CYBERPSYCHOLOGY, BEHAVIOR, AND SOCIAL NETWORKING

Volume 15, Number 9, 2012

ª Mary Ann Liebert, Inc.
DOI: 10.1089/cyber.2012.0007

Video Game Addiction Test:

Validity and Psychometric Characteristics

Antonius J. van Rooij, Ph.D.,1 Tim M. Schoenmakers, Ph.D.,1 Regina J.J.M. van den Eijnden, Ph.D.,2
Ad A. Vermulst, Ph.D.,3 and Dike van de Mheen, Ph.D.1,4

Abstract

The study explores the reliability, validity, and measurement invariance of the Video game Addiction Test
(VAT). Game-addiction problems are often linked to Internet enabled online games; the VAT has the unique
benefit that it is theoretically and empirically linked to Internet addiction. The study used data (n = 2,894) from a
large-sample paper-and-pencil questionnaire study, conducted in 2009 on secondary schools in Netherlands.
Thus, the main source of data was a large sample of schoolchildren (aged 13–16 years). Measurements included
the proposed VAT, the Compulsive Internet Use Scale, weekly hours spent on various game types, and several
psychosocial variables. The VAT demonstrated excellent reliability, excellent construct validity, a one-factor
model fit, and a high degree of measurement invariance across gender, ethnicity, and learning year, indicating
that the scale outcomes can be compared across different subgroups with little bias. In summary, the VAT can be
helpful in the further study of video game addiction, and it contributes to the debate on possible inclusion of
behavioral addictions in the upcoming DSM-V.

Introduction While several studies demonstrate the existence of a small

subgroup of problematic gamers15–17 and there is a clear link
I n light of the upcoming DSM-V, Internet addiction (IA)
is receiving renewed attention. It is often modeled along the
components for addiction proposed by Griffiths.1 These were
with IA, no consensus has been achieved regarding the
measurement of video game addiction. We therefore propose
to modify the CIUS to refer specifically to gaming, for use in
also used as input for the 14-item Compulsive Internet Use
contexts, where problems with games are of particular in-
Scale (CIUS).2 However, to fit the specific nature of Internet
terest. Through the CIUS, which incorporates established
behavior, the CIUS rephrased the component ‘‘relapse’’ as
models for defining behavioral addiction,1,2 video game ad-
‘‘loss of control,’’ while ‘‘tolerance’’ was excluded due to lack
diction is more specifically defined as: (a) a loss of control
of relevance2,3 (similar to the Internet addiction test4,5). The
over gaming, (b) conflicts about the gaming behavior and
CIUS defines IA as an addiction-like behavioral problem
problems associated with gaming, (c) preoccupation with
comprising: loss of control, conflict, preoccupation/salience,
gaming, (d) using gaming as a way to cope with problems or
coping/mood modification, and withdrawal symptoms. The
to modify your mood, and (e) withdrawal symptoms if the
CIUS is one of the few validated IA scales, which has been
gamer is forced to quit. In doing so, we broadly define video
subjected to a confirmatory factor analysis (CFA),2,6 that is, it
game addiction as a loss of control (a, c, d, e) over the gaming
supports a one-dimensional measurement structure.
behavior, which results in significant personal, professional,
Besides scale construction at the epidemiological level,
or social harm (b).1,18 The present study aims to validate this
proposals for a clinical diagnosis of IA are being made.7 How-
new Video game Addiction Test (VAT).
ever, it remains questionable whether people are addicted to the
Internet as such. In fact, problematic behavior tends to involve
specific applications: online video games,8,9 online erotica,10 or Method
instant messaging services.11 Distinguishing between these ap-
Sample
plications is relevant as the clinical nature of problems seems to
vary per application.12,13 In adolescents, playing online video This study uses the 2009 sample of the Monitor Study
games was shown to have the strongest relationship with IA.14 ‘‘Internet and Youth.’’ The sample includes ten Dutch

1
IVO Addiction Research Institute, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
2
Faculty of Social and Behavioral Sciences, Utrecht University, Utrecht. The Netherlands.
3
Behavioral Science Institute, University of Nijmegen, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
4
Department of Public Health, Erasmus Medical Centre, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.

507
508 VAN ROOIJ

secondary schools and 171 classes (n = 4,074), average per
class response rate 92 percent. For details on the procedure, see
earlier publications.14,19 The proposed VAT items were skip-
ped by adolescents who did not play games at all (n = 1,024).
For the purpose of scale validation, adolescents with less than
four of the items on the VAT completed were removed
(n = 156). As the analyses deal with scale means, missing values
do not distort scores. The final dataset has 2,894 cases (62
percent boys), of which 99 percent completed 9 or more VAT
items. Overall average age was 14.3 (SD = 1.0) years.
Measures
Compulsive Internet Use Scale. The 14-item version of
the CIUS2 was used to measure CIU, and includes questions,
such as ‘‘Have you unsuccessfully tried to spend less time on
the Internet?’’ The CIUS contains the following components:
loss of control (four items), conflict (four items), preoccupa-
tion/salience (three items), coping/mood modification (two
items), and withdrawal symptoms (one item). The CIUS has
good validity2 and internal reliability2,10,14 (current sample,
Chronbach’s a = 0.89).
Video game Addiction Test. The items that compose
the CIUS were rephrased into the 14 proposed VAT items,
measured with a with a 5-point scale: 0, never; 1, seldom; 2,
sometimes; 3, often; and 4, very often (Table 1). Conse-
quently, the VAT incorporates the same components as the
CIUS. While we strongly suspect that online games play a
particularly important role,20 playing multiple game types is
not unusual14 and problematic use of other game types can-
not be ruled out. Thus, the phrasing was kept universal (i.e.,
‘‘game’’ instead of ‘‘online game’’).
Game Addiction Scale. The seven-item version of the
Game Addiction Scale (GAS) was included.21 Six of the seven
items each measure one of Griffiths’ components of behavioral
addiction, while one question measures ‘‘problems.’’8 The GAS
shows good reliability in this sample (Chronbach’s a = 0.84).
Weekly hours online, casual browser, and offline
gaming. Three types of games are distinguished: multi-
player online games, which are video games played with
other people over the Internet; casual browser games, which
are simple games that are played online via the web browser;
and finally, offline games, which do not utilize the Internet.
Hours per week spent on these game types were obtained by
multiplication of two questions measuring days per week of
gaming and average hours of gaming per day, similar to a
previous study.19
Psychosocial measures. The following psychosocial
measures were included: Rosenberg’s Negative Self-Esteem
Scale19,22 (Chronbach’s a = 0.87), the UCLA Loneliness
Scale23,24 (Chronbach’s a = 0.87), the Depressive Mood List25–27
(Chronbach’s a = 0.81), and the Revised Social Anxiety Scale
for Children28–30 (Chronbach’s a = 0.89). These scales have
been used in Dutch studies and have demonstrated good
reliability.3,11,19 For all four scales, a higher score indicates
more reported problems.
Strategy of analyses
To confirm if the one-factor structure of the CIUS also
holds for the VAT, a 1-factor CFA was applied using Mplus
version 5.1.31 On grounds of overlapping content, some error
terms of items must be correlated to get an acceptable model
fit. We correlated the same error terms as reported for the
CIUS (item 1 with item 2, 6 with 7, 8 with 9, 11 with 12, and 13
with 14).2 Additionally, as the scale is formulated for ado-
lescents, the error term for item 3 was correlated with item 8
on grounds of content overlap. To deal with missing data, the
Full Information Maximum Likelihood estimation technique
was used. Respondents are nested within schools and classes.
Due to software limitations, the COMPLEXTWOLEVEL
procedure, which corrects for this nonindependency, did not
work. As the differences between separate COMPLEX pro-
cedures for schools and classes were negligible, we decided to
report the results for classes (most likely point of mutual in-
fluence). The COMPLEX procedure uses a robust maximum
likelihood estimator resulting in robust v2 values. Model fit
is reported in robust v2 values, and estimated degrees of
freedom, the Comparative Fit Index (CFI)32 and the root-
mean-squared error of approximation (RMSEA).33

Table 1. Factor Loadings and Item Phrasing for the 14 Video Game Addiction Test Items

Standardized
Itema How often . factor loadings

1 . do you find it difficult to stop gaming 0.72

2 . do you continue to use the games, despite your intention to stop? 0.71
3 . do others (e.g., parents or friends) say you should spend less time on games? 0.69
4 . do you prefer to game instead of spending time with others (e.g., friends or parents)? 0.72
5 . do you not get enough sleep because of gaming? 0.69
6 . do you think about gaming, even when you’re not online? 0.76
7 . do you look forward to the next time you can game? 0.75
8 . do you think you should be gaming less often? 0.65
9 . have you unsuccessfully tried to spend less time on gaming? 0.64
10 . do you feel restless, frustrated, or irritated when you cannot game? 0.78
11 . do you rush through your homework to play games? 0.70
12 . do you neglect to do your homework because you prefer to game? 0.68
13 . do you game because you are feeling down? 0.64
14 . do you game to forget about problems? 0.62
a
Items are translated from Dutch.
VIDEO GAME ADDICTION TEST 509

Table 2. Tests of Invariance Constraints (Metric and Scalar) for Gender, Ethnicity, and Learning Year

v2 test of Model Fit v2 difference

Hierarchical invariance
testing steps CFI RMSEA Value Df p Dv2 Ddf p

Tests of invariance constraints for male and female respondents

1 Noninvariant 0.961 0.046 578.37 142 0.000
2 k1 invariant 0.960 0.045 601.80 155 0.000 24.17 13 0.030
3 ks invariant 0.956 0.045 661.86 168 0.000 66.91 13 0.000
Tests of invariance constraints for ethnicity (Dutch or Western European vs. Non-Western European)
1 Noninvariant 0.959 0.049 605.12 142 0.000
2 k constrained 0.958 0.047 629.58 155 0.000 23.58 13 0.035
3 ks invariant 0.954 0.048 689.69 168 0.000 66.18 13 0.000
Tests of invariance constraints learning year (first year/second year/third and fourth year)
1 Noninvariant 0.961 0.050 726.98 213 0.000
2 k constrained 0.961 0.047 754.81 239 0.000 29.34 26 0.296
3 ks invariant 0.956 0.048 843.33 265 0.000 92.07 26 0.000

CFI, Comparative Fit Index; RMSEA, root-mean-squared error of approximation; k, factor loadings; s, item intercepts.

The second step was to test measurement invariance.
Various forms of measurement invariance can be distin-
guished,34 but we restrict ourselves to the three forms pro-
posed by Steenkamp and Baumgartner.35 If the fit of the CFA
model is acceptable across different groups, configural in-
variance is supported. Metric invariance requires that the factor
loadings (k) of corresponding factors are invariant (and thus
have the same meaning) across groups. Scalar (or strong) in-
variance requires that the item intercepts (s) of corresponding
factors are invariant across groups: this makes comparisons
of group means meaningful.
The three forms of measurement invariance were tested for
three background variables: gender, ethnicity (Dutch or
Western European versus non-Western European ethnicity),
and learning year. Learning year was operationalized as
learning one (average age 13), two, and a mixed group con-
taining years three and four (the fourth learning year has a
small sample size; n = 120). After fitting a baseline (non-
invariant) model (representing configural invariance) with no
constraints, metric and scalar invariance are tested by con-
straining factor loadings (metric invariance) and intercepts
(scalar invariance) subsequently across groups. If the increase
in v2 (from the baseline model to k-constrained model or from
the k-constrained model to the s-constrained model) is non-
significant, metric and/or scalar invariance is supported. The
robust v2 values were rescaled to standard v2 values to
compute a correct v2 difference.
As the v2 test is sensitive to sample size,36 we also exam-
ined the increment of fit indices (DCFI37 and DRMSEA) be-
tween models. We follow Cheung and Rensvold’s rule of
thumb that a decrease in CFI of .01 or less indicates that
invariance should not be rejected.37 Construct validity is
tested by cross comparisons with the GAS,21 the CIUS,2
measures of psychosocial well-being19,38,39 and time spent on
various game types.
Results
Step 1: confirmatory factor analysis
The fit of the factor model was good: v2 (71) = 549.564,
RMSEA = 0.048, and CFI = 0.961 (Table 1), with high reliability
(Chronbach’s a = 0.93). All loadings are > 0.62 indicating a
good construct validity.
Step 2: measurement invariance
Table 2 summarizes the results for the unconstrained
model, the model with constrained factor loadings (metric
invariance), and the model with constrained intercepts and
constrained factor loadings (scalar invariance) for each of the

Table 3. Pearson’s Correlations Between Game and Internet Addiction Scales, Psychosocial
Outcome Measures, and Measures of Time Spent on Various Game Types

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

1. Video game Addiction Test 1.00

2. Video game Addiction Scale 0.74*** 1.00
3. Compulsive Internet Use Scale 0.61*** 0.63*** 1.00
4. Depressive Mood List 0.29*** 0.27*** 0.40*** 1.00
5. UCLA Loneliness scale 0.29*** 0.23*** 0.23*** 0.38*** 1.00
6. Social Anxiety for Children Revised 0.22*** 0.20*** 0.22*** 0.45*** 0.47*** 1.00
7. Rosenberg Negative Self-Esteem Scale 0.22*** 0.18*** 0.27*** 0.50*** 0.54*** 0.46*** 1.00
8. Online games (hours per week) 0.37*** 0.38*** 0.37*** 0.03 0.09** 0.04 0.07* 1.00
9. Casual browser games (hours per week) 0.19*** 0.17*** 0.19*** 0.09*** 0.12*** 0.07*** 0.07*** 0.08** 1.00
10. Offline games (hours per week) 0.25*** 0.25*** 0.11*** 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.22*** 0.24***

Calculations were performed with scale means, *p < 0.05; **p < 0.01; ***p < 0.001.
510
three background variables. Configural invariance is sup-
ported by the high values of CFI ( > 0.95) and low values of
RMSEA ( < 0.05). Metric invariance shows significant in-
creases in v2 for gender and ethnicity (p < 0.05), but not for the
learning year. The decreases in the CFI-value were 0.001,
0.001, and 0.000, respectively, indicating that metric invari-
ance is supported to a high degree. With respect to scalar
invariance, the v2 difference values have p-values < 0.001,
supporting scalar noninvariance. However, the decreases in
CFI were 0.004, 0.004, and 0.005, respectively, and are lower
than the Cheung/Rensvold criterion of 0.01. Our conclusion
is that scalar invariance of the VAT should not be rejected.
Step 3: construct validity
Table 3 demonstrates the construct validity of the VAT:
strong relationships are found with related scales, that is, the
GAS (r = 0.74) and the CIUS (r = 0.61), while small, but prac-
tically significant relationships40 are found with scales mea-
suring psychosocial well-being (depressive mood, negative
self-esteem, loneliness, and social anxiety) and the time spent
on various game types (r < 0.40). Of the various game types,
online gaming (hours per week) shows the strongest rela-
tionship with the VAT (r = 0.37).
Discussion
The present study proposes a new, one-dimensional scale
to measure video game addiction: the VAT. This scale defines
video game addiction as an addiction-like behavioral prob-
lem that presents as: a loss of control over gaming, intra- and
interpersonal conflict, preoccupation with gaming, using of
games for purposes of coping or mood modification, and
withdrawal symptoms if the gamer is forced to quit.
The VAT demonstrated excellent reliability, a one-factor
model fit, and measurement invariance (configural, metric)
across gender, ethnicity, and learning year, indicating that the
scale outcomes can be compared across different subgroups
with little bias. Scalar invariance is established to a high de-
gree, which means that there are indications that (at compa-
rable test scores) boys, adolescents with a Dutch or Western
European ethnicity, and older adolescents might have
slightly higher true scores than their counterparts. Ad-
ditionally, good construct validity was established; the VAT
showed a strong relationship with an alternative measure of
game addiction (GAS) and it’s source—the CIUS, while
showing weaker positive relationships with measures of
psychosocial health and time spent on various game types.
A limitation of this study is the use of self-report data,
which means that it is hard to rule out whether the extreme
group is psychologically dependent on games or merely very
highly involved.41 This does not negate the proposed scale:
those who score high on VAT indicate considerable problems.
Finally, the sample consisted of exclusively of young ado-
lescents. Further validation is needed before applying the
VAT to different populations. As the source construct CIUS
has been demonstrated to be valid and reliable for adult
populations and at least strongly reliable in adolescent pop-
ulations,3 we do not foresee any problems here.
A variety of attempts have been made to measure video
game addiction.15,21,42 Although this earlier work has been
fruitful (i.e., the GAS, which correlates strongly with the
VAT), the problem has remained that IA and game addiction
VAN ROOIJ
are generally studied independently, while it is evident that
game-addiction problems are strongly linked to Internet-
enabled online games.17,20 The high correlation between
online games (in comparison with other game types) and
video game addiction in the current study provides further
support for this idea (see Table 3). The VAT has the benefit
that it is theoretically and empirically (r = 0.61) linked to an IA
scale: that is, it’s source, the CIUS. As such, the VAT can be
employed in further survey research to support theoretical
progress in the field of online video game addiction. More-
over, findings provide a starting point for clinical validation
of the VAT.
Acknowledgments
The authors thank the following organizations for funding
data collection of the Monitor Study ‘‘Internet and Youth’’:
Netherlands Organization for Health Research & Develop-
ment (ZonMw, project no. 31160208), Volksbond Foundation
Rotterdam, Addiction Care North Netherlands, Kennisnet
Foundation, Tactus Addiction Care, and De Hoop Foundation.
Additionally, we thank Lieneke Spel and Leonard Van-
brabant for their assistance during the data collection phase.
Finally, we thank Laraine Visser for her assistance with the
English language.
Author Disclosure Statement
No competing financial interests exist.
References
1. Griffiths MD. A ‘‘components’’ model of addiction within a
biopsychosocial framework. Journal of Substance Use 2005;
10:191–197.
2. Meerkerk G-J, Van den Eijnden RJJM, Vermulst AA, et al.
The compulsive internet use scale (CIUS): some psychometric
properties. CyberPsychology and Behavior 2009; 12:1–6.
3. Meerkerk G-J. Pwned by the internet. Explorative research
into the causes and consequences of compulsive internet use
[Ph.D. thesis]. Rotterdam: Erasmus University Rotterdam;
2007.
4. Widyanto L, McMurran M. The psychometric properties of
the Internet Addiction Test. CyberPsychology and Behavior
2004; 7:443–450.
5. Young KS. (1998) Caught in the net: how to recognize the signs
of Internet addiction—and a winning strategy for recovery. New
York: Wiley.
6. Caplan SE. Theory and measurement of generalized prob-
lematic Internet use: a two-step approach. Computers in
Human Behavior 2010; 26:1089–1097.
7. Tao R, Huang X, Wang J, et al. Proposed diagnostic criteria
for internet addiction. Addiction 2010; 105:556–564.
8. Mehroof M, Griffiths MD. Online gaming addiction: the role
of sensation seeking, self-control, neuroticism, aggression,
state anxiety, and trait anxiety. Cyberpsychology, Behavior,
and Social Networking 2010; 13:313–316.
9. Wan C-S, Chiou W-B. Why are adolescents addicted to on-
line gaming? An interview study in Taiwan. CyberPsy-
chology and Behavior 2006; 9:762–766.
10. Meerkerk G-J, Van den Eijnden RJJM, Garretsen HFL. Pre-
dicting compulsive internet use: it’s all about sex! Cyber-
Psychology and Behavior 2006; 9:95–103.
11. Van den Eijnden RJJM, Meerkerk G-J, Vermulst AA, et al.
Online communication, compulsive internet use, and psy-
VIDEO GAME ADDICTION TEST
chosocial well-being among adolescents: a longitudinal
study. Developmental Psychology 2008; 44:655–665.
12. Bernardi S, Pallanti S. Internet addiction: a descriptive clin-
ical study focusing on comorbidities and dissociative
symptoms. Comprehensive Psychiatry 2009; 50:510–516.
13. Van Rooij AJ, Zinn MF, Schoenmakers TM, et al. Treating
internet addiction with cognitive-behavioral therapy: a
thematic analysis of the experiences of therapists. Interna-
tional Journal of Mental Health and Addiction 2012; 19;
10:69–82.
14. Van Rooij AJ, Schoenmakers TM, Van den Eijnden RJJM,
et al. Compulsive internet use: the role of online gaming and
other internet applications. The Journal of Adolescent Health
2010; 47:51–57.
15. Grüsser SM, Thalemann R, Griffiths MD. Excessive com-
puter game playing: evidence for addiction and aggression?
CyberPsychology and Behavior 2007; 10:290–292.
16. Peters CS, Malesky A. Problematic usage among highly-
engaged players of massively multiplayer online role play-
ing games. CyberPsychology and Behavior 2008; 11:481–484.
17. Rehbein F, Psych G, Kleimann M, et al. Prevalence and risk
factors of video game dependency in adolescence: results of
a German nationwide survey. Cyberpsychology, Behavior,
and Social Networking 2010; 13:269–277.
18. West R, Hardly A. (2006) Theory of addiction. Oxford: Wiley-
Blackwell, p. 225.
19. Van Rooij AJ, Schoenmakers TM, Vermulst AA, et al. Online
video game addiction: identification of addicted adolescent
gamers. Addiction 2011; 106:205–212.
20. Council on Science and Public Health. (2007) Emotional
and behavioral effects, including addictive potential, of
video games. Chicago: American Medical Association. www
.ama-assn.org/resources/doc/csaph/csaph12a07-fulltext.pdf.
21. Lemmens JS, Valkenburg PM, Peter J. Development and
validation of a game addiction scale for adolescents. Media
Psychology 2009; 12:77–95.
22. Rosenberg M. (1989) Society and the adolescent self-image,
Revised ed. Middletown: Wesleyan University Press.
23. Ghassemzadeh L, Shahraray M, Moradi A. Prevalence of
internet addiction and comparison of internet addicts and
non-addicts in Iranian high schools. CyberPsychology and
Behavior 2008; 11:731–733.
24. Russell D, Peplau LA, Cutrona CE. The revised UCLA
loneliness scale: Concurrent and discriminant validity evi-
dence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1980;
39:472–480.
25. Engels RCME, Finkenauer C, Meeus WHJ, et al. Attachment
and adolescents’ emotional adjustment: the associations
with social skills and relational competence. Journal of
Counseling Psychology 2001; 48:428–439.
26. Kandel DB, Davies MNO. Epidemiology of depressive mood
in adolescents: an empirical study. Archives of General
Psychiatry 1982; 39:1205–1212.
27. Kandel DB, Davies MNO. Adult sequelae of adolescent de-
pressive symptoms. Archives of General Psychiatry 1986;
43:255–262.
511
28. La Greca AM, Dandes SK, Wick P, et al. Development of
the social anxiety scale for children: reliability and concur-
rent validity. Journal of Clinical Child Psychology 1988;
17:84–91.
29. La Greca AM, Stone WL. Social anxiety scale for children–
revised: factor structure and concurrent validity. Journal of
Clinical Child Psychology 1993; 22:17–27.
30. Gross EF. Adolescent Internet use: what we expect, what
teens report. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology
2004; 25:633–649.
31. Muthén LK, Muthén BO. (2007) Mplus user’s guide. Fifth ed.
Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén.
32. Bentler PM. Comparative fit indexes in structural models.
Psychological Bulletin 1990; 107:238–246.
33. Byrne BM. (1998) Structural equation modeling with LISREL,
PRELIS and SIMPLIS: basic concepts, applications, and pro-
gramming. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
34. Gregorich SE. Do self-report instruments allow meaningful
comparisons across diverse population groups? Testing
measurement invariance using the confirmatory factor
analysis framework. Medical Care 2006; 44:S78–S94.
35. Steenkamp JBEM, Baumgartner H. Assessing measurement
invariance in cross-national consumer research. Journal of
Consumer Research 1998; 25:78–107.
36. Schermelleh-Engel K, Moosbrugger H, Müller H. Evaluating
the fit of structural equation models: tests of significance and
descriptive goodness-of-fit measures. Methods of psycho-
logical research online [now: Methodology (Gott)] 2003;
8:23–74.
37. Cheung GW, Rensvold RB. Evaluating goodness-of-fit indexes
for testing measurement invariance. Structural Equation
Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal 2002; 9:233–255.
38. Caplan SE. Relations among loneliness, social anxiety, and
problematic internet use. CyberPsychology and Behavior
2007; 10:234–242.
39. Ha JH, Kim SY, Bae SC, et al. Depression and internet ad-
diction in adolescents. Psychopathology 2007; 40:424–430.
40. Ferguson CJ. An effect size primer: a guide for clinicians and
researchers. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice
2009; 40:532–538.
41. Charlton JP, Danforth IDW. Distinguishing addiction and
high engagement in the context of online game playing.
Computers in Human Behavior 2007; 23:1531–1548.
42. Wölfling K, Müller KW. Pathologisches glücksspiel und
computerspielabhängigkeit. Bundesgesundheitsblatt—
Gesundheitsforschung—Gesundheitsschutz 2010; 53:306–312.
Address correspondence to:
Dr. Antonius J. van Rooij
IVO Addiction Research Institute
Heemraadssingel 194
3021 DM Rotterdam
The Netherlands
E-mail: rooij@ivo.nl
Copyright of CyberPsychology, Behavior & Social Networking is the property of Mary Ann Liebert, Inc. and
its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's
express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.