User login
A team of international researchers led by Orsolya Király, PhD, of the Institute of Psychology, Eötvös Loránd University, Budapest, reviewed the characteristics and etiology of GD. They concluded that its genesis arises from the interaction of environmental factors, game-specific factors and individual factors, including personality traits, comorbid psychopathology, and genetic predisposition.
“The development of GD is a complex process and we identified three major factors involved,” study coauthor Mark Griffiths, PhD, distinguished professor of behavioral addiction and director of the international gaming research unit, psychology department, Nottingham (England) Trent University, said in an interview. Because of this complexity, “prevention and intervention in GD require multiprofessional action.”
The review was published in Comprehensive Psychiatry.
In a second paper, published online in Frontiers in Psychiatry, Chinese investigators reviewing randomized controlled trials (RCTs) presented “compelling evidence” to support four effective interventions for GD: group counseling, acceptance and cognitive restructuring intervention program (ACRIP), short-term cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT), and craving behavioral intervention (CBI).
A third paper, published online in the Journal of Behavioral Addictions, in which researchers analyzed close to 50 studies of GD, found that the concept of “recovery” is rarely mentioned in GD research. Lead author Belle Gavriel-Fried, PhD, senior professor, Bob Shapell School of Social Work, Tel Aviv University, said in an interview that recovery is a “holistic concept that taps into many aspects of life.”
Understanding the “differences in the impact and availability” of negative and positive human resources and their effect on recovery “can help clinicians to customize treatment,” she said.
Complex interplay
GD is garnering increasing attention in the clinical community, especially since 2019, when the World Health Organization included it in the ICD-11.
“Although for most individuals, gaming is a recreational activity or even a passion, a small group of gamers experiences negative symptoms which impact their mental and physical health and cause functional impairment,” wrote Dr. Király and colleagues.
Dr. Griffiths explained that his team wanted to provide an “up-to-date primer – a ‘one-stop shop’ – on all things etiologic concerning gaming disorder for academics and practitioners” as well as others, such as health policy makers, teachers, and individuals in the gaming industry.
The researchers identified three factors that increase the risk of developing GD, the first being gaming-related factors, which make video games “addictive in a way that vulnerable individuals may develop GD.”
For example, GD is more prevalent among online versus offline game players, possibly because online multiplayer games “provide safe environments in which players can fulfill their social needs while remaining invisible and anonymous.”
Game genre also matters, with massively multiplayer online role-playing games, first-person/third-person shooter games, real-time strategy games, and multiplayer online battle arena games most implicated in problematic gaming. Moreover, the “monetization techniques” of certain games also increase their addictive potential.
The researchers point to individual factors that increase the risk of developing GD, including male sex and younger age, personality traits like impulsivity and sensation-seeking, and comorbidities including ADHD, anxiety, and depression.
Poor self-esteem and lack of social competencies make gaming “an easy and efficient way to compensate for these deficiencies, which in turn, heightens the risk for developing GD,” they add. Neurobiological processes and genetic predisposition also play a role.
Lastly, the authors mentioned environmental factors, including family and peer-group issues, problems at work or school, and cultural factors.
“The take-home messages are that problematic gaming has had a long history of empirical research; that the psychiatric community now views GD as a legitimate mental health issue; and that the reasons for GD are complex, with many different factors involved in the acquisition, development, and maintenance of GD,” said Dr. Griffiths.
Beneficial behavioral therapies
Yuzhou Chen and colleagues, Southwest University, Chongqing, China, conducted a systematic review of RCTs investigating interventions for treating GD. Despite the “large number of intervention approaches developed over the past decade, as yet, there are no authoritative guidelines for what makes an effective GD intervention,” they wrote.
Few studies have focused specifically on GD but instead have focused on a combination of internet addiction and GD. But the interventions used to treat internet addiction may not apply to GD. And few studies have utilized an RCT design. The researchers therefore set out to review studies that specifically used an RCT design to investigate interventions for GD.
They searched six databases to identify RCTs that tested GD interventions from the inception of each database until the end of 2021. To be included, participants had to be diagnosed with GD and receive either a “complete and systematic intervention” or be in a comparator control group receiving no intervention or placebo.
Seven studies met the inclusion criteria (n = 332 participants). The studies tested five interventions:
- Group counseling with three different themes (interpersonal interaction, acceptance and commitment, cognition and behavior)
- CBI, which addresses cravings
- Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS)
- ACRIP with the main objectives of reducing GD symptoms and improving psychological well-being
- Short-term CBT, which addresses maladaptive cognitions
The mean duration of the interventions ranged from 3 to 15 weeks.
The primary outcome was GD severity, with secondary outcomes including depression, anxiety, cognition, game time, self-esteem, self-compassion, shyness, impulsivity, and psychological well-being.
Group counseling, CBI, ACRIP, and short-term CBT interventions had “a significant effect on decreasing the severity of GD,” while tDCS had “no significant effect.”
Behavioral therapy “exerts its effect on the behavioral mechanism of GD; for example, by reducing the association between game-related stimuli and the game player’s response to them,” the authors suggested.
Behavioral therapy “exerts its effect on the behavioral mechanism of GD; for example, by reducing the association between game-related stimuli and the game-player’s response to them,” the authors suggested.
Recovery vs. pathology
Recovery “traditionally represents the transition from trauma and illness to health,” Dr. Gavriel-Fried and colleagues noted.
Two paradigms of recovery are “deficit based” and “strength based.” The first assesses recovery in terms of abstinence, sobriety, and symptom reduction; and the second focuses on “growth, rather than a reduction in pathology.”
But although recovery is “embedded within mental health addiction policies and practice,” the concept has received “scant attention” in GD research.
The researchers therefore aimed to “map and summarize the state of the art on recovery from GD,” defining “recovery” as the “ability to handle conflicting feelings and emotions without external mediation.”
They conducted a scoping review of all literature regarding GD or internet GD published before February 2022 (47 studies, 2,924 participants with GD; mean age range, 13-26 years).
Most studies (n = 32) consisted of exclusively male subjects. Only 10 included both sexes, and female participants were in the minority.
Most studies (n = 42) did not address the concept of recovery, although all studies did report significant improvements in gaming-related pathology. Typical terminology used to describe changes in participants’ GD were “reduction” and/or “decrease” in symptom severity.
Although 18 studies mentioned the word “recovery,” only 5 actually discussed issues related to the notion of recovery, and only 5 used the term “abstinence.”
In addition, only 13 studies examined positive components of life in patients with GD, such as increased psychological well-being, life satisfaction, quality of life, improved emotional state, relational skills, and executive control, as well as improved self-care, hygiene, sleep, and interest in school studies.
“As a person and researcher who believes that words shape the way we perceive things, I think we should use the word ‘recovery’ rather than ‘pathology’ much more in research, therapy, and policy,” said Dr. Gavriel-Fried.
She noted that, because GD is a “relatively new behavioral addictive disorder, theories are still being developed and definitions of the symptoms are still being fine-tuned.”
“The field as a whole will benefit from future theoretical work that will lead to practical solutions for treating GD and ways to identify the risk factors,” Dr. Gavriel-Fried said.
Filling a research gap
In a comment, David Greenfield, MD, founder and medical director of the Connecticut-based Center for Internet and Technology Addiction, noted that 3 decades ago, there was almost no research into this area.
“The fact that we have these reviews and studies is good because all of the research adds to the science providing more data about an area we still don’t know that much about, where research is still in its infancy,” said Dr. Greenfield, who was not involved with the present study.
“Although we have definitions, there’s no complete agreement about the definitions of GD, and we do not yet have a unified approach,” continued Dr. Greenfield, who wrote the books Overcoming Internet Addiction for Dummies and Virtual Addiction.
He suggested that “recovery” is rarely used as a concept in GD research perhaps because there’s a “bifurcation in the field of addiction medicine in which behavioral addictions are not seen as equivalent to substance addictions,” and, particularly with GD, the principles of “recovery” have not yet matured.
“Recovery means meaningful life away from the screen, not just abstinence from the screen,” said Dr. Greenfield.
The study by Mr. Chen and colleagues was supported by grants from the National Social Science Foundation of China, the Chongqing Research Program of Basic Research and Frontier Technology, and the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities. Dr. Griffiths has reported receiving research funding from Norsk Tipping (the gambling operator owned by the Norwegian government). The study by Dr. Király and colleagues received support from the Hungarian National Research Development and Innovation Office and the Janos Bolyai Research Scholarship Academy of Sciences to individual investigators. The study by Dr. Gavriel-Fried and colleagues received support from the Hungarian National Research Development and Innovation Office and the Janos Bolyai Research Scholarship Academy of Sciences to individual investigators. Dr. Gavriel-Fried has reported receiving grants from the Israel National Insurance Institute and the Committee for Independent Studies of the Israel Lottery. Dr. Greenfield reported no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
A team of international researchers led by Orsolya Király, PhD, of the Institute of Psychology, Eötvös Loránd University, Budapest, reviewed the characteristics and etiology of GD. They concluded that its genesis arises from the interaction of environmental factors, game-specific factors and individual factors, including personality traits, comorbid psychopathology, and genetic predisposition.
“The development of GD is a complex process and we identified three major factors involved,” study coauthor Mark Griffiths, PhD, distinguished professor of behavioral addiction and director of the international gaming research unit, psychology department, Nottingham (England) Trent University, said in an interview. Because of this complexity, “prevention and intervention in GD require multiprofessional action.”
The review was published in Comprehensive Psychiatry.
In a second paper, published online in Frontiers in Psychiatry, Chinese investigators reviewing randomized controlled trials (RCTs) presented “compelling evidence” to support four effective interventions for GD: group counseling, acceptance and cognitive restructuring intervention program (ACRIP), short-term cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT), and craving behavioral intervention (CBI).
A third paper, published online in the Journal of Behavioral Addictions, in which researchers analyzed close to 50 studies of GD, found that the concept of “recovery” is rarely mentioned in GD research. Lead author Belle Gavriel-Fried, PhD, senior professor, Bob Shapell School of Social Work, Tel Aviv University, said in an interview that recovery is a “holistic concept that taps into many aspects of life.”
Understanding the “differences in the impact and availability” of negative and positive human resources and their effect on recovery “can help clinicians to customize treatment,” she said.
Complex interplay
GD is garnering increasing attention in the clinical community, especially since 2019, when the World Health Organization included it in the ICD-11.
“Although for most individuals, gaming is a recreational activity or even a passion, a small group of gamers experiences negative symptoms which impact their mental and physical health and cause functional impairment,” wrote Dr. Király and colleagues.
Dr. Griffiths explained that his team wanted to provide an “up-to-date primer – a ‘one-stop shop’ – on all things etiologic concerning gaming disorder for academics and practitioners” as well as others, such as health policy makers, teachers, and individuals in the gaming industry.
The researchers identified three factors that increase the risk of developing GD, the first being gaming-related factors, which make video games “addictive in a way that vulnerable individuals may develop GD.”
For example, GD is more prevalent among online versus offline game players, possibly because online multiplayer games “provide safe environments in which players can fulfill their social needs while remaining invisible and anonymous.”
Game genre also matters, with massively multiplayer online role-playing games, first-person/third-person shooter games, real-time strategy games, and multiplayer online battle arena games most implicated in problematic gaming. Moreover, the “monetization techniques” of certain games also increase their addictive potential.
The researchers point to individual factors that increase the risk of developing GD, including male sex and younger age, personality traits like impulsivity and sensation-seeking, and comorbidities including ADHD, anxiety, and depression.
Poor self-esteem and lack of social competencies make gaming “an easy and efficient way to compensate for these deficiencies, which in turn, heightens the risk for developing GD,” they add. Neurobiological processes and genetic predisposition also play a role.
Lastly, the authors mentioned environmental factors, including family and peer-group issues, problems at work or school, and cultural factors.
“The take-home messages are that problematic gaming has had a long history of empirical research; that the psychiatric community now views GD as a legitimate mental health issue; and that the reasons for GD are complex, with many different factors involved in the acquisition, development, and maintenance of GD,” said Dr. Griffiths.
Beneficial behavioral therapies
Yuzhou Chen and colleagues, Southwest University, Chongqing, China, conducted a systematic review of RCTs investigating interventions for treating GD. Despite the “large number of intervention approaches developed over the past decade, as yet, there are no authoritative guidelines for what makes an effective GD intervention,” they wrote.
Few studies have focused specifically on GD but instead have focused on a combination of internet addiction and GD. But the interventions used to treat internet addiction may not apply to GD. And few studies have utilized an RCT design. The researchers therefore set out to review studies that specifically used an RCT design to investigate interventions for GD.
They searched six databases to identify RCTs that tested GD interventions from the inception of each database until the end of 2021. To be included, participants had to be diagnosed with GD and receive either a “complete and systematic intervention” or be in a comparator control group receiving no intervention or placebo.
Seven studies met the inclusion criteria (n = 332 participants). The studies tested five interventions:
- Group counseling with three different themes (interpersonal interaction, acceptance and commitment, cognition and behavior)
- CBI, which addresses cravings
- Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS)
- ACRIP with the main objectives of reducing GD symptoms and improving psychological well-being
- Short-term CBT, which addresses maladaptive cognitions
The mean duration of the interventions ranged from 3 to 15 weeks.
The primary outcome was GD severity, with secondary outcomes including depression, anxiety, cognition, game time, self-esteem, self-compassion, shyness, impulsivity, and psychological well-being.
Group counseling, CBI, ACRIP, and short-term CBT interventions had “a significant effect on decreasing the severity of GD,” while tDCS had “no significant effect.”
Behavioral therapy “exerts its effect on the behavioral mechanism of GD; for example, by reducing the association between game-related stimuli and the game player’s response to them,” the authors suggested.
Behavioral therapy “exerts its effect on the behavioral mechanism of GD; for example, by reducing the association between game-related stimuli and the game-player’s response to them,” the authors suggested.
Recovery vs. pathology
Recovery “traditionally represents the transition from trauma and illness to health,” Dr. Gavriel-Fried and colleagues noted.
Two paradigms of recovery are “deficit based” and “strength based.” The first assesses recovery in terms of abstinence, sobriety, and symptom reduction; and the second focuses on “growth, rather than a reduction in pathology.”
But although recovery is “embedded within mental health addiction policies and practice,” the concept has received “scant attention” in GD research.
The researchers therefore aimed to “map and summarize the state of the art on recovery from GD,” defining “recovery” as the “ability to handle conflicting feelings and emotions without external mediation.”
They conducted a scoping review of all literature regarding GD or internet GD published before February 2022 (47 studies, 2,924 participants with GD; mean age range, 13-26 years).
Most studies (n = 32) consisted of exclusively male subjects. Only 10 included both sexes, and female participants were in the minority.
Most studies (n = 42) did not address the concept of recovery, although all studies did report significant improvements in gaming-related pathology. Typical terminology used to describe changes in participants’ GD were “reduction” and/or “decrease” in symptom severity.
Although 18 studies mentioned the word “recovery,” only 5 actually discussed issues related to the notion of recovery, and only 5 used the term “abstinence.”
In addition, only 13 studies examined positive components of life in patients with GD, such as increased psychological well-being, life satisfaction, quality of life, improved emotional state, relational skills, and executive control, as well as improved self-care, hygiene, sleep, and interest in school studies.
“As a person and researcher who believes that words shape the way we perceive things, I think we should use the word ‘recovery’ rather than ‘pathology’ much more in research, therapy, and policy,” said Dr. Gavriel-Fried.
She noted that, because GD is a “relatively new behavioral addictive disorder, theories are still being developed and definitions of the symptoms are still being fine-tuned.”
“The field as a whole will benefit from future theoretical work that will lead to practical solutions for treating GD and ways to identify the risk factors,” Dr. Gavriel-Fried said.
Filling a research gap
In a comment, David Greenfield, MD, founder and medical director of the Connecticut-based Center for Internet and Technology Addiction, noted that 3 decades ago, there was almost no research into this area.
“The fact that we have these reviews and studies is good because all of the research adds to the science providing more data about an area we still don’t know that much about, where research is still in its infancy,” said Dr. Greenfield, who was not involved with the present study.
“Although we have definitions, there’s no complete agreement about the definitions of GD, and we do not yet have a unified approach,” continued Dr. Greenfield, who wrote the books Overcoming Internet Addiction for Dummies and Virtual Addiction.
He suggested that “recovery” is rarely used as a concept in GD research perhaps because there’s a “bifurcation in the field of addiction medicine in which behavioral addictions are not seen as equivalent to substance addictions,” and, particularly with GD, the principles of “recovery” have not yet matured.
“Recovery means meaningful life away from the screen, not just abstinence from the screen,” said Dr. Greenfield.
The study by Mr. Chen and colleagues was supported by grants from the National Social Science Foundation of China, the Chongqing Research Program of Basic Research and Frontier Technology, and the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities. Dr. Griffiths has reported receiving research funding from Norsk Tipping (the gambling operator owned by the Norwegian government). The study by Dr. Király and colleagues received support from the Hungarian National Research Development and Innovation Office and the Janos Bolyai Research Scholarship Academy of Sciences to individual investigators. The study by Dr. Gavriel-Fried and colleagues received support from the Hungarian National Research Development and Innovation Office and the Janos Bolyai Research Scholarship Academy of Sciences to individual investigators. Dr. Gavriel-Fried has reported receiving grants from the Israel National Insurance Institute and the Committee for Independent Studies of the Israel Lottery. Dr. Greenfield reported no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.
A team of international researchers led by Orsolya Király, PhD, of the Institute of Psychology, Eötvös Loránd University, Budapest, reviewed the characteristics and etiology of GD. They concluded that its genesis arises from the interaction of environmental factors, game-specific factors and individual factors, including personality traits, comorbid psychopathology, and genetic predisposition.
“The development of GD is a complex process and we identified three major factors involved,” study coauthor Mark Griffiths, PhD, distinguished professor of behavioral addiction and director of the international gaming research unit, psychology department, Nottingham (England) Trent University, said in an interview. Because of this complexity, “prevention and intervention in GD require multiprofessional action.”
The review was published in Comprehensive Psychiatry.
In a second paper, published online in Frontiers in Psychiatry, Chinese investigators reviewing randomized controlled trials (RCTs) presented “compelling evidence” to support four effective interventions for GD: group counseling, acceptance and cognitive restructuring intervention program (ACRIP), short-term cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT), and craving behavioral intervention (CBI).
A third paper, published online in the Journal of Behavioral Addictions, in which researchers analyzed close to 50 studies of GD, found that the concept of “recovery” is rarely mentioned in GD research. Lead author Belle Gavriel-Fried, PhD, senior professor, Bob Shapell School of Social Work, Tel Aviv University, said in an interview that recovery is a “holistic concept that taps into many aspects of life.”
Understanding the “differences in the impact and availability” of negative and positive human resources and their effect on recovery “can help clinicians to customize treatment,” she said.
Complex interplay
GD is garnering increasing attention in the clinical community, especially since 2019, when the World Health Organization included it in the ICD-11.
“Although for most individuals, gaming is a recreational activity or even a passion, a small group of gamers experiences negative symptoms which impact their mental and physical health and cause functional impairment,” wrote Dr. Király and colleagues.
Dr. Griffiths explained that his team wanted to provide an “up-to-date primer – a ‘one-stop shop’ – on all things etiologic concerning gaming disorder for academics and practitioners” as well as others, such as health policy makers, teachers, and individuals in the gaming industry.
The researchers identified three factors that increase the risk of developing GD, the first being gaming-related factors, which make video games “addictive in a way that vulnerable individuals may develop GD.”
For example, GD is more prevalent among online versus offline game players, possibly because online multiplayer games “provide safe environments in which players can fulfill their social needs while remaining invisible and anonymous.”
Game genre also matters, with massively multiplayer online role-playing games, first-person/third-person shooter games, real-time strategy games, and multiplayer online battle arena games most implicated in problematic gaming. Moreover, the “monetization techniques” of certain games also increase their addictive potential.
The researchers point to individual factors that increase the risk of developing GD, including male sex and younger age, personality traits like impulsivity and sensation-seeking, and comorbidities including ADHD, anxiety, and depression.
Poor self-esteem and lack of social competencies make gaming “an easy and efficient way to compensate for these deficiencies, which in turn, heightens the risk for developing GD,” they add. Neurobiological processes and genetic predisposition also play a role.
Lastly, the authors mentioned environmental factors, including family and peer-group issues, problems at work or school, and cultural factors.
“The take-home messages are that problematic gaming has had a long history of empirical research; that the psychiatric community now views GD as a legitimate mental health issue; and that the reasons for GD are complex, with many different factors involved in the acquisition, development, and maintenance of GD,” said Dr. Griffiths.
Beneficial behavioral therapies
Yuzhou Chen and colleagues, Southwest University, Chongqing, China, conducted a systematic review of RCTs investigating interventions for treating GD. Despite the “large number of intervention approaches developed over the past decade, as yet, there are no authoritative guidelines for what makes an effective GD intervention,” they wrote.
Few studies have focused specifically on GD but instead have focused on a combination of internet addiction and GD. But the interventions used to treat internet addiction may not apply to GD. And few studies have utilized an RCT design. The researchers therefore set out to review studies that specifically used an RCT design to investigate interventions for GD.
They searched six databases to identify RCTs that tested GD interventions from the inception of each database until the end of 2021. To be included, participants had to be diagnosed with GD and receive either a “complete and systematic intervention” or be in a comparator control group receiving no intervention or placebo.
Seven studies met the inclusion criteria (n = 332 participants). The studies tested five interventions:
- Group counseling with three different themes (interpersonal interaction, acceptance and commitment, cognition and behavior)
- CBI, which addresses cravings
- Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS)
- ACRIP with the main objectives of reducing GD symptoms and improving psychological well-being
- Short-term CBT, which addresses maladaptive cognitions
The mean duration of the interventions ranged from 3 to 15 weeks.
The primary outcome was GD severity, with secondary outcomes including depression, anxiety, cognition, game time, self-esteem, self-compassion, shyness, impulsivity, and psychological well-being.
Group counseling, CBI, ACRIP, and short-term CBT interventions had “a significant effect on decreasing the severity of GD,” while tDCS had “no significant effect.”
Behavioral therapy “exerts its effect on the behavioral mechanism of GD; for example, by reducing the association between game-related stimuli and the game player’s response to them,” the authors suggested.
Behavioral therapy “exerts its effect on the behavioral mechanism of GD; for example, by reducing the association between game-related stimuli and the game-player’s response to them,” the authors suggested.
Recovery vs. pathology
Recovery “traditionally represents the transition from trauma and illness to health,” Dr. Gavriel-Fried and colleagues noted.
Two paradigms of recovery are “deficit based” and “strength based.” The first assesses recovery in terms of abstinence, sobriety, and symptom reduction; and the second focuses on “growth, rather than a reduction in pathology.”
But although recovery is “embedded within mental health addiction policies and practice,” the concept has received “scant attention” in GD research.
The researchers therefore aimed to “map and summarize the state of the art on recovery from GD,” defining “recovery” as the “ability to handle conflicting feelings and emotions without external mediation.”
They conducted a scoping review of all literature regarding GD or internet GD published before February 2022 (47 studies, 2,924 participants with GD; mean age range, 13-26 years).
Most studies (n = 32) consisted of exclusively male subjects. Only 10 included both sexes, and female participants were in the minority.
Most studies (n = 42) did not address the concept of recovery, although all studies did report significant improvements in gaming-related pathology. Typical terminology used to describe changes in participants’ GD were “reduction” and/or “decrease” in symptom severity.
Although 18 studies mentioned the word “recovery,” only 5 actually discussed issues related to the notion of recovery, and only 5 used the term “abstinence.”
In addition, only 13 studies examined positive components of life in patients with GD, such as increased psychological well-being, life satisfaction, quality of life, improved emotional state, relational skills, and executive control, as well as improved self-care, hygiene, sleep, and interest in school studies.
“As a person and researcher who believes that words shape the way we perceive things, I think we should use the word ‘recovery’ rather than ‘pathology’ much more in research, therapy, and policy,” said Dr. Gavriel-Fried.
She noted that, because GD is a “relatively new behavioral addictive disorder, theories are still being developed and definitions of the symptoms are still being fine-tuned.”
“The field as a whole will benefit from future theoretical work that will lead to practical solutions for treating GD and ways to identify the risk factors,” Dr. Gavriel-Fried said.
Filling a research gap
In a comment, David Greenfield, MD, founder and medical director of the Connecticut-based Center for Internet and Technology Addiction, noted that 3 decades ago, there was almost no research into this area.
“The fact that we have these reviews and studies is good because all of the research adds to the science providing more data about an area we still don’t know that much about, where research is still in its infancy,” said Dr. Greenfield, who was not involved with the present study.
“Although we have definitions, there’s no complete agreement about the definitions of GD, and we do not yet have a unified approach,” continued Dr. Greenfield, who wrote the books Overcoming Internet Addiction for Dummies and Virtual Addiction.
He suggested that “recovery” is rarely used as a concept in GD research perhaps because there’s a “bifurcation in the field of addiction medicine in which behavioral addictions are not seen as equivalent to substance addictions,” and, particularly with GD, the principles of “recovery” have not yet matured.
“Recovery means meaningful life away from the screen, not just abstinence from the screen,” said Dr. Greenfield.
The study by Mr. Chen and colleagues was supported by grants from the National Social Science Foundation of China, the Chongqing Research Program of Basic Research and Frontier Technology, and the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities. Dr. Griffiths has reported receiving research funding from Norsk Tipping (the gambling operator owned by the Norwegian government). The study by Dr. Király and colleagues received support from the Hungarian National Research Development and Innovation Office and the Janos Bolyai Research Scholarship Academy of Sciences to individual investigators. The study by Dr. Gavriel-Fried and colleagues received support from the Hungarian National Research Development and Innovation Office and the Janos Bolyai Research Scholarship Academy of Sciences to individual investigators. Dr. Gavriel-Fried has reported receiving grants from the Israel National Insurance Institute and the Committee for Independent Studies of the Israel Lottery. Dr. Greenfield reported no relevant financial relationships.
A version of this article first appeared on Medscape.com.