Black Swan wrote: » Could someone deconstruct the theories applied, or empirical research cited, or diagnoses used (to define, measure, explain, predict, or treat Internet addiction)?
Fathom wrote: » He's a hard read
mzungu wrote: » Indeed, navel gazing for the sake of navel gazing. Don't get me wrong, I would not discount all of what he says, and he does have interesting ideas to offer,
mzungu wrote: » but I think Popper probably offered us a more "useful" philosophy....
mzungu wrote: » certainly for the purposes of this thread.
Fathom wrote: » Popper theory. Derrida method.
mzungu wrote: » In short, internet addiction may very well be quietly taken out the list of disorders in years to come. The evidence for its existence would not pass Popper's test.
Fathom wrote: » Jacques Derrida held a joint appointment at our university up until his 2004 death. We have all his works in our library. Can't recall reading about any deconstruction of the Internet or associated addiction. He's a hard read, and I have not read all his works. Could of missed it.
mzungu wrote: » Popper would have a good bit more to say than Derrida!
Fathom wrote: » Still reading Popper. I could misinterpret his signature per Jacques Derrida.
mzungu wrote: » Yes, that answers it perfectly. Thank you
Fathom wrote: » Karl Popper's theory of demarcation. Almost any theory can obtain favorable evidence, including those that pertain to Internet addiction. Falsifiability is an approach that should be framed in scientific methods. Proceeds by attempts to refute or falsify theories, models, and explanations. Counter instances are important in that they challenge prevailing notions, and in our case, questioning if Internet addiction is myth. Uncertain if that answers your question. Only my 2-cents.
Fathom wrote: » Reading Karl Popper. Leaving door open to falsifiability?
mzungu wrote: » Interesting. I am not sure I would go down the path of it being a myth,
Black Swan wrote: » Or is there the myth of Internet addiction akin to the suggestions of Thomas S. Szasz?
mzungu wrote: » Question is, did internet use bring on the addiction, or was there an addictive personality there prior?
Fathom wrote: » Mark Griffiths reported little rigorous empirical evidence that suggested Internet use was addictive. Studies often used anecdotal evidence. Case studies. Method cannot be generalized to population. Source: Mark Griffiths, Does Internet and Computer "Addiction" Exist? Some Case Study Evidence, CyberPsychology & BehaviorVol. 3, No. 2, Published Online:5 Jul 2004.
Fathom wrote: » Outdated DSM-4 criteria for substance use disorders or pathological gambling were adopted in DSM-5. Assessment criteria specific to Internet gaming is needed in terms of content, context, time, etc., with some proposed in DSM-5 making little sense. Source: Daniel Kardefelt-Winther, A critical account of DSM-5 criteria for internet gaming disorder, Addiction Research & Theory, Volume 23, 2015 - Issue 2 Published Online: 03 Jul 2014.
Black Swan wrote: » Facebook Addiction yet another variation of the larger Internet addiction? Slicing the pie?
Black Swan wrote: » A little contrary evidence to balance out this discussion?
Black Swan wrote: » Huang Xiuqin,, et al., Mental Health, Personality, and Parental Rearing Styles of Adolescents with Internet Addiction Disorder, Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social NetworkingVol. 13, No. 4, 16 Aug 2010.
Adolescents with IAD consistently rated parental rearing behaviors as being over-intrusive, punitive, and lacking in responsiveness.
Fathom wrote: » Black Swan has me reading One-Dimensional Man (H Marcuse). Applies here to Internet addiction. Techno-society expectation.
mzungu wrote: » A ban on adults using smartphones is next on the list!