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 Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Many psychometric instruments assessing the risk of developing various behavioral addictions have been developed over the past decade based upon Griffiths’ ‘components model of addiction’ (1). This paper briefly examines the evolution of the components model and argues that some of the components are not “peripheral” to addiction (as some have argued) but that the problem lies in the operationalization of some of these components in many psychometric instruments (because items in such instruments do not necessarily include negative wordings in operationalizing the components). The paper also argues that the confirmatory approach for identifying those at risk of behavioral addictions (i.e., classifying behaviors on the basis of criteria of substance use disorders or behavioral addictions such as gambling disorder) is the best way to unify to the behavioral addiction field rather than bespoke idiosyncratic criteria.

The evolution of the ‘components model of addiction’ and the need for a confirmatory approach in conceptualizing behavioral addictions