Development of an Offline-Friend Addiction Questionnaire (O-FAQ): Are most people really social addicts?

A growing number of self-report measures aim to define interactions with social media in a pathological behavior framework, often using terminology focused on identifying those who are 'addicted' to engaging with others online. Specifically, measures of 'social media addiction' focus on motivations for online social information seeking, which could relate to motivations for offline social information seeking. However, it could be the case that these same measures could reveal a pattern of friend addiction in general. This study develops the Offline-Friend Addiction Questionnaire (O-FAQ) by re-wording items from highly cited pathological social media use scales to reflect "spending time with friends". Our methodology for validation follows the current literature precedent in the development of social media 'addiction' scales. The O-FAQ had a three-factor solution in an exploratory sample of N = 807 and these factors were stable in a 4-week retest (r = .72 to .86) and was validated against personality traits, and risk-taking behavior, in conceptually plausible directions. Using the same polythetic classification techniques as pathological social media use studies, we were able to classify 69% of our sample as addicted to spending time with their friends. The discussion of our satirical research is a critical reflection on the role of measurement and human sociality in social media research. We question the extent to which connecting with others can be considered an 'addiction' and discuss issues concerning the validation of new 'addiction' measures without relevant medical constructs. Readers should approach our measure with a level of skepticism that should be afforded to current social media addiction measures.

The role of interpersonal style in aggression and its containment in a forensic mental health setting: A correlational and pseudoprospective study of patients and nursing staff.

Inpatient aggression on mental health wards is common and staff-patient interactions are frequently reported antecedents to aggression. However, relatively little is known about the precise relationship between aggression and these interactions, or their relationships with aggression and staff containment responses such as restraint and seclusion. This study aimed to determine the roles of anger and interpersonal style among mental health nurses and between nurses and patients in the occurrence of aggression and its containment. A correlational, pseudoprospective study design was employed. n = 85 inpatients and n = 65 nurses were recruited from adult, low- and medium-secure wards of a secure forensic mental health service. Participants completed validated self-report anger and transactional interpersonal style measures. Inpatient aggression and containment incident data for a 3-month follow-up period were extracted from clinical records. Dyadic nurse-patient relationships were anticomplementary. Patients' self-reported anger and staff-rated hostile interpersonal style were significantly positively correlated; staff self-reported anger and patient-rated dominant interpersonal style were also positively correlated. Patient anger predicted aggression and their interpersonal style predicted being subject to containment in the form of restraint and seclusion. There were no statistically significant differences identified on measures between staff who were and were not involved in containment. More targeted intervention for patients' anger may have a positive impact on interpersonal style and lead to the reduction of incidents. Staff education and skills training programmes should emphasize the importance of interpersonal styles which could help to promote and enhance positive interactions.

Mental health nurses' emotions, exposure to patient aggression, attitudes to and use of coercive measures: Cross sectional questionnaire survey.

BACKGROUND: Mental health nurses are exposed to patient aggression, and required to manage and de-escalate aggressive incidents; coercive measures such as restraint and seclusion should only be used as a last resort. An improved understanding of links between nurses' exposure to aggression, attitudes to, and actual involvement in, coercive measures, and their emotions (anger, guilt, fear, fatigue, sadness), could inform preparation and education for prevention and management of violence. OBJECTIVES: To identify relationships between mental health nurses' exposure to patient aggression, their emotions, their attitudes towards coercive containment measures, and their involvement in incidents involving seclusion and restraint. DESIGN: Cross-sectional, correlational, observational study. SETTINGS: Low and medium secure wards for men and women with mental disorder in three secure mental health hospitals in England. PARTICIPANTS: N=Sixty eight mental health nurses who were designated keyworkers for patients enrolled into a related study. METHODS: Participants completed a questionnaire battery comprising measures of their exposure to various types of aggression, their attitudes towards seclusion and restraint, and their emotions. Information about their involvement in restraint and/or restraint plus seclusion incidents was gathered for the three-month period pre- and post- their participation. Linear and logistic regression analyses were performed to test study hypotheses. RESULTS: Nurses who reported greater exposure to a related set of aggressive behaviours, mostly verbal in nature, which seemed personally derogatory, targeted, or humiliating, also reported higher levels of anger-related provocation. Exposure to mild and severe physical aggression was unrelated to nurses' emotions. Nurses' reported anger was significantly positively correlated with their endorsement of restraint as a management technique, but not with their actual involvement in restraint episodes. Significant differences in scores related to anger and fatigue, and to fatigue and guilt, between those involved/not involved in physical restraint and in physical restraint plus seclusion respectively were detected. In regression analyses, models comprising significant variables, but not the variables themselves, predicted involvement/non-involvement in coercive measures. CONCLUSIONS: Verbal aggression which appears targeted, demeaning or humiliating is associated with higher experienced anger provocation. Nurses may benefit from interventions which aim to improve their skills and coping strategies for dealing with this specific aggressive behaviour. Nurse-reported anger predicted approval of coercive violence management interventions; this may have implications for staff deployment and support. However, anger did not predict actual involvement in such incidents. Possible explanations are that nurses experiencing anger are sufficiently self-aware to avoid involvement or that teams are successful in supporting colleagues who they perceive to be 'at risk'. Future research priorities are considered.