• Users Online: 555
  • Home
  • Print this page
  • Email this page
Home About us Editorial board Ahead of print Current issue Search Archives Submit article Instructions Subscribe Contacts Login 

 Table of Contents  
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year : 2019  |  Volume : 16  |  Issue : 2  |  Page : 80-91

Effect of selfie addiction on self-esteem, body image, and academic achievement among Faculty of Nursing students


Psychiatric and Mental Health Nursing Department, Faculty of Nursing, Zagazig University, Zagazig, Egypt

Date of Submission21-Aug-2019
Date of Acceptance01-Sep-2019
Date of Web Publication5-Dec-2019

Correspondence Address:
Bothina E.S Mohamed
PhD in Psychiatric and Mental Health Nursing,Department of Psychiatric and Mental Health Nursing, Faculty of Nursing, Zagazig University
Egypt
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/ENJ.ENJ_5_19

Rights and Permissions
  Abstract 


Background Selfie is a self-portrait photograph, typically taken with a digital camera or a camera phone held in the hand or supported by a selfie stick. Selfies are often shared on social networking services such as Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter.
Aim This study aimed to assess the effect of selfie addiction on self-esteem, body image, and academic achievement among Faculty of Nursing students.
Research design A descriptive correlational design was utilized to carry out this study.
Setting This study was carried out at the Faculty of Nursing, Zagazig University, in Alsharkia Governorate.
Sample 137 students were recruited for this study.
Tools Five tools were utilized in this study: the sociodemographic data sheet, the selfie taking behavior scale, the self-esteem scale, the body image scale, and the academic achievement scale.
Results Results denoted that the sociodemographic characteristics of students, age ranged between 18 and 24 years, about three-fourths of them were females and three-fourths of them reside in rural areas. Slightly more than one-third were third-year students, whereas more than one-third were from the medical surgical nursing specialty, more than two-third were single, and the majority of them had sufficient family income.
Conclusion This study concluded that three-fourths of the participants belonged to acute level from selfie behavior and there were statistically significant relations between chronic selfie behavior level and like and causes for taking selfie. There were statistically insignificant differences between levels of selfie behavior and body image, academic achievement, and self-esteem of the studied group.
Recommendations This study should be replicated using different settings and cultures with a large sample size to obtain stronger evidence of its important findings.

Keywords: academic achievement, body image, self-esteem, selfie addiction


How to cite this article:
Mohamed BE, Abdel Karim NA. Effect of selfie addiction on self-esteem, body image, and academic achievement among Faculty of Nursing students. Egypt Nurs J 2019;16:80-91

How to cite this URL:
Mohamed BE, Abdel Karim NA. Effect of selfie addiction on self-esteem, body image, and academic achievement among Faculty of Nursing students. Egypt Nurs J [serial online] 2019 [cited 2020 Nov 29];16:80-91. Available from: http://www.enj.eg.net/text.asp?2019/16/2/80/272395




  Introduction Top


The American Psychiatric Association has confirmed the taking of ‘selfies’ as a new mental disorder. The American Psychiatric Association has characterized it as follows: ‘the obsessive compulsive desire to take photos of one’s self and post them on social media as a way to make up for the lack of self-esteem and to fill a gap in intimacy’. Specialists state that selfitis is a type of over-the-top impulsive disorder to take their photo and post them via online media, to take one’s own photos and post them through web-based networking media, and is divided comprehensively into three kinds: borderline selfitis (taking something like three selfies in a day, yet not posting them through web-based networking media), acute selfitis (taking no less than three photographs of oneself consistently and posting them through web-based networking media), and chronic selfitis (taking no less than six photographs of self consistently and posting them through web-based networking media). Selfies is a sort of dependence if an individual powerless to post photographs causes withdrawal symptoms (American Psychiatric Association, APA, 2014).

Selfies have become an interesting topic for researchers to study because since 2012, the rate of use of selfies has increased by 17 000% (Preston, 2017). Some studies have reported that taking selfies is associated with mental disorders such as grandiosity, narcissism, and body dysmorphic disorder.

In brain research, the term self-esteem is utilized to depict an individual’s general feeling of self-esteem or individual esteem. As such, the amount of acknowledging is such as you. Self-regard can include an assortment of convictions about oneself, for example, the evaluation of one’s own appearance, convictions, feelings, and practices (Cherry, 2018). Selfies are a double-edged weapon. For a few people, posting selfies is a fearlessness promoter, and for other people, selfies are the reason that makes them sense of horrible about their lives and having weaknesses about their appearances. Most young people invest significantly more energy and cash to look appealing to other people and, subsequently, boost their self-esteem (Krishna and Krishna, 2016).

Body image is the discernment that an individual has of his or her physical self and the musings and emotions that arise from that recognition. These sentiments can be positive, negative or both, and are affected by individual and environmental elements (McShirley, 2015). Studies have found that the introduction to online visits and long-term informal communication sites lead to high rates of weight dissatisfaction, drive for thinness, and body monitoring in young females (Mills et al., 2018).

Academic achievement is an accomplishment identifying with instruction, learning, and study, particularly in schools and higher instructive organizations, and is the degree to which an understudy, educator, or foundation has accomplished his or her short or long instructive objectives (Oweikeye, 2014). Selfie addiction get understudies being effectively occupied from their imperative authority work with less efficiency and poor performance in the work place, job satisfaction, stress, peer weight, unfortunate family relations and marital struggles (Krishna and Krishna, 2016).

Researchers have found that people with low self-esteem tended to be more involved in taking selfie pictures, in addition to using social media to mediate their own interactions to meet their self-esteem needs, reducing the risk of humiliation, and reducing social anxiety (Varnali, 2015).

Studies have found that frequent exposure to the Internet and social networking sites leads to high levels of weight dissatisfaction, the pursuit of thinness, and body monitoring in young women (Tiggemann and Miller, 2010; Tiggemann and Slater, 2013), irrespective of race (Howard et al., 2017). In addition, Perloff (2014) suggests that women with relatively higher levels of gentle and perfect integration and / or low self-esteem are more likely to spend time in medical penitentiaries that focus on appearance and they may not use “self-protection” comparisons of descending appearance (for example, comparing their appearance with less attractive friends).

Operational definition

Selfie (conceptual) is a mainstream way for people to document themselves, reflecting a person’s change as a way to control public image, or how they are viewed online and by society (Isuan, 2015); operational used to measure the actions made by an individual in line with the surroundings.

Self-esteem (conceptual) is usually broadly defined as a person’s overall evaluation of, or attitude toward, herself or himself (Leary and MacDonald, 2003); operational the dependent variable and main variable assessed in the study.

Body image (conceptual) encompasses body-related self-perceptions and self-attitudes, including thoughts, beliefs, feelings, and behaviors (Bailey et al., 2017). Operational is the mental representation of one’s body in both static act aspects. It includes cognitive and affective elements, such as how the body is perceived and known, and how the body is experienced and felt (Alexandra, 2015).

Academic achievement (operational) is the knowledge attained or the skill developed in school subjects, usually designated by test scores or by marks assigned by teachers. In the present study percentage of marks obtained by the students in their tests (Kumar, 2010), (conceptual) academic is relating to education, especially at college or university level and achievement is the act of performing or doing something successfully using knowledge as distinguished from owning only (Essay, 2016).

Significance of the study

Social media which is selfies became a hot topic among society especially adolescents and for this research, is focused more focused on students. This is because selfies have a huge impact on users in their daily life. Selfies can also act as a bridge as communication tools and improve interaction with other people. Therefore, it is very suitable for students because in the learning and teaching process nowadays, it needs technology to create a better consequence in future. This study provided perspectives on selfies as an act of self-portraits in terms of redefining beauty standards. Emerging adulthood has developed into a more contemporary stage of development for individuals in their late teens and early twenties. Emerging adulthood, which is described as ages 18–25 years, is a combination of the late adolescence and early adulthood stages identified previously. It is a time when individuals are attempting to find a sense of self-worth while exploring possibilities of love, work, and world views. Identity formation occurs during emerging adulthood as young adults are figuring out who they are as a person. As this is a time of exploration and change, individuals may seek peer feedback to help foster their self-identity. Most teenagers nowadays are likely to take selfies. Taking selfies while getting much credit from other people gain one’s self-esteem this credit given by other people whether positive or negative statement may somewhat affect one’s feeling and self-esteem. It may heighten or decrease a person’s self-confidence. Therefore, this study attempted to provide a foundation for understanding the selfie addiction phenomenon and its relationship with self-esteem, body image, and academic achievement.

The aim of this study was to assess the effect of selfie addiction on self-esteem, body image, and academic achievement among Faculty of Nursing students.

Research questions

  1. Q1: What are the levels of selfie behavior?
  2. Q2: What are the effects of selfies on self-esteem, body image, and academic achievement?
  3. Q3: Are there relations between selfie addiction and sociodemographic characteristics?
  4. Q4: Are there correlations between selfie addiction and self-esteem, body image, and academic achievement?



  Participants and methods Top


Research design

A descriptive correlational design was used to carry out this study.

Study setting

This study was carried out at the Faculty of Nursing, Zagazig University.

Sampling and method

A multistage sample method was used. Nine sections were selected from 40 sections (first stage) and about 15 students were selected from each section by using a systemic random sample (second stage). The number of students selected from each grade was determined by proportion allocation.

First year: 30 students, second year: 26 students, third year: 48 students and fourth year: 33 students who fulfilled the following inclusion criteria: (a) students ranging in age from 18 to 24 years and of both sexes. Exclusion criteria included (a) a psychiatric diagnosis among students and (b) the presence of neurological disorders. The researchers instructed students to fill in questionnaires after they agreed to participate in the study.

Sample size

Using the open Epi method, the sample size is 137. Assuming that the number of students at the Faculty of Nursing during the academic year (2018–2019) is 1725, the prevalence of taking selfie behavior is about 11% (Saroshe et al., 2016) at a 5% confidence level.

Tools of data collection

Five tools were used to collect the study data: the sociodemographic data sheet, the selfie taking behavior scale, the self-esteem scale, the body image scale, and the academic achievement scale.

Tool I: sociodemographic data sheet. This was developed based on the review of currently related literature and used by the researcher to collect the necessary data of the participants. This includes age, sex, specialty, residence, academic year, social class, income, do you like selfies, place of taking selfie, causes of taking selfie, number of selfie are taken per day, consequences of selfie and other addicted behaviors.

Tool II: selfie addiction scale

This scale was constructed by Griffiths (1995) to measure the degree of selfie addictive behavior. It covers six dimensions: environment enhancement (four items), social competition (four items), attention seeking (three items), mood modification (three items), self-confidence (three items), and subjective conformity (three items). This instrument contains 20 items. The response options used a five-point Likert scale (5=strongly agree and 1=strongly disagree). A sum score was calculated by adding all the items, ranging from 20 to 100. There are three categories: borderline (0–33), acute (34–67), and chronic (68–100).

Tool III: self-esteem scale

This scale was originally prepared by Shrauger (1990) and translated by Mohamed. Self-confidence was defined as the individual’s perception of his or her competence, skill, and ability to deal effectively with different situations. The purpose of this design was to use it on a global scale of self-esteem. In its original form, the Rosenberg scale consists of 54 statements, six of which are excluded to carry out the global analysis so that the number of statements that make up the scale in its current form is 48 statements. Half of statements are positive and the other half are negative, and each of them has five choices (fully applicable − apply − applies to a certain extent − does not apply a lot − do not apply) where positive statements take score (4-3-2-1-0), respectively, where statements are (1- 4-5- 6- 9- 10- 15- 16- 19- 21- 22- 26- 28- 31- 32- 35- 36- 37- 40- 41- 42- 44- 45- 47) while negative statements take score (0-1-2-3-4 respectively), which statement are (2-3-7-8- 11-12-13-14-17-18-20-23-24-25-27-29-30-33-34-38-39-43-46-48). A scale score was computed by adding the items together, ranging from 0 to 192, with higher scores denoting a high rate of self-esteem.

Tool IV: body image scale

The body image measurement was prepared by Saber (2008) with (27) statements and covers two dimensions: the individual’s perception of his or her body, which is positive or negative, and includes the following statements: items: 1, 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 12, 13, 16, 17, 19, 20, 21, 23, 24, 25, 26 and the individual’s awareness of his or her body through others such as family, friends, and colleagues, and includes the following statements: items: 3, 8, 11, 14, 15, 18, 22, 27. Each positive statement has three response alternatives: (3) ‘yes’, (2) ‘sometimes’, and (1) ‘not’ (items: 1, 2, 7, 10, 11, 16, 22, 24, 25, and 27). In negative statements (items: 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 12, 13, 14, 15, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 23, 26), the scoring is reversed: (1) ‘yes’, (2) ‘sometimes,’ and (3) ‘not’. The value of that medium was calculated to measure the image of the body is 67, so that the higher scores of 67 indicate the positive body image and the real and clear perception of the body’s image satisfaction. The lower scores indicate a negative body image and the wrong person’s perception of his body image dissatisfaction. The total score was calculated by adding all the statements, which ranged from 27 to 81.

Tool V: academic achievement scale

This scale was constructed and developed by researchers to assess the academic achievement for students (Elazazy, 2013). The scale is a 45-item self-report to measure self-efficacy by asking students to rate how confident they feel of their abilities to perform common academic-related behaviors in college. It is subdivided into five categories: one is academic (it includes nine subitems such as studying hard to understand the content thoroughly, getting high grades, distribution out studying instead of forcing, apply the content of the lecture to a practical session and so on), two is extracurricular activities (it includes nine subitems such as participating in extracurricular events (sports, clubs), running for student affairs office, using a computer skillfully, writing a high-quality term paper, and so on, the third is student interaction (it includes nine subitems such as participating in a class discussion, answering a question in a large class, tutoring another student, asking a professor in class to review a concept they do not understand, and so on), four is student behavior (it includes nine sub items such as making a professor think you’re paying attention in class, making professor respect you, coming to the class without your books, damaging property just for fun (such as breaking windows or putting putting paint on the wall ...... etc.), and finally the fifth is student attendance (it includes nine subitems such as attending class regularly, attending class late, absent from class without excuse, sending to you alarm of dismissal from college due to the absenteesim .....etc.). Key answers ranged between zero (very little efficacy), little (1), moderate (2), a lot (3), and quite a lot (4).

Scoring system

  1. 0<60: low academic achievement.
  2. 60<120: moderate academic achievement.
  3. 120–180: high academic achievement.


Content validity and reliability

Tools were translated into Arabic language using the translation and back-translation technique to ensure their original validity. Content validity of the tools was assessed by asking a panel of five experts from among academic staff at the Faculty of Nursing, Zagazig University (Psychiatric and Mental Health Nursing), to revise the tools for clarity, applicability, relevance, comprehensiveness, understanding, and ease of use. Their recommendations and suggestions were taken into consideration. The reliability of the tools was assessed using Cronbach’s α test in SPSS version 20 (the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences; SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, USA 2011). They showed a good level of reliability as follows: selfie score (α=0.92), self-esteem score (α=0.82), body image (α=0.85), and academic achievement score (α=0.855).

Pilot study

Before carrying out the main study, a pilot study was carried out on 10% (14 students) of the total sample to evaluate the clarity and relevance of the tools, as well as estimate the needed time for data collection. The researcher asked participants to fill in the questionnaire and to note any questions that were unclear or difficult to answer. No modifications were made to the tools. Therefore, students who participated in the pilot study were included in the main study sample.

Administrative and ethical consideration

The researcher obtained approval to carry out the study upon letter from the Dean of the Faculty of Nursing Students’ voluntary participation it has been confirmed. Clear instructions on how to complete the questionnaire were provided. Confidentiality of the collected information was assured and that it would be used only for the purpose of scientific research.

Field study

The preparatory phase

It was done by calculating the time of the undergraduate students and getting an official authorization from the Dignitary of Workforce of Nursing, Zagazig College for the endorsement to conduct the study and get to meet the undergraduate nursing student’s enrolling in the study.

The implementation phase

This was executed over 3 months from the beginning of February 2019, and was completed by the end of April 2019. This involved real contact with the nursing undergraduate students to clarify the objective of the study and the connected technique and giving to all participants. Each participant was provided the opportunity to fill in the scales under the direction and supervision of the researchers who were available to reply any address to maintain a strategic distance from overlooking anything of apparatus such as characterizing the meaning of psychiatric symptoms. The time when the tools were distributed to the students lengthy from 9.00 am. To 12.00 pm. The time required to fill in the tools ranged between half an hour to an hour.

Statistical design

All data were collected, tabulated, and statistically analyzed using the statistical package for the social sciences 20.0 for Windows (SPSS Inc., Chicago, Illinois, USA). Quantitative data were expressed as the mean±SD and minimum–maximum and qualitative data were expressed as absolute frequencies (number) and relative frequencies (percentage). The Kruskal–Wallis test was used to compare between more than two groups of non-normally distributed variables. Percent of categorical variables were compared using the χ2-test. Spearman’s rank correlation coefficient was calculated to assess the relationship between various study variables; a positive sign indicates a direct correlation and a negative sign indicates an inverse correlation. Also, values close to 1 indicate a strong correlation and values close to 0 indicate a weak correlation. All tests were two sided. A P value less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant and a P value at least 0.05 was considered statistically insignificant.


  Results Top


[Table 1] clarifies that the age of the studied sample ranged from 18 to 24 years, with a mean age of 20.8±1.4 years; about three-fourths of the participants were women (73.0%), with three-fourths of them (75.2%) beside rural areas and slightly more than one-third of them were in third-year students (35.0%) and slightly two-fifth of them were from medical surgical nursing department (40.9%) more than two-thirds of them were single (70.8%) and the majority of them had sufficient income (81.0%).
Table 1 Sociodemographic characteristics of students in the study sample (n=137)

Click here to view


[Table 2] indicates that more than three-fifths of the studied sample (62.0%) liked taking selfies, with more than one-fourth of them were (27.7%) boring as cause for taking selfies and more than one-third of them were taking selfie in 36.5% of them were taking selfie in public places. The same table also clarifies that more than one-fourth of them had disturbance in mood as a consequence of taking selfies (28.5%) and two-fifths of them had other addictive behaviors such as Facebook addiction (40.9%).
Table 2 Profile of selfie among the study sample (n=137)

Click here to view


[Figure 1] shows the highest percentage of students had acute selfie behavior (75.2%). Meanwhile, 6.6% had borderline selfie behavior.
Figure 1 Selfie behavior level of the study sample (n=137).

Click here to view


[Table 3] shows that the mean score of students in terms of self-esteem ranged between 56 and 154; more than half of them had a negative body image (57.7%) and the majority of them had moderate academic achievement (82.5%).
Table 3 Mean scores of self-esteem, body image, and academic achievement of the studied group (n=137)

Click here to view


[Table 4] shows that selfie behavior levels showed statistically insignificant differences with their personal characteristics (P>0.05).
Table 4 Relations between selfie behavior levels and their personal characteristics in the studied group (n=137)

Click here to view


[Table 5] shows that a statistically significant relation was found between selfie behavior levels and like taking selfie (P=0.002), number of taking selfie (P=0.007) and cause to take a selfie (P=0.001).
Table 5 Relations between selfie behavior levels and like taking selfies, reason of taking selfies, and places where selfies are taking in the studied group (n=137)

Click here to view


[Table 6] clarifies that there are statistically insignificant differences in selfie behavior levels and problem from selfie or present other addicted behaviors (P>0.05).
Table 6 Relation between selfie behavior level and problem and other addictive behaviors in the studied group (n=137)

Click here to view


[Table 7] shows statistically insignificant differences in selfie behavior levels and body image, academic achievement levels, and the total self-esteem score (P>0.05).
Table 7 Relations between selfie behavior level and body image, academic achievement level, and the total self-esteem score in the study sample (n=137)

Click here to view


[Table 8] shows that there were statistically insignificant correlations between the total selfie score with age, the total self-esteem score, total achievement, and total body image (P>0.05).
Table 8 Correlations of total selfie score with age, total self-esteem score, total academic achievement, and total body image in the studied group (n=137)

Click here to view



  Discussion Top


Selfie taking is considered a pleasurable activity by selfie users. Mostly teens and young people are adherents to personal images because through this process they get a kind of fun. Teens have a tendency to build their identity. To gain identity and status in society, they follow what the gathering is doing. Selfie users also use selfie as a way to capture moments of enjoyment. If you are a selfie user if he gets any pleasure, he will continue to do so and usually make it. In the end, this habit will lead to selfie addicted behavior. A certain proportion of selfie users consider selfies as a medium to capture the moments of enjoyment that they spend with family, friends, pets, etc. These selfies are the symbol of love towards that familiarity. There is a relationship between self-expression and the satisfaction arising from it. Based on the expression of personal feelings, skills and abilities, a person begins to enjoy oneself (Barry et al., 2017).

In terms of the personal characteristics of the studied sample, the current study found that the age of the studied sample ranged from 18 to 24 years, about three-fourths of them were females, with three-fourths of them beside rural areas slightly more than one-third of them were third-year students more than two-fifths of them were from medical surgical nursing department, more than two-thirds of them were single and the majority of them had sufficient family income. This might be due to that selfies have the capacity to permit young ladies to precise their dispositions in a way not conceivable some time recently. It appeared that among the members, females have the most noteworthy number with the screening test.

Similarly, Som et al. (2017), who carried out a study on the evaluation of selfie enslavement among proficient restorative understudies of Rama Therapeutic College Clinic about Centre Mandhana Kanpu, it was found that out of 100 medicos, 55% were female and 45% were male. 34% of medicos were 17–19 years of age, male were more (46.7%) than female (23.6%) whereas in age 20–22 years. 45% (greatest) medicos, female (54.5%) were more than male percent (33.3%).

Additionally, Priya et al. (2018), who in their recent study considered selfie compulsion among College Understudies appears the recurrence of male and female respondents who have taken part within the study. 45% male and 55% female which comprised the entire of 100 members. In opposite with delineates more than half of the understudies has a place to less than 20 a long time of age (51%), larger part were males (70%), 68% of them had monthly to month family wage less than 10 000 and the highest share were from atomic family (87%) and (89%) reside in rural area.

As regards the relation between selfie behavior levels, like and cause of selfie, this study results referred to factually noteworthiness relations between selfie behavior level (like and causes of selfie taking) (P<0.05). The research results showed that among those who like taking selfies, 22.3% had persistent behavior compared with 11.5% who disliked taking selfies, the distinction really critical. This can be due to that taking selfie makes them cheerful and more friendly with others. As well, the taking of selfies in terms of self-presentation hypothesis, which is connected to awe others. The taking of selfies is seemingly not a stand-alone activity since it takes on other measurements when it is shared by means of social media. Such activities empower selfie-takers to show themselves in a controlled manner.

Similarly, Saroshe et al. (2016), who carried out an assessment of selfie clutter among the capable understudies of a compilation the city of Center India, showed that up to around 15% of people took selfies essentially to send to a companion, 14% to post on social media, 13% seemed they were bored, 3% to show people they have companions, 21% take selfies to share their current way of life with their family. 3% said they take selfies for thought, in spite of the fact that 31% said they had other causes of selfie taking.

In a similar study carried out by Kramer et al. (2017), the results of 20 tests showed that those people who like taking selfies apart, out of which 10 guys and 10 females, the cruel of guys who enjoyed taking selfies was 24.8 and females was 28.1, SD for guys was 2.34 and for females was 1.33 and the t-test esteem for the male was 3.75 and for the female was 3.75, which implies that the t-esteem is critical at 0.01 level as the t-esteem is more prominent than average of self-esteem (t=2.88).

Additionally, Som et al. (2017), who carried out a study on appraisal of selfie habit among proficient restorative understudies of Rama Therapeutic College Clinic and Investigated Middle Mandhana Kanpur appeared the dissemination of medicos concurring to fundamental reason of taking selfie. The highest share of medicos (25%) took selfie to share their current life-style with near relatives, taken after by to put on social media (17%), to send to companions (12%), due to boring 13% and the least 5% for consideration.

This study finding displayed that think about represented 36.5% of the considered test taking selfie in open places. This can be due to that the public places include a part of wonderful places to require selfie behind it.

In the same line, Som et al. (2017), carried out a study on evaluation of selfie enslavement among proficient restorative understudies of Rama Therapeutic College Clinic and Investigated Middle Mandhana Kanpur detected that the highest share of medicos were taking selfie when they were in open (66%) taken after by alone, or at domestic (20%), at work (9%) and the least (5%) selfie shot was taken in university.

In contrast to the previous finding, the study carried out by Saroshe et al. (2016), to evaluate selfie disorders among the proficient understudies of a compilation City of Center India, showed that 30% of the individuals incline toward requiring selfies at home alone, 59% lean toward requiring them in open, 3% said at work, 1% at school/college, though 7% said they lean toward selfies within the bathroom.

In terms of the total percent of selfie, this study findings showed that almost three quarters of the studied students had acute selfie addiction, whereas less than fifth of them had chronic selfie addiction and only a minority of them had borderline selfie behavior. This might be due to that the selfie don’t have a harmful effect on the study sample.

Similarly, Priya et al. (2018), in their very recent study that evaluated selfie compulsion among college understudies, showed that 53% were distinguished with direct selfie habit, 41% had gentle enslavement, 4% were dependent seriously and 2% of the understudies were non dependant.

Concerning selfie and self-esteem, this study results clarified that there’s measurably immaterial contrast of selfie behavior level of studied group and added up to self-regard score (P>0.05). This recommends that posting and taking selfies are related to the conviction of whether it can increment or decrease self-esteem.

In contrast, Isuan (2015) showed that there is a critical relationship between taking selfies and self-esteem of selected participants’ (r=0.306). Additionally Alblooshi (2015), study findings that the most noteworthy number of selfies is posted by the individuals with high self-esteem. Moreover, the individuals with the highest self-esteem levels take and post the least number of selfies. They found a critical relationship between elevated self-esteem levels and posting selfies to boost self-esteem.

Considering selfie and body image, this study findings clarified that there was a statistically insignificant difference in the selfie behavior level of the studied group and the body image score (P>0.05); this finding could be interpreted to suggest that the psychological states affected by taking and posting selfies to social media are specifically related to feelings of self-consciousness and/or fear of negative evaluation by others. This interpretation seems likely, given that participants in the study were sharing their selfie photos on their own social media profiles.

In contrast, Mills et al. (2018) surveyed the physical emotions that are adversely influenced by taking and posting selfies, but not sentiments of bloatedness or fulfillment with one’s body appreciation. The results showed that there are positive impacts of taking selfies for understudies with diverse incapacities, whereby understudies accept that selfies can increase one’s self-image.

Considering the correlation between total selfies taken and academic achievement, the present study results clarified that there are measurably insignificant correlations contrast of selfie behavior level of studied group, body image, academic level and added up to self-esteem scale (P>0.05). This may well be because of all of the media-related innovations, linked to increments in multitasking, and increment in scholastic accomplishment is presently commonly gotten to with a single versatile phone that supports the Internet.

Similarly, Gamal (2015), who examined social media utilization, engagement, and enslavement as indicators of scientific implementation, found that excessive engagement with social media by collaborators can have unfavorable effects on scientific implementation; this has provoked dialogue among teachers from different scholastic areas almost the value and practicality of social media as an educational device.

In contrary with the previous results, Oweikeye (2014), who evaluated scholastic execution of understudies conceded with diverse entry certificates to the Nigerian certificates in education program at the Federal College of education (technical) OMOKU appeared the rate dispersion of scholarly execution of expressions college understudies within the past year and current year. Students’ past year execution was better when compared to their current year execution. Less number of students got qualification within this year (4%), while 58% falls between 60–74 and 38% of their execution was less than 60%. Results indicate the need for making mindfulness among the students’ with respect to their scholastic implementation.

Similarly, Ching (2017), who examined the impact of social media utilization on academic performance, found that the sum of time one spends utilizing social media influences scholarly implementation in a negative way, and is contrarily connected with their scholastic execution. So, understudies ought to be mindful of this reality that intemperate engagement with social media which can hurt their scholastic carrier as they can end up by being dependent to it. They ought to spend their recreation hours doing profitable works other than keeping themselves active with social networking. To conclude, it can be said that some understudies of the participants in the study were dependent on social media and a huge number of them had not appeared any enslavement toward social media.

In addition, Priya et al. (2018), in a very recent similar study, found that scholastic achievement and selfie compulsion scores were factually critical (P>0.001). Results were very reliable with the study conducted by Cohen and Sherman (2014) on the relationship Between using portable media and educational implementation in college understudies. Portable phones can be utilized whereas walking, traveling in buses or trains and indeed whereas driving a car. These smaller scale time spaces in which individuals can take portion in various online exercises were not accessible fair a decade prior. Miniaturized scale time openings can lead to over-the-top versatile phone utilization and can meddled with face-to-face interaction and harms scientific implementation.


  Conclusion Top


The study results lead to the conclusion that the highest percentage of students had acute selfie behavior. Meanwhile, the lowest percentage had borderline selfie behavior. More than half of them had negative body image and the majority of them had moderate academic achievement. There were statistically insignificant differences in selfie behavior level, body image, academic achievement level, and total self-esteem. Also, selfie behavior level showed a statistically insignificant difference with their personal characteristics. The main influences of selfie behavior level were like taking selfie, number of taking selfie and cause of selfie taking behavior.

Recommendations

On the basis of this study findings, the following recommendations are suggested:
  1. Understudies are to be mindful and conservative of selfie to take selfies and post photos.
  2. The selfie addiction proposal determined incorporates headings for further researches.
  3. Future analysis focussing on people in a range of other age groups to completely get it whether selfie incorporates a relationship on self-esteem and has other impacts in passionate state and inspirations which may have a distinctive result from this ponder.
  4. Stressing more on utilizing diverse variables having advantages relating more to particular qualities they need to discover and how they might influence the results of how it can influence the results of study.
  5. Future analysis can assemble factual information that can speak to a larger sample where it can reasonably define the degree of selfie persons’ selfie behavior.
  6. The researchers presented this research finding as a reference for long-term analysis of selfie behavior in other settings.
[31]

Financial support and sponsorship

Nil.

Conflicts of interest

There are no conflicts of interest.



 
  References Top

1.
Alblooshi A (2015). Self-esteem levels & selfies: the relationship between self-esteem levels and the number of selfies people take and post, and the uses and gratifications of taking and posting selfies. Available at: https://jewlscholar.mtsu.edu/bitstream/handle/mtsu/4760/Alblooshi_mtsu_0170N_10511.pdf?. [Accessed on 22 February 2019].  Back to cited text no. 1
    
2.
Alexandra B (2015). Body image: a theoretical framwork. Proc Rom Acad 17:29–38.  Back to cited text no. 2
    
3.
American Psychiatric Association, APA (2014). Selfie. Available at: https://adobochronicles.com/2014/03/31/american-psychiatric-association-makes-it-official-selfie-a-mental-disorder/comment-page-3/. [Accessed 14 November 2018].  Back to cited text no. 3
    
4.
Bailey K, Gammage L, Ingen C (2017). How do you define body image? Exploring conceptual gaps in understandings of body image at an exercise facility. Body Image 23:69–79.  Back to cited text no. 4
    
5.
Barry CT, Doucette H, Loflin DC, Rivera-Hudson N, Herrington LL (2017). Let me take a selfie: associations between self-photography, narcissism, and self-esteem. Psychol Pop Media Cult 6:48–60.  Back to cited text no. 5
    
6.
Cherry K (2018). What exactly is self-esteem? Available at: https://www.verywellmind.com/what-is-self-esteem-2795868. [Accessed 18 November 2018].  Back to cited text no. 6
    
7.
Ching N (2017). Effects of social media on the academic performance. Available at: http://14.139.209.82:8080/xmlui/bitstream/handle/123456789/101/Final%20Draft%20%282%29.pdf?. [Accessed 12 February 2019].  Back to cited text no. 7
    
8.
Cohen G, Sherman D (2014). The psychology of change: self-affirmation and social psychological intervention. Annu Rev Psychol 65:333–371.  Back to cited text no. 8
    
9.
Elazazy AA (2013). Impact of internet usage on the student attitude and academic achievement at two faculties in Beni Suif University. Available at: http://db4.eulc.edu.eg/eulc_v5/Libraries/Thesis/BrowseThesisPages.aspx?fn=PublicDrawThesis&BibID=12161417. [Accessed 14 November 2018].  Back to cited text no. 9
    
10.
Essay UK (2016). Peer acceptance and academic performance among undergraduate students education essay. Available at: https://www.ukessays.com/essays/education/peer-acceptance-and-academic-performance-among-undergraduate-students-education-essay.php?vref=1. [Accessed 12 November 2018].  Back to cited text no. 10
    
11.
Gamal J (2015). Social media use, engagement and addiction as predictors of academic performance. Int J Psychol Stud 7:85–94.  Back to cited text no. 11
    
12.
Griffiths MD (1995). Technological addictions. Clin Psychol Forum 76:14–19.  Back to cited text no. 12
    
13.
Howard LM, Heron KE, MacIntyre RI, Myers TA, Everhart RS (2017). Is use of social networking sites associated with young women’s body dissatisfaction and disordered eating? A look at Black-White racial differences. Body Image 23:109–113.  Back to cited text no. 13
    
14.
Isuan CL (2015). Correlation of Selfie and self-esteem. Available at: https://www.academia.edu/27826725/correlation_of_selfie_and_self-esteem?auto=download. [Accessed 12 March 2019].  Back to cited text no. 14
    
15.
Kramer N, Feurstein M, Kluck J, Meier M, Rother M, Winter S (2017). Beware of selfies: the impact of photo type on impression formation based on social networking profiles. Front Psychol 8:188. 1–14.  Back to cited text no. 15
    
16.
Krishna S, Krishna K (2016). Selfie syndrome: a disease of new era. Res Pharm Health Sci 2:118–121.  Back to cited text no. 16
    
17.
Kumar A (2010). Study of academic achievement values and adjustment of secondary school students in relation to working status of mothers. Available at: http://shodhganga.inflibnet.ac.in/bitstream/10603/7147/13/13_summary.pdf. [Accessed 12 December 2018].  Back to cited text no. 17
    
18.
Leary , MacDonald G. (2003) Individual Differences in Trait Self-Esteem: A Theoretical Integration. In: Leary M., Tangney J., Eds., Handbook of Self and Identity. New York: Guildford Publications.401-418.  Back to cited text no. 18
    
19.
McShirley C (2015). What is body image? Available at: https://www.psychalive.org/what-is-body-image/. [Accessed 16 December 2018].  Back to cited text no. 19
    
20.
Mills J, Musto S, Williams L, Tiggemannb M (2018). “Selfie” harm: effects on mood and body image in young women. Body Image 27:86–92.  Back to cited text no. 20
    
21.
Oweikeye J (2014). Academic performance of students admitted with different entry certificates to the Nigerian certificate in education program at the federal college of education (technical), OMOKU. J Tech Sci Educ 4:38–47.  Back to cited text no. 21
    
22.
Perloff RM (2014). Social media effects on young women’s body image concerns: theoretical perspectives and an agenda for research. Sex Roles 71:363–377.  Back to cited text no. 22
    
23.
Preston S (2017). Harmful impacts of taking too many selfies [internet] [updated 2017] 2018. Available at: https://www.quora.com/What-are-the-harmful-impacts-of-taking-too-many-selfies. [Accessed on 15 May 2019]  Back to cited text no. 23
    
24.
Priya S, Venkatesan L, Vijayalakshmi K (2018). Selfie addiction among college students. Res Rev Int J Multidiscip 3:78–81.  Back to cited text no. 24
    
25.
Saber S (2008). The relationships among body image, self-esteem and depression to a sample of university students. Available at: https://search.mandumah.com/Record/117187. [Accessed 12 February 2019].  Back to cited text no. 25
    
26.
Saroshe S, Banseria R, Dixit S, Patider A (2016). Assessment of selfie syndrome among the professional students of accomplition City of Central India. Int J Prev Public Health Sci 2:118–121.  Back to cited text no. 26
    
27.
Shrauger S (1990). Self-esteem scale. Translated to Arabic language by Mohamed, A.A. Faculty of Education - Zagazig University: pp. 1-10. Available at: http://psycho.sudanforums.net/t294-topic. [Accessed on 21 November 2018].  Back to cited text no. 27
    
28.
Som N, Ajay B, Manjusha N, Anju G (2017). Assessment of selfie addiction among professional medical students of Rama Medical College Hospital and Research Centre Mandhana Kanpur Indian. J Forensic Comm Med 4:261–266.  Back to cited text no. 28
    
29.
Tiggemann M, Miller J (2010). The internet and adolescent girls’ weight satisfaction and drive for thinness. Sex Roles 63:79–90.  Back to cited text no. 29
    
30.
Tiggemann M, Slater A (2013). Netgirls: The Internet, Facebook, and bodyimage concern in adolescent girls. Int J Eat Disord 46:630–633.  Back to cited text no. 30
    
31.
Varnali K (2015). Self-disclosure on social networking sites. Soc Behav Pers 43:1–14.  Back to cited text no. 31
    


    Figures

  [Figure 1]
 
 
    Tables

  [Table 1], [Table 2], [Table 3], [Table 4], [Table 5], [Table 6], [Table 7], [Table 8]



 

Top
 
 
  Search
 
Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
Access Statistics
Email Alert *
Add to My List *
* Registration required (free)

 
  In this article
Abstract
Introduction
Participants and...
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
References
Article Figures
Article Tables

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed3762    
    Printed316    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded270    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal


[TAG2]
[TAG3]
[TAG4]