ArticleScientific reports2026
Intentional versus passive technology use patterns differentially predict attentional control and psychological well-being.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Despite growing concerns about digital technology's impact on mental health, research has produced inconsistent findings, suggesting the relationship may depend more on how technology is used rather than how much. This study introduces and empirically evaluates the concept of "digital balance", defined as purposeful, goal-directed engagement with technology characterized by user agency, self-regulation, and awareness of usage boundaries, rather than passive, habitual consumption driven by external triggers or automatic behaviors. Unlike mere "intentional" use (which could describe any deliberate action to pick up a device), digital balance specifically emphasizes explicit goal-setting for engagement, conscious regulation of duration and timing, and alignment between technology use and personal values or priorities. This construct builds upon but is distinct from prior work on mindful technology use and active versus passive engagement by integrating self-regulatory and goal-alignment components within a unified framework. Using structural equation modeling with data from 842 adults (ages 18-65), we examined relationships between intentional versus passive technology use patterns across four digital domains (social media, entertainment, information seeking, and communication), attentional control, and psychological well-being. Results revealed that intentional technology use was positively associated with attentional control (β = 0.42, p < .001) and psychological well-being (β = 0.37, p < 0.001), while passive use showed negative associations with both constructs (β = -0.39, p < 0.001; β = -0.31, p < 0.001, respectively). Attentional control significantly mediated the relationship between technology use patterns and well-being. Importantly, these relationships remained significant after controlling for overall screen time, suggesting quality of engagement matters more than quantity. These findings advance theoretical understanding of healthy technology engagement and have implications for designing digital wellness interventions focused on intentional use rather than abstinence. This study was not preregistered; findings should therefore be interpreted as hypothesis-generating rather than confirmatory.
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.