College of Education, Psychology and Social Work, Flinders University, Adelaide, Australia.
School of Psychology, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, Australia.
Addiction. 2023 Sep;118(9):1687-1698. doi: 10.1111/add.16211. Epub 2023 May 10.
The inclusion of gaming disorder (GD) in the International Classification of Diseases 11th Revision (ICD-11) has generated scholarly debate, including claims about its potential stigmatizing effects on the wider gaming population. The present study aimed to estimate the effect of addiction-based and non-addiction-based conceptualizations of problem gaming on stigma of gamers.
This preregistered experiment involved a 2 (health information: addiction-related or non-addiction-related) × 3 (vignette: problem, regular or casual gamer) randomized, between-subjects design.
An international sample of participants was recruited via Prolific in June and July 2021.
Participants were eligible (n = 1228) if they were aged 35 to 50 years, played video games for no more than 6 hours per week and did not endorse DSM-5 or ICD-11 criteria for GD.
Participants were provided with an explanation of problem gaming as related to either an addictive disorder (i.e. 'addiction' explanation) or personal choice and lifestyle factors (i.e. 'non-addiction' explanation).
The Attribution Questionnaire (AQ) and Universal Stigma Scale (USS) assessed stigma toward each gamer vignette. Vignettes described a problem gamer (with features of GD); a regular gamer (frequent gaming; some life interference); and a casual gamer (infrequent gaming; no life interference).
Problem gamer vignettes (mean [M] = 113.3; 95% CI = 111.5-115.4) received higher AQ stigma ratings than regular (M = 94.0; 95% CI = 91.9-95.9) and casual gamers (M = 80.1; 95% CI = 78.2-82.1). Although significant, the effect of health information type on AQ stigma ratings was negligible (addiction group [M = 97.6; 95% CI = 95.9-99.1], non-addiction group [M = 94.1; 95% CI = 92.6-95.8]). However, the addiction information group scored lower on USS blame and responsibility than the non-addiction information group with at least a small effect (99.1% confidence).
Framing of problem gaming as an addictive disorder or non-addictive activity appears to have a negligible effect on stigma of different gamers among middle-age adults with minimal gaming experience. The concept of 'gaming addiction' seems unlikely to be an important influence on public stigma of gaming.
游戏障碍（GD）被纳入《国际疾病分类》第 11 版（ICD-11）引发了学术争议，包括对更广泛游戏人群可能产生污名化影响的说法。本研究旨在评估基于成瘾和非成瘾的游戏问题概念化对游戏者污名的影响。
这是一项预先注册的实验，采用 2（健康信息：与成瘾相关或与成瘾无关）×3（小插曲：问题、常规或休闲玩家）随机、被试间设计。
通过 Prolific 于 2021 年 6 月至 7 月招募国际参与者。
如果参与者年龄在 35 至 50 岁之间、每周玩视频游戏不超过 6 小时且不符合 DSM-5 或 ICD-11 的 GD 标准，则有资格参加（n=1228）。
向参与者提供与成瘾障碍相关的游戏问题（即“成瘾”解释）或个人选择和生活方式因素（即“非成瘾”解释）的解释。
归因问卷（AQ）和通用污名量表（USS）评估每个游戏玩家小插曲的污名。小插曲描述了一个有问题的游戏玩家（有 GD 的特征）；一个常规游戏玩家（经常玩游戏；有些生活干扰）；和一个休闲游戏玩家（不常玩游戏；没有生活干扰）。
问题游戏玩家小插曲（均值[M]=113.3；95%CI=111.5-115.4）比常规（M=94.0；95%CI=91.9-95.9）和休闲游戏玩家（M=80.1；95%CI=78.2-82.1）获得更高的 AQ 污名评分。尽管存在显著差异，但健康信息类型对 AQ 污名评分的影响可以忽略不计（成瘾组[M=97.6；95%CI=95.9-99.1]，非成瘾组[M=94.1；95%CI=92.6-95.8]）。然而，与非成瘾信息组相比，成瘾信息组在 USS 责任和指责方面的得分较低，具有至少小的影响（99.1%置信区间）。
将游戏问题框定为成瘾障碍或非成瘾活动，似乎对具有最小游戏经验的中年成年人中不同游戏玩家的污名影响可以忽略不计。“游戏成瘾”的概念不太可能对游戏的公众污名产生重要影响。
