0000000000826050

AUTHOR

Jeffrey L. Derevensky

showing 2 related works from this author

Working towards an international consensus on criteria for assessing internet gaming disorder: a critical commentary on Petry et al. (2014).

2016

This commentary paper critically discusses the recent debate paper by Petry et al. (2014) that argued there was now an international consensus for assessing Internet Gaming Disorder (IGD). Our collective opinions vary considerably regarding many different aspects of online gaming. However, we contend that the paper by Petry and colleagues does not provide a true and representative international community of researchers in this area. This paper critically discusses and provides commentary on (i) the representativeness of the international group that wrote the ‘consensus’ paper, and (ii) each of the IGD criteria. The paper also includes a brief discussion on initiatives that could be taken to…

ConsensusInternationality030508 substance abuseMedicine (miscellaneous)Representativeness heuristicArticleDSM-5ddc:616.8903 medical and health sciences0302 clinical medicineHumansEmpirical evidencebusiness.industryInternational communityVideo Games/psychologyPublic relations030227 psychiatryBehavior AddictiveDiagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental DisordersPsychiatry and Mental healthVideo GamesScale (social sciences)Video game addictionThe InternetIndustrial and organizational psychology0305 other medical sciencePsychologybusinessSocial psychologyBehavior Addictive/diagnosisAddiction (Abingdon, England)
researchProduct

Including gaming disorder in the ICD-11: The need to do so from a clinical and public health perspective: Commentary on: A weak scientific basis for …

2018

The proposed introduction of gaming disorder (GD) in the 11th revision of the International Classification of Diseases (ICD-11) developed by the World Health Organization (WHO) has led to a lively debate over the past year. Besides the broad support for the decision in the academic press, a recent publication by van Rooij et al. (2018) repeated the criticism raised against the inclusion of GD in ICD-11 by Aarseth et al. (2017). We argue that this group of researchers fails to recognize the clinical and public health considerations, which support the WHO perspective. It is important to recognize a range of biases that may influence this debate; in particular, the gaming industry may wish to …

medicine.medical_specialtyInclusion (disability rights)clinical perspective030508 substance abuseMedicine (miscellaneous)DiseaseWorld healthgaming disorder03 medical and health sciences0302 clinical medicineICD-11medicineMedia psychologybusiness.industryPublic healthpublic healthPerspective (graphical)General MedicinePublic relations030227 psychiatry3. Good healthPsychiatry and Mental healthClinical PsychologyCriticismPosition (finance)0305 other medical sciencebusinessPsychologyJournal of behavioral addictions
researchProduct