Working towards an international consensus on criteria for assessing internet gaming disorder: A critical commentary on Petry et al. (2014)

Mark D. Griffiths, Antonius J. van Rooij, Daniel Kardefelt-Winther, Vladan Starcevic, Orsolya Király, Ståle Pallesen, Kai Müller, Michael Dreier, Michelle Carras, Nicole Prause, Daniel L. King, Elias Aboujaoude, Daria J. Kuss, Halley M. Pontes, Olatz Lopez Fernandez, Katalin Nagygyorgy, Sophia Achab, Joël Billieux, Thorsten Quandt, Xavier CarbonellChristopher J. Ferguson, Rani A. Hoff, Jeffrey Derevensky, Maria C. Haagsma, Paul Delfabbro, Mark Coulson, Zaheer Hussain, Zsolt Demetrovics

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

231 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

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.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)167-175
Number of pages9
JournalAddiction
Volume111
Issue number1
Early online date16 Dec 2015
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Jan 2016

Cite this