Problematic smartphone use and academic procrastination over an academic year: a four-wave random intercept cross-lagged panel study of Chinese undergraduates
Year: 2026
Type: article
Study design: Observational Study
Abstract: Problematic smartphone use (PSU) and academic procrastination (AP) are reliably correlated among university students, but the evidence base is almost entirely cross-sectional, and the only existing longitudinal study tested a single direction using a model that cannot separate stable trait-like co-occurrence from genuine within-person dynamics. This study used a four-wave Random Intercept Cross-Lagged Panel Model (RI-CLPM) to test both directions of within-person prediction simultaneously in a sample of Chinese undergraduates ( N = 512 at intake, 422 retained by the fourth wave) surveyed across a full academic year, and to test whether the well-documented PSU-AP association persists after accounting for trait self-control and trait negative affect. The model fit the data well, χ 2 (45) = 67.72, CFI = 0.994, RMSEA = 0.031, SRMR = 0.022. Within-person increases in PSU predicted later increases in AP in one interval only, the final T3 → T4 interval (β = 0.374, p < 0.001); the two earlier intervals were non-significant, and a stationarity test confirmed that the three are not statistically equivalent, Δχ 2 (2) = 11.16, p = 0.004. The pooled estimate, γ = 0.213, is accordingly reported as a descriptive summary of a heterogeneous set of paths rather than as a stable within-person effect, and the wave-specific estimates, the T3 → T4 path in particular, carry the evidence for H1. Within-person increases in AP were not detected as predictors of later PSU at any wave (pooled δ = −0.013, p = 0.863, a defensible single estimate since these three waves were statistically equivalent); a design-stage Monte Carlo check gave about 0.81 power for an effect of the hypothesized size, so this is a reasonably informative null: the AP → PSU pathway was not detected at a three-month lag in this sample, which is not the same as showing it absent. The two directions differed in estimated magnitude; an equality-constraint likelihood-ratio test within the RI-CLPM confirmed the asymmetry at the final interval, Δχ 2 (1) = 9.16, p = 0.002, although the γ side rests on a single interval, so the asymmetry is specific to the T3 → T4 window. The random-intercept correlation between PSU and AP remained significant in the full model adjusting for all six T1 covariates (r = 0.250, p < 0.001), indicating a substantial trait-level component. However, the pooled cross-lagged estimates did not hold their values once a common-method factor was added. That specification is too weakly identified to re-estimate the correlation at all, so shared-method inflation cannot be excluded for either. A traditional cross-lagged panel model without this trait/state decomposition showed markedly inflated stability and cross-lagged estimates by comparison. PSU met metric but not scalar longitudinal invariance, which qualifies the interpretation of within-person change on that construct. However, refitting the model on an item-reduced PSU composite left the focal estimate essentially unchanged (T3 → T4 β = 0.378). These findings indicate that the PSU–AP relationship, as observed here, is interval-specific rather than uniform, directionally asymmetric within the one interval in which a within-person effect was detected, and only partially dynamic; they are best read as hypotheses about how future intervention research might be sequenced and targeted rather than as direct guidance for practice.
Source: Frontiers in Psychology
Author: Peng Che
Institution: Zhejiang University of Finance and Economics
Language: English
Subfield: Clinical Psychology
Field: Psychology
Domain: Social Sciences
Open Access status: gold
Estimated APC paid: $3,801
OpenAlex ID: W7220667712