How to pin a compulsive behavior down: A systematic review and conceptual synthesis of compulsivity-sensitive items in measures of behavioral addiction.

Experimental models identify the transition from choice to compulsivity as the main mechanism underlying addiction. In behavioral addictions research, however, the adjective compulsive is used to describe virtually any kind of excessive or dysregulated behavior, which hinders the connection between experimental and clinical models. In this systematic review, we adopted a preliminary definition of compulsive behavior based on previous theoretical work. Subsequently, a systematic review following PRISMA guidelines was conducted (a) to identify the validated instruments, currently used in behavioral addictions research, that include items that are sensitive (intendedly or not) to compulsivity, and (b) to categorize those items into differentiable operationalizations of compulsivity. Six operationalizations of compulsivity emerged from item content analysis: 1. Automatic or habitual behavior occurring in absence of conscious instrumental goals; 2. Behavior insensitive to negative consequences despite conscious awareness of them; 3. Overwhelming urge or desire that impels the individual to initiate the activity and jeopardizes control attempts; 4. Bingeing, or inability to stop or interrupt the activity once initiated, resulting in an episode substantially longer or more intense than intended; 5. Attentional capture and cognitive hijacking; and 6. Inflexible rules, stereotyped behaviors, and rituals related to task completion or execution. Subsequently, a list of 15 representative items per operationalization was elaborated for independent assessment and identification of delimitation problems. A high degree of agreement was reached in assessing them as instantiating compulsivity, as well as in their assignment to the corresponding categories. However, many of them were also considered overinclusive, i.e., uncapable of distinguishing compulsivity from value-based momentary choice. To increase their discriminative value, items in future compulsivity scales should be refined to explicitly mention disconnection between behavior and declarative goals. Further research on factorial structure of a pool of items derived from these operational definitions is warranted. Such a factorial structure could be used as an intermediate link between specific behavioral items and explanatory psychobiological, learning, and cognitive mechanisms.