High school students usage behavior and views about mobile phones

Abstract

Objective: The aim of this study was to determine high school students\' usage behavior and views about mobile phones. Methods: Totally 253 (85.5%) students educated at Honaz High School within the academic year 2010-2011, participated to this cross-sectional study and a questionnaire consisting of 42 questions which aimed to determine usage behavior and views about mobile phones was administered to the students. Results: The mean age of the students was 16.1 ± 1.1 years, and 56.9% of them were girl. 79.8% of students have mobile phone and 53.9% of them make daily average of over 30 minutes mobile phone calls. 76.1% of participants stated that they did not use headphones, 78.1% did not turn off their mobile phones when they are sleeping and 67.3% put it right next to them or under the pillow. 83.1% of students think mobile phones are harmful for human health, 56.7% think the base stations are harmful to human health and the environment, 91.3% think mobile phones are harmful for children, pregnant women and elderly people. Conclusion: It is found that students\' mobile phone ownership is widespread, the age of starting to use mobile phone and headphones usage is low, knowledge about the base stations is not adequate.

Keywords

• Mobile phone, electromagnetic radiation, student, dependency

Lise öğrencilerinin cep telefonu kullanma davranışları ve cep telefonları hakkındaki görüşleri

Abstract

Amaç: Bu çalışmanın amacı lise öğrencilerinin cep telefonu kullanma davranışları ve cep telefonu hakkındaki görüşlerini belirlemektir. Yöntemler: Kesitsel tipteki bu çalışmaya 2010-2011 öğretim yılı içerisindeki Honaz Lisesi\'nde eğitim gören 253 öğrenci (%85,5) katılmış olup, çalışmaya katılan öğrencilere cep telefonu kullanma davranışlarını ve cep telefonu hakkındaki görüşlerini ortaya koymayı amaçlayan 42 sorudan oluşan bir anket formu uygulanmıştır. Bulgular: Çalışmaya katılan öğrencilerin yaş ortalaması 16,1±1,1 yıl olup, %56,9\'u kız idi. Öğrencilerin %79,8\'inin cep telefonu vardı ve %53,9\'u günlük ortalama 30 dakikanın üzerinde cep telefonuyla görüşme yapmaktaydı. Katılımcıların % 76,1\'i kulaklık kullanmadığını, %78,1\'i yatarken cep telefonunu kapatmadığını ve %67,3\'ü yatarken cep telefonunu hemen yanına veya yastığın altına koyduğunu belirtmiştir. Katılımcıların %83,1\'i cep telefonunun insan sağlığına zararlı olduğunu, %56,7\'si baz istasyonlarının insan sağlığına ve çevreye zararlı olduğunu, %91,3\'ü çocuklara, hamilelere ve yaşlılara zararlı olduğunu düşünmekte idi. Sonuç: Öğrencilerin cep telefonu sahipliğinin yaygın olduğu ve cep telefonu kullanmaya başlama yaşının ve kulaklık kullanımının düşük olduğu, baz istasyonları hakkında yeterli bilgiye sahip olmadığı görüldü.

Keywords

• Cep telefonu, elektromanyetik radyasyon, öğrenci, bağımlılık

References

1. Karaaslan İA, Budak L. Üniversite öğrencilerinin cep telefo- nu özelliklerini kullanımlarının ve gündelik iletişimlerine etkisinin araştırılması. J Yaşar University 2012;26:4548- 4571.
2. Mitchell KJ, Bull S, Kiwanuka J, Ybarra ML. Cell phone us- age among adolescents in Uganda: acceptability for relay- ing health information. Health Educ Res 2011;26:770-781.
3. Davidson HC, Lutman ME. Survey of mobile phone use and their chronic effects on the hearing of a student population. Int J Audiol 2007;46:113-118.
4. Ameli SR. New individualism and mobil phone: technology of individualism and identity. Global Media J 2006;1:3.
5. Redmayne M. New Zealand adolescents’ cellphone and cord- less phone user-habits: are they at increased risk of brain tumours already? A cross-sectional study. Environ Health 2013;12:5.
6. Rubin GJ, Das MJ, Wessely S. Electromagnetic hypersensi- tivity: a systematic review of provocation studies. Psycho- som Med 2005;67:224-232.
7. Ammari M, Brillaud E, Gamez C, Lecomte A, Sakly M, Ab- delmelek H. Effect of a chronic GSM 90MhHz exposure on glia in the rat brain. Biomed Pharmacother 2008;62:273- 281.
8. Riddervold IS, Pedersen GF, Andersen NT et al. Cognitive function and symptoms in adults and adolescents in relation to f radiation from UMTS base stations Bioelectromagnet- ics 2008;29:257-267.

9. Eltiti S, Wallace D, Ridgewell A, et al. Does short term ex- posure to mobile phone base station signals increase symp- toms in individuals who report sensitivity to electromag- netic fields? A double-blind randomized provocation study. Environ Health Perspect 2007;115:1603-1608.
10. Franke H, Streckert J, Bitz A, et al. Effects of universal mobile telecommunications systems(UMTS) electromag- netic fields on the blood-brain barrier in vitro. Radiat Res 2005;164:258-269.
11. Curcio G, Ferrara M, Moroni F, D’Inzeo G, De Bertini LM. Is the brain influenced by a phone call? An EEG study of resting wakefulness. Neurosci Res 2005;53:265-270.
12. Karger CP. Mobile phones and health: A literature overview. Z Med Phys 2005;15:73-85.
13. Johansen C. Electromagnetic fields and health effects-ep- idemiologic studies of cancer, diseases of the central ner- vous system and arrhythmia-related heart disease. Scand J Work Environ Health 2004;1:1-30.
14. Westerman R, Hocking B. Diseases of modern living: neu- rological changes associated with mobile phones and radio frequency radiation in humans. Neurosci Lett 2004;361:13- 16.
15. French PW, Penny R, Laurance JA, McKenzie DR. Mo- bile phones heat shock proteins and cancer. Differentiation 2001;67:93-97.
16. Repacholi MH. Health risks from the use of mobile phones. Toxicol Lett 2001;120:323-331.
17. Regel SJ, Negovetic S, Roosli M, et al. UMTS base station- like exposure well-being and cognitive performance, Envi- ron Health Perspect 2006;114:1270-1275.
18. World Health Organization, International Agency for Re- search on Cancer. IARC classifies radiofrequency elec- tromagnetic fields as possibly carcinogenic to humans. Ulaşılabileceği adres: http://www.iarc.fr/en/media-centre/ pr/2011/pdfs/pr208_E.pdf
19. International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Pro- tection (ICNIRP). Guidelines for limiting exposure to time- varying electric, magnetic and electromagnetic fields (up to 300 GHz). Health Phys. 1998;74:494-522.
20. Council of European Union. Implementation report on the council recommendation limiting the public exposure to electromagnetic fields. Ulaşılabileceği adres: http:// ec.europa.eu/health/archive/ph_determinants/environment/ emf/implement_rep_en.pdf
21. Federal Communications Commissions. Specific absorp- tion rate (Sar) for cellular telephones. Ulaşılabileceği adres: http://www.fcc.gov/encyclopedia/specific-absorption-rate- sar-cellular-telephones
22. Lenhart A. Teens, smartphones & texting. Ulaşılabileceği adres:http://www.pewinternet.org/2012/03/19/communica- tion-choices/
23. Mezei G, Benyi M, Muller A. Mobile phone ownership and use among school children in three Hungarian cities. Bio- electromagnetics 2007;28:309-315.
24. Thomas S, Heinrich S, Kühnlein A, Radon K. The associa- tion between socioeconomic status and exposure to mobile telecommunication networks in children and adolescents. Bioelectromagnetics 2010;31:20-27.
25. Schüz J. Mobile phone use and exposures in children. Bio- electromagnetics 2005;7:45-50.
26. Türkiye İstatistik Kurumu. Hanehalkı bilişim teknolojile- ri kullanım araştırması. Ulaşılabileceği adres: http://www. tuik.gov.tr/PreHaberBultenleri.do?id=13569
27. Türkiye İstatistik Kurumu. 06-15 yaş grubu çocuklarda bilişim teknolojileri kullanımı ve medya, 2013. Ulaşılabi- leceği adres: http://www.tuik.gov.tr/PreHaberBultenleri. do?id=15866
28. Bilgi teknolojileri ve iletişim kurumu piyasa gözetim la- boratuvarı müdürlüğü sar değerleri Ulaşılabileceği adres: http://pgm.btk.gov.tr/?q=SARvalues
29. Hassoy H, Durusoy R, Karababa AO. Adolescents’ risk perceptions on mobile phones and their base stations, their trust to authorities and incivility in using mobile phones: a cross-sectional survey on 2240 high school students in Izmir, Turkey. Environ Health 2013;12:1-10.
30. Lonn S, Forssen U, Vecchia P, et al. Output power levels from mobile phones in different geographical areas; im- plications for exposure assessment. Occup Environ Med 2004;61:769-772.