Disturbing aspects of smartphone usage: a qualitative analysis

ABSTRACT

There is little research in the field of problematic smartphone use, which directly enquired with users about what they find disturbing about smartphone usage behaviour. This qualitative study addressed sub-critical issues which may be a precursor to more severe problems such as problematic smartphone usage. Ninety-nine participants completed an online questionnaire with open questions regarding disturbing smartphone usage behaviour. Using the method of ‘thematic analysis’, we identified eight themes that we clustered into two overarching themes: reasons for use and consequences of use. Five themes related to reasons for use, including inevitability, habitual use, avoiding unpleasant circumstances, need satisfaction and fulfilling social expectations. Three themes referred to consequences of smartphone usage (i.e. life management, social life, and online life). Across all themes it appeared that the different aspects of disturbing smartphone usage were triggered and sustained by contextual factors and complex social dynamics, suggesting that participants lack control over their actual usage. Therefore, this research provides a holistic view of the sub-critical issues disturbing participants as well as identifies several mechanisms perpetuating these problems. The listing and description of such sub-critical issues and the different mechanisms are of high importance for prevention and the design of interventions.

KEYWORDS:

• Actual use
• emotional response
• problematic smartphone use

1. Introduction

Smartphones are ubiquitous in today's society, and their far-reaching impact is undeniable. While smartphones have had a positive impact on people’s life by making many activities easier, there are also considerable negative consequences, upon which much research has focused. Both types of consequences will be considered in our review of the literature. However, the focus will be on negative consequences due to the need to alleviate them. The types of negative consequences that were identified refer to physical health, psychological well-being, social interactions, and cognitive performance (Elhai, Levine, and Hall 2019; Kushlev, Hunter, et al. 2019b; Wilmer, Sherman, and Chein 2017; Xie, Szeto, and Dai 2017). These will now be examined in turn.

1.1. Consequences of smartphone usage

In many ways, different smartphone functions were designed to promote physical health (e.g. by using workout apps or apps monitoring food intake). While users might appreciate these apps, there is little evidence that these actually succeed in improving physical health (Milne-Ives et al. 2020). While the positive effects are still unclear, some patterns of smartphone usage (e.g. overuse) were found to lead to negative consequences on physical health, such as musculoskeletal disorder or pain (e.g. in the neck, shoulders, and hands; Mustafaoglu et al. 2021; Xie, Szeto, and Dai 2017). Other physical consequences are eye strain and headaches if the smartphone is used for a prolonged amount of time (Long et al. 2017).

While smartphones have had some positive effects on well-being, they have also shown negative effects on psychological well-being and mental health, resulting in two opposing hypotheses being debated in the research literature (Valkenburg and Peter 2007). The first is called the stimulation hypothesis, suggesting that smartphones offer functions that have a positive impact on user well-being (e.g. being able to talk to close friends from overseas; Harkin and Kuss 2021; Valkenburg and Peter 2007). The second, called displacement hypothesis, postulates that smartphones have a negative impact on well-being because they deflect the attention of users from activities that would have contributed to their happiness otherwise (Valkenburg and Peter 2007). An example of such an activity may be having uninterrupted quality time with one’s child (Kushlev, Hunter, et al. 2019b). There has been empirical evidence for both hypotheses, and a recent qualitative study showed that users also noted both the positive and negative aspects of smartphone usage (Harkin and Kuss 2021). This suggests that the way in which the smartphone is used will determine whether there are positive or negative effects on well-being, though much research focused on the potentially negative consequences of smartphones. Often, research has shown a link between smartphone usage and lower psychological well-being in the form of anxiety, depression, or general well-being (e.g. Elhai et al. 2017, 2019; Horwood and Anglim 2019). However, most studies in this research field are cross-sectional, which makes it difficult to establish the causality of the relationship between smartphone usage and well-being (Kushlev and Leitao 2020; Ochs and Sauer 2021). However, the results of the few studies that are not cross-sectional seem to corroborate the main pattern of effects by showing a negative impact of smartphone use on well-being rather than vice-versa (Kushlev and Leitao 2020; Ochs and Sauer 2021).

Similar to physical health and psychological well-being, smartphone usage is expected to have positive and negative outcomes on social interactions. Since smartphones were designed to facilitate communication between individuals, it would be expected that smartphones have a positive impact on social interactions. Indeed, social use of the smartphone is associated less strongly with negative consequences than non-social use (Elhai et al. 2017; Stevic et al. 2019). For example, studies have shown that the use of online messaging or social network apps have a positive impact on social capital (Cho 2015; Phua, Jin, and Kim 2017). However, smartphones have also caused negative consequences on social interactions, which is demonstrated by a considerable number of empirical studies. These negative consequences can occur (a) during in vivo social interactions or (b) during online social interactions. (a) Concerning in vivo social interactions, one study demonstrated that the mere presence of a smartphone in a waiting room reduced the smiles between strangers even if the smartphone was not actively used (Kushlev, Hunter, et al. 2019b). Furthermore, using the smartphone in the presence of others can subtly reduce well-being by either distracting from face-to-face interaction with friends and family, or by reducing face-to-face interaction with strangers (e.g. ordering takeout food via an app). Using the smartphone in the presence of others has negative consequences on the smartphone user (e.g. lower satisfaction with friendships) (Rotondi, Stanca, and Tomasuolo 2017). Furthermore, it may also have negative effects on bystanders (Kushlev, Hunter, et al. 2019b; Vanden Abeele et al. 2019). Using the smartphone in the presence of others has a high chance of leading the smartphone user to ignore or make others feel ignored leading to further negative consequences. This act of ignoring others with the phone is called phubbing, a portmanteau word combining the words phone and snubbing (Chotpitayasunondh and Douglas 2018; Vanden Abeele, Antheunis, and Schouten 2016). Research has shown that phubbing reduces conversation quality, relationship quality, and perceived closeness (Chotpitayasunondh and Douglas 2018; Vanden Abeele, Antheunis, and Schouten 2016; Vanden Abeele and Postma-Nilsenova 2018). Interestingly, a qualitative study found that while interviewed participants found phubbing annoying, the same participants admitted to showing this behaviour themselves (Aagaard 2020). (b) Concerning online social interactions, tensions may also arise in such situations. Misunderstandings might happen more frequently during online communication as messages are often entirely text-based, with useful nonverbal cues missing that help the receiver understand the message (Kelly and Miller-Ott 2018). Tensions may arise when users perceive the response time to messages to be too long or no response is received at all (Agarwal and Lu 2020). In a qualitative interview, participants reported that non-responses or too long response times could cause them to feel anger, anxiety, shame, sadness, or confusion (Agarwal and Lu 2020). In turn, this could lead to some form of negative response (e.g. passive aggressiveness), which could then affect the relationship between the communication partners (Agarwal and Lu 2020). Overall, the evidence from the research literature shows that smartphones can have negative consequences on social interactions in many ways.

Since smartphones are used for supporting many different cognitive activities in our daily lives (e.g. looking for directions, storing phone numbers), it has raised concerns that the access to too much support could lead to negative effects on cognitive performance such as attention and memory(Wilmer, Sherman, and Chein 2017). Evidence has shown that smartphones can have a negative impact on attention paid to an ongoing task (Wilmer, Sherman, and Chein 2017). Research demonstrating a negative effect of smartphone use on attention has been in the domain of distracted drivers and pedestrians (Perlman et al. 2019; Ropaka, Nikolaou, and Yannis 2020), and the impact of digital distractions on academic performance (Ochs and Sonderegger 2021). With regard to the effects on memory, the evidence is not conclusive, but it might also be at risk (Wilmer, Sherman, and Chein 2017). Overall, although only a few studies examined the issue of cognitive performance impairment due to smartphone usage, such a risk should not be underestimated.

1.2. Sub-critical smartphone use

If any of the previously mentioned negative consequences of smartphone use caused significant distress that lead to the impairment of the smartphone user's daily functioning, it has most commonly been referred to as ‘problematic smartphone usage (PSU)’ or ‘smartphone addiction’ (Billieux 2012). While these terms have been used to describe the same phenomenon in the research literature, researchers have made the case that PSU is the more appropriate term (Panova and Carbonell 2018). This is because there is not yet sufficient evidence to claim that problematic smartphone use is an addiction (Billieux et al. 2015; Panova and Carbonell 2018). For the same reason, smartphone addiction has not yet been recognised by psychiatric manuals such as the DSM (Harris et al. 2020). However, it has not been completely ruled out that smartphone use is not an addiction. For example, one study found first evidence that the neural mechanism linked to PSU are similar to the ones linked to substance abuse (Horvath et al. 2020). Yet, until more is known about problematic smartphone use, using the term addiction loosely could lead to over-pathologising of the phenomenon, which might undermine the severity of the term addiction (Casale et al. 2022; Panova and Carbonell 2018). Therefore, in the remainder of the article, we will use the term problematic smartphone use.

Problematic smartphone use is generally defined as smartphone-related behaviour or consequences that significantly impair daily functioning (Busch and McCarthy 2020). Yet research (e.g. Kushlev, Dwyer, and Dunn 2019a) has suggested that smartphone use often only has a subtle negative impact on user interactions and well-being rather than representing a major problem (Dwyer, Kushlev, and Dunn 2018; Kushlev, Dwyer, and Dunn 2019a; Kushlev, Hunter, et al. 2019b). Nevertheless, an accumulation of subtly negative behaviour might still be of consequence if it is maintained over a longer period of time. In a similar vein, stress research has shown that a series of daily hassles (e.g. small daily stressors such as a traffic jam) were a stronger negative predictor of mental health than major life stressors (e.g. divorce; Kanner et al. 1981). Therefore, we believe that more subtle issues regarding smartphone use should also be investigated. To this end, we coined the term ‘sub-critical smartphone use’ to describe any smartphone-related behaviour or consequence that can be considered disturbing but does not fall under the more severe definition of impairment to daily life.

1.3. The present study

The review of the research literature on the consequences of smartphone usage revealed several gaps in the current knowledge on negative consequences of smartphone usage. First, most of the research addressing negative consequences of smartphone use addresses severe consequences or uses terminology that implies severe consequences. Therefore, we coined the term sub-critical use to describe smartphone behaviour and consequences at a sub-critical level. Research at the sub-critical level is important because it could help understand how more severe negative consequences occur or could allow for the creation of preventions for sub-critical behaviour to avoid these developing into more severe problems. For this reason, this piece of research will focus on sub-critical consequences of smartphone usage.

The second research gap was that little qualitative research addressed the consequences of smartphone usage at a critical or subcritical level. While some of these studies have shed light on important aspects of smartphone usage, such as attitudes related to the smartphone (Fullwood et al. 2017), triggers to use the smartphone (Tran et al. 2019), and examining the impact of the smartphone on the users (e.g. unintentional usage creating feelings of meaninglessness; Lukoff et al. 2018). However, none of these studies have addressed the issue by asking the smartphone users directly what aspects of smartphone usage they find disturbing or problematic.

The third research gap is related to the focus of past research. Previous studies focused mostly on the individual user, yet as our summary of the literature has revealed, disturbing smartphone use may have detrimental causes not only for the user (e.g. neck pain), but also for others (e.g. social interaction of poorer quality). Therefore, we esteemed it would be interesting not only to ask participants about their own use but also about others’ use. With others being a rather vague term, we decided to ask about the smartphone use of participants’ peers (representing the typical behaviour of their ingroup) and the use of smartphones in society overall (representing the behaviour of their outgroup).

Given these three research gaps, we aimed to address the research question of what disturbs users about their own and other people’s smartphone use. In order to address this research question, we considered an inductive study to be the best approach. This is because inductive qualitative research is regarded as highly appropriate when there is little prior knowledge on the topic (Suddaby 2006).

2. Method

2.1. Ethics approval

This study was approved by the Internal Review Board of the Department of Psychology at the University of Fribourg.

2.2. Participants

In total, 99 French-speaking student participants from the University of Fribourg took part in our online questionnaire (77 women). We explicitly chose students as a reference group, because they are frequent smartphone users. The participants’ age ranged from 18 to 41 years (M = 21.89, SD = 3.02). Participants were from the faculties of humanities (n = 56), science and medicine (n = 13), law (n = 5), social economics (n = 4), and other institutions of higher education (n = 22). Recruitment was carried out online by using different social media platforms and through snowball effect. Psychology students received experimental points that they needed to collect for course credit. Participants from other departments received no compensation. The survey was short and framed in an interesting manner, which enabled us to recruit participants from other fields.

2.3. Procedure

The first page of the online questionnaire explained the purpose of the project, which was to gain a better understanding of what users find disturbing about smartphone usage. Participants were informed that they would be asked three questions, referring to what they find disturbing about their own smartphone usage, their peers’ smartphone usage and the smartphone usage of others in society. After the general description of the study, participants were asked for their consent to take part in the study. They were informed that all data collected are anonymous and cannot be traced back to an individual. After having agreed to take part, students were asked a number of demographic questions (e.g. age, gender, study subject). Following the demographic questions, participants completed the qualitative questionnaire.

The qualitative questionnaire consisted of three open questions, which referred to factors that participants found disturbing during smartphone usage. We covered disturbing factors at three levels: (a) The first question referred to participants’ own smartphone usage (‘What do you find disturbing about your smartphone use?’). The second question concerned annoying factors during smartphone usage within their peers (‘What do you find disturbing about your peers’ smartphone usage?’). The third and last question addressed smartphone usage in society overall with regard to annoying factors (‘What do you find disturbing about smartphone usage in society in general?’). For each question, participants were given the possibility of entering up to ten different aspects that they found disturbing. Afterwards, they were asked to describe each aspect in detail, resulting in a maximum number of 30 responses per participant.

The rationale behind asking participants the same question relating to three different reference groups was that we aimed to gain a thorough understanding of potentially disturbing smartphone usage behaviour. Participants might not like some of their own smartphone usage behaviours while other disturbing behaviours they might only notice in other users (e.g. friends, strangers).

When participants finished responding to the qualitative questions, they arrived at the final page of the online questionnaire. It contained a thank-you message and provided participants with a contact address of the researchers.

2.4. Data analysis

The data were analysed using the principles of ‘thematic analysis’ (Braun and Clarke 2006; Fullwood et al. 2017). We opted for an inductive approach with a focus on semantic meaning. Coding was conducted using Microsoft Word’s comment feature. Four researchers were involved in the process of data analysis allowing for enhanced credibility to be achieved (Nowell et al. 2017). Before conducting complete coding with the finalised codebook, inter-rater reliability was calculated on a sample of 10% of the data, using Fleiss Kappa (self (κ = .91), peers (κ = .75), and society (κ = .86)). These scores suggested inter-rater reliability was satisfactory (Landis and Koch 1977). If there were disagreements between researchers concerning the interpretation of the data, these were resolved through discussion, as recommended by Braun and Clarke (2006).

To analyse the data, we followed the six phases proposed by Braun and Clarke. For the first, ‘Familiarizing yourself with your data’, all four researchers acquainted themselves with the questionnaire responses of our participants. In the second phase, ‘Generating initial codes’, initial coding began with the team meeting weekly to discuss and agree on codes. Codes refer to different aspects that relate to the research question that are found in the dataset. Codes were given initial names that were modified and improved during the course of the analysis. The third phase, ‘Searching for themes’, refers to the organisation of these codes into different themes. Themes summarise several aspects that have a common central organising concept. In other words, codes summarise one aspect and themes summarise several aspects that are linked to one another. Themes themselves were organised into overarching themes. Overarching themes in thematic analysis generally do not contain their own codes but a set of themes that share a common idea. In the fourth phase, ‘Reviewing themes’, these themes were then revised at the level of the collated data and at the level of the entire data set. Lastly, in the fifth phase, ‘Defining and naming themes’, the themes were given names, and in the sixth phase, ‘Producing the report’, the reporting process began.

The data and data analysis were originally conducted in French. For the writing of this article, quotes of participants in the text were translated using back translation to increase the validity of the translation. The same applied to the labels of codes, themes and overarching themes. Each quote is followed by a parenthesis containing the participant’s number and which of the three reference groups it refers to (i.e. self (SE), peers (P), or society (SO)).

3. Results

3.1. Overview of results

Participants gave between one and four responses per question, with each giving on average 3.83 responses to all three questions together. They typically entered a few sentences into the online questionnaire to express their personal views on disturbing smartphone usage behaviour.

The use of the method of thematic analysis revealed twenty-nine codes, which were organised into eight themes. These eight themes were subsequently grouped into two overarching themes: (a) ‘reasons for use’ and (b) ‘consequences of use’. The two overarching themes may, at least to some extent, map onto the distinction between cause (reasons for use) and effect (consequences of use). The theme ‘reasons for use’ is composed of different motives to use the smartphone that users did not consider to be acceptable. Conversely, ‘consequences of use’ comprises negative side-effects of smartphone usage. Table 1 provides an overview of the themes that were clustered into the two overarching themes. In the following sections, each overarching theme and its themes will be examined in more detail by describing the different codes that were assigned to them.

Table 1. Summary of themes.

Overarching themes	Reasons for use	Consequences of use
Themes	Inevitability	Time and life management
	Avoiding unpleasant circumstances	Social life
	Fulfilling social expectations	Living a life online
	Need satisfaction
	Habitual use

3.2. Reasons for use

The overarching theme ‘Reasons for use’ comprises five themes that reflect different reasons for using the smartphone, which participants deemed disturbing. A summary of the five themes and their constituting codes may be found in Table 2. They are described in more detail in the following sections.

Table 2. Summary of the themes and codes of the overarching theme ‘Reasons for use’.

Themes	Codes
Inevitability	Omnipresence	Indispensability
Habitual use	Checking habit
Avoiding unpleasant circumstances	Avoiding uncomfortable situations	Avoiding boredom	Avoiding other activities
Need satisfaction	Need to share	Need to capture	Need to know
Fulfilling social expectations	Expected availability	Mirroring behaviour

3.2.1 Inevitability

The theme ‘Inevitability’ can be considered an important reason for use, explaining why smartphone users cannot stop using their smartphones. Participants distinguished two slightly different reasons why they found it difficult to stop using smartphones; the omnipresence, and the indispensability of the smartphone.

Participants complained that using smartphones was inevitable because of their omnipresence. They reported that wherever they went smartphones were physically present. This was described to be an issue for the participants on all three levels, that is, when being alone, when interacting with peers, and in society overall. This points to the widespread nature of this phenomenon, which is illustrated by the following quotes:

My phone is always sitting next to me […]. (P77.SE)

[…] when we are at the restaurant, the phone is always on the table and as soon as there is a moment of silence the phone is immediately in hand. (P72.P)

For example, in the train, when I look up from my phone I realize that 95% of the people have a mobile phone in their hands […]. (P73.SO)

Related to the omnipresence of smartphone usage, participants also described smartphones to be inevitable due to the indispensability of the device. This meant for participants that they could not carry out fundamental daily activities without it (e.g. E-banking, street maps). This indispensability led participants to worry about an over-reliance on the smartphone. ‘Lost’ and ‘handicapped’ were two words used to describe the difficult situations users would find themselves in if they did not have a smartphone at their disposal. These issues surrounding indispensability are exemplified by the following quotes:

We can do so much via smartphones that we are quickly handicapped without it. (P2.SO)

The way it is now accepted and obvious that everyone should have a smartphone bothers me. E-Banking connection system requires scanning a code with your smartphone. Me, who wonders about keeping one, I don't know how I would do it in these multiple situations. (P47.SO)

To summarise, participants were disturbed by the fact that it is virtually impossible not to use a smartphone. According to the participants, using the smartphone is inevitable because it is omnipresent and indispensable. Participants’ responses imply that the choice of using a smartphone is out of their control.

3.2.2 Habitual use

Habitual use was described as a reason to use the smartphone either caused by a checking habit or a reflex. This was forwarded by participants as disturbing with regard to their own and their peers’ behaviour. They employed words such as ‘mechanical’, ‘reflex’ and ‘habit’ to describe this kind of usage. While these words already insinuate a low intentionality of the behaviour, participants explicitly mentioned that there was no goal or intention linked to their action. Even if there had been a goal, participants were not always convinced of it (e.g. ‘I feel like I'm always looking at it hoping to get messages when I'm not expecting anything in particular.’(P66.SE)). Furthermore, participants sometimes linked their phone checking habits to specific situations, such as when waking up, going to the toilet, having a break, or any other spare moment;

The fact that looking at my smartphone has become a reflex. Whether it's in the morning when I wake up, before I even get out of bed. On the toilet, even if I am only there for a few seconds. As soon as I feel uncomfortable because I don't know what to do. (P33.SE)

To summarise, participants described being unsatisfied when using their smartphone in a habitual way without specific purpose. This behaviour may be triggered by specific contextual factors such as specific situations (e.g. waking up).

3.2.3. Avoiding unpleasant circumstances

While in the previous theme participants mentioned the role of habitual behaviour, this theme addresses deliberate actions of users employing their smartphone with the intent to avoid unpleasant circumstances. Typically, they indicated three types of situations to be avoided, that is, uncomfortable ones, boring situations, or unpleasant activities (e.g. with regard to professional responsibilities but also leisure activities). Sometimes, some of these three types of situations were interlinked. The following quote exemplifies the linkage between uncomfortable and boring situations:

Sometimes, when I'm alone on the train or in another public place, I pretend I have something else to do on my phone to, you could say, give me a sense of purpose. As if doing nothing is perceived as abnormal. (P51.SE)

Furthermore, while participants might feel bored or uncomfortable, they might also simultaneously be avoiding unpleasant activities such as studying; ‘I use it as a technique to avoid certain awkward situations or boredom (in public transport, instead of studying etc.)’ (P95.SE). Similarly, participants described situations in which users were bored in the presence of their peers resulting in disturbing smartphone use;

When I go out with friends, there's always a moment when the discussion dies down. At that moment, everyone goes to their smartphone […]. (P12.P)

To summarise, two things mainly seemed to disturb participants. The first refers to them relying on their smartphone to overcome uncomfortable situations. The second being that it disturbed participants that they did not do anything meaningful with it when employing their smartphone in such situations. Similar to the theme ‘habits’, smartphone use appears to be triggered by contextual factors (e.g. uncomfortable situations).

3.2.4. Need satisfaction

While in the previous theme participants used their smartphone to avoid unpleasant circumstances, this theme referred to participants being disturbed when they and especially others (i.e. peers or society) had to use their phone to satisfy specific needs (e.g. need to take and share photos, need for information). It disturbed participants that smartphones were used in situations in which it was deemed inappropriate or unnecessary to fulfil this need. Interestingly, taking and sharing pictures were described as a problem that affected others but not the participants themselves. Participants expressed their dissatisfaction about their peers but also society in general taking and sharing pictures online. This was considered antisocial behaviour. Participants stated that people who gave in to this need no longer knew how to appreciate the present moment. Two quotes are given as examples:

Many people tend to want to film everything, to photograph everything. For example, I was at a concert and the person next to me watched the concert through the screen of his phone instead of watching it in real life. (P.15.P)

People spend their time on their smartphone and forget about reality. At my cousin's hen party, I was alone because they were all posting selfies on Instagram. (P66.P)

In particular, the excessive taking and sharing of photos by others seemed to cause a great deal of frustration. For example, participants used the word ‘everything’ when referring to others taking pictures and sharing them. Some participants also expressed the uselessness of such activities because the content is not of interest to most other users (e.g. what you ate, or where you were). Only one participant mentioned suffering from this need to capture and share; ‘At parties, people film everything that happens, they think that sharing their lives with the world is interesting, why this need? I have it myself. Why spread out your life to the eyes of all.’ (P15.SO).

Lastly, participants put forward some need to check information as a reason to use the smartphone. Furthermore, participants mentioned that their frustration about their friends or themselves interrupting a social interaction to check information on their smartphone, even if this information was linked to the conversation (‘Researching something that is being talked about, for example, during a meal. Using the Internet in a social environment  … ’ (P36.P)).

To summarise, checking a piece of information, or taking and sharing photos represent needs that cause users to use their phones. As for the two previous themes, these needs might arise due to cues provided by the environment (e.g. a beautiful sunset gives rise to the need of taking and sharing photos). Participants perceived succumbing to these needs as an incapacity to enjoy the present moment (e.g. watching a sunset). This behaviour was believed to be a consequence of an overreliance on the phone.

3.2.5 Fulfilling social expectations

The theme ‘fulfilling social expectations’ encompasses explanations that participant gave to use their phone that were linked to social pressure. Two explanations were given; ‘expected availability’ and ‘conforming smartphone behavior’. These answers appeared in the responses to the question regarding the self, the peers and society highlighting the social aspect of these reasons to use the phone.

Expected availability was described by participants as a social pressure. They were concerned that other users expected them to be able to respond to their messages quickly. Participants even expressed fearing repercussions if they did not reply in a timely fashion. As a consequence, participants felt that they needed to have their smartphone in the vicinity to check their messages regularly, ensuring they had not missed any that would have required an answer. Receiving notifications was typically mentioned as a reason to immediately attend to the smartphone. The following statements underline these points:

I feel compelled to respond as quickly as possible when I receive a message, even if I’m busy or it’s not important. (P47.SE)

If I don’t respond to someone for a while, they tend to get angry because you are expected to be available 24 hours a day. (P8.SE)

Interestingly, there seems to be a double standard concerning phone availability when comparing the responses between participants’ own smartphone usage, their peers and in society in general. While participants do not wish to be available at all times, this is expected from others. This double standard was acknowledged by some, which is illustrated in the two following quotes:

On the other hand, it's also annoying when I see that someone has seen my message and doesn't reply or takes too long to answer. But here I guess the problem is my lack of patience. (P20.P)

The person you contact is always expected to respond immediately. I have experienced this on both sides: I have sometimes felt the need to have the right not to answer right away, but I have also been irritated by someone's radio silence. (P2.SO)

Participants also fulfilled social expectations by engaging in mirroring behaviour, which was characterised by adapting one’s own smartphone usage behaviour to the one of others. For example, if one person takes out their phone in a group, the rest of the group may copy this behaviour. This form of adaptation was reported to occur even if the participant felt that it was inappropriate:

I find that I use my phone too much and too frequently, and even though I am aware of this, it is difficult to reduce usage because I feel like I am copying my family and friends. (P3.SE)

When they use it too much in certain situations such as when we eat together. I find that very rude. And the worst thing is that I do the same thing afterwards. (P76.P)

Such mirroring behaviour seemed to extend to virtual situations, that is, where peers were not physically present. It makes participants still feel like they should act in a similar way online like their peers (e.g. ‘You absolutely have to have a nice Instagram account with lots of photos, Facebook, send snaps, etc. and it puts pressure on you if you don't do it.’ (P95.SO)).

To summarise, participants reported using their phone to fulfil different social expectations. First, participants complained about feeling some pressure to be constantly available and to be expected to reply rapidly to messages. However, the same participants expressed what they expected of their peers, indicating a double standard. Second, participants explained that they adapt to other phone users’ behaviour by copying others’ behaviour, which even extended to times when participants were alone (e.g. feeling pressure to post certain content).

3.3. Consequences of use

The overarching theme ‘Consequences of use’ is composed of the following three themes representing different aspects of life that are affected by smartphone use: life management, social life, online life. The codes belonging to each theme may be found in Table 3.

Table 3. Summary of the themes and codes of the overarching theme ‘Consequences of use’.

Themes	Codes
Time and life management	Wasting time	Lack of self-discipline	Loss of awareness of time spent online	Feeling of uselessness
	Poor sleep	Attempts to regain control	Nomophobia	Perceived dependence
Impaired social life	Phubbing	Prioritising smartphone	Loss of human contact	Social marginalisation
Living a life online	Misunderstandings in communication	Manipulation of Internet-based information	Gullibility of users	Power of anonymity
	Social comparison	Information overload

3.3.1. Time and life management

The theme ‘time and life management’ encompasses a wide range of consequences of smartphone use for participants’ capacity to manage their time and also their life in general. These consequences affected the behavioural level (e.g. wasting time), the psychophysiological level (e.g. lack of sleep), and the subjective level (e.g. feeling of uselessness).

Concerning wasting time, participants complained about spending too much time on their smartphone and emphasised the uselessness of the activities they carried out during this time; ‘I sometimes waste time on social networks (especially on Instagram and snapchat), looking at content that seems meaningless and not really interesting.’ (P34.SE). This pattern was not limited to self-evaluation. Peers and other users were also perceived as spending too much time on the smartphone. Participants generally combined their complaints of wasted time with the reason why it occurred, citing the following two reasons: (1) loosing track of the time spent on the phone and (2) a lack of self-control or an incapacity to stop using the smartphone. This is illustrated by the following quotes:

(1)	‘When I have free time and I'm in a lazy mood, I sometimes lie on my bed and scroll/switch from one app to another for 1h-1h30, without seeing the time go by. It doesn't leave me with a good feeling.’ (P4.SE)
(2)	‘Sometimes I go to watch videos on YouTube andit's hard for me to stop because there are a lot of proposals for videos that are quite short and look interesting.’ (P18.SE)

In addition to problems associated with wasting time, participants mentioned more severe consequences regarding life management, such as addiction, nomophobia, and lack of sleep. Addiction was a problem that was primarily attributed to peers and society rather the participants themselves; ‘everybody is an addict’ (P11.SO). However, some participants admitted to suffering from this problem as well. These participants then provided a rather detailed account of their dependence issues. In these cases, participants admitted that they were addicted and then typically complained about lost time but also about habitual use, which we had already identified as a disturbing reason for using the phone. Other participants described why the phone was an object of dependence for them, citing specific purposes of phone usage:

I didn't learn how to look at a map, because every time I lose my way, I use Google Maps to show me where I am. I think I haven't developed my resourcefulness like I could have done without a smartphone. Another example: writing messages when making appointments, and therefore being dependent on my phone to reassure me if the person isn't there on time, for example. (P47.SE)

Similar to addictive behaviour, some participants reported not being able to leave the house without their smartphone: ‘I don't feel good if I don't know where my phone is, before I leave home I always check that it is in my bag.’ (P20.SE). This kind of behaviour is corresponds to the term ‘nomophobia’ (i.e. the fear of being without one's phone; Bhattacharya et al. 2019).

The perceived psychophysiological consequence in the form of sleep deprivation time was confirmed by comments that delays of falling asleep were caused by continuing smartphone activities. This is exemplified by the following quote: ‘By always looking at one or two little things before going to sleep, I always end up postponing my bedtime.’ (P40. SE).

All of these consequences for life and time management are underpinned by the fact that participants admitted to trying to manage their smartphone usage with different kinds of techniques and self-imposed interventions. The reasons for these attempts to control smartphone usage varied. Participants cited diverse reasons for attempting to control smartphone usage, such as wasting time and fear of missing out. The disciplinary measures were equally varied, ranging from ‘switching one's phone off’ through to ‘deleting apps’ to ‘using the flight mode’. The following quote is an example of such behaviours: ‘I often find that in order to really concentrate while I study I have to turn off the phone, or else I continue to check messages and social media.’ (P21.SE).

To summarise, participants were concerned about the consequences that smartphone use had on their time and life management. This wastage of time was due to loss of awareness of time and difficulties of stopping usage. It resulted in participants feeling consequences on their daily life management in the form of perceived dependence and lack of sleep. Overall, it indicates that participants struggled to manage their smartphone usage as well as the consequences they face if they fail to control their usage. However, it is important to note that participants did not passively succumb to this situation but they attempted to regain control by means of different techniques (e.g. deleting an app).

3.3.2. Impaired social life

While the preceding theme included consequences at several levels (i.e. behavioural, physiological, subjective), the theme called ‘impaired social life’ is concerned with consequences at the social levels. The survey revealed several factors that participants found disturbing, ranging from being ostracised by peers through loss of human contact to social marginalisation.

Phubbing (i.e. the act of ignoring others by using the phone), was reported as a highly negative experience. Participants associated phubbing with feelings such as isolation, disrespect, anger, and irritation. According to the participants this behaviour seemed to happen frequently. Meals were mentioned as a context that was considered particularly inappropriate for phubbing. Participants expressed some understanding for certain social situations, in which using one’s phone in a group is acceptable (e.g. urgent messages or calls,

For me the use of the smartphone must be done privately or in case of emergency. It annoys me a lot when I'm with people chatting over a drink, and some people make phone calls next to me because it's not respectful to other people. (P27.P))

Phubbing was mentioned when referring to peers, but it also appeared in responses about society and the self. Participants admitted phubbing others and expressed shame over this (‘Sometimes I realize that I'm writing messages when I'm talking to somebody and I hate it when they do this to me but I do it sometimes.’ (P84.SE)).

Directly linked to the experience of phubbing is the notion of prioritising one’s smartphone over their present human company. This point was also mentioned without directly being linked to phubbing. For example, some participants reported that they had experienced situations with their friends, in which online content (e.g. comments, chats or memes) was given more weight in their conversation than aspects of their non-virtual life. This was in particular mentioned as a criticism to society that to some people the social media image was more important than aspects of their physical world. This frustration with peers and society is exemplified by the two following quotes:

We will always talk about what is happening on social networks or what this person said instead of talking about our real lives. (P46.P)

Social contact via smartphone becomes more important than real contact with the person. I get the impression when taking public transportation that some people prefer to watch what people are doing on social networks or chatting through WhatsApp with someone who's away rather than taking advantage of the people they know and who are really around them. (P97.So)

The previously described behaviours can lead to the loss of human contact because of users increasingly paying attention to their smartphone. Such a loss of human contact was directly described by participants as being both of a qualitative and quantitative nature. Qualitative loss refers to human contact lacking depth due to increasing interaction with the smartphone. This may be related to user behaviours such as phubbing or because real contacts are replaced by virtual ones (e.g. ‘chat via message when they could see each other’ (P29.P)). Quantitative loss refers to the duration of contact with others decreasing as a result to increasing interaction with the smartphone (e.g. ‘spending a lot of time on social networks instead of with friends, etc.’" (P55.SO)). Typically, participants reported that spontaneous contact with strangers had been reduced due to the availability of smartphones and headphones (‘[…] no one looks at each other or talks with strangers’ (P35.SO)). ‘Isolation’ was a term used by participants to describe this loss of human contact.

Finally, social marginalisation was another related but still distinctive negative consequence on social life, which was mentioned by participants. They explained that showing smartphone usage behaviour that deviates too strongly from the social norm could lead to social marginalisation. Participants reported that they not only needed to own a smartphone, they also needed to possess certain apps, and interact with them in an appropriate manner. Otherwise, they might be socially excluded, or no longer be able to follow their friends’ conversations. This is exemplified in the following quote:

It's sometimes hard to interact with them and to understand some jokes (like for example the ones on our band's groupchat when I don't have Instagram …). Not having any social network, I sometimes feel out of touch with reality because of these people because I feel like I know nothing about them but on the other hand I feel like these people are the ones who are out of touch at times … (P18.P)

To summarise, this theme shows the complexity of the impact of smartphone use on social life. Not using a smartphone can lead to exclusion. However, overusing smartphones also reduces the quality of social contact. This represents a dilemma for the participants, which face the difficult challenge to find an appropriate balance.

3.3.3 Living a life online

While the two preceding themes were concerned with consequences of smartphone usage at the social, behavioural, physiological and subjective level, the theme ‘Living a life online’ addresses different specific problems that result from human-smartphone interaction. This included participants feeling overloaded by information, not knowing what information to trust, misunderstandings in online communication, and hostile behaviours fostered by the anonymity of communication.

Participants reported being overwhelmed by the amount of information presented on their phone; ‘Too much information on everything.’ (P84.SO). They also referred to the content of this information because of concerns about potential manipulation; ‘The misinformation present on social media is also very disturbing, especially when it serves political or economic interests.’ (P59.SO). Furthermore, participants expressed frustration about the gullibility of other users who trust all online content. Their comments also referred to social media and how posting only positive content creates a biased view of other users’ lives. This seemed to be a serious concern for participants who compared themselves to other users. These concerns are illustrated by the following quote:

The fact that we are always presenting ourselves in the best possible light on social networks gives us the illusion of a perfect and happy life, and leads us to envy and compare ourselves, which makes us feel miserable and insecure. (P54.SE)

Participants stated that misunderstandings happened more frequently when communicating online than in face-to-face communication; ‘Sometimes we misinterpret a message because we don't hear the person's intonation or see their expression or emotion and this can create tensions that would not have existed without a smartphone.’ (P7.SO). Participants also expressed concerns that bullying was more prevalent in online communication because users felt particularly powerful when being anonymous (‘Rumors circulate quickly, and harassment is much easier on the Internet when it's anonymous.’ (P61.SO)).

To summarise, this theme reflects negative consequences of spending time online. These comments on the difficulty of living a life online were almost exclusively made about society. This seems to indicate that participants considered this as a global problem and not necessarily as a personal problem.

4. Discussion

Centering around the question of what disturbs users about their own and others’ smartphone usage, this qualitative study allowed us to adopt a new perspective and a more holistic approach by asking smartphone users directly about this issue. We identified two overarching themes: reasons for use and consequences of use. The issues belonging to the first overarching theme address the many reasons people use their smartphones, ranging from habits through fulfilling social expectations to avoiding unpleasant situations. The issues belonging to the second overarching theme refer to a wide range of consequences of smartphone usage, including difficulties with life management, social life, and online life. While the results section focused on the analysis and description of each theme, the following discussion will focus on five points we have drawn from the overall analysis.

The first point refers to the extent to which the two overarching themes we identified (i.e. reasons for use and consequences of use) have been covered in previous research. An important aspect of our analysis shows that participants were disturbed by the consequences of smartphone usage, as well as by the different reasons why smartphones were used in the first place. We consider this an important point because most previous studies focused on the negative consequences of use (e.g. on mental health; Busch and McCarthy 2020) rather than on reasons for use. The research that has been conducted on reasons for use has primarily focused on individual traits (e.g. anxiety, depression, and personality; Aljomaa et al. 2016; Elhai, Levine, and Hall 2019; Hussain, Griffiths, and Sheffield 2017; Mitchell and Hussain 2018). However, in our study, participants did not mention individual traits as reasons for use but external causes instead, such as the context and social dynamics. Overall, the imbalance between the research on consequences and reasons for use may suggest a need to redress the imbalance in future work by focusing more intensely on the research questions associated with reasons for use.

The second point refers to the importance of context, which is considered one of the external causes that appears across different themes within the overarching theme ‘reason for use’. In virtually all these themes, some mention is made of contextual and environmental factors that influence smartphone usage patterns. For example, contextual and environmental factors are prominent for the theme ‘avoiding uncomfortable situations’, where the smartphone is used to avoid a specific context (e.g. awkwardness). Context may also trigger needs and habits (e.g. a bus stop might be a trigger for using one’s phone). Habits have been shown to be triggered mainly by outside cues (Heitmayer and Lahlou 2021). Interestingly, similar findings were described in a qualitative study investigating users’ attitudes toward their smartphones (Fullwood et al. 2017). Participants in this study described that context had an influence on when and how they used their smartphone. Lastly, in the themes ‘fulfilling social expectations’ and ‘inevitability’, participants’ usage happens in response to social context. Participants described how smartphone usage was inevitable because of its omnipresence (e.g. needing a smartphone to function in society). Overall, this suggests that context plays an important role when considering reasons for use.

The third point concerns the role of social dynamics in influencing smartphone usage behaviour. Social dynamics were described both in reasons for use and consequences of use. The overall picture revealed social dynamics of considerable complexity that participants needed to deal with, with conflicting requirements having to be managed. We will illustrate this with three examples. The first example refers to the fine line between underuse and overuse of smartphones. On the one hand, participants expressed that they needed to engage in certain patterns of usage (e.g. using the same social media as peers or answering quickly to messages) in order to avoid social marginalisation. On the other hand, overusing the smartphone reduces the quality and quantity of their face-to-face interactions. The second example for social dynamics relates to the double standards that appeared in participants’ responses. For instance, participants complained about having to reply to other users’ messages quickly while, at the same time, they expected quick responses from their peers. Similarly, participants admitted to phubbing other users although they found this behaviour unacceptable. The third example relates to participants imitating the inappropriate behaviour of other users (e.g. also using the smartphone at the dinner table) even if they thought the behaviour was inappropriate. This discrepancy may be due to imitation often being an unconscious process used to create social bonding. Indeed, recent research suggested that smartphone users were engaging in this sort of unconscious imitation (Riccobono, Giunchi, and Palagi 2021). Overall, these different examples demonstrate that participants need to comply with certain standards to be included socially (e.g. own a phone but not use it too much), and engage in behaviours that they consider inappropriate even if it has negative effects on the quality of their social relationships.

The fourth point builds on the preceding three points, suggesting the notion that participants might have little control over their smartphone usage. This was particularly noticeable when analysing how context and social dynamics play an important role. Both context and social dynamics are external reasons to use the phone, suggesting a reactive usage pattern rather than a proactive one. This kind of reactive use indicates that some smartphone users are not entirely in control of their usage. This loss or lack of control is an issue that has also been examined in previous work (e.g. Tran et al. 2019). In their study, participants reported experiencing a lack of control when using their phones as a reaction to uncomfortable situations. While this notion of lack of control has been associated with problematic smartphone usage before (Lyngs et al. 2019; Tran et al. 2019), it did not sufficiently emphasise external causes as triggers.

As a fifth point, we will discuss how the identified sub-critical smartphone uses relate to well-being in light of the basic needs theory (Deci and Ryan 2012; Ryan and Deci 2017). In the introduction, we argued that it was important to look at sub-critical smartphone use, as it has been shown to subtly affect well-being (Kushlev, Dwyer, and Dunn 2019a). The basic needs theory may offer some insight into how this may occur. The theory postulates that if one or several of three basic needs (i.e. autonomy, relatedness, or competence) are thwarted, this leads to lower well-being (Deci and Ryan 2012). Our analysis suggests that certain sub-critical smartphone behaviours might violate one or several of these three needs. For example, as discussed in previous paragraphs, individuals sometimes use their smartphones as a reaction to specific situations (e.g. uncomfortable situations) or social dynamics (e.g. perceived pressure to be available and respond to others). In such situations, there may be a violation of the person’s need for autonomy (e.g. users would not employ their smartphones out of their own volition) and the need for competence (e.g. instead of influencing the environment, users are subjected to it). Similarly, the need for relatedness might be violated in a situation where the smartphone reduces social connection (e.g. phubbing or spending time on the phone instead of meeting up with friends). The basic needs theory postulates that violations of these needs affect well-being. However, these needs and the degree to which they are violated vary constantly, meaning that their effects on well-being also fluctuates (Deci and Ryan 2012; Vansteenkiste, Ryan, and Soenens 2020). We consider such a theory useful to explain the small adverse effects of sub-critical smartphone use.

The points described previously have some theoretical implications. First, our findings have implications for future research on smartphone non-use interventions, that is, interventions that help users use their smartphone less (Hiniker et al. 2016). A considerable number of studies have tried to develop such non-use interventions (Hiniker et al. 2016; Kim, Jung, et al 2019b; Ko et al. 2015; Lyngs 2018; Okeke et al. 2018). Most of this research has focused on reducing individuals’ usage time by nudging them to use their phone less (Fishbach and Hofmann 2015; Okeke et al. 2018), or by actively reducing their access to potential problematic applications or the phone as a whole (Kim et al. 2019b; Kim, Park, et al. 2019a). Such studies that have measured for long-term effects did not find any (Biedermann, Schneider, and Drachsler 2021). If, as our analysis suggests, context and social dynamics are important, this may explain why such interventions fail to have long-term effects. Therefore, the focus should be more on the physical and social environment of the user (e.g. avoiding triggers, replacing responses to triggers, and carrying out group-based interventions). Most interventions seem to be focused on the individual user (Hiniker et al. 2016; Kim, Park, et al. 2019a; Lyngs et al. 2019; Okeke et al. 2018). However, there are exceptions instudies that have created a group-based intervention to reduce smartphone usage (Kim, Cho, and Lee 2017; Ko et al. 2015, 2016). Based on our analysis, this appears to be a promising approach for future work.

A second theoretical implication of the present study is that it addresses the topic of sub-critical smartphone issues rather than problematic smartphone use. We believe sub-critical issues to be a topic worth investigating for three reasons. First, there is the possibility of more serious problems developing from sub-critical issues such as problematic smartphone use. This may occur if a disturbing behaviour becomes excessive and therefore impacts the daily functioning of the user. For example, if nomophobia became so intense that users would refuse to go places where they did not have cell reception, or frequent checking of private messages would turn into a habit that continually worsens over time and affects user’s work performance. Second, sub-critical issues might become a more serious concern if several issues are simultaneously present (e.g. inability to bear uncomfortable situations without the phone, fear of missing out, reduction of the quantity of social interactions, etc.). Because of the concomitant nature of the sub-critical issues, they may be considered a form of problematic smartphone usage. Third, the focus on sub-critical issues is expected to concern more users than focusing on problematic smartphone usage, which enjoys the advantage of obtaining a broader data base.

In addition to these two theoretical implications, our data also have practical implications. We previously argued that our findings on the importance of social dynamics and context are relevant for intervention research. However, this information can also directly be used by individuals or groups to create interventions for themselves. If smartphone users are aware that context and social dynamics trigger undesirable smartphone behaviours or other negative consequences, they can actively seek to avoid or change the context of social dynamics in which they engage. The users can make these changes at an individual and a group level. For example, people might individually set the goal not to use their phone at the bus stop but to read a book instead. On a group level, friends might agree not to use a phone at an event together. While examples of individuals adopting such measures already exist our research shows that users should be further encouraged to implement them.

This study has two major limitations. First, due to our methodological approach, we cannot make any claims about the prevalence of sub-critical behaviours of smartphone use. Participants were asked to describe different behaviours of smartphone use that they found to be disturbing. This allowed us to identify a maximum number of different sub-critical smartphone use behaviours. However, since the omission of a certain pattern of behaviour by participants does not mean that they do not find it disturbing (e.g. the behaviour did not come to mind during the study), we could not draw any conclusions about the prevalence of sub-critical use behaviour (Braun and Clarke 2013; Huxley, Clarke, and Halliwell 2011). This means that some of these behaviours might be considered to be sub-critical use by a large number of individuals while other behaviours might only be considered to be sub-critical by a few. Second, we know little about the extent to which these behaviours are perceived as disturbing. Some of these behaviours may be very disturbing while others may only be slightly disturbing. It is even possible that some smartphone use behaviour (e.g. avoiding unpleasant circumstances) is considered to be functional or an example of positive use by some participants. Thus, future research in the form of quantitative studies is needed to determine the prevalence and severity of these different sub-critical smartphone use behaviours.

In conclusion, this study is the first to assess sub-critical smartphone usage issues qualitatively by directly asking users about disturbing behaviour. Through our analysis, we revealed several disturbing aspects. Interestingly, participants not only reported consequences of smartphone usage as disturbing aspects but also reasons for using the smartphone. These reasons listed by participants to use their phone referred to external cues such as physical and social contexts suggesting a certain lack of control of the user. These findings are highly relevant for research addressing non-use intervention for smartphone usage. If context plays a prominent role in reasons for using the smartphone, it should not be overlooked when designing future non-use interventions.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).