Cited by 242Impact of Technology on AdolescentsGambling Behavior and TreatmentsSexuality, Behavior, and Technology

High Involvement Versus Pathological Involvement in Video Games: a Crucial Distinction for Ensuring the Validity and Utility of Gaming Disorder

Billieux, Joël, Flayelle, Maèva, Rumpf, Hans-Jürgen, Stein, Dan J.·2019·Current Addiction Reports

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s40429-019-00259-x

Cites

60 of 60 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Billieux, J., Flayelle, M., Rumpf, H.-J., & Stein, D. J.
Affiliations
  • University of Luxembourg (LU)
  • University of Lübeck (DE)
  • South African Medical Research Council (ZA)
Corresponding author
Billieux, Joël
Venue
Current Addiction Reports
Published
2019-05-23
Volume
6
Issue
3
Pages
323-330
ISSN
2196-2952 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2946062009
Cited by
242
References
60
Citations by year
2026: 27 · 2025: 47 · 2024: 32 · 2023: 33 · 2022: 35 · 2021: 40 · 2020: 24 · 2019: 4
FWCI
48.55
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Current Addiction Reports (publishedVersion)
  • Open Repository and Bibliography (University of Luxembourg) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Impact of Technology on Adolescents
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Gambling Behavior and Treatments
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Sexuality, Behavior, and Technology
Keywords
gaming disorder, gaming addiction, ICD-11, diagnostic validity, overdiagnosis, functional disability, problem gaming

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review