> The effects of increased internet usage could be seen before reaching that stage.
But that's true of any addiction - alcohol, drug, gambling, etc. You can see the effects before it reaches the extreme stage.
But that's true of any addiction - alcohol, drug, gambling, etc. You can see the effects before it reaches the extreme stage.
But I'm not sure an addiction to reading, or an addiction to painting, would necessarily have the same negative effect. Sure, an obsessive addiction where you can't do anything else, but that isn't what's discussed here.
I'd hypothesise some addictions have a worse effect on study skills than others.
This has the disadvantage that it is near-totally unrelated to what most people think of as "addiction". But it has the advantage that it is a coherent concept, which isn't true of most offered definitions.
In the vernacular, "addiction" just means that you disapprove of someone's behavior.
In medicine outside psychiatry, "addiction" refers to the phenomenon of physical withdrawal symptoms in the absence of something. For no particularly good reason, you are not considered to be addicted to oxygen. But that's not part of the definition, it's an implied codicil.
Psychiatry defines a single "addictive disorder", which is compulsive gambling. Nothing else is considered addictive. This seems to be a response to the fact that no one has ever provided a workable definition of addiction. (See e.g. https://www.porticonetwork.ca/web/fundamentals-addiction-too... : "The term addiction is no longer used to describe substance use disorders. It was felt that the term was so loaded with associations that it lacked precision.") This comic ( http://www.smbc-comics.com/comic/2014-03-21 ) provides an amusing illustration of the issues. But for a less irreverent joke at psychiatry's expense, this formal paper ( https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5328289/ ) spends some time making fun of the fact that compulsive gambling is the unique "addictive disorder" while compulsive stealing, which is mostly identical except in the specific behavior expressed, is an "impulse control disorder".
Here's how the different systems classify caffeine:
Vernacular: addictive if you're a Mormon; not otherwise.
Economics: not addictive; no increasing returns.
Medicine: addictive. (Withdrawal causes severe headaches.)
Psychiatry: not a substance use disorder. (Consumption of caffeine may be compulsive, but it is not a "disorder", itself not a well-defined term.)
I suggest to you that the definition you provided, "a behavior that impairs other aspects of your life to a large degree", comes from psychiatry, but is actually part of the definition of a "disorder", not an "addiction".
Addiction Medicine (ADM) is a recognized physician subspecialty of the American Board of Medical Specialties. [1]
Addiction is a treatable, chronic medical disease involving complex interactions among brain circuits, genetics, the environment, and an individual’s life experiences. People with addiction use substances or engage in behaviors that become compulsive and often continue despite harmful consequences. [2]
Dependence or physical dependence is used in the psychopharmacological context in a narrower sense, referring solely to the development of withdrawal symptoms on cessation of drug use. [3]
[1] https://www.drugabuse.gov/nidamed-medical-health-professiona...
[2] https://www.asam.org/resources/definition-of-addiction
[3] https://www.who.int/substance_abuse/terminology/definition1/...
A good psychiatrist uses the ICD and DSM as a guide and not as a rule. The two key factors that contribute to a gaming disorder, according to ICD-11 are:
1. increasing priority given to gaming to the extent that gaming takes precedence over other life interests and daily activities; and
2. continuation or escalation of gaming despite the occurrence of negative consequences. The behaviour pattern is of sufficient severity to result in significant impairment in personal, family, social, educational, occupational or other important areas of functioning.
This can be applied to many things reasonably. Each is not going to get its own category as an addictive disorder. A good psychiatrist would, however, still be able to identify that there may be a problem if these two conditions are met for a different activity.
That aside, I'd like to congratulate you on how non-confrontational your comment was, making it easier for me to reply that you've taught me something. I will try to emulate that in my comments in the future.
If I'm addictive to romance novels at the expense of my studies I think it would have the same negative effect.
I'm just saying the title isn't completely click-baity.
You can see the bad effects on people on their way to extreme addiction. There is a difference between that and the vast majority of ordinary users of the internet. It's like the difference between someone who plays the lotto once in a while or drinks on special occasions vs people on their way to gambling or alcohol addiction.
> I'm just saying the title isn't completely click-baity.
The title is clickbait. Sciencedaily is well known for doing that as they take science press releases and fluff it up in order to get traffic. I guess in this tough media environment, you can't blame them since everyone clickbaits.
The internet doesn't reduce study skills. Problematic internet use does. So the title is absolutely clickbait since most people who use the internet aren't affected.