Social Sciences, Humanities and Education Journal (SHE Journal)

Volume 3 (3) 324 – 334, September 2022 | ISSN: 2720-9946 (Online) ISSN: 2723-3626 (Print)
The article is published with Open Access at: http://e-journal.unipma.ac.id/index.php/SHE

GADGET SCREEN TIME USE OF STUDENTS IN SELECTED

TERTIARY INSTITUTIONS: IMPLICATIONS IN THE NEW
NORMAL LEARNING

John Mark R. Asio ; Research Development and Community Extension Services, Gordon College,
Olongapo City, Philippines

Abstract: Since the advent of the pandemic, students exposed to gadgets were even more
dependent than ever before. This study aims to analyze tertiary students' gadget screen time usage
during the pandemic. The proponent used a descriptive research via online survey as the primary
data gathering tool. The study subjected the gathered data to statistical treatment. Results show
that students responded that it is "important" and they "agree" to reduce gadget screen time use.
The students also "agree" on the context of expectations about screen time use, and they "often"
observe a family model of screen time use in their households. Furthermore, significant differences
were found in the attitude, self-efficacy, expectations, and family model of screen time use when
grouped according to demographic profile. Finally, the proponent shared some implications at the
end of the study.

Keywords: Attitudes, Self-efficacy, Gadgets, Screen time use, Tertiary students.

 [email protected]

Citation: Asio, J.M.R. (2022). Gadget screen time use of students in selected tertiary institutions:
Implications in the new normal learning. Social Sciences, Humanities and Education Journal (SHE
Journal), 3(3), 324 – 334. DOI: 10.25273/she.v3i3.13920.

Published by Universitas PGRI Madiun. This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-
ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Asio, J.M.R. SHE Journal

INTRODUCTION healthy children (Gautam et al., 2022).

With the widespread impact of the Another study linked mobile screen time to
pandemic, people turned their lives into elevated blood pressure (Nathania et al.,
different forms of mechanisms to adapt to 2022). In addition, screen time among
the change. Although gadgets have already children and adolescent leads to incidences
been part of our lives, during the pandemic, of adiposity/ obesity (Handayani et al.,
we cannot help but rely more than ever on 2021; Tripathi & Mishra, 2020) and eating
them, especially among the students who difficulty (Yohana & Mulyono, 2021). There
depend on these apparatuses and even was also a link between screen time with
more due to lockdowns. As defined by an nutritional status and the development of
editorial article, screen time is the children (Maqfiro et al., 2021) and
cumulative time that an individual spends depression among university students
looking at or watching the screen of a (Aroob et al., 2021).
gadget (which includes but is not limited to Some studies pertain to the role of
television, video screens, computer, the family in screen time exposure. For
smartphones, video games, or tablets) instance, a cross-sectional study revealed
(Anuradha, 2019). During the COVID-19 parental characteristics in their children's
pandemic, there was a significant increase screen time (Koirala et al., 2021). Parents
in screen time exposure. One study proved prefer more interactive online learning to
an increased knowledge about gadget facilitate learning (Lau & Lee, 2020). But in
addiction (Rafidah et al., 2022). The COVID- another study, parents of the students do
19 pandemic increased the use of the not limit their screen time (West et al.,
internet, which causes addiction among 2021) which is quite a debate to consider.
adolescents (Putri et al., 2022). On the other hand, some parents
Different studies have shown that accompany their children, especially when
gadget screen time has varying degrees of using their gadgets (Konca, 2021).
importance and advantages as well as Too much screen time exposure
adverse effects and disadvantages to also affects students' academic
students. In general, the average screen performance to some extent. However,
time exposure for children and adults studies showed that too much gadget
varies between 2 hours (Nair et al., 2022) exposure did not significantly impact
to 5 hours (Aroob et al., 2021; Yeluri et al., academic achievement (Mabaroh &
2021, Shahid et al., 2021; Othman et al., Sugianti, 2021; Raca et al., 2021). On the
2020). This time is more than one-fifth of other hand, a group of investigators proved
an individual's 24-hour life expenditure. an association between academic
The mentioned average time can also vary achievement and time spent with the
depending on leisure, work, or studying electronic gadget (Othman et al., 2020).
activities. Regardless of the circumstances, whether
Studies link gadget screen time too much screen time affects academic
exposure to different health concerns and performance positively or negatively,
conditions. For example, a study showed managing it will be a hassle for students.
that gadget screen time affects sleep quality Local studies in the Philippines also
(Nair et al. 2022; Baby et al., 2021; Foo et showed some exciting screen time usage
al., 2021; Handayani et al., 2021; Amelia & among students. One, in particular, tackled
Ramdani, 2019; Shanmugasundaram et al., the relationship between screen time usage
2019), as well as academic performance and sleep management (Taguinod, 2022).
(Yeluri et al., 2021). In terms of screen time In another study, researchers tried to find
exposure among children with migraine, the association between the duration of
research linked it to internet addiction and gadget use and socio-emotional difficulties
more time on smartphones compared to among students (Dizon et al., 2019). From a

325
Asio, J.M.R. SHE Journal

different perspective, parents also set rules institutions in Central Luzon, Philippines,
in screen time exposure and other the said research design is applicable.
management on misbehavior using digital
technology (Paguirigan & Paguirigan, Respondents
2022). On average, millennials spend 3-4 Three hundred nineteen (319) voluntary
hours daily on social media and gadgets respondents participated in the said online
(Delelis et al.,2018). It is noteworthy as survey. Since the data gathering was still
well that not all students have the capacity during the pandemic, the research
to have devices like laptops or tablets for employed a convenience sampling
learning which is why they have higher technique to obtain enough respondents
levels of consequence-related COVID-19 for the study. To be included in the survey,
anxiety (Cleofas & Rocha, 2021). From the following criteria must be met: a)
these few revelations from selected should be a bona fide student studying in
references, the impact of the COVID-19 any recognized higher education institution
pandemic on students was unpleasant and in Central Luzon, Philippines; b) should be
full of challenges and some drawbacks. currently enrolled in the academic year of
From the literature mentioned 2021-2022; c) should have a gadget (e.g.,
above, the study began delving into another smartphone) with internet capability; and
perspective on how students in higher willing to participate in the survey.
education institutions see themselves in
dealing with screen time exposure. Instrument
Therefore, this study's main objective is to The study used a modified research
analyze the gadget screen time use of questionnaire from the previous paper of
students from selected higher education Filho et al. in 2021, which comprises the
institutions in Central Luzon, Philippines. different factors associated with screen
Specifically, it aims to determine the time among students. The research
students' attitude, self-efficacy, questionnaire contained the following
expectations, and family model towards parts: a) Demographic Profile; b) Attitude
reducing screen time use. Toward Reducing Gadget Screen Time Use;
The result of this study can become c) Self-Efficacy Toward Reducing Screen
a basis for higher education institutions to Time Use; d) Expectations of Screen Time
manage students' exposure to gadgets and Use, and e) Family Model Screen Time Use.
find alternative means to deliver learning Based on the previous study where the
in a less hazardous way until the pandemic research questionnaire originated, the
subsides and everyday school life will internal consistency of their instrument
return soon for the students. was between 0.70 to 0.85, which is already
a good indication of their instrument's
reliability.
METHODS
Data Analysis
Design With the help of software, SPSS 23, the data
This study employed descriptive survey gathered underwent analysis using the
research to achieve the main objectives of following statistical tools: frequency,
the study. A descriptive study intends to percentage, mean, and Kruskal-Wallis.
"describe" a particular event or Before the actual analysis of the data, the
characteristics of a sample for a specific study also performed a test of normality.
population. With the help of an online After determining that the data were not
survey via Google Form, the study gathered normally distributed, the study employed a
enough data for the analysis. Since the non-parametric test. The mentioned
study intends to assess the screen time use statistical tools decided on the descriptive
of students in selected higher education and inferential statistics for the analysis to

326
Asio, J.M.R. SHE Journal

assess the screen time use of the Fourth Year 18 5.64

respondents. GPA/ GWA
Below 75% 2 0.63
76%-80% 14 4.39
RESULT 81%-85% 54 16.93
86%-90% 129 40.44
In this section, the research tries to provide 91%-95% 96 30.09
vital information to attain the research 96% above 11 3.45
objective, which is to assess the gadget No Response 13 4.08
screen time use of students in higher Total 319 100
education institutions. The following tables
below present the results of the study. Table 1 shows the demographic profile of
the student respondents. As seen from the
TABLE 1. Demographic profiles of the table, more than 60 percent of the
respondents respondents were female. On the other
Profiles f % hand, most of the respondents were still
Gender single regarding their civil status. More
Male 104 32.60 students have a monthly family income of
Female 207 64.89 5,000-15,000 pesos. At the same time, more
I prefer Not to say 8 2.51 respondents took the Bachelor of
Civil Status Secondary Education (BSEd) course. More
Single 309 96.86 than one-third of the respondents were in
Married 7 2.19 the second-year level. Lastly, more students
Prefer Not to say 3 0.95 have a GPA/GWA of 86%-90%.
Ave. Family
Monthly Income TABLE 2. Attitude toward reducing gadget
Below 5,000 screen time use
pesos Statement Mean Interpretation
5,000-15,000 106 33.23 1 2.88 Important
pesos 2 2.58 Important
16,000-25,000 134 42.01 3 3.18 Important
pesos Average Mean 2.88 Important
26,000-35,000 57 17.87 Legend: 1.00-1.49= Not Important; 1.50-
pesos 2.49=A little Important; 2.50-3.49=
36,000 pesos and 13 4.08 Important; 3.50-4.00=Very Important
above
9 2.82 Table 2 shows the frequency of the
Course responses and the mean computation from
BEED 28 8.78 the study's survey to assess students'
BSED 74 23.30 attitudes towards reducing gadget screen
BSTM 37 11.60 time use. As seen from the table,
BSHM 45 14.11 statements one, two, and three got a
BSBA 29 9.09 general response of “important," as implied
BSA 28 8.78 in the study's frequency and mean
BSCS 55 17.24 distribution. This result suggests that
BAComm 7 2.19 students recognize the idea of limiting
BSN 13 4.08 themselves in their exposure to their
Others 3 0.94 gadgets at the same as the advantages and
Year Level disadvantages of using devices in learning
First Year 83 26.02 and other leisure.
Second Year 123 38.56
Third Year 95 29.78

327
Asio, J.M.R. SHE Journal

TABLE 3. Self-efficacy toward reducing screen 11 2.97 Agree

time use 12 2.92 Agree
Statement Mean Interpretation Average 2.76 Agree
Mean
1 2.85 Agree Legend: 1.00-1.49=Strongly Disagree; 1.50-
2 2.52 Agree 2.49=Disagree; 2.50-3.49= Agree; 3.50-
3 2.39 Disagree 4.00=Strongly Agree
4 2.76 Agree
5 2.50 Agree Table 4 displays the frequency and mean
6 2.31 Disagree distribution of the responses of the
7 2.96 Agree students in terms of expectations of screen
8 2.90 Agree time use. One can glean from the table that
9 2.92 Agree only item 5 displayed a reaction of
10 2.86 Agree "disagree," wherein the computed mean
11 2.91 Agree value supported it. The rest of the items
Average 2.72 Agree generated enough results to fall under the
Mean interpretation of "agree." The average
Legend: 1.00-1.49=Strongly Disagree; 1.50- mean for the expectations of screen time
2.49=Disagree; 2.50-3.49= Agree; 3.50- use also had the same remarks of "agree."
4.00=Strongly Agree The study's result disclosed that most
students have a particular expectation that
Table 3 displays the frequency and mean needs to be followed for their screen time
distribution of the students' responses use.
regarding self-efficacy toward reducing
screen time use. One can deduct from the TABLE 5. Family model screen time use
presentation that items three (3) and six Statement Mean Interpretation
(6) generated scores with a "disagree"
response among the students. The two 1 2.65 Often
entities also generated the lowest mean 2 3.10 Often
scores among the statements in the study. 3 2.51 Often
The rest of the accounts fall under the 4 2.61 Often
interpretation of "agree," so does the 5 2.76 Often
average mean of the study. This result 6 3.01 Often
means that in terms of students' self- 7 2.51 Often
efficacy, they rated themselves as efficient 8 2.58 Often
in reducing screen time use of their Average 2.72 Often
gadgets. Mean
Legend: 1.00-1.49=Never; 1.50-
TABLE 4. Expectations of screen time use 2.49=Sometimes; 2.50-3.49= Often; 3.50-
Statement Mean Interpretation 4.00=Always

1 2.87 Agree Table 5 exhibits the frequency and mean

2 2.93 Agree distribution of the respondents in terms of
3 2.79 Agree family model screen time use. As presented
4 3.02 Agree in the table, item 2 displays the group's
5 2.29 Disagree highest mean score, which falls under the
6 2.56 Agree interpretation of "often." On the other
7 2.73 Agree hand, items 3 and 7 showed the lowest
8 2.61 Agree mean values, corresponding to "often" in
9 2.67 Agree the performance. The overall mean falls
10 2.74 Agree under the interpretation of "often" also.

328
Asio, J.M.R. SHE Journal

This study result assumes that the family according to the students' demographic
influences how the students manage screen profiles.
time exposure.

TABLE 6. Significant differences using Kruskal-

DISCUSSION
Wallis Test
Profile 1 2 3 4 The objective of this study was to
A .265 .476 .361 .014* determine the gadget screen time use of
B .113 .021* .041* .636 higher education students in Central Luzon,
C .534 .731 .100 .000* Philippines.
D .081 .197 .379 .004* Based on the study's result, the
E .212 .848 .049* .070 students' demographic profile provided a
F .049* .937 .458 .160 glimpse of the general status of their
Legend: A=Gender personal characteristics. As exhibited in the
B=Civil Status study, a good number of students were
C=Income
female, single, with monthly family income
D=Course
within 5,000-15,000 pesos, enrolled in
E=Year Level
F=GPA/GWA Bachelor of Secondary Education, second-
Note: *p < .05 year level with a GWA/GPA between 86-
90%. There are some similarities that the
The study performed a Kruskal-Wallis test current study has with the previous one in
to determine if there were any variations in terms of gender, year level (Delelis et al.,
the students' responses when they were 2018), and low socioeconomic status (Nair
grouped into their demographic profiles. et al., 2022). This result is not as
The data in the study were not normally remarkable as it seems since the study
distributed based on the normality test focused on students in higher education
performed before the inferential test; thus, institutions. It is essential to establish,
the data analyst performed the non- however, the general characteristics of the
parametric test. As observed in the table for
sample population to analyze the extent of
variable 1 (attitude toward reducing gadget
the study.
screen time use), the inferential statistics
only found a significant difference in terms For the first variable of the study,
of the student's Grade Point Average (GPA). the attitude of students toward reducing
For variable 2 (self-efficacy toward screen time use, the current study revealed
reducing screen time use), the computation that it is essential for them to manage their
only generated a significant difference in screen time exposure. One research
civil status. In variable 3 (expectations of concluded that the lockdown following the
screen time use), the calculation found COVID-19 pandemic changed the various
substantial differences in terms of civil aspects of students' lifestyles, wherein their
quality and year level of the students. exposure to screen time increased (Ranjbar
Lastly, for variable 4 (family model screen et al., 2021).
time use), the study found significant For the self-efficacy of students in
differences in gender, civil status, average
reducing screen time use, the study
family monthly income, and course of the
students. Based on the table, the mentioned revealed that students are self-efficient in
demographic profiles revealed a p-value reducing screen time use. But a study
lower than the alpha level of significance of showed that parents could not control their
.05. Therefore, it is safe to conclude that children's smartphone usage as children
there are significant differences found consider it a form of deprivation of their
among the four variables when grouped rights (Buabbas et al., 2021). To another

329
Asio, J.M.R. SHE Journal

study, time management and academic self- immediate social environment also plays a
efficacy function as mediators between role in students' excessive internet use
digital competence and stressors (Galindo- behavior (Faltynkova et al., 2020). A study
Dominguez & Bezanilla, 2020). also revealed that parental mental health
In the case of students' expectations decreased due to the loss of child care and
of screen time use, the study respondents school (Hartshorne et al., 2021).
agreed on the different items which
explored the expectations during the CONCLUSION
screen time exposure. Thus, parents or
guardians should set ground rules for their From the previous results and discussion of
children’s screen time exposure or use the study, the researcher concluded the
(Eyimaya & Irmak, 2021). A study also following:
exposed that parent stress levels increased The respondents' demographic
during the school closure due to more characteristics were as follows: female,
hours of media screen time in children single, with a family monthly income
(Seguin et al., 2021). between 5,000-15,000 pesos, taking up a
In the context of the family model Bachelor in Secondary Education course,
for screen time use, the respondents second-year level, and with a GPA/ GWA
between 86%-90%.
revealed that their households often have
The students generally answered that
televisions and personal computers for
they must reduce their screen time
family use. A related study showed that exposure. The students also agreed on the
children live in a digital home environment different perspectives regarding their self-
where parents accompany their children efficacy in reducing screen time use. In
using digital technologies (Konca, 2021). terms of the students' expectations for
Another research article also concluded their screen time use, they generally agree
that the home environment, parental on the various items mentioned in the
behaviors, role modeling, child preferences, survey. Finally, the students answered
and school policies influence screen time in often for the different mentioned gadgets
the home (Arundell et al., 2020). mentioned for the family model of screen
Finally, since the study tried to time use.
Statistical inferences showed
elicit if there are some degree of variations
significant differences in the attitude
in the responses of the students, the
toward reducing gadget screen time use in
inferential statistics showed some terms of GPA/GWA; self-efficacy in
significant results. There was a substantial reducing gadget screen time use in terms of
difference in the students' attitude civil status; expectations of screen time use
regarding screen time use when grouped in terms of civil status and year level; and
according to their GPA/GWA. As for the family model of screen time use in terms of
students' self-efficacy, there were gender, monthly family income, and course
significant findings regarding civil status. of the students.
For the expectations of the students,
significant variations were seen for civil IMPLICATIONS
quality and year level. And for the family Based on the following results, discussion,
model, there were substantial differences and conclusion of the study, the researcher
as a result of this presents the following
in gender, income, and course of the
implications:
students. In a previous study the
1) For the family, a constant reminder and
investigators showed that family factors practice of gadget screen time off are
explained the 14% variance, which highly advisable, especially in this era
suggested that aside from other factors, an of technological reliance on youth.

330
Asio, J.M.R. SHE Journal

2) For the student, effective time Indian Journal of Psychiatric Nursing, 18(1),
management and the notion of not 29-32.
relying too much on gadgets help https://doi.org/10.4103/iopn.iopn_15_21
promote self-efficacy, for instance,
reading books, journals, magazines, and Buabbas, A., Hasan, H., & Shehab, A.A.
other written materials for school (2021). Parents' attitudes toward school
activities and assignments. students' overuse of smartphones and its
3) For the institution, encourage a digital detrimental health impacts: Qualitative
environment with a greater emphasis study JMIR Pediatrics and Parenting, 4(2),
on human communication and e24196. https://doi.org/10.2196/24196
interactive learning inside and outside
the school premises. Cleofas, J.V., & Rocha, I.C.N., (2021).
4) For the teachers/ instructors, provide a Demographic, gadget, and internet profiles
curriculum that utilizes digital and as determinants of disease and
traditional teaching and learning consequence related COVID-19 anxiety
methods for students so that they will among Filipino college students. Education
not rely too much on gadgets for their and Information Technologies, 26, 6771–
learning. 6786. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-
021-10529-9

REFERENCES Delelis, M.G.T., Talosig, G.C., Lardera, M.G.,

Sarmiento, S.J.A., & Macabadbad, R.C.
Amelia, V.L., & Ramdani, M.L. (2019). (2018). E-Gadgets of generation X and
Screen time activity and its impact to sleep millennials: Their social life. International
duration of school-aged. Medisains Jurnal Journal of Advanced Research in
Ilmiah Ilmu-ilmu Kesehatan, 17(1), 3-7. Management and Social Sciences, 7(2), 78-
http://dx.doi.org/10.30595/medisains.v1 94.
7i1.4823 https://garph.co.uk/IJARMSS/Feb2018/7.p
df
Anuradha, B., (2019). Screen Time, Journal
of Tropical Pediatrics, 65(2), 105– Dizon,B.M.B., Dolor, M.K.Y.D., Domalanta,
106. https://doi.org/10.1093/tropej/fmz0 A.J.T., Domingo, P.F.M., Domingues, J.A.V.,
14 Dulay, A.M., Dulfo, A.C., Dumo, H.M.A.,
Ebuengan, K.J.T., Eduardo, D.D. L., Ela, P.D.J.,
Arundell, L., Parker, K., Timperio, Elarmo, T.A.B., & Adversario, M.P.L. (2019).
A. Salmon, J., & Veitch, J. (2020). Home- Association between duration of gadget use
based screen time behaviors amongst and the socio-emotional difficulties of
youth and their parents: familial typologies junior high school students in selected
and their modifiable correlates. BMC Public private schools in Quezon City: An analytic
Health, 20,1492. cross-sectional study. UERM Health
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-020- Sciences Journal, 8(1), 2019).
09581-w https://library.uerm.edu.ph/kohaimages/
UERM/repository/Health%20Sciences%20
Babaroh, B., & Sugianti, L. (2021). Gadget Journal/Vol8%20No1%20January-
addiction and the student's achievement. June%202019/HSJ%20vol.8no.1%202019-
International Journal of Social 45-51.pdf
Learning,1(3), 321-332.
https://doi.org/10.47134/ijsl.v1i3.59 Eyimaya, A.O., & Irmak, A.Y. (2021).
Relationship between parenting practices
Baby R.S., Issac, A., Vasudev, A., Sabu, D.K., and children's screen time during the
Gopika, T.S., Pl, M., & Sahu, R. (2021). COVID-19 pandemic in Turkey. Journal of
Impact of screen time on sleep quality. Pediatric Nursing, 56, 24-29.

331
Asio, J.M.R. SHE Journal

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pedn.2020.10.00 stress, and physical activity to obesity.

2 Malaysian Journal of Public Health
Medicine, 21(1), 1-8.
Faltýnková, A., Blinka, L., Ševčíková, A., & https://doi.org/10.37268/mjphm/vol.21/
Husarova, D. (2020). The associations no.1/art.272
between family-related factors and
excessive internet use in Hartshorne, J.K., Huang, Y.T., Paredes,
adolescents. International Journal of P.M.L., Oppenheimer, K., Robbins, PT, &
Environmental Research and Public Velasco, M.D. (2021) Screen time index as
Health, 17(5), 1754. an index of family distress. Current
https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17051754 Research in Behavioral Sciences, 2, 100023.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crbeha.2021.100
Fatima, A., Ansari, S.K., Waqar, H., Jameel, A. 023
(2021). Determine augmented risk
association between health problems and Koirala, S., Banstola, S., Shrestha, N.,
screen exposure to electronic gadgets in Gurung, N., Sah, S. K., & Sharma, B. (2021).
university students, Islamabad during Role of parents on-screen time of young
COVID-19 pandemic. Innovation, 2(2), 22- children in Pokhara metropolitan, Nepal- a
26. cross sectional study. Journal of Gandaki
https://doi,org/10.11648/j.innov.2021020 Medical College-Nepal, 14(1), 8–13.
2.11 https://doi.org/10.3126/jgmcn.v14i1.3476
6
Foo, S.X., Marina, A.N., Aparna, M., Afaaf, E.,
Amy Pakiam D. Jy., Hew S.Y., Verna Lee, Konca, A.S. (2021). Digital Technology
K.M., & Fai’za A. (2021). Association Usage of Young Children: Screen Time and
between screen time and sleep among Families. Early Childhood Education Journal.
children between 2 to 6 years old. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10643-021-
Malaysian Family Physician, 16, 22. 01245-7
https://www.proquest.com/openview/316
87537d110a1394d163f1e69749a66/1?pq- Lau, E.Y.H., & Lee, K. (2021). Parents’ views
origsite=gscholar&cbl=2031889 on young children’s distance learning and
screen time during covid-19 class
Galindo-Domínguez, H., & Bezanilla, M.-J. suspension in Hong Kong. Early Education
(2021). Promoting Time Management and and Development, 32(6), 863-
Self-Efficacy Through Digital Competence 880, https://doi.org/10.1080/10409289.2
in University Students: A Mediational 020.1843925
Model. Contemporary Educational
Technology, 13(2), Maqfiro, S.N., Fajrin, I., & Suaib, N. (2021).
ep294. https://doi.org/10.30935/cedtech/ Relationship between screen time among
9607 children with nutritional status and their
development. Midwifery and Nursing
Gautam, A., Yadav, A., Mittal, A., Arya, V., & Research, 3(2), 69-75.
Kaushik, J.S. (2022). Internet addiction and https://doi.org/10.31983/manr.v3i2.7624
screen time exposure among children with
migraine. Indian Journal of Nair, ANKK, Jayan, AJ, Santhosh, M.M.,
Pediatrics, 89, 627. Lalichen, L.M., Santosh, A., & Indu, PS
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12098-022- (2022). High screen time and associated
04114-2 factors among high school students in an
urban setting of Kerala: A cross-sectional
Handayani, O. W. K., Yuniastuti, A., Abudu, study. International Journal of Community
K. O., & Nugroho, E. (2021). Gadget Medicine and Public Health, 9(2), 767-771.
addiction and the effect of sleep habit,

332
Asio, J.M.R. SHE Journal

https://dx.doi.org/10.18203/2394- pandemic quarantine: a web-based survey

6040.ijcmph20220237 in south of Iran. Environmental Health
Preventive Medicine, 26, 33.
Nathania, J., Sidharta, V.M., Prastowo, N.A., https://doi.org/10.1186/s12199-021-
& Hananta, L. (2022). The association of 00950-4
mobile screen time and elevated blood
pressure during the COVID-19 pandemic. Salipsip, D.C.S., Raca, J.N.Q., Razon, M.A.C.,
International Journal of Physical Education, Serrano, M.M., Singh, B.C., & Ponciano, F.E.
Sports, and Health, 9(1), 433- (2021). Effects of Third-year Medical
436. https://doi.org/10.22271/kheljournal Technology Students' Amount of Sleep,
.2022.v9.i1g.2367 Screen Time, and Physical Activity to their
Academic Performance. International
Othman, N., Kelana, M.K.S.B.K., & Jamaludin, Journal of Progressive Research in Science
S. (2020). The impact of electronic gadgets' and Engineering, 2(9), 156–170.
uses with academic performance among https://journals.grdpublications.com/inde
secondary school students. Practique x.php/ijprse/article/view/441
Clinique et Investigation, 2(2), 56-60.
https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/300478 Seguin, D., Kuenzel, E., Morton, J.B., &
175.pdf Duerden, E.G. (2021). School’s out:
Parenting stress and screen time use in
Paguirigan, E, M., & Paguirigan, M, J, R. school-age children during the COVID-19
(2022). Parenting in the digital age: pandemic. Journal of Affective Disorders
Implications to physical, social and Reports, 6, 100217.
academic life of children in various age https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jadr.2021.10021
groups. Jurnal Pendidikan Progresif, 12(2), 7
866-880.
https://doi.org/10.23960/jpp.v12.i2.2022 Shahid, E., Taqi, U., Wamiq, M., Fasih, U., &
37. Jafri, A.R. (2021). Duration of daily digital
screen time during COVID-19 and its ocular
Putri, A. N., Setiawati, Y., Shieh, Y. T., & Lin, impact on children in Pakistan. Primary
S-H. (2022). High-risk internet addiction in Health Care: Open Access, 11(11), 410.
adolescents during pandemic Covid19 and https://www.iomcworld.org/abstract/dur
parents’ role. Jurnal Berkala Epidemiologi, ation-of-daily-digital-screen-time-during-
10(1), 11–20. covid19-and-its-ocular-impact-on-children-
https://dx.doi.org/10.20473/jbe.v10i1202 in-pakistan-88463.html
2.11–20.
Shanmugasundaram, S., Swetham N.B., &
Rafidah, S.F., Rafif,K.T., Amru, S.N., & Gopalakrishnan, S. (2019). Effects of
Fatmaningrum, W. (2022). Raising electronic gadget usage on sleep quality
awareness and knowledge regarding among medical students in Chennai.
gadget addiction during COVID-19 International Journal of Public Health
pandemic through webinar. World Journal Research & Development, 10(11), 1564-
of Advanced Research and Reviews, 13(1), 1567. https://doi.org/10.5958/0976-
332-337. 5506.2019.04436.X
https://doi.org/10.30574/wjarr.2022.13.1.
0008 Taguinod, D. (2022). Management of screen
time usage and sleep condition among BSIT
Ranjbar, K., Hosseinpour, H., Shahriarirad, third-year students in CSU Carig-Campus.
R., Ghaem, H., Jafari, K., Rahimi, T., International Journal of Arts, Sciences, and
Mirahadizaeh, A., & Hosseinpour P. (2021). Education, 3(1), 282-294.
Students’ attitude and sleep pattern during https://www.ijase.org/index.php/ijase/art
school closure following COVID-19 icle/view/115

333
Asio, J.M.R. SHE Journal

Tripathi, M., & Mishra, S.K. (2020). Screen

time and adiposity among children and
adolescents: a systematic review. Journal of
Public Health, 28, 227–244.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10389-019-
01043-x

West S., Puszczynski, R., & Cohn, T. (2021).

Exploring recreational screen time and
social anxiety in adolescents. Pediatric
Nursing, 47(3), 133-140.
https://www.proquest.com/docview/2541
928952?pq-
origsite=gscholar&fromopenview=true

Yeluri K, Kiran, H., H B.G., & Bj S.C. (2021).

Electronic Gadget Screen-time, perceived
sleep quality & quantity and academic
performance in medical students. The
Journal of the Association of Physicians of
India, 69(11), 11-12.
https://europepmc.org/article/med/3478
1611

Yohana, A., & Mulyono, S. (2021). The

impact of digital era: Intensity of excessive
use of gadgets causing eating difficulty on
children. Enfermeria Clinica, 31(2), S6-S9.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enfcli.2020.10.0
05

334