Validation of Thai Smartphone Addiction Scale-short version for school students between 10 to 18 years

Main Article Content

Panida Hanphitakphong
Nuanlaor Thawinchai


Background: With the dramatic increase in the number of smartphone users, concern has been raised that smartphone overuse can be hazardous to health. There is a need of smartphone addiction screening instrument that can be used for the Thai people, particularly children and adolescents.

Objectives: This study aimed to translate Smartphone Addiction Scale – Short Version (SAS-SV) into Thai for school students between 10 to 18 years and to comprehensively validate the translated version.

Materials and methods: After completing the translation according to published guidelines, Thai version of the SAS-SV (THAI-SAS-SV) for school students underwent thorough many psychometric tests. The content validity was evaluated by a panel of seven experts. Internal consistency and construct validity of the THAI-SAS-SV were then tested among 200 Thai school students between ages 10 and 18 (mean age 12.82±2.21 years). The test-retest reliability was also evaluated in half of all participants.

Results: THAI-SAS-SV for school students demonstrated an excellent validity index for scale (S-CVI = 0.97) and an item content validity index (I-CVI) ranging from 0.86 to 1.0. Cronbach’s alpha for internal consistency was calculated as 0.85. The THAI-SAS-SV for school students has similar construct to the original instrument because the confirmatory factor analysis clearly revealed a single-factor structure. Intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) value for test retest reliability was 0.73 (95% CI: 0.62-0.81).

Conclusion: The findings suggest that THAI-SAS-SV for school students between 10 to 18 years is a valid and reliable instrument for screening smartphone addiction targeted towards Thai children and adolescents.


Download data is not yet available.

Article Details

How to Cite
Hanphitakphong, P., & Thawinchai, N. (2020). Validation of Thai Smartphone Addiction Scale-short version for school students between 10 to 18 years. Journal of Associated Medical Sciences, 53(3), 34–42. Retrieved from
Research Articles


World Health Organization [Internet]. Public health implications of excessive use of the internet, computers, smartphones, and similar electronic devices: meeting report. 2015 [cited 2019 Sep 4]. Available from: /iris/handle/10665/184264.

De-Sola Gutiérrez J, Rodríguez de Fonseca F, Rubio G. Cell-phone addiction: a review. Front Psychiatry 2016; 7: 175. doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2016.00175.

We Are Social [Internet]. Digital 2019: global internet use accelerates. 2019 [cited 2019 Sep 6]. Available from:

Newzoo [Internet]. Top 50 countries/markets by smartphone users and penetration. 2019 [cited 2019 Sep 11] Available from:

DQ Institute [Internet]. 60% at Cyber-Risk. Thailand 4,652 4,960. Average DQ Screen Time Management Score Schools & Organizations Reached in 2017. 2018 [cited 2019 Sep 10]. Available from:

Pew Research Center [Internet]. Teens, social media & technology 2018. 2018 [cited 2019 Sep 2]. Available from:

National Statistical Office of Thailand [Internet]. The ITU indicators from 2017 household survey on the use of information and communication technology [cited 2019 Sep 12]. Available from:

Charoenwanit S, Soonthornchaiya R. Development of Smartphone Addiction Scale: Thai Short Version (SAS-SV-TH). J Ment Health Thai 2019; 27(1): 25-36.

Kwon M, Kim D-J, Cho H, Yang S. The smartphone addiction scale: development and validation of a short version for adolescents. PLoS ONE 2013; 8(12): e83558. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0083558.

Haug S, Castro RP, Kwon M, Filler A, Kowatsch T, Schaub MP. Smartphone use and smartphone addiction among young people in Switzerland. J Behav Addict 2015; 4(4): 299-307. doi:10.1556/ 2006.4.2015.037.

Lopez-Fernandez O. Short version of the smartphone addiction scale adapted to Spanish and French: towards a cross-cultural research in problematic mobile phone use. Addict Behav 2017; 64: 275-80.

Samaha M, Hawi NS. Relationships among smartphone addiction, stress, academic performance, and satisfaction with life. Comput Human Behav 2016; 57: 321-25.

Akın A, Altundağ Y, Mehmet ET, Turan ME, AKm U. The validity and reliability of the Turkish version of the smart phone addiction scale-short form for adolescent. Procedia Soc Behav Sci 2014; 152: 74-7. doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.09.157.

De Pasquale C, Sciacca F, Hichy Z. Italian validation of smartphone addiction scale short version for adolescents and young adults (SAS-SV). Psychology 2017; 8: 1513-18. doi:10.4236/psych.2017.810100

Luk TT, Wang MP, Shen C, Wan A, Chau P H, Oliffe J, et al. Short version of the Smartphone Addiction Scale in Chinese adults: psychometric properties, sociodemographic, and health behavioral correlates. J Behav Addict 2018; 7(4): 1157–65. doi:10.1556/20 06.7.2018.105.

Phanasathit M, Manwong M, Hanprathet N, Khumsri J, Yingyeun R. Validation of the Thai version of Bergen Facebook Addiction Scale (Thai-BFAS). J Med Assoc Thai 2015; 98(2): S108-17.

Pornnoppadol C, na Ayudhaya SL, Phoasavasdi C, Surapongphiwattana T. Development of Game Addiction Protection Scale (GAME-P). J Psychiatr Assoc Thailand 2017; 62(1): 3-16.

Kwon M, Lee JY, Won WY, Park JW, Min JA, Hahn C, et al. Development and validation of a smartphone addiction scale (SAS). PLoS ONE 2013; 8(2): e56936. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0056936.

Beaton DE, Bombardier C, Guillemin F, Ferraz MB. Guidelines for the process of cross-cultural adaptation of self-report measures. Spine 2000; 25: 3186-91. doi:10.1097/00007632-200012150-00014.

Nunnally JC. Psychometric Theory. 2nd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill; 1978.

Terwee CB, Bot SD, de Boer MR, van der Windt DA, Knol DL, Dekker J, et al. Quality criteria were proposed for measurement properties of health status questionnaires. J Clin Epidemiol 2007; 60: 34-42. doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2006.03.012.

Bolarinwa OA. Principles and methods of validity and reliability testing of questionnaires used in social and health science researches. Niger Postgrad Med J 2015; 22(4): 195-201.

Polit DF, Beck CT. The content validity index: are you sure you know what's being reported? critique and recommendations. Res Nurs Health 2006; 29: 489-97. doi:10.1002/nur.20147.

Kline RB. Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. New York: Guilford Press; 1998.

Nunnally JC, Bernstein I. Psychometric theory. 3rd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill; 1994.

De Vellis RF. Scale development: theory and applications. 3rd ed. California: SAGE Publications; 2012.

Rosenberg KP, Feder LC. Behavioral addictions: criteria, evidence, and treatment. Amsterdam: Elsevier/Academic Press; 2014.

Koo TK, Mae YL. A guideline of selecting and reporting intraclass correlation coefficients for reliability research. J Chiropr Med 2016; 15: 155-63.

American Psychological Association [Internet]. Developing adolescents: a reference for professionals. 2002 [cited 2019 Sep 11]. Available from Retrieved from develop.pdf.