ReviewAddictive behaviors reports2025
Methodological issues in behavioral addictions' research: A call for an unbiased analysis of excessive behaviors.
Review in Addictive behaviors reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In the psychological literature, there has been a proliferation of new behavioral addictions, often biased by an aprioristic and confirmatory approach that applied the addiction framework without adequately considering other potential explanations of excessive behaviors. This position paper further extends the critiques previously pointed out in the literature by highlighting the methodological issues underlying the current behavioral addiction research and the need for future studies to avoid a confirmatory and aprioristic approach (whatever the etiological hypothesis). Analyzing repetitive behaviors in their own specifies could help find a balance between the risk of over-pathologizing common behaviors and not exploring new potential clinical disorders related to everyday (excessive) behaviors associated with functional impairment and deserving public health attention. Finally, we underline the value of recalling that if an existing diagnosis might explain the problematic behavior under consideration, a new clinical disorder should not be introduced in the literature.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.