This anonymous quote summarizes some of these qualities of the people that
may be prone to IAD;
Additionally, the utility of the activity has be called into question when
you are looking at an intensely repeated
behavior. In the case of frequent and continual use of the Internet what
I see most frequently in my practice (I am a
psychiatrist in general private practice) is that the Internet becomes
a way of avoiding intimate social contact. The
hook however is that it looks like contact given the freedom that people
take to communicate their most intimate
thoughts and so it has the appearance of intimacy while in fact the communication
is just with a computer screen and
words on a line. There is a self-delusion of real depth and emotion here
when it allows for the most complete
masquerade (I will only show what I want) and the most complete control
(I will only interact when I want) and no one
truly knows who I am (Anonymous email post)
In Dr. Kimberly Young's interview with a radio talk show host (available
on the Web as a Real Audio clip), Dr. Young
stated that in about 50% of the 400 cases of IAD she reviewed, the person
reported a prior history of another addiction.
The rate at which this study population reported other pathology was mixed,
with no pattern to, or significance in, the self
reports of the co-occurrence depression, introversion or general personality
disorders (Young, 96).
Review of recent studies
Three studies have now reported results of survey data that attempt to
define the scope of IAD. These articles are available
on the Web, and are all self report data from surveys. Each used a different
strategy for recruiting subjects. The studies used
definitions for Internet Addiction that were similar, but each used different
means to analyze their results.
Viktor Brenner posted a survey called the Internet Usage Survey to the
web, and then advertised it's existence by listing it
with search engines. The survey asked about on-line usage in terms of time
spent on-line, and if on-line interactivity had
negatively impacted one's work or professional life. Brenner received 185
valid responses, of which two thirds were from
males. Thirty-two of the questions made up what the author calls an "Internet-Related
Addictive Behavior Checklist" or
IRABC. Thirty percent of respondents reported a failed attempt to cut back
on their Internet usage, but only 7% endorsed
the item that related to "getting in to hot water" at work due to this.
The fact that 58% reported that others in their life had
told them they were spending too much time on-line is significant and congruent
with a well know aspect of addictive
behaviors is that one's friends and family members are often aware of the
problem long before the individual involved is able
to admit any troubles. Brenner notes that there appeared to be an over-representation
of researchers and reporters
interested in this topic that also answered the survey question. In addition,
the study population contained a large number of
users that were new to the Internet. The average time on-line was 24 months,
but with a standard deviation of 22 months,
24% reported being on-line less then 6 months. Most DSM-IV diagnostic criteria
have a time requirement that the condition
must have persisted before it can be diagnosed. The lack, in this study
and others reviewed here, of differentiating the
newcomers from the users with a longer history of net use, is a confound.
The possibility exists that a percentage of people
self-reporting as Internet addicts are actually just currently very passionate
about their on-line use, and will be able to
moderate it if the problems it creates for them persists. Brenner addresses
some of the pros and cons of the methodology
involved in Web based surveys, with the ease of subject access being the
major advantage. Among the drawbacks
mentioned is the need for researcher to understand the nuances of web page
design (Brenner, 96).
Steve Thompson posted a survey called the "McSurvey", composed of questions
designed to determine the kinds of
disruptions experienced by people that self-identified as Internet Addicts.
This is a two-tiered study, and only the first part
was available for review. Additional quantitative data will be forthcoming.
Thompson embarked on a search for these
subjects, in what he terms a "total immersion into the studied environment".
He queried various cyberspace forums where a
high rate of this phenomena could be expected, in various modalities, and
got 104 valid responses. Of those, 72% reported
an addiction or dependency to the Internet, and 33% stated their Internet
use had negative effect on their lives. In testing to
see if a perceived deficit in real life personal relations was correlated
to the reporting of Internet Addiction, Thompson
reports mixed results. Twenty-nine respondents in this subject pool reported
that their communication skills had been
"crippled", but 36 reported an enhancement in this. Forty-seven percent
reported some level of physical distress such as
blurred vision or sleep disorders, or a similar somatic complaint. Thompson
did not report what percent of respondents were
new to the Internet, and in this initial qualitative report the data on
on-line usage rates is unclear, so a complete review of this
study is not possible at this time. Of notable interest are the results
relating to the question about what this group thought was
their primary reason for engaging in on-line activity. This was a pursuit
of knowledge. It is not clear if this represents
knowledge of facts or of others. Thompson concludes that Internet Addiction
is a real phenomena, one deserving of study,
but cautions that many people currently reporting this condition may in
fact only be responding to the newness of this source
of knowledge in their lives, and are so involved in learning all the benefits
they can receive that they are "interpreting it all as
being out of moderation when it comes to the perception of their usage."
(Thompson, 96). (Note: Additional data that was
not reviewed here has now been posted to http://www.personal.psu.edu/sjt112/iads/thesis.html)
Oliver Egger posted a questionnaire to the Web designed to determine Internet
behavior and addiction. Most of the replies
came from Switzerland, 450 valid responses were received, and a throughout
statistical analysis of this data was available for
review. As opposed to the two previous studies reviewed here, Egger did
not advertise for Internet Addicts to take his
survey, but instead asked all respondents to self-identify as addicted
or dependent. There were 10.6% of the respondents
who endorsed this item. Egger analyzed responses based on these two groups
to see what differences were significant. To a
statistically significant degree, those identified as addicts reported
(among other things) a greater tendency to:
Report negative consequences for their Internet use.
Participate more often in on-line self help groups.
Feel an urge to use the net when off line.
Anticipate their next Internet usage.
Feel guilty over their Internet usage.
Lie to their friends about how much time they spend on-line.
Report that colleagues complained about their excessive Internet use.
There were no significant differences in the data on age, gender or living
situation, or in how long the person had been using
the Internet. Since newcomers were just as likely to endorse being addicted
to or dependent on the Internet as others, it is
not clear if the level of distress reported by this group is a pervasive
condition or a passing phase. This data set represents a
strong case for the occurrence of negative consequences for Internet addicts.
Egger offers very little besides the data to
indicate how one should interpret it, but this study is rich in it's quantitative
content. Questions were asked on a 6 or 7 point
Likard scale, and published results include histograms as well as the raw
data. The 450 responses were generated in only 6
weeks, as the study was announced to Internet forums such as www.news.announce,
alt.irc.misc and alt.mud.misc. Links to
the survey site were established and an inducement for participation was
offered. Egger sates that " Since their is no
particular interest group for a questionnaire like this, a competition
was added to induce more people to take part in the
survey." (Egger, 96)
It was possible in this review to locate several areas where the results
of these studies can be directly compared.
Brenner
Thompson
Egger
Gender of respondents,
percent male.
66%
75%
84%
Reported any urge to
connect to the Internet.
30% *(1)
50%
62%
Attempted to meet others
they first met on-line.
40%
N/A
37%
Reported problems in work
or school due to their
Internet use
59%
25%
40%
Others complained about
their excessive Internet use.
58%
22% *(2)
40%
*1 Brenner's question here involved failed attempts to cut back on Internet
usage.
*2 Thompson's question here involved decreased communications skills, as
subjects thought others would report about
them.
Note: Egger's results were dichotomized here. For example, 60% reported
never having anyone complain of their excessive
Internet use, so the 40% reported above is the total of the categories
of respondents that choose rarely, sometimes, or often
for this choice.
It is clear from this review that the time period specified in Dr. Goldbergs
original IAD official criteria were not used in these
studies to distinguish true cases of this disorder from people that may
be experiencing a temporary, passionate Internet
involvement. Dr. Goldberg suggested that IAD existed only if the criteria
were evaluated across a 12 month interval.
Newcomers to the Internet have not had time to demonstrate the strength
of their resolve to prioritize their on-line time, with
respect to any real and continued losses, with regard to the very real
value and knowledge they may be gaining, and the often
extraordinary amount of time needed to learn all that the Internet can
offer.
Dr. Young's original study of 400 people with IAD clearly did include this
time period in the criteria for that diagnosis, but
that actual data from that study was not reviewed here. The author failed
the get the full text of that widely publicized study in
time for this review. That study was designed to recruit people suffering
from their Internet use, to see if Dr. Young's criteria
for evaluating this condition were valid. Dr. Young is currently involved
in a larger study that is expected to reveal more
about the prevalence rates for this condition.