ArticleJMIR mental health2025
Perceived Digital Well-Being Scale in the United States and United Kingdom: Psychometric Validation Study.
Article in JMIR mental health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Psychometric Validation of the Arabic Doomscrolling Scale Among Saudi Young-Adult Social Media Users: Factor Structure, Measurement Invariance Across Gender, and Digital Correlates.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Demographic, social, psychological, mental health, and academic correlates of problematic smartphone use among French psychology students.Frontiers in digital health · 2026Article
- Psychometric properties of the Arabic Perceived Digital Well-Being Scale (PDWS) in Saudi young adults.PloS one · 2026Article
- Psychometric validation of the English version of the digital wellbeing questionnaire for young adults.PloS one · 2026Article
- Data governance transparency and psychological wellbeing in digital platforms: the roles of trust and emotional regulation.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Digital well-being encourages balanced mobile use. The Perceived Digital Well-Being in Adolescence Scale measures this in adolescents but has been validated only in Slovenia, raising questions about its relevance for other age groups and cultural contexts. Objective: This study had three primary objectives: (1) confirm the 3-factor structure of an English version of the Perceived Digital Well-Being in Adolescence Scale, renamed the Perceived Digital Well-Being Scale (PDWS), in samples of young adults from the United States and the United Kingdom; (2) examine the associations between PDWS dimensions and participants' sociodemographic characteristics; and (3) explore the relationships between PDWS scores and patterns of smartphone use. Methods: A total of 1854 young adults from the United States and the United Kingdom (ages 18-25 years; mean 22.4, SD 2.1; 892, 48.1% female, 872, 47.0% male, 90, 4.9% nonbinary) participated in an online survey including the PDWS, digital flourishing, and digital stress measures. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, confirmatory factor analysis, correlations, t tests, chi-squared tests, and moderation-mediation analysis. Results: Smartphone screen time and smartphone time for nonessential activities were statistically higher in the US sample than in the UK sample (mean 6.95 vs mean 6.13; t1852=4.97; P<.001; d=0.27 and mean 3.62 vs mean 3.29; t1852=5.57; P<.001; d=0.25, respectively). The digital well-being total score was statistically higher among US participants when compared with the UK counterparts (mean 3.49 vs mean 3.38; t1852=3.33; P<.001; d=0.15). Male participants were significantly more represented among the group with higher PDWB scores (χ2136=478.45; P<.001). Confirmatory factor analysis supported the adequacy of the 3-factor model (emotional, social, and cognitive), indicating strong model fit (critical indices ≥0.90). Evidence of convergent validity was established through significant associations between PDWS scores and measures of digital flourishing and digital stress (most correlation coefficients being significant at P<.001). Measurement invariance testing confirmed the scale's equivalence across US and UK samples (χ2246 change=17.90; P=.21); however, strict invariance across gender (male vs female) was not supported (χ2246 change=200.91; P<.001). Gender, sexual orientation, relationship status, ethnicity, socioeconomic status, and education level significantly influenced PDWS scores. Gender and socioeconomic status also moderated the relationship between smartphone use or screen time and PDWS scores (b=0.048; P=.03 and b=0.020; P=.03, respectively), indicating that these factors affect how smartphone usage relates to psychological distress or well-being in different demographic groups. Conclusions: The PDWS showed good psychometric properties in the US and UK samples. The scale offers a promising tool for identifying individuals at risk of adverse outcomes associated with digital connectivity.
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.