ArticleJournal of behavioral addictions2015
Commentary on: Are we overpathologizing everyday life? A tenable blueprint for behavioral addiction research. Can the emerging domain of behavioral addictions bring a new reflection for the field of addictions, by stressing the issue of the context of addiction development?
Article in Journal of behavioral addictions, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Too many swipes for today: The development of the Problematic Tinder Use Scale (PTUS).Journal of behavioral addictions · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
- Comment on
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis paper is a commentary to the article entitled: "Are we overpathologizing everyday life? A tenable blueprint for behavioral addiction research", by Billieux, Schimmenti, Khazaal, Maurage and Heeren (2015). METHODS AND
aimsIn this manuscript, we commented on two aspects developed by the authors. Billieux et al. (2015) propose that the recent development of propositions of behavioral addiction is driven by an unwise application of an addiction model to excessive behaviors and rests on a confirmatory research strategy that does not question the psychological processes underlying the development of the conduct. They also show that applying a process driven strategy leads to a more appropriate description of the reality of the behavior and conduct, in particular by describing a variety of motivations for the excessive behavior, which is central to understanding the nature of the conduct. We believe that this new approach, which is fruitful to the emerging domain of behavioral addictions, could also apply to the domain of addictions in general. The latter is characterized by the application of a generic biological model, largely influenced by animal models, focusing on neurophysiological determinants of addiction. This approach may have decreased the attention paid to dimensions of addictions that are more specifically human. We will firstly briefly argue on the limitation of this neurophysiological addiction model for the field of excessive behavioral conducts. Secondly, we will argue for an approach centered on the differentiation of motivations and on the adaptive dimension of the behavior when it first developed and on the evocation of a transition where the conduct became independent of its original function.
conclusionsThe emerging domain of behavioral addictions, where no animal model has been developed so far, may bring a new reflection that may apply to the domain of addictions in general, with a specific attention to human questions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.