说服性设计是否让智能手机更易上瘾？——基于中国大学生的混合方法研究
Do Persuasive Designs Make Smartphones More Addictive? -- A Mixed-Methods Study on Chinese University Students
AI总结：
本研究采用问卷调查与访谈的混合方法，探究说服性设计与智能手机问题性使用的关系，发现25%的参与者存在多种问题使用行为，证实说服性设计延长屏幕时间并强化查看习惯，可能导致智能手机更易上瘾。
摘要：
说服性设计在智能手机上变得普遍，越来越多的用户报告存在有问题的智能手机使用行为。智能手机中的说服性设计可能是导致并强化此类问题使用的原因。本文采用混合方法研究说服性设计与有问题的智能手机使用之间的关系：（1）问卷调查（N=183），调查存在多种有问题的智能手机使用行为的参与者比例，以及他们感知到影响其态度和行为的手机设计与应用程序（apps）；（2）访谈（N=10），加深对用户关于说服性设计的观察与评估的理解。25%的参与者自我报告存在多种有问题的智能手机使用行为，其中短视频、社交网络、游戏和学习应用被认为最影响态度和行为。受访者在大多数此类应用中识别出多种说服性设计，并表示说服性设计延长了屏幕时间，强化了查看手机的习惯，并导致分心。总体而言，本研究提供证据论证说服性设计促成了有问题的智能手机使用，可能使智能手机更易上瘾。最后，我们讨论了本研究中凸显的说服性设计的伦理影响。
英文摘要：
Persuasive designs become prevalent on smartphones, and an increasing number of users report having problematic smartphone use behaviours. Persuasive designs in smartphones might be accountable for the development and reinforcement of such problematic use. This paper uses a mixed-methods approach to study the relationship between persuasive designs and problematic smartphone use: (1) questionnaires (N=183) to investigate the proportion of participants having multiple problematic smartphone use behaviours and smartphone designs and applications (apps) that they perceived affecting their attitudes and behaviours, and (2) interviews (N=10) to deepen our understanding of users' observations and evaluations of persuasive designs. 25\% of the participants self-reported having multiple problematic smartphone use behaviours, with short video, social networking, game and learning apps perceived as most attitude and behaviour-affecting. Interviewees identified multiple persuasive designs in most of these apps and stated that persuasive designs prolonged their screen time, reinforced phone-checking habits, and caused distractions. Overall, this study provides evidence to argue that persuasive designs contribute to problematic smartphone use, potentially making smartphones more addictive. We end our study by discussing the ethical implications of persuasive designs that became salient in our study.
机构、总结、中文摘要均由AI分析而来，可能存在错误，请以论文正文为准。
