2
English Language Department, Fasa University of Medical Sciences, Fasa, Iran
Abstract
Aims: The purpose of the present study was to investigate the validity and reliability of the Phubbing scale among Iranian students.
Materials & Methods: The participants were 330 students of Semnan University who were selected by cluster random sampling. All of them completed the Phubbing scale, the Quality of Relationships Inventory (QRI), and the Mobile-based Social Networking Addiction scale. Reliability analysis, confirmatory factor analysis, and item-total correlation were run to investigate the psychometric properties of the Phubbing scale.
Findings: The findings showed that the Phubbing scale was saturated with two factors of communication disorder and mobile phone obsession. Cronbach's alpha of the Phubbing scale was 0.82. Correlation of communication disorder and mobile phone obsession with social networking addiction and quality of the relationship was inconsistent with theoretical orientations.
Conclusion: The Persian version of the Phubbing scale has acceptable psychometric properties to the student community and can be used as a reliable instrument in psychological study.
1. Nasiri B, A. B. Pathology Mobile Phone Function on Family. Women's Research Journal. 2016;7(18):133-58.
2. Mousavi K, S. S. Addiction to Mobile in Tehran: A Sociological Study. Journal of Sociology of Iran. 2016;17(4):139-64.
3. Plant S. On the Mobile: the effects of mobile telephones on social and individual life2001.
4. Radesky JS, Kistin CJ, Zuckerman B, Nitzberg K, Gross J, Kaplan-Sanoff M, et al. Patterns of mobile device use by caregivers and children during meals in fast food restaurants. Pediatrics. 2014;133(4):e843-9.
5. Roberts J, David M. My life has become a major distraction from my cell phone: Partner phubbing and relationship satisfaction among romantic partners2016. 134-41 p.
6. Ling R. The impact of the mobile telephone on four established social institutions2000.
7. Nazir.T, Piskin.M. A Technological Invasion Which Connected the World But Disconnected Humans. The International Journal of Indian Psychology. 2016:39-46.
8. Karadag E, Tosuntas SB, Erzen E, Duru P, Bostan N, Sahin BM, et al. Determinants of phubbing, which is the sum of many virtual addictions: a structural equation model. J Behav Addict. 2015;4(2):60-74.
9. Koc T, Ugur NG. Time for Digital Detox: Misuse of Mobile Technology and Phubbing2015.
10. Chotpitayasunondh V, Douglas KM. How “phubbing” becomes the norm: The antecedents and consequences of snubbing via smartphone. Computers in Human Behavior. 2016;63:9-18.
11. Diamanduros T, Jenkins SJ, Downs E. Analysis of technology ownership and selective use among undergraduates2007. 970-6 p.
12. Siegel DJ. The mindful therapist: A clinician's guide to mindsight and neural integration. New York, NY, US: W W Norton & Co; 2010. xxvii, 288-xxvii, p.
13. Leggett C, Rossouw P. The impact of technology use on couple relationships: A neuropsychological perspective. International Journal of Neuropsychotherapy (IJNPT), 2(1), . 2014: 44-99.
14. Przybylski AK, Weinstein N. Can you connect with me now? How the presence of mobile communication technology influences face-to-face conversation quality. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships 2013:. 237-46.
15. Lenhart A, Duggan M. Couples, the internet, and social media. www pewinternetorg/2014/02/11/couples-the-internet-and-social-meida/ Accessed 020215
2014.
16. McDaniel BT, Coyne SM. “Technoference”: The interference of technology in couple relationships and implications for women’s personal and relational well-being. Psychology of Popular Media Culture. 2016;5(1):85-98.
17. Chotpitayasunondh V, Douglas KM. Measuring phone snubbing behavior: Development and validation of the Generic Scale of Phubbing (GSP) and the Generic Scale of Being Phubbed (GSBP). Computers in Human Behavior. 2018;88:5-17.
18. Jackson DL. Revisiting Sample Size and Number of Parameter Estimates: Some Support for the N:q Hypothesis. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal. 2003;10(1):128-41.
19. Brown TA. Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research: Guilford publications; 2015.
20. Shah R, Goldstein SM. Use of structural equation modeling in operations management research: Looking back and forward. Journal of Operations Management. 2006;24(2):148-69.
21. Khajeahmadi M, Pooladi S, Bahreini M. Design and Assessment of Psychometric Properties of the Addiction to Mobile Questionnaire Based on Social Networks. Journal of Nursing Education. 2017;4(4):43-51.
22. Pierce GR. The Quality of Relationships Inventory: Assessing the interpersonal context of social support. 1994.
23. Jöreskog KG, sorbom. LISREL 8 : user's reference guide. In: Sörbom D, editor. 2nd ed. ed. Chicago, IL :: Scientific Software International; 2003.
24. Breckler SJ. Applications of covariance structure modeling in psychology: Cause for concern? Psychological Bulletin. 1990;107(2):260-73.
Zamani,F. , Talepasand,S. and Taghinezhad,A. (2025). Psychometric Properties of the Phubbing Scale among Iranian Students. Health Education and Health Promotion, 8(1), 25-30.
MLA
Zamani,F. , , Talepasand,S. , and Taghinezhad,A. . "Psychometric Properties of the Phubbing Scale among Iranian Students", Health Education and Health Promotion, 8, 1, 2025, 25-30.
HARVARD
Zamani F., Talepasand S., Taghinezhad A. (2025). 'Psychometric Properties of the Phubbing Scale among Iranian Students', Health Education and Health Promotion, 8(1), pp. 25-30.
CHICAGO
F. Zamani, S. Talepasand and A. Taghinezhad, "Psychometric Properties of the Phubbing Scale among Iranian Students," Health Education and Health Promotion, 8 1 (2025): 25-30,
VANCOUVER
Zamani F., Talepasand S., Taghinezhad A. Psychometric Properties of the Phubbing Scale among Iranian Students. Health Education and Health Promotion, 2025; 8(1): 25-30.
Health Education and Health Promotion