Search Results
Policy and prevention efforts for gaming should consider a broad perspective
Commentary on: Policy responses to problematic video game use: A systematic review of current measures and future possibilities (Király et al., 2018)
use in any format or for a variety of functions is often confounded with excessive or problematic gaming, despite growing evidence of their differences ( Király et al., 2014 ; Montag et al., 2015 ; Rehbein & Mößle, 2013 ; Siomos, Dafouli, Braimiotis
female gamers. The participants who suffered from problematic gaming behavior had significantly higher neuroticism scores and lower scores on extraversion, conscientiousness, and openness to experience. However, in terms of agreeableness, no difference
problematic gaming, such as those based on the idea that this behavior may be a consequence of maladaptive coping or a way of meeting particular needs ” ( Kardefelt-Winther, 2014 ). However, as Griffiths ( 2017 ) has noted, many – if not most – addictions
). These comprised nine criteria with at least five criteria needing to be met for a diagnosis of IGD to be made. In a recent review of studies, the prevalence of problematic gaming ranged from 0.7% to 27.5%, depending on study design, measurement, and
contribute to misinformation about video games being overly harmful, restricting research into a confirmatory approach, and perpetuating unsubstantiated stigma. However, on the other hand, some experts defend the conceptualization of problematic gaming
Internet Network Information Center, 2017 ). Despite the entertainment purpose of online gaming, engaging in excessive, problematic gaming can be devastating to an individual’s well-being ( Kuss & Griffiths, 2012 ); hence, in its fifth edition, the
motivations do not play an important role in online gaming addiction, and online gaming addiction is predicted by personality traits related to social functioning. Social situation was expected to contribute to problematic gaming by some researchers ( Lemmens
for researchers and clinicians working with gamers to not only assess for gaming frequency (and potential problematic gaming behaviors) but also for the individuals level of involvement in gaming-related gambling activities including esports betting
differences and problematic gaming Pediatrics 126 e1414 e1424 . C. P. Dukarm R. S
, measurement, and study population. One recent review suggested that the prevalence of problematic gaming was between 0.7% and 27.5% ( Mihara & Higuchi, 2017 ). More recently, a comprehensive review revealed that the prevalence of IGD ranged from 0.21% to 57