ArticleBehavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland)2025
Phubbing Behaviour: A Bibliometric Analysis of Scientific Production.
Article in Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Phubbing refers to the act of ignoring someone in a face-to-face conversation by paying more attention to a mobile phone. This practice, although common, has been identified as harmful and deserves to be considered a problem. As a result, it has captured the attention of the scientific community, with a significant increase in studies in recent years. However, there is a lack of bibliometric analyses examining existing research on this topic, which would be useful in guiding future studies. This article seeks to fill that gap by providing a detailed bibliometric analysis of phubbing. It analyses the entire production in the Web of Science database between 1985 and 2022 (199 articles and 82 keywords). The study employs citation, co-occurrence, and co-citation analysis techniques using scientific maps created with VOSviewer software. The results indicate that most research has focused on how phubbing affects romantic relationships, with less emphasis on other types of relationships such as family, work, or friends. Areas that require further research are identified, such as motivations for internet use, the tendency to compare oneself on social networks, impulsivity, and the influence of executive functions on phubbing. Further exploration of the relationship between phubbing and other disorders is also suggested. This analysis will serve as a guide and stimulus for future research, offering valuable resources for professionals in psychology, health, and education.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.