Exploring Addictive Consumption of Mobile Phone ... - Anzmac

Exploring Addictive Consumption of Mobile Phone Technology Diana James, Judy Drennan, Queensland University of Technology Abstract This paper examines addictive consumption of mobile phones within the domain of consumer behaviour. Specifically, it explores what characterises addictive users of mobile phone technology, factors that increase their usage, and adverse consequences from addiction. Data collection involved eight in-depth interviews with mobile phone users and one focus group containing six self-identified addictive users. Findings show a range of characteristics that comprise possible antecedents to addictive use, and factors common to any consumer engaged in addictive or compulsive consumption. Situational factors effecting excessive use include special events, alcohol use, and depressive circumstances. Finally, in addition to significant financial issues, results showed a wide range of adverse consequences for addictive mobile phone consumers such as damaged relationships, emotional stress and falling literacy. Introduction Mobile phone technology is pervasive in Australia. Current ownership is estimated at 18 million – more than 80 percent of the population. Amongst mobile phone owners, usage of services is also increasing; in particular, short message services (SMS) rose 44% from 2002 to 2003 (Allen Consulting Group, 2004). For young people, ownership and usage levels are even higher (Australian Psychological Society, 2004). The Spin Sweeny Report (2003) found that about 88 per cent of those aged between 16 and 28 now own mobile phones. Benefits accruing from this new communication technology are undeniable. Australian academic studies highlight advantages such as deaf people connecting through SMS (Power and Power, 2004); forming and supporting relationships (Power and Horstmanshof, 2004); security and safety (Chapman and Schofield, 1998); and social gratification of youths from mobility, access and convenience (Tjong, Weber and Sternberg, 2003). However, it appears some consumers are paying a heavy “price” for the freedoms afforded by mobile technology. For example, the press have been reporting on “mobile addiction”, “phone junkies”, and “text addicts” (BBC News, 2004; China Daily, 2004; Herald Sun, 2005; Korea Times, 2005; Sydney Morning Herald, 2004; The Mercury, 2003). In addition, the Australian Broadcasting Corporation reported experts issuing health warnings about youths so addicted to their phones they sleep with them (ABC News Radio, May 2005). Policy makers and community groups indicate that problems are arising, particularly when “a customer’s usage may be excessive or extreme” (Australian Communications Authority, 2004, p. 20). Problems include users incurring considerable debt (Communication Law Centre, 1999; La Trobe University, 2004; Office of Fair Trading, 2003), harassing others and privacy issues (Australian Psychological Society, 2004), and using the devices in banned settings, including hospitals, planes, petrol stations, and cars (Bianchi and Phillips, 2005). Research into these problematic areas “is currently hampered by a lack of good quality data” (Australian Government, 2005, p. 32). Consequently, there is a need for empirical data to ascertain the extent of these mobile phone related problems. This paper specifically explores addictive use of mobile phones, and reports on an exploratory study examining three research questions: 1. 2. 3.

What characterises addictive mobile phones users? What situational factors influence addictive use of mobiles? What are the negative consequences of addictive mobile phone consumption?

ANZMAC 2005 Conference: Electronic Marketing

87

Literature Review The term “addiction” is traditionally reserved for clinical literature and has historically been avoided within consumer behaviour studies. Instead, the softer terms “compulsive” or “excessive” are usually used to refer to extreme behaviours, particularly with regards to shopping and consumption. In this paper the term “addiction” is used to describe the most severe manifestation of problematic consumption, with “compulsive” being a lesser form, and “impulsive” the least. Impulsive (Rook and Hoch, 1985), compulsive (Faber, O'Guinn and Krych, 1992), and addictive (Krych, 1989) buying are forms of abnormal or deviant consumer behaviours studied in physical shopping environments. More recently, researchers extended problematic behaviour studies into virtual realities created by information technology including computer gaming (Griffiths, Davies and Chappell, 2004), Internet usage (Kaltiala-Heino, Lintonen and Rimpela, 2004), and online shopping (LaRose and Eastin 2002). Preliminary studies into mobile phones also indicate the presence of addictive consumption styles (Wilska, 2003) and problematic behaviour with ensuring negative consequences (Bianchi and Phillips, 2005). Most consumers possess an impulse buying tendency “to buy spontaneously, unreflectively, immediately, and kinetically” (Rook and Fisher 1995, p. 306). Rook (1987) linked impulse buying behaviour with other control disorders such as drug abuse, over eating, and spending sprees. For some consumers impulsive becomes compulsive as the desire for specific products shifts to a general desire for buying. Compulsive buying is defined as “chronic, repetitive purchasing that becomes a primary response to negative events or feelings [escape]…becomes very difficult to stop and ultimately results in harmful consequences” (O'Guinn and Faber, 1989, p. 155). Faber et al (1995) also linked compulsive buying to other compulsive behaviours including addiction. Ultimately, “as abuse turns to dependency, compulsive buying becomes a behavioural addiction” (LaRose and Eastin, 2002, p. 550). Consumer behaviour research began exploring impulsive and compulsive consumption two decades ago. Initially, consumers were dichotomously classified to determine whether, or not, they were “afflicted” by compulsive buying (Faber and O'Guinn, 1989; Valence, DAstous and Fortier, 1988). Hirschman’s (1992) phenomenology study of drug consumption integrated this relative new consumer behaviour research with addiction and its literature’s long history of theorisation. Later authors argue that impulsive, compulsive and addictive buying occurs along a continuum, representing varying degrees of the problematic behaviour and its negative consequences (Dittmar and Drury, 2000; Edwards, 1993; LaRose, 2001). Besides impulsiveness, problematic consumption comprises other commonalities. O’Guinn and Faber (1989) identify three common characteristics across addictive and compulsive phenomena as: the presence of a drive, impulse or urge to engage in the behaviour, denial of the harmful consequences of engaging in the behaviour, and repeated failure in attempts to control or modify the behaviour. Faber, O’Guinn and Krych (1992, p. 466) later describe the anxiety and preoccupation surrounding the need to use as “building tension”. Withdrawal distress and tolerance are cornerstones in the definition of addiction and necessary components in the diagnosis of alcohol and drug dependence (Marlatt et al., 1988). Tolerance involves the “need for more” as consumers increase consumption in order to achieve the same level of effect (Marks, 1990). Bianchi and Phillips (2005) applied several of these constructs in a recent study into problematic usage of mobile phones, including: (1) tolerance, (2) escape from other problems, (3) withdrawal, and (4) negative consequences. Moreover, numerous studies have attempted to identify psychological and social factors as potential causes of compulsive/addictive consumption. For mobile phone users, high social use of the device was linked to low self esteem and extraversion (Bianchi and Phillips 2005). ANZMAC 2005 Conference: Electronic Marketing

88

Methodology Two exploratory studies undertaken in Brisbane are the basis for a larger project now in progress. Ten semi-structured interviews were conducted in March 2005, followed by a focus group containing six participants in June 2005. (See Appendix A for subject description.) A judgement sample of eight consumers of mobile phone technology was used in this study. These subjects represented a broad spectrum of the population in terms of usage levels, occupation, and age (19 to 45 years, median age of 29). Interviews typically lasted about an hour. The interviews were recorded on audio cassettes and transcribed. The focus group was a convenience sample of six young people (aged 18 to 22 years, median age of 21), enrolled full-time at university. They self-identified as problematic users of mobile technology. Subjects were highly animated about the topic. The discussion lasted 87 minutes. Guided by existing literature, results from the research questions including common characteristics of users, situational factors, and negative consequences, were built into a conceptual framework for addictive consumption of mobile phone usage. Findings In our study, it was found that these users had a long established relationship with their phone with an average of 6.5 years, and all subjects were using their third to fifth mobile phone upgrade. Usage time was high ranging from 1.5 to 5 hours per day, and the average bill per month was $140, which is expensive given restricted student incomes. The paper’s three research questions were examined and the findings are provided below. Characteristics of addictive mobile phone users In this study, both attitudinal and behavioural characteristics were found amongst mobile phone users who self-identified as problematic. Attitudinal characteristics include: (1) importance that mobile phone plays in life, (2) a sense of self identity with mobile phone, (3) fear of group exclusion, and (4) the device’s entertainment or hedonistic value. Examples of these four attitudes are shown in sequence below. 1. My mobile, I would consider my mobile to be probably my prize possession. (Subject 4) 2. It’s like a reflection on you, if your phone is not working, or you can’t answer your phone or be available 24 hours a day, then it’s a reflection on you… So it gives an image of you as well, that you are flexible and mobile. (Subject 14) 3. Everyone uses their mobile phone now to communicate to everyone else, and if you don’t have access to that for whatever period of time then you’re out of the loop. (Subject 10) 4. The fashion does worry me a little bit. I always look at the phones that I can’t afford. Even though the flip top doesn’t work, and has failed me before, I probably will go back to it. There’s no question about it because it’s so cool. Because you whip it out, flip it on your chin, and you’re listening, sort of thing, it’s great. (Subject 14) Behavioural characteristics related to addictive mobile phone use were found to be: 1) impulsiveness, 2) mounting tension prior to using the device, and 3) failure of control strategies, and 4) withdrawal symptoms. These four aspects are illustrated in sequence by subjects’ comments as follow:


89

1. So as soon as I get a message I will answer that person straight back, unless of course the mobile is switched off. It has to be switched off at my work, but sometimes I’ll leave it on… I’ll stop what I’m doing, answer the message and then keep going. (Subject 2) 2. If I go to work or somewhere and accidentally leave my phone at home, I literately get anxious. Because I’m like “who’s calling me, what have I missed”. (Subject 10) 3. Usage has been a bit excessive of late. Every bill that I get I think: “oh I’m not going to message that person”, “I’m not going to have a conversation that goes all day”, or “I’m going to message over ringing”, or something like that. Usually by the end of the month my resolve is completely gone, and we’re back to where we started from again. (Subject 2) 4. Like one of my limbs is missing.. feel quite insecure when I don’t have my phone. (Subject 3) These exploratory findings suggest that a number of commonalities are reflected in addictive mobile phone consumption which can be used as a warning signal to consumers, government organisations and mobile phone companies. Situational factors associated with addictive use of mobile phones Exacerbating addictive consumption are three factors – alcohol, special events, and depressive circumstances – which are proposed variables believed to be temporal, rather than enduring psychological traits or social circumstances. The first two variables, alcohol and special events, were clearly detailed by subjects, both in the in-depth interviews and focus group discussion. Depression was inferred as subjects describe situations when feeling lonely, bored and distressed. Alcohol featured particularly strongly with the younger subjects. You lose your inhibitions, you don’t care who you are messaging… alcohol has an influence on that because you’re not really thinking about `gee, this is costing me 25 cents’, every time I send a message. (Subject 14) Special events are occasions that interrupt daily schedules. Some subjects used their mobile to organise social events and incurred particularly heavy usage on the weekends. Focus group discussion reached consensus about high usage occasions being when routines were broken and land lines are impractical, then the mobile phone becomes a critical tool. I’m out at night, I become an addictive. But every day to day use I’m an active. But say like I’m at a festival I think, I just go crazy and use it… I don’t use my phone as much as say on holidays. But now I’m in a routine, everyone knows I’m at uni. (Subject 9) In lonely and depressed circumstances, subjects may use mobile phone technology to repair their mood. Reaching out to others through their mobile phone helped them feel better. When I am alone, I am always using mobile phone. But when I’m with someone else, like friends or boyfriend, I don’t have to worry about who’s calling me or what text message I get because I can check it when I’m alone. (Subject 13) Social marketing campaigns are already targeting alcohol and depressive problems in society and the data on mobile phone related issues could inform future marketing strategies. Negative consequences of addictive mobile phone usage Focus group subjects spent an average of three hours per day on their phone (handling, texting, talking) resulting in monthly bills approximately $82 per month. With average


90

monthly earnings of $685 this equates to 12% spent on mobile phone usage. All six participants had borrowed money to pay bills, and two subjects had service disconnected. Six types of negative consequences arising from mobile phone use were uncovered from the quantitative research: (1) financial costs cited as the primary problem, (2) psychological impacts, (3) social relations, (4) occupational issues, (5) physical consequences, and (6) legal repercussions. In sequence, comments illustrating each aspect are provided below: 1. Really expensive bills. Giving up other things so I can get credit. (Subject 11) 2.

It becomes a drag to have it sometimes; it’s like a cigarette or an unnecessary attachment, or just another piece of baggage on me. (Subject 1)

3. You get up to 10 to 20 messages of just fighting when it would have been cheaper or easier, and probably would have cleared up a lot quicker if you just pick up the phone and rang…. (Subject 14) 4. I did a university paper where I kept spelling you just as the letter u. And it was constant I just couldn’t stop it. (Subject 11) 5.

Keeps me awake at night because I’ll start talking with someone, or start messaging someone, then they’ll start messaging back, and I’ll lay awake full of anxiety waiting for the next message…. Yet I still can’t sleep because I’m anxious. (Subject 4)

6. One of my friends had a crash recently. She told the police officer who was driving just down the road from her that she sneezed and crashed into the ICB wall. I know for a fact that she was actually typing a message on her phone... (Subject 10) These findings show evidence of negative consequences that extend beyond the financial problems linked to high mobile phone bills. Clearly, consumers need to be provided with strategies to contain the psychological, social and legal ramifications of addictive phone use. This may require both social and commercial marketing efforts to bring about a change in addictive consumer behaviour. Conclusion and Future Directions This paper has provided exploratory insights into the characteristics of mobile phone users, situational factors associated with addictive use of mobile phones, and negative consequences of addictive mobile consumption. Attitudinal and behavioural characteristics of addictive mobile phone use were found in self-identified mobile phone addicts and suggest that further research should examine the impact of attitudinal characteristics on behavioural characteristics. Findings of the study also suggest that situational factors can be associated with addictive mobile phone consumption and may lead to negative consequences. Factors identified as contributing to heightened consumption are social occasions that interrupt the individual’s routine, alcohol consumption, and depressed mood states. Serious consequences impacting on the user’s occupational functioning, physical health, and possibly the legal system, are also considered worthy of further investigation because of broader societal implications. Identification of possible control strategies that can be used by addictive mobile phone consumers may assist in modifying their behaviour, or at the very least, minimising negative consequences caused by excessive usage. Further study is required to assess the effectiveness of control strategies, and ways that government agencies, social marketers mobile phone service providers may assist.


91

References Allen Consulting Group, 2004. The Economic Significance of the Australian Mobile Telecommunications Industry. Report – Executive Summary. Melbourne. Research commissioned by Australian Mobile Telecommunications Association: 1-7. Australian Broadcasting Corporation, 2005. Mobile phone addiction threatens teen health. Radio AM. 14 May, 08:26:44. Available from http://www.abc.net.au, accessed 4 June 2005. Australian Communications Authority, 2004. Preventing unexpected high bills: credit management in the telecommunications industry. Discussion Paper. Melbourne. Government Regulator of Telecommunications and Radiocommunications: 1-55. Australian Government, 2005. The social impact of mobile phone use in Australia: a review of data sources. Report. Canberra. Department of Communications, Information Technology and the Arts: 1-33. Australian Psychological Society, 2004. Psychosocial aspects of mobile phone use among adolescents. The Australian Psychological Society, 3 (November): 1-7. BBC News, 2003. Text addiction leaves thumbs numb. 5 October. United Kingdom. Available from http://news.bbc.co.uk, accessed 4 June 2005. Bianchi, A., and Phillips, J., 2005. Psychological predictors of problem mobile phone use. Cyber Psychology & Behaviour 8(1): 39-51. Chapman, S., and Schofield, W. N., 1998. Lifesavers and cellular samaritans: emergency use of cellular (mobile) phones in Australia. Sociology of the Mobile Phone Online Publications Available from http://socio.ch/mobile/index_mobile.htm, accessed 4 June 2005. China Daily, 2004. Hooked on mobile phones. 28 January. New York: 3. Available from http://www.chinadaily.com.cn, accessed 4 June 2005. Communication Law Centre, 1999. Mobile matters: young people and mobile phones. Report. Communication Law Centre and Victoria University funded by the Victorian Consumer Credit Fund and Commonwealth Government: 1-79. Dittmar, H., and Drury, J., 2000. Self-image – is it in the bag? A qualitative comparison between ordinary and excessive consumers. Journal of Economic Psychology 21(2): 109-142. Edwards, E. A., 1993. Development of a new scale for measuring compulsive buying behavior. Financial Counseling and Planning 4: 67-84. Faber, R. J., Christenson, G. A., De Zwaan, M., and Mitchell, J., 1995. Two forms of compulsive consumption: comorbidity of compulsive buying and binge eating. Journal of Consumer Research 22(3): 296-304. Faber, R. J., and O'Guinn, T. C., 1989. Compulsive buying: a phenomenological exploration. Journal of Consumer Research 16(2): 147-157.


92

Faber, R. J., O'Guinn, T. C., and Krych, R., 1992. A clinical screener for compulsive buying. Advances in Consumer Research 19(3): 459-469. Griffiths, M., Davies, M., and Chappell, D., 2004. Online computer gaming: a comparison of adolescent and adult gamers. Journal of Adolescence 27(1): 87-96. Herald Sun, 2005. Feeding the addiction. 2 September. Melbourne: 78. Hirschman, E. C., 1992. The consciousness of addiction: toward a general theory of compulsive consumption. Journal of Consumer Research 19(2): 155-179. Kaltiala-Heino, R., Lintonen, T., and Rimpela, A., 2004. Internet addiction? Potentially problematic use of the Internet in a population of 12-18 year-old adolescents. Addiction Research & Theory 12(1): 89-96. Korea Times , 2005. Mobile phone addiction emerging as new problem: poll. Available from http://times.hankooki.com, accessed 4 June 2005. Krych, R., 1989. Abnormal consumer behavior: a model of addictive behaviors. Advances in Consumer Research 16: 745-748. LaRose, R., 2001. On the negative effects of e-commerce: a sociocognitive exploration of unregulated on-line buying. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 6(1) LaRose, R., and Eastin, M. S., 2002. Is online buying out of control? Electronic commerce and consumer self-regulation. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media 46(4): 549-564. La Trobe University, 2004. A report into youth debt: `He that goes a borrowing goes a sorrowing. Report. Melbourne. La Trobe University, Law Centre on behalf of West Heidelberg Community Legal Service. Marks, I., 1990. Behavioural (non-chemical) addictions. British Journal of Addiction 85: 1389-1394. Marlatt, G. A., Baer, J. S., Donovan, D.M., and Kivlahan, D.R., 1988. Addictive behaviors: etiology and treatment. Annual Review of Psychology 39: 223-252. Office of Fair Trading, 2003. Youth debt. Report. Sydney, New South Wales Consumer Protection Agency: 1-52. O'Guinn, T. C., and Faber, R. J., 1989. Compulsive buying: a phenomenological exploration. Journal of Consumer Research 16(2): 147-157. Power, M. R., and Horstmanshof, L., 2004. YYSSW (Yeah, yeah, sure, sure, whatever): keeping and supporting relationships through SMS text messaging. Human Communication and Technology Communication, National Communication Association Annual Convention, Chicago, Illinois.


93

Power, M. R., and Power, D., 2004. Everyone here speaks txt: deaf people using SMS in Australia and the rest of the world. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education 9(3): 333343. Rook, D. W., 1987. The buying impulse. Journal of Consumer Research 14(3): 189-199. Rook, D. W., and Fisher, R. J., 1995. Normative influences on impulsive buying behaviour. Journal of Consumer Research 22: 305-313. Rook, D. W., and Hoch, S. J., 1985. Consuming impulses. Advances in Consumer Research 12: 23-27. Sweeny Research, 2003. The Spin Sweeny Report 2003: The definitive lifestyle guide to 1628 year olds in Australia. Sydney. Available from http://www.spinsweeneyreport.com.au, accessed 4 June 2005. Sydney Morning Herald, 2004. Mobile phones becoming a major addiction. 8 September. Sydney. Available from http://www.smh.com.au, accessed 4 June 2005. The Mercury, 2003. Text addicts in for detox. 7 October. Hobart: 3. Tjong, S., Weber, I., and Sternberg, J., 2003. Mobile, youth culture, shaping telephone use in Australia and Singapore. ANZCA03 Australian and New Zealand Communication Association: Designing communication for diversity, Brisbane, Queensland. Valence, G., DAstous, A., and Fortier, L., 1988. Compulsive buying: concept and measurement. Journal of Consumer Policy 11: 419-433. Wilska, T.-A., 2003. Mobile phone use as part of young people's consumption styles. Journal of Consumer Policy 26(4): 441-463.


94

Appendix A Subject Description In-Depth Interviews – broad spectrum of mobile phones users: usage levels, demographics and psychographics Subject

Age and gender

Occupation and important lifestyle attributes

1

45 Male

Pipe Fitter Welder. Lives alone in boarding house, despite high income. No landline. Children live in other country. Attends community meetings.

2

27 Female

Nurse works full time plus agency shift work. Lives alone. Drives own car 15 minutes to work. Recently relocated to City for job, but maintains close phone ties with old friends. Very active social.

3

43 Female

Unemployed. Lives alone. No car. No family? Attends community meetings. Wide range of acquaintances.

4

30 Male

Mechanic. Shares a unit with one mate. No car. Gets picked up for work or takes 10 minute train ride to work. Family interstate. Wide circle of friends, attends several community meetings.

5

35 Female

Full-time Student in Animal Husbandry. Lives with mother and 2 other relatives. Drives 20 minutes in own car to college. Attends community meetings each week. Limited social life.

6

19 Male

Casual bar tender. No regular work hours. No car. Resides with relatives in household of 4. Highly involved in sports, plays 7 times per week.

7

19 Female

Part-time Legal Secretary and law student. Very active social life including sports. Lives with parents and younger brother. Commutes by bus 40 minutes to work and drives 5 minutes to university.

8

20 Female

Junior Claims Secretary. Youngest of four, lives with parents and brother. Commutes 20 minutes to work on City Cat. Limited outside interests.


95

Focus Group – Self-identified problematic users from a single, second-year university student class Subject

Age & gender

Full-time Students, Key Attributes of Mobile Phone Usage

9

20 Female

Ave USE per weekday: Handling = 1.5 hrs; Talk = 1 hrs; Text = .5 hrs. Monthly: Ave Income = $800; Ave MP cost = $120; Highest MP Bill = $150 ITEMS: Bill usually a bit more than expected; Usually finds paying bill a bit difficult, causes anxiety & depression; occasionally borrows money from parents to pay MP bill; Just can’t help using. High and exclusive use of MP features, except music and phones; Considers MP very beneficial for all social/business groups.

10

22 Female

Ave USE per weekday: Handling = 2 hrs; Talk = 10 mins; Text = 1 hr. Monthly: Ave Income = $1500; Ave MP cost = $100; Highest MP Bill = $469 *** Unable to pay bill; service disconnected; 5 years bad credit rating ITEMS: Usually finds paying bill a bit difficult, causes anxiety & depression; occasionally borrows money from partner to pay MP bill; Just can’t help using, borrowing places strain on relationship Exclusively uses MP no landline, also several features, but not all; Considers MP somewhat to very beneficial for all social/business groups.

11

22 Male

Ave USE per weekday: Handling = 2 hrs; Talk = 20mins; Text = 1 hrs Monthly: Ave Income = $600; Ave MP cost = $100; Highest MP Bill = $250 *** Unable to pay bill accumulated; contract terminated ITEMS: Usually finds paying bill a bit difficult, causes anxiety & depression; Regularly has to borrow money from family member; feels embarrassed; just can’t help using; forgets local call costs. Uses all available MP features except for music; Considers MP somewhat to very beneficial for all social/business groups.

12

18 Female

Ave USE per weekday: Handling = 4 hrs; Talk = 2 hrs; Text = 1.5 hrs. Monthly: Ave Income = $15; Ave MP cost = $50; Highest MP Bill = $60 ITEMS – Bill is usually a bit more than expected; Usually a struggle to pay; causes anxiety & depression; Just can’t help using; Occasionally borrows money from family & partner to pay bill; borrowing also causes anxiousness. Uses all features, high usage; Considers very beneficial for all groups.

13

22 Female

Ave USE per weekday: Handling = 1.5 hrs; Talk = 1 hrs; Text = .5 hrs. Monthly: Ave Income = $200; Ave MP cost = $70; Highest MP Bill = $1000 ITEMS – just can’t help using Uses few MP features; Considers very beneficial to only a few social groups.

14

20 Male

Ave USE per weekday: Handling = 5 hrs; Talk = 3 hrs; Text = 1.5 hrs. Monthly: Ave Income = $1000; Ave MP cost = $50; Highest MP Bill = $190 ITEMS: just can’t help using; forgets local call costs; Occasionally borrows money from family member to pay MP bill Uses most MP features; Considers somewhat to very beneficial for all groups.


96