游戏障碍和网络赌博障碍中冲动性的因子分析。
Factor analysis of impulsivity in gaming disorder and internet gaming disorder.
机构信息
School of Psychology, Aston University, Birmingham, UK.
School of Psychological, Social and Behavioural Sciences, Coventry University, Coventry, UK.
出版信息
BMC Psychiatry. 2024 Oct 3;24(1):652. doi: 10.1186/s12888-024-06072-9.
BACKGROUND
Research suggests that a two-factor model of impulsivity predicts Substance Use Disorder and Gambling Disorder. We aimed to determine whether a similar factor structure was present for Gaming Disorder (GD) and Internet Gaming Disorder (IGD).
METHODS
Secondary data analysis was conducted on survey responses from 372 participants who had completed a series of questions on facets of impulsivity and their involvement in gaming. Participants were sampled from gaming forums and an online recruitment website. Exploratory factor analysis was conducted on the measures of trait impulsivity, and the identified factors were then analyzed against measures of Gaming Disorder and Internet Gaming Disorder. A confirmatory factor analysis was then run to confirm the model.
RESULTS
The exploratory results suggested a five-factor model of impulsivity, with gaming being related to all five factors. Interestingly, only two of those factors (Urgency (Positive Urgency, Negative Urgency, Delay Discounting) and (Impaired) Inhibitory Control (False Button Presses on Go/No-Go Tasks)) predicted symptom counts above the clinical cut-off for IGD. In addition, Urgency was related to symptom counts above 7/9 criteria for IGD, as well as symptom counts above the suggested clinical cut-off for GD. The confirmatory factor analysis suggested that this two-factor model of impulsivity had 'good fit.'
CONCLUSIONS
This two-factor model of impulsivity is similar to those found in established addiction disorders, in that one factor appears to predict more problematic involvement than the other. However, the results indicate that Urgency predicts higher symptom counts than (Impaired) Inhibitory Control. This contrasts with previous findings on substance use and gambling, where (Impaired) Inhibitory Control was the factor predicting problematic use. However, there was evidence to suggest that gaming is similar to alcohol consumption, where socially acceptable, "healthy," use is related to impulsivity at some level, but Urgency is key in the transition from recreational to disordered behavior.
背景
研究表明，冲动的两因素模型可以预测物质使用障碍和赌博障碍。我们旨在确定类似的因素结构是否存在于游戏障碍（GD）和网络赌博障碍（IGD）中。
方法
对来自 372 名参与者的调查回复进行二次数据分析，这些参与者完成了一系列关于冲动方面和他们参与游戏的问题。参与者是从游戏论坛和在线招聘网站上抽样的。对特质冲动的测量进行探索性因素分析，然后分析确定的因素与游戏障碍和网络赌博障碍的测量结果。然后进行验证性因素分析以确认该模型。
结果
探索性结果表明，冲动存在五因素模型，其中游戏与所有五个因素都有关。有趣的是，只有两个因素（紧迫性（积极紧迫性、消极紧迫性、延迟折扣）和（受损）抑制控制（Go/No-Go 任务中的错误按钮按压））可以预测超过 IGD 临床截止值的症状计数。此外，紧迫性与 IGD 超过 7/9 个标准的症状计数以及 GD 建议的临床截止值以上的症状计数有关。验证性因素分析表明，该冲动的两因素模型具有“良好的拟合度”。
结论
冲动的这种两因素模型与已建立的成瘾障碍相似，因为一个因素似乎比另一个因素更能预测更成问题的参与。然而，结果表明，紧迫性比（受损）抑制控制预测更高的症状计数。这与以前关于物质使用和赌博的发现形成对比，在这些发现中，（受损）抑制控制是预测问题使用的因素。然而，有证据表明，游戏与酒精消费类似，在某种程度上，社交上可接受的“健康”使用与冲动有关，但在从娱乐行为到障碍行为的转变中，紧迫性是关键。
Zotero 插件