Journal of Child and Family Studies (2020) 29:2000–2009

https://doi.org/10.1007/s10826-020-01726-0

ORIGINAL PAPER

Integrating Adolescent Problematic Internet Use Risk Factors:

Hyperactivity, Inconsistent Parenting, and Maladaptive Cognitions
1
Sandra B. Sebre ●
Anika Miltuze1 Mihails Limonovs1
●

Published online: 25 May 2020

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2020

Abstract
The aim of this study was to examine the interrelationships of adolescent biological, social and cognitive factors in relation
to problematic internet use (PIU). The design of this study was based upon a multi-faceted theoretical framework with the
intent of exploring the integration of risk factors associated with PIU. Participants were 305 middle school and high school
adolescents who completed questionnaires with measures of hyperactivity, parenting practices, maladaptive cognitions and
PIU. After controlling for age, gender and family economic status, the regression analyses showed hyperactivity,
inconsistent parenting and maladaptive cognitions to be independently predictive of PIU. Inconsistent parenting was found
1234567890();,:
1234567890();,:

to mediate the effect between hyperactivity and maladaptive cognitions. No significant interactions were found between
parenting practices and hyperactivity or maladaptive cognitions. This study contributes to an understanding of the interplay
of biological, familial and cognitive factors in the development of adolescent PIU and points to implications for the necessity
of considering multiple preventive and treatment approaches for adolescents who are encountering difficulties with excessive
use of the internet.
Keywords Problematic internet use Hyperactivity Inconsistent parenting Maladaptive cognitions
● ● ●

Highlights
● Various risk factors may promote adolescent problematic internet use (PIU).
● Theoretical models propose biological, psychological and social factors.
● Hyperactivity, parenting practices and maladaptive cognitions were examined.
● PIU was predicted by hyperactivity, inconsistent parenting and maladaptive cognitions.
● Inconsistent parenting mediated between hyperactivity and maladaptive cognitions.

Internet use is becoming an almost ubiquitous aspect of ado-
lescent everyday life, including the necessity of internet use for
academic achievement and social engagement. It has been
suggested that there is a “normative shift” in how adolescents
communicate as a result of the embeddedness of internet use in
their daily life (Kardefelt-Winther 2014, p. 353). However, as
technological literacy has become increasingly pivotal for
adolescents, the risks of internet overuse increase (Anderson
et al. 2017). In a recent study 45% of adolescents surveyed said
* Sandra B. Sebre
sebre@lu.lv
1
Department of Psychology, University of Latvia, Imantas 7. linija
1, Riga LV-1083, Latvia
that they use the internet almost constantly (Pew Research
Center 2018), yet the amount of time spent online is a sig-
nificant risk factor for the development of internet addiction
(Ko et al. 2007). Internet addiction, in turn, has been found to
be associated with numerous negative sequelae, including
depression, suicidal behaviors (suicidal ideation and suicide
attempts), depression, anxiety, impairment in relationships and
general mental health problems (Ciarrochi et al. 2016; Kaess
et al. 2014).
Difficulties in controlling one’s use of the internet and
the subsequent functional impairment has been referred to
with various terms, including internet addiction, excessive
internet use, pathological internet use, compulsive internet
use or problematic internet use, and often these labels have
been used interchangeably (Widyanto and Griffiths 2006).
The initially proposed set of criteria for diagnosing internet
Journal of Child and Family Studies (2020) 29:2000–2009
addiction was based upon the American Psychiatric Asso-
ciation’s (1995) Diagnostic and Statistical Manual or Mental
Disorders (4th ed.; DSM-IV) criteria for pathological gam-
bling and included such specifications as preoccupation with
the internet, a need for increased time spent online, irritation
if there are attempts to cut down on internet time, and
unsuccessful attempts to cut down on internet use (Young
1998). Various debates have ensued on whether or not to
identify internet addiction as a psychiatric disorder, with
opponents arguing that excessive use of the internet can
become problematic, but that it is not a specific mental illness
(Yellowlees and Marks 2007). Other opponents of internet
addiction as a diagnosis have argued that one does not
become addicted to the internet itself, but rather to specific
online activities (Meerkerk et al. 2009). Indeed, there are now
numerous studies on specific aspects of internet use, such as
“problematic smartphone use” (e.g. Carvalho et al. 2018) and
“social networking sites addiction” (e.g. Lee 2019). At pre-
sent there is some indication that “Internet Gaming Disorder”
may warrant inclusion as a separate diagnostic category in
future psychiatric taxonomies, considering that the authors of
the American Psychiatric Association’s (2013) Diagnostic
and Statistical Manual or Mental Disorders (5th ed.; DSM-5)
have included it in the addendum as a construct which
requires further study.
In this current study we have chosen to use the term
Problematic Internet Use (PIU) because our research is
focused on examining the adolescent tendency to become
preoccupied with internet use, as self-reported on a
dimensional continuum from a lesser to greater degree of
experienced difficulty. PIU refers to preoccupation with
internet use, difficulty in controlling one’s use of the
internet, need for increasingly greater time spent using the
internet, and withdrawal symptoms such as irritability when
one is not using the internet. Instead of claiming to make a
diagnosis of psychiatric illness, PIU refers to tendencies
related to the above noted symptoms. At the same time, in
reviewing previous literature and recent theoretical models,
we include discussion of internet addiction because this
term is widely used in the scientific community, and often
with very similar meaning as excessive internet use, com-
pulsive internet use, or PIU.
Various theoretical models advocate for an integrated and
bidirectional approach in considering risk and protective factors
associated with PIU. At a more general level the bioecological
model of human development proposes an interaction of bio-
logical, social and cultural factors in regard to individual
development (Bronfenbrenner and Morris 2006). Within the
framework of Bronfenbrenner’s bioecological model is the
possibility of considering adolescent internet use as influenced
by interrelated individual and familial factors. In parallel, the
theoretical Interaction of Person-Affect-Cognition-Execution
(I-PACE) model focuses on specific internet use disorders and
2001
allows for the possibility of using this theoretical model as a
framework for PIU. At the foundations of the I-PACE model
are a person’s core characteristics, including one’s biopsycho-
logical constitution, influenced by biological/genetic factors
and parent–child interaction. Cognitive factors, such as internet
related cognitions and expectations, facilitate active use of the
internet with subsequent feedback loops involving positive
reinforcement of these expectations (Brand et al. 2016).
Among the biological/genetic factors which have pre-
viously been shown to be associated with excessive internet
use is Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD),
defined by symptoms of heightened activity level, inatten-
tion and impulsivity, with 70–80% of the variation in
symptoms is explained by genetic factors (American Psy-
chiatric Association 2013; Barkley 2016). In a recent meta-
analysis Wang and colleagues (2017) found that internet
addiction was associated with more severe symptoms of
ADHD, and suggested that an explanation of this relation-
ship might be that individuals with ADHD have a tendency
to be easily bored, have an aversion for delayed rewards,
and have impaired inhibition. The internet in its various
forms, from online games to interactive chat rooms, pro-
vides exciting stimuli with vivid colors and often unremit-
ting action. The internet also provides the possibility of
receiving immediate rewards, either in the form of game
points or prompt response in the formation of new online
friendships. Hyperactivity is associated with executive
function difficulties, including difficulties with inhibition.
Hence, even if the individual with ADHD has a desire to
stop using the internet, the neurological correlates of ADHD
could impede this intent (Barkley 2016).
At the level of familial factors, studies have shown that
positive and protective parenting lowers the likelihood of
internet addiction (Chen et al. 2015), and that the quality of
communication about internet use between adolescent and
parent decreases the possibility of developing PIU (van den
Eijnden et al. 2010). Parental monitoring of internet use has
been negatively associated with PIU, although mediated by
deviant peer relationships (Ding et al. 2017). Interparental
conflict and a lack of parental monitoring of internet use has
been found to be predictive of internet addiction, and
bidirectional effects indicate that when adolescents become
addicted to the internet, family functioning tends to further
decrease (Ko et al. 2015). Insensitive parenting has been
associated with an insecure attachment style that, in turn, has
been associated with internet use disorders (Schimmenti
et al. 2014). In consideration of specific aspects of parenting
practices, studies have consistently shown that emotionally
warm and supportive parenting practices facilitate child
mental health, whereas punishment oriented practices facil-
itate child internalizing and externalizing problems (Sebre
et al. 2015). Inconsistent disciplining, whereby discipline
strategies may erratically fluctuate depending upon the
2002
parents’ mood or the child’s powers of persuasion, has been
shown to directly contribute to child mental health problems
and delinquent-oriented attitudes (Halgunseth et al. 2013).
Warm parental consistency is important for optimal child
development, and inconsistency is a significant risk factor
for cognitive and emotional impairment (Landry et al. 2001).
We know of no studies that specifically look at consistent or
inconsistent parenting in relation to PIU.
In addition to the various biological and social risk fac-
tors that may contribute to excessive internet use, as indi-
cated in the I-PACE model, maladaptive cognitions have
also been implicated in relation to PIU. Davis (2001) con-
siders maladaptive cognitions within the diathesis-stress
model framework, which proposes that some individuals are
more vulnerable than others to environmental stressors such
as low quality parenting. These stressors may activate an
individual’s vulnerability and facilitate maladaptive cogni-
tions that, in turn, facilitate maladaptive behavior. Similarly
as do other cognitive-behavioral theorists (e.g. Ehlers and
Clark 2000), Davis considers these maladaptive cognitions
to be negative thoughts about the self and/or negative
thoughts about the world. According to Davis, psycholo-
gical predisposing factors, in conjunction with maladaptive
cognitions, can facilitate accelerated use of the internet,
especially in situations where the internet user experiences
positive reinforcement. This may be in the form of tem-
porary relief from anxiety or a fulfillment of internet-related
expectations, such as being able to make friends more
easily. In support of these suppositions, Zhang et al. (2015)
found that maladaptive cognitions mediated the relationship
between adolescent temperament (effortful control and
sensation seeking) and PIU, and that this relation was
moderated by parenting styles. Researchers of hyperactivity
have found associations between ADHD and maladaptive
cognitions, whereby the child or adult with ADHD engages
in overly optimistic thoughts, which may serve to relieve
aversive emotions in the short-term but can have negative
consequences long-term (Knouse et al. 2005; Knouse and
Mitchell 2015).
To date there have been relatively few studies looking at
the interactive effects between biological/genetic factors,
social factors, and cognitive factors in relation to excessive
internet use, as has been proposed by the I-PACE model
(Brand et al. 2016). This study examines interrelationships
between potential risk factors of PIU, including biopsy-
chological contributions such as hyperactivity and parenting
practices, as well as internet-related maladaptive cognitions.
We hypothesize that adolescent reported hyperactivity,
unsupportive parenting practices, as well as internet-related
maladaptive cognitions to be predictive of PIU. We also
examine possible effects of mediation and moderation
between these biological, social and cognitive factors. We
propose covariates to be age, gender and family economic
Journal of Child and Family Studies (2020) 29:2000–2009
status, because in previous studies gender has been shown
to be associated with ADHD (Gaub and Carlson 1997), age
has been shown to be associated with maladaptive cogni-
tions, and family socioeconomic status has been shown to
be associated with parenting practices (Zhang et al. 2015).
Method
Participants
Participating in the study were 305 adolescents (183 girls
and 122 boys) between the ages of 13–19 years (M = 15.96;
SD = 2.45). The study participants were middle or high
school students in grades 7 through 12 from four schools in
Latvia, including the capital city of Riga, as well as one
regional center. Of note regarding this age range is that
children in Latvia begin first grade at age 7 and therefore
many 12th grade students have already turned 19 during
their last year of high school. Schools were chosen
according to accessibility. Adolescents reported their eth-
nicity as follows: 93.1% Latvian, 6.2% Russian, 0.7% other.
The majority of the study participants (70%) reported that
they are living with both parents, while 23% reported living
in a single-parent household with their mother, another 2%
reported living in a single-parent household with their
father, and 5% reported other living arrangements, such as
living with their grandparents. The majority of the adoles-
cents (61%) reported that they consider their family to be
fairly well-off financially, while 17% reported that their
family is able to afford all they want, another 20% con-
sidered their family financial situation to be average, and
2% reported that their family economic situation is poor.
Almost all of the study participants reported that computers
and smart phones are readily available to them: 97%
reported that they have a computer at home; 98% reported
that they have internet access at home; 96% reported that
they have their own smart phone with internet access.
Procedure
Permission was received from the school principals to
conduct the study. Parents were informed of the content of
the study with information posted on the online platform for
teacher–parent communication, and passive consent was
received, meaning that the parents were advised to indicate
if they did not want their child to participate. However,
none of the parents indicated that they did not want their
child to participate. Students and parents were informed that
the study was about adolescent internet use in relation to
their thoughts and emotions, as well as their parents’ par-
enting practices. Principles of anonymity, voluntary parti-
cipation and the right to withdraw from the study at any
Journal of Child and Family Studies (2020) 29:2000–2009
time without repercussions were explained. All of the
adolescents who were invited to participate in the study
agreed to participate with active consent. Questionnaires
were distributed and collected by trained research assistants
during homeroom class sessions. The homeroom teachers
were not involved with the data collection process. The data
was collected by two research assistants over a three-week
period.
Measures
All measures were independently forward and back-
translated from English to Latvian by several bilingual
translators. Consensus agreement was reached in case of
any discrepancies. The translations were pilot-tested and
after initial psychometric analysis, the translations of some
items were refined in order to ensure conceptual equiva-
lence of the items in comparison to the original. The ori-
ginal questionnaire answer format was universally adapted
to a 5-point Likert-type scale in order to facilitate the ado-
lescents’ ease in completing the questionnaire packet, which
included several subsections.
Hyperactivity
Hyperactivity was assessed with the hyperactivity subscale
of the adolescent self-report form of the Strengths and
Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ; Goodman 1997). Ado-
lescents rated the 5 items of the hyperactivity scale on a 5-
point Likert-type scale from 1 (never) to 5 (always).
Example items include: I am constantly fidgeting or
squirming, and I think before I do things (reverse coded).
Internal consistency for the 5-item scale was moderate in
our sample (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.71).
Parenting practices
Parenting practices were assessed with several subscales
from the Alabama Parenting Questionnaire (APQ; Frick
1991; Shelton et al. 1996): positive parenting, inconsistent
parenting, and harsh parenting. The questionnaire com-
pleted by the adolescents included 11 items from the posi-
tive parenting subscale (e.g., My parents have friendly talks
with me); seven items from the inconsistent parenting sub-
scale (e.g., My parents threaten to punish me but then
actually do not punish me); and four items concerning harsh
parenting, asked about in relation to their childhood
experience (e.g., When I was a child my parents spanked me
when I had done something wrong). Adolescents rated the
items on a 5-point Likert-type scale from 1 (never) to 5
(always). In our sample the internal consistency of incon-
sistent parenting indicates that this subscale needs to be
interpreted with caution (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.60). Internal
2003
consistency for the harsh parenting scale is moderate
(Cronbach’s alpha = 0.78); and internal consistency for the
positive parenting scale is good (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.82).
Maladaptive cognitions
Adolescents responded to nine items for purposes of
assessing maladaptive cognitions, reflecting unrealistic
expectations or exaggerated beliefs, which favor the online
world. These were similar to the items used by Li et al.
(2010) as well as Zhang et al. (2015) in previous studies of
maladaptive cognitions. For example, the item Friends
online are more trustable than those offline, implies that
people in the real world cannot be trusted, in contrast to
those who are online. The item When I am online I don’t
have do think about my problems related to school
assignments implies a distrust in one’s abilities to deal with
school problems in an adaptive way, such as actually
completing one’s school assignments, in contrast to dealing
with these problems by escaping from them via the internet.
Adolescents rated the 9 maladaptive cognition items on a 5-
point Likert-type scale from 1 (never) to 5 (always). In our
sample internal consistency for the scale was good (Cron-
bach’s alpha = 0.81).
Problematic internet use
PIU was assessed with four items from the Compulsive
Internet Use Scale (Meerkerk et al. 2009). Adolescents
reported on items about preoccupation with using the
internet; the need to use increased amounts of time on the
internet; and feeling restless, moody or depressed when not
using the internet. Adolescents rated the items on a 5-point
scale, ranging from 1 (never) to 5 (always). Internal con-
sistency for the four-item scale was moderate in our sample
(Cronbach’s alpha = 0.78).
Family economic status
In order to assess the adolescent’s perception of his or her
family’s financial situation, the adolescents marked one of
the following statements: 1 (my family can afford all that we
want); 2 (my family is fairly well off); 3 (we get along at an
average level); 4 (my family can afford only basic neces-
sities); and 5 (we are lacking even in the basic necessities).
This item has been developed and used by sociologists in
Latvia as an indication of family socioeconomic context
because up until 2018 there was no obligatory declaration of
income, and parents often received fluctuating formal and
informal wages (Koroļeva et al. 2009). This item is an
adaptation of the measure of adolescent-specific subjective
socioeconomic status developed by Goodman et al. (2001),
with reliability demonstrated by intraclass correlations, and
2004 Journal of Child and Family Studies (2020) 29:2000–2009

correlations with objective measures of social status (Kar-
vonen and Rahkonen 2011).
Data Analysis
First, preliminary descriptive analyses, and zero-order cor-
relational analyses were conducted to examine bivariate
associations among the adolescents’ ratings of hyper-
activity, parenting practices, maladaptive cognitions and
PIU. Second, two separate linear regression analyses were
conducted to examine main effects and interactions between
variables. The first regression analysis included independent
variables hyperactivity, parenting practices and hyper-
activity X parenting practices in predicting the dependent
variable PIU, controlling for relevant covariates (age, gen-
der, family financial situation). The second regression
analysis included the same independent variables as men-
tioned above, but with the addition of maladaptive cogni-
tions and cognitions X parenting practices in predicting
PIU. The interaction variables were computed upon the
basis of standardized z-scores. The possibility of a media-
tion effect was tested with an additional series of four
regression analyses, all of which included controlling for
the same covariates as above (age, gender and family eco-
nomic situation): (1) inconsistent parenting was regressed
on hyperactivity; (2) maladaptive cognitions were regressed
on inconsistent parenting; (3) maladaptive cognitions were
regressed on hyperactivity; and (4) maladaptive cognitions
were regressed on hyperactivity and inconsistent parenting.
The Sobel test was conducted to examine the mediation
effect.
Results
Descriptive statistics and bivariate associations (Pearson
correlations) between the study variables are presented in
Table 1. PIU was found to be positively correlated with
hyperactivity (r = 0.31, p < 0.01), harsh parenting (r = 0.12,
p < 0.05), inconsistent parenting (r = 0.25, p < 0.01), as well
as maladaptive cognitions (r = 0.44, p < 0.01). Maladaptive
cognitions were negatively correlated with positive parent-
ing (r = –0.12, p < 0.05) and adolescent age (r = –0.23, p <
0.01) but positively correlated with hyperactivity (r = 0.19,
p < 0.01) and inconsistent parenting (r = 0.26, p < 0.01).
Hyperactivity was negatively correlated with positive par-
enting (r = –0.26, p < 0.01) but positively correlated with
inconsistent parenting (r = 0.29, p < 0.01) and adolescent
gender (r = 0.16, p < 0.01). Positive parenting was nega-
tively correlated with family financial situation (r = –0.16,
p < 0.01).
The first regression model (see Table 2) predicting PIU
was significant F (10, 285) = 2.42, p < 0.001, with the
independent variables hyperactivity, positive parenting,
harsh parenting, inconsistent parenting and the interaction
variables of hyperactivity X parenting practices explaining
13% of the variance of PIU ratings (R2 = 0.13), controlling
for age, gender and family financial situation. Hyperactivity
and inconsistent parenting were both found to be indepen-
dent predictors of PIU (β = 0.27, p < 0.01 and β = 0.17, p <
0.01, respectively). No significant interactions were found
between parenting practices and hyperactivity. The second
regression model predicting PIU was significant F (11, 284)
= 9.35, p < 0.001 and included maladaptive cognitions and
interaction variables of cognitions X parenting practices in
addition to the variables entered in the first regression
model. This model explained 27% of the variance of PIU
ratings (R2 = 0.27). No significant interactions were found
between parenting practices and maladaptive cognitions.
Hyperactivity and maladaptive cognitions were both found
to be independent predictors of PIU (β = 0.24, p < 0.01 and
β = 0.40, p < 0.01, respectively).
Within the combined regression model (see Table 3),
again controlling for age, gender and family economic

Table 1 Descriptive statistics and zero-order corelations among study variables

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Mean SD

(1) PIU – 2.20 0.79

(2) Hyperactivity 0.31** – 2.56 0.68
(3) Positive parenting −0.06 −0.26** – 3.75 0.80
(4) Harsh parenting 0.12* 0.10 −0.26** – 1.62 0.77
(5) Inconsistent parenting 0.25** 0.29** −0.14* 0.29** – 2.15 0.71
(6) Maladaptive cognitions 0.44** 0.19** −0.12* 0.07 0.26** – 1.99 0.71
(7) Adolescent age −0.04 −0.01 −0.06 0.06 0.06 −0.23** – 15.96 2.45
(8) Adolescent gender 0.04 0.16** −0.04 0.12* 0.17** 0.14* −0.17** – 1.40 0.49
(9) Family economic status 0.09 −0.02 −0.16** 0.09 0.05 0.01 0.23** −0.08 – 2.07 0.67
Adolescent gender coded as 1 = female, 2 = male
*p < 0.05; **p < 0.01
Journal of Child and Family Studies (2020) 29:2000–2009 2005

Table 2 Regression models

Regression model 1 Regression model 2
predicting PIU
B (SE) β 95% CI B (SE) β 95% CI
LL, UL LL, UL

Gender −0.07 (0.04) −0.05 −0.26, 0.11 −0.11 (0.09) −0.07 −0.29, 0.06
Age −0.02 (0.02) −0.07 −0.06, 0.01 0.01 (0.02) 0.03 −0.03, 0.05
Family income 0.12 (0.07) 0.10 −0.01, 0.26 0.10 (0.06) 0.08 −0.03, 0.22
Hyperactivity (H) 0.32 (0.07) 0.27** 0.18, 0.46 0.28 (0.07) 0.24** 0.15, 0.41
Positive parenting (PP) 0.07 (0.06) 0.07 −0.05, 0.19 0.10 (0.06) 0.10 −0.01, 0.21
Harsh parenting (HP) 0.05 (0.06) 0.05 −0.07, 0.18 0.06 (0.06) 0.06 −0.05, 0.17
Inconsistent parenting (IP) 0.19 (0.07) 0.17** 0.05, 0.33 0.08 (0.07) 0.07 −0.06, 0.21
H × PP −0.03 (0.05) −0.03 −0.13, 0.07 −0.05 (0.05) −0.06 −0.15, 0.05
H × HP 0.03 (0.05) 0.03 −0.08, 0.13 0.06 (0.05) 0.07 −0.04, 0.16
H × IP −0.02 (0.04) −0.02 −0.10, 0.07 −0.03 (0.04) −0.04 −0.11, 0.06
Madaptive 0.44 (0.06) 0.40** 0.32, 0.57
cognitions (MC)
MC × PP 0.01 (0.05) 0.01 −0.09, 0.11
MC × HP −0.05 (0.04) −0.07 −0.14, 0.03
MC × IP 0.04 (0.04) 0.05 −0.04, 0.12
R2 0.13 0.27
**p < 0.01

Table 3 Inconsistent parenting

B SD (B) β F R2
mediating the association
between hyperactivity and 1. Hyperactivity 8.47*** 0.10
maladaptive cognitions
Inconsistent parenting 0.28 0.06 0.27***
2. Inconsistent parenting 10.96*** 0.13
Maladaptive cognitions 0.27 0.06 0.27***
3. Hyperactivity 7.22*** 0.09
Maladaptive cognitions 0.18 0.06 0.17***
4. Predicting maladaptive cognitions 10.03*** 0.15
Inconsistent parenting 0.26 0.06 0.25***
Hyperactivity 0.11 0.06 0.10
Included in the first step of each regression were age, gender and family financial situation
**p < 0.01; ***p < 0.001

status in the first step, hyperactivity was shown to be a
significant contributing factor in the second step, in the third
step both hyperactivity and inconsistent discipline were
shown to be independent contributing factors to the varia-
tion in PIU ratings. However, with the addition of dis-
sociation symptom ratings in the fourth step, there was a
change in the Beta value of hyperactivity ratings (from 0.24,
p < 0.001 to 0.11, p = 0.055). Yet, in the fifth step with the
addition of maladaptive cognitions in the regression model,
independent, significant contributions were made by ratings
of hyperactivity, dissociation and maladaptive cognitions.
A final examination of mediation effects showed incon-
sistent parenting to mediate the association between
hyperactivity and maladaptive cognitions (see Table 3).
Again all regressions were calculated controlling for age,
gender and family financial situation. Initial results showed
a significant direct relation between hyperactivity and
maladaptive cognitions (β = 0.17, SE = 0.06), and a sig-
nificant direct relation between inconsistent parenting and
maladaptive cognitions (β = 0.27, SE = 0.06). After con-
trolling for inconsistent parenting, the relationship between
hyperactivity and maladaptive cognitions was no longer
significant (β = 0.10, SE = 0.06). The Sobel test confirmed
the mediation effect, z = 3.175 (SE = 0.02), p < 0.01.
Discussion
The aim of this study was to explore the interrelationships
between biological/genetic, social/familial and cognitive
2006
factors in relation to adolescent PIU. We would expect to
see such interrelationships according to both the bioecolo-
gical model of human development (Bronfenbrenner and
Morris 2006) and the internet use specific I-PACE (Brand
et al. 2016) theoretical models. The results of this study
showed independent contributions of hyperactivity and
inconsistent parenting in the prediction of PIU in the first
regression model, without the inclusion of maladaptive
cognitions. With the inclusion of maladaptive cognitions in
the second regression model, hyperactivity and maladaptive
cognitions remained as predictors of PIU. No significant
interactions were found between parenting practices and
hyperactivity or maladaptive cognitions. Subsequent ana-
lysis showed inconsistent parenting to have a mediation
effect between ratings of hyperactivity and maladaptive
cognitions.
The finding in our study that hyperactivity is predictive of
PIU is not surprising in that several previous studies have
shown similar associations. As Wang et al. (2017) have
suggested in the context of their meta-analysis, it is under-
standable that an adolescent with ADHD symptoms would
be attracted to the kind of stimuli which the internet pro-
vides. The vividness of the colors on the screen, the
accompanying speed of action and diversity of images may
be more appealing to the adolescent than the slower-moving
objects in one’s everyday life, especially for an adolescent
who has a tendency to become easily bored without heigh-
tened degrees of stimulation. The possibilities of engaging
with altered or alternative identities provide additional ele-
ments of risk-taking and excitement. Within the internet
cosmos there is also the ever present possibility of switching
from one game to another, from one chatroom to the next, or
even the possibility of alternating between various modes of
internet use. The established associations between ADHD
and executive function difficulties, including difficulties with
inhibition (Barkley 2016), provide additional explanation as
to why the adolescent with hyperactivity symptoms would
have difficulty in controlling use of the internet, even if he or
she decided to limit internet use.
The independent contribution of inconsistent parenting
as a predictor of adolescent PIU in the first regression model
is in adherence with previously found associations between
inconsistent parenting and adolescent behavior problems
(Halgunseth et al. 2013). Parental consistency refers to the
follow-through in adhering to rules and standards of con-
duct for the child’s behavior, and such parental adherence to
rules might or might not apply also to the child’s internet
use. Consistent parenting practices in general might entail
that the parent also engages in more consistent monitoring
of the child’s internet use, which, in turn, has been nega-
tively associated with PIU (Ding et al. 2017). However,
these associations need to be studied in greater depth in
future studies. Consistent parenting is considered to be of
Journal of Child and Family Studies (2020) 29:2000–2009
particular importance for children with ADHD, and has
been identified as one of the key treatment targets in psy-
chosocial interventions for ADHD (Kaminski et al. 2008).
Again, future studies need to examine the role of parental
training for parents of ADHD children in the use of con-
sistent parenting strategies and consistent monitoring of
internet use in order to protect against excessive internet use
and the development of PIU
The effect of maladaptive cognitions as predictors of
PIU, as shown in our study, aligns with the theoretical
framework of cognitive-behavioral specialists and others
who consider that cognitions play an essential role in
affecting one’s behavior (Davis 2001). It may be that this
association between maladaptive cognitions and PIU is
enhanced due to the ubiquitous presence of internet use in
the contemporary adolescent’s daily life (Kardefelt-Winther
2014). The adolescent’s necessity of using the internet for
school assignments and for specific modes of social com-
munication may encourage an accruement of adolescent
thoughts and expectations regarding internet-related possi-
bilities. Some of these cognitions, for example, that the
internet can serve as a source of escape from daily diffi-
culties, might be adaptive for some adolescents in the short-
term, but maladaptive in the long-term. For some adoles-
cents these expectations may become more exaggerated,
unrealistic or unfounded than for others.
The subsequent mediational analysis of this study initi-
ally showed a relationship between hyperactivity and
maladaptive cognitions, mediated by inconsistent parenting.
Previous research has shown that individuals with ADHD
have a tendency to construct unrealistic or overly optimistic
beliefs, often inaccurately evaluating the strength of their
own abilities (Barkley 2015; Knouse 2005). Within the
context of internet use assessed in this study, the mala-
daptive cognitions were related to the opportunities which
the internet provides—e.g. that friends online are more
trustworthy than those in everyday life. This suggests that
the adolescent who affirms such an assumption may be
overly optimistic about those whom one encounters in the
internet world but lacks trust in those one is closest to in the
actual world. A fundamental principle of attachment theory
(Bowlby 1969) is that consistently comforting parenting
facilitates the child’s trust in the caregiver’s availability. In
contrast, inconsistent or unpredictable parenting facilitates
the child’s anxiety and lack of trust that the caregiver will
respond in times of need. The child thereby develops a set
of cognitive representations or expectations about the
child–parent relationship that influences the child’s expec-
tations regarding other close relationships (Benoit 2004). If
inconsistent parenting engenders mistrust in close relation-
ships in the actual world, inconsistent parenting may inad-
vertently encourage maladaptive cognitions or unfounded
beliefs regarding the trustworthiness of friends online.
Journal of Child and Family Studies (2020) 29:2000–2009
Although previous studies have shown a link between
insecure attachment style and internet use disorders
(Schimmenti et al. 2014), the interrelationships between
inconsistent parenting, insecure attachment, maladaptive
cognitions and PIU need to be studied in greater depth in
future studies.
Limitations and Future Research Directions
Among the limitations of the present study is its cross-
sectional nature. In addition, it would be meaningful in
future studies to look at the interrelationships between the
biological, emotional, cognitive and behavioral aspects of
problematic internet use within a longitudinal study
design, in order to examine unidirectional and bidirec-
tional effects. Another limitation is that all ratings were
reported by the adolescents themselves. Reliance solely
upon the adolescents’ reports may have inflated the cor-
relations due to shared method variance. Although it has
been previously argued that an adolescent’s own percep-
tion of his or her parents’ parenting practices may be more
meaningful than how others see this behavior (Jessor et al.
2003), nevertheless, the possibility of utilizing multiple
sources of information (e.g. particularly in regard to
hyperactivity and parenting practices) would be of added
benefit. In the future longitudinal studies are warranted in
order to examine unidirectional and bidirectional effects
between adolescent self-regulation difficulties, parenting
practices (especially inconsistent parenting practices),
parental monitoring of internet use, maladaptive cogni-
tions and PIU. In the future it would also be valuable to
include measures of various coping strategy styles in
relation to internet use, as well as to look at interactive
effects of these various variables in relation to specific
types of internet use.
Results from the present study suggest considering a
combination of treatment methods or training programs for
adolescents with PIU and their parents, as has been pre-
viously suggested by other researchers of excessive internet
use (Dong and Potenza 2014). Behavioral programs are
generally considered the gold-standard for children with
ADHD (Barkley 2015), and the many studies linking
ADHD and internet use (Wang et al. 2017) indicate the
potential benefits that behavioral programs may have for
helping adolescents with ADHD symptoms to regulate their
use of the internet. The effectiveness of such treatment
programs need to be examined in future studies. As pre-
vious studies have indicated an overlap between child
ADHD and parental ADHD symptoms (Cheung and Theule
2016), and the current study has pointed to the mediational
effect of parental inconsistency between adolescent hyper-
activity and maladaptive cognitions, then it might be
2007
beneficial to engage the parents of adolescents with ADHD
symptoms in psychoeducational parent training programs
designed to facilitate consistency in parenting practices. In
accord with previous theoretical models and empirical stu-
dies showing the negative effects of maladaptive cognitions
on PIU, it seems possible that cognitive-behavioral
approaches would provide appropriate treatment strategies
in order to help adolescents with unfounded beliefs and
expectations about internet use to construct more realistic
and adaptive beliefs and expectations (Brand et al. 2016).
Such treatment programs would need to be implemented
and examined in future research.
Author Contributions S.B.S: designed and executed the study, con-
ducted data analysis, and wrote the paper. A.M.: collaborated with the
study design and writing of the manuscript. M.L.: collaborated with
the data analysis.
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of Interest The authors declare that they have no conflict of
interest.
Ethical Approval All of the study authors and research assistants
complied with ethical standards in the treatment of participants. This
study was reviewed and approved by the University of Latvia Ethics
Committee for Humanities and Social Sciences. All procedures were in
accordance with the ethical principles of the 1964 Helsinki declaration
and its later amendments.
Informed Consent Parents were informed and passive consent was
received, meaning that the parents were advised to indicate if they did
not want their adolescent to participate in the study. Active informed
consent was obtained from all adolescents included in the study.
Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to
jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
References
American Psychiatric Association. (1995). Diagnostic and statistical
manual of mental disorders (4th ed.). Washington, DC: American
Psychiatric Association. https://doi.org/10.1176/ajp.152.8.1228.
American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Diagnostic and statistical
manual of mental disorders (5th ed.). Arlington, VA: American
Psychiatric Association. https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.books.
9780890425596.
Anderson, E. L., Steen, E., & Stavropoulos, V. (2017). Internet use
and problematic internet use: a systematic review of longitudinal
research trends in adolescence and emergent adulthood. Inter-
national Journal of Adolescence and Youth, 22(4), 430–454.
https://doi.org/10.1080/02673843.2016.1227716.
Barkley, R. A. (2015). Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder: a
handbook for diagnosis and treatment. 4th ed. New York, NY:
Guilford Press.
Barkley, R. A. (2016). Recent longitudinal studies of childhood
attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: important themes and
questions for further research. Journal of Abnormal Psychology,
125(2), 248–255. https://doi.org/10.1037/abn0000125.
2008
Benoit, D. (2004). Infant-parent attachment: definition, types, ante-
cedents, measurement and outcome. Paediatrics and Child
Health, 9(8), 541–545. https://doi.org/10.1093/pch/9.8.541.
Bowlby, J. (1969). Attachment and loss: Vol. 1. Attachment. New
York, NY: Basic Books.
Brand, M., Young, K. S., Laiera, C., Wölfling, K., & Potenza, M. N.
(2016). Integrating psychological and neurobiological considerations
regarding the development and maintenance of specific Internet-use
disorders: an interaction of person-affect-cognition-execution (I-
PACE) model. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, 71,
252–266. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2016.08.033.
Bronfenbrenner, U., & Morris, P. (2006). The bioecological model of
human development. In W. Damon & R. M. Lerner (Eds.),
Handbook of child development, volume 1, Theoretical models of
human development. 6th ed. (pp. 793–828). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Carvalho, L. F., Sette, C. P., & Ferrari, B. L. (2018). Problematic
smartphone use relationship with pathological personality traits:
systematic review and meta-analysis. Cyberpsychology: Journal
of Psychosocial Research on Cyberspace, 12(3), 5. https://doi.
org/10.5817/CP2018-3-5.
Chen, Y. L., Chen, S. H., & Gau, S. F. S. (2015). ADHD and autistic
traits, family function, parenting style, and social adjustment for
internet addiction among children and adolescents in Taiwan: a
longitudinal study. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 39,
20–31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ridd.2014.12.025.
Cheung, K., & Theule, J. (2016). Parental psychopathology in families
of children with ADHD: a meta-analysis. Journal of Child and
Family Studies, 25, 3451–3461. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10826-
016-0499-1.
Ciarrochi, J., Parker, P., Sahdra, B., Marshall, S., Jackson, C., Gloster,
A. T., & Heaven, P. (2016). The development of compulsive
internet use and mental health: a four-year study of adolescence.
Developmental Psychology, 52(2), 272–283. https://doi.org/10.
1037/dev0000070.
Davis, R. A. (2001). A cognitive-behavioral model of pathological
internet use. Computers in Human Behavior, 17, 187–195.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0747-5632(00)00041-8.
Ding, Q., Li, D., Zhou, Y., Dong, H., & Luo, J. (2017). Perceived
parental monitoring and adolescent internet addiction: a moder-
ated mediation model. Addictive Behavior, 74, 48–54. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.addbeh.2017.05.033.
Dong, G., & Potenza, M. N. (2014). A cognitive-behavioral model of
internet gaming disorder: theoretical underpinnings and clinical
implications. Journal of Psychiatric Research, 58, 7–11. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.jpsychires.2014.07.005.
Ehlers, A., & Clark, D. M. (2000). A cognitive model of posttraumatic
stress disorder. Behavior Research and Therapy, 38, 319–345.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0005-7967(99)00123-0.
Frick, P. J. (1991). The Alabama Parenting Questionnaire. Unpub-
lished rating scale, University of Alabama
Gaub, M., & Carlson, C. L. (1997). Gender differences in ADHD: a
meta-analysis and critical review. Journal of the American
Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 36, 1036–1045.
https://doi.org/10.1097/00004583-199708000-00011.
Goodman, E., Adler, N., Kawachi, I., Frazier, L., Huang, B., & Col-
ditz, G. (2001). Adolescents’ perceptions of social status: devel-
opment and evaluation of a new indicator. Pediatrics, 108(2),
1–8. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.108.2.e31.
Goodman, R. (1997). The strengths and difficulties questionnaire: a
research note. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 38,
581–586. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7610.1997.tb01545.x.
Halgunseth, L. C., Perkins, D. F., Lippold, M. A., & Nix, R. L. (2013).
Delinquent-oriented attitudes mediate the relation between par-
ental inconsistent discipline and early adolescent behavior.
Journal of Family Psychology, 27(2), 293–302. https://doi.org/
10.1037/a0031962.
Journal of Child and Family Studies (2020) 29:2000–2009
Jessor, R., Turbin, M. S., Costa, F. M., Dong, Q., Zhang, H., & Wang,
C. (2003). Adolescent problem behavior in China and the United
States: a cross-national study of psychosocial protective factors.
Journal of Research on Adolescence, 13(3), 329–360. https://doi.
org/10.1111/1532-7795.1303004.
Kaess, M., Durkee, T., Brunner, R., Carli, V., Parzer, P.,
Wasserman, C., Sarchiapone, M., Hoven, C., Apter, A., Balazs,
J., Balint, M., Bobes, J., Cohen, R., Cosman, D., Cotter, P.,
Fischer, G., Floderus, B., Iosue, M., Haring, C., & Wasserman,
D. (2014). Pathological Internet use among European adoles-
cents: psychopathology and self-destructive behaviours. Eur-
opean Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 23(11), 1093–1102.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00787-014-0562-7.
Kaminski, J. W., Valle, L. A., Filene, J. H., & Boyle, C. L. (2008). A
meta-analytic review of components associated with parent training
program effectiveness. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 36,
567–589. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10802-007-9201-9.
Kardefelt-Winther, D. (2014). A conceptual and methodological cri-
tique of internet addiction research: towards a model of com-
pensatory internet use. Computers in Human Behavior, 31,
351–354. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2013.10.059.
Karvonen, S., & Rahkonen, O. (2011). Subjective social status and
health in young people. Sociology of Health & Illness, 33(3),
372–383. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9566.2010.01285.x.
Knouse, L. E., Bagwell, C. L., Barkley, R. A., & Murphy, K. R.
(2005). Accuracy of self-evaluation in adults with ADHD: Evi-
dence from a driving study. Journal of Attention Disorders, 8,
221–234. https://doi.org/10.1177/1087054705280159.
Knouse, L. E., & Mitchell, J. T. (2015). Incautiously optimistic: positively-
valenced cognitive avoidance in adult ADHD. Cognitive and
Behavioral Practice, 22(2), 192–202. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cbpra.
2014.06.003.
Ko, C. H., Wang, P. W., Liu, T. L., Yen, C. F., Chen, C. S., & Yen, J.
Y. (2015). Bidirectional associations between family factors and
Internet addiction among adolescents in a prospective investiga-
tion. Psychiatry Clinical Neuroscience, 69(4), 192–200. https://
doi.org/10.1111/pcn.12204.
Ko, C. H., Yen, J. Y., Yen, C. F., Lin, H. C., & Yang, M. J. (2007).
Factors predictive for incidence and remission of internet addiction in
young adolescents: a prospective study. Cyberpsychology and
Behavior, 10, 545–551. https://doi.org/10.1089/cpb.2007.9992.
Koroļeva, I., Rungule, R., Sniķere, S., & Aleksandrovs, A. (2009).
Latvijas jaunatnes portrets: integrācija sabiedrībā un margin-
alizācijas riski [A portrait of Latvian youth today: Integration in
society and marginalization risks]. LU Akadēmiskais apgāds.
Landry, S. H., Smith, K. E., Swank, P. R., Assel, M. A., & Vellet, S.
(2001). Does early responsive parenting have a special impor-
tance for children’s development or is consistency across early
childhood necessary? Developmental Psychology, 37, 387–403.
https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.37.3.387.
Lee, S.-L. (2019). Predicting SNS addiction with the Big Five and the
Dark Triad. Cyberpsychology: Journal of Psychosocial Research
on Cyberspace, 13(1). doi:10.5817/CP2019-1-3.
Li, D., Zhang, W., Li, X., Zhen, S., & Wang, Y. (2010). Stressful life
events and problematic internet use by adolescent females and males:
a mediated moderation model. Computers in Human Behavior, 26,
1199–1207. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2010.03.031.
Meerkerk, G.-J., Van Den Eijnden, R. J. J. M., Vermulst, A. A., &
Garretsen, H. F. L. (2009). The Compulsive Internet Use Scale
(CIUS): some psychometric properties. CyberPsychology and
Behavior,, 12(1), 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1089/cpb.2008.0181.
Pew Research Center. (2018). Teens, social media & technology 2018.
https://www.pewinternet.org/2018/05/31/teens-social-media-
technology-2018/
Schimmenti, A., Passanisi, A., Gervasi, A. M., Manzella, S., & Famà,
F. I. (2014). Insecure attachment attitudes in the onset of
Journal of Child and Family Studies (2020) 29:2000–2009
problematic internet use among late adolescents. Child Psychiatry
and Human Development, 45, 588–595. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s10578-013-0428-0.
Sebre, S., Jusiene, R., Dapkevice, E., Skreitule-Pikse, I., & Bie-
liauskaite, R. (2015). Parenting dimensions in relation to pre-
schoolers’ behavior problems in Latvia and Lithuania.
International Journal of Behavioral Development, 39(5),
458–466. https://doi.org/10.1177/0165025414548774.
Shelton, K. K., Frick, P. J., & Wootton, J. (1996). Assessment of
parenting practices in families of elementary school-age children.
Journal of Clinical Child Psychology, 25, 317–329. https://doi.
org/10.1207/s15374424jccp2503_8.
van den Eijnden, R. J. J. M., Spijkerman, R., Vermulst, A. A., van
Rooij, T. J., & Engels, R. C. (2010). Compulsive internet use
among adolescents: bidirectional parent-child relationships.
Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 38, 77–89. https://doi.
org/10.1007/s10802-009-9347-8.
2009
Yellowlees, P. M., & Marks, S. (2007). Problematic Internet use or
Internet addiction? Computers in Human Behavior, 23,
1447–1453. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2005.05.004.
Young, K. S. (1998). Internet addiction: the emergence of a new
clinical disorder. Cyber Psychology and Behavior, 1, 237–244.
https://doi.org/10.1089/cpb.1998.1.237.
Wang, B.-Q., Yao, N.-Q., Zhou, X., Liu, J., & Lv, Z.-T. (2017). The
association between attention deficit/ hyperactivity disorder and
internet addiction: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC
Psychiatry, 17, 260. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12888-017-1408-x.
Widyanto, L., & Griffiths, M. (2006). ‘Internet addiction’: a critical
review. International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction, 4,
31–51. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11469-006-9009-9.
Zhang, H., Li, D., & Li, X. (2015). Temperament and problematic internet
use in adolescents: a moderated mediation model of maladaptive
cognition and parenting styles. Journal of Child and Family Studies,
24, 1886–1897. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10826-014-9990-8.