1Department of General Psychology, University of Padova, Padova, Italy.
2Department of Psychiatry, The Second Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, China.
J Behav Addict. 2020 Nov 2;9(4):938-941. doi: 10.1556/2006.2020.00077.
This commentary addresses a recent article by Montag et al. (2019) about the relevance of distinguishing between mobile and non-mobile Internet Use Disorder (IUD). In response to the review, we reflect on the clinical relevance of this distinction and, in parallel, we propose some Pavlovian conditioning processes as possible mechanisms underlying different IUDs. We believe that, from a clinical point of view, it is of fundamental importance assessing both specific "forms" of IUDs and the underlying mechanisms that would be shared across different IUDs, like multiple and parallel classes of Pavlovian responses and the influences of Internet cues on Internet-related addictive behaviors that may be influenced by the probability of obtaining Internet rewards.
这篇评论针对 Montag 等人(2019 年)最近发表的一篇关于区分移动和非移动互联网使用障碍(IUD)相关性的文章。针对这篇综述,我们思考了这种区分的临床意义,同时,我们提出了一些巴甫洛夫条件反射过程作为不同 IUD 的可能机制。我们认为,从临床角度来看,评估特定的“形式”的 IUD 和潜在的机制是至关重要的,这些机制将在不同的 IUD 中共享,如多个和并行的巴甫洛夫反应类和互联网线索对互联网相关成瘾行为的影响,这可能受到获得互联网奖励的可能性的影响。