Predictive power of the DSM-5 criteria for internet use disorder: A CHAID decision-tree analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction Although the majority of internet users enjoy the internet as a recreational activity, some individuals report problematic internet use behaviors causing negative psychosocial consequences. Therefore, it is important to have precise and valid diagnostic criteria to ensure suitable treatment for those affected and avoid over-pathologization. Methods The aim of the present study was to determine which of the nine DSM-5 criteria of internet gaming disorder (IGD) are crucial in distinguish pathological from non-pathological internet use based on the questionnaire-based response behavior of the participants by applying the Chi-squared automatic interaction detection (CHAID) decision tree analysis. Under consideration of the nine DSM-5 criteria for IGD and according to the short-form scale to assess Internet Gaming Disorder (IGDS-SF9) the DSM-5 criteria were formulated as questions and applied to the broader concept of Internet Use Disorder (IUD). The nine questions were answered on a 5-point Likert scale from “never” to “very often.” In accordance with the IGDS-SF9 participants were assigned to IUD-5plus if at least 5 of the 9 criteria were answered with “very often.” The study was conducted in Germany ( N = 37,008; mean age : 32 years, SD = 13.18, 73.8% male). Results Although “loss of control,” “continued overuse” and “mood regulation” were the most endorsed criteria, the analysis indicated that the criterion “jeopardizing” was found as the best predictor for IUD-5plus, followed by “loss of interest” and “continued overuse.” Overall 64.9% of all participants who were in the IUD-5plus, could been identified by the fulfillment of the three criteria mentioned above. Discussion The results found support for adjustment of the DSM-5 criteria of IGD in accordance to ICD-11. If the predictive power of the three criteria can be replicated in future representative studies, such a decision tree can be used as guidance for diagnostics to capture the particularly relevant criteria.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".