Ihre Suche

IntroductionCurrent methods of assessing digital technology use fail to adequately capture a holistic picture of how individuals experience digital technology during daily life. This is because current measures focus on measuring the frequency/duration of specific forms of technology use or problematic use. This research aimed to create two general measures of digital technology use and experience, respectively, which are flexible amid technological changes.MethodsThe measured constructs were specified via bottom-up analysis of an international qualitative study (N=300) on post-covid digital practices. Across three studies we developed and validated the measures using data from 2227 participants.ResultsExploratory and Confirmatory Factor Analyses indicated that the Quality of Digital Experience Scale contains 26 items, measuring individuals’ perceptions and overall experience of digital technology usage and its impact on Well-being, Time and Efficiency, and Social Connectedness. The second scale, the Immersion in Digital Life Scale consists of five separate questions concerning individuals’ estimation of how much digital technology is present in different areas of life.DiscussionThe scales offer reliable measurements of individuals’ interactions with technology in the digital era. Their ability to capture engagement beyond frequency and duration will facilitate greater understanding of the complexities of the positive and negative impacts of digital practices on individuals and societies.

The Quality of Digital Experience Scale (QDES) and the Immersion in Digital Life Scale (IDLS) were developed to measure positive and negative experiences of digital technology use and the extent to which different facets of life were digital. Critically, the QDES and ILDS were developed to be independent of digital device or platform, thus providing a more holistic account of digital technology use than previous measures. The objective of the current studies was to validate the QDES and IDLS in German, French, Czech, Polish and Spanish. Across the studies, data from a total of 4,447 participants were analyzed. Confirmatory Factor Analyses confirmed a three-factor model for the QDES consisting of Wellbeing, Social Connectedness and Time and Efficiency. The IDLS was also confirmed as having a single factor structure. Reliability and validity analysis indicated that the QDES and IDLS showed good reliability and validity in all countries. The present study confirms that the QDES and IDLS offer reliable measurements of individuals’ interactions with technology in the digital era. By extending the validation of these measures beyond English, to German, Polish, Czech, French and Spanish, we expand researchers and policy makers abilities to establish the positive and negative impacts of digital practices on individuals and societies.

Digital devices are marketed as tools to improve efficiency and save time, however their use is also often associated with time pressure, time poverty and reduced wellbeing. Precisely how and why digital technologies reduce the availability of time is largely unknown. This study sought to explore the ways in which people experience a loss of time as a result of digital technology use. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 300 people from Spain, Poland, Czechia, Germany, Switzerland and the United Kingdom. Thematic analysis of the interview data revealed that digital technology use impacted the way in which time was used, monitored and evaluated. Participants associated digital technology use with a loss of time, a desire to fill all time, a propensity to forget time and, as a result, a desire to gain greater control of time. As a result, the experience of loss of time to digital technology was associated with feelings of guilt, shame and a lack of self-control. The findings suggest that a combination of structural factors, including imperfect algorithm content provision and ease of device use, and attitudinal factors, including the belief that digital time was inauthentic, unintellectual or “bad for you”, lead to the perception of time loss through digital device use. Improvements in algorithmic content generation and greater acceptance of the benefits of time on digital media may help reduce the sense that time is lost to digital technology, and the associated feelings of guilt and loss of control.

Despite the widespread use of digital technologies during free time and its potential benefits for wellbeing and recovery from work life, digital engagement is considered a low-quality form of free time that often results in significant regret and guilt. Given its increasing significance as an accessible source of relaxation and enjoyment in today's post-COVID digitised society and the negative health consequences of chronic regret and guilt, the current study sought to explore the drivers of guilt and regret following digital free time across Europe. We conducted semi-structured interviews with 150 participants from Czechia, Germany, Poland, Spain, French-speaking Switzerland and the UK. A thematic analysis of the data showed that digital free time was perceived as inconsistent with the ideal of meaningful and self-determined free time and led to a spiral of guilty pleasure: Unintentional or involuntary uptake of digital activity, digital engagement beyond the desired duration and consumption of unwanted content were followed by a negative evaluation of one's own digital behaviour as a self-regulative failure and digital free time as unproductive, passive, unhealthy and inauthentic. The perceived meaninglessness and lack of control over digital free time engendered feelings of guilt and regret, which were maintained through continued digital engagement during free time. Measures to reduce guilt and regret may require societal-level changes in the way digital technology use during free time is portrayed in media and mainstream discourse in combination with structural changes to digital entertainment apps or services.

Despite advances in technology and labour-saving devices, chronic time pressure, or the sense that you do not have enough time, is increasing globally. The implications of this for health and wellbeing are poorly understood. This study aimed to examine the impact of chronic time pressure on experiences of symptoms of depression, anxiety and stress in a European sample.

In this study, we utilized two newly developed and psychometrically validated instruments—the Immersion in Digital Life Scale (IDLS) and the Quality of Digital Experience Scale (QDES)—to investigate the relationships among Immersion in Digital Life (IDL), the Quality of Digital Experiences (QDE), individual Temporal Focus (TF), and the subjective Passage of Time (PoT). The study sample comprised 7536 participants across six European countries. Our findings indicate that a higher IDLS score and a higher QDES score are associated with an accelerated PoT. Our results revealed that a higher Future Temporal Focus (TF-Future) is related to an accelerated PoT. Moreover, there is an indirect effect of TF-Future on PoT via IDLS and the dimension Time and Efficiency of QDES. Specifically, individuals with a stronger TF-Future tend to engage in digital life to a greater extent and experience its beneficial effects, which in turn contributes to a faster subjective experience of time. Country-level differences emerged: participants in Poland reported the highest levels of IDL and the fastest PoT, while individuals in the United Kingdom exhibited the strongest Past Temporal Focus (TF-Past) and the slowest PoT. The results shed more light on the consequences of digital usage on time perception.

There is growing awareness that wellbeing in today's digital age cannot simply be achieved by minimising digital engagement. Instead, it requires living well with digital technology and pursuing digital practices that afford a sense of productivity and user control. This study sought to identify and distinguish between types of digital technology use viewed as ideal, acceptable or tolerable and negative and determine what factors contribute to digital practices being evaluated this way. 50 semi-structured interviews were conducted with individuals from the UK population. An inductive and interpretative thematic analysis of the data led to the creation of four themes, which differentiated between digital practices associated with (1) high productivity and high control (ideal digital engagement), (2) high productivity and low control (acceptable or tolerable technology use), (3) low productivity and low control (negative digital practices) and (4) low productivity and high control (mixed digital experiences). Quality of digital experience was shaped by how well the type of productivity afforded by specific digital practices aligned with user goals in a specific context and how well these practices supported user control in interaction with the context of digital engagement. As control was perceived to be restricted by external factors, such as digital functions and social norms, control-enhancing structural, societal and social changes may be needed to support digital wellbeing. In addition, non-prescriptive education that raises awareness of productivity and control as broad principles of good digital time could be helpful. However, further research is needed to investigate the effectiveness of such interventions.