What is "Phubbing" and how does it affect our relationships?

We are still glued to our smartphones, and it affects our lives.

Since the smartphone boom in the middle of the last decade, the presence of these devices in our lives has only grown exponentially.

The percentage of our planet's inhabitants who are users of a cell phone is 51%, or no less than 3.5% of the world's population.that is, no less than 3.79 billion people. This percentage of smartphone users in Spain, for example, is as high as 80% of the adult population. As for the social use of the phone, 42% access networks such as Facebook, WhatsApp Twitter or Instagram on a regular basis in order to interact with others. In light of these data (Fernández, 2016), we can assume that the way we relate to each other is in a process of constant change.

"With their constant beeps, rings, vibrations and whistles, phones are like a wayward child who won't behave until he or she gets what he or she wants. The desire of our phones is to be constantly attended to." (Roberts and David (2016)

What is phubbing and why is it becoming normalized?

Due to the need to describe a social phenomenon that not many years ago did not exist, the Australian dictionary Macquaire developed during 2012 a campaign around the world dedicated to familiarize the population with the word phubbing (Pathak, 2013). Combination of the words phone (phone) and snubbing (snubbing), this term refers to the act of, in a social gathering, ignoring someone by paying attention to a cell phone instead of talking to that person face to face..

This behavior, certainly harmful in any social interaction, is becoming commonplace. Varoth Chotpitayasunondh and Karen Douglas (2016), have recently investigated the psychological causes and consequences of this behavior. These authors found that, as could be predicted intuitively.one of the causes that leads us to deliberately ignore the person we are with is cell phone addiction..

Phubbing and smartphone addiction

Among the predictors of cell phone addiction, and therefore phubbing, is Internet addiction and its inordinate use, which is closely related to other non-chemical addictions such as pathological gambling.

As a predictor of Internet and smartphone addiction, these researchers from the University of Kent found that one influential factor was the user's ability to self-control. The lower the self-control, the higher the probability of addiction to the Internet, the smartphone and, therefore, the higher the probability of phubbing.. A final important factor identified was the fear and worry of being left out of events, happenings and conversations that are taking place in the social circle, causing problematic cell phone use.

Phubbing behavior, the authors argue, is becoming normal and acceptable due to what is conceptualized in social psychology as "reciprocity." Repeatedly ignoring others while looking at one's cell phone causes others, intentionally or unintentionally, to return this social action.

Although it is not pleasant for anyone to be ignored, roles are often reversed during different social interactions, with one being the "ignoring" one inbeing the "ignoring" one on some occasions and the ignored one on others. Because social learning is basic to the acquisition of new behaviors, this exchange, according to the researchers, leads us to assume the false consensus that this way of acting is acceptable and even normal. The authors confirmed this by finding that those who ignored more and those who tended to be ignored more saw these behaviors as more socially acceptable.

How does phubbing affect our close relationships?

The mere (visible) presence of a cell phone on the table can reduce the perception of closeness, trust and quality of conversation between two people, with this effect being more pronounced when discussing emotionally relevant topics (Przybylski and Weinstein, 2013).

About 70% of participants in a study on the influence of technologies on couple relationships (McDaniel and Coyne, 2016), stated that. computers or smartphones interfered in some way with their coexistence.. The greater the frequency of interference from technologies, the greater the impact on their well-being (less satisfaction with the relationship, with life in general and more depressive symptoms).

Therefore, this phubbing behavior is not reduced to sporadic encounters between friends, co-workers, classmates, etc. but can directly affect the structure of our most intimate relationships and have some influence on our quality of life.

Phubbing in relationships

James Roberts and Meredith David (2016), from Baylor University, decided to study the effects of partner phubbing o p-phubbing, i.e., interruptions to look at one's cell phone during a conversation while in the presence of one's romantic partner. Due to the widespread presence of these smartphones, as mentioned above, it is highly probable that interruptions will occur frequently in people who share a large amount of time, such as a married couple or any couple.

Due to the attachment needs of human beings, these authors hypothesize that for a quality relationship to occur, the presence of the partner alone is not enough, but that certain affective exchanges must take place that must be reciprocal. These exchanges, as the use and presence of smartphones advances, may be diminished. As a result, due to the interruptions caused by p-phubbing, attachment and attention needs may not be met in the same way as they were in the past. in the same way they are without the interference of certain technologies.

Conflicts aggravated by phubbing

Regarding the results of the study by James Roberts and Meredith David (2016), as predicted., the higher the frequency of phubbing, the higher the number of conflicts regarding cell phone use.. 

Phubbing and conflicts regarding mobile were good predictors of relationship quality, i.e., when there were numerous conflicts and couples engaged in phubbing, relationship quality decreased significantly. Moreover, with relationship quality being a factor that influences quality of life, it could be argued that disrupting our face-to-face relationships by phubbing can have a negative impact on our long-term well-being. This decrease in quality of life may indirectly cause phubbing to create a context conducive to the onset of depressive symptoms in a progressive manner.

It is important to note that in couples who interrupted their relationship more frequently due to the cell phone, the number of conflicts was higher in those in which one of the partners had an insecure attachment style, the number of conflicts was even higher in those in which one partner had an insecure attachment stylecompared to the secure attachment style. People with an insecure attachment style, related to cold affective relationships and a greater desire to control their partner, would therefore be more affected by the contempt provoked by their partner.

Conclusions

Bearing in mind that, at present, the percentage of divorces with respect to marriages stands at 50% (without taking into account the separations of other couples), the empirical evidence provided by this type of study should be useful to make us aware of our actions.

This awareness does not imply that in order to live a fruitful relationship we should isolate ourselves from the benefits that new technologies bring with them, but rather that we should use them correctly. Just as a person can subjugate his or her partner by exercising excessive control over him or her and preventing, for example, him or her from going to meetings with friends, a cell phone (something inert) can deprive us of moments with our loved ones. Taking advantage of our "powerful" frontal lobe, we must take control of our relationships and be able to guide our lives towards the best possible quality of life. There would be little point in living in an online world if we disconnect from what is truly important.

Bibliographical references:

• Chotpitayasunondh, V., & Douglas, K. M. (2016). How "phubbing" becomes the norm: The antecedents and consequences of snubbing via smartphone. Computers in Human Behavior, 63, 9-18.

• Fernandez, S. (2016). España, territorio smartphone. [online] Xatakamovil.com.

• McDaniel, B. T., & Coyne, S. M. (2016). “Technoference”: The interference of technology in couple relationships and implications for women’s personal and relational well-being. Psychology of Popular Media Culture, 5(1), 85.

• Pathak, S. (2013). McCann Melbourne Made Up a Word to Sell a Print Dictionary. [online] Adage.com.

• Przybylski, A. K., & Weinstein, N. (2013). Can you connect with me now? How the presence of mobile communication technology influences face-to-face conversation quality. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 30(3), 237-246.

• Roberts, J. A., & David, M. E. (2016). My life has become a major distraction from my cell phone: Partner phubbing and relationship satisfaction among romantic partners. Computers in Human Behavior, 54, 134-141.