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

6533b835fe1ef96bd12a00b2

RESEARCH PRODUCT

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

Daniel Kardefelt-winther Daniel L. King Sophia Achab Ellias Aboujaoude Jeffrey L. Derevensky Rani A. Hoff Ståle Pallesen Christopher J. Ferguson Mark Coulson Kai W. Müller Antonius J. Van Rooij Zaheer Hussain Nicole Prause Maria C. Haagsma Michael Dreier Vladan Starcevic Joël Billieux Zsolt Demetrovics Mark D. Griffiths Thorsten Quandt Xavier Carbonell Daria J. Kuss Katalin Nagygyörgy Orsolya Király Paul Delfabbro Olatz Lopez-fernandez Michelle Colder Carras Halley M. Pontes

subject

Consensus Internationality 030508 substance abuse Medicine (miscellaneous)Representativeness heuristic Article DSM-5 ddc:616.89 03 medical and health sciences 0302 clinical medicine Humans Empirical evidence business.industry International community Video Games/psychology Public relations 030227 psychiatry Behavior Addictive Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders Psychiatry and Mental health Video Games Scale (social sciences)Video game addiction The Internet Industrial and organizational psychology 0305 other medical science Psychology business Social psychology Behavior Addictive/diagnosis

description

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 move the field towards consensus. It is hoped that this paper will foster debate in the IGD field and lead to improved theory, better methodologically designed studies, and more robust empirical evidence as regards problematic gaming and its psychosocial consequences and impact.

year	journal	country	edition	language
2016-01-01	Addiction (Abingdon, England)

10.1111/add.13057 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26669531