A qualitative, descriptive study was conducted by HAMC in June 2025 as a structured literature review organized into three search phases. The first phase involved a systematic review based on PRISMA guidelines, drawing from four widely recognized databases in health and behavioral sciences: PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Redalyc. A unified search formula and defined inclusion and exclusion criteria were applied, supplemented by four additional criteria.

The second phase identified 13 documents, and the third yielded 10, resulting in a total of 27 scales. The psychometric properties of these instruments were evaluated following the COSMIN methodology (Appendix 2).

The search strategy was guided by the PICOS framework, which specified the following elements:

For the review of potentially eligible studies, duplicates were removed, and the titles and abstracts of all references identified through the search strategy were examined, excluding those that did not meet the inclusion criteria. The inclusion criteria were: studies that described the development, validation, or cross-cultural adaptation of validated questionnaires related to social media addiction. The exclusion criteria were: studies that did not use validated questionnaires, lack of access to the full text, non-original articles, theoretical articles without instruments, studies unrelated to the topic of interest, and sample saturation. The study selection process is illustrated in the PRISMA-based diagram (Figure 1).

A total of 27 scales were selected; their psychometric properties are summarized in Appendix 1, which outlines their main characteristics, feasibility, categories, and ethical considerations. Additional information is available in Appendices 1–4 for further reference.

The initial database screening yielded 25 records, four of which met the PRISMA inclusion criteria. These studies, published between 2015 and 2023, validated instruments in both Western (e.g., Germany, Italy) and non-Western (e.g., China, Peru) contexts.

The selected questionnaires generally assess physiological (tolerance, withdrawal), behavioral (use, relapse), cognitive-emotional (loss of control, mood modification), and social (conflict, consequences) dimensions of technological and social media addiction.

Notable examples include the SOMEDIS-A for adolescents, based on ICD-11 criteria, and the Bergen Social Media Addiction Scale—both demonstrating strong internal consistency and sound construct validity. Other instruments, such as the Smartphone Application-Based Addiction Scale (SABAS) and the Cellphone Dependence Test, evaluate related constructs such as impulsive use and excessive smartphone reliance.

The second-level search identified 13 validated questionnaires published between 2009 and 2024, covering social media addiction, problematic internet use, and associated digital behaviors. Together, these instruments comprise approximately 160 items categorized into four primary dimensions:

Instruments were developed and validated across Europe, Latin America, and Asia, ensuring both Western and non-Western representation. Notable examples include the Social Media Disorder Scale (Netherlands), the Problematic Facebook Use Scale (Italy), and the Social Network Addiction Scale (Spain), all of which demonstrate acceptable internal consistency (α > 0.80) and factorial validity.

The third search phase (2020–2025) identified 10 additional validated questionnaires assessing social media and internet-related addictions. Collectively, these instruments comprise approximately 110 items organized into three broad categories:

Most instruments demonstrated robust psychometric properties (α > 0.80, good model fit indices) and conceptual alignment with DSM-5 or ICD-11 criteria.

The selected questionnaires primarily target adolescents and young adults, employ Likert-type response formats, and adhere to international ethical standards as outlined in the Declaration of Helsinki. They were administered under conditions of informed, voluntary, and anonymous participation, ensuring confidentiality and, in many cases, approval from the bioethics committees of the corresponding institutional entities (Appendix 4).

Of the 27 questionnaires reviewed (Appendix 1), nine do not explicitly report approval from an ethics committee, although they mention ethical aspects. This constitutes a procedural limitation, particularly in studies involving minors. The instruments without documented ethical approval include the Social Media Addiction Scale (Ukraine), Mobile Phone Dependency Test, Social Media Disorder Scale, Social Media Addiction Questionnaire, Social Media Addiction Scale–Student Form, Bergen Facebook Addiction Scale, Arab Social Media Addiction Scale, Facebook Addiction Scale, and the Social Media Addiction Scale (Portuguese version).

To assess the psychometric quality of the identified questionnaires, the COSMIN standards (Mokkink et al., 2018) were applied, providing an international framework for evaluating the measurement properties of health instruments (see Appendix 2 for details). Overall, the instruments showed strong psychometric quality, with high internal consistency (Cronbach’s α > 0.80) and sound structural validity. However, methodological quality and the strength of psychometric evidence varied across studies and were, in some cases, limited.

Notably, the Social Media Disorder Scale (SMDS) exhibited particularly strong validity; however, several studies lacked information on test–retest reliability or measurement error, which may affect the robustness of future findings. To complement this evaluation, evidence of reliability, structural validity, construct validity, and criterion validity was reviewed when available (see Appendix 3). Appendix 1 summarizes the psychometric properties identified across the three search levels.

This study has several limitations, including reliance on quantitative research, potential researcher bias, constraints in factor selection, and the need to refine search strategies, as several relevant questionnaires were not identified in the initial search phase. Moreover, social media addiction is a global, cross-cultural phenomenon that should be examined not only within Western contexts but through a holistic lens integrating both cognitive and behavioral dimensions.

Future research should adopt mixed-methods designs, implement longitudinal interventions, refine and expand search terms, and broaden the dimensions under study. Conducting a meta-analysis would be especially valuable to systematically assess the psychometric properties of each questionnaire—such as reliability, validity, effect size, factorial structure, and invariance—while reducing dependence on qualitative studies with limited comparability. A meta-analytic approach also enhances transparency, as inclusion, coding, and analysis procedures can be thoroughly documented, replicable, and auditable. Furthermore, this statistical method enables the parallel examination of multiple variables and moderators (e.g., age, country, instrument type, context), thereby identifying key factors that influence outcomes and overcoming the limitations of partial or fragmented analyses.

In practical terms, these questionnaires can serve as diagnostic tools for detecting problematic digital media use among adolescents. However, effective intervention requires the engagement of multiple stakeholders, with foundational support beginning at the level of public policy aimed at protecting the most vulnerable populations—especially adolescents. This is particularly important given that digital media represent the primary window through which young people access information, understand their world, and engage socially.

The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest, and adhere to fundamental ethical principles. This is an unpublished manuscript, submitted using the Turnitin anti-plagiarism program, and translated by a professional with certificate number 7808, with additional review by an external native speaker.

The authors declare that this study did not receive specific or direct funding. However, it was conducted within the institutional framework of the Research and Knowledge Transfer Plan of the University of Almería, through the Department of University, Research and Innovation, within the framework of Program 54A “Co-financed Scientific Research” of the ERDF Andalusia 2021–2027 Program, under Specific Objective RSO11: “To develop and enhance research and innovation capacities and assimilate advanced technologies.”