1. Introduction
The rise of smartphones and social media has profoundly transformed human interactions, challenging and reshaping traditional concepts of friendship, intimacy, and belonging [
1,
2]. These digital technologies have become central mediators of social relationships, redefining how individuals build and maintain connections across diverse cultural and social contexts [
3,
4,
5]. At the same time, new interaction dynamics are emerging, not only expanding communication possibilities but also reconfiguring values and practices, emphasizing the need for anthropological investigations to understand the impacts of these digital mediums on contemporary forms of sociability [
6,
7].
From an evolutionary perspective, social interactions have played a central role in human survival and development [
8]. The process of primary socialization, which takes place during childhood and is fundamental to the construction of identity and the formation of emotional bonds, has traditionally been mediated by face-to-face interactions [
9]. However, the rise of digital devices has altered this landscape, restricting fundamental experiences essential for emotional and cognitive development. The absence of eye contact, the impoverishment of verbal interactions, and the reliance on screen-mediated communication may undermine crucial social skills, such as empathy and the ability to interpret others’ emotions. These changes are far from trivial, as they impact the very evolutionary mechanisms that have facilitated the consolidation of human societies throughout history.
These changes also significantly impact family relationships, creating new challenges for coexistence. Family members often isolate themselves in their rooms or even in each other’s presence, preferring to interact with digital devices rather than share moments of face-to-face connection [
10]. In social settings outside the home, such as restaurants or gatherings, an interpersonal disconnection is frequently observed, as individuals remain engaged with digital networks, with little to no meaningful interaction among themselves [
5,
11].
The impact of digital technologies extends to the educational environment, where schools and classrooms face the challenge of balancing the pedagogical use of technological tools with the negative effects of excessive usage [
12]. Students, and even teachers, often struggle to disconnect, creating an atmosphere of friction and difficulties in the teaching and learning process [
13]. Excessive attention to devices can disrupt concentration, engagement, and interaction dynamics within the school setting, exacerbating obstacles to building a productive and harmonious educational environment [
14].
The global health crisis caused by the COVID-19 pandemic brought to light and intensified social dynamics that were already being shaped by digital mediation, revealing new layers of complexity in human relationships [
15,
16]. Social isolation imposed during the pandemic heightened dependence on digital technologies as the primary means of interaction, turning apps and social networks into essential channels for maintaining connections [
17,
18]. This reliance, however, also underscored challenges related to mental health, including loneliness, anxiety, and difficulties in achieving deep communication [
19]. Although the trend of social isolation had already been underway due to the predominance of digital interactions, the pandemic exacerbated these patterns, creating a new normal in which physical distancing perpetuated a reality of predominantly screen-mediated interactions [
20]. This situation highlights the need to understand the implications of these shifts for contemporary sociability, as well as the long-term effects on how individuals connect and experience intimacy and belonging.
These scenarios underscore the urgency of investigating how digital technologies are reshaping not only individual relationships but also collective interaction structures, such as family and educational environments.
2. The Impact of Smartphones and Social Media on Interpersonal Bonds
The intensive use of smartphones and social media platforms has significantly altered the dynamics of interpersonal relationships. Studies suggest that communication mediated by digital devices can diminish the quality of face-to-face interactions, impacting the depth of human connections. The phenomenon known as ‘phubbing’—ignoring those nearby in favor of smartphone use ()—illustrates how divided attention can weaken social bonds [
21,
22].
‘Phubbing’ has emerged as one of the most prominent phenomena associated with the rise of digital technologies. This practice reflects profound changes in contemporary social dynamics, marking a shift away from full attention in face-to-face interactions and a transfer of intimacy to digital devices [
23,
24]. While smartphones provide uninterrupted connectivity, they also create invisible barriers to human interactions, negatively impacting the quality of interpersonal relationships, particularly in family, academic, and professional settings [
25].
The reconfiguration of family interactions due to the intensive use of mobile devices has direct implications for child development. Studies indicate that children whose parents devote more time to their smartphones during direct interactions exhibit difficulties in language development and lower social engagement [
26,
27]. Most young children show signs of stress or frustration when their parents prioritize phone use during moments of interaction [
28]. Moreover, excessive smartphone use by caregivers is directly linked to an increase in negative behaviors in children, such as tantrums, hyperactivity, and emotional difficulties [
29,
30].
Studies indicate that ‘phubbing’ has significant implications for mental health and emotional well-being. It is associated with feelings of exclusion, reduced relationship satisfaction, and increased interpersonal conflicts [
22,
31]. In romantic contexts, for instance, the constant use of smartphones during shared moments can lead to feelings of neglect and emotional dissatisfaction, undermining perceptions of mutual support and intimacy between partners [
32,
33]. Similarly, in family settings, this practice can weaken the bond between parents and children, compromising the development of emotional connections and healthy communication [
34].
The phenomenon of ‘phubbing’ has profound impacts on the mother-child relationship and primary socialization processes [
35,
36]. Eye contact and parental responsiveness are fundamental for the development of secure attachment, a crucial aspect of developmental psychology. However, the fragmentation of attention due to the constant use of digital devices can hinder the formation of this bond. Research indicates that infants whose parents frequently use their smartphones during direct interactions exhibit lower emotional responsiveness and delayed language development [
37,
38]. This phenomenon is even more concerning when observed during early childhood, a critical period for the development of social and cognitive skills.
Beyond its emotional impact, ‘phubbing’ also has broader consequences for social dynamics (). In academic settings, it is identified as a factor that affects concentration, classroom interaction, and student engagement with in-person activities [
39,
40]. In workplace environments, this practice can undermine productivity and team cohesion, as continuous partial attention hinders the development of trust and the effective resolution of group problems [
41].
From an anthropological perspective, ‘phubbing’ illustrates how digital devices are reshaping everyday practices, establishing new behavioral norms that often conflict with traditional values of face-to-face interaction. This practice highlights a paradigmatic shift in the allocation of attention, revealing a tension between physical and digital presence that calls for further scientific investigation [
23,
24]. Through cultural and ethnographic studies, it is possible to understand how ‘phubbing’ manifests in different social and cultural contexts and the meanings individuals assign to this behavior.
For Anthropology, ‘phubbing’ emerges as an essential and evolving object of study for understanding the cultural and social impacts of digital technologies. This phenomenon not only transforms daily practices but also redefines fundamental concepts of presence, attention, and intimacy crucial to human interactions. By acknowledging “phubbing” as a field of analysis, anthropology can explore how these changes unfold across diverse sociocultural contexts, mapping variations in the meanings attributed to this behavior and the adaptive strategies employed by communities. Such an approach sheds light on how contemporary technologies are reconfiguring traditional values and creating new paradigms in social relationships.
Finally, ‘phubbing’ represents not only a challenge to interpersonal relationships but also an opportunity to reflect on the conscious use of digital technologies. Developing strategies to mitigate its negative impacts, such as promoting awareness campaigns and intentional disconnection practices, is essential to balance the benefits of digital connectivity with the need for meaningful human interactions.
. The image illustrates ‘Phubbing’, where individuals in close physical proximity ignore each other in favor of digital interactions. The disconnection in the digital age: Physically close yet emotionally distant, the scene symbolizes the impact of smartphones and social media on interpersonal bonds. The cold glow of screens highlights the growing divide between them, emphasizing how technology can isolate rather than unite. This image was created with the assistance of the DALL·E artificial intelligence.
3. Reconfiguration of Friendship and Intimacy
The digital revolution, driven by the proliferation of smartphones and social media, has profoundly reconfigured traditional notions of friendship and intimacy () [
1]. Digital platforms provide an unprecedented ease in establishing and maintaining social connections, enabling individuals to cultivate a significantly larger number of relationships than would be feasible in offline contexts [
42,
43]. However, this quantitative expansion does not always translate into emotional depth or meaningful intimate bonds [
44].
Studies suggest that while social media expands the reach of connections, it often results in more superficial interactions [
45]. The nature of these platforms tends to favor brief and public communications, which can limit the depth of interactions and, consequently, the formation of intimate bonds [
46]. Additionally, constant exposure to information about others’ lives may lead to social comparisons and feelings of inadequacy, negatively impacting the perception of intimacy and satisfaction in personal relationships [
47].
Adolescence is a crucial period for the development of social identity, and the rise of digital interactions has profoundly transformed this stage of life. Recent studies indicate that adolescents who spend more time interacting virtually rather than in person exhibit lower levels of empathy and a reduced ability to read emotional cues [
48,
49]. Data suggest that young individuals who excessively use social media for more than three hours per day report feelings of loneliness and dissatisfaction with their personal relationships [
50,
51]. This reconfiguration of digital friendships and intimacies may affect the maturation of socio-emotional skills, limiting the depth and authenticity of interpersonal bonds.
Digital anthropology emphasizes that the quality of face-to-face interactions remains crucial for the development of intimate bonds [
52]. In-person communication allows for the reading of nonverbal cues, such as facial expressions and body language, which are essential for building trust and empathy [
53,
54]. These elements are often absent or diminished in online interactions, potentially limiting the depth of connections formed in digital environments [
5].
The management of identity on social media, where individuals often present idealized versions of themselves, can create barriers to forming authentic relationships [
55,
56]. The careful curation of shared information can lead to distorted perceptions and unrealistic expectations, hindering the development of genuine intimacy [
57].
Anthropology, when addressing contemporary transformations in human relationships, must acknowledge the emergence of algorithm-based applications and programs that foster affective connections as a new and significant subject of study. These platforms not only redefine how connections are initiated and maintained but also raise new questions about how intimacy and friendship are mediated by digital technologies [
58,
59]. Anthropological analysis of these tools can uncover how affectionate relationships are shaped by algorithmic logic, highlighting the cultural, emotional, and ethical implications of this reconfiguration. Understanding this phenomenon is crucial to broadening the debate on the social and subjective impacts of technological mediation in human relationships.
While social media provides valuable opportunities for maintaining connections and expanding social networks, it cannot replace the depth and quality of face-to-face interactions essential for developing meaningful friendships and intimacies () [
52,
60]. Understanding these dynamics is crucial for navigating the contemporary social environment in a healthy way, balancing online and offline interactions to foster authentic and fulfilling relationships [
61].
. The Reconfiguration of Friendship and Intimacy in the Digital Age: As online connections multiply, face-to-face emotional bonds weaken, illustrating the tension between quantity and depth in contemporary relationships. This image was created using DALL·E artificial intelligence.
4. Consequences of ‘Constant Contact’
The constant connectivity provided by smartphones has profoundly transformed the dynamics of human interactions, creating a state of ‘constant contact’ that impacts both individuals and their social relationships (). From an anthropological perspective, this phenomenon can be understood as an extension of physical presence, where digital availability is perceived as a means of maintaining social bonds, yet it often leads to emotional and social overload [
44,
62]. The pressure to remain continuously available and to respond promptly to messages generates what some researchers term ‘connectivity fatigue’, characterized by stress, anxiety, and a sense of exhaustion in the face of digital social demands [
63].
Constant exposure to digital interactions also impacts concentration capacity and time perception. The phenomenon of ‘connectivity fatigue’ has been increasingly documented in psychological studies [
64]. Research reveals that individuals who check their smartphones every few minutes experience a significant decline in their ability to focus on prolonged tasks [
65]. Moreover, excessive connectivity is associated with increased levels of anxiety and stress, as the lack of breaks in digital communication prevents the cognitive and emotional regeneration necessary to maintain a healthy balance in social life [
66].
The social overload caused by constant contact is not homogeneous; it varies depending on cultural contexts and social norms of connectivity. In some cultures, such as Japan, the expectation of immediate responses may reinforce social hierarchies and collective obligations, whereas in others, like the United States, connectivity is often associated with productivity and individual efficiency [
67,
68]. This cultural variability highlights the need for an anthropological analysis of digital practices to understand how constant contact is negotiated and interpreted across different contexts.
Constant contact profoundly alters the perception of time and space in social interactions (). Communication mediated by digital devices introduces a simultaneity that collapses the boundaries between public and private life, work and leisure, and even the different social roles individuals perform [
69,
70]. This blurring of spheres can lead to a fragmentation of time and attention, hindering full engagement in face-to-face interactions and negatively affecting the depth of relationships [
5].
The anthropological perspective also sheds light on the strategies individuals develop to cope with the demands of constant contact. Practices such as “intentional disconnection” are attempts to regain control over time and social space, while others, such as prioritizing face-to-face interactions, represent efforts to balance the benefits of digital connectivity with the need for intimacy and focused attention [
71]. These practices highlight how individuals not only react to but also actively reconstruct their social realities in response to the demands of the digital world.
Anthropology, when examining the implications of ‘constant contact’, must recognize this phenomenon as a new and significant subject of study, essential for understanding transformations in contemporary social dynamics. This state of hyperconnectivity challenges traditional norms of interaction and sociability, creating new forms of belonging and exclusion that affect both social structures and individual experiences [
72]. The consequences of continuous contact, such as connectivity fatigue and time fragmentation, raise fundamental questions about how digital technologies are reshaping human relationships, social hierarchies, and perceptions of intimacy. By analyzing these issues, anthropology can provide valuable insights into the social and cultural impacts of digital connectivity and propose pathways toward a more balanced coexistence between the digital world and face-to-face relationships.
‘Constant contact’ not only challenges the boundaries between public and private domains but also redefines how intimacy and belonging are experienced (). For some, digital connectivity serves as a tool for inclusion, while for others, it becomes a source of alienation and loneliness [
44]. A more in-depth anthropological approach can help to understand these dynamics and propose ways to balance the demands of digital connectivity with the pursuit of well-being and quality in human interactions.
. The Consequences of ‘Constant Contact’: The pressure of uninterrupted digital availability leads to emotional exhaustion and anxiety, highlighting the challenges of modern connectivity. This image was created using DALL·E artificial intelligence.
5. The Need for Anthropological Research
The social transformations driven by the integration of digital technologies into daily life demand a reassessment of traditional anthropological approaches. The practice of ‘phubbing’ exemplifies how mobile devices are redefining social interaction norms, impacting the quality of interpersonal relationships and individual well-being [
33,
73]. Similarly, the constant connectivity enabled by smartphones creates a state of ‘constant contact’, which can lead to social overload and a decline in the quality of human interactions [
63].
In this context, it is imperative for anthropology to develop new theoretical and methodological perspectives to understand these emerging dynamics (). Ethnographic studies focusing on interactions mediated by digital devices can uncover the nuances of how different cultures and social contexts adapt to these changes, exploring the everyday practices associated with smartphone and social media use [
52]. Such investigations are crucial for understanding the new forms of identity and community building in the digital age, as well as the impacts of these technologies on power relations, privacy, and intimacy [
74,
75].
Digital anthropology must take into account the ethical and political implications of emerging technologies, examining how they influence social structures and modes of subjectivity. A mixed-methods approach, combining qualitative and quantitative analyses, can enhance the understanding of the complex phenomena associated with digital technology use, enabling a more comprehensive analysis of contemporary social interactions [
76].
To adequately investigate new digital environments and the emerging conditions of human relationships, anthropology must design and test innovative methodologies that adapt to ever-evolving technological and cultural dynamics (). Traditional methods such as observation and interviews should be complemented by techniques that enable the analysis of online interactions, including digital ethnography, data mining on social platforms, and the use of artificial intelligence to map virtual sociability patterns. These approaches facilitate the exploration of the complexities of digital relationships, capturing nuances such as the performativity of online identities, the formation of virtual communities, and the tensions between connectivity and disconnection.
It is, therefore, essential for anthropologists to consider developing tools to study the long-term effects of these transformations on social structures and individual behaviors. Collaborative experiments with other disciplines, such as data science, psychology, and sociology, can enrich anthropological methods, enabling an interdisciplinary approach that reflects the intersection of culture, technology, and subjectivity. Participatory methods, where digital technology users themselves contribute to the design and execution of research, can also provide valuable insights into the motivations, anxieties, and expectations that shape digital practices.
These methodological innovations are crucial for expanding the horizons of anthropology in studying contemporary human relationships. Ultimately, the need for anthropological research addressing new social interaction issues, such as “phubbing” and constant connectivity, is urgent. By developing new theoretical and methodological perspectives, anthropology can significantly contribute to understanding the challenges and opportunities that digital technologies present for human relationships in the modern era.
. The Need for Anthropological Research: The coexistence of traditional interactions and digital immersion highlights how mobile devices are transforming social norms and redefining human behavior. The image was generated using DALL·E artificial intelligence.
6. Conclusions
The impact of new technologies on human sociability should not be seen merely as an inevitable transformation but as a phenomenon that demands critical reflection and mitigation strategies. Regulating screen time, particularly in family and educational contexts, should be considered a priority to prevent adverse effects on social and cognitive development. Research on the impact of excessive smartphone use on human behavior needs to be expanded to support public policies that promote a more balanced digital coexistence. Raising awareness through campaigns on healthy technology use can help restore the importance of face-to-face interactions and preserve the richness of human connections amid the digital revolution.
The digital age presents significant challenges and opportunities for human relationships, demanding in-depth analyses of how smartphones and social media reshape social bonds, intimacy, and everyday values. Phenomena such as ‘phubbing’ and constant connectivity underscore the need for strategies that balance digital connectivity with meaningful face-to-face interactions. Anthropology, with its holistic focus and ethnographic perspective, provides valuable tools to understand the nuances of these transformations across diverse cultural contexts, uncovering tensions between physical and digital presence. By exploring these dynamics, the discipline contributes to the development of policies and practices that encourage a more conscious use of technologies, strengthening social bonds and enhancing the quality of human interactions in contemporary society.
Acknowledgements
The author thanks UNIFORMG and the Research Productivity Scholarship Program (PQ) State University of Minas Gerais (UEMG) for the scholarships and the opportunity to encourage research.
Ethics Statement
Not applicable.
Informed Consent Statement
Not applicable.
Data Availability Statement
No data available.
Funding
This research received no external funding.
Declaration of Competing Interest
The author declares that he has no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.
References
1.
Miller D. The Comfort of People; John Wiley & Sons: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2017.
2.
Coyne R. The Tuning of Place: Sociable Spaces and Pervasive Digital Media; MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2010.
3.
Madianou M, Miller D. Polymedia: Towards a new theory of digital media in interpersonal communication.
Int. J. Cult. Stud. 2013,
16, 169–187.
[Google Scholar]
4.
Rückriem G. Digital technology and mediation: A challenge to activity theory. In Learning and Expanding with Activity Theory; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 2009; pp. 88–111.
5.
Baym NK. Personal Connections in the Digital Age; John Wiley & Sons: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2015.
6.
Couldry N, Hepp A. The Mediated Construction of Reality; John Wiley & Sons: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2018.
7.
Coleman EG. Ethnographic approaches to digital media.
Annu. Rev. Anthropol. 2010,
39, 487–505.
[Google Scholar]
8.
Bjorklund DF, Pellegrini AD. Evolutionary perspectives on social development. In The Wiley Blackwell Handbook of Childhood Social Development, 2nd ed.; Wiley Blackwell: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2010; pp. 64–81.
9.
Amici F, Widdig A. An evolutionary perspective on the development of primate sociality.
Behav. Ecol. Sociobiol. 2019,
73, 1–7.
[Google Scholar]
10.
Kacane I, Hernández-Serrano MJ. Social connection when physically isolated: Family experiences in using video calls.
Open Cult. Stud. 2023,
7, 20220165.
[Google Scholar]
11.
Hillyer RS. Staying connected: Effects of online platforms on transnational family relations and social capital.
Contemp. Japan. 2021,
33, 3–23.
[Google Scholar]
12.
Johnson AM, Jacovina ME, Russell DG, Soto CM. Challenges and solutions when using technologies in the classroom. In Adaptive Educational Technologies for Literacy Instruction; Routledge: London, UK, 2016.
13.
Silva HM. A new and serious disease arises in schools.
J. Educ. Health Promot. 2020,
9, 1.
[Google Scholar]
14.
Pedro LFMG, de O. Barbosa CMM, das N. Santos CM. A critical review of mobile learning integration in formal educational contexts.
Int. J. Educ. Technol. High. Educ. 2018,
15, 1–15.
[Google Scholar]
15.
Gkeredakis M, Lifshitz-Assaf H, Barrett M. Crisis as opportunity, disruption and exposure: Exploring emergent responses to crisis through digital technology.
Inf. Organ. 2021,
31, 100344.
[Google Scholar]
16.
Kopecka-Piech K, Łódzki B. The COVID-19 Pandemic as a Challenge for Media and Communication Studies; Routledge: London, UK, 2022.
17.
Cachopo JP. The Digital Pandemic: Imagination in Times of Isolation; Bloomsbury Publishing: London, UK, 2022.
18.
Nawaz S, Bhowmik J, Linden T, Mitchell M. Adapting to the new normal: Understanding the impact of COVID-19 on technology usage and human behaviour.
Entertain. Comput. 2024,
51, 100726.
[Google Scholar]
19.
Jones R, Mougouei D, Evans SL. Understanding the emotional response to COVID‐19 information in news and social media: A mental health perspective.
Hum. Behav. Emerg. Technol. 2021,
3, 832–842.
[Google Scholar]
20.
Schafer MH. Social contact during the COVID-19 pandemic: The role of long-term connectedness and cumulative inequality in later life.
Soc. Sci. Res. 2024,
120, 103007.
[Google Scholar]
21.
Vanden Abeele M. The social consequences of phubbing. In The Oxford Handbook of Mobile Communication and Society; Oxford Academic: Oxford, UK, 2020; pp. 158–174.
22.
Chotpitayasunondh V, Douglas KM. The effects of “phubbing” on social interaction.
J. Appl. Soc. Psychol. 2018,
48, 304–316.
[Google Scholar]
23.
Verma S, Kumar R, Yadav SK. The determinants of phubbing behaviour: a millenials perspective.
Int. J. Innov. Technol. Explor. Eng. 2019,
8, 806–812.
[Google Scholar]
24.
Karadağ E, Tosuntaş ŞB, Erzen E, Duru P, Bostan N, Şahin BM, et al. Determinants of phubbing, which is the sum of many virtual addictions: A structural equation model.
J. Behav. Addict. 2015,
4, 60–74.
[Google Scholar]
25.
Allred RJ. Cell Phone Presence, Phubbing, and Rejection: Antecedents and Effects of Cell Phone Usage during Face-to-Face Communication; University of Connecticut: Storrs, CT, USA, 2020.
26.
Kildare CA, Middlemiss W. Impact of parents mobile device use on parent-child interaction: A literature review.
Comput. Human Behav. 2017,
75, 579–593.
[Google Scholar]
27.
Abels M, Vanden Abeele M, Van Telgen T, Van Meijl H. Nod, nod, ignore: An exploratory observational study on the relation between parental mobile media use and parental responsiveness towards young children.
Talk. Species Perspect. Evol. Neur. Cult. Found. Lang. 2018,
195, 228.
[Google Scholar]
28.
Lemish D, Elias N, Floegel D. “Look at me!” Parental use of mobile phones at the playground.
Mob. Media Commun. 2020,
8, 170–187.
[Google Scholar]
29.
Lee G, Kim S. Effects of emotion coaching group programme for mothers of preschool children with smart device overdependence: a mixed methods study.
BMC Nurs. 2023,
22, 380.
[Google Scholar]
30.
Kutscher ML. Digital Kids: How to Balance Screen Time, and Why It Matters; Jessica Kingsley Publishers: Philadelphia, PA, USA, 2016.
31.
David ME, Roberts JA. Phubbed and alone: Phone snubbing, social exclusion, and attachment to social media.
J. Assoc. Consum. Res. 2017,
2, 155–163.
[Google Scholar]
32.
Liu S, Wu P, Han X, Wang M, Kan Y, Qin K, et al. Mom, dad, put down your phone and talk to me: how parental phubbing influences problematic internet use among adolescents.
BMC Psychol. 2024,
12, 125.
[Google Scholar]
33.
Mosley MA. What’s the Phubbing Problem? Attachment, Phone Snubbing, and Couple Satisfaction; The Florida State University: Tallahassee, FL, USA, 2022.
34.
Pancani L, Gerosa T, Gui M, Riva P. “Mom, dad, look at me”: The development of the Parental Phubbing Scale.
J. Soc. Pers. Relat. 2021,
38, 435–458.
[Google Scholar]
35.
Xie X, Chen W, Zhu X, He D. Parents’ phubbing increases Adolescents’ Mobile phone addiction: Roles of parent-child attachment, deviant peers, and gender.
Child. Youth Serv. Rev. 2019,
105, 104426.
[Google Scholar]
36.
Li X, Fu Y, Weng W, Liu M, Li Y. Maternal Phubbing and Problematic Media Use in Preschoolers: The Independent and Interactive Moderating Role of Children’s Negative Affectivity and Effortful Control.
Psychol. Res. Behav. Manag. 2024,
17, 3083–3100.
[Google Scholar]
37.
Nguyen D. Is there a Relationship between Parents’ Screen Usage and Young Children’s Development? PhD dissertation, University of Plymouth, Plymouth, UK, 2024.
38.
Khourochvili M. Technology and Caregiver-Child Interaction: The Effects of Parental Mobile Device Use on Infants. Master Thesis, York University, North York, ON, Canada, 2017.
39.
Aagaard J. Drawn to distraction: A qualitative study of off-task use of educational technology.
Comput. Educ. 2015,
87, 90–97.
[Google Scholar]
40.
Han JH, Park SJ, Kim Y. Phubbing as a millennials’ new addiction and relating factors among nursing students.
Psychiatry Investig. 2022,
19, 135.
[Google Scholar]
41.
Alzaabi YSR, Alshehhi SMA. The Negative Effects of Social Media Usage on Employee Performance–A Conceptual Analysis.
Int. J. Intellect. Hum. Resour. Manag. 2023,
4, 40–47.
[Google Scholar]
42.
Miller D, Costa E, Haynes N, McDonald T, Nicolescu R, Sinanan J, et al. How the World Changed Social Media; UCL Press: London, UK, 2016.
43.
Wood DM. Alone together, why we expect more from technology and less from each other.
Growth J. Assoc. Christ. Student Dev. 2012,
11, 10.
[Google Scholar]
44.
Turkle S. Reclaiming Conversation: The Power of Talk in a Digital Age; Penguin Press: New York, NY, USA, 2016.
45.
Przybylski AK, Weinstein N. Can you connect with me now? How the presence of mobile communication technology influences face-to-face conversation quality.
J. Soc. Pers. Relat. 2013,
30, 237–246.
[Google Scholar]
46.
Utz S, Beukeboom CJ. The role of social network sites in romantic relationships: Effects on jealousy and relationship happiness.
J. Comput. Commun. 2011,
16, 511–527.
[Google Scholar]
47.
Chou HTG, Edge N. “They are happier and having better lives than I am”: The impact of using Facebook on perceptions of others’ lives.
Cyberpsychol. Behav. Soc. Netw. 2012,
15, 117–121.
[Google Scholar]
48.
Walker G, Venker Weidenbenner J. Social and Emotional Learning in the age of virtual play: Technology, empathy, and learning.
J. Res. Innov. Teach. Learn. 2019,
12, 116–132.
[Google Scholar]
49.
Waytz A, Gray K. Does online technology make us more or less sociable? A preliminary review and call for research.
Perspect. Psychol. Sci. 2018,
13, 473–491.
[Google Scholar]
50.
Cotterell J. Social Networks in Youth and Adolescence; Routledge: London, UK, 2013.
51.
Sampasa-Kanyinga H, Lewis RF. Frequent use of social networking sites is associated with poor psychological functioning among children and adolescents.
Cyberpsychol. Behav. Soc. Netw. 2015,
18, 380–385.
[Google Scholar]
52.
Miller D, Slater D. The Internet: an Ethnographic Approach; Routledge: London, UK, 2020.
53.
Hagen S. Psychological Dynamics of Social Interaction in Face-to-Face and Digital Communication.
J. Soc. Civilecial. 2024,
2, 11–21.
[Google Scholar]
54.
Uzun GÖ. A review of communication, body language and communication conflict.
Int. J. Psychosoc. Rehabil. 2020,
24, 2833–2844.
[Google Scholar]
55.
Bozkurt A, Tu CH. Digital identity formation: Socially being real and present on digital networks.
EMI. Educ. Media Int. 2016,
53, 153–167.
[Google Scholar]
56.
Freitas D. The Happiness Effect: How Social Media Is Driving a Generation to Appear Perfect at any Cost; Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK, 2017.
57.
Ellison N, Heino R, Gibbs J. Managing impressions online: Self-presentation processes in the online dating environment.
J. Comput. Commun. 2006,
11, 415–441.
[Google Scholar]
58.
Chayko M. Techno‐social life: The internet, digital technology, and social connectedness.
Sociol. Compass. 2014,
8, 976–991.
[Google Scholar]
59.
Graham SL. Relationality friendship and identity in digital communication. In The Routledge Handbook of Language and Digital Communication; Routledge: London, UK, 2015; pp. 305–320.
60.
Koch R, Miles S. Inviting the stranger in: Intimacy, digital technology and new geographies of encounter.
Prog. Hum. Geogr. 2021,
45, 1379–1401.
[Google Scholar]
61.
Schroeder R. Being There Together: Social Interaction in Shared Virtual Environments; Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK, 2010.
62.
Broadbent S. Approaches to personal communication. In Digital Anthropology; Routledge: London, UK, 2020; pp. 127–145.
63.
Misra S, Cheng L, Genevie J, Yuan M. The iPhone effect: The quality of in-person social interactions in the presence of mobile devices.
Environ. Behav. 2016,
48, 275–298.
[Google Scholar]
64.
Zhao C, Zhao M, Yang Y, Gao J, Rao N, Lin P. The reorganization of human brain networks modulated by driving mental fatigue.
IEEE J. Biomed. Health informatics. 2016,
21, 743–755.
[Google Scholar]
65.
Wilmer HH, Sherman LE, Chein JM. Smartphones and cognition: A review of research exploring the links between mobile technology habits and cognitive functioning.
Front. Psychol. 2017,
8, 605.
[Google Scholar]
66.
Derks D, Bakker AB. Smartphone use, work–home interference, and burnout: A diary study on the role of recovery.
Appl. Psychol. 2014,
63, 411–440.
[Google Scholar]
67.
Ito ME, Okabe DE, Matsuda ME. Personal, Portable, Pedestrian: Mobile Phones in Japanese Life; MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2006.
68.
Baron NS, Segerstad YH. Cross-cultural patterns in mobile-phone use: Public space and reachability in Sweden, the USA and Japan.
New Media Soc. 2010,
12, 13–34.
[Google Scholar]
69.
Thompson JB. Mediated interaction in the digital age.
Theory Cult. Soc. 2020,
37, 3–28.
[Google Scholar]
70.
De Wolf R, Ling R, Vanden Abeele M. Mobile media and social space: How anytime, anyplace connectivity structures everyday life.
Media Commun. 2018,
6, 5–14.
[Google Scholar]
71.
Boellstorff T. Coming of Age in Second Life: An Anthropologist Explores the Virtually Human; Princeton University Press: Princeton, NJ, USA, 2015.
72.
Brubaker R. Hyperconnectivity and Its Discontents; John Wiley & Sons: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2022.
73.
Beaglehole R, Epping-Jordan J, Patel V, Chopra M, Ebrahim S, Kidd M, et al. Improving the prevention and management of chronic disease in low-income and middle-income countries: a priority for primary health care.
Lancet 2008,
372, 940–949.
[Google Scholar]
74.
Horst HA, Miller D. Digital Anthropology; Routledge: London, UK, 2020.
75.
Boellstorff T. Rethinking digital anthropology. In Digital Anthropology; Routledge: London, UK, 2020; pp. 39–60.
76.
Pertierra AC. Media Anthropology for the Digital Age; John Wiley & Sons: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2018.
