Next Article in Journal
Motor Skill Development at Preschool Age in Girls and Boys: The Role of Outdoor Free Play
Previous Article in Journal
Pandemic as an Organizational Paradigm for Neonatal Care: Long-Term Impact of Mother–Infant Separation Practice During COVID-19
Previous Article in Special Issue
Refugee Caregivers’ Perceptions of Using Mindfulness-Based Interventions to Support Coping Skills in Children with Disability in Jordan
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Children
Volume 12
Issue 5
10.3390/children12050593
children-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Intervention Effects of Group Sandplay Therapy on Children at Risk of Smartphone Addiction: Focusing on Internalizing and Externalizing Problems in the Korean Youth Self Report

by
Yang Hee Lee
1,
Heajin Shin
1,
Eunju Bae
1,
Youngil Lee
2,
Chang Min Lee
3,
Se Hoon Shim
4,
Min Sun Kim
1,5 and
Myung Ho Lim
1,5,*
1
Department of Psychology, Graduate School, Dankook University, 119 Dandae-ro, Dongnam-gu, Cheonan 31116, Republic of Korea
2
Department of Anatomy, College of Medicine, Dankook University, 119 Dandae-ro, Dongnam-gu, Cheonan 31116, Republic of Korea
3
Department of Neurology, College of Medicine, Dankook University, 119 Dandae-ro, Dongnam-gu, Cheonan 31116, Republic of Korea
4
Department of Psychiatry, College of Medicine, Soonchunhyang University, Asan 31538, Republic of Korea
5
Department of Psychology and Psychotherapy, College of Health Science, Dankook University, 119 Dandae-ro, Dongnam-gu, Cheonan 31116, Republic of Korea
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Children 2025, 12(5), 593; https://doi.org/10.3390/children12050593
Submission received: 31 March 2025 / Revised: 24 April 2025 / Accepted: 28 April 2025 / Published: 1 May 2025
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Behavioral and Mental Health Problems in Children: 2nd Edition)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Objectives: this study examined the intervention effects of group sandplay therapy (GST) on children at risk of smartphone addiction. Methods: The participants consisted of 113 elementary school students in grades 5 and 6 (ages 11–12), with 57 in the intervention group and 56 in the control group. The intervention group participated in the GST program once a week for 40 min over 10 weeks, while the control group received no intervention. The Youth Smartphone Addiction Scale (S-scale) and the Korean Youth Self Report (K-YSR) were used to assess the program. Additionally, a repeated measures ANOVA was employed to examine changes between pre- and post-tests. Results: compared to the control group, the intervention group that received GST showed a significant reduction in smartphone addiction (F = 7.355, p = 0.020), withdrawal/depression (F = 5.540, p = 0.032), and somatic symptoms (F = 4.542, p = 0.040) compared to the control group. Conclusions: GST was found to be effective in reducing smartphone addiction, depression, and somatic symptoms in children at risk for smartphone addiction.

1. Introduction

The rate of Internet access among Korean households is 99.9%, with a smartphone ownership rate of 96.1% among individuals aged six and older, indicating widespread usage across all age groups [1]. Smartphones have become an integral part of people’s lives, serving not only as tools for communication but also for accessing information and entertainment. However, high usage also increases the risk of smartphone overdependence. According to the 2023 Smartphone Overdependence Survey, 23.1% of the South Korean population is at risk of overdependence, up nearly 10% from 14.2% in 2014. The rate of overdependence among adolescents (ages 10–19) is 40.1%, which is significantly higher than that of children (25.0%) and adults (22.7%) [1].
Smartphone addiction has been defined as the overuse of smartphones to the extent that it disturbs the everyday lives of users [2]. Similar to other addictions, smartphone addiction can lead to increased tolerance, withdrawal symptoms, cravings, and loss of self-control [3,4,5].
Smartphone addiction can negatively impact both mental and physical health, causing various problems such as sleep disturbances, headaches, and dietary issues [6]. A meta-analysis by Sohn et al. [5] revealed that 23.3% of children and adolescents exhibited problematic smartphone use, leading to increased stress, poorer sleep quality, and higher levels of depression and anxiety. Ye et al. [7] found that Internet addiction exacerbates depression, which in turn can also worsen Internet addiction. Smartphone use has also been shown to be positively related to anxiety, with the two factors interacting over time to further intensify anxiety symptoms [8]. Among adolescents, higher smartphone dependence and fewer close friendships were associated with higher anxiety [9], leading to an increased risk of smartphone addiction [10]. Smartphone addiction has also been linked to aggressive behavior, anger, and hostility [11] and is associated with somatization and obsessive–compulsive symptoms [12]. Smartphone addiction has also been found to be associated with ADHD. Individuals with ADHD often exhibit impulsivity, low self-control, and heightened sensitivity to rewards. The characteristics of smartphones, such as instant feedback and portability, may cause adolescents with ADHD symptoms to become more dependent on their devices, thereby aggravating their symptoms [13,14]. Similar to Internet addiction, smartphone addiction has been linked to depression and anxiety [3,15], as well as other negative emotions such as loneliness. Furthermore, several studies have linked smartphone addiction to obsessive–compulsive disorder and ADHD [6,16,17]. Though similar to Internet addiction, smartphone addiction may pose a greater risk due to its accessibility at any time and place [18].
Smartphone addiction has been found to be associated with various psychological problems, including depression, anxiety, and aggression. In addition, adolescent characteristics, such as psychological immaturity and impulsivity, contribute to the risk of smartphone addiction [19]. Relationships with significant others also play a critical role. Negative relationships with parents, teachers, or peers are associated with a higher risk of smartphone addiction [20]. Conversely, positive and supportive relationships can help alleviate symptoms of depression and anxiety [21,22]. Thus, addressing smartphone addiction requires an integrated approach that considers psychological issues as well as social and environmental influences.
Non-pharmacological treatments for Internet addiction, such as cognitive behavioral therapy, educational interventions, combined interventions, and sandplay therapy, have demonstrated effectiveness in certain target groups. However, further research is needed to understand the impact and mechanisms of these interventions [23,24]. Sandplay therapy involves using sand and figures to express thoughts and feelings in a nondirective and receptive environment [25]. It can be particularly useful for children and patients who have difficulty expressing themselves verbally, as it allows them to visualize internal images using various figures, including people, animals, houses, and natural objects [26]. By engaging in play, sandplay therapy reduces psychological resistance and defense mechanisms [27] while relaxing the autonomic nervous system, which promotes interpersonal development and improves emotional regulation [28].
GST can enhance self-acceptance by enabling individuals to safely express their feelings and desires while experiencing acceptance and empathy from peers as they play in the sand [29]. Through interactions with group members, children can develop intimacy, acquire social skills, and achieve personal growth [30]. A meta-analysis by Roesler [26] found that sandplay therapy is effective in improving relationships, reducing social anxiety, and addressing ADHD, depression, anxiety, and addictive behaviors in children and adolescents. However, there is a lack of research on GST specifically for children with smartphone addiction. Therefore, this study investigated whether GST is effective in addressing smartphone addiction and internalizing/externalizing problems in affected children.

2. Methods

2.1. Study Design

This study was designed as a non-randomized controlled trial to assess the effectiveness of GST for children with smartphone addiction. The intervention group received GST, while the control group received no treatment. Both groups underwent pre- and post-tests. This study took place in a sandplay therapy room at an elementary school in Cheonan, South Chungcheong Province, South Korea. It was conducted over four semesters, from April 2021 to October 2022. Prior to the study, cooperation from elementary school teachers was requested, and three experts were consulted to develop a group plan. The program was conducted by a qualified expert with over ten years of experience in sandplay therapy under the clinical supervision of a pediatric psychiatrist.

2.2. Participants

A survey on smartphone addiction was conducted among 413 fifth and sixth graders at an elementary school in Cheonan, South Chungcheong Province, Republic of Korea. According to the survey results, 119 of the 413 students fell into the high-risk and potential-risk categories. Of these, five children refused to participate in sandplay therapy, and one child was excluded for other reasons. Parental consent was obtained from 113 students willing to participate in this study via school newsletters and individual contacts. Of the 113 final participants, 57 were assigned to the intervention group, while 56 were placed in the control group.

2.3. Intervention

The GST program consisted of ten 40 min sessions, held once a week on Tuesdays and Thursdays during after-school activities. The program was conducted in groups of 3 to 4 peers. Each child was provided with a sand tray measuring 72 cm wide, 57 cm high, and 7 cm deep. The figures for the GST program were shared among the children, and after completing their work, they took turns presenting and appreciating each other’s creations. The therapist facilitated the group interactions and encouraged the children to freely express their emotions. Throughout this process, the group members experienced mutual support, encouragement, and empathy (Table 1). The program was based on Boik and Goodwin’s [27] Sandplay Therapy and Kalff’s [31] Introduction to Sandplay Therapy, with reference to Kwak et al.’s [32] GST program for schools.

2.4. Measures

2.4.1. Youth Smartphone Addiction Scale (S-Scale)

The S-scale is a standardized self-report scale developed by the National Information Society Agency [33] to measure smartphone addiction among adolescents aged 10 to 19. It consists of 15 items divided into four sub-factors. Factor 1 consists of 5 items related to impairment in daily life, Factor 2 consists of 2 items related to virtual world orientation, Factor 3 consists of 4 items on withdrawal, and Factor 4 consists of 4 items on tolerance. Scores range from 15 to 60 points. Elementary school students are considered high-risk if they meet one of the three following criteria: a total score of 42 or higher, a score of 14 or higher on Factor 1, or a score of 13 or higher on Factor 3. For potentially high-risk students, one of the four following criteria must be met: a total score between 39 and 41, a score of 13 or higher on Factor 1, a score of 12 or higher on Factor 3, or a score of 12 or higher on Factor 4. Each item is rated on a 4-point Likert scale, with responses ranging from “strongly disagree (1)” to “strongly agree (4).” To avoid response bias, items 8, 10, and 13 were reverse scored, with a higher total score indicating a greater likelihood of smartphone addiction. In this study, Cronbach’s α was 0.91.

2.4.2. Korean Youth Self Report: K-YSR

The Youth Self Report (YSR) is a 119-item self-report test developed by Achenbach [34] for children and adolescents aged 11 to 18 years. Participants are asked to rate their emotional behavior on a 3-point Likert scale based on the preceding six months. The Korean Youth Self Report (K-YSR) was adapted and standardized by Oh et al. [35] and includes subscales measuring problem behavior syndrome and social competence syndrome. This study measured eight subscales, excluding other issues from the problem behavior syndrome. The eight subscales encompass internalizing problems such as anxiety, withdrawal, depression, and somatic symptoms. In addition, the subscales include externalizing problems such as aggressive and delinquent behaviors, as well as social problems and thought problems. The Cronbach’s α for the eight subscales in this study were as follows: anxiety/depression (0.87), withdrawal/depression (0.88), somatic symptoms (0.89), social problems (0.88), thought problems (0.87), attention problems (0.89), delinquent behavior (0.90), and aggressive behavior (0.88).

2.5. Statistical Analysis

Statistical analysis was performed using IBM SPSS Statistics 28.0. Additionally, an χ2 test and t-test were conducted for gender and age comparisons, respectively. Repeated measures ANOVA (RM-ANOVA) was used to examine changes between pre- and post-tests across groups after GST implementation.

2.6. Ethics Statement

This study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and was approved by the Institutional Review Board of Dankook University (DKU 2020-03-004). Voluntary informed consent was obtained from all participants and their guardians after explaining the purpose and procedures of this study. Participants were also informed that they could withdraw from this study at any time without any penalty.

3. Results

3.1. Participant Demographics

Of the 113 children who participated in this study, 52 from the intervention group and 47 from the control group completed the post-test. Four children from the intervention group were excluded from the analysis: three who missed three or more sessions and one who did not complete the post-test. In the control group, nine children were excluded: seven who did not complete the post-test and two who transferred schools (see Figure 1).
Participants in the program consisted of fifth- and sixth-grade elementary school students (ages 11–12), with a mean age of 11.46 years (SD = 0.50) in the intervention group and 11.30 years (SD = 0.46) in the control group. Homogeneity tests indicated that the difference between the groups was not statistically significant (t = 8.83, p = 0.09). Additionally, the difference between genders was also not found to be significant (χ2 = 0.658, p = 0.42) (see Table 2).

3.2. Changes in K-YSR After GST Intervention

The analysis revealed significant effects for smartphone addiction related to group (F = 16.425, p < 0.001), time (F = 19.311, p < 0.001), and interaction (F = 7.355, p = 0.020). Withdrawal/depression was significant for the group (F = 5.540, p = 0.032) and time effects (F = 5.506, p = 0.021) but not for the interaction effect. Anxiety/depression and aggressive behavior were not significant for the group and interaction effects but were significant for the time effect (F = 10.685, p = 0.002). Somatic symptoms were not significant for group and time but were significant for the interaction effect (F = 4.542, p = 0.040). Thought problems were significant for the group effect (F = 4.359, p = 0.044) but not for the time and interaction effects. Delinquent behaviors, social problems, and attention problems were not found to be significant. Thus, the intervention group showed significant improvements in smartphone addiction, anxiety/depression, withdrawal/depression, somatic symptoms, aggressive behavior, and thought problems compared to the control group.
The differences between the intervention and control groups before and after the intervention were analyzed using repeated measures ANOVA (RM-ANOVA), and the results are presented in Table 3 and Figure 2.

4. Discussion and Conclusions

This study examined the effectiveness of GST intervention on children at risk of smartphone addiction. The results indicated significant improvements for the intervention group in smartphone addiction, anxiety/depression, withdrawal/depression, somatic symptoms, aggressive behavior, and thought problems.
First, the symptoms of smartphone addiction were found to be statistically significant in the group, time, and interaction effects following GST intervention. These findings are consistent with previous research on smartphone addiction among adolescents. Shin and Jang [36] reported significant decreases in smartphone addiction levels after a GST intervention with 78 middle school students. Additionally, Kim and Kim [29] found that GST improved peer relationships while reducing impulsivity and social anxiety in smartphone-addicted teenagers.
Smartphone addiction is associated with a lack of direct social support and difficulty in communicating and feeling connected with family and peers [37]. Limited social interaction has been shown to increase the likelihood of smartphone addiction, as it becomes more challenging to experience pleasure [38].
In addition, GST encourages children to express their feelings by communicating with one another about the various sensations of sand and the figures they place in the sand tray. Active peer interaction through GST may help alleviate symptoms of smartphone addiction by providing emotional support and fostering a sense of connection.
Furthermore, smartphone addiction has been linked to impairments in the brain’s inhibitory system, which regulates emotions and impulses [18]. Foo et al. [39] discovered that the prefrontal and temporal regions were co-activated during sandplay therapy, facilitating the recall and reprocessing of memories. In GST, sensory integration occurs as patients express the tactile sensations of touching the sand and the visual images of the figures they place in the sand tray. This process stimulates and activates the brain, strengthening neural connectivity.
Second, symptoms of anxiety and depression showed a significant effect over time after GST intervention, which was consistent with previous studies. A study by Lee et al. [40] on delinquent adolescents found that sandplay therapy significantly improved depression and anxiety symptoms in this population. Rousseau et al. [41] conducted sandplay therapy on 105 preschoolers aged 4 to 6 years living in a multiethnic neighborhood. The results showed that emotional issues such as depression and anxiety were alleviated.
GST integrates play into therapy, allowing children to express themselves freely using sand and figures without relying on verbal communication [42]. For children who have difficulty expressing themselves, this approach helps them process their memories and emotions more comfortably.
In the case of the withdrawal/depression variable, significant group and time effects were observed after GST, indicating a positive impact on the intervention group. Withdrawal and depression are often associated with peer relationships, as suggested by items such as “I feel lonely” and “I enjoy very few things”. GST helps alleviate depression by fostering peer attachment through interaction [29].
Third, GST showed a statistically significant interaction effect on somatic symptoms. Roubenzadeh and Abedin [43] used sandplay in a supportive environment with grieving adolescents, enabling them to understand, observe, and separate their emotions. This process contributed to a reduction in negative emotions such as depression, anger, and guilt, as well as somatic symptoms. Moreover, in a study of middle school students with PTSD symptoms, Cao et al. [44] reported that sandplay therapy effectively reduced somatic symptoms and negative emotions.
Fourth, the GST intervention resulted in significant changes in aggressive behavior. Lee et al. [45] reported that GST improved peer relationships and reduced behavioral problems such as aggression in a study of Korean–Chinese children. Abdollahi Keivani and Abolmaali [46] found that sandplay therapy could alleviate aggression, depression, and anxiety in preschool children. In addition, sandplay therapy has been shown to reduce aggressive behavior in female juvenile delinquents by providing an outlet for expressing their repressed anger and aggression [47]. This study suggests that aggressive behavior was mitigated by allowing these individuals to express negative emotions they were experiencing at the time by using sand and sharing their stories.
Fifth, GST resulted in significant between-group changes relating to thought problems. Shin and Park [48] found that GST significantly affected internalizing, externalizing, and cognitive issues among adolescents (grades 4–6) at a local children’s center. Von Gontard et al. [49] also reported that sandplay therapy significantly affected cognitive issues in a one-year study (with three assessment points of 0, 6, and 12 months) involving middle-class children and adolescents (ages 5–18). Thus, GST has been shown to be effective for addressing smartphone addiction, as well as for internalizing and externalizing symptoms.
However, this study has several limitations.
First, this study has methodological limitations in interpretation due to its non-randomized design and imbalanced gender distribution among participants.
Second, there were limitations in evaluating effectiveness due to relying solely on a self-report questionnaire. To establish more scientific evidence for the effectiveness of GST, additional studies involving brain wave observations and changes in autonomic nervous system activity are required.
Third, the current study was limited in its assessment of the long-term sustainability of the intervention. Future follow-up studies are warranted to evaluate the durability of treatment effects.
Fourth, this study’s scope was limited to a single elementary school, making it difficult to generalize the findings. Future research should expand to include different regions and age groups to explore the effects of GST on smartphone addiction comprehensively.
Fifth, this study was conducted over the course of four semesters, and although efforts were made to maintain consistent conditions, the extended intervention period posed limitations in fully controlling the environment. Therefore, future research should consider shortening the intervention period and utilizing regular class hours to ensure a more structured and stable setting for implementation.
Sixth, a limitation of the present study is its inability to control for factors such as parenting style and peer relationships, which are known to influence children’s emotional and behavioral development. For instance, the effectiveness of sandplay therapy may vary depending on the level of parental emotional responsiveness and the degree of peer support. Future research should incorporate assessments of the quality and frequency of parent–child interactions and peer relationships to more accurately examine the influence of these variables on therapeutic outcomes [20,50].
Lastly, the small sample size in this study limits the generalizability of the findings.
Nevertheless, this study is significant, as it validates the effectiveness of GST as an intervention for children with smartphone addiction within a context where research on this topic is scarce.
Group sandplay therapy (GST) facilitates emotional conflict resolution, emotional regulation, and the reconstruction and reorganization of the internal representational world by stabilizing the nervous system and promoting prefrontal cortex activation through nonverbal, sensory, and experiential approaches [30,51]. The findings of this study confirm the therapeutic mechanisms of GST to be effective in reducing smartphone addiction as well as various internalizing and externalizing symptoms.
This suggests that GST can be effectively applied not only in school settings but also within the home environment to improve interpersonal relationships and emotional regulation. Furthermore, in contemporary society where face-to-face interactions are decreasing due to the proliferation of online communication and artificial intelligence, such offline, physical, and sensory-based therapeutic approaches remain essential.

Author Contributions

Y.H.L. conceptualized and investigated these data and wrote the first draft of the manuscript. H.S. validated and performed formal analysis of these data. E.B. participated in methodology and formal analysis. Y.L., C.M.L. and S.H.S. participated in validation and formal analysis. M.S.K. participated in validation and data curation. M.H.L. participated in the conceptualization, methodology, and writing of this manuscript. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This study was conducted using the research fund of Dankook University in 2025.

Institutional Review Board Statement

This study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and approved by the ethical review committee of Dankook University (DKU 2020-03-004; date 4 March 2020).

Informed Consent Statement

All participants were informed that participation was voluntary and provided written, informed consent. The authors report no competing interests.

Data Availability Statement

The datasets generated during and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Ministry of Science and ICT. 2023 Survey on the Internet Usage; Ministry of Science and ICT: Sejong-si, Republic of Korea, 2023. Available online: https://www.msit.go.kr (accessed on 29 March 2025).
  2. Demirci, K.; Orhan, H.; Demirdas, A.; Akpinar, A.; Sert, H. Validity and Reliability of the Turkish Version of the Smartphone Addiction Scale in a Younger Population. Bull. Clin. Psychopharmacol. 2014, 24, 226–234. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Ilyanova, A.; Gorbaniuk, O.; Blachnio, A.; Przepiórka, A.; Mraka, N.; Polishchuk, V.; Gorbaniuk, J. Mobile Phone Addiction, Phubbing, and Depression Among Men and Women: A Moderated Mediation Analysis. Psychiatr. Q. 2020, 91, 655–668. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Kuss, D.J.; Griffiths, M.D.; Karila, L.; Billieux, J. Internet Addiction: A Systematic Review of Epidemiological Research for the Last Decade. Curr. Pharm. Des. 2014, 20, 4026–4052. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Sohn, S.Y.; Rees, P.; Wildridge, B.; Kalk, N.J.; Carter, B. Prevalence of Problematic Smartphone Usage and Associated Mental Health Outcomes Amongst Children and Young People: A Systematic Review, Meta-Analysis and GRADE of the Evidence. BMC Psychiatry 2019, 19, 356. [Google Scholar]
  6. Wacks, Y.; Weinstein, A.M. Excessive Smartphone Use Is Associated with Health Problems in Adolescents and Young Adults. Front. Psychiatry 2021, 12, 669042. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. Ye, X.L.; Zhang, W.; Zhao, F.F. Depression and Internet Addiction Among Adolescents: A Meta-Analysis. Psychiatry Res. 2023, 326, 115311. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  8. Wang, Y.; Luo, Y.; Yan, N.; Mackay, L.E.; Wang, Y.; Wang, Y.; Wang, W. The Longitudinal Relationships Between Problematic Smartphone Use and Anxiety Symptoms Among Chinese College Students: A Cross-Lagged Panel Network Analysis. Addict. Behav. 2025, 160, 108170. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Kim, K.; Yee, J.; Chung, J.E.; Kim, H.J.; Han, J.M.; Kim, J.H.; Gwak, H.S. Smartphone Addiction and Anxiety in Adolescents—A Cross-Sectional Study. Am. J. Health Behav. 2021, 45, 895–901. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Liu, Y.; Jin, C.; Zhou, X.; Chen, Y.; Ma, Y.; Chen, Z.; Ren, Y. The Mediating Role of Inhibitory Control and the Moderating Role of Family Support Between Anxiety and Internet Addiction in Chinese Adolescents. Arch. Psychiatr. Nurs. 2024, 53, 165–170. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Fekih-Romdhane, F.; Malaeb, D.; Sarray El Dine, A.; Obeid, S.; Hallit, S. The Relationship Between Smartphone Addiction and Aggression Among Lebanese Adolescents. World J. Sand Ther. Pract. 2022, 2, 735. [Google Scholar]
  12. Zamboni, L.; Portoghese, I.; Congiu, A.; Carli, S.; Munari, R.; Federico, A.; Lugoboni, F. Internet Addiction and Related Clinical Problems: A Study on Italian Young Adults. Front. Psychol. 2020, 11, 571638. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Kim, S.G.; Park, J.; Kim, H.T.; Pan, Z.; Lee, Y.; McIntyre, R.S. The Relationship Between Smartphone Addiction and Symptoms of Depression, Anxiety, and Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity in South Korean Adolescents. Ann. Gen. Psychiatry 2019, 18, 1. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Wang, B.Q.; Yao, N.Q.; Zhou, X.; Liu, J.; Lv, Z.T. The Association Between Attention Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder and Internet Addiction: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. BMC Psychiatry 2017, 17, 260. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Elhai, J.D.; Levine, J.C.; O’Brien, K.D.; Armour, C. Distress Tolerance and Mindfulness Mediate Relations Between Depression and Anxiety Sensitivity with Problematic Smartphone Use. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2018, 84, 477–484. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Jeong, B.; Lee, J.Y.; Kim, B.M.; Park, E.; Kwon, J.G.; Kim, D.J.; Lee, D. Associations of Personality and Clinical Characteristics with Excessive Internet and Smartphone Use in Adolescents: A Structural Equation Modeling Approach. Addict. Behav. 2020, 110, 106485. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  17. Kim, S.; Kim, T.H. The Effect of Group Art Therapy on the Delay of Gratification of Children with Smartphone Addiction. Forum Youth Cult. 2019, 58, 31–60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Méndez, M.L.; Padrón, I.; Fumero, A.; Marrero, R.J. Effects of Internet and Smartphone Addiction on Cognitive Control in Adolescents and Young Adults: A Systematic Review of fMRI Studies. Neurosci. Biobehav. Rev. 2024, 159, 105572. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Do, K.Y.; Kim, C.B. Predicting Smartphone Addiction Trajectories in Korean Adolescents: A Longitudinal Analysis of Protective and Risk Factors Based on a National Survey from 2018 to 2020. Asia-Pac. J. Public Health 2024, 36, 550–557. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Lee, C.; Lee, S.J. Prevalence and Predictors of Smartphone Addiction Proneness Among Korean Adolescents. Child. Youth Serv. Rev. 2017, 77, 10–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Luo, Y.; Deng, Y.; Wu, Y.; Liu, J.; Ran, H.; Yuan, J.; Zhao, L. The Experiences in Close Relationship and Internet Addiction Among College Students: A Moderated Mediation Model of Anxiety and Information Cocoon. Soc. Sci. Med. 2025, 366, 117641. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Zhao, M.; Huang, Y.; Wang, J.; Feng, J.; Zhou, B. Internet Addiction and Depression Among Chinese Adolescents: Anxiety as a Mediator and Social Support as a Moderator. Psychol. Health Med. 2023, 28, 2315–2328. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. Jiang, Y.S.; Liu, T.H.; Qin, D.; Wang, Z.P.; He, X.Y.; Chen, Y.N. Effects of Non-Pharmacological Interventions on Youth with Internet Addiction: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials. Front. Psychiatry 2024, 14, 1327200. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Malinauskas, R.; Malinauskiene, V. A Meta-Analysis of Psychological Interventions for Internet/Smartphone Addiction Among Adolescents. J. Behav. Addict. 2019, 8, 613–624. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  25. Tan, J.; Yin, H.; Meng, T.; Guo, X. Effects of Sandplay Therapy in Reducing Emotional and Behavioural Problems in School-Age Children with Chronic Diseases: A Randomized Controlled Trial. Nurs. Open 2021, 8, 3099–3110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Roesler, C. Sandplay Therapy: An Overview of Theory, Applications and Evidence Base. Arts Psychother. 2019, 64, 84–94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Boik, B.; Goodwin, E.A. Sandplay Therapy: A Step-by-Step Manual for Psychotherapists of Diverse Orientations; W. W. Norton & Company: New York, NY, USA, 2000. [Google Scholar]
  28. Chan, K.L.R.; Ouyang, G. Impact of Child-Centered Play Therapy Intervention on Children with Autism Reflected by Brain EEG Activity: A Randomized Controlled Trial. Res. Autism Spectr. Disord. 2024, 112, 102336. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Kim, H.R.; Kim, Y.J. The Effects of Group Sandplay Therapy on Peer Attachment, Impulsiveness, and Social Anxiety of Adolescents Addicted to Smartphones. J. Symb. Sandplay Ther. 2015, 6, 1–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Kestly, T.A. The Interpersonal Neurobiology of Play: Brain-Building Interventions for Emotional Well-Being; W. W. Norton & Company: New York, NY, USA, 2014. [Google Scholar]
  31. Kalff, D.M. Introduction to Sandplay Therapy. J. Sandplay Ther. 1991, 1, 1–4. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Kwak, H.J.; Ahn, U.K.; Lim, M.H. The Clinical Effects of School Sandplay Group Therapy on General Children with a Focus on Korea Child & Youth Personality Test. BMC Psychol. 2020, 8, 9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. National Information Society Agency (NIA). 2011 Survey on Internet Addiction; National Information Society Agency (NIA): Seoul, Republic of Korea, 2011. Available online: https://www.nia.or.kr (accessed on 28 March 2025).
  34. Achenbach, T.M. Manual for the Youth Self-Report and 1991 Profile; University of Vermont Department of Psychiatry: Burlington, VT, USA, 1991. [Google Scholar]
  35. Oh, K.J.; Ha, E.H.; Lee, H.L.; Hong, K.E. Korean Youth Self Report; JungAng Aptitude Publication: Seoul, Republic of Korea, 2001. [Google Scholar]
  36. Shin, J.H.; Jang, M. Effect of Group Sandplay Therapy on Addicted Youth’s Addiction Levels and Anxiety. J. Symb. Sandplay Ther. 2015, 7, 39–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Ihm, J. Social Implications of Children’s Smartphone Addiction: The Role of Support Networks and Social Engagement. J. Behav. Addict. 2018, 7, 473–481. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  38. Pera, A. The Psychology of Addictive Smartphone Behavior in Young Adults: Problematic Use, Social Anxiety, and Depressive Stress. Front. Psychiatry 2020, 11, 573473. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Foo, M.; Freedle, L.R.; Sani, R.; Fonda, G. The Effect of Sandplay Therapy on the Thalamus in the Treatment of Generalized Anxiety Disorder: A Case Report. Int. J. Play Ther. 2020, 29, 191. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Lee, S.; Kwak, H.J.; Ahn, U.K.; Kim, K.M.; Lim, M.H. Effect of Group Sand Play Therapy on Psychopathologies of Adolescents with Delinquent Behaviors. Medicine 2023, 102, e35445. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  41. Rousseau, C.; Benoit, M.; Lacroix, L.; Gauthier, M.F. Evaluation of a Sandplay Program for Preschoolers in a Multiethnic Neighborhood. J. Child Psychol. Psychiatry 2009, 50, 743–750. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Herce, N.B.; de Alda, I.O.; Marrodán, J.L.G. Sand Tray and Sandplay in the Treatment of Trauma with Children and Adolescents: A Systemic Review. World J. Sand Ther. Pract. 2024, 2. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Roubenzadeh, S.; Abedin, A. Effectiveness of Sand Tray Short-Term Group Therapy with Grieving Youth. Procedia Soc. Behav. Sci. 2012, 69, 2131–2136. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Cao, J.; Jin, L.; Cui, C.; Cui, M. A Study on the Effects of Sandplay Therapy on Second-Grade Middle School Students with PTSD. J. Symb. Sandplay Ther. 2019, 10, 75–103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Lee, Y.R.; Jang, M.; Shim, J. The Effectiveness of Group Sandplay Therapy on Quality of Peer Relationships and Behavioral Problems of Korean-Chinese Children in China. J. Symb. Sandplay Ther. 2018, 9, 69–93. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Abdollahi Keivani, S.N.; Abolmaali, K. Effectiveness of Sand Tray Therapy on Emotional-Behavioral Problems in Preschool Children. Iran. J. Learn. Mem. 2018, 1, 29–36. [Google Scholar]
  47. Sim, E.; Jang, M. Effects of Sandplay Therapy on Aggression and Brain Waves of Female Juvenile Delinquents. J. Symb. Sandplay Ther. 2013, 4, 45–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Shin, H.J.; Park, M.H. The Effect of Sandplay Group Counseling on Emotional and Behavioral Problems at a Local Children’s Center. Sch. Couns. Sandplay 2020, 2, 95–103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. von Gontard, A.; Löwen-Seifert, S.; Wachter, U.; Kumru, Z.; Becker-Wördenweber, E.; Hochadel, M.; Senges, C. Sandplay Therapy Study: A Prospective Outcome Study of Sandplay Therapy with Children and Adolescents. J. Sandplay Ther. 2010, 19, 131–139. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Sun, J.; Liu, Q.; Yu, S. Child Neglect, Psychological Abuse and Smartphone Addiction Among Chinese Adolescents: The Roles of Emotional Intelligence and Coping Style. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2019, 90, 74–83. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Homeyer, L.E.; Sweeney, D.S. Sandtray Therapy: A Practical Manual; Routledge: New York, NY, USA, 2022. [Google Scholar]
Children 12 00593 g001
Figure 1. Flow diagram of participants.
Figure 1. Flow diagram of participants.
Children 12 00593 g001
Children 12 00593 g002
Figure 2. Differences between pre- and post-tests across intervention and control groups using RM-ANOVA (N = 99).
Figure 2. Differences between pre- and post-tests across intervention and control groups using RM-ANOVA (N = 99).
Children 12 00593 g002
Table 1. GST program highlights.
Table 1. GST program highlights.
DirectivesSessionSandplay Therapy Activities
Departure1Feel the texture of the sand and express your thoughts and feelings.
Self-emotional contact2Close your eyes. Touch the sand and express the emotions that arise from its texture in the sand tray.
3Express the emotions you feel when recalling past memories.
Conflict and struggle4Express any negative emotions you’re experiencing right now.
5Recall and express an image of a hero overcoming hardship and adversity.
Family, friends, school6Express your feelings while thinking about your family.
7Express your thoughts and feelings about friends and school.
Self-understanding and acceptance8Express yourself in the sand tray.
9Recall the sandwork you’ve created thus far and express your feelings.
Integration10Imagine and express a new version of yourself.
Table 2. Demographics of the intervention group (n = 52) and control group (n = 47).
Table 2. Demographics of the intervention group (n = 52) and control group (n = 47).
VariablesIntervention (n = 52)Control (n = 47)t/χ²p Value
Age11.46 ± 0.5011.30 ± 0.468.830.09
Sex 0.6580.42
Male18 (34.6)20 (42.6)
Female34 (65.4)27 (57.4)
Table 3. Differences between pre- and post-tests across intervention and control groups using RM-ANOVA (N = 99).
Table 3. Differences between pre- and post-tests across intervention and control groups using RM-ANOVA (N = 99).
VariablesGroup (N)Mean ± SD
PrePostGroup F (p)Time F (p)Group × Time F (p)η2
Interaction
Smartphone AddictionIntervention (52)36.98 ± 6.1832.35 ± 6.3816.425 ***
(3.7 × 10−4)		19.311 ***
(3.3 × 10−5)		7.355 *
(0.020)		0.071
Control (47)29.30 ± 4.6529.15 ± 6.72
Anxiety/DepressionIntervention (52)61.02 ± 10.0855.92 ± 9.993.712
(0.158)		10.685 **
(0.002)		3.792
(0.069)		0.038
Control (47)55.98 ± 9.4755.45 ± 8.77
Withdrawal/DepressionIntervention (52)61.35 ± 10.6057.21 ± 9.865.540 *
(0.032)		5.506 *
(0.021)		3.863
(0.093)		0.038
Control (47)54.85 ± 8.2855.36 ± 7.88
Somatic SymptomsIntervention (52)56.73 ± 6.5254.10 ± 7.233.89
(0.391)		0.589
(0.445)		4.542 *
(0.040)		0.045
Control (47)54.28 ± 7.0555.89 ± 7.77
Delinquent BehaviorIntervention (52)55.46 ± 7.2054.90 ± 6.532.149
(0.278)		0.080
(0.778)		2.332
(0.453)		0.023
Control (47)53.43 ± 4.1754.38 ± 5.46
Aggressive BehaviorIntervention (52)58.71 ± 8.4054.98 ± 7.440.391
(0.535)		6.638 **
(0.012)		2.937
(0.264)		0.029
Control (47)55.74 ± 7.0755.83 ± 7.79
Social ProblemsIntervention (52)60.15 ± 8.3658.19 ± 9.761.069
(0.333)		1.771
(0.187)		4.865
(0.314)		0.048
Control (47)55.62 ± 7.9957.21 ± 8.90
Thought ProblemsIntervention (52)60.54 ± 9.2558.19 ± 9.764.359 **
(0.044)		2.120
(0.149)		0.849
(0.380)		0.036
Control (47)55.47 ± 7.3555.28 ± 8.43
Attention ProblemsIntervention (52)57.46 ± 9.5753.77 ± 7.532.900
(0.134)		3.485
(0.066)		2.447
(0.232)		0.025
Control (47)52.64 ± 5.3653.04 ± 6.47
RM-ANOVA (repeated measures analysis of variance); * p < 0.05, ** p < 0.01, *** p < 0.001.
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Lee, Y.H.; Shin, H.; Bae, E.; Lee, Y.; Lee, C.M.; Shim, S.H.; Kim, M.S.; Lim, M.H. Intervention Effects of Group Sandplay Therapy on Children at Risk of Smartphone Addiction: Focusing on Internalizing and Externalizing Problems in the Korean Youth Self Report. Children 2025, 12, 593. https://doi.org/10.3390/children12050593

AMA Style

Lee YH, Shin H, Bae E, Lee Y, Lee CM, Shim SH, Kim MS, Lim MH. Intervention Effects of Group Sandplay Therapy on Children at Risk of Smartphone Addiction: Focusing on Internalizing and Externalizing Problems in the Korean Youth Self Report. Children. 2025; 12(5):593. https://doi.org/10.3390/children12050593

Chicago/Turabian Style

Lee, Yang Hee, Heajin Shin, Eunju Bae, Youngil Lee, Chang Min Lee, Se Hoon Shim, Min Sun Kim, and Myung Ho Lim. 2025. "Intervention Effects of Group Sandplay Therapy on Children at Risk of Smartphone Addiction: Focusing on Internalizing and Externalizing Problems in the Korean Youth Self Report" Children 12, no. 5: 593. https://doi.org/10.3390/children12050593

APA Style

Lee, Y. H., Shin, H., Bae, E., Lee, Y., Lee, C. M., Shim, S. H., Kim, M. S., & Lim, M. H. (2025). Intervention Effects of Group Sandplay Therapy on Children at Risk of Smartphone Addiction: Focusing on Internalizing and Externalizing Problems in the Korean Youth Self Report. Children, 12(5), 593. https://doi.org/10.3390/children12050593

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop