Jump to content

Internet addiction disorder

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Wikiaddict)
Problematic internet use (colloquially "internet addiction disorder")

Internet addiction disorder (IAD), also known as problematic internet use or pathological internet use, is problematic, compulsive use of the internet, particularly social media, that impairs individual function over a prolonged period of time. Young people are at particular risk of developing internet addiction disorder,[1] with case studies highlighting students whose academic performance declines as they spend more time online.[2] Some experience health consequences from loss of sleep[3] as they stay up to continue scrolling, chatting, and gaming.[4]

Excessive Internet use is not recognized as a disorder by the World Health Organization, the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5) or the International Classification of Diseases (ICD-11). However, gaming disorder appears in the ICD-11. Controversy around the diagnosis includes whether the disorder is a separate clinical entity, or a manifestation of underlying psychiatric disorders. Definitions are not standardized or agreed upon, complicating the development of evidence-based recommendations.

Users under 30 access the Internet more than other age groups and experience a higher risk of overuse.[5]

In 2011 the term "Facebook addiction disorder" (FAD) emerged.[6] FAD is characterized by compulsive use of Facebook. A 2017 study investigated a correlation between excessive use and narcissism, reporting "FAD was significantly positively related to the personality trait narcissism and to negative mental health variables (depression, anxiety, and stress symptoms)".[7][8]

In 2020, the documentary The Social Dilemma reported the concerns of mental health experts and former employees of social media companies over social media's pursuit of addictive use. For example, when a user has not visited Facebook for some time, the platform varies its notifications, attempting to lure them back. It also raises concerns about the correlation between social media use and child and teen suicidality.[9]

Turning off social media notifications may help reduce social media use.[10] For some users, changes in web browsing can be helpful in compensating for self-regulatory problems. For instance, a study involving 157 online learners on massive open online courses examined the impact of such an intervention. The study reported that providing support in self-regulation was associated with a reduction in time spent online, particularly on entertainment.[11]


Mental health consequences[edit]

A longitudinal study of Chinese high school students (2010) suggests that individuals with moderate to severe risk of Internet addiction are 2.5 times more likely to develop depressive symptoms than their IAD-free counterparts.[12] Researchers studied pathological or uncontrolled Internet use, and later mental health problems in one thousand and forty-one teenage students in China. The students were free of depression and anxiety at the start of the study. Nine months later, the youngsters were evaluated again for anxiety and depression, and eighty-seven were judged as having developed depression. Eight reported significant anxiety symptoms.[12] Another longitudinal study of high school students from Helsinki found that problematic internet usage and depressive symptoms may produce a positive feedback loop. Problematic internet usage is also associated with increased risk of substance abuse.[13] A representative study of the German population (N = 2512) from the medical center at the University of Mainz found pathological usage to be associated with negative psychosocial and health consequences in addicted users compared to regular users.[14]

Social consequences[edit]

Internet addiction increases the risk of many negative social and health outcomes, including poor academic performance, harmful personality effects, anxiety and depression.[15]

The best-documented evidence of Internet addiction so far is time-disruption, which subsequently results in interference with regular social life, including academic, professional performance and daily routines.[16] Some studies also reveal that IAD can lead to disruption of social relationships in Europe and Taiwan.[17][18] It is, however, also noted by others that IAD is beneficial for peer relations in Taiwan.[19]

Keith W. Beard (2005) states that "an individual is addicted when an individual's psychological state, which includes both mental and emotional states, as well as their scholastic, occupational and social interactions, is impaired by the overuse of [Internet]".[20]

As a result of its complex nature, some scholars do not provide a definition of Internet addiction disorder and throughout time, different terms are used to describe the same phenomenon of excessive Internet use.[21] Internet addiction disorder is used interchangeably with problematic Internet use, pathological Internet use, and Internet addictive disorder. In some cases, this behavior is also referred to as Internet overuse, problematic computer use, compulsive Internet use, Internet abuse, harmful use of the Internet, and Internet dependency.

Mustafa Savci and Ferda Aysan, reviewed existing research on internet addiction and identified a number of social and emotional factors that have been linked to this phenomenon. These include loneliness, social anxiety, depression, and low self-esteem. They argued that these factors can lead individuals to use the internet as a way of coping with negative emotions or social isolation, which can in turn lead to addictive behavior.[1]

Sign and symptoms[edit]

Physical symptoms[edit]

Physical symptoms include a weakened immune system due to lack of sleep, loss of exercise, and increased risk for carpal tunnel syndrome and eye and back strain.[22]

Symptoms of withdrawal might include agitation, depression, anger and anxiety when the person is away from technology. These psychological symptoms might even turn into physical symptoms such as rapid heartbeat, tense shoulders and shortness of breath.[22]

Theoretical model[edit]

Current researchers have proposed different theoretical models of IAD from different perspectives.

Theories based on the characteristics of the Internet[edit]

ACE model[edit]

This theory suggests that addiction is caused by the characteristics of the Internet itself, including anonymity, convenience and escape, referred to as the ACE model.[23] Anonymity means that individuals are able to hide their true identity and personal information on the Internet and are thus freer to do what they want. Because of this anonymity, it is difficult to regulate what individuals do on the Internet, thus creating an Internet addiction. Convenience may be a benefit of the development of the Internet, as people can do certain things such as shopping online and watching movies without leaving their homes. However, this convenience can also lead to addiction and dependence on the Internet. Escape refers to the ability of users to find solace when faced with difficulty or irritation online because the Internet offers a free virtual environment that entices people away from the actual world. Originally the ACE Model was used to describe Internet pornography addiction, but now it is applied to the whole field of IAD.

Reduced social cues[edit]

People using their smartphones

The invention of email and SMS made online chatting a reality. However, in online communication, the individual's ability to judge the mood, tone and content of the other person is reduced because the necessary social cues, such as situational and personal cues, are missing. As online norms are currently imperfect, it is difficult to regulate individuals' behaviours on the Internet, and the anonymity of the Internet can make individuals' perceptions of themselves and others diminish, resulting in some anti-social behaviour. Consequently, this can lead to inappropriate Internet use and addiction without proper restraints.

Theories based on interaction orientation[edit]

Cognitive-behavioural model of pathological Internet use[edit]

This model defines IAD as pathological Internet use (PIU).[24] It is split into two parts: proximal and distal contributory causes. At the distal end of the model, the developing Internet is the original stressor leading to maladaptive cognitions, and situational cues are the moderator of this relationship. In addition, some psychopathological factors such as depression, social anxiety and substance dependency might promote maladaptive cognitions and result in more PIU behaviours. In terms of the proximal end, there is the interactive effect of maladaptive cognitions and behavioural symptoms of PIU. Maladaptive cognitions are the central factor of the model and could be split into specific pathological Internet use (SPIU) and generalised pathological Internet use (GPIU). In general, the Internet would lead to maladaptive cognitions, and predisposed vulnerability could reinforce this relationship.

Moreover, the higher the individual's level of adaptation to undesirable behaviour, the more likely pathological Internet use is to occur, which also means a higher level of addiction to the Internet.

Game addiction and flow experience[edit]

The flow experience is an emotional experience in which an individual shows a strong interest in an event or object that drives the individual to become fully engaged in it.[25] It was first introduced by Csikszentimihalyi in the 1960s, and he also proposed a systematic model of the flow experience. According to his theory, the flow experience comes from performing challenges at a level similar to the individual's own, which means that people could fully commit to the challenge and do their best to complete it. When individuals are faced with a challenge that is too different from their own level, they may lose interest because it is too easy or too difficult. Online games are a real-life application of this model. Based on Csikszentimihalyi's theory, the theory called GameFlow[26] suggests 8 characteristics that can create a sense of immersion in players: concentration, challenge, skills, control, clear goals, feedback, immersion, and social interaction. With these elements, games would be really addictive and result in Internet addiction.

Theories based on development orientation[edit]

The word "development" has two meanings in this context; both the process and stages of development of Internet addictive behaviour, and the development of the individual throughout the life cycle.

John Grohol's 3-stage model[edit]

The 3-stage model proposed by John Grohol suggests that Internet users would go through three stages:[27]

  1. The Internet fascinates those new to it. In the first stage, users might be excited and curious about the Internet, leading to an increase in the amount of time spent on the Internet.
  2. Users start avoiding something addictive. After devoting a long time to using the Internet, individuals might realise that they should not spend too much time on the Internet, so they may reject games or websites that might be addictive.
  3. Users achieve a balance between surfing and other activities. In the last stage, people might be able to manage their time online well and develop healthy online habits.

John suggested that the reason why many people were addicted to the Internet was that they were struggling with the first stage and needed help. Also, he believed that everyone would get to the final stage in the end, and it just took a different amount of time.

Effects of COVID-19[edit]

A study conducted by Nassim Masaeli and Hadi Farhadi found that the prevalence of internet-based addictive behaviors during the COVID-19 pandemic has increased compared to pre-pandemic levels.[2] Specifically, the prevalence of IAD ranged from 4.7% to 51.6%, SMA ranged from 9.7% to 47.4%, and gaming addiction ranged from 4.4% to 32.4%. The authors also identified several risk factors that contribute to the development of internet-based addictive behaviors during the pandemic, including boredom, stress, anxiety, and social isolation. They also highlighted the importance of interventions to prevent and treat internet-based addictive behaviors during the pandemic. These interventions can include psychological therapies, educational interventions, and pharmacological treatments. The authors recommended that these interventions should be tailored to specific age groups and populations to maximize their effectiveness.

Another study that looked further into the effect of COVID-19 on the prevalence of IAD was "Internet Addiction Increases in the General Population During COVID‐19".[28] The study looked at how the likely increase in stress related to COVID-19 induced quarantine contributed to an increase in IAD among the Chinese population. The study was conducted among 20,472 participants who were asked to fill out the Internet Addiction Test (IAT) online. The study ultimately shows that the overall prevalence of Internet addiction amounted to 36.7% among the general, and according to IAT scores the level of severe Internet addiction was 2.8%. The conclusion drawn was that the pandemic increased the prevalence and severity of Internet addiction among the general population in China

Related disorders[edit]

Problem gambling (online gambling disorder)[edit]

Risks to gamblers and their families of problematic gambling have increased with the advent of online gambling.[29] This is particularly true for minors.[30]

Video game addiction[edit]

Video game addiction (VGA), also known as gaming disorder or internet gaming disorder, is generally defined as a psychological addiction that is problematic, compulsive use of video games that results in significant impairment to an individual's ability to function in various life domains over a prolonged period of time.

Internet sex addiction[edit]

Internet sex addiction, also known as cybersex addiction, has been proposed as a sexual addiction characterized by virtual Internet sexual activity that causes serious negative consequences to one's physical, mental, social, and financial well-being.[31][32]

Compulsive talking (communication addiction disorder)[edit]

Communication addiction disorder (CAD) is a supposed behavioral disorder related to the necessity of being in constant communication with other people, even when there is no practical necessity for such communication. CAD has been linked to Internet addiction.[33] Users become addicted to the social elements of the Internet, such as Facebook and YouTube. Users become addicted to one-on-one or group communication in the form of social support, relationships, and entertainment. However, interference with these activities can result in conflict and guilt. This kind of addiction is called problematic social media use.

Social network addiction is a dependence of people by connection, updating, and control of their and their friend's social network page.[34] For some people, in fact, the only important thing is to have a lot of friends in the network regardless if they are offline or only virtual; this is particularly true for teenagers as a reinforcement of egos.[35][36] Sometimes teenagers use social networks to show their idealized image to others.[37] However, other studies claim that people are using social networks to communicate their real personality and not to promote their idealized identity.[38]

Compulsive VR use[edit]

Compulsive VR use (colloquially virtual-reality addiction) is a compulsion to use virtual reality or virtual, immersive environments. Currently, interactive virtual media (such as social networks) are referred to as virtual reality,[39] whereas future virtual reality refers to computer-simulated, immersive environments or worlds. Experts warn about the dangers of virtual reality,[40] and compare the use of virtual reality (both in its current and future form) to the use of drugs, bringing with these comparisons the concern that, like drugs, users could possibly become addicted to virtual reality.[40]

Video streaming addiction[edit]

Video streaming addiction is an addiction to watching online video content, such as those accessed through free online video sharing sites such as YouTube, subscription streaming services such as Netflix, as well as livestreaming sites such as Twitch. The social nature of the internet has a reinforcing effect on the individual's consumption habits, as well as normalizing binge-watching behavior for enthusiasts of particular television series.[41][42][43]

Risk factors[edit]

Interpersonal difficulties[edit]

It is argued that interpersonal difficulties such as introversion, social problems,[44] and poor face-to-face communication skills[45] often lead to internet addiction. Internet-based relationships offer a safe alternative for people with aforementioned difficulties to escape from the potential rejections and anxieties of interpersonal real-life contact.[46]

Social factors[edit]

There are several social risk factors that have been found to be associated with adult internet addiction such as low income, being a student or unemployed and/or unmarried or in an unstable partnership.[47] Individuals who lack sufficient social connection and social support are found to run a higher risk of Internet addiction. They resort to virtual relationships and support to alleviate their loneliness.[48][49] As a matter of fact, the most prevalent applications among Internet addicts are chat rooms, interactive games, instant messaging, or social media.[46] Some empirical studies reveal that conflict between parents and children and not living with mother significantly associated with IA after one year.[50] Protective factors such as quality communication between parents and children[51] and positive youth development[52] are demonstrated, in turn, to reduce the risk of IA.

Psychological factors[edit]

Prior addictive or psychiatric history are found to influence the likelihood of being addicted to the Internet.[50][53] Some individuals with prior psychiatric problems such as depression and anxiety turn to compulsive behaviors to avoid the unpleasant emotions and situation of their psychiatric problems and regard being addicted to the Internet a safer alternative to substance addictive tendency. But it is generally unclear from existing research which is the cause and which is the effect partially due to the fact that comorbidity is common among Internet addicts.

The most common co-morbidities that have been linked to IAD are major depression and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). The rate of ADHD and IAD associating is as high as 51.6%.[54]

Internet addicts with no previous significant addictive or psychiatric history are argued to develop an addiction to some of the features of Internet use: anonymity, easy accessibility, and its interactive nature.[46]

Neurobiological factors[edit]

There are many neurobiological factors that contribute to addiction, with male gender being a risk factor.[55] Like most other psychopathological conditions, Internet addiction belongs to the group of multifactorial polygenic disorders. For each specific case, there is a unique combination of inherited characteristics (nervous tissue structure, secretion, degradation, and reception of neuromediators), and many are extra-environment factors (family-related, social, and ethnic-cultural). One of the main challenges in the development of the bio-psychosocial model of Internet addiction is to determine which genes and neuromediators are responsible for increased addiction susceptibility.[56]

A study conducted by Aviv Weinstein and Michel Lejoyeux (2020) titled "Neurobiological mechanisms underlying internet gaming disorder" highlights that IGD is associated with alterations in brain regions involved in reward processing, impulse control, decision-making, and executive functioning. These changes in neural activity may result in the persistent and excessive use of internet gaming and may contribute to the development of IGD. The study also highlights the role of neurotransmitters, such as dopamine, in the reinforcement and reward-seeking behavior associated with IGD. They suggest that the neurobiological mechanisms involved in IGD are similar to those observed in substance use disorders, and they propose a framework for understanding IGD as a behavioral addiction. The authors also discuss the potential implications of these findings for the treatment of IGD, suggesting that interventions targeting the neurobiological mechanisms underlying IGD may be effective in reducing problematic internet gaming behaviors.[4]

Other factors[edit]

Parental educational level, age at first use of the Internet, and the frequency of using social networking sites and gaming sites are found to be positively associated with excessive Internet use among adolescents in some European countries, as well as in the USA.[17][57]


Diagnosis of Internet addiction disorder is empirically difficult. Various screening instruments have been employed to detect Internet addiction disorder. Current diagnoses are faced with multiple obstacles.

Initial indicators[edit]

A study conducted by Lori C. Soule, L. Wayne Shell, and Betty A. Kleen (2003) titled "Exploring Internet Addiction: Demographic Characteristics and Stereotypes of Heavy Internet Users" found that heavy internet users were more likely to be male and younger than non-heavy users. The study also found that heavy internet users were more likely to use the internet for gaming and entertainment purposes, rather than for work or education. It also went on further to suggest that heavy internet use may be related to certain personality traits, such as sensation-seeking and impulsivity, and highlight the need for further research to better understand the psychological factors that contribute to internet addiction. The study also highlights the need for interventions that target specific groups, such as young males who are heavy internet users, and that address the underlying factors that contribute to problematic internet use behaviors.[13]


Given the newness of the Internet and the inconsistent definition of Internet addiction disorder, practical diagnosis is far from clear-cut. With the first research initiated by Kimberly S. Young in 1996, the scientific study of Internet addiction has merely existed for more than 20 years.[58] A few obstacles are present in creating an applicable diagnostic method for Internet addiction disorder.

  • Wide and extensive use of the Internet: Diagnosing Internet addiction is often more complex than substance addiction as internet use has largely evolved into being an integral or necessary part of human lives. The addictive or problematic use of the internet is thus easily masked or justified.[46] Also, the Internet is largely a pro-social, interactive, and information-driven medium, while other established addiction behaviors such as gambling are often seen as a single, antisocial behavior that has very little socially redeeming value. Many so-called Internet addicts do not experience the same damage to health and relationships that are common to established addictions.[59]
  • High comorbidity: Internet addiction is often accompanied by other psychiatric disorders such as personality disorder and intellectual disability.[46][60][61][62][63] It is found that Internet addiction is accompanied by other DSM-IV diagnosis 86% of the time.[64] In one study conducted in South Korea, 30% of the identified Internet addicts have accompanying symptoms such as anxiety or depression and another 30% have a second disorder such as attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD).[65] Another study in South Korea found an average of 1.5 other diagnoses among adolescent internet addicts.[64] Further, it is noted in the United States that many patients only resort to medical help when experiencing difficulties they attribute to other disorders.[46][64] For many individuals, overuse or inappropriate use of the Internet is a manifestation of their depression, social anxiety disorders, impulse control disorders, or pathological gambling.[66] It generally remains unclear from existing literature whether other psychiatric disorders is the cause or manifest of Internet addiction.

Despite the advocacy of categorizing Internet addiction as an established illness,[64][67] neither DSM-IV (1995) nor DSM-5 (2013) considers Internet addiction as a mental disorder.[68] A subcategory of IAD, Internet gaming disorder is listed in DSM-5 as a condition that requires more research in order to be considered as a full disorder in May 2013.[68][69][70] The WHO's draft 11th Revision of the International Classification of Diseases (ICD-11) scheduled for publication in 2018 also include gaming disorder.[71] There is still considerable controversy over whether IAD should be included in the DSM-5 and recognized as a mental disease in general.[72]

Screening instruments[edit]

DSM-based instruments[edit]

Most of the criteria utilized by research are adaptations of listed mental disorders (e.g., pathological gambling) in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) handbook.[21]

Ivan K. Goldberg, who first broached the concept of Internet addiction in 1995, adopted a few criteria for IAD on the basis of DSM-IV, including "hoping to increase time on the network" and "dreaming about the network."[73][21] By adapting the DSM-IV criteria for pathological gambling, Kimberly S. Young (1998) proposed one of the first integrated sets of criteria, Diagnostic Questionnaire (YDQ), to detect Internet addiction. A person who fulfills any five of the eight adapted criteria would be regarded as Internet addicted:[74][75]

  1. Preoccupation with the Internet;
  2. A need for increased time spent online to achieve the same amount of satisfaction;
  3. Repeated efforts to curtail Internet use;
  4. Irritability, depression, or mood lability when Internet use is limited;
  5. Staying online longer than anticipated;
  6. Putting a job or relationship in jeopardy to use the Internet;
  7. Lying to others about how much time is spent online; and
  8. Using the Internet as a means of regulating mood.

While Young's YDQ assessment for IA has the advantage of simplicity and ease of use, Keith W. Beard and Eve M. Wolf (2001) further asserted that all of the first five (in the order above) and at least one of the final three criteria (in the order above) be met to delineate Internet addiction in order for a more appropriate and objective assessment.[76]

Young further extended her eight-question YDQ assessment to the now most widely used Internet Addiction Test (IAT),[74][77][78] which consists of 20 items with each on a five-point Likert scale. Questions included on the IAT expand upon Young's earlier eight-question assessment in greater detail and include questions such as "Do you become defensive or secretive when anyone asks you what you do online?" and "Do you find yourself anticipating when you go online again?". A complete list of questions can be found in Dr. Kimberly S. Young's 1998 book Caught in the Net: How to Recognize the Signs of Internet Addiction and A Winning Strategy for Recovery and Laura Widyanto and Mary McMurran's 2004 article titled The Psychometric Properties of the Internet Addiction Test. The Test score ranges from 20 to 100 and a higher value indicates a more problematic use of the Internet:

  • 20–39 = average Internet users,
  • 40–69 = potentially problematic Internet users, and
  • 70–100 = problematic Internet users.

Over time, a considerable number of screening instruments have been developed to diagnose Internet addiction, including the Internet Addiction Test (IAT),[74] the Internet-Related Addictive Behavior Inventory (IRABI),[79] the Chinese Internet Addiction Inventory (CIAI),[80] the Korean Internet Addiction Self-Assessment Scale (KS Scale),[81] the Compulsive Internet Use Scale (CIUS),[82] the Generalized Problematic Internet Use Scale (GPIUS),[83] the Internet Consequences Scale (ICONS),[84] and the Problematic Internet Use Scale (PIUS).[85] Among others, the Internet Addiction Test (IAT) by Young (1998) exhibits good internal reliability and validity and has been used and validated worldwide as a screening instrument.[86][87][78]

Although the various screening methods are developed from diverse contexts, four dimensions manifest themselves across all instruments:[64][88]

  • Excessive use: compulsive Internet use and excessive online time-use;
  • Withdrawal symptoms: withdrawal symptoms including feelings such as depression and anger, given restricted Internet use;
  • Tolerance: the need for better equipment, increased internet use, and more applications/software;
  • Negative repercussions: Internet use caused negative consequences in various aspects, including problematic performance in social, academic, or work domains.

More recently, researchers Mark D. Griffiths (2000) and Jason C. Northrup and colleagues (2015) claim that Internet per se is simply the medium and that the people are in effect addicted to processes facilitated by the Internet.[88][89] Based on Young's Internet Addiction Test (IAT),[74] Northrup and associates further decompose the internet addiction measure into four addictive processes: Online video game playing, online social networking, online sexual activity, and web surfing.[88] The Internet Process Addiction Test (IPAT)[88] is created to measure the processes to which individuals are addicted.

Screening methods that heavily rely on DSM criteria have been accused of lacking consensus by some studies, finding that screening results generated from prior measures rooted in DSM criteria are inconsistent with each other.[18] As a consequence of studies being conducted in divergent contexts, studies constantly modify scales for their own purposes, thereby imposing a further challenge to the standardization in assessing Internet addiction disorder.[21]

Single-question instruments[edit]

Some scholars and practitioners also attempt to define Internet addiction by a single question, typically the time-use of the Internet.[65][90] The extent to which Internet use can cause negative health consequences is, however, not clear from such a measure.[21] The latter of which is critical to whether IAD should be defined as a mental disorder.

Neuroimaging techniques[edit]

Emergent neuroscience studies investigated the influence of problematic, compulsive use of the internet on the human brain.[91] Following anecdotal reports and the conclusion by Kimberly S. Young (1998),[75] neuroimaging studies revealed that IAD contributes to structural and functional abnormalities in the human brain, similar to other behavioral and substance additions. Therefore, objective non-invasive neuroimaging can contribute to the preliminary diagnosis and treatment of IAD.[91][92]

Electroencephalography-based diagnosis[edit]

Using electroencephalography (EEG) readings allows identifying abnormalities in the electrical activity of the human brain caused by IAD. Studies revealed that individuals with IAD predominantly demonstrate increased activity in the theta and gamma band and decreased delta, alpha, and beta activity.[93][94][95][96][97] Following these findings, studies identified a correlation between the differences in the EEG readings and the severity of IAD, as well as the extent of impulsivity and inattention.[93][95][96]


As many scholars have pointed out, the Internet serves merely as a medium through which tasks of divergent nature can be accomplished.[88][89] Treating disparate addictive behaviors under the same umbrella term is highly problematic.[98]

Kimberly S. Young (1999) asserts that Internet addiction is a broad term which can be decomposed into several subtypes of behavior and impulse control problems, namely,[99]

For a more detailed description of related disorders please refer to the related disorders section above.

Public concern[edit]

Internet addiction has raised great public concern in Asia and some countries consider Internet addiction as one of the major issues that threatens public health, in particular among adolescents. A study conducted by David S. Bickham (2021) titled "Current Research and Viewpoints on Internet Addiction in Adolescents" found that internet addiction is a growing concern among adolescents, with many spending a significant amount of time online and exhibiting problematic use behaviors, such as compulsive internet use and withdrawal symptoms when offline. The study also highlighted that certain demographic factors, such as gender and socioeconomic status, may be associated with higher rates of internet addiction.[100]

Bickham further discussed the various factors that may contribute to the development of internet addiction, including individual factors such as depression, anxiety, and poor self-regulation, as well as environmental factors such as parental monitoring and peer influence. The study also discussed the potential negative consequences of internet addiction, such as poor academic performance, disrupted sleep patterns, and social isolation.[100]


Current interventions and strategies used as treatments for Internet addiction stem from those practiced in substance abuse disorder. In the absence of "methodologically adequate research", treatment programs are not well corroborated.[101] Psychosocial treatment is the approach most often applied.[72] In practice, rehab centers usually devise a combination of multiple therapies.[80]

Psychosocial treatment[edit]

Cognitive behavioral therapy[edit]

The cognitive behavioral therapy with Internet addicts (CBT-IA) is developed in analogy to therapies for impulse control disorder.[46][102]

Several key aspects are embedded in this therapy:[103][104]

  • Learning time management strategies;
  • Recognizing the benefits and potential harms of the Internet;
  • Increasing self-awareness and awareness of others and one's surroundings;
  • Identifying "triggers" of Internet "binge behavior", such as particular Internet applications, emotional states, maladaptive cognitions, and life events;
  • Learning to manage emotions and control impulses related to accessing the Internet, such as muscles or breathing relaxation training;
  • Improving interpersonal communication and interaction skills;
  • Improving coping styles;
  • Cultivating interests in alternative activities.

Three phases are implemented in the CBT-IA therapy:[46][102]

  1. Behavior modification to control Internet use: Examine both computer behavior and non-computer behavior and manage Internet addicts' time online and offline;
  2. Cognitive restructuring to challenge and modify cognitive distortions: Identify, challenge, and modify the rationalizations that justify excessive Internet use;
  3. Harm reduction therapy to address co-morbid issues: Address any co-morbid factors associated with Internet addiction, sustain recovery, and prevent relapse.

Symptom management of CBT-IA treatment has been found to sustain six months post-treatment.[46] There have also been promising CBT-short-term treatments for internet and computer game addiction such as STICA[105]

Motivational interviewing[edit]

The motivational interviewing approach is developed based on therapies for alcohol abusers.[46][104] This therapy is a directive, patient-centered counseling style for eliciting behavior change through helping patients explore and resolve ambivalence with a respectful therapeutic manner. It does not, however, provide patients with solutions or problem solving until patients' decision to change behaviors.[103]

Several key elements are embedded in this therapy:[46]

  • Asking open-ended questions;
  • Giving affirmations;
  • Reflective listening

Other psychosocial treatment therapies include reality therapy, Naikan cognitive psychotherapy, group therapy, family therapy, and multimodal psychotherapy.[103]


IAD may be associated with a co-morbidity, so treating a related disorder may also help in the treatment of IAD. When individuals with IAD were treated with certain antidepressants, the time online was reduced by 65% and cravings of being online also decreased. The antidepressants that have been most successful are selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) such as escitalopram and the atypical antidepressant bupropion. A psychostimulant, methylphenidate, was also found to have beneficial effects.[54] However, the available evidence on treatment of IAD is of very low quality at this time and well-designed trials are needed.[106]

12-step recovery programs[edit]

A flyer on a corkboard reads, "ADDICTED to the INTERNET?" and gives information for meeting up with an "Internet addicts anonymous" group. Some tabs at the bottom with contact information have already been pulled off.
A 2009 flyer for an internet addiction support group in New York City

Gaming Addicts Anonymous, founded in 2014 is a 12-step program focused on recovery from computer gaming addiction.[107]

Internet and Technology Addicts Anonymous (ITAA), founded in 2017, is a 12-step program supporting users coping with the problems resulting from compulsive internet and technology use.[108] Some common sub-addictions include smartphone addiction, binge watching addiction, and social media addiction. There are face-to-face meetings in some cities. Telephone / online meetings take place every day of the week, at various times (and in various languages) that allow people worldwide to attend.

Similar to 12-step fellowships related to behavioral addictions, such as Overeaters Anonymous, Workaholics Anonymous, or Sex and Love Addicts Anonymous, most members do not define sobriety as avoiding all technology use altogether.[109] Instead, most ITAA members come up with their own definitions of abstinence or problem behaviors, such as not using the computer or internet at certain hours or locations or not going to certain websites or categories of websites that have proven problematic in the past. They refer to these problematic behaviors as "bottom lines". In contrast, "top lines" are activities, both online and offline, they can do to enhance self esteem without falling into compulsive use. "Middle lines" are behaviors that may be OK sometimes, but can lead to bottom lines if a user is not careful.[110][111][109]

Meetings provide a source of live support for people, to share struggles and victories, and to learn to better function in life once less of it is spent on problematic technology use.

Media Addicts Anonymous (MAA), founded in 2020, is a 12-step program focused on recovery from media addiction. All forms of media sobriety are supported, including abstinence from electronic media, films, radio, newspapers, magazines, books, and music.[112]

There are other 12-step programs which touch on recovery from aspects of internet addiction disorder. For instance, SLAA,[113] SAA,[114] SPAA,[115] SA[116] have meetings focused on recovery from the compulsive use of internet pornography. In addition, Underearners Anonymous[117] and Workaholics Anonymous[118] have meetings that focus on the role of internet addiction disorder in exacerbating the primary addiction.


The NoSurf Reddit community[119] maintains a list of resources and strategies helpful for people trying to decrease their internet usage. This includes lists of software programs that people use to control which sites they visit and when, as well as a discussion group that takes place on Discord.


Research-based prevalence rate of Internet addiction
Country or region Rate or population Sample Year Inst­rument
Global 6%[77] A meta-analysis-based estimate 1994–2012 YDQ & IAT
Asia 20%[120]
Pakistan 9%[121] 231 Medical students 2020 IAT
China 10.4%[122] 10,158 adolescents 2016 IAT
Hong Kong 17–26.7%[123] Over 3000 high school students 2009–2015 IAT
Taiwan 13.8%[124] 1708 high school students n.a. YDQ
South Korea 2.1%[64] An estimate based on Korean population aged 6–19 years 2006
Japan 2.0%[125] 853 adolescents aged 12–15 years 2014 IAT
Europe 4.4%[126] 11,956 adolescents in 11 European countries 2009–2010 YDQ
Germany 1.5 million[127] An estimate based on German population n.a.
Spain 16.3%[128] 40,955 school adolescents aged 12–17 years 2016 PIUS-a
Norway 0.7%[129] 3399 individuals aged 16–74 years 2007 YDQ
UK 18.3%[130] 371 university students n.a. PIUS
Russia 7.1%[3] 4,615 adolescents aged 12–18 years 2019 CIAS
North America
USA 0.3–0.7%[131] 2513 adults 2004 Non-standard

Different samples, methodologies, and screening instruments are employed across studies.


The notion of "Internet addictive disorder" was initially conjured up by Ivan K. Goldberg in 1995 as a joke to parody the complexity and rigidity of the American Psychiatric Association's (APA) Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM). In his first narration, Internet addictive disorder was described as having the symptoms of "important social or occupational activities that are given up or reduced because of Internet use", "fantasies or dreams about the Internet", and "voluntary or involuntary typing movements of the fingers".[132]

The definition of Internet addiction disorder has troubled researchers ever since its inception. In general, no standardized definition has been provided despite that the phenomenon has received extensive public and scholar recognition.[16][21] Below are some of the commonly used definitions.

In 1998, Jonathan J. Kandell defined Internet addiction as "a psychological dependence on the Internet, regardless of the type of activity once logged on."[133]

English psychologist Mark D. Griffiths (1998) conceived Internet addiction as a subtype of broader technology addiction, and also a subtype of behavioral addictions.[134]

In recent years, the validity of the term "Internet addiction" as a single psychological construct has been criticized.[135][136] New empirical evidence is emerging to support this view.[137]

Public concern[edit]

Internet addiction has raised great public concern in Asia and some countries consider Internet addiction as one of the major issues that threatens public health, in particular among adolescents.[64][103]


Internet addiction is commonly referred to as "electronic opium"[138] or "electronic heroin" in China.[139] The government of the People's Republic of China was the first country to formally classify Internet addiction a clinical disorder by recognizing "Clinical Diagnostic Criteria for Internet Addiction" in 2008.[140][141] The government has enacted several policies to regulate adolescents' Internet use, including limiting daily gaming time to 3 hours and requiring users' identification in online video games.[142]

Mistreatment and abuse in China[edit]

In the absence of guidance from China's Health Ministry and a clear definition of Internet addiction, dubious treatment clinics have sprouted up in the country.[65] As part of the treatment, some clinics and camps impose corporal punishment upon patients of Internet addiction and some conducted electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) against patients, the latter of which has caused wide public concern and controversy.[65][143] Several forms of mistreatment have been well-documented by news reports.

One of the most commonly used treatments for Internet-addicted adolescents in China is inpatient care, either in a legal or illegal camp. It is reported that children were sent to these camps against their will. Some are seized and bound by staff of the camp, some are drugged by their parents, and some are tricked into treatment.[141][144][145][146]

In many camps and clinics, corporal punishment is frequently used in the treatment of Internet addiction disorder. The types of corporal punishment practiced include, but not limited to, kilometers-long hikes, intense squats, standing, starving, and confinement.[65][147][148][149] After physical abuse caused the death of an adolescent at a treatment camp in 2009, the Chinese government officially prohibited the use physical violence in such places.[150] However, multiple cases of abuse and deaths at such facilities continue to be reported.[citation needed]

Among Internet addiction rehab centers that use corporal punishment in treatment, Yuzhang Academy in Nanchang, Jiangxi Province, is the most notorious. In 2017, the academy was accused of using severe corporal punishment against students, the majority of which are Internet addicts. Former students claimed that the academy hit problematic students with iron rulers, "whip them with finger-thick steel cables", and lock students in small cells week long.[151] Several suicidal cases emerged under the great pressure.[152]

In November 2017, the academy stopped operating after extensive media exposure and police intervention.[153]

Electroconvulsive therapy[edit]

In China, electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) is legally used for schizophrenia and mood disorders. Its use in treating adolescent Internet addicts has raised great public concern and stigmatized the legal use of ECT.[154]

The most reported and controversial clinic treating Internet addiction disorder is perhaps the Linyi Psychiatric Hospital in Shandong Province.[65] Its center for Internet addiction treatment was established in 2006 by Yang Yongxin.[155] Various interviews of Yongxin Yang confirm that Yang has created a special therapy, xingnao ("brain-waking") therapy, to treat Internet addiction. As part of the therapy, electroconvulsive therapy is implemented with currents of 1–5 milliampere.[156] As Yang put it, the electroconvulsive therapy only involves sending a small current through the brain and will not harm the recipient.[157] As a psychiatric hospital, patients are deprived of personal liberty and are subject to electroconvulsive treatment at the will of hospital staffs.[143] And before admission, parents have to sign contracts in which they deliver their guardianship of kids partially to the hospital and acknowledge that their kids will receive ECT.[143] Frequently, ECT is employed as a punishment method upon patients who breaks any of the center's rules, including "eating chocolate, locking the bathroom door, taking pills before a meal and sitting on Yang's chair without permission".[143] It is reported in a CCTV-12 segment that a DX-IIA electroconvulsive therapy machine is utilized to correct Internet addiction. The machine was, later on, revealed to be illegal, inapplicable to minor[158][159] and can cause great pain and muscle spasm to recipients.[65] Many former patients in the hospital later on stood out and reported that the ECT they received in the hospital was extremely painful, tore up their head,[145] and even caused incontinence.[155][160] An Interview of the Internet addiction treatment center in Linyi Psychiatric Hospital is accessible via the following link. Since neither the safety nor the effectiveness of the method was clear, the Chinese Ministry of Health banned electroconvulsive therapy in treating Internet addiction disorder in 2009.[157][161]


In Yang's clinic, patients are forced to take psychiatric medication[144] in addition to Jiewangyin, a type of medication invented by himself. Neither the effectiveness nor applicability of the medication has been assessed, however.

Physical abuse and death[edit]

At clinics and rehab centers, at least 12 cases of physical abuse have been revealed by media in the recent years including seven deaths.[162][163]

In 2009, a 15-year-old, Senshan Deng, was found dead eight hours after being sent to an Internet-addiction center in Nanning, Guangxi Province. It is reported that the teenager was beaten by his trainers during his stay in the center.[141]

In 2009, another 14-year-old teenager, Liang Pu, was taken to hospital with water in the lungs and kidney failure after a similar attack in Sichuan Province.[150]

In 2014, a 19-year-old, Lingling Guo, died in an Internet-addiction center with multiple injuries on head and neck in Zhengzhou, Henan Province.[141]

In 2016, after escaping from an Internet addiction rehab center, a 16-year-old girl tied up and starved her mother to death as revenge for being sent to treatment in Heilongjiang Province.[141]

In August 2017, an 18-year-old boy, Li Ao, was found dead with 20 external scars and bruises two days after his parents sent him to a military-style boot camp in Fuyang city, Anhui Province.[164]

South Korea[edit]

Being almost universally connected to the Internet and boasting online gaming as a professional sport, South Korea deems Internet addiction one of the most serious social issues[165] and describes it as a "national crisis".[166] Nearly 80% of the South Korean population have smartphones. According to government data, about two million of the country's population (less than 50 million) have Internet addiction problem, and approximately 680,000 10–19-year-olds are addicted to the Internet, accounting for roughly 10% of the teenage population.[167] Even the very young generation are faced with the same problem: Approximately 40% of South Korean children between age three to five are using smartphones over three times per week. According to experts, if children are constantly stimulated by smartphones during infancy period, their brain will struggle to balance growth and the risk of Internet addiction.[168]

It is believed that due to Internet addiction, many tragic events have happened in South Korea: A mother, tired of playing online games, killed her three-year-old son. A couple, obsessed with online child-raising games, let their young daughter die of malnutrition. A 15-year-old teenager killed his mother for not letting him play online games and then committed suicide.[169] One Internet gaming addict stabbed his sister after playing violent games. Another addict killed one and injured seven others.[166]

In response, the South Korea government has launched the first Internet prevention center in the world, the Jump Up Internet Rescue School, where the most severely addicted teens are treated with full governmental financial aid.[166] As of 2007, the government has built a network of 140 Internet-addiction counseling centers besides treatment programs at around 100 hospitals.[170] Typically, counselor- and instructor-led music therapy and equine therapy and other real-life group activities including military-style obstacle courses and therapeutic workshops on pottery and drumming are used to divert IAs' attention and interest from screens.[166][170]

In 2011, the Korean government introduced the "Shutdown Law", also known as the "Cinderella Act", to prevent children under 16 years old from playing online games from midnight (12:00) to 6 a.m.[167]


Many cases of social withdrawal have been occurring in Japan since the late 1990s which inclines people to stay indoors most of the time. The term used for this is hikikomori, and it primarily affects the youth of Japan in that they are less inclined to leave their residences. Internet addiction can contribute to this effect because of how it diminishes social interactions and gives young people another reason to stay at home for longer. Many of the hikikomori people in Japan are reported to have friends in their online games, so they will experience a different kind of social interaction which happens in a virtual space.[171]

US lawsuits[edit]

Numerous lawsuits have been filed in US courts by US states, US school districts and others asserting that social media platforms are deliberately designed to be addictive to minors and seeking damages.[172] These lawsuits include:

  • In October of 2023, several public school systems in Maryland joined together to sue Meta Platforms, Snapchat, ByteDance and Google, claiming that these companies knowingly cause harm to students by providing addictive social media platforms. This lawsuit was one of many filed in the US as part of a mass action with many other entities around the US filing similar lawsuits. According to attorneys representing the plaintiffs, these lawsuits, may or may not be combined into a class action. These lawsuits were in part inspired by the success of a similar lawsuit against Juul Labs, makers of electronic cigarettes that were marketed to minors. It is expected that the defendant social media companies will seek to have these cases dismissed.[173]
  • In October of 2023, Washington DC, Maryland, and Virginia filed Federal and State lawsuits against Facebook and Instagram claiming that those platforms are designed to get children and teens addicted to social media. Meta Platforms, the parent company of Facebook and Instagram, responded that they have implemented many safety features and are disappointed that the states have not worked cooperatively with them.[174]
  • In February of 2024, the city of New York et al. filed a lawsuit in the California Superior Court against Facebook, Instagram, TikTok, Snapchat, and YouTube, seeking to have the companies' behaviour declared a public nuisance and seeking monetary damages. The tech companies have responded that they have policies and procedures in place to insure public safety.[172]

See also[edit]


  1. ^ a b Tomczyk Ł, Solecki R (July 2019). "Problematic internet use and protective factors related to family and free time activities among young people". Educational Sciences: Theory & Practice. 19 (3): 1–13. doi:10.12738/estp.2019.3.001.
  2. ^ a b "emigration-plummets-to-lowest-figure-recorded-apr-2-1984-1-p". Human Rights Documents online. doi:10.1163/2210-7975_hrd-1326-0318. Retrieved September 28, 2022.
  3. ^ a b Tereshchenko S, Kasparov E, Smolnikova M, Shubina M, Gorbacheva N, Moskalenko O (October 2021). "Internet Addiction and Sleep Problems among Russian Adolescents: A Field School-Based Study". International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 18 (19): 10397. doi:10.3390/ijerph181910397. PMC 8507923. PMID 34639694.
  4. ^ a b Wallace P (January 2014). "Internet addiction disorder and youth: There are growing concerns about compulsive online activity and that this could impede students' performance and social lives". EMBO Reports. 15 (1): 12–6. doi:10.1002/embr.201338222. PMC 4303443. PMID 24398129.
  5. ^ Anderson EL, Steen E, Stavropoulos V (2017). "Internet use and Problematic Internet Use: A systematic review of longitudinal research trends in adolescence and emergent adulthood". International Journal of Adolescence and Youth. 22 (4): 430–454. doi:10.1080/02673843.2016.1227716. S2CID 152003110.
  6. ^ Summers, Amy (May 2, 2011). "Facebook Addiction Disorder — The 6 Symptoms of F.A.D." AdWeek. Retrieved 2011-05-02.
  7. ^ Brailovskaia, J.; Margraf, J. (2017). "Facebook Addiction Disorder (FAD) among German students—A longitudinal approach". PLOS ONE. 12 (12): 2423–2478. Bibcode:2017PLoSO..1289719B. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0189719. PMC 5730190. PMID 29240823.
  8. ^ Zhao, Nan; Zhou, Guangyu (9 February 2021). "COVID-19 Stress and Addictive Social Media Use (SMU): Mediating Role of Active Use and Social Media Flow". Frontiers in Psychiatry. 12: 635546. doi:10.3389/fpsyt.2021.635546. PMC 7899994. PMID 33633616.
  9. ^ Watch The Social Dilemma. www.netflix.com (Film). Netflix Official Site. Retrieved 2022-04-13.
  10. ^ Kane, Suzanne (December 6, 2018). "Portion-Control in Social Media? How Limiting Time Increases Well-Being". World of Psychology. Archived from the original on August 14, 2020. Retrieved 2019-04-29.
  11. ^ Pogorskiy, Eduard; Beckmann, Jens F. (2023). "From procrastination to engagement? An experimental exploration of the effects of an adaptive virtual assistant on self-regulation in online learning". Computers and Education: Artificial Intelligence. 4: 100111. doi:10.1016/j.caeai.2022.100111. S2CID 254612244.
  12. ^ a b Lam LT, Peng ZW (October 2010). "Effect of pathological use of the internet on adolescent mental health: a prospective study". Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine. 164 (10): 901–6. doi:10.1001/archpediatrics.2010.159. PMID 20679157.
  13. ^ a b Lejtenyi P. "Problematic internet use and teen depression are closely linked, new Concordia study finds". Concordia University. Retrieved 4 April 2021.
  14. ^ Mueller K, Glaesmer H, Braehler E, Woelfling K, Beutel E. "Prevalence of internet addiction in the general population: results from a German population-based survey". Behavior & Information Technology. doi:10.1080/0144929X.2013.810778.
  15. ^ Elbilgahy, Amal; Sweelam, Rasha; Eltaib, Fatma; Bayomy, Hanaa; Elwasefy, Shereen (2021). "Effects of electronic devices and Internet addiction on sleep and academic performance among female egyptian and saudi nursing students: A comparative study". SAGE Open Nursing. 7: 237796082110556. doi:10.1177/23779608211055614. ISSN 2377-9608. PMC 8738996. PMID 35005227.
  16. ^ a b Chou C, Condron L, Belland JC (1 December 2005). "A Review of the Research on Internet Addiction". Educational Psychology Review. 17 (4): 363–388. doi:10.1007/s10648-005-8138-1. S2CID 7014879.
  17. ^ a b Tsitsika A, Janikian M, Schoenmakers TM, Tzavela EC, Olafsson K, Wójcik S, et al. (August 2014). "Internet addictive behavior in adolescence: a cross-sectional study in seven European countries". Cyberpsychology, Behavior and Social Networking. 17 (8): 528–35. doi:10.1089/cyber.2013.0382. PMID 24853789. S2CID 27117970.
  18. ^ a b Chou C, Hsiao MC (2000). "Internet addiction, usage, gratification, and pleasure experience: the Taiwan college students' case". Computers & Education. 35 (1): 65–80. doi:10.1016/s0360-1315(00)00019-1.
  19. ^ Chin-Chung L, Tsai SS (1999). Internet Addiction among High Schoolers in Taiwan. Annual meeting of American Psychological Association, August 20–24, 1999, Boston, MA.
  20. ^ Beard KW (February 2005). "Internet addiction: a review of current assessment techniques and potential assessment questions". Cyberpsychology & Behavior. 8 (1): 7–14. doi:10.1089/cpb.2005.8.7. PMID 15738688.
  21. ^ a b c d e f Byun S, Ruffini C, Mills JE, Douglas AC, Niang M, Stepchenkova S, et al. (April 2009). "Internet addiction: metasynthesis of 1996-2006 quantitative research". Cyberpsychology & Behavior. 12 (2): 203–7. doi:10.1089/cpb.2008.0102. PMID 19072075. S2CID 16743234.
  22. ^ a b Rosen, Larry D., et al. "Social Networking Is Addictive and Can Lead to Psychological Disorders." Are Social Networking Sites Harmful?, edited by Noah Berlatsky, Greenhaven Press, 2015.
  23. ^ Young, Kimberly S.; Griffin-shelley, Eric; Cooper, Al; O'mara, James; Buchanan, Jennifer (2000-01-01). "Online infidelity: A new dimension in couple relationships with implications for evaluation and treatment". Sexual Addiction & Compulsivity. 7 (1–2): 59–74. doi:10.1080/10720160008400207. ISSN 1072-0162. S2CID 143786655.
  24. ^ Davis, R. A. (2001-03-01). "A cognitive-behavioral model of pathological Internet use". Computers in Human Behavior. 17 (2): 187–195. doi:10.1016/S0747-5632(00)00041-8. ISSN 0747-5632.
  25. ^ Massimini, Fausto; Carli, Massimo (1988), Csikszentmihalyi, Isabella Selega; Csikszentmihalyi, Mihaly (eds.), "The systematic assessment of flow in daily experience", Optimal Experience: Psychological Studies of Flow in Consciousness, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 266–287, ISBN 978-0-521-43809-4, retrieved 2023-03-29
  26. ^ Sweetser, Penelope; Wyeth, Peta (July 2005). "GameFlow: a model for evaluating player enjoyment in games". Computers in Entertainment. 3 (3): 3. doi:10.1145/1077246.1077253. ISSN 1544-3574. S2CID 2669730.
  27. ^ Grohol, John M. (1999-10-01). "Too Much Time Online: Internet Addiction or Healthy Social Interactions?". CyberPsychology & Behavior. 2 (5): 395–401. doi:10.1089/cpb.1999.2.395. ISSN 1094-9313. PMID 19178211.
  28. ^ Li, Yang-Yang; Sun, Yan; Meng, Shi-Qiu; Bao, Yan-Ping; Cheng, Jia-Lu; Chang, Xiang-Wen; Ran, Mao-Sheng; Sun, Yan-Kun; Kosten, Thomas; Strang, John; Lu, Lin; Shi, Jie (July 2021). "Internet Addiction Increases in the General Population During COVID-19: Evidence From China". The American Journal on Addictions. 30 (4): 389–397. doi:10.1111/ajad.13156. ISSN 1055-0496. PMC 8251395. PMID 33738888.
  29. ^ Sayre, Katherine (February 20, 2024). "Betting Apps Kept Gambler Going". Wall Street Journal.
  30. ^ Akçayır, M., Nicoll, F. & Baxter, D.G. (2023). "Emerging Gambling Problems and Suggested Interventions: A Systematic Review of Empirical Research". Journal of Gambling Studies. 39 (2). J Gambl Stud: 857–882. doi:10.1007/s10899-022-10122-w. PMID 35460439.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  31. ^ Stein, Dan J.; Hollander, Eric; Rothbaum, Barbara Olasov (31 August 2009). Textbook of Anxiety Disorders. American Psychiatric Pub. pp. 359–. ISBN 978-1-58562-254-2. Retrieved 24 April 2010.
  32. ^ Parashar A, Varma A (April 2007). "Behavior and substance addictions: is the world ready for a new category in the DSM-V?". CNS Spectr. 12 (4): 257, author reply 258–9. doi:10.1017/S109285290002099X. PMID 17503551.
  33. ^ Walther, J.B. (1999) "Communication Addiction Disorder: Concern over media, behavior and effects Archived 2018-03-05 at the Wayback Machine [APA conference talk]".
  34. ^ Echeburúa E, de Corral P (2010). "[Addiction to new technologies and to online social networking in young people: A new challenge]". Adicciones. 22 (2): 91–5. doi:10.20882/adicciones.196. PMID 20549142.
  35. ^ Hutson M. (2009). "Facebook Friends: Too Many, Too Few?" Retrieved 10 March 2012
  36. ^ Buffardi LE, Campbell WK (October 2008). "Narcissism and social networking Web sites". Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin. 34 (10): 1303–14. CiteSeerX doi:10.1177/0146167208320061. PMID 18599659. S2CID 5740594.
  37. ^ Manago AM, Graham MB, Greenfield PM, Salimkhan G (2008). "Self-presentation and gender on My Space". Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology. 29 (6): 446–458. doi:10.1016/j.appdev.2008.07.001. S2CID 43442440.
  38. ^ Ambady N., Skowronski J. (2008). "First impressions". New York Guilford.[page needed]
  39. ^ Davidow WH (31 July 2012). "Virtual Reality Is Addictive and Unhealthy". IEEE Spectrum.
  40. ^ a b "The dangers of virtual reality gaming" (Press release). reSTART. 7 January 2016.
  41. ^ Ort, Alexander; Wirz, D. S.; Fahr, A. (June 2021). "Is binge-watching addictive? Effects of motives for TV series use on the relationship between excessive media consumption and problematic viewing habits". Addictive Behaviors Reports. 13. doi:10.1016/j.abrep.2020.100325. PMC 7797362. PMID 33457488.
  42. ^ "Is internet addiction a growing problem?". 2021-10-24. Retrieved 2023-12-06.
  43. ^ "Risky Business: Internet Addiction". Mental Health America. Retrieved 2023-12-06.
  44. ^ Ebeling-Witte S, Frank ML, Lester D (October 2007). "Shyness, Internet use, and personality". Cyberpsychology & Behavior. 10 (5): 713–6. doi:10.1089/cpb.2007.9964. PMID 17927542. S2CID 23484450.
  45. ^ Leung L (April 2007). "Stressful life events, motives for Internet use, and social support among digital kids". Cyberpsychology & Behavior. 10 (2): 204–14. doi:10.1089/cpb.2006.9967. PMID 17474837. S2CID 14499167.
  46. ^ a b c d e f g h i j k Young K (2017). "The Evolution of Internet Addiction Disorder". Internet Addiction. Studies in Neuroscience, Psychology and Behavioral Economics. Springer, Cham. pp. 3–18. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-46276-9_1. ISBN 9783319462752.
  47. ^ Mueller K, Glaesmer H, Braehler E, Woelfling K, Beutel E. "Prevalence of internet addiction in the general population: results from a German population-based survey". Behavior & Information Technology. doi:10.1080/0144929X.2013.810778.
  48. ^ Morahan-Martin J (1999-10-01). "The relationship between loneliness and internet use and abuse". Cyberpsychology & Behavior. 2 (5): 431–9. doi:10.1089/cpb.1999.2.431. PMID 19178216.
  49. ^ Hardie E, Tee MY (2007). "Excessive Internet Use: The Role of Personality, Loneliness and Social Support Networks in Internet Addiction" (PDF). Australian Journal of Emerging Technologies & Society. 5 (1): 34–47.
  50. ^ a b Ko CH, Yen JY, Chen CS, Yeh YC, Yen CF (October 2009). "Predictive values of psychiatric symptoms for internet addiction in adolescents: a 2-year prospective study". Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine. 163 (10): 937–43. doi:10.1001/archpediatrics.2009.159. PMID 19805713.
  51. ^ van den Eijnden RJ, Spijkerman R, Vermulst AA, van Rooij TJ, Engels RC (January 2010). "Compulsive internet use among adolescents: bidirectional parent-child relationships". Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology. 38 (1): 77–89. doi:10.1007/s10802-009-9347-8. PMC 2809946. PMID 19728076.
  52. ^ Yu L, Shek DT (June 2013). "Internet addiction in Hong Kong adolescents: a three-year longitudinal study". Journal of Pediatric and Adolescent Gynecology. 26 (3 Suppl): S10-7. doi:10.1016/j.jpag.2013.03.010. hdl:10397/8135. PMID 23683821.
  53. ^ Cho SM, Sung MJ, Shin KM, Lim KY, Shin YM (August 2013). "Does psychopathology in childhood predict internet addiction in male adolescents?". Child Psychiatry and Human Development. 44 (4): 549–55. doi:10.1007/s10578-012-0348-4. PMID 23242708. S2CID 26245088.
  54. ^ a b Przepiorka AM, Blachnio A, Miziak B, Czuczwar SJ (April 2014). "Clinical approaches to treatment of Internet addiction". Pharmacological Reports. 66 (2): 187–91. doi:10.1016/j.pharep.2013.10.001. PMID 24911068. S2CID 15573952.
  55. ^ Mueller K, Glaesmer H, Braehler E, Woelfling K, Beutel E. "Prevalence of internet addiction in the general population: results from a German population-based survey". Behavior & Information Technology. doi:10.1080/0144929X.2013.810778.
  56. ^ Tereshchenko S, Kasparov E (June 2019) [June 2019]. "Neurobiological Risk Factors for the Development of Internet Addiction in Adolescents". Behavioral Sciences. 9 (6): 62. doi:10.3390/bs9060062. PMC 6616486. PMID 31207886. This article incorporates text from this source, which is available under the CC BY 4.0 license.
  57. ^ Ramachandran S (2015-10-01). "Technology: Smart tablet or just a new drug? (Lessons for use of technology with children)". The Essayist. Archived from the original on 2019-12-30. Retrieved 2018-04-18.
  58. ^ Brand M (2017). "Theoretical Models of the Development and Maintenance of Internet Addiction". Internet Addiction. Studies in Neuroscience, Psychology and Behavioral Economics. Springer, Cham. pp. 19–34. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-46276-9_2. ISBN 9783319462752.
  59. ^ Kershaw S (1 December 2005). "Hooked on the Web: Help Is on the Way". The New York Times.
  60. ^ Ko CH, Yen JY, Chen CS, Chen CC, Yen CF (February 2008). "Psychiatric comorbidity of internet addiction in college students: an interview study". CNS Spectrums. 13 (2): 147–53. doi:10.1017/S1092852900016308. PMID 18227746. S2CID 3101800.
  61. ^ Floros G, Siomos K, Stogiannidou A, Giouzepas I, Garyfallos G (December 2014). "Comorbidity of psychiatric disorders with Internet addiction in a clinical sample: the effect of personality, defense style and psychopathology". Addictive Behaviors. 39 (12): 1839–45. doi:10.1016/j.addbeh.2014.07.031. PMID 25129172.
  62. ^ Shapira NA, Goldsmith TD, Keck PE, Khosla UM, McElroy SL (2000). "Psychiatric features of individuals with problematic internet use". Journal of Affective Disorders. 57 (1–3): 267–72. doi:10.1016/s0165-0327(99)00107-x. PMID 10708842.
  63. ^ Black DW, Belsare G, Schlosser S (December 1999). "Clinical features, psychiatric comorbidity, and health-related quality of life in persons reporting compulsive computer use behavior". The Journal of Clinical Psychiatry. 60 (12): 839–44. doi:10.4088/jcp.v60n1206. PMID 10665630.
  64. ^ a b c d e f g Block JJ (March 2008). "Issues for DSM-V: internet addiction". The American Journal of Psychiatry. 165 (3): 306–7. doi:10.1176/appi.ajp.2007.07101556. PMID 18316427. S2CID 36268291.
  65. ^ a b c d e f g Stone R (June 2009). "Science in society. China reins in wilder impulses in treatment of 'Internet addiction'". Science. 324 (5935): 1630–1. Bibcode:2009Sci...324.1630S. doi:10.1126/science.324_1630. PMID 19556477.
  66. ^ Hawi NS (2012). "Internet addiction among adolescents in Lebanon". Computers in Human Behavior. 28 (3): 1044–1053. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2012.01.007.
  67. ^ Bai YM, Lin CC, Chen JY (October 2001). "Internet addiction disorder among clients of a virtual clinic". Psychiatric Services. 52 (10): 1397. doi:10.1176/appi.ps.52.10.1397. PMID 11585966.
  68. ^ a b "DSM-5". www.psychiatry.org. Retrieved 2018-02-19.
  69. ^ Campanella M, Mucci F, Baroni S, Nardi L, Marazziti D (2017). "Prevalence of Internet Addiction: A Pilot Study in a Group of Italian Students". European Psychiatry. 41 (S1): s248. doi:10.1016/j.eurpsy.2017.02.030. S2CID 44793385.
  70. ^ Lopez-Fernandez O (1 September 2015). "How Has Internet Addiction Research Evolved Since the Advent of Internet Gaming Disorder? An Overview of Cyberaddictions from a Psychological Perspective". Current Addiction Reports. 2 (3): 263–271. doi:10.1007/s40429-015-0067-6. S2CID 21736591.
  71. ^ "Gaming disorder". World Health Organization. Retrieved 2018-03-02.
  72. ^ a b Weinstein A, Lejoyeux M (September 2010). "Internet addiction or excessive internet use". The American Journal of Drug and Alcohol Abuse. 36 (5): 277–283. CiteSeerX doi:10.3109/00952990.2010.491880. PMID 20545603. S2CID 17713327.
  73. ^ Salicetia, Francesca (2015-06-02). "Internet Addiction Disorder (IAD)". Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences. The Proceedings of 6th World Conference on educational Sciences. 191: 1372–1376. doi:10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.04.292. ISSN 1877-0428.
  74. ^ a b c d Young KS (1998). Caught in the net: how to recognize the signs of Internet addiction—and a winning strategy for recovery. New York: J. Wiley. ISBN 9780471191599. OCLC 38130573.[page needed]
  75. ^ a b Young KS (1 January 1998). "Internet Addiction: The Emergence of a New Clinical Disorder". CyberPsychology & Behavior. 1 (3): 237–244. doi:10.1089/cpb.1998.1.237. S2CID 17108879.
  76. ^ Beard KW, Wolf EM (June 2001). "Modification in the Proposed Diagnostic Criteria for Internet Addiction". CyberPsychology & Behavior. 4 (3): 377–383. doi:10.1089/109493101300210286. PMID 11710263. S2CID 40907675.
  77. ^ a b Cheng C, Li AY (December 2014). "Internet addiction prevalence and quality of (real) life: a meta-analysis of 31 nations across seven world regions". Cyberpsychology, Behavior and Social Networking. 17 (12): 755–60. doi:10.1089/cyber.2014.0317. PMC 4267764. PMID 25489876.
  78. ^ a b Widyanto L, McMurran M (August 2004). "The psychometric properties of the internet addiction test". Cyberpsychology & Behavior. 7 (4): 443–50. doi:10.1089/cpb.2004.7.443. PMID 15331031. S2CID 8052698.
  79. ^ Brenner V (June 1997). "Psychology of computer use: XLVII. Parameters of Internet use, abuse and addiction: the first 90 days of the Internet Usage Survey". Psychological Reports. 80 (3 Pt 1): 879–82. doi:10.2466/pr0.1997.80.3.879. PMID 9198388. S2CID 43237173.
  80. ^ a b Huang Z, Wang M, Qian M, Zhong J, Tao R (December 2007). "Chinese Internet addiction inventory: developing a measure of problematic Internet use for Chinese college students". Cyberpsychology & Behavior. 10 (6): 805–11. doi:10.1089/cpb.2007.9950. PMID 18085968.
  81. ^ Heo J, Oh J, Subramanian SV, Kim Y, Kawachi I (2014-02-05). "Addictive internet use among Korean adolescents: a national survey". PLOS ONE. 9 (2): e87819. Bibcode:2014PLoSO...987819H. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0087819. PMC 3914839. PMID 24505318.
  82. ^ Meerkerk GJ, Van Den Eijnden RJ, Vermulst AA, Garretsen HF (February 2009). "The Compulsive Internet Use Scale (CIUS): some psychometric properties". Cyberpsychology & Behavior. 12 (1): 1–6. doi:10.1089/cpb.2008.0181. hdl:2066/77299. PMID 19072079.
  83. ^ Caplan SE (2010). "Theory and measurement of generalized problematic Internet use: A two-step approach". Computers in Human Behavior. 26 (5): 1089–1097. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2010.03.012. S2CID 34724650.
  84. ^ Clark DJ, Frith KH (September 2005). "The development and initial testing of the Internet Consequences Scales (ICONS)". Computers, Informatics, Nursing. 23 (5): 285–91. doi:10.1097/00024665-200509000-00013. PMID 16166831. S2CID 43342374.
  85. ^ Demetrovics Z, Szeredi B, Rózsa S (May 2008). "The three-factor model of Internet addiction: the development of the Problematic Internet Use Questionnaire". Behavior Research Methods. 40 (2): 563–74. doi:10.3758/BRM.40.2.563. PMID 18522068. S2CID 22920306.
  86. ^ Chang MK, Law SP (2008). "Factor structure for Young's Internet Addiction Test: A confirmatory study". Computers in Human Behavior. 24 (6): 2597–2619. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2008.03.001.
  87. ^ Widyanto L, Griffiths MD, Brunsden V (March 2011). "A psychometric comparison of the Internet Addiction Test, the Internet-Related Problem Scale, and self-diagnosis" (PDF). Cyberpsychology, Behavior and Social Networking. 14 (3): 141–9. doi:10.1089/cyber.2010.0151. PMID 21067282.
  88. ^ a b c d e Northrup JC, Lapierre C, Kirk J, Rae C (July 2015). "The Internet Process Addiction Test: Screening for Addictions to Processes Facilitated by the Internet". Behavioral Sciences. 5 (3): 341–52. doi:10.3390/bs5030341. PMC 4600140. PMID 26226007.
  89. ^ a b Griffiths M (2000). "Internet addiction-time to be taken seriously?". Addiction Research. 8 (5): 413–418. doi:10.3109/16066350009005587. S2CID 146471881.
  90. ^ Soule LC, Shell LW, Kleen BA (2003). "Exploring Internet addiction: Demographic characteristics and stereotypes of heavy Internet users". Journal of Computer Information Systems. 44 (1): 64–73. doi:10.1080/08874417.2003.11647553. S2CID 71716613.
  91. ^ a b Yuan K, Qin W, Liu Y, Tian J (November 2011). "Internet addiction: Neuroimaging findings". Communicative & Integrative Biology. 4 (6): 637–9. doi:10.4161/cib.17871. PMC 3306323. PMID 22448301.
  92. ^ Müller-Putz GR, Riedl R, C Wriessnegger S (1 November 2015). "Electroencephalography (EEG) as a Research Tool in the Information Systems Discipline: Foundations, Measurement, and Applications". Communications of the Association for Information Systems. 37 (1). doi:10.17705/1CAIS.03746.
  93. ^ a b Lee J, Hwang JY, Park SM, Jung HY, Choi SW, Kim DJ, et al. (April 2014). "Differential resting-state EEG patterns associated with comorbid depression in Internet addiction". Progress in Neuro-Psychopharmacology & Biological Psychiatry. 50: 21–6. doi:10.1016/j.pnpbp.2013.11.016. PMID 24326197. S2CID 23750266.
  94. ^ Burleigh TL, Griffiths MD, Sumich A, Wang GY, Kuss DJ (August 2020). "Gaming disorder and internet addiction: A systematic review of resting-state EEG studies" (PDF). Addictive Behaviors. 107: 106429. doi:10.1016/j.addbeh.2020.106429. PMID 32283445. S2CID 215758373.
  95. ^ a b Gross J, Baumgartl H, Buettner R (2020-08-10). "A Novel Machine Learning Approach for High-Performance Diagnosis of Premature Internet Addiction Using the Unfolded EEG Spectra". AMCIS 2020 Proceedings.
  96. ^ a b Choi JS, Park SM, Lee J, Hwang JY, Jung HY, Choi SW, et al. (September 2013). "Resting-state beta and gamma activity in Internet addiction". International Journal of Psychophysiology. Psychophysiology in Australasia - ASP conference - November 28–30, 2012. 89 (3): 328–33. doi:10.1016/j.ijpsycho.2013.06.007. PMID 23770040.
  97. ^ Yu H, Zhao X, Li N, Wang M, Zhou P (October 2009). "Effect of excessive Internet use on the time–frequency characteristic of EEG". Progress in Natural Science. 19 (10): 1383–1387. doi:10.1016/j.pnsc.2008.11.015.
  98. ^ Kuss D, Lopez-Fernandez O (2016). "Internet-use related addiction: The state of the art of clinical research". European Psychiatry. 33: S303. doi:10.1016/j.eurpsy.2016.01.1038. S2CID 148064363.
  99. ^ Young KS (1999-10-01). "The research and controversy surrounding internet addiction". Cyberpsychology & Behavior. 2 (5): 381–3. doi:10.1089/cpb.1999.2.381. PMID 19178209.
  100. ^ a b Bickham, David S. (2021-03-01). "Current Research and Viewpoints on Internet Addiction in Adolescents". Current Pediatrics Reports. 9 (1): 1–10. doi:10.1007/s40124-020-00236-3. ISSN 2167-4841. PMC 7796811. PMID 33457108.
  101. ^ Petersen KU, Weymann N, Schelb Y, Thiel R, Thomasius R (May 2009). "[Pathological Internet use--epidemiology, diagnostics, co-occurring disorders and treatment]" [Pathological Internet use--epidemiology, diagnostics, co-occurring disorders and treatment]. Fortschritte der Neurologie-Psychiatrie (in German). 77 (5): 263–271. doi:10.1055/s-0028-1109361. PMID 19418384. S2CID 260158439.
  102. ^ a b Young KS (October 2007). "Cognitive behavior therapy with Internet addicts: treatment outcomes and implications". Cyberpsychology & Behavior. 10 (5): 671–9. doi:10.1089/cpb.2007.9971. PMID 17927535. S2CID 13951774.
  103. ^ a b c d Huang XQ, Li MC, Tao R (October 2010). "Treatment of internet addiction". Current Psychiatry Reports. 12 (5): 462–70. doi:10.1007/s11920-010-0147-1. PMID 20697848. S2CID 21592685.
  104. ^ a b Orzack MH, Voluse AC, Wolf D, Hennen J (June 2006). "An ongoing study of group treatment for men involved in problematic Internet-enabled sexual behavior". Cyberpsychology & Behavior. 9 (3): 348–60. doi:10.1089/cpb.2006.9.348. PMID 16780403.
  105. ^ Woelfling K, Mueller K, Dreier M, et al. (July 2019). "Efficacy of Short-term Treatment of Internet and Computer Game Addiction. A Randomized Clinical Trial". JAMA Psychiatry. doi:10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2019.1676. PMC 6624826.
  106. ^ Zajac K, Ginley MK, Chang R, Petry NM (December 2017). "Treatments for Internet gaming disorder and Internet addiction: A systematic review". Psychol Addict Behav. 31 (8): 979–994. doi:10.1037/adb0000315. PMC 5714660. PMID 28921996.
  107. ^ cgaa513admin. "About Us". Gaming Addicts Anonymous. Retrieved 2023-11-30.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: numeric names: authors list (link)
  108. ^ "Internet and Technology Addicts Anonymous". Internet and Technology Addicts Anonymous. Retrieved 2018-10-10.
  109. ^ a b Giordano, Amanda (October 5, 2021). "Six steps for addressing behavioral addictions in clinical work". Counseling Today.
  110. ^ Paul, Kari (September 17, 2023). "'I couldn't stop myself': inside the 12-step program for internet addiction". The Guardian.
  111. ^ "Tools of Recovery". ITAA.
  112. ^ "Media Addicts Anonymous". Media Addicts Anon. Retrieved 2022-05-11.
  113. ^ "Sex and Love Addicts Anonymous (S.L.A.A.) – Fellowship-Wide Services (F.W.S.)". Retrieved 2023-11-30.
  114. ^ "Sex Addicts Anonymous". SAA. Retrieved 2023-11-30.
  115. ^ "Home". Sex and Porn Addicts Anonymous. Retrieved 2023-11-30.
  116. ^ "Sexaholics Anonymous | The Official Website for Sexaholics Anonymous, a Program of Recovery from Sex and Lust Addiction". Retrieved 2023-11-30.
  117. ^ "Underearners Anonymous – Freedom | Abundance | Prosperity | Serenity". Retrieved 2023-11-30.
  118. ^ "Home". workaholics-anonymous.org. Retrieved 2023-11-30.
  119. ^ "R/nosurf - the Beginner's Guide to NoSurf (Essential Reading, Success Stories, Guides, FAQ and more!)". NoSurf Sub-reddit. 2 September 2018. Retrieved 2018-10-10.
  120. ^ Adams M (2016). Adams, Margaret E. (ed.). Internet addiction: prevalence, risk factors and health effects. Hauppauge, New York: Nova Science Publishers. ISBN 9781536104363. OCLC 961923990.
  121. ^ Ansar F, Ali W, Zareef A, Masud N, Zahab S, Iftekhar H (17 December 2020). "Internet Addiction and Its Relationship with Depression and Academic Performance: A Cross-Sectional Study at a Medical School in Pakistan". International Journal of Medical Students. 8 (3): 251–256. doi:10.5195/ijms.2020.740.
  122. ^ Wu XS, Zhang ZH, Zhao F, Wang WJ, Li YF, Bi L, et al. (October 2016). "Prevalence of Internet addiction and its association with social support and other related factors among adolescents in China". Journal of Adolescence. 52: 103–11. doi:10.1016/j.adolescence.2016.07.012. PMID 27544491.
  123. ^ Shek DT, Yu L (February 2016). "Adolescent Internet Addiction in Hong Kong: Prevalence, Change, and Correlates". Journal of Pediatric and Adolescent Gynecology. 29 (1 Suppl): S22-30. doi:10.1016/j.jpag.2015.10.005. hdl:10397/62018. PMID 26461526.
  124. ^ Yang SC, Tung CJ (2007). "Comparison of Internet addicts and non-addicts in Taiwanese high school". Computers in Human Behavior. 23 (1): 79–96. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2004.03.037.
  125. ^ Kawabe K, Horiuchi F, Ochi M, Oka Y, Ueno S (September 2016). "Internet addiction: Prevalence and relation with mental states in adolescents". Psychiatry and Clinical Neurosciences. 70 (9): 405–12. doi:10.1111/pcn.12402. PMID 27178110. S2CID 31236193.
  126. ^ Durkee T, Kaess M, Carli V, Parzer P, Wasserman C, Floderus B, et al. (December 2012). "Prevalence of pathological internet use among adolescents in Europe: demographic and social factors". Addiction. 107 (12): 2210–22. doi:10.1111/j.1360-0443.2012.03946.x. PMID 22621402. S2CID 21956924.
  127. ^ Wölfling K, Bühler M, Leménager T, Mörsen C, Mann K (September 2009). "[Gambling and internet addiction: review and research agenda]". Der Nervenarzt (in German). 80 (9): 1030–9. doi:10.1007/s00115-009-2741-1. PMID 19697001. S2CID 6366918.
  128. ^ Gómez P, Rial A, Braña T, Golpe S, Varela J (April 2017). "Screening of Problematic Internet Use Among Spanish Adolescents: Prevalence and Related Variables". Cyberpsychology, Behavior and Social Networking. 20 (4): 259–267. doi:10.1089/cyber.2016.0262. PMID 28394211.
  129. ^ Bakken IJ, Wenzel HG, Götestam KG, Johansson A, Oren A (April 2009). "Internet addiction among Norwegian adults: a stratified probability sample study". Scandinavian Journal of Psychology. 50 (2): 121–7. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9450.2008.00685.x. PMID 18826420.
  130. ^ Niemz K, Griffiths M, Banyard P (December 2005). "Prevalence of pathological Internet use among university students and correlations with self-esteem, the General Health Questionnaire (GHQ), and disinhibition" (PDF). Cyberpsychology & Behavior. 8 (6): 562–70. doi:10.1089/cpb.2005.8.562. PMID 16332167.
  131. ^ Aboujaoude E, Koran LM, Gamel N, Large MD, Serpe RT (October 2006). "Potential markers for problematic internet use: a telephone survey of 2,513 adults". CNS Spectrums. 11 (10): 750–5. doi:10.1017/S1092852900014875. PMID 17008818. S2CID 31582999.
  132. ^ Wallis D (5 January 1997). "Just Click No". The New Yorker.
  133. ^ Kandell JJ (1 January 1998). "Internet Addiction on Campus: The Vulnerability of College Students". CyberPsychology & Behavior. 1 (1): 11–17. doi:10.1089/cpb.1998.1.11.
  134. ^ Griffiths M (1998). "Internet addiction: Does it really exist?". In Gackenbach J (ed.). Psychology and the Internet: Intrapersonal, interpersonal, and transpersonal implications. Academic Press. pp. 61–75.
  135. ^ Griffiths MD (2018-02-01). "Conceptual Issues Concerning Internet Addiction and Internet Gaming Disorder: Further Critique on Ryding and Kaye (2017)". International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction. 16 (1): 233–239. doi:10.1007/s11469-017-9818-z. PMC 5814513. PMID 29491772.
  136. ^ Ryding FC, Kaye LK (2018-02-01). ""Internet Addiction": a Conceptual Minefield". International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction. 16 (1): 225–232. doi:10.1007/s11469-017-9811-6. PMC 5814538. PMID 29491771.
  137. ^ Tereshchenko S, Kasparov E, Semenova N, Shubina M, Gorbacheva N, Novitckii I, et al. (June 2022). "Generalized and Specific Problematic Internet Use in Central Siberia Adolescents: A School-Based Study of Prevalence, Age-Sex Depending Content Structure, and Comorbidity with Psychosocial Problems". International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. 19 (13): 7593. doi:10.3390/ijerph19137593. PMC 9265954. PMID 35805263.
  138. ^ Bax T (2013-08-15). Youth and Internet Addiction in China. Routledge. ISBN 9781135096953.
  139. ^ Phillips T (2017-08-28). "'Electronic heroin': China's boot camps get tough on internet addicts". The Guardian. Retrieved 2018-02-20.
  140. ^ "我国首个《网络成瘾临床诊断标准》通过专家论证". www.gov.cn. Retrieved 2018-03-02.
  141. ^ a b c d e Wang AB (14 August 2017). "A teen checked into an Internet-addiction camp in China. He was dead two days later". Washington Post.
  142. ^ "China moves to zap online game addiction". Financial Times. 2005-08-23. Retrieved 2018-02-20.
  143. ^ a b c d "暗访杨永信网瘾戒治中心:杨永信和传销一个样-搜狐健康". health.sohu.com. Retrieved 2018-02-20.
  144. ^ a b ""戒网专家"电击治网瘾惹争议". zqb.cyol.com. Retrieved 2018-02-19.
  145. ^ a b "一个网戒中心的生态系统". zqb.cyol.com. Retrieved 2018-02-19.
  146. ^ "It's the addiction gripping thousands of Chinese teenagers". NewsComAu. Retrieved 2018-02-20.
  147. ^ Krajnak D. "China probe of abuse at Web addiction camp". www.cnn.com. CNN. Retrieved 2018-02-20.
  148. ^ "我在'网瘾集中营'的生活". zqb.cyol.com. Retrieved 2018-02-19.
  149. ^ "南方周末 - 86条规定". www.infzm.com. Retrieved 2018-02-19.
  150. ^ a b "China bans physical punishment for Internet addicts". IN. Retrieved 2018-02-21.
  151. ^ "南昌豫章书院深陷"暴力门" 学生称"绝望"". jx.ifeng.com. Retrieved 2018-02-20.
  152. ^ Tencent VFE Team. "独家专访引爆豫章书院事件当事人:曾被铁棍打 吞牙膏自杀未遂_网罗天下_腾讯视频". v.qq.com (in Chinese (China)). Retrieved 2018-02-20.
  153. ^ "南昌豫章书院学生陆续被接走,警方正调查书院是否涉嫌违法_教育家_澎湃新闻-The Paper". www.thepaper.cn. Retrieved 2018-02-20.
  154. ^ Tang YL, Jiang W, Ren YP, Ma X, Cotes RO, McDonald WM (December 2012). "Electroconvulsive therapy in China: clinical practice and research on efficacy". The Journal of ECT. 28 (4): 206–12. doi:10.1097/yct.0b013e31825957b1. PMID 22801297. S2CID 2743272.
  155. ^ a b "杨永信网瘾中心再追踪:女孩唱舞娘也遭电击_科技_腾讯网". tech.qq.com. Retrieved 2018-02-20.
  156. ^ "南方周末 - "电击"可治网瘾?卫生部叫停". www.infzm.com. Retrieved 2018-02-20.
  157. ^ a b Branigan T (2009-07-14). "China bans electric shock treatment used to 'cure' young internet addicts". The Guardian. Retrieved 2018-02-20.
  158. ^ 网易. "杨永信"神话"破灭背后的媒体漩涡_网易新闻". discover.news.163.com. Archived from the original on 2018-03-08. Retrieved 2018-02-19.
  159. ^ 网易. "《新闻调查》曝光杨永信电击真相_网易科技". tech.163.com. Archived from the original on 2010-03-03. Retrieved 2018-02-20.
  160. ^ "经济半小时:杨永信网戒中心入账可达8100万_互联网_科技时代_新浪网". tech.sina.com.cn. Retrieved 2018-02-20.
  161. ^ "卫生部通知停止电刺激治疗"网瘾"技术临床应用". www.gov.cn. Retrieved 2018-02-19.
  162. ^ Kuo L. "China's cure for teenage internet addiction is worse than the supposed disease". Quartz. Retrieved 2018-02-20.
  163. ^ chinanews. "盘点12起被曝光戒网瘾学校事件:9成涉体罚 致7人亡-中新网". www.chinanews.com. Retrieved 2018-02-20.
  164. ^ "China 'internet addict' death sparks fury". BBC News. 2017-08-14. Retrieved 2018-02-20.
  165. ^ Leonard T (19 November 2007). "First boot camp for internet-addicted teenagers". The Telegraph. Archived from the original on 2022-01-12.
  166. ^ a b c d "Korea's Internet Addicts". News. Archived from the original on 2018-10-15. Retrieved 2018-02-27.
  167. ^ a b "Horses to the rescue of Korea's Internet-addicted teens". Reuters. 2013. Retrieved 2018-02-27.
  168. ^ Smith L. "Internet-addicted teens are being sent to rehab to "get clean"". www.kidspot.com.au. Retrieved 2018-02-20.
  169. ^ Fifield A (24 January 2016). "In South Korea, a rehab camp for Internet-addicted teenagers". Washington Post.
  170. ^ a b Fackler M (18 November 2007). "In Korea, a Boot Camp Cure for Web Obsession". The New York Times.
  171. ^ Kato TA, Kanba S, Teo AR (August 2019). "Hikikomori: Multidimensional understanding, assessment, and future international perspectives". Psychiatry and Clinical Neurosciences. 73 (8): 427–440. doi:10.1111/pcn.12895. PMID 31148350. S2CID 171093449.
  172. ^ a b "New York sues TikTok, Instagram and YouTube over 'addictive' platforms for children". The Guardian. February 15, 2024.
  173. ^ Smith, Thomas Goodwin (October 22, 2023). "Carroll, Frederick schools pursue lawsuits against social media companies, alleging damage to students". Baltimore Sun.
  174. ^ Fitzgerald, Tom (October 24, 2023). "DC, Maryland, Virginia sue Facebook, Instagram for fueling kids' 'addiction' to social media". Fox5 Washington DC.

Further reading[edit]