4.2 Article

Is Dysfunctional Use of the Mobile Phone a Behavioural Addiction? Confronting Symptom-Based Versus Process-Based Approaches

期刊

CLINICAL PSYCHOLOGY & PSYCHOTHERAPY
卷 22, 期 5, 页码 460-468

出版社

WILEY-BLACKWELL
DOI: 10.1002/cpp.1910

关键词

Transdiagnostic Approach; Behavioural Addiction; Mobile Phone Addiction; Case Conceptualization; Cyber Addiction; Mobile Phone Problematic Use

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Dysfunctional use of the mobile phone has often been conceptualized as a 'behavioural addiction' that shares most features with drug addictions. In the current article, we challenge the clinical utility of the addiction model as applied to mobile phone overuse. We describe the case of a woman who overuses her mobile phone from two distinct approaches: (1) a symptom-based categorical approach inspired from the addiction model of dysfunctional mobile phone use and (2) a process-based approach resulting from an idiosyncratic clinical case conceptualization. In the case depicted here, the addiction model was shown to lead to standardized and non-relevant treatment, whereas the clinical case conceptualization allowed identification of specific psychological processes that can be targeted with specific, empirically based psychological interventions. This finding highlights that conceptualizing excessive behaviours (e.g., gambling and sex) within the addiction model can be a simplification of an individual's psychological functioning, offering only limited clinical relevance. Copyright (C) 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Key Practitioner Message: The addiction model, applied to excessive behaviours (e.g., gambling, sex and Internet-related activities) may lead to non-relevant standardized treatments. Clinical case conceptualization allowed identification of specific psychological processes that can be targeted with specific empirically based psychological interventions. The biomedical model might lead to the simplification of an individual's psychological functioning with limited clinical relevance.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据