Cognitive absorption and hedonic technology addiction: the mediating roles of impulsive urge and self-regulation
Chongyang Chen et al.
Abstract
Purpose Cognitive absorption is critical for hedonic technology addiction, yet the mediating mechanisms by which cognitive absorption affects hedonic technology addiction remain unclear. Drawing on dual-system theory, which posits that reflexive and reflective systems are pivotal in shaping user decisions and behaviors, this study seeks to deepen our understanding of the drivers of hedonic technology addiction. We conceptualize impulsive urge as the reflexive system and self-regulation as the reflective system, aiming to uncover the mediating roles of these two distinct systems in linking cognitive absorption to hedonic technology addiction. Design/methodology/approach A longitudinal survey involving 410 online gamers was conducted, with data collected at two time points separated by a 6-week interval. Partial least squares structural equation modeling was employed to validate the proposed research model. Findings The results indicate that cognitive absorption elicits responses from both reflexive and reflective systems. Specifically, cognitive absorption enhances the reflexive system via impulsive urge, while inhibiting the reflective system through impaired self-regulation. The joint full mediation of impulsive urge and self-regulation in the relationship between cognitive absorption and hedonic technology addiction has been proved. Our results shed lights on the underlying reflexive and reflective systems by which cognitive absorption affects hedonic technology addiction. Originality/value This study leverages dual-system theory to elucidate the mediating mechanisms through which cognitive absorption influences hedonic technology addiction. By demonstrating how cognitive absorption triggers addictive behaviors through heightened impulsive urges and impaired self-regulation, this study advances the literature on hedonic technology addiction and offers actionable strategies for intervention. Highlights
Evidence weight
Balanced mode · F 0.40 / M 0.15 / V 0.05 / R 0.40
| F · citation impact | 0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20 |
| M · momentum | 0.50 × 0.15 = 0.07 |
| V · venue signal | 0.50 × 0.05 = 0.03 |
| R · text relevance † | 0.50 × 0.4 = 0.20 |
† Text relevance is estimated at 0.50 on the detail page — for your query’s actual relevance score, open this paper from a search result.