Nomophobia describes anxiety or unease arising when a person cannot access a mobile phone or mobile communication services. Smartphone addiction, by contrast, refers to excessive, compulsive and uncontrolled smartphone use despite negative consequences. The distinction is central to the analysis: nomophobia captures an emotional response to potential separation from a device, while smartphone addiction measures a problematic behavioural pattern. Both were assessed among undergraduates at a university where smartphones support communication, academic coordination and access to information but can also become tools for coping with distress or unmet emotional needs.

Researchers used a quantitative, cross-sectional correlational design and recruited 411 students through convenience sampling during a one-month data-collection period. Participants were approached at selected halls, hostels, shuttle terminals and summer huts, mainly between 6 p.m. and 8 p.m. Eligibility required participants to be at least 18 years old, enrolled as undergraduates and smartphone owners. Questionnaires were completed anonymously after written informed consent, and the researchers reported a return rate of about 99.5%. All questionnaires included in the final analysis were sufficiently complete, with no missing data.

The measures covered nomophobia, financial stress, love addiction, academic stress and smartphone addiction. The 20-item Nomophobia Questionnaire used seven-point responses and produced total scores from 20 to 140, with higher scores indicating more severe nomophobia. The study also used a 13-item financial stress scale, a 24-item love addiction inventory, a 35-item academic stress questionnaire and a 10-item smartphone addiction scale. The mean score for nomophobia was 94.0 ± 24.5, compared with 26.3 ± 7.9 for financial stress, 53.0 ± 23.7 for love addiction, 121.8 ± 23.5 for academic stress and 31.8 ± 12.1 for smartphone addiction.

Nomophobia showed weak positive correlations with financial stress, love addiction and academic stress, but its strongest reported correlation was with smartphone addiction. The corresponding Pearson coefficients were 0.139, 0.218, 0.200 and 0.512, respectively, with all reported p-values below 0.01. A multiple linear regression found that financial stress, love addiction and academic stress jointly explained 8.8% of the variance in nomophobia, with an adjusted R² of 0.081: F(3, 407) = 13.04, p < .001. Love addiction and academic stress were significant individual associates in that model, whereas financial stress was not.

Process analysis produced statistically significant indirect associations for all three predictors through smartphone addiction. The estimated indirect effect was 0.247 for financial stress, with a 95% bias-corrected bootstrap confidence interval of 0.083 to 0.419; 0.135 for love addiction, with an interval of 0.083 to 0.192; and 0.134 for academic stress, with an interval of 0.078 to 0.195. None of these intervals included zero. In each model, the direct association became non-significant after smartphone addiction was included, which the authors described as evidence consistent with indirect-only statistical mediation.

The pattern is compatible with several psychological mechanisms, but it does not establish one. Compensatory Internet Use Theory proposes that people may turn to digital devices to cope with distress, adverse events or unmet social and emotional needs. Stress and coping theory similarly suggests that smartphones may temporarily help students manage academic demands, communicate with others or regulate emotional responses. Attachment theory adds a relational dimension: students who seek frequent reassurance may depend on mobile communication to preserve closeness with romantic partners. Collectively, these frameworks suggest a sequence in which stress or emotional dependence is associated with greater smartphone reliance, which is then associated with heightened discomfort when access is lost.

The direct results nevertheless require cautious interpretation. Academic stress and love addiction together with financial stress accounted for only a modest proportion of the observed variation in nomophobia, leaving most of it unexplained. The study did not measure potential influences such as anxiety, fear of missing out, self-control, social support, personality traits or patterns of smartphone access. Conceptual overlap between smartphone addiction and nomophobia may also have inflated their association. The authors noted that alternative temporal orders remain possible: nomophobia could contribute to smartphone addiction, academic stress or financial stress, and the relationships could be reciprocal rather than unidirectional.

Generalisation is further constrained by the recruitment method and setting. All participants came from one institution, and convenience sampling may have favoured students who were available in the selected campus locations during evening collection. Students attending evening classes, working, living off campus or otherwise unavailable may have been underrepresented. Reliance on self-report also creates the possibility that participants overestimated or understated their nomophobia, smartphone addiction, financial stress, love addiction and academic stress. Because the measurements were collected at one point, longitudinal research is needed to determine whether stress and emotional factors precede problematic smartphone use, whether such use precedes nomophobia, or whether both develop together.

The results offer a more connected picture than a simple comparison between stressed and non-stressed students. Financial stress did not retain a statistically significant direct association with nomophobia after the three predictors were considered together, yet its indirect association through smartphone addiction was significant. Love addiction and academic stress showed direct associations as well as significant indirect pathways. For the University of Cape Coast sample, the clearest statistical signal was not that any single stressor automatically produced fear of being without a phone, but that problematic reliance on smartphones formed part of the observed connection. Larger, longitudinal and mixed-method studies across multiple Ghanaian universities would be needed to test the pathway’s temporal direction and determine whether the same relationships hold in other student populations.

Subject of Research: Statistical mediation of nomophobia among University of Cape Coast students by smartphone addiction

Article Title: Predictors of nomophobia and the mediating role of smartphone addiction among students at the university of cape coast ghana

Article References: Mfodwo, R. D., Bamfo, H. D., & Cudjoe, R. C. (2026). Predictors of nomophobia and the mediating role of smartphone addiction among students at the university of cape coast ghana. Discover Education, 5(1), Article 1200. https://doi.org/10.1007/s44217-026-02318-8

Image Credits: AI Generated

DOI: 10.1007/s44217-026-02318-8

Keywords: nomophobia, smartphone addiction, academic stress, financial stress, love addiction, university students, cross-sectional study, mediation analysis, Ghana, Cape Coast, Predictors, mediating