Mobile Phone Addiction

Exploring Addictive Consumption of Mobile Phone Technology

Diana James, Judy Drennan, Queensland University of Technology

Abstract

This paper examines addictive consumption of mobile phones within the domain of consumerbehaviour. Specifically, it explores what characterises addictive users of mobile phonetechnology, factors that increase their usage, and adverse consequences from addiction. Datacollection involved eight in-depth interviews with mobile phone users and one focus groupcontaining six self-identified addictive users. Findings show a range of characteristics thatcomprise possible antecedents to addictive use, and factors common to any consumer engagedin addictive or compulsive consumption. Situational factors effecting excessive use includespecial events, alcohol use, and depressive circumstances. Finally, in addition to significantfinancial issues, results showed a wide range of adverse consequences for addictive mobilephone consumers such as damaged relationships, emotional stress and falling literacy.

Introduction

Mobile phone technology is pervasive in Australia. Current ownership is estimated at 18million – more than 80 percent of the population. Amongst mobile phone owners, usage ofservices is also increasing; in particular, short message services (SMS) rose 44% from 2002 to2003 (Allen Consulting Group, 2004). For young people, ownership and usage levels are evenhigher (Australian Psychological Society, 2004). The Spin Sweeny Report (2003) found thatabout 88 per cent of those aged between 16 and 28 now own mobile phones.

Benefits accruing from this new communication technology are undeniable. Australianacademic studies highlight advantages such as deaf people connecting through SMS (Powerand Power, 2004); forming and supporting relationships (Power and Horstmanshof, 2004);security and safety (Chapman and Schofield, 1998); and social gratification of youths frommobility, access and convenience (Tjong, Weber and Sternberg, 2003). However, it appearssome consumers are paying a heavy “price” for the freedoms afforded by mobile technology.For example, the press have been reporting on “mobile addiction”, “phone junkies”, and “textaddicts” (BBC News, 2004; China Daily, 2004; Herald Sun, 2005; Korea Times, 2005;Sydney Morning Herald, 2004; The Mercury, 2003). In addition, the Australian BroadcastingCorporation reported experts issuing health warnings about youths so addicted to their phonesthey sleep with them (ABC News Radio, May 2005).

Policy makers and community groups indicate that problems are arising, particularly when “acustomer’s usage may be excessive or extreme” (Australian Communications Authority,2004, p. 20). Problems include users incurring considerable debt (Communication LawCentre, 1999; La Trobe University, 2004; Office of Fair Trading, 2003), harassing others andprivacy issues (Australian Psychological Society, 2004), and using the devices in bannedsettings, including hospitals, planes, petrol stations, and cars (Bianchi and Phillips, 2005).Research into these problematic areas “is currently hampered by a lack of good quality data”(Australian Government, 2005, p. 32). Consequently, there is a need for empirical data toascertain the extent of these mobile phone related problems. This paper specifically exploresaddictive use of mobile phones, and reports on an exploratory study examining three researchquestions:

1. What characterises addictive mobile phones users?2. What situational factors influence addictive use of mobiles?3. What are the negative consequences of addictive mobile phone consumption?

ANZMAC 2005 Conference: Electronic Marketing 87

Literature Review

The term “addiction” is traditionally reserved for clinical literature and has historically beenavoided within consumer behaviour studies. Instead, the softer terms “compulsive” or“excessive” are usually used to refer to extreme behaviours, particularly with regards toshopping and consumption. In this paper the term “addiction” is used to describe the mostsevere manifestation of problematic consumption, with “compulsive” being a lesser form, and“impulsive” the least.

Impulsive (Rook and Hoch, 1985), compulsive (Faber, O'Guinn and Krych, 1992), andaddictive (Krych, 1989) buying are forms of abnormal or deviant consumer behavioursstudied in physical shopping environments. More recently, researchers extended problematicbehaviour studies into virtual realities created by information technology including computergaming (Griffiths, Davies and Chappell, 2004), Internet usage (Kaltiala-Heino, Lintonen andRimpela, 2004), and online shopping (LaRose and Eastin 2002). Preliminary studies intomobile phones also indicate the presence of addictive consumption styles (Wilska, 2003) andproblematic behaviour with ensuring negative consequences (Bianchi and Phillips, 2005).

Most consumers possess an impulse buying tendency “to buy spontaneously, unreflectively,immediately, and kinetically” (Rook and Fisher 1995, p. 306). Rook (1987) linked impulsebuying behaviour with other control disorders such as drug abuse, over eating, and spendingsprees. For some consumers impulsive becomes compulsive as the desire for specific productsshifts to a general desire for buying. Compulsive buying is defined as “chronic, repetitivepurchasing that becomes a primary response to negative events or feelings [escape]…becomesvery difficult to stop and ultimately results in harmful consequences” (O'Guinn and Faber,1989, p. 155). Faber et al (1995) also linked compulsive buying to other compulsivebehaviours including addiction. Ultimately, “as abuse turns to dependency, compulsivebuying becomes a behavioural addiction” (LaRose and Eastin, 2002, p. 550).

Consumer behaviour research began exploring impulsive and compulsive consumption twodecades ago. Initially, consumers were dichotomously classified to determine whether, or not,they were “afflicted” by compulsive buying (Faber and O'Guinn, 1989; Valence, DAstous andFortier, 1988). Hirschman’s (1992) phenomenology study of drug consumption integrated thisrelative new consumer behaviour research with addiction and its literature’s long history oftheorisation. Later authors argue that impulsive, compulsive and addictive buying occursalong a continuum, representing varying degrees of the problematic behaviour and itsnegative consequences (Dittmar and Drury, 2000; Edwards, 1993; LaRose, 2001).

Besides impulsiveness, problematic consumption comprises other commonalities. O’Guinnand Faber (1989) identify three common characteristics across addictive and compulsivephenomena as: the presence of a drive, impulse or urge to engage in the behaviour, denial ofthe harmful consequences of engaging in the behaviour, and repeated failure in attempts tocontrol or modify the behaviour. Faber, O’Guinn and Krych (1992, p. 466) later describe theanxiety and preoccupation surrounding the need to use as “building tension”. Withdrawaldistress and tolerance are cornerstones in the definition of addiction and necessarycomponents in the diagnosis of alcohol and drug dependence (Marlatt et al., 1988). Toleranceinvolves the “need for more” as consumers increase consumption in order to achieve the samelevel of effect (Marks, 1990). Bianchi and Phillips (2005) applied several of these constructsin a recent study into problematic usage of mobile phones, including: (1) tolerance, (2) escapefrom other problems, (3) withdrawal, and (4) negative consequences.

Moreover, numerous studies have attempted to identify psychological and social factors aspotential causes of compulsive/addictive consumption. For mobile phone users, high socialuse of the device was linked to low self esteem and extraversion (Bianchi and Phillips 2005).


Methodology

Two exploratory studies undertaken in Brisbane are the basis for a larger project now inprogress. Ten semi-structured interviews were conducted in March 2005, followed by a focusgroup containing six participants in June 2005. (See Appendix A for subject description.)

A judgement sample of eight consumers of mobile phone technology was used in this study.These subjects represented a broad spectrum of the population in terms of usage levels,occupation, and age (19 to 45 years, median age of 29). Interviews typically lasted about anhour. The interviews were recorded on audio cassettes and transcribed.

The focus group was a convenience sample of six young people (aged 18 to 22 years, medianage of 21), enrolled full-time at university. They self-identified as problematic users of mobiletechnology. Subjects were highly animated about the topic. The discussion lasted 87 minutes.

Guided by existing literature, results from the research questions including commoncharacteristics of users, situational factors, and negative consequences, were built into aconceptual framework for addictive consumption of mobile phone usage.

Findings

In our study, it was found that these users had a long established relationship with their phonewith an average of 6.5 years, and all subjects were using their third to fifth mobile phoneupgrade. Usage time was high ranging from 1.5 to 5 hours per day, and the average bill permonth was $140, which is expensive given restricted student incomes. The paper’s threeresearch questions were examined and the findings are provided below.

Characteristics of addictive mobile phone users

In this study, both attitudinal and behavioural characteristics were found amongst mobilephone users who self-identified as problematic. Attitudinal characteristics include: (1)importance that mobile phone plays in life, (2) a sense of self identity with mobile phone, (3)fear of group exclusion, and (4) the device’s entertainment or hedonistic value. Examples ofthese four attitudes are shown in sequence below.

1. My mobile, I would consider my mobile to be probably my prize possession. (Subject 4)

2. It’s like a reflection on you, if your phone is not working, or you can’t answer your phone

or be available 24 hours a day, then it’s a reflection on you… So it gives an image of you

as well, that you are flexible and mobile. (Subject 14)

3. Everyone uses their mobile phone now to communicate to everyone else, and if you don’t

have access to that for whatever period of time then you’re out of the loop. (Subject 10)

4. The fashion does worry me a little bit. I always look at the phones that I can’t afford. Even

though the flip top doesn’t work, and has failed me before, I probably will go back to it.

There’s no question about it because it’s so cool. Because you whip it out, flip it on your

chin, and you’re listening, sort of thing, it’s great. (Subject 14)

Behavioural characteristics related to addictive mobile phone use were found to be: 1)impulsiveness, 2) mounting tension prior to using the device, and 3) failure of controlstrategies, and 4) withdrawal symptoms. These four aspects are illustrated in sequence bysubjects’ comments as follow:


1. So as soon as I get a message I will answer that person straight back, unless of course the

mobile is switched off. It has to be switched off at my work, but sometimes I’ll leave it

on… I’ll stop what I’m doing, answer the message and then keep going. (Subject 2)

2. If I go to work or somewhere and accidentally leave my phone at home, I literately get

anxious. Because I’m like “who’s calling me, what have I missed”. (Subject 10)

3. Usage has been a bit excessive of late. Every bill that I get I think: “oh I’m not going to

message that person”, “I’m not going to have a conversation that goes all day”, or “I’m

going to message over ringing”, or something like that. Usually by the end of the month

my resolve is completely gone, and we’re back to where we started from again. (Subject 2)

4. Like one of my limbs is missing.. feel quite insecure when I don’t have my phone. (Subject

3)

These exploratory findings suggest that a number of commonalities are reflected in addictivemobile phone consumption which can be used as a warning signal to consumers, governmentorganisations and mobile phone companies.

Situational factors associated with addictive use of mobile phones

Exacerbating addictive consumption are three factors – alcohol, special events, and depressivecircumstances – which are proposed variables believed to be temporal, rather than enduringpsychological traits or social circumstances. The first two variables, alcohol and specialevents, were clearly detailed by subjects, both in the in-depth interviews and focus groupdiscussion. Depression was inferred as subjects describe situations when feeling lonely, boredand distressed.

Alcohol featured particularly strongly with the younger subjects.

You lose your inhibitions, you don’t care who you are messaging… alcohol has an

influence on that because you’re not really thinking about `gee, this is costing me 25

cents’, every time I send a message. (Subject 14)

Special events are occasions that interrupt daily schedules. Some subjects used their mobile toorganise social events and incurred particularly heavy usage on the weekends. Focus groupdiscussion reached consensus about high usage occasions being when routines were brokenand land lines are impractical, then the mobile phone becomes a critical tool.

I’m out at night, I become an addictive. But every day to day use I’m an active. But say

like I’m at a festival I think, I just go crazy and use it… I don’t use my phone as much as

say on holidays. But now I’m in a routine, everyone knows I’m at uni. (Subject 9)

In lonely and depressed circumstances, subjects may use mobile phone technology to repairtheir mood. Reaching out to others through their mobile phone helped them feel better.

When I am alone, I am always using mobile phone. But when I’m with someone else, like

friends or boyfriend, I don’t have to worry about who’s calling me or what text message I

get because I can check it when I’m alone. (Subject 13)

Social marketing campaigns are already targeting alcohol and depressive problems in societyand the data on mobile phone related issues could inform future marketing strategies.

Negative consequences of addictive mobile phone usage

Focus group subjects spent an average of three hours per day on their phone (handling,texting, talking) resulting in monthly bills approximately $82 per month. With average


monthly earnings of $685 this equates to 12% spent on mobile phone usage. All sixparticipants had borrowed money to pay bills, and two subjects had service disconnected.

Six types of negative consequences arising from mobile phone use were uncovered from thequantitative research: (1) financial costs cited as the primary problem, (2) psychologicalimpacts, (3) social relations, (4) occupational issues, (5) physical consequences, and (6) legalrepercussions. In sequence, comments illustrating each aspect are provided below:

1. Really expensive bills. Giving up other things so I can get credit. (Subject 11)

2. It becomes a drag to have it sometimes; it’s like a cigarette or an unnecessary

attachment, or just another piece of baggage on me. (Subject 1)

3. You get up to 10 to 20 messages of just fighting when it would have been cheaper or

easier, and probably would have cleared up a lot quicker if you just pick up the phone and

rang…. (Subject 14)

4. I did a university paper where I kept spelling you just as the letter u. And it was constant I

just couldn’t stop it. (Subject 11)

5. Keeps me awake at night because I’ll start talking with someone, or start messaging

someone, then they’ll start messaging back, and I’ll lay awake full of anxiety waiting for

the next message…. Yet I still can’t sleep because I’m anxious. (Subject 4)

6. One of my friends had a crash recently. She told the police officer who was driving just

down the road from her that she sneezed and crashed into the ICB wall. I know for a fact

that she was actually typing a message on her phone... (Subject 10)

These findings show evidence of negative consequences that extend beyond the financialproblems linked to high mobile phone bills. Clearly, consumers need to be provided withstrategies to contain the psychological, social and legal ramifications of addictive phone use.This may require both social and commercial marketing efforts to bring about a change inaddictive consumer behaviour.

Conclusion and Future Directions

This paper has provided exploratory insights into the characteristics of mobile phone users,situational factors associated with addictive use of mobile phones, and negative consequencesof addictive mobile consumption. Attitudinal and behavioural characteristics of addictivemobile phone use were found in self-identified mobile phone addicts and suggest that furtherresearch should examine the impact of attitudinal characteristics on behaviouralcharacteristics.

Findings of the study also suggest that situational factors can be associated with addictivemobile phone consumption and may lead to negative consequences. Factors identified ascontributing to heightened consumption are social occasions that interrupt the individual’sroutine, alcohol consumption, and depressed mood states. Serious consequences impacting onthe user’s occupational functioning, physical health, and possibly the legal system, are alsoconsidered worthy of further investigation because of broader societal implications.

Identification of possible control strategies that can be used by addictive mobile phoneconsumers may assist in modifying their behaviour, or at the very least, minimising negativeconsequences caused by excessive usage. Further study is required to assess the effectivenessof control strategies, and ways that government agencies, social marketers mobile phoneservice providers may assist.


References

Allen Consulting Group, 2004. The Economic Significance of the Australian MobileTelecommunications Industry. Report – Executive Summary. Melbourne. Researchcommissioned by Australian Mobile Telecommunications Association: 1-7.

Australian Broadcasting Corporation, 2005. Mobile phone addiction threatens teen health.Radio AM. 14 May, 08:26:44. Available from http://www.abc.net.au, accessed 4 June 2005.

Australian Communications Authority, 2004. Preventing unexpected high bills: creditmanagement in the telecommunications industry. Discussion Paper. Melbourne. GovernmentRegulator of Telecommunications and Radiocommunications: 1-55.

Australian Government, 2005. The social impact of mobile phone use in Australia: a reviewof data sources. Report. Canberra. Department of Communications, Information Technologyand the Arts: 1-33.

Australian Psychological Society, 2004. Psychosocial aspects of mobile phone use amongadolescents. The Australian Psychological Society, 3 (November): 1-7.

BBC News, 2003. Text addiction leaves thumbs numb. 5 October. United Kingdom.Available from http://news.bbc.co.uk, accessed 4 June 2005.

Bianchi, A., and Phillips, J., 2005. Psychological predictors of problem mobile phone use.Cyber Psychology & Behaviour 8(1): 39-51.

Chapman, S., and Schofield, W. N., 1998. Lifesavers and cellular samaritans: emergency useof cellular (mobile) phones in Australia. Sociology of the Mobile Phone Online PublicationsAvailable from http://socio.ch/mobile/index_mobile.htm, accessed 4 June 2005.

China Daily, 2004. Hooked on mobile phones. 28 January. New York: 3. Available fromhttp://www.chinadaily.com.cn, accessed 4 June 2005.

Communication Law Centre, 1999. Mobile matters: young people and mobile phones. Report.Communication Law Centre and Victoria University funded by the Victorian ConsumerCredit Fund and Commonwealth Government: 1-79.

Dittmar, H., and Drury, J., 2000. Self-image – is it in the bag? A qualitative comparisonbetween ordinary and excessive consumers. Journal of Economic Psychology 21(2): 109-142.

Edwards, E. A., 1993. Development of a new scale for measuring compulsive buyingbehavior. Financial Counseling and Planning 4: 67-84.

Faber, R. J., Christenson, G. A., De Zwaan, M., and Mitchell, J., 1995. Two forms ofcompulsive consumption: comorbidity of compulsive buying and binge eating. Journal ofConsumer Research 22(3): 296-304.

Faber, R. J., and O'Guinn, T. C., 1989. Compulsive buying: a phenomenological exploration.Journal of Consumer Research 16(2): 147-157.


Faber, R. J., O'Guinn, T. C., and Krych, R., 1992. A clinical screener for compulsive buying.Advances in Consumer Research 19(3): 459-469.

Griffiths, M., Davies, M., and Chappell, D., 2004. Online computer gaming: a comparison ofadolescent and adult gamers. Journal of Adolescence 27(1): 87-96.

Herald Sun, 2005. Feeding the addiction. 2 September. Melbourne: 78.

Hirschman, E. C., 1992. The consciousness of addiction: toward a general theory ofcompulsive consumption. Journal of Consumer Research 19(2): 155-179.

Kaltiala-Heino, R., Lintonen, T., and Rimpela, A., 2004. Internet addiction? Potentiallyproblematic use of the Internet in a population of 12-18 year-old adolescents. AddictionResearch & Theory 12(1): 89-96.

Korea Times , 2005. Mobile phone addiction emerging as new problem: poll. Available fromhttp://times.hankooki.com, accessed 4 June 2005.

Krych, R., 1989. Abnormal consumer behavior: a model of addictive behaviors. Advances inConsumer Research 16: 745-748.

LaRose, R., 2001. On the negative effects of e-commerce: a sociocognitive exploration ofunregulated on-line buying. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication 6(1)

LaRose, R., and Eastin, M. S., 2002. Is online buying out of control? Electronic commerceand consumer self-regulation. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media 46(4): 549-564.

La Trobe University, 2004. A report into youth debt: `He that goes a borrowing goes asorrowing. Report. Melbourne. La Trobe University, Law Centre on behalf of WestHeidelberg Community Legal Service.

Marks, I., 1990. Behavioural (non-chemical) addictions. British Journal of Addiction 85:1389-1394.

Marlatt, G. A., Baer, J. S., Donovan, D.M., and Kivlahan, D.R., 1988. Addictive behaviors:etiology and treatment. Annual Review of Psychology 39: 223-252.

Office of Fair Trading, 2003. Youth debt. Report. Sydney, New South Wales ConsumerProtection Agency: 1-52.

O'Guinn, T. C., and Faber, R. J., 1989. Compulsive buying: a phenomenological exploration.Journal of Consumer Research 16(2): 147-157.

Power, M. R., and Horstmanshof, L., 2004. YYSSW (Yeah, yeah, sure, sure, whatever):keeping and supporting relationships through SMS text messaging. Human Communicationand Technology Communication, National Communication Association Annual Convention,Chicago, Illinois.


Power, M. R., and Power, D., 2004. Everyone here speaks txt: deaf people using SMS inAustralia and the rest of the world. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education 9(3): 333-343.

Rook, D. W., 1987. The buying impulse. Journal of Consumer Research 14(3): 189-199.

Rook, D. W., and Fisher, R. J., 1995. Normative influences on impulsive buying behaviour.Journal of Consumer Research 22: 305-313.

Rook, D. W., and Hoch, S. J., 1985. Consuming impulses. Advances in Consumer Research12: 23-27.

Sweeny Research, 2003. The Spin Sweeny Report 2003: The definitive lifestyle guide to 16-28 year olds in Australia. Sydney. Available from http://www.spinsweeneyreport.com.au,accessed 4 June 2005.

Sydney Morning Herald, 2004. Mobile phones becoming a major addiction. 8 September.Sydney. Available from http://www.smh.com.au, accessed 4 June 2005.

The Mercury, 2003. Text addicts in for detox. 7 October. Hobart: 3.

Tjong, S., Weber, I., and Sternberg, J., 2003. Mobile, youth culture, shaping telephone use inAustralia and Singapore. ANZCA03 Australian and New Zealand CommunicationAssociation: Designing communication for diversity, Brisbane, Queensland.

Valence, G., DAstous, A., and Fortier, L., 1988. Compulsive buying: concept andmeasurement. Journal of Consumer Policy 11: 419-433.

Wilska, T.-A., 2003. Mobile phone use as part of young people's consumption styles. Journalof Consumer Policy 26(4): 441-463.


Appendix A

Subject Description

In-Depth Interviews – broad spectrum of mobile phones users: usage levels, demographics and psychographics

Subject Age and gender Occupation and important lifestyle attributes

1 45 Male Pipe Fitter Welder. Lives alone in boarding house, despite high income.

No landline. Children live in other country. Attends community

meetings.

2 27 Female Nurse works full time plus agency shift work. Lives alone. Drives own

car 15 minutes to work. Recently relocated to City for job, but maintains

close phone ties with old friends. Very active social.

3 43 Female Unemployed. Lives alone. No car. No family? Attends community

meetings. Wide range of acquaintances.

4 30 Male Mechanic. Shares a unit with one mate. No car. Gets picked up for work

or takes 10 minute train ride to work. Family interstate. Wide circle of

friends, attends several community meetings.

5 35 Female Full-time Student in Animal Husbandry. Lives with mother and 2 other

relatives. Drives 20 minutes in own car to college. Attends community

meetings each week. Limited social life.

6 19 Male Casual bar tender. No regular work hours. No car. Resides withrelatives in household of 4. Highly involved in sports, plays 7 times per

week.

7 19 Female Part-time Legal Secretary and law student. Very active social life

including sports. Lives with parents and younger brother. Commutes by

bus 40 minutes to work and drives 5 minutes to university.

8 20 Female Junior Claims Secretary. Youngest of four, lives with parents and

brother. Commutes 20 minutes to work on City Cat. Limited outside

interests.


Focus Group – Self-identified problematic users from a single, second-year university student class

Subject Age & gender Full-time Students, Key Attributes of Mobile Phone Usage

9 20 Female Ave USE per weekday: Handling = 1.5 hrs; Talk = 1 hrs; Text = .5 hrs.

Monthly: Ave Income = $800; Ave MP cost = $120; Highest MP Bill = $150

ITEMS: Bill usually a bit more than expected; Usually finds paying bill a bit

difficult, causes anxiety & depression; occasionally borrows money from

parents to pay MP bill; Just can’t help using.

High and exclusive use of MP features, except music and phones; Considers

MP very beneficial for all social/business groups.

10 22 Female Ave USE per weekday: Handling = 2 hrs; Talk = 10 mins; Text = 1 hr.


*** Unable to pay bill; service disconnected; 5 years bad credit rating

ITEMS: Usually finds paying bill a bit difficult, causes anxiety & depression;

occasionally borrows money from partner to pay MP bill; Just can’t help using,borrowing places strain on relationship

Exclusively uses MP no landline, also several features, but not all; Considers

MP somewhat to very beneficial for all social/business groups.

11 22 Male Ave USE per weekday: Handling = 2 hrs; Talk = 20mins; Text = 1 hrs


*** Unable to pay bill accumulated; contract terminated

ITEMS: Usually finds paying bill a bit difficult, causes anxiety & depression;

Regularly has to borrow money from family member; feels embarrassed; just

can’t help using; forgets local call costs.

Uses all available MP features except for music; Considers MP somewhat tovery beneficial for all social/business groups.

12 18 Female Ave USE per weekday: Handling = 4 hrs; Talk = 2 hrs; Text = 1.5 hrs.


ITEMS – Bill is usually a bit more than expected; Usually a struggle to pay;

causes anxiety & depression; Just can’t help using; Occasionally borrowsmoney from family & partner to pay bill; borrowing also causes anxiousness.

Uses all features, high usage; Considers very beneficial for all groups.

13 22 Female Ave USE per weekday: Handling = 1.5 hrs; Talk = 1 hrs; Text = .5 hrs.


ITEMS – just can’t help using

Uses few MP features; Considers very beneficial to only a few social groups.

14 20 Male Ave USE per weekday: Handling = 5 hrs; Talk = 3 hrs; Text = 1.5 hrs.


ITEMS: just can’t help using; forgets local call costs; Occasionally borrows

money from family member to pay MP bill

Uses most MP features; Considers somewhat to very beneficial for all groups.


Mobile Phone Addiction

Documents