RESEARCH ARTICLE
P edic ing echnos ess: The Big Fi e model o
pe sonali y and subjec i e well-being
Da
´ma is Cuad adoID*
☯
, Inmaculada O e o
☯
, Alexand a Ma ı
´nez
☯
, Tania Pa ı
´s
☯
,
Sil ia Moscoso
☯
Depa men o Poli ical Science and Sociology, Uni e si y o San iago de Compos ela, San iago de
Compos ela, Spain
☯These au ho s con ibu ed equally o his wo k.
*dama is.cuad [email protected]
Abs ac
The main goal o he cu en s udy is o b oaden he knowledge on he associa ion be ween
pe sonali y, subjec i e well-being (SWB) and echnos ess in an academic con ex . This
esea ch speci ically examines he p e alence o echnos ess in a Eu opean uni e si y
sample. I also explo es he ela ionship be ween echnos ess and i s dimensions wi h he
Big Fi e model o pe sonali y and wi h SWB and i s a ec i e and cogni i e componen s.
Finally, he combined p edic i e alidi y o he Big Fi e and SWB on echnos ess is es ed.
The sample was composed o 346 unde g adua e s uden s. Co ela ional and mul iple
eg ession analyses we e ca ied ou . Resul s show ha a igue and anxie y a e he mos
equen ly expe ienced dimensions o echnos ess. Emo ional s abili y, openness o expe i-
ence, and SWB a e nega i ely and signi ican ly co ela ed o echnos ess. Mul iple eg es-
sion analyses show ha he Big Fi e ac o s and SWB accoun o echnos ess a iance,
he main p edic o being he a ec i e componen o SWB. These esul s con ibu e o a
mo e comp ehensi e unde s anding o echnos ess and sugges ha pe sonali y ai s and
SWB a e impo an ac o s in i s p edic ion. The heo e ical and p ac ical implica ions will be
discussed.
In oduc ion
S eady echnological ad ancemen is subs an ially inc easing he use o In o ma ion and Com-
munica ion Technologies (ICTs) in ou daily li es. ICTs allow us o be mo e e icien , accu a e,
and p oduc i e in ou ac i i ies, o ha e quick and easy access o in o ma ion, and o keep in
ouch wi h ela i es, iends, and cowo ke s. Despi e hei bene i s, p e ious s udies ha e
shown ha ICTs can nega i ely a ec ou li es [1–6]. Spending long hou s in on o sc eens,
uncon olled use o ICTs, and a lack o b eaks can lead o s ess and psychological p essu e in
use s. These symp oms a e commonly e e ed o as echnos ess.
Technos ess a ec s he li es o indi iduals in mul iple aspec s. In he occupa ional domain,
echnos ess has been linked o employees’ physical and psychological p oblems, amily-wo k
con lic , gene al and occupa ional dis ess and anxie y, wo k exhaus ion, bu nou , and lowe
a es o job pe o mance, wo k sa is ac ion, and o ganiza ional commi men [3,5–13]. Simila
PLOS ONE
PLOS ONE | h ps://doi.o g/10.1371/jou nal.pone.0313247 No embe 4, 2024 1 / 18
a1111111111
a1111111111
a1111111111
a1111111111
a1111111111
OPEN ACCESS
Ci a ion: Cuad ado D, O e o I, Ma ı
´nez A, Pa ı
´s T,
Moscoso S (2024) P edic ing echnos ess: The
Big Fi e model o pe sonali y and subjec i e well-
being. PLoS ONE 19(11): e0313247. h ps://doi.
o g/10.1371/jou nal.pone.0313247
Edi o : Adeel Luqman, Shenzhen Uni e si y, CHINA
Recei ed: Ma ch 14, 2024
Accep ed: Oc obe 21, 2024
Published: No embe 4, 2024
Copy igh : ©2024 Cuad ado e al. This is an open
access a icle dis ibu ed unde he e ms o he
C ea i e Commons A ibu ion License, which
pe mi s un es ic ed use, dis ibu ion, and
ep oduc ion in any medium, p o ided he o iginal
au ho and sou ce a e c edi ed.
Da a A ailabili y S a emen : The da a unde lying
he esul s p esen ed in his s udy is a ailable a
h ps://os .io/3apg /? iew_only=
c2b275c2b701478ea189cc8 c2356d16.
Funding: This esea ch was pa ially suppo ed by
g an PID2020-114984GB-I00 o SM and by g an
PID2020-116409GB-I00 o JS om he Spanish
Minis y o Science and Inno a ion o SM. Spanish
Minis y o Science and Inno a ion websi e: h p://
www.ciencia.gob.es/ The unde s had no ole in
s udy design, da a collec ion and analysis, decision
o publish, o p epa a ion o he manusc ip .
o he wo kplace, he academic ield has unde gone a p o ound digi aliza ion in ecen yea s.
Un o una ely, esea ch in his con ex has been mo e limi ed han in occupa ional se ings
[14,15]. S ill, some ecen indings indica e ha s uden s su e ing om echnos ess show a
a ie y o nega i e e ec s. Lowe academic pe o mance, highe bu nou and anxie y a es,
and g ea e exhaus ion le els han hei non- echnos essed pee s can be ci ed [16–22]. The
se iousness o hese consequences makes he s udy o echnos ess a c i ical issue o academic
ins i u ions.
The alidi y o indi idual cha ac e is ics o p edic echnos ess has been examined in he
ecen yea s, pa icula ly, in he occupa ional con ex . Among hem, demog aphic cha ac e is-
ics, cogni i e and emo ional in elligence, and pe sonali y can be ci ed. S ill, pe sonali y and
subjec i e well-being ha e ye o be ully examined ega ding echnos ess in he educa ional
ield. Fo his eason, he main goals o he cu en esea ch a e (1) o examine he p e alence
o echnos ess in a sample o uni e si y s uden s; (2) o s udy i s ela ionship wi h (a) he
dimensions o he Big Fi e model o pe sonali y and wi h (b) o e all SWB and i s a ec i e and
cogni i e componen s; and (3) o es he join capaci y o he Big Fi e model and SWB o
explain he a iance o echnos ess.
Technos ess can be de ined as “ he s ess expe ienced by end use s in o ganiza ions as a
esul o hei use o In o ma ion and Communica ion Technologies (ICTs),caused by an indi-
idual’s a emp s o deal wi h cons an ly e ol ing ICTs and he changing o physical,social,and
cogni i e esponses demanded by hei use” [3]. Following he model de eloped by Llo ens and
colleagues [23], echnos ess is a mul idimensional cons uc composed o ou dimensions
(i.e., anxie y, a igue, skep icism, and low compe ence). Anxie y occu s when he use o ICTs
gi es indi iduals high le els o unpleasan physiological ension and discom o . Fa igue is
cha ac e ized by men al and cogni i e exhaus ion de i ed om he use o ICTs. Skep icism
e e s o nega i e e alua ions made ega ding he use o ICTs and is ela ed o a i udes o cyni-
cism and doub ulness. Finally, low compe ence consis s o subjec s’ nega i e hough s abou
hei own abili y o success ully wo k wi h ICTs.
Empi ical e idence indica es ha pe sonali y ai s explain subjec s’ p edisposi ion o su e
om echnos ess. Sel -e icacy and ai /s a e anxie y a e wo pe sonali y a iables ha ha e
been he mos s udied in scien i ic li e a u e [24–28]. Howe e , he ela ionship be ween ech-
nos ess and i s dimensions wi h o he pe sonali y cha ac e is ics, such as he Big Fi e model,
has no been examined in de ail. Addi ionally, p e ious esul s on hese ela ionships a e o en
mixed, anging om almos -null o mode a e co ela ions [see, o ins ance, 11,29–31], showing
high a iabili y in esul s, and c ea ing a con lic ing pic u e o esea che s and p ac i ione s.
The Big Fi e model is he mos accep ed model o explain an indi idual’s no mal pe sonal-
i y and i has been shown o p edic impo an occupa ional and academic c i e ia [32–39].
This model pos ula es ha an indi idual’s pe sonali y is explained by i e dimensions (i.e.,
emo ional s abili y, ex a e sion, openness o expe ience, ag eeableness, and
conscien iousness).
Emo ional s abili y (ES), as opposed o neu o icism, e e s o an indi idual’s abili y o con-
ol hei emo ions. People desc ibed as emo ionally s able a e calm, elaxed, and e en- em-
pe ed, whe eas neu o ic subjec s end o expe ience ne ousness, ange , guil , and a e mo e
ulne able o s ess and anxie y [40–43]. Since he la e end o ace di icul y in dealing wi h
daily s imuli, i is possible ha hey expe ience nega i e emo ions such as ea , hos ili y, con-
ce n, and psychological s ain when exposed o ICTs. Failu es o in e up ions caused by ICTs
could be pe cei ed as a sou ce o ension and conce n. Al hough e idence on he ES- echnos-
ess ela ionship is sca ce, esul s in he occupa ional domain sugges ha his dimension is
one o he mos s ongly ela ed o echnos ess [see, 11]. In he academic con ex , esul s by
Wang e al. [31] ollow he same line.
PLOS ONE
Technos ess, Big Fi e, and subjec i e well-being
PLOS ONE | h ps://doi.o g/10.1371/jou nal.pone.0313247 No embe 4, 2024 2 / 18
Compe ing in e es s: The au ho s ha e decla ed
ha no compe ing in e es s exis .
Ex a e sion (EX) desc ibes indi iduals who a e social, asse i e, dominan , and op imis ic
[40–43]. Since hey enjoy in e ac ing wi h people, he use o ICTs in he academic con ex
could be pe cei ed as a means o sa is y hei social needs, allowing hem o engage wi h pee s,
ins uc o s, and he academic communi y in gene al. P e ious esea ch has shown ha ex a-
e ed indi iduals a e genuinely com o able and con iden in compu e -media ed in e ac-
ions [44]. I has been a gued ha hey a e mo i a ed o p ese e a posi i e image owa ds
o he s [45] and, consequen ly, ex a e ed subjec s could be p edisposed o use ICTs as a way
o make a a o able imp ession. As hey end o be socially dominan and a e com o able
leading o he s, ICTs could help hem become mo e p ominen in online- eamwo k. Empi ical
esul s on he EX- echnos ess ela ionship a e mixed. Some s udies in he occupa ional ield
show a nega i e ela ionship be ween he a iables [e.g., 11,46]. O he s udies show a posi i e
associa ion [e.g., 30]. In he educa ional con ex , Ko zynksi e al. [29] p o ide a posi i e bu
almos null esul and Wang e al. [31] epo a small nega i e co ela ion.
Openness o expe ience (OP) is associa ed wi h an ac i e imagina ion, an in e es in alues
and ideas, and an a en ion o in e nal eelings [40–43]. Open indi iduals a e also in ellec ually
cu ious, o ien ed owa ds lea ning, and hey look o oppo uni ies o acqui e expe ise in new
a eas [47,48]. They migh pe cei e ICTs as a means o expand hei knowledge and mas e
academic asks, and, he e o e, be less p one o de eloping nega i e a i udes. Also, open sub-
jec s migh eel mo i a ed o sol e po en ial issues wi h ICTs. Since hey a e men ally lexible
and open o new app oaches, hey could pe cei e he use o ICTs as less complica ed han
hose indi iduals sco ing lowe in his dimension, esul ing, pe haps, in a less s ess ul expe i-
ence. Empi ical e idence sugges s he exis ence o a nega i e ela ionship be ween he a i-
ables. Howe e , he esul s also show an impo an a iabili y, anging om almos null o
mode a e e ec sizes [see, 11,49].
Ag eeableness (A) desc ibes coope a i e, iendly, us wo hy, and ole an indi iduals.
They ejec ad an ages a he cos o o he s and a e complian wi h no ms and egula ions
[40–43]. Thus, highly ag eeable s uden s migh be mo e willing o accep he use o ICTs when
equi ed by ins uc o s o academic ins i u ions o acili a e collabo a ion. Likewise, hey end
o ake pleasu e in suppo ing and accep ing help om o he s, use ul quali ies when he use o
ICTs u ns complex o p oblema ic. Fu he mo e, as hey a e us ing o o he s and easie o
pe suade, hey could de elop posi i e a i udes owa ds ICTs i hey a e demanded in he aca-
demic con ex . Mos o he empi ical esea ch has shown nega i e co ela ions be ween A and
echnos ess. Howe e , as seen wi h o he pe sonali y dimensions, he a iabili y o esul s is
an impo an conce n. The esul s epo ed in p ima y esea ch a y om i ually ze o [e.g.,
11,50] o mode a e e ec sizes [e.g., 31].
The i h ac o , Conscien iousness (C), e e s o he con ol o impulses and in ol es he
ac i e p ocess o planning, o ganizing, and pe o ming asks. Those sco ing high in C a e
esponsible, wo k-o ien ed, and sel -disciplined [40–43]. As such, i is p obable ha hey a e
willing o accep ICTs as an e icien ins umen o inc ease hei academic pe o mance.
T ai s like me iculousness and a en ion o de ail can help p e en p oblems associa ed wi h
he use o ICTs. Gi en hei inne d i e owa ds achie emen , indi iduals wi h hese ai s a e
expec ed o be p o icien in he use o echnology. This could lead o he de elopmen o posi-
i e pe cep ions and a i udes owa ds ICTs. Howe e , empi ical e idence on his ela ionship
has also epo ed mixed esul s. Some s udies in o m small posi i e co ela ions [e.g., 45],
while o he s, mode a e and nega i e co ela ions [e.g., 31].
Like he Big Fi e model o pe sonali y, subjec i e well-being (SWB) is ano he cha ac e is ic
ha could explain he p edisposi ion o indi iduals o su e om echnos ess. The mos
widely accep ed model o SWB is ha o Diene [51–53], which desc ibes SWB as he e alua-
ions indi iduals make o hei li es. SWB consis s o a cogni i e and an a ec i e componen .
PLOS ONE
Technos ess, Big Fi e, and subjec i e well-being
PLOS ONE | h ps://doi.o g/10.1371/jou nal.pone.0313247 No embe 4, 2024 3 / 18
The i s e e s o judgmen s o li e sa is ac ion, and he second e e s o he balance be ween
posi i e and nega i e emo ions expe ienced by an indi idual [54–56]. Thus, subjec s sco ing
high in SWB a e sa is ied wi h li e, and hei posi i e emo ions p e ail o e nega i e ones.
Al hough SWB has been linked o ele an o ganiza ional c i e ia bo h in he occupa ional
[e.g., 57–59] and educa ional domains [60–62], i s ela ionship wi h echnos ess is s ill
unde s udied.
F om a heo e ical poin o iew, a nega i e ela ionship be ween echnos ess and SWB
could be expec ed. Acco ding o Salano a and colleagues [63], echnos ess dimensions can be
classi ied in o an a ec i e, an a i udinal, and a cogni i e componen . The a ec i e componen
o echnos ess includes he dimensions o anxie y and a igue. Compa able o he a ec i e
componen o SWB, i e e s o he emo ions ha a ise when subjec s use ICTs. The e o e, we
could an icipa e ha s uden s who end o expe ience nega i e emo ions owa ds li e e en s
also mani es nega i e emo ions in speci ic scena ios, such as when ICTs a e used o academic
pu poses. On he o he hand, since he cogni i e componen o SWB in ol es e alua ing li e
sa is ac ion, indi iduals who a e p edisposed o be dissa is ied wi h li e may also eel displeased
wi h hei abili ies. This could esul in nega i e e alua ions o hei own e icacy when wo k-
ing wi h ICTs (i.e., echnos ess- ela ed low compe ence).
Empi ical esea ch examining his ela ionship ( echnos ess-SWB) has ocused pa icula ly
on he wo king popula ion and has shown a p edominan in e es in e alua ing he cogni i e
componen o SWB. Some s udies e eal a small o mode a e nega i e ela ionship be ween
employees’ echnos ess and li e sa is ac ion [see, o ins ance, 14,64,65]. The limi ed numbe
o s udies assessing he a ec i e componen sugges s a link be ween he a iables, especially
be ween nega i e emo ions and echnos ess [see 64,66]. The esul s indica e ha subjec s who
p esen a g ea e p edisposi ion o eel nega i e emo ions owa ds li e e en s a e also hose
who a e mo e likely o expe ience echnos ess. Las ly, empi ical e idence p o ided by Hang
e al. [67] shows a clea nega i e associa ion be ween o e all SWB and he dimensions o ech-
nos ess, anging om small o mode a e co ela ions.
Aims o he s udy and hypo heses
The cu en esea ch has h ee main objec i es. Fi s , o examine he p e alence o echnos-
ess in a sample o Eu opean uni e si y s uden s. Second, o explo e he ela ionship be ween
echnos ess and i s dimensions wi h (1) he Big Fi e model o pe sonali y and (2) SWB and i s
componen s. Thi d, o examine he alidi y o he Big Fi e ac o s along wi h SWB o p edic
echnos ess. To he bes o ou knowledge, no p io s udy has es ed he join e ec s o hese
a iables in he p edic ion o his phenomenon in he academic ield.
Following he heo e ical and empi ical a ionale p esen ed abo e, we p opose he ollowing
hypo heses:
Hypo hesis 1. The Big Fi e pe sonali y ac o s, independen ly, co ela e nega i ely wi h ech-
nos ess and i s dimensions.
Hypo hesis 2. O e all SWB co ela es nega i ely wi h echnos ess and i s dimensions.
Hypo hesis 2a. The cogni i e componen o SWB co ela es nega i ely wi h echnos ess and
i s dimensions, meaning ha he subjec s wi h a highe li e sa is ac ion a e less
echnos essed.
Hypo hesis 2b. The a ec i e componen o SWB co ela es nega i ely wi h echnos ess and i s
dimensions, meaning ha he subjec s whose posi i e emo ions p e ail o e he nega i e
emo ions a e less echnos essed.
PLOS ONE
Technos ess, Big Fi e, and subjec i e well-being
PLOS ONE | h ps://doi.o g/10.1371/jou nal.pone.0313247 No embe 4, 2024 4 / 18
Me hod
Pa icipan s and p ocedu e
The sample consis ed o 346 s uden s who we e en olled in deg ee p og ams wi hin he ield o
social sciences a a Spanish Uni e si y (112 men and 234 women). The mean age was 21.15
yea s old (SD = 4.63, ange = 17–55). Da a was ga he ed in class sessions om Ap il 18
h
2023
o May 16
h
2023, whe e he pu pose o he s udy was explained o he s uden s. Those who
olun a ily ag eed o pa icipa e p o ided in o med w i en consen . Nex , an anonymous
online ques ionnai e was adminis e ed, and no pe sonal iden i ica ion was collec ed. E hical
app o al o conduc he s udy was ob ained om he Bioe hics Commi ee o he Uni e si y o
San iago de Compos ela (Code o app o al: USC15/2023).
Ma e ials
Technos ess
Technos ess was assessed using he RED-TIC Scale designed by Salano a e al. [68]. The scale
consis s o 16 i ems s uc u ed in ou dimensions: (1) anxie y (e.g., “I eel ense and anxious
when wo king wi h ICTs”); (2) a igue (e.g., “When I inish wo king wi h ICTs, I eel
exhaus ed”); (3) skep icism (e.g., "I am cynical abou he con ibu ion o ICTs o my wo k");
and (4) low compe ence (e.g., “I am unce ain abou success ully comple ing asks when I use
ICTs”). Subjec s had o indica e he equency hey expe ienced he si ua ions desc ibed in
each i em du ing hei s udies, using a 5-poin scale, whe e 1 = ne e and 5 = always/e e y
day. The in e nal consis ency coe icien s (C onbach´s alpha) in his s udy we e .83, .88, .75,
.80, and .91 o anxie y, a igue, skep icism, low compe ence, and he o e all scale o echnos-
ess, espec i ely.
The Big Fi e model o pe sonali y. The Big Fi e model o pe sonali y was assessed using a
Spanish adap a ion o Saucie ’s Mini-ma ke s scale [69] composed o 35-i ems. Each pe sonal-
i y ac o was assessed wi h 7 adjec i es (e.g., emo ional, ene ge ic, ad en u ous, kind, eliable
o ES, EX, OP, A, and C, espec i ely). Subjec s had o indica e he ex en o which hey eel
ep esen ed by each adjec i e using a 5-poin scale, whe e 1 = no a all and 5 = a lo . P e ious
s udies ha e examined he psychome ic p ope ies o his pe sonali y in en o y. Fo ins ance,
Ta a es [70] ound ha he ins umen is a eliable measu e and ha i s ac o ial s uc u e i s
he i e dimensions o he model. The in e nal consis ency coe icien s (C onbach´s alpha)
we e .83, .66, .74, .72, and .77, o EX, ES, OP, A, and C, espec i ely.
Subjec i e well-being. The cogni i e componen o SWB was assessed using he 5-i em
Scale o Sa is ac ion wi h Li e [71]. The i ems (e.g., “I am comple ely sa is ied wi h my li e”)
we e answe ed using a 5-poin scale ( om 1 = o ally disag ee o 5 = o ally ag ee). The in e nal
consis ency eliabili y (C onbach´s alpha) o he scale was .83 in his s udy. The a ec i e com-
ponen o SWB was assessed wi h he Scale o Posi i e and Nega i e A ec i e Expe ience,
SPANE [55,56], which desc ibes eelings and emo ions using 14 adjec i es. Se en adjec i es
we e posi i e (e.g., happy) and se en adjec i es we e nega i e (e.g., s ess ul). Subjec s had o
indica e he equency wi h which hey expe ience each emo ion using a 5-poin scale ( om
1 = ne e o 5 = always). The SPANE Scale p o ides h ee sco es: (1) a posi i e a ec sco e; (2)
a nega i e a ec sco e; and (3) an emo ional balance sco e (i.e., he a ec i e componen o
SWB). The balance was calcula ed by sub ac ing he nega i e a ec sco e om he posi i e
a ec sco e. The in e nal consis ency coe icien s (C onbach´s alpha) o he posi i e a ec ,
nega i e a ec , and emo ional balance we e .87, .82, and .89, espec i ely, o he cu en sam-
ple. Las , we es ima ed a measu e o o e all SWB by c ea ing a composi e o he cogni i e and
PLOS ONE
Technos ess, Big Fi e, and subjec i e well-being
PLOS ONE | h ps://doi.o g/10.1371/jou nal.pone.0313247 No embe 4, 2024 5 / 18
he a ec i e componen s. The in e nal consis ency using Mosie ’s es ima ion o composi es
eliabili y was .91.
Resul s
Desc ip i e s a is ics o echnos ess
Table 1 p esen s he desc ip i e s a is ics bo h o he o e all measu e o echnos ess and i s
dimensions. The a e age sco e could ange om 1 o 5. Al hough he mean alues do no
exceed he midpoin o he scale (i.e., 3 poin s), some dimensions appea o be mo e p e alen
han o he s. In his case, a igue is he mos equen ly expe ienced dimension o echnos ess
(M= 2.90, SD = 1.05), ollowed by anxie y (M= 2.38, SD = 1.01). The lowes a e age sco e was
o skep icism (M= 1.92, SD = 0.77).
Table 2 shows he equency (exp essed in pe cen age) wi h which he indi iduals admi ed
o ha ing expe ienced, on a e age, echnos ess and i s dimensions.
Resul s show ha 66.55% o he sample epo ed o ha ing expe ienced one o mo e indica-
o s o echnos ess a leas once du ing hei s udies. Following he line o he esul s p e-
sen ed in Table 1, a igue is he dimension occu ing wi h he highes equency. O he
s uden s who ook pa in he s udy, only 16.40% admi ed o ne e ha ing expe ienced any
signs o ICTs- ela ed a igue, while 11.63% indica ed su e ing om i e e y ime hey wo k
wi h echnology. Skep icism appea s o be he leas equen ly expe ienced dimension, wi h
44.94% o he sample epo ing ne e ha ing been skep ical o he use and alue o ICTs.
Bi a ia e co ela ions. Tables 3and 4 epo he bi a ia e co ela ions among echnos-
ess and i s dimensions wi h he Big Fi e model o pe sonali y and wi h SWB and i s a ec i e
and cogni i e componen s. Speci ically, Table 3 epo s he obse ed co ela ions among he
a iables and Table 4 epo s he ue co ela ions o he key ela ionships in his esea ch.
The ue co ela ions we e co ec ed o measu emen e o in he independen and he
dependen a iables. We desc ibe he esul s epo ed in Table 4 in he ollowing pa ag aphs.
Table 1. Desc ip i e s a is ics o he echnos ess measu e.
I ems M SD Max. Min.
Technos ess 16 2.31 0.75 5 1
Anxie y 4 2.38 1.01 5 1
Fa igue 4 2.90 1.05 5 1
Skep icism 4 1.92 0.77 5 1
Low compe ence 4 2.01 0.82 5 1
No e.N= 346; M= mean, SD = s anda d de ia ion; Max. = maximum indi idual mean sco e; Min. = minimum indi idual mean sco e.
h ps://doi.o g/10.1371/jou nal.pone.0313247. 001
Table 2. Pe cen age o s uden s engaging in echnos ess a each le el o equency.
Technos ess Anxie y Fa igue Skep icism Low compe ence
Ne e 33.24 30.71 16.40 44.94 40.89
Ha dly e e 28.45 29.26 24.35 28.76 31.43
Some imes 18.84 17.99 23.27 17.56 16.55
Usually 13.60 14.96 24.35 7.15 7.95
Always 5.87 7.08 11.63 1.59 3.18
No e.N= 346.
h ps://doi.o g/10.1371/jou nal.pone.0313247. 002
PLOS ONE
Technos ess, Big Fi e, and subjec i e well-being
PLOS ONE | h ps://doi.o g/10.1371/jou nal.pone.0313247 No embe 4, 2024 6 / 18
S a ing wi h he pe sonali y a iables, he esul s show ha emo ional s abili y and open-
ness o expe ience a e alid p edic o s o gene al echnos ess. The co ec ed co ela ion o
emo ional s abili y is ρ= -.36. The esul o openness o expe ience is ρ= -.22. Conscien ious-
ness and ag eeableness show nega i e bu non-signi ican esul s. In he case o ex a e sion,
he esul is essen ially ze o. In ega d o he speci ic dimensions o echnos ess, emo ional
Table 3. Obse ed co ela ions among he a iables.
M SD 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17
1. Sex - - -
2. Age 21.15 4.63 -.12*-
3. Technos ess 2.31 0.75 .17** -.13*(.91)
4. Anxie y 2.38 1.01 .16** -.10 .88** (.83)
5. Fa igue 2.90 1.05 .23** -.12*.81** .60** (.88)
6. Skep icism 1.92 0.77 .03 -.07 .75** .53** .48** (.75)
7. Low
compe ence
2.01 0.82 .09 -.15** .82** .72** .49** .52** (.80)
8. ES 3.37 0.58 -.27** .08 -.28** -.28** -.26** -.14** -.22** (.66)
9. EX 3.42 0.75 -.09 .19** -.03 .00 .03 -.07 -.08 .18** (.83)
10. OP 3.55 0.62 -.22** .11*-.18** -.10 -.15** -.16** -.21** .28** .40** (.74)
11. A 4.05 0.52 -.03 .06 -.09 -.11 .03 -.13*-.12*.37** 46** 37** (.72)
12. C 3.62 0.62 .20** .09 -.09 -.05 -.04 -.10 -.12*.26** 23** 45** 36** (.77)
13. SWB - - -.11*.19** -.31** -.33** -.18** -.20** -.28** 50** 38** 25** 37** 28** (.91)
14. Li e sa is ac ion 3.17 0.84 .01 .14** -.16** -.17** -.07 -.14** -.16** 34** 36** 22** 34** 28**** -(.83)
15. Emo ional
balance
0.65 1.36 -.20** .19** -.37** -.40** -.25** -.21** -.33** 53** 30** 21** 31** 20** - 51** (.89)
16. Posi i e a ec 3.36 0.74 -.13*.16** -.30** -.34** -.17** -.21** -.28** .44*37** 28** 40** 29** - 52** 88** (.87)
17. Nega i e a ec 2.70 0.79 .23** -.18** .36** .38** .28** .17** .31** -.49** -.17** -.10 -.16** -.07 - -.39** -.90** -.58** (.82)
No e.N= 346; Reliabili y coe icien s a e p esen ed in he diagonal; Sex was coded 0 o male and 1 o emale; ES = emo ional s abili y; EX = ex a e sion;
OP = openness o expe ience; A = ag eeableness; C = conscien iousness; SWB = subjec i e well-being.
*p<.05
**p<.01.
h ps://doi.o g/10.1371/jou nal.pone.0313247. 003
Table 4. Co ec ed co ela ions (ρ) among he a iables.
Technos ess Anxie y Fa igue Skep icism Low
compe ence
Emo ional s abili y -.36** -.38** -.34** -.20** -.30**
Ex a e sion -.03 .00 .04 -.09 -.10
Openness o expe ience -.22** -.13*-.19** -.21** -.27**
Ag eeableness -.11 -.14** .04 -.18** -.16**
Conscien iousness -.11 -.06 -.05 -.13** -.15**
SWB -.34** -.38** -.20** -.24** -.33**
Li e sa is ac ion -.18** -.20** -.08 -.18** -.20**
Emo ional balance -.41** -.47** -.28** -.26** -.39**
Posi i e a ec -.34** -.40** -.19** -.26** -.34**
Nega i e a ec .42** .46** .33** -.22** .38**
No e.N= 346; SWB =subjec i e well-being.
*p<.05
**p<.01.
h ps://doi.o g/10.1371/jou nal.pone.0313247. 004
PLOS ONE
Technos ess, Big Fi e, and subjec i e well-being
PLOS ONE | h ps://doi.o g/10.1371/jou nal.pone.0313247 No embe 4, 2024 7 / 18
s abili y and openness o expe ience appea o be alid p edic o s o he ou dimensions. The
co ela ions a e nega i e and signi ican in all ins ances, anging om ρ= -.38 o anxie y o ρ
= -.20 o skep icism in he case o emo ional s abili y, and om ρ= -.27 o low compe ence
o ρ= -.13 o anxie y in he case o openness o expe ience. Conscien iousness and ag eeable-
ness a e alid p edic o s o ce ain dimensions. These a e skep icism (ρ= -.13 and ρ= -.18,
espec i ely) and low compe ence (ρ= -.15 and ρ= -.16, espec i ely). Ag eeableness is also a
alid p edic o o anxie y (ρ= -.14). Finally, no signi ican co ela ions we e ound be ween
ex a e sion and he ou dimensions o echnos ess o his sample (ρ anging om -.10 o
.04). O e all, he esul s indica e ha emo ional s abili y is he s onges pe sonali y cha ac e -
is ic in he p edic ion o gene al echnos ess and o he speci ic dimensions o anxie y, a igue,
and low compe ence. The bes p edic o o skep icism is openness o expe ience. These esul s
pa ially suppo Hypo hesis 1, as emo ional s abili y and openness o expe ience signi ican ly
and nega i ely co ela e wi h echnos ess and i s dimensions. Howe e , ag eeableness and
conscien iousness a e only alid p edic o s o some dimensions, and ex a e sion did no p e-
dic any c i e ia.
In ega d o SWB, he esul s show ha o e all SWB, i s a ec i e componen (i.e., emo-
ional balance), and, pa ially, i s cogni i e componen (i.e., li e sa is ac ion), nega i ely and
signi ican ly co ela e wi h echnos ess and i s dimensions. The bes p edic o o gene al ech-
nos ess is emo ional balance wi h a co ec ed co ela ion o ρ= -.41. Li e sa is ac ion shows a
lowe bu also signi ican esul o ρ= -.18, and o e all SWB o ρ= -.34. In he p edic ion o
he speci ic echnos ess’ dimensions, he esul s o o e all SWB a e nega i e and signi ican
in all he cases, anging om ρ= -.38 o anxie y o ρ= -.20 o a igue. Bo h li e sa is ac ion
and emo ional balance a e alid p edic o s o skep icism (ρ= -.18 and ρ= -.26, espec i ely),
anxie y (ρ= -.20 and ρ= -.47, espec i ely), and low compe ence (ρ= -.20 and ρ= -.39, espec-
i ely). In he case o a igue, emo ional balance is he only alid p edic o (ρ= -.28). These
esul s indica e ha emo ional balance is a s onge p edic o o gene al echnos ess and i s
dimensions han li e sa is ac ion, sugges ing he supe io i y o he a ec i e componen o SWB
o e he cogni i e componen in he p edic ion o his phenomenon. O e all, he ob ained
esul s suppo Hypo hesis 2 and Hypo hesis 2b. Hypo hesis 2a is only pa ially suppo ed as
li e sa is ac ion is no a alid p edic o o a igue.
Mul iple eg ession analyses
Table 5 shows he esul s o he mul iple eg ession analyses. The co ela ions co ec ed o
measu emen e o in he dependen and he independen a iables we e used o conduc he
analyses, because he p esence o a i ac ual e o s iola es he independence-o -e o s
assump ion and, consequen ly, biases he ob ained pa ame e s [72–75]. Likewise, we es ima ed
he squa ed popula ion c oss- alidi y coe icien (R
2c
) using B owne´s o mula [76] in o de
o con ol he biases on R,R
2
, and adjus ed R
2
due o capi aliza ion on chance. This phenome-
non p oduces a sys ema ic a enua ion o R
2
when he eg ession coe icien s ob ained o a
speci ic sample a e applied o a di e en sample.
The i s pa o he analyses was ca ied ou o es he p edic i e alidi y o he Big Fi e
model o pe sonali y. When he i e dimensions o pe sonali y a e en e ed oge he in he
eg ession analysis, he esul s show a mul iple co ela ion o R= .403 and a squa ed mul iple
co ela ion o R
2
= .162, meaning ha he Big Fi e model o pe sonali y con ibu es o he
explana ion o 16.2% o he echnos ess a iance. In alignmen wi h he co ela ional esul s
p esen ed abo e, he bes p edic o o echnos ess is emo ional s abili y, wi h a be a coe icien
o β= -.389, ollowed by openness o expe ience wi h a esul o β= -.212. The be a coe icien s
o he emaining dimensions a e no s a is ically signi ican .
PLOS ONE
Technos ess, Big Fi e, and subjec i e well-being
PLOS ONE | h ps://doi.o g/10.1371/jou nal.pone.0313247 No embe 4, 2024 8 / 18
When he join p edic i e alidi y o he cogni i e and a ec i e componen s o SWB is
es ed, he esul s show a mul iple co ela ion o R= .417 and a squa ed mul iple co ela ion o
R
2
= .174. Thus, li e sa is ac ion and emo ional balance explain 17.4% o he echnos ess a i-
ance. The be a coe icien s indica e ha emo ional balance is he main p edic o o echnos-
ess wi h a be a alue o β= -.466. The esul o li e sa is ac ion is a non-signi ican be a
weigh o β= .095.
The hi d eg ession analysis shows ha , when he Big Fi e pe sonali y dimensions a e
en e ed in he eg ession equa ion oge he wi h he SWB componen s, he explained a iance
o echnos ess inc eases o 23.3% (R
2
= .233 and R= .483). We also es ed he signi icance o
he di e ence be ween his mul iple co ela ion (R= .483) and he mul iple co ela ion
ob ained in he i s eg ession analysis (R= .403) when only he Big Fi e dimensions we e
en e ed in he equa ion. Fo his, we used he o mula p o ided by Guil o d [77] o he es i-
ma ion o he s a is ical signi icance o he di e ence be ween mul iple co ela ions calcula ed
wi h a di e en numbe o independen a iables. The esul was an F alue o 15.62 (p<.01),
meaning ha he es ima ions a e dis inc wi h a p obabili y g ea e han 99%. The inc emen
p oduced in R
2
(Δ) by he SWB componen s o e he pe sonali y dimensions is R
2
= .071
(7.1% o explained a iance).
In ega d o he speci ic p edic i e weigh s, bo h he a ec i e and he cogni i e componen s
o SWB show simila esul s o he p e ious eg ession analysis, emo ional balance being he
key a iable in he p edic ion o echnos ess wi h a be a alue o β= -.406. In he case o he
Big Fi e model, he be a alues o wo pe sonali y dimensions show subs an ial al e a ions
when compa ed o he esul s p oduced in he p e ious analyses. Fi s , he p edic i e alidi y
o emo ional s abili y dec eases om β= -.389 (p<.01) o β= -.105 (p>.05). As emo ional
Table 5. Reg ession analyses o he Big Fi e model o pe sonali y and SWB on echnos ess.
βR R
2
R
2adj
R
2c
Pe sonali y .403 .162 .150 .140
Emo ional s abili y -.389**
Ex a e sion .072
Openness o expe ience -.212**
Ag eeableness .129
Conscien iousness .074
LS + EB .417 .174 .169 .167
Li e sa is ac ion .095
Emo ional balance -.466**
Pe sonali y + LS + EB .483 .233 .217 .204
Emo ional s abili y -.105
Ex a e sion .189**
Openness o expe ience -.265**
Ag eeableness .069
Conscien iousness .081
Li e sa is ac ion .042
Emo ional balance -.406**
ΔLS+EB o e pe sonali y .071
No e.N= 346; β= s anda dized eg ession weigh ; R= mul iple co ela ion; R
2
= explained a iance; R
2adj
= adjus ed R
2
;R
2c
= squa ed popula ion c oss- alidi y
coe icien ; LS = li e sa is ac ion; EB = emo ional balance; Δ= inc emen in R
2
.
*p<.05
** p<.01
h ps://doi.o g/10.1371/jou nal.pone.0313247. 005
PLOS ONE
Technos ess, Big Fi e, and subjec i e well-being
PLOS ONE | h ps://doi.o g/10.1371/jou nal.pone.0313247 No embe 4, 2024 9 / 18
43. Saucie G, Goldbe g LR. Assessing he big i e: Applica ions o 10 psychome ic c i e ia o he de elop-
men o ma ke scales. In: De Raad B, Pe ugini M, edi o s. Big Fi e Assessmen . Hog e e & Hube Pub-
lishe s; 2002. p. 30–54.
44. Rice L, Ma key PM. The ole o ex a e sion and neu o icism in in luencing anxie y ollowing compu e -
media ed in e ac ions.Pe s Indi id Di . 2009; 46(1):35–9. h ps://doi.o g/10.1016/j.paid.2008.08.022
45. De a aj S, Easley RF, C an JM. How Does Pe sonali y Ma e ? Rela ing he Fi e-Fac o Model o
Technology Accep ance and Use. In Sys Res. 2008; 19(1):93–105. h ps://doi.o g/10.1287/is e.1070.
0153
46. Aha ony N. Web 2.0 use by lib a ians.Lib In Sci Res. 2009; 31(1):29–37. h ps://doi.o g/10.1016/j.lis .
2008.06.004
47. Connelly BS, Ones DS, Che nyshenko OS. In oducing he special sec ion on openness o expe ience:
Re iew o openness axonomies, measu emen , and nomological ne . J Pe s Assess. 2014; 96(1):1–
16. h ps://doi.o g/10.1080/00223891.2013.830620 PMID: 24073877
48. Payne SC, Youngcou SS, Beaubien JM. A me a-analy ic examina ion o he goal o ien a ion nomologi-
cal ne . J Appl Psychol. 2007; 92(1):128–50. h ps://doi.o g/10.1037/0021-9010.92.1.128 PMID:
17227156
49. Maie C, Laume S, Wi h J, Wei zel T. Technos ess and he hie a chical le els o pe sonali y: A wo-
wa e s udy wi h mul iple da a samples. Eu J In Sys . 2019; 28(5):496–522. h ps://doi.o g/10.1080/
0960085X.2019.1614739
50. K ishnan S. Pe sonali y and espoused cul u al di e ences in echnos ess c ea o s. Compu Hum
Beha . 2017; 66:154–67. h ps://doi.o g/10.1016/j.chb.2016.09.039
51. Diene E. Subjec i e well-being. Psychol Bull. 1984; 95(3):542–75. h ps://doi.o g/10.1037/0033-2909.
95.3.542 PMID: 6399758
52. Diene E. Subjec i e well-being: The science o happiness and a p oposal o a na ional index. Am Psy-
chol. 2000; 55(1):34–43. h ps://doi.o g/10.1037/0003-066X.55.1.34
53. Diene E, Oishi S, Lucas RE. Pe sonali y, cul u e, and subjec i e well-being: Emo ional and cogni i e
e alua ions o li e. Annu Re Psychol. 2003; 54:403–25. h ps://doi.o g/10.1146/annu e .psych.54.
101601.145056 PMID: 12172000
54. Busse i MA. Examining he s uc u e o subjec i e well-being h ough me a-analysis o he associa ion
among posi i e a ec , nega i e a ec , and li e sa is ac ion. Pe s Indi id Di . 2018; 122:68–71. h ps://
doi.o g/10.1016/j.paid.2017.10.003
55. Diene E, Wi z D, To W, Kim-P ie o C, Choi D, Oishi S, e al. New measu es o well-being: Flou ishing
and posi i e and nega i e eelings. Soc Indic Res. 2009; 39:247–66.
56. Diene E, Biswas-Diene R. Happiness: Unlocking he mys e ies o psychological weal h. 1s ed. Mal-
den, Ma: Blackwell; 2008. h ps://doi.o g/10.1002/9781444305159
57. Bowling NA, Eschleman KJ, Wang Q. A me a-analy ic examina ion o he ela ionship be ween job sa is-
ac ion and subjec i e well-being. J Occup O gan Psychol. 2010; 83(4):915–34. h ps://doi.o g/10.1348/
096317909X478557
58. Salgado JF, Blanco S, Moscoso S. Subjec i e well-being and job pe o mance: Tes ing o a supp esso
e ec .J Wo k O gan Psychol. 2019; 35(2):93–102. h ps://doi.o g/10.5093/jwop2019a9
59. Qu HY, Wang CM. S udy on he ela ionships be ween nu ses’ job bu nou and subjec i e well-being.
Chin Nu s Res. 2015; 2(2–3):61–6. h ps://doi.o g/10.1016/j.cn e.2015.09.003
60. Bu¨cke S, Nu aydin S, Simonsmeie BA, Schneide M, Luhmann M. Subjec i e well-being and aca-
demic achie emen : A me a-analysis.J Res Pe s. 2018; 74:83–94. h ps://doi.o g/10.1016/j.j p.2018.
02.007
61. Shoshani A, Slone M. Middle school ansi ion om he s eng hs pe spec i e: Young adolescen s’ cha -
ac e s eng hs, subjec i e well-being, and school adjus men .J Happiness S ud. 2013; 14:1163–81.
h ps://doi.o g/10.1007/s10902-012-9374-y
62. Sa ahl S, Mon se a C, Casas F, Adams S, Tiliouine H, Benninge E, e al. Child en’s expe iences o
bullying ic imiza ion and he in luence on hei subjec i e well-being: A mul ina ional compa ison. Child
De . 2019; 90(2):414–31. h ps://doi.o g/10.1111/cde .13135 PMID: 30207591
63. Salano a M, Llo ens S, Ven u a M. Technos ess: The da k side o echnologies. In Ko unka C, Hoo-
nakke P, edi o s. The impac o ICT on quali y o wo king li e. Do d ech , Ne he lands: Sp inge Ne h-
e lands; 2014. p. 87–103.
64. Candel OS. Measu ing echnowellness and i s ela ionship o subjec i e well-being: The media ing ole
o op imism.Psychol Russ. 2021; 14(3):166–79. h ps://doi.o g/10.11621/pi .2021.0311 PMID:
36733537
PLOS ONE
Technos ess, Big Fi e, and subjec i e well-being
PLOS ONE | h ps://doi.o g/10.1371/jou nal.pone.0313247 No embe 4, 2024 16 / 18
65. Le Roux DJ, Bo ha PA. In es iga ing he impac o echnos ess on p oduc i i y and o e all li e sa is ac-
ion o manage s wo king a a Sou h A ican e och ome smel ing company.SA J Hum Resou
Manag,2021; 19(a):1649. h ps://doi.o g/10.4102/sajh m. 19i0.1649
66. Tha che JB, Pe ewe PL. An empi ical examina ion o indi idual ai s as an eceden s o compu e anxi-
e y and compu e sel -e icacy. MIS Q. 2002; 26(4):381–96. h ps://doi.o g/10.2307/4132314
67. Hang Y, Hussain G, Amin A, Abdullah MI. The mode a ing e ec s o echnos ess inhibi o s on echno-
s esso s and employee’s well-being.F on Psychol. 2022; 12:821446. h ps://doi.o g/10.3389/ psyg.
2021.821446 PMID: 35082738
68. Salano a M, Llo ens S, Ci e E, Noga eda C. El ecnoes e
´s: Concep o, medida y p e encio
´n [Technos-
ess: Concep , measu emen , and p e en ion]. Mad id, Spain: INSHT; 2007. No a Te
´cnica de P e en-
cio
´n, 730.
69. Saucie G. Mini-Ma ke s: A b ie e sion o Goldbe g’s unipola Big-Fi e ma ke s.J Pe s Assess. 1994;
63(3):506–16. h ps://doi.o g/10.1207/s15327752jpa6303_8 PMID: 7844738
70. Ta a es JC. A psycho-economic model o ax aud: s uc u al and c oss-cul u al analysis in Po ugal
and Spain [disse a ion]. San iago de Compos ela: Uni e si y o San iago de Compos ela; 2018.
71. Diene E, Emmons RA, La sen RJ, G i in S. The sa is ac ion wi h li e scale.J Pe s Assess,.1985; 49
(1):71–5. h ps://doi.o g/10.1207/s15327752jpa4901_13 PMID: 16367493
72. Schmid FL, Hun e JE. Me hods o me a-analysis: Co ec ing e o and bias in esea ch indings. 3 d
ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; 2015. h p://dx.doi.o g/10.4135/9781483398105
73. F i z MS, Kenny DA, MacKinnon DP. The combined e ec s o measu emen e o and omi ing con-
ounde s in he single-media o model. Mul i a ia e Beha Res. 2016; 51(5):681–97. h ps://doi.o g/10.
1080/00273171.2016.1224154 PMID: 27739903
74. Hoyle RH, Kenny DA. Sample size, eliabili y, and es s o s a is ical media ion. In: Hoyle R, edi o s. S a-
is ical s a egies o small sample esea ch. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage; 1999. p. 195–222.
75. MacKinnon DP. In oduc ion o S a is ical Media ion Analysis. 1s ed. New Yo k, NY; Law ence E l-
baum Associa es: 2008.
76. B owne MW. P edic i e alidi y o a linea eg ession equa ion. B J Ma h S a Psychol.1975; 28(1):79–
87. h ps://doi.o g/10.1111/j.2044-8317.1975. b00550.x
77. Guil o d JP, F uch e B. Fundamen al s a is ics in psychology and educa ion. 5 h. ed. McG aw-Hill;
1973.
78. MacKinnon DP, Lockwood CM, Ho man JM, Wes SG, Shee s V. A compa ison o me hods o es
media ion and o he in e ening a iable e ec s. Psychol Me hods. 2002; 7(1):83–104. h ps://doi.o g/
10.1037/1082-989x.7.1.83 PMID: 11928892
79. P eache K, Leona delli G. Calcula ion o he Sobel Tes : An in e ac i e calcula ion ool o media ion
es s. 2003. A ailable online: h ps://quan psy.o g/sobel/sobel.h m
80. To ighi D, MacKinnon DP. RMedia ion: An R package o media ion analysis con idence in e als.
Beha Res Me hods. 2011; 43:692–700. h ps://doi.o g/10.3758/s13428-011-0076-x PMID: 21487904
81. Dingli A, Seychell D. The new digi al na i es. S u ga , Ge many: JB Me zle ; 2015.
82. P ensky M. Digi al na i es, digi al immig an s, pa 2: Do hey eally hink di e en ly? On Ho iz. 2001; 9
(6):1–6. h ps://doi.o g/10.1108/10748120110424843
83. Schmid FL. S a is ical signi icance es ing and cumula i e knowledge in psychology: Implica ions o
he aining o esea che s. Psychol Me hods. 1996; 1(2):115–29. h p://dx.doi.o g/10.1037/1082-989X.
1.2.115
84. Moscoso S, Salgado JF. Me a-analy ic examina ion o a supp esso e ec on subjec i e well-being and
job pe o mance ela ionship.J Wo k O gan Psychol. 2021; 37(2):119–31. h ps://doi.o g/10.5093/
jwop2021a13
85. Fuglse h AM, Sø ebø Ø. The e ec s o echnos ess wi hin he con ex o employee use o ICT. Compu
Hum Beha . 2014; 40:161–70. h ps://doi.o g/10.1016/j.chb.2014.07.040
86. Lee AR, Son SM, Kim KK. In o ma ion and communica ion echnology o e load and social ne wo king
se ice a igue: A s ess pe spec i e. Compu Hum Beha . 2016; 55(a):51–61. h ps://doi.o g/10.1016/j.
chb.2015.08.011
87. A ne JJ. Eme ging adul hood: A heo y o de elopmen om he la e eens h ough he wen ies. Am
Psychol. 2000; 55(5):469–80. h ps://doi.o g/10.1037/0003-066X.55.5.469
88. Bleido n W, Schwaba T, Zheng A, Hopwood CJ, Sosa SS, Robe s BW, e al. Pe sonali y s abili y and
change: A me a-analysis o longi udinal s udies. Psychol Bull. 2022; 148(7–8):588–619. h ps://doi.o g/
10.1037/bul0000365 PMID: 35834197
PLOS ONE
Technos ess, Big Fi e, and subjec i e well-being
PLOS ONE | h ps://doi.o g/10.1371/jou nal.pone.0313247 No embe 4, 2024 17 / 18
89. Robe s BW, Del Vecchio WF. The ank-o de consis ency o pe sonali y ai s om childhood o old
age: A quan i a i e e iew o longi udinal s udies. Psychol Bull. 2000; 126(1):3–25. h ps://doi.o g/10.
1037/0033-2909.126.1.3 PMID: 10668348
90. Lei H, Cui Y, Chiu MM. The ela ionship be ween eache suppo and s uden s’ academic emo ions: A
me a-analysis.F on Psychol. 2018; 8:2288. h ps://doi.o g/10.3389/ psyg.2017.02288 PMID:
29403405
91. Ma ı
´nez A, Salgado JF. A me a-analysis o he aking esis ance o o ced-choice pe sonali y in en o-
ies.F on . Psychol. 2021; 12:732241. h ps://doi.o g/10.3389/ psyg.2021.732241 PMID: 34659043
92. Ma ı
´nez A, Salgado JF, Lado M. Quasi-ipsa i e o ced-choice pe sonali y in en o ies and he con ol o
aking: The biasing e ec s o ansien e o .J Wo k O gan Psychol. 2022; 38(3):241–8. h ps://doi.o g/
10.5093/jwop2022a16
PLOS ONE
Technos ess, Big Fi e, and subjec i e well-being
PLOS ONE | h ps://doi.o g/10.1371/jou nal.pone.0313247 No embe 4, 2024 18 / 18
