Established risk factors for addiction fail to discriminate between healthy gamers and gamers endorsing DSM-5 Internet gaming disorder

Abstract

Background and aimsThe DSM-5 includes criteria for diagnosing Internet gaming disorder (IGD) that are adapted from substance abuse and widely used in research and clinical contexts, although evidence supporting their validity remains scarce. This study compared online gamers who do or do not endorse IGD criteria regarding self-control-related abilities (impulsivity, inhibitory control, and decision-making), considered the hallmarks of addictive behaviors.MethodA double approach was adopted to distinguish pathological from recreational gamers: The first is the classic DSM-5 approach (≥5 criteria required to endorse the IGD diagnosis), and the second consists in using latent class analysis (LCA) for IGD criteria to distinguish gamers’ subgroups. We computed comparisons separately for each approach. Ninety-seven volunteer gamers from the community were recruited. Self-reported questionnaires were used to measure demographic- and game-related characteristics, problematic online gaming (with the Problematic Online Gaming Questionnaire), impulsivity (with the UPPS-P Impulsive Behavior Scale), and depression (with the Beck Depression Inventory-II). Experimental tasks were used to measure inhibitory control (Hybrid-Stop Task) and decision-making abilities (Game of Dice Task).ResultsThirty-two participants met IGD criteria (33% of the sample), whereas LCA identified two groups of gamers [pathological (35%) and recreational]. Comparisons that used both approaches (DSM-5 and LCA) failed to identify significant differences regarding all constructs except for variables related to actual or problematic gaming behaviors.DiscussionThe validity of IGD criteria is questioned, mostly with respect to their relevance in distinguishing high engagement from pathological involvement in video games.

Psychometric properties of the Internet Gaming Disorder Test (IGDT‐10) and problematic gaming behavior among Finnish vocational school students

“…However, three of the four LCA groups exhibited elevated scores for the “preoccupation” item, suggesting that its diagnostic usefulness is limited. Consequently, our findings provide partial support for earlier studies (e.g., Charlton & Danforth, ; Deleuze, Nuyens, Rochat, Rothen, Maurage & Billieux, ) that suggested that some criteria from the IGD framework (e.g., preoccupation and tolerance) are probably not suitable for distinguishing between high but healthy engagement with digital games on the one hand and excessive and problematic engagement on the other. In keeping with these results, Deleuze et al .…”

Game Addiction Scale Assessment Through a Nationally Representative Sample of Young Adult Men: Item Response Theory Graded�Response Modeling (Preprint)

“…As found in other studies, the preoccupation [58,59,62] and escape [58,59,61,63] criteria had lower discriminatory power than the other items did. The deceiving others item had good discriminant capacity in the present study and others [59], whereas some authors found low diagnostic accuracy for this criterion [63].…”

“…The following 5 criteria are more controversial: -Preoccupation (being absorbed by gaming and thinking about it): This criterion, thought to be related to cognitive salience, is considered a core criterion by some authors [30,61] but not others [20,58,62]. Preoccupation is commonly reported among high achievers [26,63] and is supposed to be common for gamers because of the social features of the games and flow-related engagement [62,64].…”

“…Preoccupation is commonly reported among high achievers [26,63] and is supposed to be common for gamers because of the social features of the games and flow-related engagement [62,64].…”

“…In some -but not all [62] -IGDrelated studies, low diagnostic accuracy was observed for this criterion [58,61]. -Deceiving others (such as lying to relatives related to the number of games): This criterion is related to "excessive gaming despite problems" and conflicts.…”