Ma Jian-Ling, Jin ZhengCheng, Liu Chang
Chongqing University of Posts and Telecommunications, Chongqing, China.
Yangtze Normal University, Fuling District, China.
Front Psychol. 2025 Jan 7;15:1444039. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1444039. eCollection 2024.
The Bergen Facebook addiction scale (BFAS) is a screening instrument frequently used to evaluate Facebook addiction. However, its reliability varies considerably across studies. This study aimed to evaluate the reliability of the BFAS and its adaptation, the Bergen Social Media Addiction Scale (BSMAS), and to identify which study characteristics are associated with this reliability. We performed a reliability generalization meta-analysis involving 173,641 participants across 127 articles, which reported 147 Cronbach's alpha values for internal consistency. The random-effects model revealed that the pooled Cronbach's alpha values were 0.8535 (95% CI [0.8409, 0.8660]) for the BFAS and 0.8248 (95% CI [0.8116, 0.8380]) for the BSMAS. Moderator analyses indicated that the mean and standard deviation of the total scores accounted for 10.06 and 36.7% of the total variability in the BFAS alpha values, respectively. For the BSMAS, the standard deviation of the total scores and sample size accounted for 13.54 and 10.22% of the total variability alpha values, respectively. Meta-ANOVA analyses revealed that none of the categorical variables significantly affected the estimated alpha values for either the BFAS or BSMAS. Our findings endorse the BFAS and BSMAS as reliable instruments for measuring social media addiction.
卑尔根Facebook成瘾量表(BFAS)是一种常用于评估Facebook成瘾的筛查工具。然而,其可靠性在不同研究中差异很大。本研究旨在评估BFAS及其改编版卑尔根社交媒体成瘾量表(BSMAS)的可靠性,并确定哪些研究特征与这种可靠性相关。我们进行了一项可靠性概括性元分析,涉及127篇文章中的173,641名参与者,这些文章报告了147个内部一致性的Cronbach's α值。随机效应模型显示,BFAS的合并Cronbach's α值为0.8535(95%置信区间[0.8409, 0.8660]),BSMAS的合并Cronbach's α值为0.8248(95%置信区间[0.8116, 0.8380])。调节因素分析表明,总分的均值和标准差分别占BFAS α值总变异性的10.06%和36.7%。对于BSMAS,总分的标准差和样本量分别占总变异性α值的13.54%和10.22%。元方差分析显示,分类变量均未对BFAS或BSMAS的估计α值产生显著影响。我们的研究结果认可BFAS和BSMAS作为测量社交媒体成瘾的可靠工具。