A latent profile analysis study on the association between adolescent social media use severity and dual-system measures

This study aimed to identify severity-based subgroups of adolescent social media use and to examine their associations with differential patterns across the impulse and control systems, so as to provide empirical evidence for severity-specific precision intervention. A cross-sectional survey was conducted using stratified cluster sampling among 2,028 adolescents aged 15–19 years in Fujian Province, China. Latent profile analysis (LPA) was employed to classify participants based on the six items of the Bergen Social Media Addiction Scale (BSMAS). The Self-Control Dual System Scale (DMSC-S) was administered to assess impulse and control system strengths, and the Monetary Choice Questionnaire (MCQ) was used to measure the delay discounting rate (k-value). One-way ANOVA and Pearson correlation analyses were performed to examine between-group differences and associations. LPA identified three distinct subgroups differentiated solely by the severity of self-reported social media addiction symptoms: the low-symptom group (51.0%), the moderate-symptom group (32.7%), and the high-symptom group (16.3%). Impulse system scores increased progressively across the three subgroups, while control system scores were significantly lower in both the moderate-symptom and high-symptom groups compared to the low-symptom group. The correlation between BSMAS and the impulse system intensified from the moderate-symptom group to the high-symptom group, whereas a significant negative correlation with the control system emerged only in the high-symptom group. The high-symptom group exhibited a significantly higher delay discounting rate than the low-symptom group, and the k-value was positively correlated with BSMAS. The three identified subgroups differed significantly in dual-system measures: the moderate-symptom group showed higher impulse system scores, whereas the high-symptom group additionally showed lower control system scores and higher delay discounting rates. These cross-sectional patterns are compatible with the severity differentiation described in the I-PACE model, although they do not test the model’s process assumptions and suggest potential intervention priorities—impulse-focused strategies for adolescents with moderate symptoms and control-focused strategies for those with severe symptoms—though these implications require validation in future longitudinal and experimental studies.