Bergen Facebook Addiction Scale

Introduction
The Bergen Facebook Addiction Scale (BFAS) was designed to operationalize the extent to
which behavioral addiction symptoms may be linked to social networking sites (Andreassen,
Torsheim, Brunborg, & Pallesen, 2012). While pathological gambling is the only “addiction”
that is recognized as a formal psychiatric disorder, increasing research is being conducted on
other potential behavioral addictions, including online gaming and Internet use (Andreassen et
al., 2012; Lemmens, Valkenburg, & Peter, 2009). The measure is made up of 6 items, one for
each of the six core dimensions of addiction, drawn from clinical research: salience – the activity
dominates thinking and behavior, mood modification – the activity improves mood, tolerance –
increasing amounts of the activity are required to achieve the previous effect, withdrawal –
unpleasant feelings occur when the activity is stopped or suddenly reduced, conflict – the activity
causes conflict in relationships, work, or education, and relapse – a tendency to revert to earlier
patterns of the activity after abstinence or control. Items are set on 5-point Likert-type response
options.

Reliability:
Andreassen et al. (2012) found the original measure to be reliable at one time (ɑ = .83),
as well as in a three week test-retest reliability check (ɑ = .82). In addition to Cronbach’s
estimates, subsequent research has also performed confirmatory factor analysis on the scale,
indicating acceptable model fit as a unidimensional construct (2 = 291.88, df = 118, p < 0.001,
RMSEA = .061, CFI = .95, GFI = .92, IFI = .95, and SRMR = .040; Satici & Uysal, 2015).

Validity:
The BFAS has shown face validity in its items reflecting behavioral-addictive symptoms, such as
using Facebook to forget about personal problems or trying to cut down on time spent on
Facebook without success. BFAS has shown convergent validity when correlated with the
Wilson, Fornasier, and White (2010) addictive tendencies scale (r = .69; Andreassen et al.,
2012). When compared to the similar construct of “problematic Facebook use”, which also
considers preference for online versus face-to-face social interactions in addition to compulsive
behavior, the BFAS and the problematic Facebook use scale showed strong, positive associations
(r = .79; Marino, Vieno, Altoè, & Spada, 2016). Predictive validity has also been demonstrated
with Neuroticism ( = .25) and Extraversion ( = .22) constructs of the Big Five personality
inventory, showing that certain personality constructs predict BFAS (Andreassen et al., 2012).
Divergent validity has been established with BFAS, such as the negative relationship between
BFAS and Conscientiousness ( = -.23). Andreassan and colleagues argue that the “Big Five”
support the scales’ validity, as individuals who are high in neuroticism would be more likely to
be prone to addictions, while those who are conscientious would be less likely to become
addicted.

Comments
Some debate has been raised surrounding the applicability of BFAS to other social
networking sites (SNS) outside of Facebook, arguing that Facebook addiction could be generally
applicable to Internet addiction or online social interaction compulsions because there are many
activities that a person can engage in on the Facebook website (e.g., messaging friends, playing
games like Farmville, see Griffiths, 2012). However, in a follow-up article the scales’ creators
argue that its applicability is limited to the context of Facebook as a platform, as people engage
with Facebook differently than they may other SNS such as online dating sites, where the users
may have differing goals (see Andreassen & Pallesen, 2013) – this claim seems to contrast with
the genesis of the scale as one that borrows from established clinical addiction behaviors, such as
gambling and gaming.

Location of Measure
Andreassen, C. S., Torsheim, T., Brunborg, G. S., & Pallesen, S. (2012). Development of a
Facebook addiction scale. Psychological Reports, 110, 501-517.
doi:10.2466/02.09.18.PR0.110.2.501-517

Measure
Instructions:
Please rate the frequency of your Facebook behaviors on the following scale:
1: Very rarely, 2: Rarely, 3: Sometimes, 4: Often, 5: Very often

Salience
1. Spent a lot of time thinking about Facebook or planned use of Facebook?

Tolerance
2. Felt an urge to use Facebook more and more?

Mood modification
3. Used Facebook in order to forget about personal problems?

Relapse
4. Tried to cut down on the use of Facebook without success?

Withdrawal
5. Become restless or troubled if you have been prohibited from using Facebook?

Conflict
6. Used Facebook so much that it has had a negative impact on your job/studies?

References

Andreassen, C. S., & Pallesen, S. (2013). Facebook addiction: A reply to Griffiths (2012).
Psychological reports, 113, 899-902. doi:10.2466/02.09.PR0.113x32z6

Griffiths, M. D. (2012) Facebook addiction: concerns, criticism, and recommendations—a

Marino, C., Vieno, A., Altoè, G., & Spada, M. M. (2016). Factorial validity of the Problematic
Facebook Use Scale for adolescents and young adults. Journal of behavioral addictions,
6, 5-10. doi:10.1556/2006.6.2017.004

Satici, S. A., & Uysal, R. (2015). Well-being and problematic Facebook use. Computers in
Human Behavior, 49, 185-190. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2015.03.005

Wilson, K., Fornasier, S., & White, K. M. (2010) Psychological predictors of young
adults’ use of social networking sites. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking, 13,
173-177. doi:10.1089/cyber.2009.0094

Profiled by Nicholas Bowman and Cathlin Clark-Gordon