(3):577-82.
Disney KL (2013) Dependent personality disorder: A critical review. Clin Psychol Rev.
33:1184-1196.
14
Douzenis A, Tsopelas C, Tzeferakos G (2012) Medical comorbidity of cluster B personality
Disorders. Curr Opin Psychiatry. 25:398–404.
Floros G, Siomos K, Stogiannidou A, Giouzepas I, Garyfallos G (2014) Comorbidity of
psychiatric disorders with Internet addiction in a clinical sample: The effect of personality,
defense style and psychopathology. Addict Behav. 39:1839-1845.
Hoertel N, Peyre H, Wall MM, Limosin F, Blanco C (2014) Examining sex differences in
DSM-IV borderline personality disorder symptom expression using Item Response Theory
(IRT). J Psychiatr Res. 59:213-219.
Hofmann SG, Asnaani A, Hinton DE (2010) Cultural Aspects in Social Anxiety and Social
Anxiety Disorder. Depress Anxiety. 27(12):1117-1127.
Huang SY, Lin WW, Ko HC, Lee JF, Wang TJ, Chou YH, Yin SJ, Lu RB (2004) Possible
Interaction of ADH and ALDH genes with dopamine D2 receptor (DRD2) gene in
anxiety-depressive alcohol dependence. Alcohol Clin Exp Res. 28:374-384.
Jylha P, Ketokivi M, Mantere O, Melartin T, Suominen K, Vuorilehto M, Holma M, Holma I,
Isometsa E (2013) Temperament, character and personality disorders. Eur Psychiatry.
28:483–491.
Kandell JJ (1998) Internet addiction on campus: The vulnerability of college students.
Cyberpsychol Behav. 1(1):11-17.
Kim EJ, Namkoong K, Ku T, Kim SJ (2008) The relationship between online game addiction
and aggression, self-control and narcissistic personality traits. Eur Psychiatry. 23:212-218.
King DL, Delfabbro PH (2013) Issues for DSM-5: Video-gaming disorder? Aust N Z J
Psychiatry. 47(1): 20-22.
Ko CH, Yen JY, Chen CC, Chen SH, Yen CF (2005) Proposed diagnostic criteria of Internet
15
addiction for adolescents. J Nerv Ment Dis. 193(11):728-733.
Ko CH, Yen JY, Chen SH, Yang MJ, Lin HC, Yen CF (2009) Proposed diagnostic criteria and
the screening and diagnosing tool of Internet addiction in college students. Compr Psychiatry.
50:378–384.
Ko HC, Lu RB, Shen JJ, Shyu LY (1997) Construction of a screening inventory for major mental
disorder in the Army. Ann Acad Med Singapore. 26(1):8-12.
Kuss DJ, Griffiths MD (2011) Online Social Networking and Addiction – A Review of the
Psychological Literature. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 8:3528-3552.
Kuusikko-Gauffin S, Wurman RP, Mattila ML, Jussila K, Ebeling H, Moilanen IK (2012)
Gender Differences in Social Anxiety Symptoms: A Novel Use of Two Self-Report Measures
in a Finnish Sample. Cureus. 4(12):e78. doi:10.7759/cureus.78
Lemieux R, Lajoie S, Trainor NE (2013) Affinity-Seeking, Social Loneliness, and Social
Avoidance among Facebook users. Psychol Rep. 112(2):545-552.
Lin MP, Ko HC, Wu JY (2011) Prevalence and psychosocial risk factors associated with Internet
addiction in a nationally representative sample of college students in Taiwan. Cyberpsychol
Behav Soc Netw. 14(12):741-746.
Marques L, Porter E, Keshaviah A, Pollack MH, Van Ameringen M, Stein MB, Simon NM
(2012) Avoidant Personality Disorder in Individuals with Generalized Social Anxiety
Disorder: What Does It Add? J Anxiety Disord. 26(6):665-672.
Mehdizadeh S (2010) Self-Presentation 2.0: Narcissism and Self-Esteem on Facebook.
Cyberpsychol Behav Soc Netw. 13(4):357-364.
Morahan-Martin J, Schumacher P (2000) Incidence and correlates of pathological Internet use
among college students. Comput Human Behav. 16(1):13-29.
16
Shapira NA, Goldsmith TD, Keck PE, Khosla UM, McElroy SL (2000). Psychiatric features of
individuals with problematic Internet use. J Affect Disord. 57(1-3):267-272.
Shaw M, Black DW (2008) Internet addiction: Definition, assessment, epidemiology and clinical
management. CNS Drugs. 22(5):353-365.
Triebwasser J, Chemerinski E, Roussos R, Siever LJ (2012) Schizoid personality disorder. J Pers
Disord. 26(6):919-926.
Triebwasser J, Chemerinski E, Roussos R, Siever LJ (2013) Paranoid personality disorder. J
Pers Disord. 27(6):795-805.
Tsai HF, Cheng SH, Yeh TL, Shih CC, Chen KC, Yang YC, Yang YK (2009) The risk factors of
Internet addiction—A survey of university freshmen. Psychiatry Res. 167(3):294-299.
Wang ES, Wang MC (2013) Social support and social interaction ties on Internet addiction:
Integrating online and offline contexts. Cyberpsychol Behav Soc Netw. 16(11):843-9.
Weiser EB (2000). Gender Differences in Internet Use Patterns and Internet Application
Preferences: A Two-Sample Comparison. Cyberpsychol Behav. 3(2):167-178.
Yang CK, Choe BM, Baity M, Lee JH, Cho JS (2005) SCL-90-R and 16PR profiles of senior
high school students with excessive Internet use. Can J Psychiatry. 50(7):407-414.
Young KS (1998) Internet addiction: The emergence of a new clinical disorder. Cyberpsychol
Behav. 1(3):237-244.
Young KS (2004) Internet Addiction: A new clinical phenomenon and its consequences. Am
Behav Sci. 48(4):402-415.
Zanarini MC (2005) The subsyndromal phenomenology of borderline personality disorder. In:
M.C. Zanarini (Ed.), Borderline personality disorder (pp 19-40). New York(NY): Taylor and
Francis Group.
17
Table 1. Demographic and clinical data among male and female college students
IA (M/SD)
non-IA (M/SD)
t-test
(N=41)
(N=174)
Age
19.73 (±1.10)
19.79 (±.94)
0.32
Internet usage time (hrs/week)
33.33 (±25.53)
24.51 (±20.36)
2.35*
IA severity (CIAS total)
78.05 (±10.01)
51.57 (±11.18)
13.91***
Compulsive Internet use
15.24 (±2.54)
9.52 (±2.36)
13.76***
Withdrawal Symptoms
15.32 (±2.77)
9.86 (±2.67)
11.71***
Tolerance Symptoms
12.59 (±1.99)
8.19 (±1.95)
12.92***
20.44 (±3.31)
13.78 (±3.57)
10.89***
14.39 (±2.48)
10.14 (±2.81)
8.89***
(N=32)
(N=309)
19.94 (±.76)
20.10 (±.87)
1.10
Internet usage time (hrs/week)
43.63 (±35.54)
20.47 (±18.65)
5.86***
IA severity (CIAS total)
75.27 (±6.33)
49.08 (±11.33)
12.86***
Compulsive Internet use
15.16 (±2.02)
9.17 (±2.79)
11.84***
Withdrawal Symptoms
15.50 (±2.26)
9.85 (±2.82)
10.96***
Tolerance Symptoms
12.34 (±2.10)
8.27 (±2.25)
9.81***
17.69 (±2.56)
12.73 (±3.28)
8.30***
14.47 (±2.91)
9.01 (±2.67)
10.92***
Male
Interpersonal & Health Related
Problems
Time Management Problems
Age
Female
Interpersonal & Health Related
Problems
Time Management Problems
IA=Internet Addiction; CIAS=Chen’s Internet Addiction Scale; * p<0. 05; ***p<0.001
18
Table 2. Frequencies of personality disorders among male and female individuals
Personality Disorders
χ2
IA (N/%)
Non-IA (N/%)
(N=41)
(N=174)
Paranoid PD (N=1)
0 (0%)
1 (0.6%)
.24
Schizoid PD (N=1)
0 (0%)
1 (0.6%)
.24
Schizotypal PD (N=0)
0 (0%)
0 (0%)
null
Antisocial PD (N=4)
1 (2.4%)
3 (1.7%)
.09
Borderline PD (N=7)
2 (4.9%)
5 (2.9%)
.42
Histrionic PD (N=2)
0 (0%)
2 (1.2%)
.48
Narcissistic PD (N=4)
3 (7.3%)
1 (0.6%)
8.26**
Avoidant PD (N=11)
4 (9.8%)
7 (1.5%)
2.25
Dependent PD (N=5)
2 (4.9%)
3 (4.0%)
1.45
Obsessive Compulsive PD (N=11)
2 (4.9%)
9 (5.2%)
.01
(N=32)
(N=309)
Paranoid PD (N=5)
1 (3.1%)
4 (1.3%)
.68
Schizoid PD (N=1)
0 (0%)
1 (0.3%)
.10
Schizotypal PD (N=1)
0 (0%)
1 (0.3%)
.10
Antisocial PD (N=3)
1 (3.1%)
2 (0.7%)
2.05
Borderline PD (N=15)
7 (21.9%)
8 (2.6%)
25.65***
Histrionic PD (N=4)
1 (3.1%)
3 (1.0%)
1.17
Narcissistic PD (N=2)
1 (3.1%)
1 (0.3%)
3.90*
Avoidant PD (N=27)
8 (25.0%)
19 (6.2%)
14.22***
Dependent PD (N=16)
5 (15.6%)
11 (3.6%)
9.49**
Male
Female
19
Obsessive Compulsive PD (N=6)
0 (0%)
6 (1.9%)
.63
PD=Personality Disorder; *p<0. 05; **p<0. 01; ***p<0.001
20