Psychopathological Symptoms and Gaming Motives in Disordered Gaming-A Psychometric Comparison between the WHO and APA Diagnostic Frameworks.
American psychiatric association
gaming disorder
internet gaming disorder
world health organization
Journal
Journal of clinical medicine
ISSN: 2077-0383
Titre abrégé: J Clin Med
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101606588
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
15 Oct 2019
15 Oct 2019
Historique:
received:
05
09
2019
revised:
08
10
2019
accepted:
10
10
2019
entrez:
18
10
2019
pubmed:
18
10
2019
medline:
18
10
2019
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
'Gaming Disorder' (GD) has received increased medical attention and official recognition from both the American Psychiatric Association (APA) and the World Health Organization (WHO). Although these two medical organizations have independently developed promising clinical diagnostic frameworks to assess disordered gaming, little is known about how these frameworks compare at different psychometric levels in terms of producing consistent outcomes in the assessment of GD. A sample of 1429 German gamers (Mean The findings suggest the existence of minor discrepancies in the estimation of prevalence rates of GD according among the two frameworks. Nevertheless, both diagnostic frameworks are fairly consistent in the psychometric prediction of GD in relation to gaming motives and psychopathological symptoms. The findings underscore the role of key gaming motives as risk factors and protective factors across both diagnostic frameworks. Finally, the study provides support for the WHO diagnostic framework for GD and its measurement with the German Gaming Disorder Test (GDT). The findings and their implications are further discussed in terms of clinical relevance.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
'Gaming Disorder' (GD) has received increased medical attention and official recognition from both the American Psychiatric Association (APA) and the World Health Organization (WHO). Although these two medical organizations have independently developed promising clinical diagnostic frameworks to assess disordered gaming, little is known about how these frameworks compare at different psychometric levels in terms of producing consistent outcomes in the assessment of GD.
METHODS
METHODS
A sample of 1429 German gamers (Mean
RESULTS
RESULTS
The findings suggest the existence of minor discrepancies in the estimation of prevalence rates of GD according among the two frameworks. Nevertheless, both diagnostic frameworks are fairly consistent in the psychometric prediction of GD in relation to gaming motives and psychopathological symptoms. The findings underscore the role of key gaming motives as risk factors and protective factors across both diagnostic frameworks. Finally, the study provides support for the WHO diagnostic framework for GD and its measurement with the German Gaming Disorder Test (GDT). The findings and their implications are further discussed in terms of clinical relevance.
Identifiants
pubmed: 31618950
pii: jcm8101691
doi: 10.3390/jcm8101691
pmc: PMC6832511
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Subventions
Organisme : German Research Foundation
ID : DFG, MO2363/3-2
Références
Community Ment Health J. 2011 Feb;47(1):113-21
pubmed: 19701792
J Behav Addict. 2016 Dec;5(4):683-690
pubmed: 27876422
Addict Behav. 2020 Apr;103:106191
pubmed: 31887719
Cyberpsychol Behav Soc Netw. 2016 Apr;19(4):288-93
pubmed: 26974853
Psychiatry Clin Neurosci. 2017 Jul;71(7):459-466
pubmed: 27278653
Cyberpsychol Behav Soc Netw. 2017 Jan;20(1):52-57
pubmed: 28080150
Psychiatr Q. 2019 Mar;90(1):117-128
pubmed: 30328020
Front Psychol. 2019 Feb 19;10:310
pubmed: 30873069
J Behav Addict. 2017 Mar 1;6(1):11-20
pubmed: 28264590
Addict Behav. 2010 Feb;35(2):116-22
pubmed: 19775821
Addict Behav. 2018 Jul;82:44-49
pubmed: 29486329
J Behav Addict. 2016 Jun;5(2):304-10
pubmed: 27363464
Cyberpsychol Behav Soc Netw. 2014 Jan;17(1):19-25
pubmed: 24003967
Psychiatry Res. 2019 Feb;272:521-530
pubmed: 30616119
Psychiatr Q. 2019 Dec;90(4):747-760
pubmed: 31385123
Addict Behav. 2020 Apr;103:106059
pubmed: 31473045
J Behav Addict. 2014 Mar;3(1):27-32
pubmed: 25215212
J Clin Med. 2019 Jun 28;8(7):
pubmed: 31261841
J Gambl Stud. 2015 Sep;31(3):867-85
pubmed: 24871297
Addict Behav Rep. 2018 Jun 30;8:176-184
pubmed: 30505924
Eur J Dent. 2009 Jul;3(3):161-4
pubmed: 19756188
Addiction. 2013 Jul;108(7):1186-7
pubmed: 23668389
Front Psychol. 2019 Aug 06;10:1822
pubmed: 31447748
J Nerv Ment Dis. 2017 Jul;205(7):568-573
pubmed: 28598958
J Pers Assess. 1996 Feb;66(1):20-40
pubmed: 8576833
Compr Psychiatry. 2019 Oct;94:152117
pubmed: 31422185
Int J Ment Health Addict. 2018;16(2):377-392
pubmed: 29670499
Cyberpsychol Behav. 2006 Dec;9(6):772-5
pubmed: 17201605
Int J Ment Health Syst. 2017 May 11;11:35
pubmed: 28503193
J Behav Addict. 2017 Jun 1;6(2):256-263
pubmed: 28571474
Psychiatry Res. 2018 Jul;265:349-354
pubmed: 29793049
Front Psychol. 2019 Mar 27;10:578
pubmed: 30971971
Addict Behav Rep. 2019 Jan 02;9:100158
pubmed: 30671530
J Med Internet Res. 2015 Apr 07;17(4):e88
pubmed: 25855558
Harv Rev Psychiatry. 1997 Jan-Feb;4(5):231-44
pubmed: 9385000
Eur Addict Res. 2011;17(4):185-9
pubmed: 21494046
Addict Behav. 2019 Dec;99:106102
pubmed: 31473571
Am J Psychiatry. 1985 Nov;142(11):1259-64
pubmed: 3904487
Behav Res Methods. 2011 Sep;43(3):814-25
pubmed: 21487899
Pediatrics. 2010 Aug;126(2):214-21
pubmed: 20603258
J Gen Intern Med. 2001 Sep;16(9):606-13
pubmed: 11556941
J Behav Addict. 2015 Sep;4(3):119-23
pubmed: 26014667
Front Psychol. 2013 Sep 09;4:608
pubmed: 24058355
Asian J Psychiatr. 2018 Jan;31:98-99
pubmed: 29453152