Stepping back to advance: Why IGD needs an intensified debate instead of a consensus

Abstract

Based on their analysis of Internet gaming disorder (IGD) criteria, Kuss, Griffiths, and Pontes (2017) come to the conclusion that the current situation can be described as "chaos and confusion." Their assessment is not an exaggeration. It can be argued that there are even more issues, on logical/definitional and political/social levels: (a) the IGD diagnosis is lacking a well-defined object, (b) the cause and effect cannot be differentiated outside lab conditions, (c) the social and political effects of declaring a social behavior as a disease are worrying, and (d) a rushed diagnosis may construct an addiction with potentially harmful effects on (formerly) healthy populations. Instead of closing the debate by declaring a consensus and codifying IGD in the DSM, an undogmatic, intensified, and broader discussion is needed.

DOI: 10.1556/2006.6.2017.014

Cite this paper

@inproceedings{Quandt2017SteppingBT, title={Stepping back to advance: Why IGD needs an intensified debate instead of a consensus}, author={Thorsten Quandt}, booktitle={Journal of behavioral addictions}, year={2017} }