1. Definitions
\nFirst of all - about the important distinction between one and the other: “An initial principle important to understanding this topic is the notion that Internet addiction and PIU represent different concepts. Although these terms have been used interchangeably in the past, they represent 2 separate frameworks for identifying Internet overuse. Internet addiction may be considered more analogous to a classic substance addiction, with loss of control and feelings of withdrawal. PIU represents a broader array of problems related to Internet use, including social, behavioral, and emotional issues. An extreme case of PIU may involve Internet addiction, but PIU is a broader, more multifaceted concept”. [1]
\nNext, PCIAT – Parent-Child Internet Addiction Test is defined as: “a 20-item scale that measures characteristics and behaviors associated with compulsive use of the Internet that include compulsivity, escapism, and dependency. Questions also assess problems related to addictive use in personal, occupational, and social functioning”. https://fcon_1000.projects.nitrc.org/indi/cmi_healthy_brain_network_old/assessments/pciat.html
\nIn an attempt to clarify what is - PIU, I turned to definitions: “Internet use that is risky, excessive, or impulsive in nature, leading to adverse life consequences, specifically physical, emotional, social, or functional impairment.” [1] Also “PIU is defined as the inability to control Internet use that causes marked distress and functional impairment (Shapira et al., 2000) and is characterized by compulsive use, withdrawal symptoms, tolerance symptoms, interpersonal and health problems, and time management problems (Chen et al., 2003).” [2] Inability to control Internet use is probably a broader concept than Internet addiction.
\nFurther, there was a need to clarify what is included in the definition of PIU :)
\n“The researchers identified three areas where they believed excessive Internet use could create problems:
\n• Social Impairment: Problems with face-to-face communication; failing to pursue real-life relationships, skipping social events.
\n• Emotional Impairment: Being anxious, angry, or irritable when away from the Internet; experiencing feelings of “withdrawal” when away from the Internet.
\n• Risky/Impulsive Internet Use: Internet use interfering with school performance; losing sleep due to Internet use; loss of interest in non-Internet activities.” [3]
\nThus, risky/impulsive internet use can apparently lead to functional, physical, and/or social impairments.
I considered risky internet use to be that which leads to the following negative consequences described in this study (although, the average age of the participants in this study is 42.46 years old, as a definition it will do): “Negative online consequences considered in this study include personal abuse such as being the target of negative comments, cyberbullying, trolling, or accessing disturbing content, theft of personal information including through accounts being hacked, fraud such as not receiving goods purchased online or these not being as described, spam, malware/viruses, scams including ransomware, romance/dating, or other financial scams where victims are tricked into sending money to criminals posing as others… [4]
\nAnd a little bit about how it all measured up: “Responses for participation in each activity were provided using a 5-point Likert scale (never – very frequently). These included making purchases from offshore and peer-to-peer shopping sites, as well as meeting someone in person after initially connecting via an online peer-to-peer marketplace. Participation in online gambling was assessed in terms of monthly expenditure on online gambling and number of different online gambling sites used (numerical), as well as frequency of offshore gambling site use (Likert). Online game use was assessed with similar questions in terms of expenditure and number of sites used. Use of online dating sites was assessed in terms of expenditure on online dating sites and number of sites used, as well as frequency of site use and frequency of meeting someone in person after connecting through an online dating site. Online discussion forum site use was assessed in terms of the number of sites used. Finally, online pornography use was assessed in terms of frequency of use, expenditure, and the frequency of posting or sharing online pornography of self or others”. [4]
About Impulsive Internet Use: “the construct of impulsivity includes at least two independent components: first, acting without an appropriate amount of deliberation, which may or may not be functional; and second, choosing short-term gains over long-term ones.” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impulsivity
\n2. Internet use and its consequences in PCIAT
\nNext, according to the first PIU definition, I attempted to match each question in the questionnaire with Internet use (risky/impulsive or excessive) and its consequences (physical, emotional, social, or functional impairment). It is possible that some may disagree with individual items in the comparisons, but hopefully my overall conclusions will not be affected.
\nPCIAT_01 How often does your child disobey time limits you set for online use? (using: excessive (1), impairment: social(1))
\nPCIAT_02 How often does your child neglect household chores to spend more time online? (using: excessive(2), risky/impulsive(1), impairment: social(2), functional(1))
\nPCIAT_03 How often does your child prefer to spend time online rather than with the rest of your family? (using: excessive(3), risky/impulsive(2), impairment: social(3))
\nPCIAT_04 How often does your child form new relationships with fellow online users? (using: risky/impulsive(3), impairment: social(4))
\nPCIAT_05 How often do you complain about the amount of time your child spends online? (using: excessive (4), impairment: social(5))
\nPCIAT_06 How often do your child's grades suffer because of the amount of time he or she spends online? (using: excessive(5), risky/impulsive(4), impairment: functional(2))
\nPCIAT_07 How often does your child check his or her e-mail before doing something else? (using: excessive?(6), risky/impulsive(5), impairment: social(6))
\nPCIAT_08 How often does your child seem withdrawn from others since discovering the Internet? (using: excessive?(7), risky/impulsive?(6), impairment: emotional(1), social?(7))
\nPCIAT_09 How often does your child become defensive or secretive when asked what he or she does online? (using: excessive?(8), risky/impulsive?(7), impairment: emotional?(2), social?(8))
\nPCIAT_10 How often have you caught your child sneaking online against your wishes? (using: excessive (9), impairment: social(9))
\nPCIAT_11 How often does your child spend time along in his or her room playing on the computer? (using: excessive(10), risky/impulsive?(8) impairment: social(10))
\nPCIAT_12 How often does your child receive strange phone calls from new \"\"online\"\" friends?\" (using: risky/impulsive(9), impairment: social(11))
\nPCIAT_13 How often does your child snap, yell, or act annoyed if bothered while online? (using: excessive?(11), risky/impulsive?(10), impairment: emotional(3))
\nPCIAT_14 How often does your child seem more tired and fatigued than he or she did before the Internet came along? (using: excessive?(12), risky/impulsive?(11) impairment: physical(1))
\nPCIAT_15 How often does your child seem preoccupied with being back online when off-line? (using: excessive(13), risky/impulsive?(12) impairment: social(12))
\nPCIAT_16 How often does your child throw tantrums with your interference about how long he or she spends online? (using: excessive(14), risky/impulsive(13), impairment: emotional(4), social(13))
\nPCIAT_17 How often does your child choose to spend time online rather than doing once enjoyed hobbies and/or outside interests? (using: excessive(15), risky/impulsive(14) impairment: social(14))
\nPCIAT_18 How often does your child become angry or belligerent when your place time limits on how much time he or she is allowed to spend online? (using: excessive(16), risky/impulsive(15), impairment: emotional(5), social(15))
\nPCIAT_19 How often does your child choose to spend more time online than going out with friends? (using: excessive(17), risky/impulsive(16) impairment: social(16))
\nPCIAT_20 How often does your child feel depressed, moody, or nervous when off-line which seems to go away once back online? (using: excessive(18), risky/impulsive(17), impairment: emotional(6), social(17, physical?(2))
Total Using: excessive – 18, risky/impulsive – 17
\nTotal Impairment: social – 17, emotional – 6, functional – 2, physical – 2
Conclusions
\nSo, internet addiction as measured by PCIAT is not the same as PIU.
\nIn most cases, excessive or (and) risky/impulsive internet use can be assumed. In the majority of cases (85%) it can be assumed that the questionnaire is designed to detect social impairment (which is very likely with compulsive internet use), i.e. problems with face-to-face communication, inability to maintain relationships in real life, skipping social events, loss of interest in non-Internet related activities. 30% of the questions reflect how emotional or depressed the person being observed was when not online or someone prevented them from being there. 10% of the questions are related to functional impairments (grades or household chores suffer), and 10% are possibly related to physical impairments (fatigue, tiredness, or depression).
\nIt is important to note that in most cases, it cannot be determined from the PCIAT whether the impairment is due to excessive or risky/impulsive internet use.
\nWe can probably agree that this characterization applies to this questionnaire as well: “The questionnaire does not specify what activities “internet use” and “being online” refer to, leaving interpretation to the respondent; it also has no mention of social media or smartphone usage, reflecting the timing of its creation. “ [5]
\nI would add to what many Kagglers have said about the subjectivity of the questionnaire, that children who are not satisfied with their families (one of the particular groups at increased risk [1]) may have too low scores on the questionnaire. If parents do not pay proper attention to their children, it is to be expected that they will not make a proper effort to fill out the questionnaire truthfully and thoroughly about their children.
References
\n1. Definitions
\nFirst of all - about the important distinction between one and the other: “An initial principle important to understanding this topic is the notion that Internet addiction and PIU represent different concepts. Although these terms have been used interchangeably in the past, they represent 2 separate frameworks for identifying Internet overuse. Internet addiction may be considered more analogous to a classic substance addiction, with loss of control and feelings of withdrawal. PIU represents a broader array of problems related to Internet use, including social, behavioral, and emotional issues. An extreme case of PIU may involve Internet addiction, but PIU is a broader, more multifaceted concept”. [1]
\nNext, PCIAT – Parent-Child Internet Addiction Test is defined as: “a 20-item scale that measures characteristics and behaviors associated with compulsive use of the Internet that include compulsivity, escapism, and dependency. Questions also assess problems related to addictive use in personal, occupational, and social functioning”. https://fcon_1000.projects.nitrc.org/indi/cmi_healthy_brain_network_old/assessments/pciat.html
\nIn an attempt to clarify what is - PIU, I turned to definitions: “Internet use that is risky, excessive, or impulsive in nature, leading to adverse life consequences, specifically physical, emotional, social, or functional impairment.” [1] Also “PIU is defined as the inability to control Internet use that causes marked distress and functional impairment (Shapira et al., 2000) and is characterized by compulsive use, withdrawal symptoms, tolerance symptoms, interpersonal and health problems, and time management problems (Chen et al., 2003).” [2] Inability to control Internet use is probably a broader concept than Internet addiction.
\nFurther, there was a need to clarify what is included in the definition of PIU :)
\n“The researchers identified three areas where they believed excessive Internet use could create problems:
\n• Social Impairment: Problems with face-to-face communication; failing to pursue real-life relationships, skipping social events.
\n• Emotional Impairment: Being anxious, angry, or irritable when away from the Internet; experiencing feelings of “withdrawal” when away from the Internet.
\n• Risky/Impulsive Internet Use: Internet use interfering with school performance; losing sleep due to Internet use; loss of interest in non-Internet activities.” [3]
\nThus, risky/impulsive internet use can apparently lead to functional, physical, and/or social impairments.
I considered risky internet use to be that which leads to the following negative consequences described in this study (although, the average age of the participants in this study is 42.46 years old, as a definition it will do): “Negative online consequences considered in this study include personal abuse such as being the target of negative comments, cyberbullying, trolling, or accessing disturbing content, theft of personal information including through accounts being hacked, fraud such as not receiving goods purchased online or these not being as described, spam, malware/viruses, scams including ransomware, romance/dating, or other financial scams where victims are tricked into sending money to criminals posing as others… [4]
\nAnd a little bit about how it all measured up: “Responses for participation in each activity were provided using a 5-point Likert scale (never – very frequently). These included making purchases from offshore and peer-to-peer shopping sites, as well as meeting someone in person after initially connecting via an online peer-to-peer marketplace. Participation in online gambling was assessed in terms of monthly expenditure on online gambling and number of different online gambling sites used (numerical), as well as frequency of offshore gambling site use (Likert). Online game use was assessed with similar questions in terms of expenditure and number of sites used. Use of online dating sites was assessed in terms of expenditure on online dating sites and number of sites used, as well as frequency of site use and frequency of meeting someone in person after connecting through an online dating site. Online discussion forum site use was assessed in terms of the number of sites used. Finally, online pornography use was assessed in terms of frequency of use, expenditure, and the frequency of posting or sharing online pornography of self or others”. [4]
About Impulsive Internet Use: “the construct of impulsivity includes at least two independent components: first, acting without an appropriate amount of deliberation, which may or may not be functional; and second, choosing short-term gains over long-term ones.” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impulsivity
\n2. Internet use and its consequences in PCIAT
\nNext, according to the first PIU definition, I attempted to match each question in the questionnaire with Internet use (risky/impulsive or excessive) and its consequences (physical, emotional, social, or functional impairment). It is possible that some may disagree with individual items in the comparisons, but hopefully my overall conclusions will not be affected.
\nPCIAT_01 How often does your child disobey time limits you set for online use? (using: excessive (1), impairment: social(1))
\nPCIAT_02 How often does your child neglect household chores to spend more time online? (using: excessive(2), risky/impulsive(1), impairment: social(2), functional(1))
\nPCIAT_03 How often does your child prefer to spend time online rather than with the rest of your family? (using: excessive(3), risky/impulsive(2), impairment: social(3))
\nPCIAT_04 How often does your child form new relationships with fellow online users? (using: risky/impulsive(3), impairment: social(4))
\nPCIAT_05 How often do you complain about the amount of time your child spends online? (using: excessive (4), impairment: social(5))
\nPCIAT_06 How often do your child's grades suffer because of the amount of time he or she spends online? (using: excessive(5), risky/impulsive(4), impairment: functional(2))
\nPCIAT_07 How often does your child check his or her e-mail before doing something else? (using: excessive?(6), risky/impulsive(5), impairment: social(6))
\nPCIAT_08 How often does your child seem withdrawn from others since discovering the Internet? (using: excessive?(7), risky/impulsive?(6), impairment: emotional(1), social?(7))
\nPCIAT_09 How often does your child become defensive or secretive when asked what he or she does online? (using: excessive?(8), risky/impulsive?(7), impairment: emotional?(2), social?(8))
\nPCIAT_10 How often have you caught your child sneaking online against your wishes? (using: excessive (9), impairment: social(9))
\nPCIAT_11 How often does your child spend time along in his or her room playing on the computer? (using: excessive(10), risky/impulsive?(8) impairment: social(10))
\nPCIAT_12 How often does your child receive strange phone calls from new \"\"online\"\" friends?\" (using: risky/impulsive(9), impairment: social(11))
\nPCIAT_13 How often does your child snap, yell, or act annoyed if bothered while online? (using: excessive?(11), risky/impulsive?(10), impairment: emotional(3))
\nPCIAT_14 How often does your child seem more tired and fatigued than he or she did before the Internet came along? (using: excessive?(12), risky/impulsive?(11) impairment: physical(1))
\nPCIAT_15 How often does your child seem preoccupied with being back online when off-line? (using: excessive(13), risky/impulsive?(12) impairment: social(12))
\nPCIAT_16 How often does your child throw tantrums with your interference about how long he or she spends online? (using: excessive(14), risky/impulsive(13), impairment: emotional(4), social(13))
\nPCIAT_17 How often does your child choose to spend time online rather than doing once enjoyed hobbies and/or outside interests? (using: excessive(15), risky/impulsive(14) impairment: social(14))
\nPCIAT_18 How often does your child become angry or belligerent when your place time limits on how much time he or she is allowed to spend online? (using: excessive(16), risky/impulsive(15), impairment: emotional(5), social(15))
\nPCIAT_19 How often does your child choose to spend more time online than going out with friends? (using: excessive(17), risky/impulsive(16) impairment: social(16))
\nPCIAT_20 How often does your child feel depressed, moody, or nervous when off-line which seems to go away once back online? (using: excessive(18), risky/impulsive(17), impairment: emotional(6), social(17, physical?(2))
Total Using: excessive – 18, risky/impulsive – 17
\nTotal Impairment: social – 17, emotional – 6, functional – 2, physical – 2
Conclusions
\nSo, internet addiction as measured by PCIAT is not the same as PIU.
\nIn most cases, excessive or (and) risky/impulsive internet use can be assumed. In the majority of cases (85%) it can be assumed that the questionnaire is designed to detect social impairment (which is very likely with compulsive internet use), i.e. problems with face-to-face communication, inability to maintain relationships in real life, skipping social events, loss of interest in non-Internet related activities. 30% of the questions reflect how emotional or depressed the person being observed was when not online or someone prevented them from being there. 10% of the questions are related to functional impairments (grades or household chores suffer), and 10% are possibly related to physical impairments (fatigue, tiredness, or depression).
\nIt is important to note that in most cases, it cannot be determined from the PCIAT whether the impairment is due to excessive or risky/impulsive internet use.
\nWe can probably agree that this characterization applies to this questionnaire as well: “The questionnaire does not specify what activities “internet use” and “being online” refer to, leaving interpretation to the respondent; it also has no mention of social media or smartphone usage, reflecting the timing of its creation. “ [5]
\nI would add to what many Kagglers have said about the subjectivity of the questionnaire, that children who are not satisfied with their families (one of the particular groups at increased risk [1]) may have too low scores on the questionnaire. If parents do not pay proper attention to their children, it is to be expected that they will not make a proper effort to fill out the questionnaire truthfully and thoroughly about their children.
References
\nIs anyone alive in here? Why no comments?
", "rawMarkdown": "Is anyone alive in here? Why no comments?", "votes": null }, { "id": "3024060", "postDate": "10/21/2024 09:48:12", "content": "What to say? There is even an ongoing debate about the existence of PIU, or whether it should be considered a distinct clinical disorder at all, or if it's simply a symptom of underlying mental health issues. I have included some links here: https://www.kaggle.com/competitions/child-mind-institute-problematic-internet-use/discussion/535525#2996071
\nSubjectivity and susceptibility to inaccuracy and bias are problems inherent in any questionnaire. As @dan3dewey mentioned elsewhere, we do not have an objective target in this competition. For some reason, the hosts are interested in predicting the scores people would get on this questionnaire.
", "rawMarkdown": "What to say? There is even an ongoing debate about the existence of PIU, or whether it should be considered a distinct clinical disorder at all, or if it's simply a symptom of underlying mental health issues. I have included some links here: https://www.kaggle.com/competitions/child-mind-institute-problematic-internet-use/discussion/535525#2996071\n\nSubjectivity and susceptibility to inaccuracy and bias are problems inherent in any questionnaire. As @dan3dewey mentioned elsewhere, we do not have an objective target in this competition. For some reason, the hosts are interested in predicting the scores people would get on this questionnaire.", "votes": null }, { "id": "3025040", "postDate": "10/22/2024 10:08:01", "content": "What do you say about the finding that the PCIAT cannot be used to determine whether the disorder is related to excessive or risky/impulsive Internet use, since most questions (80%) suggest either (or both)? Excessive internet use characterizes the quantity of internet use, while risky/impulsive use characterizes the quality of internet use. So we can't rely on the fact that if, for example, a person spent too many hours on the Internet and scored high on the PCIAT, it was because of excessive use and not risky/impulsive use. This may also explain how, despite spending too little time on the Internet, the PCIAT score was high because the quality of use (risky/impulsive) contributed to it.
", "rawMarkdown": "What do you say about the finding that the PCIAT cannot be used to determine whether the disorder is related to excessive or risky/impulsive Internet use, since most questions (80%) suggest either (or both)? Excessive internet use characterizes the quantity of internet use, while risky/impulsive use characterizes the quality of internet use. So we can't rely on the fact that if, for example, a person spent too many hours on the Internet and scored high on the PCIAT, it was because of excessive use and not risky/impulsive use. This may also explain how, despite spending too little time on the Internet, the PCIAT score was high because the quality of use (risky/impulsive) contributed to it.", "votes": null }, { "id": "3025235", "postDate": "10/22/2024 15:06:37", "content": "Hi @kalakagat . Your conclusion that \"internet addiction as measured by PCIAT is not the same as PIU\" certainly seems true based on the references you give; for example from [1]:
\n\"It is also important to point out a nonrecommended approach, which is to focus on time spent online. Whereas early screening approaches asked patients and families to report the number of hours of “screen time,” the 2016 American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) policy statement on media use in school-aged children and adolescents no longer recommends that strategy for this population.32 This shift in screening focus represents newer evidence that illustrates time spent online is not the only factor involved in PIU as well as a lack of evidence to support strict hour-based recommendations that can apply across various developmental stages.\"
\nThe PCIAT questionaire does feel dated (late 90s, early 2000s) and is not as comprehensive as the more recent understanding of PIU in 2020 [1]. However, this very clear distinction is something for the competition organizers to consider as they study and assess PIU in children. They probably used PIU in the title of the competition because it is a simple way to describe the general topic of the competition -- clearly PIU is very broad. These days the internet is involved in practically everything, so the topic is not so different from studying Problematic Electricity Use 😀
\nFor this Kaggle competition, like it or not, the specific goal is to predict the PCIAT Score's SII value (0,1,2,3) from the given data, as is being discussed in Questioning the Task. Going through the questions as you did is a good way to suggest useful features that could be made using the wrist-activity data. That is the main challenge in the competition, I think.
", "rawMarkdown": "Hi @kalakagat . Your conclusion that \"internet addiction as measured by PCIAT is not the same as PIU\" certainly seems true based on the references you give; for example from [1]:\n\n\"It is also important to point out a nonrecommended approach, which is to focus on time spent online. Whereas early screening approaches asked patients and families to report the number of hours of “screen time,” the 2016 American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) policy statement on media use in school-aged children and adolescents no longer recommends that strategy for this population.32 This shift in screening focus represents newer evidence that illustrates time spent online is not the only factor involved in PIU as well as a lack of evidence to support strict hour-based recommendations that can apply across various developmental stages.\"\n\nThe PCIAT questionaire does feel dated (late 90s, early 2000s) and is not as comprehensive as the more recent **understanding of PIU in 2020 [1]**. However, **this very clear distinction is something for the competition organizers to consider** as they study and assess PIU in children. They probably used PIU in the title of the competition because it is a simple way to describe the general topic of the competition -- clearly PIU is very broad. These days the internet is involved in practically everything, so the topic is not so different from studying Problematic Electricity Use 😀\n\nFor this Kaggle competition, like it or not, the specific goal is to predict the PCIAT Score's SII value (0,1,2,3) from the given data, as is being discussed in [Questioning the Task](https://www.kaggle.com/competitions/child-mind-institute-problematic-internet-use/discussion/535525). Going through the questions as you did is a good way to suggest *useful* features that could be made using the wrist-activity data. That is the main challenge in the competition, I think.", "votes": null }, { "id": "3025985", "postDate": "10/23/2024 10:39:42", "content": "Hi, Daniel Dewey. I also come to the conclusion that the most useful data for this competition may be actigraphy data. Physical fitness data, for example, are also questioned:
\n\"Surprisingly, when compared with previous work, PIU was not consistently negatively correlated with physical fitness, although some results trended towards significance. This may be because some pediatric participants have more structured exercise and play times dictated by caregivers (e.g. Physical Education class, compulsory after-school sports, etc.) and thus the deleterious effects of PIU on physical fitness are prevented.\" [5]
Is anyone alive in here? Why no comments?
", "votes": null, "replies": [] }, { "id": 3024060, "author_name": "antoninadolgorukova", "author_url": "", "post_date": "10/21/2024 09:48:12", "content": "What to say? There is even an ongoing debate about the existence of PIU, or whether it should be considered a distinct clinical disorder at all, or if it's simply a symptom of underlying mental health issues. I have included some links here: https://www.kaggle.com/competitions/child-mind-institute-problematic-internet-use/discussion/535525#2996071
\nSubjectivity and susceptibility to inaccuracy and bias are problems inherent in any questionnaire. As @dan3dewey mentioned elsewhere, we do not have an objective target in this competition. For some reason, the hosts are interested in predicting the scores people would get on this questionnaire.
", "votes": null, "replies": [ { "id": 3025040, "author_name": "kalakagat", "author_url": "", "post_date": "10/22/2024 10:08:01", "content": "What do you say about the finding that the PCIAT cannot be used to determine whether the disorder is related to excessive or risky/impulsive Internet use, since most questions (80%) suggest either (or both)? Excessive internet use characterizes the quantity of internet use, while risky/impulsive use characterizes the quality of internet use. So we can't rely on the fact that if, for example, a person spent too many hours on the Internet and scored high on the PCIAT, it was because of excessive use and not risky/impulsive use. This may also explain how, despite spending too little time on the Internet, the PCIAT score was high because the quality of use (risky/impulsive) contributed to it.
", "votes": null, "replies": [] } ] }, { "id": 3025235, "author_name": "dan3dewey", "author_url": "", "post_date": "10/22/2024 15:06:37", "content": "Hi @kalakagat . Your conclusion that \"internet addiction as measured by PCIAT is not the same as PIU\" certainly seems true based on the references you give; for example from [1]:
\n\"It is also important to point out a nonrecommended approach, which is to focus on time spent online. Whereas early screening approaches asked patients and families to report the number of hours of “screen time,” the 2016 American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) policy statement on media use in school-aged children and adolescents no longer recommends that strategy for this population.32 This shift in screening focus represents newer evidence that illustrates time spent online is not the only factor involved in PIU as well as a lack of evidence to support strict hour-based recommendations that can apply across various developmental stages.\"
\nThe PCIAT questionaire does feel dated (late 90s, early 2000s) and is not as comprehensive as the more recent understanding of PIU in 2020 [1]. However, this very clear distinction is something for the competition organizers to consider as they study and assess PIU in children. They probably used PIU in the title of the competition because it is a simple way to describe the general topic of the competition -- clearly PIU is very broad. These days the internet is involved in practically everything, so the topic is not so different from studying Problematic Electricity Use 😀
\nFor this Kaggle competition, like it or not, the specific goal is to predict the PCIAT Score's SII value (0,1,2,3) from the given data, as is being discussed in Questioning the Task. Going through the questions as you did is a good way to suggest useful features that could be made using the wrist-activity data. That is the main challenge in the competition, I think.
", "votes": null, "replies": [ { "id": 3025985, "author_name": "kalakagat", "author_url": "", "post_date": "10/23/2024 10:39:42", "content": "Hi, Daniel Dewey. I also come to the conclusion that the most useful data for this competition may be actigraphy data. Physical fitness data, for example, are also questioned:
\n\"Surprisingly, when compared with previous work, PIU was not consistently negatively correlated with physical fitness, although some results trended towards significance. This may be because some pediatric participants have more structured exercise and play times dictated by caregivers (e.g. Physical Education class, compulsory after-school sports, etc.) and thus the deleterious effects of PIU on physical fitness are prevented.\" [5]