Internet Addiction Disorder: Causes, Symptoms,and Consequences
Jennifer R. Ferris
Psychology
Virginia Tech
jferris@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
growing body of research in the area of addiction suggests that
Internet
Addiction Disorder, a psychophysiological disorder involving
tolerance; withdrawal
symptoms; affective disturbances; and interruption of social
relationships, is a presenting
problem that is becoming more common in society as on-line usage
increases by the day.
With the growing importance of the Internet in everyday life, more and
more people are
accessing various on-line resources each day. The World Wide Web is
informative,
convenient, resourceful, and fun. For some people though--the
addicted--these benefits are
becoming detriments. There are varying opinions on the subject,
especially among those
who utilize the Internet. Some say that the Internet can be
addicting, to the point that it
disturbs one's life and the lives of those around him. Others say
that there is no such thing
as Internet Addiction Disorder-- getting pleasure out of a computer is
not the same as
getting pleasure from cocaine or any other drug. Whether there is or
is not a bona fide
disorder, the Internet is disrupting many people's lives. Who is to
blame for this disorder?
Is it the WWW companies or is it the individual? Whichever (if
either), the solution is not
to outlaw the Internet, as with psychoactive drugs. Simple methods of
prevention do exist
that can reduce the negative effects of Internet use.
DEFINING INTERNET ADDICTION DISORDER
To be diagnosed as having Internet Addiction Disorder, a person must
meet certain
criteria as prescribed by the American Psychiatric Association.
Three or more of these
criteria must be present at any time during a twelve month period:
1. Tolerance: This refers to the need for increasing amounts of
time on the Internet to
achieve satisfaction and/or significantly diminished effect with
continued use of the same
amount of time on the Internet.
2. Two or more withdrawal symptoms developing within days to one
month after
reduction of Internet use or cessation of Internet use (i.e., quitting
cold turkey) , and these
must cause distress or impair social, personal or occupational
functioning. These include:
psychomotor agitation, i.e. trembling, tremors; anxiety; obsessive
thinking about what is
happening on the Internet; fantasies or dreams about the Internet;
voluntary or involuntary
typing movements of the fingers.
3. Use of the Internet is engaged in to relieve or avoid withdrawal
symptoms.
4. The Internet is often accessed more often, or for longer periods
of time than was
intended.
5. A significant amount of time is spent in activities related to
Internet use ( e.g., Internet
books, trying out new World Wide Web browsers, researching Internet
vendors, etc.).
6. Important social, occupational, or recreational activities are
given up or reduced because
of Internet use.
7. The individual risks the loss of a significant relationship, job,
educational or career
opportunity because of excessive use of the Internet.
In recent research, other characteristics have been identified. The
first is feelings of
restlessness or irritability when attempting to cut down or stop
Internet use. The second is
that the Internet is used as a way of escaping problems or relieving
feelings of
helplessness, guilt, anxiety or depression. The third characteristic
is that the user lies to
family members or friends to conceal the extent of involvement with
the Internet. And,
finally, the user returns repeatedly despite excessive fees (Egger &
Rauterberg, 1996).
"ADDICTION" AND INTERNET ADDICTION DISORDER
Bratter and Forest (1985; in Freeman, 1992) define addiction as "a
behavior pattern
of compulsive drug use characterized by overwhelming
involvement...with the use of a
drug and the securing of the supply, as well as the tendency to
relapse after completion of
withdrawal." Like all other addictions, Internet addiction is a
psychophysiological disorder
involving tolerance (the same amount of usage elicits less response;
increased amounts
become necessary to evoke the same amount of pleasure), withdrawal
symptoms
(especially, tremors, anxiety, and moodiness), affective disturbances
(depression,
irritability), and interruption of social relationships (a decline or
loss, either in quality or
quantity).
Due to the nature of Internet Addiction Disorder (failed impulse
control without
involving an intoxicant), of all other addictions, IAD is said to be
closest to pathological
gambling. However, the effects that the addiction can have on every
aspect of the person's
life are just as devastating as those of alcoholism. Kimberly S.
Young, Psy.D., conducted
a study involving nearly 500 heavy Internet users. Their behavior was
compared to the
clinical criteria used to classify pathological gambling as defined by
the Diagnostic and
Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders-IV, published by the American
Psychiatric
Association. Using this criteria, eighty percent of the participants
in the Young's study
were classified as dependent Internet users. They "exhibited
significant addictive behavior
patterns." She concludes that, "the use of the internet can
definitely disrupt one's
academic, social, financial, and occupational life the same way other
well-documented
addictions like pathological gambling, eating disorders, and
alcoholism can" (Young,
1996).
There have been many attempts by medical doctors and psychologists to
explain
addiction disorders. These theories include psychodynamic and
personality explanations,
sociocultural explanations, behavioral explanations, and biomedical
explanations. Not all
explain any addiction perfectly, and some are better than others at
explaining Internet
addiction.
Psychodynamics and Personality
Psychodynamic and personality views account for addiction through
early
childhood traumas, correlations with other certain personality traits
or other disorders, and
inherited psychological dispositions (Sue, 1994). A dispositional
model or diathesis-stress
model of addiction might help in understanding IAD. Certain people,
due to a variety of
factors, may be predisposed (diathesis) to developing an addiction to
something, be it
alcohol, heroin, gambling, sex, shopping, or on-line computer
services. They could go
through their entire lives never developing any kind of addiction. On
the other hand, if the
right stressor, or combination of stressors, affects the person at a
critical time, the person
may be more inclined to develop an addiction. If the person begins
drinking alcohol even
occasionally, but continues to increase consumption, he may develop a
dependency on
alcohol. The same premise holds for Internet addiction. If it is
the right combination of
time, person, and event, then addiction may take place. The idea is
that it is not the activity
or subject that is important. It is the person that is most crucial
to the equation.
Sociocultutral explanations
Addictions vary according to sex, age, socioeconomic status,
ethnicity, religion,
and country. Some addictions are more common among persons of
different categories.
For example, alcoholism is most common in the middle socioeconomic
classes, in Native
and Irish Americans, and in Catholics. Whites are more likely to use
PCP and
hallucinogens, but less likely than Blacks or Latinos to use
heroin(Sue, 1994). Not
enough data is available yet about those persons addicted to the
Internet to determine if a
particular class is most predominant. In addition, at this point
there is not enough diversity
among Internet users to make any definitive statements. As the
diversity among users
increases, and as the amount of research on the problem increases,
hopefully we will know
more about this interesting aspect of addiction with regard to the
Internet.
Behavioral explanations
These explanations are based on B.F. Skinner's studies on operant
conditioning
(Sue, 1994). The person performs a behavior and gets either rewarded
or punished for the
behavior. To illustrate, there might be a child who is painfully shy
and fears meeting new
people. Whenever it is time for recess, he goes off on his own, and
does not play with the
other children. Thus, he avoids having to talk to anyone new, and
consequently avoids the
anxiety associated with new encounters. This avoidance of anxiety is
rewarding and
reinforces his behavior. This means that he is likely to engage in
this behavior (escaping
from the problem) the next recess, or the next time he must meet new
people. This relates
to addiction, and specifically Internet addiction in the following
way: Drugs, alcohol, sex,
gambling, the Internet, and shopping offer many rewards. They offer
love, excitement,
physical, emotional, and material comfort, and the means to escape
from reality. These
can all be rewards. If an individual wants these rewards and learns
that the Internet will
allow him to escape, or receive love, or have a lot of fun, he will
probably turn to the
Internet the next time he feels these needs. This becomes
reinforcing, and the cycle
continues.
Biomedical explanations
These explanations focus on hereditary and congenital factors,
chemical imbalances
in the brain and neurotransmitters. There could be chromosomes,
hormones, and surplus
or lack of certain necessary chemicals and neurotransmitters that
regulate activity in the
brain and the rest of the nervous system. According to this
perspective, this would cause a
someone to be susceptible to addiction (Sue, 1994). . There is
definitive research that
shows that some drugs act to fill in the synaptic gaps of the neurons
in the brain, fooling
the brain into sending out faulty information. This, it is thought,
is one reason for the
"high" one gets from engaging in activities such as running, drug
use, and gambling. This
might apply to Internet addiction, since many opportunities on the
Internet are fun and
exciting.
IS THIS ALL HYPE?
There is debate among users as to whether there really is such an
addiction, and as
to whether it's a bad thing. Some people feel that the Internet is
just a harmless, friendly
tool for gathering information, making new friends, and passing time.
Mental Health Net
sponsors a discussion room about different topics related to mental
health. There were several
responses from people across the United States. Some of the people
agreed that it
is indeed possible to become addicted to the Internet. Others claimed
it was all a farce. One
of the participants, Charity, believes there is no such thing as
Internet Addiction Disorder.
She says there are many activities in life that she gets pleasure from
engaging in, yet she
does not believe she is addicted. She says, "Maybe the computer is
just nicely interactive
in a world of increasingly isolated people. And it's quiet, which is a
very nice thing."
Scribe, another participant, holds that maybe there is such a
disorder, but it may not be all
bad. He says, "...a person may spend a lot of time on the Internet,
as I do, because I have
finally found the 'bottomless' source of information. There is no
last passage to this
reference book, and if I am addicted to anything, it is knowledge...
Are we not all addicted
to something, which keeps us interested in living?" (Mental Health
Net, 1997)
Others such as Young and other psychologists, feel that used in
excess, the Internet
can become hazardous to one's mental and physical health. By
definition, an addiction
does interfere with normal, adaptive functioning. So if someone is
addicted, his or her
functioning is maladaptive. This may manifest itself in a few of the
symptoms classified by
the American Psychiatric Association, or it may manifest itself in all
of them.
The New York Times reported last August about IAD, providing true
stories about
individuals who think they might be addicted. The paper tells the
story of one woman in
the Pacific Northwest who was divorced by her husband because of the
enormous amount
of time she spent in front of her computer. Her fixation with the
Internet apparently caused
her to forget to buy food for her children, to take them to their
doctor appointments, and to
buy enough oil to heat her home. There is also the story of the
seventeen year old boy from
Texas who was suffering from Internet withdrawal symptoms. When he was
brought into
the alcohol and drug rehabilitation center, his body convulsed about,
and he through tables
and chairs around the rooms (Belluck, 1996).
SCAPEGOAT, ANYONE?
It seems obvious that Internet Addiction Disorder does indeed exist.
The question
arises of who, if anyone, is to blame? Should it be the individual
who chooses to
participate in any on-line activity--from research, to chat, to just
"surfing" the Net? A
contemporary and pressing issue involving alcohol, drugs, cigarettes
and even state-
sponsored gambling faces legislatures today. Is it the suppliers of
these addictive
substances and products that should take responsibility for the
problem? LavaMind, a
company that produces computer games, quoted one of their customers in
an advertisement
on their web page. "Why is this thing so damned addictive?" is what
the customer had
written to LavaMind (LavaMind, 1997). Should the programmers and
on-line services
providers, like the drug dealers on the street, or the nicotine fixers
at R.J. Reynolds, or the
Commonwealth of Virginia Lottery marketers be held responsible for how
and how much
people use their products? Not everyone gets addicted to drugs or
the lottery. In fact, it
seems most people who do use the Internet, even in large quantities,
never get addicted. It
is hard to say who, if anyone, should take the blame. Programmers and
service providers
should be responsible enough to create appropriate products, and
provide services in the
ways that best serve the public, while maintaining their
competitiveness. Consumers,
however, should take responsibility for themselves and "know when to
say when". If not
that, then at least "tie one on". Unfortunately, if there are those
that are predisposed to
addiction, they might not be the ones to recognize a problem when it
is happening.
PREVENTION
Psychiatrist Ivan Goldberg, MD is the doctor who coined the term
Internet
Addiction Disorder. Goldberg and Young offer some ways people who
believe they are
addicted, or may be heading toward addiction, can help themselves.
First, Goldberg says,
people must recognize patterns of overuse. An awareness of the basic
symptoms is
important. A key signal to this would be time spent at the computer,
but also time spent
thinking about the Internet or in activities related to the Internet.
The next step, according
to Young, is to identify underlying problems. Similar to other kinds
of addicts, Internet
addicts should ask themselves what is causing them to want to escape
from everyday life?
The third step is to devise and act out a plan to work through the
problem, rather than
escape it. Escaping from the problem through the Internet, and
effectively ignoring it,
does not make the problem go away. It usually only intensifies the
problem. Finally, the
addict needs to take steps to resolve the addiction itself. Young
advises a gradually decline
in use, until finally a "sensible" amount of time is reached (Murray,
1996).
CONCLUSION
The Internet is not the enemy just because people become dependent on
it. It has
many important and necessary benefits. It is fast, ecologically
sound, convenient, and
informative. In many ways it makes our lives much simpler. In many
ways it makes our
lives more complex. The Internet provides an escape from reality and
everyday problems
just like alcohol or drugs. Some argue that the interaction with
other people on the
Internet fills a social void. People can assume new identities;
others interact with that
identity and the person may assume these on-line relationships are the
same as the real
thing. It becomes a problem when people become so engrossed and
enmeshed in on-line
activities, and their "other" lives to the point of neglecting their
health, relationships, jobs,
and other responsibilities. As with many of life's pleasures,
moderation is the key.
WORKS CITED
Belluck, Pam. "Net Addiction: True Disorder or Just a
Cyber-Psycho-Fad?"
New York Times 1 Dec. 1996.
http://search.nytimes.com/search/daily/bin/fastweb?search
Egger, O., Rauterberg, M., (1996) "Internet Behavior and Addiction."
Swiss Federal Institute of Technology, Zurich
http://www.ifap.bepr.ethz.ch/~egger/ibq/res.htm
Freedman, Edith (1992). The Addiction Process:
Effective Social Work Approaches. Longman:New York.
LavaMind, 1997.
http://www.gazillionaire.com/talk.html
Mental Health Net. "Round Table Round-Up." Jan. 1997.
http.www.cmhc.com/archives/rr97-1.html
Murray, Bridget. "Is Your Computer Use Out of Control?" APA
Monitor,June, 1996,
American Psychological Association. http://www.apa.org/monitor/jun96/
onlinec.html
Sue, D., Sue, D. , & Sue, S. (1994) Understanding Abnormal Behavior.
Boston: Houghton Mifflin
Young, Kimberly S., Psy. D. "Pathological Internet Use: The Emergence
Of A New
Clinical Disorder," Presentation, University of Pittsburgh at
Bradford, Session
2127, 11:00-11:50 AM, 10 August,1996, Metro Toronto Convention
Centre, Exhibit Hall (D-14). APA Monitor, American Psychological
Association.
http://www.apa.org/releases/internet.html
|
