↓ Skip to main content

Challenges in Internet Addiction Disorder: Is a Diagnosis Feasible or Not?

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, June 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (73rd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (65th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
77 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
176 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Challenges in Internet Addiction Disorder: Is a Diagnosis Feasible or Not?
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, June 2016
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00842
Pubmed ID
Authors

Alessandro Musetti, Roberto Cattivelli, Marco Giacobbi, Pablo Zuglian, Martina Ceccarini, Francesca Capelli, Giada Pietrabissa, Gianluca Castelnuovo

Abstract

An important international discussion began because of some pioneer studies carried out by Young (a) on the internet addiction disorder (IAD). In the fifth and most recent version of the Diagnostic, and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) there is no mention of this disorder and among researchers there are basically two opposite positions. Those who are in favor of a specific diagnosis and those who are claiming the importance of specific criteria characterizing this behavior and the precise role it has in the patient's life. The aim of the present paper is to answer the question whether it is possible or not to formulate diagnoses of internet-related disorders. We revised literature on the history of diagnostic criteria, on neurocognitive evidence, on the topic debate and on IAD instrumental measures. We found that the disorder was not univocally defined and that the construct was somehow too broad and generic to be explicative for a diagnosis. Indeed, the models are borrowed from other addiction pathologies and they are often formulated before the development of internet as intended in current society. In conclusion, we think we need a more innovative, integrated and comprehensive model for an IAD diagnosis.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 176 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
France 1 <1%
Unknown 174 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 26 15%
Student > Ph. D. Student 19 11%
Researcher 15 9%
Student > Master 15 9%
Lecturer 9 5%
Other 30 17%
Unknown 62 35%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 32 18%
Medicine and Dentistry 30 17%
Social Sciences 12 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 3%
Neuroscience 6 3%
Other 23 13%
Unknown 67 38%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 25 November 2022.
All research outputs
#5,293,529
of 24,875,365 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#8,541
of 33,562 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#85,895
of 347,746 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#148
of 433 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,875,365 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 33,562 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 347,746 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 433 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 65% of its contemporaries.