↓ Skip to main content

Merging Theoretical Models and Therapy Approaches in the Context of Internet Gaming Disorder: A Personal Perspective

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, October 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
66 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
218 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
Merging Theoretical Models and Therapy Approaches in the Context of Internet Gaming Disorder: A Personal Perspective
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, October 2017
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01853
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kimberly S. Young, Matthias Brand

Abstract

Although, it is not yet officially recognized as a clinical entity which is diagnosable, Internet Gaming Disorder (IGD) has been included in section III for further study in the DSM-5 by the American Psychiatric Association (APA, 2013). This is important because there is increasing evidence that people of all ages, in particular teens and young adults, are facing very real and sometimes very severe consequences in daily life resulting from an addictive use of online games. This article summarizes general aspects of IGD including diagnostic criteria and arguments for the classification as an addictive disorder including evidence from neurobiological studies. Based on previous theoretical considerations and empirical findings, this paper examines the use of one recently proposed model, the Interaction of Person-Affect-Cognition-Execution (I-PACE) model, for inspiring future research and for developing new treatment protocols for IGD. The I-PACE model is a theoretical framework that explains symptoms of Internet addiction by looking at interactions between predisposing factors, moderators, and mediators in combination with reduced executive functioning and diminished decision making. Finally, the paper discusses how current treatment protocols focusing on Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy for Internet addiction (CBT-IA) fit with the processes hypothesized in the I-PACE model.

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 218 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 218 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 37 17%
Student > Ph. D. Student 26 12%
Student > Bachelor 24 11%
Researcher 18 8%
Student > Postgraduate 9 4%
Other 29 13%
Unknown 75 34%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 72 33%
Medicine and Dentistry 20 9%
Social Sciences 10 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 6 3%
Computer Science 6 3%
Other 21 10%
Unknown 83 38%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 07 November 2017.
All research outputs
#13,571,666
of 23,005,189 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#13,487
of 30,245 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#166,166
of 328,576 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#355
of 612 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,005,189 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 30,245 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% 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 328,576 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 612 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.