Cross-sectional survey reveals learning engagement mediates the effect of problematic internet use on social withdrawal, highlighting demographic influences.
The ubiquity of digital technology has precipitated a rise in Problematic Internet Use (PIU), posing severe risks to college students’ psychosocial well-being, particularly by inducing social withdrawal. Grounded in the I-PACE model and Self-Determination Theory, this study investigated whether learning engagement mediates the relationship between PIU and social withdrawal, and examined the boundary conditions of this mechanism via demographic moderators. A cross-sectional survey was administered to 2034 Chinese college students. Data were analyzed using Structural Equation Modeling (SEM). Bias-corrected bootstrapping (5,000 resamples) was employed to test mediation, and Multi-Group SEM (MG-SEM) was used to assess structural invariance. PIU demonstrated a robust positive association with social withdrawal (r = .619,p<.001r = 0.619,p<.001) and a significant negative association with learning engagement (r = − .213,p<.001r = − 0.213,p<.001). Mediation analysis confirmed that learning engagement partially mediated the link between PIU and social withdrawal. Crucially, moderation analysis revealed that this structural mechanism is not uniform; it was significantly moderated by gender (Δχ2 = 26.886, p<.001 Δχ2 = 26.886, p<.001) and grade level (Δχ2 = 17.297, p=.008 Δχ2 = 17.297, p=.008). Conversely, the model exhibited structural invariance across residence (Urban/Rural) and binary grouping variables, indicating cross-group stability for these factors. These findings suggest that PIU fosters social withdrawal by depleting students’ learning engagement. The study identifies learning engagement as a pivotal intervention target and underscores the necessity of culturally and demographically tailored strategies—specifically adjusting for gender and academic stage—to alleviate the “digital isolation” of contemporary college students.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Zhou et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: