English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

The recent commentary paper by Ryding and Kaye Journal of Mental Health and Addictio n (doi 10.1007/s11469-017-9811-6, 2017) rightly claimed that "internet addiction" (IA) is a conceptual minefield and raised some important issues for researchers and treatment providers working in the online addiction field. In the present commentary paper, some of the assertions made by Ryding and Kaye are briefly critiqued and extended. More specifically, the present paper (i) examines IA and Internet-based addictions and argues that IA is now a misnomer, (ii) examines IA and its relationship to Internet Gaming Disorder (IGD) and argues IA and IGD are two completely different constructs, and that IGD is a sub-type of gaming disorder rather than a sub-type of IA, (iii) argues that the time spent engaging in online activities is not a good criterion for assessing online addictions and that the context of use is far more important criterion, and (iv) argues that those researchers working in the IA field can learn a lot from the problem gambling field in collecting robust data. More specifically, one of the innovative ways forward could be to build strategic partnerships with commercial online companies to analyze their behavioral tracking data.

Conceptual Issues Concerning Internet Addiction and Internet Gaming Disorder: Further Critique on Ryding and Kaye (2017)