AimsIn light of the rise in research on technological addictions and smartphone addiction in particular, the aim of this paper was to review the relevant literature on the topic of smartphone addiction and determine whether this disorder exists or if it does not adequately satisfy the criteria for addiction.MethodsWe reviewed quantitative and qualitative studies on smartphone addiction and analyzed their methods and conclusions to make a determination on the suitability of the diagnosis “addiction” to excessive and problematic smartphone use.ResultsAlthough the majority of research in the field declares that smartphones are addictive or takes the existence of smartphone addiction as granted, we did not find sufficient support from the addiction perspective to confirm the existence of smartphone addiction at this time. The behaviors observed in the research could be better labeled as problematic or maladaptive smartphone use and their consequences do not meet the severity levels of those caused by addiction.Discussion and conclusionsAddiction is a disorder with severe effects on physical and psychological health. A behavior may have a similar presentation as addiction in terms of excessive use, impulse control problems, and negative consequences, but that does not mean that it should be considered an addiction. We propose moving away from the addiction framework when studying technological behaviors and using other terms such as “problematic use” to describe them. We recommend that problematic technology use is to be studied in its sociocultural context with an increased focus on its compensatory functions, motivations, and gratifications.

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.

No abstract

It has been more than a decade since a concern about the addictive use of the Internet and mobile phones was first expressed, and its possible inclusion into the lists of mental disorders has recently become a popular topic of scientific discussion. Thus, it seems to be a fitting moment to investigate the prevalence of this issue over time. The aim of the present study was to analyze the prevalence of the perception of problematic Internet and smartphone use in young people over the period 2006–2017. To this end, a questionnaire on Internet use habits and two questionnaires on the negative consequences of Internet and smartphone use were administered to a sample of 792 university students. The scores were then compared with the results of former studies that had used these questionnaires. The perception of problematic Internet and mobile phone use has increased over the last decade, social networks are considered responsible for this increase, and females are perceived to be more affected than males. The current study shows how strong smartphone and Internet addiction and social media overlap. Participants from 2017 report higher negative consequences of both Internet and mobile phone use than those from 2006, but long-term observations show a decrease in problematic use after a sharp increase in 2013. We conclude that the diagnosis of technological addictions is influenced by both time and social and culture changes.

No abstract

In recent years, problematic and addictive gaming has been a phenomenon of growing concern worldwide. In light of the increasing awareness about this issue, the latest Introduction Internet Gaming DisorderEver since Griffiths (1995) coined the term 'technological addictions', research in this field has grown considerably, especially in the area of addiction to videogames and Massively Multiplayer Online Role-Playing Games (MMORPGs) (Carbonell, Guardiola, Beranuy, & Bellés, 2009). In light of increasing awareness and empirical research into this issue in North America, Europe and Asia, the American Psychiatric (iv) unsuccessful attempts to control participation in internet games; (v) loss of interest in previous hobbies as a result of, and with the exception of, internet games; (vi) continued excessive use of internet games despite knowledge of the resulting psychosocial problems; (vii) deceiving family members, therapists and others with regard to the amount of internet gaming; (viii) use of internet games to escape from or reduce negative moods; and (ix) jeopardizing or losing a significant relationship, job or educational opportunity due to online gaming (APA, 2013). An individual who endorses five or more of these criteria over a period of 12 months is considered to be a disordered gamer. Griffiths (2005) has argued that while there are always some idiosyncratic differences between addictive behaviors, there are six common components that comprise both chemical and behavioral addictions (i.e., salience, mood modification, tolerance, withdrawal symptoms, conflict and relapse). As has been noted previously (Griffiths, King, & Demetrovics, 2014), the nine IGD criteria correspond to the six components proposed in Griffiths' addiction model (2005). Support for the model comes from a number of studies that have developed and validated behavioral addiction scales and instruments using the six components for behaviors such as exercise addiction (Terry et al., 2004), shopping (Andreassen et al., 2015), gaming addiction (Lemmens et al., 2009), work addiction (Andreassen et al., 2012a), internet addiction (Kuss et al., 2014), and social networking addiction (Andreassen et al., 2012b). Disorder Test (IGD-20 Test), a 20-item scale designed to assess IGD.Psychometric analyses of the IGD-20 Test displayed good results in terms of both validity and reliability. In addition, the results obtained from the model showed an acceptable degree of fit with confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), lending support to the test's factorial validity. More specifically, the test's criterion validity and concurrent validity were justified via the significant correlations existing between IGD-20 test results and (i) hours of weekly game play and (ii) the nine criteria for IGD in the DSM-5. Assessment of problematic gamingThe assessment of problematic gaming has received extensive scholarly attention and has been subject to numerous debates due to the current unofficial status of this condition and the more general negative me...

No abstract

No abstract