IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v16y2019i7p1162-d218756.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

COPE.er Method: Combating Digital Addiction via Online Peer Support Groups

Author

Listed:
  • Amen Alrobai

    (Department of Information Science, King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah 21589, Saudi Arabia)

  • Abdullah Algashami

    (Faculty of Science and Technology, Bournemouth University, Fern Barrow, Poole BH12 5BB, UK)

  • Huseyin Dogan

    (Faculty of Science and Technology, Bournemouth University, Fern Barrow, Poole BH12 5BB, UK)

  • Tessa Corner

    (StreetScene Addiction Recovery, Bournemouth BH1 1QA, UK)

  • Keith Phalp

    (Faculty of Science and Technology, Bournemouth University, Fern Barrow, Poole BH12 5BB, UK)

  • Raian Ali

    (Faculty of Science and Technology, Bournemouth University, Fern Barrow, Poole BH12 5BB, UK)

Abstract

Digital addiction (hereafter DA) denotes a problematic relationship with technology described by being compulsive, obsessive, impulsive and hasty. New research has identified cases where users’ digital behaviour shows symptoms meeting the clinical criteria of behavioural addiction. The online peer groups approach is one of the strategies to combat addictive behaviours. Unlike other behaviours, intervention and addictive usage can be on the same medium; the online space. This shared medium empowers influence techniques found in peer groups, such as self-monitoring, social surveillance, and personalised feedback, with a higher degree of interactivity, continuity and real-time communication. Social media platforms in general and online peer groups, in particular, have received little guidance as to how software design should take it into account. Careful theoretical understanding of the unique attributes and dynamics of such platforms and their intersection with gamification and persuasive techniques is needed as the ad-hoc design may cause unexpected harm. In this paper, we investigate how to facilitate the design process to ensure a systematic development of this technology. We conducted several qualitative studies including user studies and observational investigations. The primary contribution of this research is twofold: (i) a reference model for designing interactive online platforms to host peer groups and combat DA, (ii) a process model, COPE.er, inspired by the participatory design approach to building Customisable Online Persuasive Ecology by Engineering Rehabilitation strategies for different groups.

Suggested Citation

  • Amen Alrobai & Abdullah Algashami & Huseyin Dogan & Tessa Corner & Keith Phalp & Raian Ali, 2019. "COPE.er Method: Combating Digital Addiction via Online Peer Support Groups," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(7), pages 1-39, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:16:y:2019:i:7:p:1162-:d:218756
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/16/7/1162/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/16/7/1162/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Ajzen, Icek, 1991. "The theory of planned behavior," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 50(2), pages 179-211, December.
    2. Antoaneta P. Petkova & Violina P. Rindova & Anil K. Gupta, 2013. "No News Is Bad News: Sensegiving Activities, Media Attention, and Venture Capital Funding of New Technology Organizations," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 24(3), pages 865-888, June.
    3. Jean-Jacques Rémond & Lucia Romo, 2018. "Analysis of Gambling in the Media Related to Screens: Immersion as a Predictor of Excessive Use?," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 15(1), pages 1-17, January.
    4. Nan Jiang & Sai Yin Ho & Man Ping Wang & Lok Tung Leung & Tai Hing Lam, 2016. "Waterpipe smoking among secondary school students in Hong Kong," International Journal of Public Health, Springer;Swiss School of Public Health (SSPH+), vol. 61(4), pages 427-434, May.
    5. Heath, Chip & Tversky, Amos, 1991. "Preference and Belief: Ambiguity and Competence in Choice under Uncertainty," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 4(1), pages 5-28, January.
    6. Amen Alrobai & John McAlaney & Keith Phalp & Raian Ali, 2016. "Exploring the Risk Factors of Interactive E-Health Interventions for Digital Addiction," International Journal of Sociotechnology and Knowledge Development (IJSKD), IGI Global, vol. 8(2), pages 1-15, April.
    7. Kietzmann, Jan H. & Hermkens, Kristopher & McCarthy, Ian P. & Silvestre, Bruno S., 2011. "Social media? Get serious! Understanding the functional building blocks of social media," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 54(3), pages 241-251, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Phoenix K. H. Mo & Juliet Honglei Chen & Joseph T. F. Lau & Anise M. S. Wu, 2020. "Internet-Related Addictions: From Measurements to Interventions," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(7), pages 1-4, April.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Wilert Puriwat & Suchart Tripopsakul, 2021. "Explaining Social Media Adoption for a Business Purpose: An Application of the UTAUT Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-13, February.
    2. Peter D., Lunn & Sean, Lyons, 2017. "Consumer switching intentions for telecoms services: evidence from Ireland," MPRA Paper 77412, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    3. Mohammad Tipu Sultan & Farzana Sharmin & Alina Badulescu & Darie Gavrilut & Ke Xue, 2021. "Social Media-Based Content towards Image Formation: A New Approach to the Selection of Sustainable Destinations," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(8), pages 1-22, April.
    4. Janarthanan Balakrishnan & Pantea Foroudi, 2020. "Does Corporate Reputation Matter? Role of Social Media in Consumer Intention to Purchase Innovative Food Product," Corporate Reputation Review, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 23(3), pages 181-200, August.
    5. Arumugam Seetharaman & Saurabh Singhal & Pankaj Galdhar & John Rudolph Raj & A. S. Saravanan, 2016. "Customers’ Expectations for Next Generation Internet Banking," Journal of Information & Knowledge Management (JIKM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 15(01), pages 1-28, March.
    6. Almourad, Mohamed Basel & Alrobai, Amen & Skinner, Tiffany & Hussain, Mohammed & Ali, Raian, 2021. "Digital wellbeing tools through users lens," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 67(C).
    7. Eun Ju Seo & Jin-Woo Park & Yu Jin Choi, 2020. "The Effect of Social Media Usage Characteristics on e-WOM, Trust, and Brand Equity: Focusing on Users of Airline Social Media," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(4), pages 1-18, February.
    8. Ciaran Heavey & Zeki Simsek & Christina Kyprianou & Marten Risius, 2020. "How do strategic leaders engage with social media? A theoretical framework for research and practice," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 41(8), pages 1490-1527, August.
    9. Poonam Khanna & Lemaro Thompson & Michael Mcdonald, 2015. "Research On Venture Capital Firms’ ‘Investment Behavior A Review’," Working Papers 0197mgt, College of Business, University of Texas at San Antonio.
    10. Saeed Awadh Bin-Nashwan & Adel Sarea & Meshari Al-Daihani & Abdullahi Bala Ado & Halima Begum & Mushari Hamdan Alosaimi & Hijattulah Abdul-Jabbar & Mohammed Khalifa Abdelsalam, 2022. "Fundraising Appeals for the COVID-19 Epidemic Fight: A Cross-Country Study of Donor Responses," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(11), pages 1-20, May.
    11. Verswijvel, Karen & Walrave, Michel & Hardies, Kris & Heirman, Wannes, 2019. "Sharenting, is it a good or a bad thing? Understanding how adolescents think and feel about sharenting on social network sites," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 1-1.
    12. Gino, Francesca & Sharek, Zachariah & Moore, Don A., 2011. "Keeping the illusion of control under control: Ceilings, floors, and imperfect calibration," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 114(2), pages 104-114, March.
    13. Tran Thi Kim Phuong & Tran Trung Vinh, 2019. "An empirical study examining an extended TAM model in the context of a Facebook event page," Asian Journal of Empirical Research, Asian Economic and Social Society, vol. 9(9), pages 238-353, September.
    14. Nedra, Bahri-Ammari & Hadhri, Walid & Mezrani, Mariem, 2019. "Determinants of customers' intentions to use hedonic networks: The case of Instagram," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 21-32.
    15. Maria Andersson & Ola Eriksson & Chris Von Borgstede, 2012. "The Effects of Environmental Management Systems on Source Separation in the Work and Home Settings," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 4(6), pages 1-17, June.
    16. Tran Huy Phuong & Thanh Trung Hieu, 2015. "Predictors of Entrepreneurial Intentions of Undergraduate Students in Vietnam: An Empirical Study," International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, Human Resource Management Academic Research Society, International Journal of Academic Research in Business and Social Sciences, vol. 5(8), pages 46-55, August.
    17. Clara Cardone-Riportella & María José Casasola-Martinez & Isabel Feito-Ruiz, 2014. "Do Entrepreneurs Come From Venus Or Mars? Impact Of Postgraduate Studies: Gender And Family Business Background," Working Papers 14.04, Universidad Pablo de Olavide, Department of Financial Economics and Accounting (former Department of Business Administration), revised Sep 2014.
    18. Peng Cheng & Zhe Ouyang & Yang Liu, 0. "The effect of information overload on the intention of consumers to adopt electric vehicles," Transportation, Springer, vol. 0, pages 1-20.
    19. Ruijie Zhu & Guojing Zhao & Zehai Long & Yangjie Huang & Zhaoxin Huang, 2022. "Entrepreneurship or Employment? A Survey of College Students’ Sustainable Entrepreneurial Intentions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-15, May.
    20. Alsalem, Amani & Fry, Marie-Louise & Thaichon, Park, 2020. "To donate or to waste it: Understanding posthumous organ donation attitude," Australasian marketing journal, Elsevier, vol. 28(3), pages 87-97.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:16:y:2019:i:7:p:1162-:d:218756. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.