The development and psychometric evaluation of the Internet Disorder Scale (IDS-15)

Abstract

was assessed by means of factorial, convergent, and discriminant validity. Criterionrelated validity and reliability were also investigated. Additionally, latent profile analysis (LPA) was carried out to differentiate and characterize Internet users based on their potential IA risk. Results: The construct and criterion-related validity of the IDS-15 were both warranted. The IDS-15 proved to be a valid and reliable tool. Using the LPA, participants were classed as "low addiction risk" (n = 183, 18.2%), "medium addiction risk" (n = 456, 41.1%), and "high addiction risk" (n = 455, 40.77%).Furthermore, key differences emerged among these classes in terms of age, relationship status, cigarette consumption, weekly Internet usage, age of Internet use initiation, and IDS-15 total scores. Conclusions: The present findings support the viability of using adapted IGD criteria as a framework to assess IA.

Individual Differences and the Development of Internet Addiction

“…Accordingly, a recent study by Pontes and Griffiths (2017) on a large sample of Internet users found that the concept of IA could be adequately captured and operationalized using the diagnostic framework for Internet Gaming Disorder (IGD) that was developed by the American Psychiatric Association [APA] in the latest (fifth) edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5) (APA, 2013). Based on this, the study by Pontes and Griffiths (2017) found that under these theoretical premises, the phenomenon of IA can be defined by four unique and distinct conceptual dimensions, with these being: (i) escapism and dysfunctional emotional coping, (ii) withdrawal symptoms, (iii) impairments and dysfunctional self-regulation, and (iv) dysfunctional Internet-related self-control. Additional empirical research by Pontes and Griffiths (2016) have further corroborated the validity and feasibility for conceptualizing and framing IA in light of the IGD diagnostic criteria, an approach that has been backed up by several scholars in the field (e.g., Rumpf et al, 2015).…”

The Development and Psychometric Properties of the Internet Disorder Scale–Short Form (IDS9-SF)

“…Even though the knowledge base of IA and its neurobiological correlates has progressed considerably over the past 15 years (Pontes et al, 2015), research in this field comes with a caveat in terms of the definition and characterization of this phenomenon, ultimately leading to inadequate psychometric assessment on the basis of extant assessment tools (Pontes & Griffiths, 2015a). For instance, a review conducted by Király, Nagygyörgy, Koronczai, Griffiths, and Demetrovics (2014) on the nine most used instruments for assessing IA found several inconsistencies and limitations.…”

“…The review also found that while the factor structure information of some instruments were not consistently reported, they generally comprised between one and seven factors, and only a few psychometric properties were assessed. Although the theoretical framework proposed by the APA for IGD confusingly refers to both online and offline gaming addiction, several recent studies on technological addictions (e.g., Cho et al, 2014;Pontes & Griffiths, 2015a;van den Eijnden, Lemmens, & Valkenburg, 2016) have adapted the IGD theoretical framework to understand other potential behavioral addictions. This provides an opportunity to formally standardize the operational definition of the main construct under investigation and potentially unify the area in terms of psychometric assessment by adopting an agreed upon assessment criteria, which is key for advancing the field.…”

“…To the best of the authors' knowledge, only two studies (i.e., Cho et al, 2014;Pontes & Griffiths, 2015a) have used this strategy to develop IA psychometric tools. Although other researchers have suggested it might be beneficial to adopt such an approach to understand and assess IA (e.g., Rumpf et al, 2015), little research has addressed this issue, and the existing evidence remains unclear.…”

“…This provides an opportunity to formally standardize the operational definition of the main construct under investigation and potentially unify the area in terms of psychometric assessment by adopting an agreed upon assessment criteria, which is key for advancing the field. The IGD framework proposed by the APA has helped researchers develop numerous psychometric instruments for a number of different technological addictions, such as gaming addiction (e.g., Pontes & Griffiths, 2015b;Pontes, Király, Demetrovics, & Griffiths, 2014), social networking addiction (e.g., van den Eijnden et al, 2016), and generalized IA (Cho et al, 2014;Pontes & Griffiths, 2015a).…”