Inclusion of gaming disorder in ICD has more advantages than disadvantages

Orsolya Király, Z. Demetrovics

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

16 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

This paper is a response to a recent debate paper in which Aarseth et al. argue that the inclusion of a formal diagnosis and categories for problematic video gaming or Gaming Disorder (GD) in the World Health Organization's 11th Revision of the International Classification of Diseases (ICD-11) is premature and therefore the proposal should be removed. The present authors systematically address all the six main arguments presented by Aarseth et al. and argue that, even though some of the concerns presented in the debate paper are legitimate, the inclusion of GD in ICD-11 has more advantages than disadvantages. Furthermore, the present authors also argue that the two GD subtypes ("GD, predominantly online" and "GD, predominantly offline") are unnecessary and rather problematic; the main category for GD would be perfectly sufficient.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)280-284
Number of pages5
JournalJournal of Behavioral Addictions
Volume6
Issue number3
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Jan 1 2017

Fingerprint

International Classification of Diseases

Keywords

  • Diagnosis
  • DSM-5
  • Gaming disorder
  • ICD-11
  • Problematic gaming
  • Video game addiction

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Medicine (miscellaneous)
  • Clinical Psychology
  • Psychiatry and Mental health

Cite this

Inclusion of gaming disorder in ICD has more advantages than disadvantages. / Király, Orsolya; Demetrovics, Z.

In: Journal of Behavioral Addictions, Vol. 6, No. 3, 01.01.2017, p. 280-284.

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

@article{9fee468070fe4c078e772983321619f0,
title = "Inclusion of gaming disorder in ICD has more advantages than disadvantages",
abstract = "This paper is a response to a recent debate paper in which Aarseth et al. argue that the inclusion of a formal diagnosis and categories for problematic video gaming or Gaming Disorder (GD) in the World Health Organization's 11th Revision of the International Classification of Diseases (ICD-11) is premature and therefore the proposal should be removed. The present authors systematically address all the six main arguments presented by Aarseth et al. and argue that, even though some of the concerns presented in the debate paper are legitimate, the inclusion of GD in ICD-11 has more advantages than disadvantages. Furthermore, the present authors also argue that the two GD subtypes ({"}GD, predominantly online{"} and {"}GD, predominantly offline{"}) are unnecessary and rather problematic; the main category for GD would be perfectly sufficient.",
keywords = "Diagnosis, DSM-5, Gaming disorder, ICD-11, Problematic gaming, Video game addiction",
author = "Orsolya Kir{\'a}ly and Z. Demetrovics",
year = "2017",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1556/2006.6.2017.046",
language = "English",
volume = "6",
pages = "280--284",
journal = "Journal of Behavioral Addictions",
issn = "2062-5871",
publisher = "Akademiai Kiado",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Inclusion of gaming disorder in ICD has more advantages than disadvantages

AU - Király, Orsolya

AU - Demetrovics, Z.

PY - 2017/1/1

Y1 - 2017/1/1

N2 - This paper is a response to a recent debate paper in which Aarseth et al. argue that the inclusion of a formal diagnosis and categories for problematic video gaming or Gaming Disorder (GD) in the World Health Organization's 11th Revision of the International Classification of Diseases (ICD-11) is premature and therefore the proposal should be removed. The present authors systematically address all the six main arguments presented by Aarseth et al. and argue that, even though some of the concerns presented in the debate paper are legitimate, the inclusion of GD in ICD-11 has more advantages than disadvantages. Furthermore, the present authors also argue that the two GD subtypes ("GD, predominantly online" and "GD, predominantly offline") are unnecessary and rather problematic; the main category for GD would be perfectly sufficient.

AB - This paper is a response to a recent debate paper in which Aarseth et al. argue that the inclusion of a formal diagnosis and categories for problematic video gaming or Gaming Disorder (GD) in the World Health Organization's 11th Revision of the International Classification of Diseases (ICD-11) is premature and therefore the proposal should be removed. The present authors systematically address all the six main arguments presented by Aarseth et al. and argue that, even though some of the concerns presented in the debate paper are legitimate, the inclusion of GD in ICD-11 has more advantages than disadvantages. Furthermore, the present authors also argue that the two GD subtypes ("GD, predominantly online" and "GD, predominantly offline") are unnecessary and rather problematic; the main category for GD would be perfectly sufficient.

KW - Diagnosis

KW - DSM-5

KW - Gaming disorder

KW - ICD-11

KW - Problematic gaming

KW - Video game addiction

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85031745682&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85031745682&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1556/2006.6.2017.046

DO - 10.1556/2006.6.2017.046

M3 - Review article

AN - SCOPUS:85031745682

VL - 6

SP - 280

EP - 284

JO - Journal of Behavioral Addictions

JF - Journal of Behavioral Addictions

SN - 2062-5871

IS - 3

ER -