Assignment 2: Other Addictive Behaviors In Looking At The Di
Assignment 2 Other Addictive Behaviorsin Looking At The Diagnostic Cr
Assignment 2: Other Addictive Behaviors In looking at the diagnostic criteria for substance use disorders, many clinicians and researchers believe that these criteria could be applied to behaviors outside of substance use to classify other addictive behaviors. To this end, gambling disorder was added as a diagnostic classification in the DSM -5. Imagine that you are on the next DSM revision committee. What addictive behavior (not including substance use or gambling) would you lobby to include as a diagnostic classification? Explain your reasoning for including this addictive behavior.
Use your textbook and the Argosy University online library resources to support your position.
Paper For Above instruction
The expansion of diagnostic categories within the DSM-5 reflects a growing recognition of behavioral addictions that resemble substance use disorders in their clinical presentation and neurobiological underpinnings. While gambling disorder was the first behavioral addiction to receive formal recognition, ongoing research suggests that other behaviors may also warrant inclusion to better address their impact on individuals and society. One such behavior that I would advocate for inclusion as a formal behavioral addiction is problematic internet use, often referred to as internet addiction or problematic online behavior. This phenomenon has gained significant attention over the past decade, accompanied by increasing empirical evidence supporting its classification as a behavioral addiction with clinical relevance.
Problematic internet use involves excessive or poorly controlled preoccupations, urges, or behaviors regarding internet engagement that lead to significant impairment or distress (Young, 1998). Similar to substance use disorders, individuals with internet addiction often report a preoccupation with online activities, withdrawal symptoms when not engaged, tolerance effects as they seek increasingly time-consuming or stimulating online experiences, and persistent use despite negative consequences (Kuss & Griffiths, 2017). The diversity of activities encompassed—such as social media, online gaming, and compulsive browsing—reflects its multifaceted nature, akin to the variety seen in substance use or gambling disorders (Kardefelt-Winther, 2014).
Neurobiologically, research suggests that problematic internet use involves dysregulation of reward pathways, specifically alterations in dopaminergic systems associated with reinforcement and motivation (Dong et al., 2018). Studies involving neuroimaging demonstrate that individuals with internet addiction exhibit brain activity patterns similar to those observed in substance dependence, such as impaired prefrontal cortex functioning that affects impulse control (Yao et al., 2017). These findings support the conceptualization of internet addiction as a compulsive behavior with neurochemical overlaps to other addictions.
Clinically, problematic internet use shares many features with established addictive disorders, including craving, functional impairment, and unsuccessful attempts to reduce use (Widyanto & Griffiths, 2006). It also tends to interfere with academic, occupational, and social functioning, leading to significant distress (Ko et al., 2009). Given its prevalence—affecting adolescents and adults worldwide—and its association with mental health conditions such as depression, anxiety, and ADHD, recognizing internet addiction as a formal disorder could facilitate better diagnosis, treatment, and research.
Adding internet addiction as a recognized behavioral disorder in future DSM revisions would have several benefits. It would validate sufferers' experiences, promote the development of targeted interventions, and encourage insurance coverage for treatment. Moreover, formal recognition could stimulate further research into its neurobiological basis and effective therapies, similar to what occurred with gambling disorder (Petry & Billings, 2015). Critics suggest that caution is necessary to avoid pathologizing normal behavior; however, clear diagnostic criteria can mitigate this risk by distinguishing between healthy and maladaptive patterns.
In conclusion, problematic internet use presents compelling similarities to recognized addictive disorders in terms of clinical features, neurobiological mechanisms, and societal impact. A formal classification within the DSM would enhance understanding, diagnosis, and treatment of this pervasive issue, ultimately contributing to improved mental health outcomes in an increasingly digital world.
References
Dong, G., Wang, Z., Du, X., & Zhou, X. (2018). Cognitive control and internet addiction: The role of the prefrontal cortex. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 87, 153-169.
Kardefelt-Winther, D. (2014). A conceptual and methodological critique of internet addiction research: Towards interdisciplinary dialogue. Addiction Research & Theory, 22(3), 206-217.
Kuss, D. J., & Griffiths, M. D. (2017). Social networking sites and addiction: ten lessons learned. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 14(3), 311.
Ko, C. H., Yen, J. Y., Chen, C. S., Chen, S. H., & Weng, C. C. (2009). Dependence of Internet pornography use and its association with psychological distress and interpersonal relationships. Cyberpsychology & Behavior, 12(5), 531-534.
Petry, N. M., & Billings, R. L. (2015). Behavioral addictions. In M. R. Gold (Ed.), Clinical Manual of Prevention and Treatment of Substance Abuse (pp. 123-135). American Psychiatric Publishing.
Widyanto, L., & Griffiths, M. (2006). “Internet addiction”: A critical review. International Journal of Mental Health and Substance Abuse, 4(1), 1-17.
Yao, D., Nie, J., Zhang, Z., & Wang, L. (2017). Brain structural abnormalities in internet addiction disorder: A meta-analysis of voxel-based morphometry studies. Progress in Neuro-Psychopharmacology and Biological Psychiatry, 82, 23-31.
Young, K. S. (1998). Internet addiction: The emergence of a new clinical disorder. Cyberpsychology & Behavior, 1(3), 237–244.