Validation of the Ten-Item Internet Gaming Disorder Test (IGDT-10) and evaluation of the nine DSM-5 Internet Gaming Disorder criteria

Abstract

Introduction: The inclusion of Internet gaming disorder (IGD) in the DSM-5 (Section 3) has given rise to much scholarly debate regarding the proposed criteria and their operationalization.The present study's aim was threefold: to (i) develop and validate a brief psychometric instrument (Ten-Item Internet Gaming Disorder Test; IGDT-10) to assess IGD using definitions suggested in DSM-5, (ii) contribute to ongoing debate regards the usefulness and validity of each of the nine IGD criteria (using Item Response Theory [IRT]), and (iii) investigate the cut-off threshold suggested in the DSM-5.Methods: An online gamer sample of 4,887 gamers (age range 14-64 years, mean age 22.2 years [SD=6.4], 92.5% male) was collected through Facebook and a gaming-related website with the cooperation of a popular Hungarian gaming magazine. A shopping voucher of approx. 300 Euros was drawn between participants to boost participation (i.e., lottery incentive). Confirmatory factor analysis and a structural regression model were used to test the psychometric properties of the IGDT-10 and IRT analysis was conducted to test the measurement performance of the nine IGD criteria. Finally, latent class analysis along with sensitivity and specificity analysis were used to investigate the cut-off threshold proposed in the DSM-5.Results: Analysis supported IGDT-10's validity, reliability, and suitability to be used in future research. Findings of the IRT analysis suggest IGD is manifested through a different set of symptoms depending on the level of severity of the disorder. More specifically, "continuation", "preoccupation", "negative consequences" and "escape" were associated with lower severity of IGD, while "tolerance", "loss of control", "giving up other activities" and "deception" criteria were associated with more severe levels. "Preoccupation" and "escape" provided very little information to the estimation IGD severity. Finally, the DSM-5 suggested threshold appeared to be supported by our statistical analyses.Conclusions: IGDT-10 is a valid and reliably instrument to assess IGD as proposed in the DSM-5. Apparently the nine criteria do not explain IGD in the same way, suggesting that additional 2 studies are needed to assess the characteristics and intricacies of each criterion and how they account to explain IGD.

Game Addiction Scale Assessment Through a Nationally Representative Sample of Young Adult Men: Item Response Theory Graded�Response Modeling (Preprint)

“…Specifically, relapse (unsuccessful attempts to stop or reduce), conflict (deceiving others), and withdrawal and problems (loss of interests) were the GAS items with a higher ability to discriminate IGD (endorsed more frequently in more severe IGD stages), whereas the items related to tolerance, salience (preoccupation), and mood modification (escape) were endorsed more widely among participants (included in less severe IGD stages). The results regarding preoccupation and escape were in concordance with those reported in previous studies [59,61] that showed large endorsement of the criteria. As reported in other studies, loss of interests [58,59], unsuccessful attempts to reduce or stop [59], deceiving others [59], and withdrawal [58,59] were more endorsed among participants with more severe IGD.…”

“…The following 4 criteria, described by some authors of core addiction criteria [20,30], received more consensus than the other criteria did: unsuccessful attempts to reduce or stop [4]; loss of interest in previous hobbies or activities [32,58,59]; continue despite problems [4,30,59]; and jeopardized or lost a relationship, job, or educational or career opportunity [59]. When observing such criteria, careful attention must be paid to possible coping motives (ie, related to a depressive disorder) before attributing any such symptoms to addictive behavior [58,60].…”

“…Kiraly et al [59] examined how each IGD criterion performs at different severity levels by using an IRT approach. The results of this analysis demonstrated that some criteria -preoccupation, escape, continue despite problems, and jeopardized or lost a relationship -were endorsed more frequently in less severe IGD stages, whereas other criteria -tolerance, unsuccessful attempts to stop or reduce, loss of interest in previous hobbies or activities, and deceiving others -were reported only in more severe cases.…”

The psychometric properties of the Turkish version of the Internet Gaming Disorder Scale

“…Although IGD is not yet recognized as an official clinical entity (16), several new promising psychometric tools covering the nine IGD criteria have been developed following the formal recognition of this condition by the APA in May 2013 (12)(13)(14)(15)(16)(17)(18)(19)(20)(21).…”

Current practices in the clinical and psychometric assessment of internet gaming disorder in the era of the DSM-5: A mini review of existing assessment tools

“…Although the field of IGD is still in its early infancy, based on the latest progresses the field have witnessed, the following recommendations are made to help move forward and improve future research on IGD: (i) more scientific scrutiny is needed on each IGD criterion in terms of the impact and weight they may carry towards the final diagnosis, (ii) existing assessment tools would greatly benefit from further clinical studies utilizing actual clinically diagnosed samples so more concrete information on the validity and diagnostic properties (e.g., sensitivity, specificity, negative and positive predictive values) of these tools could be gathered, (iii) acquiring further longitudinal evidence on IGD is paramount for understanding the potential etiological mechanisms and clinical course of the disorder, such studies might provide useful evidence supporting the recognition of IGD as an official disorder, and (iv) large-scale nation-wide studies using probability samples and the already available new standardized psychometric tools are needed in order to estimate robust prevalence rates of IGD that can then be contrasted with prevalence rates found elsewhere, and that can be reliably be used by governmental bodies and other stakeholders in the process of policy making and development of adequate treatment protocols needed for this disorder [16,17]. A criterion is endorsed when a participant provides the maximum response possible in that item (i.e., 'Very often').…”