Uk Subscription Membership Application Form: Fill & Download for Free

I can only answer this question in relation to internet gaming disorder (IGD), which I researched around this time last year. The short answer is yes and no. There are medical and psychological treatments available, which work for some people, and the addition can be uprooted, but not for others. There is still insufficient body of research to categorically confirm or invalidate such claims. If you’re interested in IGD, I’ve pasted a synthesis paper I wrote last year.Can psychological theories explain why some people develop an internet gaming disorder (IGD) and others don’t? What implications do those theories have for reducing the harm associated with IDG?Online gaming addiction remains the subject of academic debate focusing on the condition’s prevalence and diagnostic criteria. The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5) identifies Internet Gaming Disorder (IGD) as a provisional disorder due to insufficient clinical research (APA, 2013). Whilst a neurologically evidenced link between substance and behavioural addictions has been identified, more systematic investigation is required. This essay critically evaluates psychological theories that explain why some people remain at greater risk of developing IGD and discusses implications for reducing the harm associated with online gaming addiction. Behavioural, cognitive and social theories are applied to explore IGD’s internal and external risk factors.IGD belongs within a wider compulsive-impulsive spectrum of online computer disorders, alongside social networking, messaging and online pornography addiction (Kuss & Griffiths, 2012; Ferguson & Ceranoglu, 2013). The disorders are characterised by excessive use, which leads to lost sense of time; withdrawal, with feelings of tension, anger, guilt or depression; tolerance, with a need to increase the quality of gaming equipment or hours played; and negative repercussions, following social isolation and mental and physical exhaustion (Block, 2008).Excessive online gaming in itself is not a pathological behaviour. Many virtual hobbies are considered normal, even if initial excitement results in the loss of control, mood modification and longing for more of the same activity (Beranuy et al., 2013). Turner et al. (2012) give examples of previous generations’ preoccupations with comic books or television, which resulted in moral panics, yet did not develop into addictions. Decisively, it is the persistent nature of one’s inability to control the habit, despite the many associated problems, that makes internet gaming pathological (Lemmens et al., 2009).IGD’s pathological status is upheld when the syndrome model of addiction is applied and biochemical and neuronal factors are considered. First, IGD sufferers have the same genetic polymorphisms as alcohol addicts (Blum et al., 1990), cocaine addicts (Noble et al., 1993) and pathological gamblers (Comings et al., 1996). Second, Kalivas and Volkow (2005) demonstrated that brains of IGD addicts respond to rewards in exactly the same way as substance addicts’ brains. Brain functional imaging studies consistently show the same neurobiological mechanism behind urges and cravings in pathological gamers and substance addicts (Ko et al., 2009). Finally, the success of pharmacological treatment in alleviating IGD symptoms supports the disorder’s biochemical basis. Thus, substance and behavioural addictions might be one single addiction type with different opportunistic expressions.However, diagnostic analogies with substance addictions can produce spuriously high prevalence estimates, as they lack severity and time-based dimensions and do not consider the context of game use (Ferguson et al., 2011). In addition, pathological gamers usually have other underlying problems, combined with poor time management skills, which makes IGD appear as a symptom, rather than the cause of the problem (Wood, 2008). Finally, cultural differences exist between substance and behavioural addictions; whilst alcohol or drug addicts are aware of legal and social constraints on their usage, playing games is not likely to land someone in trouble (Christakis, 2010).Despite the problematic diagnostic criteria, certain demographic characteristics of IGD can be discerned. The mean age of UK and US gamers in 2004 was 27.9 years of age (Griffiths, Davies & Chappell, 2004) and 25 years of age in 2008 for Asian players (Yee, 2007). Gamers are usually male college graduates who live in urban areas (Achab et al., 2011). Although age in itself is not a risk factor, the age of onset of online gaming is, with earlier exposure increasing the IGD risk (Achab et al., 2011), particularly when already existing comorbidities can be identified. Kuss and Griffiths (2012) suggest that an IGD diagnosis process should start with screening for anxiety disorders, e.g. GAD, panic disorder and phobias; ADHD; and psychosomatic symptoms. This supports Huang et al.’s (2010) conviction that IGD meets diagnostic criteria for Axis I and II disorders, especially anxiety, ADHD and impulse control disorders, with additional correlation between pathological gaming and substance use disorders.However, overlapping diagnostic criteria create a risk of eliminating IGD, or explaining it purely in the light of existing labels (Young, 2009). For most people, computers are work and study tools, with occasional entertainment value; thus, clinicians diagnosing mental health disorders might fail to ask questions about computer use. Block (2008) reports that an average American mental health patient has 1.5 diagnoses, with 86% of all DSM-IV diagnoses comorbid with some form of internet addiction. As more than three quarters of mental health patients show some comorbidity with IGD, it is difficult to justify the status of IGD as a unique disorder.An important exemption, however, are attention disorders. Although Bioulac et al. (2008) found no relationship between frequency or duration of play between ADHD children and internet gamers, Yoo et al. (2004) demonstrated that teenagers with ADHD score highly on Internet addiction and vice versa. Significantly, Ferguson and Ceranoglu (2013) showed that in adolescents, pathological gaming is a result of attention difficulty, but not the other way round. Whilst those with impulse dysregulation difficulty find it easy to become immersed in video game play, pathological gamers do not typically develop impulse dysregulation as a consequence of their addiction. This shows IGD cannot be explained in the light of the attention disorder label.Similarly, lower psychosocial wellbeing and loneliness, risk factors for IGD, are due to a shift in social interactions from real to virtual life (Lemens et al., 2011). Positive correlations have been established between pathological gaming, social phobia and depression with somatic pain symptoms, although depression is typically specific to substance addictions (Walther et al., 2012). Likened to pathological gambling, online gaming is also described as “a silent epidemic” (Suisa, 2011, p.12), understood within the framework of sociocultural pathology that, nonetheless, must not be confused with mood disorders.A better way to explain IGD involves application of a theoretical framework based on combined behavioural, cognitive and social models, which present IGD as a continuum condition with risk factors acting as triggers relevant at any stage of online gaming development into a fully-brown addiction (Kuss & Griffiths, 2012). The specific risk factors can be broadly categorised into internal influences, e.g. personality traits, motivations for playing and pathophysiology factors; and external influences, e.g. structural game characteristics. The two main types of influences will be analysed in turn.A range of personality traits associated with IGD can be subsumed under three main traits: introversion, neuroticism and impulsivity (Kuss & Griffiths, 2012). Not unique to IGD, their etiological value is difficult to assess, especially, as the causality direction is not clear and a third variable might be at play, e.g. increased health-risk behaviours (Sublette & Mullan, 2012). In addition, experimentation with parts of one’s core personality leads to skewed personality tests’ results, e.g. after an introverted neurotic individual with emotional problems and low self-worth had successfully adopted vocal leadership roles in a game and their new identity’s personality comes to life during completion of a study questionnaire (Yee, 2007).Examples of the causality direction difficulty are studies into pathological gaming and aggressiveness and impulsivity. A broad link between IGD and aggressiveness was suggested by Anderson and Bushman (2001) without specifying the causality direction, or explaining the mechanisms involved. It was speculated that aggressive individuals are attracted to internet games to release negative emotions and to gain control over impulsivity. Later on, Desai et al. (2010) found positive correlation between teenage IGD and participation in fights, alongside regular cigarette smoking, drug use, and depression. It would appear that aggression in gaming does play a normative function.Chumbley and Griffiths (2006) demonstrated that impulsivity does not predict nor lead to gaming addiction and, if it does, another contributing factor is responsible. More recently, Kim et al. (2008), Grant et al. (2010) and Mehroof and Griffiths (2010) documented that impulsivity and aggression are significantly associated with IGD, and any additional factor would be of phenomenological nature, i.e. to do with intentionality of the gaming experience, rather than its compulsivity.In a study by Walther et al. (2012) that looked at shared personality traits between gaming addiction, gambling addiction and substance abuse, aggression and irritability were only associated with problematic computer gaming, whilst high impulsivity with both substance and behavioural addictions. Shared personality traits are only one way of explaining etiology of gaming addiction. Scales used to measure addiction, substance-based and behavioural, are not without internal validity problems, as some only relate to substance use, or behaviour dependency.Another internal risk factor for IGD is motivation for playing, particularly if dysfunctional coping, socialisation and personal satisfaction reasons are considered. Escape from reality in order to cope with negative emotions is the most common incentive (Hussain & Griffiths, 2009). Escapism is positively correlated with the motivation of mechanics, i.e. high investment of time and energy to play as best as one can. Mechanics accurately predicts IGD development, alongside occupational and social problems due to wasted time (Kuss et al., 2012). Beranuy et al. (2013) show how escapism can end in dissociation and the gamer’s inability to sustain relationships with individuals other than virtual ones. Dissociation also serves as a motivational factor to continue gaming (Caplan et al., 2009). Thus, entertainment and playfulness value of early online gaming experience cannot be underestimated.Motivations behind pathological gaming can also be conceptualised using the Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB). Behaviour is determined by intention, a function of attitude, subjective norm (SN) and perceived behavioural control (PBC) (Ajzen, 1991). Haagsma et al. (2013) undertook a six-month longitudinal study and found that PBC, i.e. one’s perception of the level of difficulty involved in stopping gaming, had the highest predicting power of IGD. Those who had positive attitudes towards gaming and low PBC reported an intention to continue excessive gaming. The SN, i.e. perceived expectations of others, only played a role in initial stages of addiction. These findings have practical implications for treatment, as the TPB can be used as a screening tool to determine excessive gamers’ intentions for future behaviour, before it becomes pathological.Little research exists into genetic predisposition to IGD. However, Grant et al. (2010) found that pathological internet users, including internet gamers, show higher frequencies of the long arm allele of the serotonin transporter gene 5HTTLPR. They explained their findings in terms of associated greater harm avoidance, i.e. excessive shyness, pessimism and fearfulness, linked to escapism in IGD. Caplan et al. (2009) demonstrated that poor social skills, introversion, shyness and social anxiety are positively correlated with IGD.In contrast to genetics, pathophysiology, i.e. the correlation between gaming addiction and physical changes in the brain, explains IGD risk factors more confidently. fMRI studies reveal the same brain activation processes in substance and behavioural addicts, including pathological gamers and gamblers. Significantly greater neural activation takes place in the left occipital lobe, parahippocampal gyrus, dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, nucleus accumbens, right orbitofrontal cortex, bilateral anterior cingulate, medial frontal cortex, and the caudate nucleus (Ko et al., 2009; Kuss & Griffiths, 2012). Ko et al. (2009) concluded that the urge in IGD and craving in substance dependence share the same neurobiological mechanism. Similarly, Han et al. (2007) reported higher occurrence of two polymorphisms in the dopaminergic system, the area linked to substance addictions.The specific neural activations in the brain cannot be denied potential etiological status; they show that risk factors can be physiological and biochemical in nature, not simply psychosocial. However, to date, it has not been established whether the changes in the brain are specific to IGD, substance addictions, or any activity that results in arousal. Furthermore, pathophysiological findings do not specify whether the changes are causes or effects of IGD.The second category of IGD risk factors are external influences. The highly addictive nature of internet games is due to their construction features that reinforce playing (Kuss & Griffiths, 2012). Offline games lack such structures, e.g. virtual alter-egos (avatars), superior to real-life physical characteristics and characters, adult content, finding rare items located in different online ‘worlds’, and watching games’ cut scenes (Lee & Shin, 2004). Playing online with others is a highly reinforcing activity. Positive reinforcement results in game perseverance, whilst negative reinforcement leads to frustration (Chumbley & Griffiths, 2006).The application of variable ratio reinforcement schedules (Skinner, 1953) gives strongest habitual and repetitive behaviour. Pathological gamers continue responding, even when immediate reinforcement is not offered, hoping that another reward is close-by – the effect of intermittent reinforcement schedules, as part of the partial reinforcement effect theory by Skinner, which particularly affects younger players (Wood, 2008) due to the reinforcing nature of newly found feelings of excitement (Solomon & Corbit, 1974). Behavioural addition can be better understood when the Hedonic Management Model of Addiction (HMMA) is applied (Brown, 1991). Arousal and mood are manipulated using specific activities to achieve pleasure, i.e. good hedonic tone. Addiction is a result of powerful manipulation of the hedonic tone to achieve euphoria. Although the HMMA explains the complex behavioural changes associated with addiction, the theory lacks empirical evidence and fails to explain why gamers might return to addiction after a long period of abstinence.A game genre is a better predictor of the extent of pathological gaming. Fantasy-themed Massively Multiplayer Online Role-Playing Games (MMORPGs), e.g. World of Warcraft or Skyrim, are especially problematic, as they require substantial personal commitment and time investment at the expense of work- or study-related activities (Kuss et al., 2012). Elliott et al. (2012) identified the following addictive elements of MMORPG games: never-ending nature; desirable items to collect and trade; social organisation of in-game groups, with notions of belonging and obligation; and membership based on monthly subscription that encourages excessive playing to secure best value for money. The elements powerfully resonate with Skinner’s reinforcement effect theory.Beranuy et al. (2013) explain why MMORPGs are more addictive than violent first-person shooter (FPS) games, e.g. Call of Duty, or Halo. The FPSs provide entertainment and temporary dissociation, but not more permanent escapism by means of virtual friendships. Through avatars, players interact, cooperate and compete in the game, which facilitates dissociation with real life and online identity formation (Smahel et al., 2008). MMORPG addiction is associated with gradually increased playing time, a loss of control over the behaviour and a narrow focus. The consequences resemble those in substance addictions: salience, mood modification via negative reinforcement, cravings and resultant serious adverse effects. Tolerance and relapse can additionally be present.Caplan’s (2005) Social Skill Model is particularly useful in making predictions about one’s pathological MMORPG gaming behaviour. Poor self-presentational skills result in preference of online interactions over face-to-face communication. Secondly, a media attendance model by Bandura’s (1986) Social Cognitive Theory allows analysis of uses and gratifications in IGD. LaRose and Easton (2002) applied the model and found that media exposure can be predicted from media gratification and that gratification goes beyond entertainment or ‘pass time’ factor. Habit, deficient self-regulation and internet self-efficacy are new gratification dimensions, previously overlooked by researchers.In 2006, 1.2 million South Korean children aged 6-19 were identified by the Korean government as being at risk of gaming addiction, with 80% needing psychotropic medication (Block, 2008). Lee and Shin (2004) refer to IGD in children as deviant behaviour understood in terms of the Self-Control Theory (Vazsonyi & Belliston, 2007). High pressure to achieve at school leaves Korean children stressed and can result in addictive avatar consumption. Parental socialisation is partly to blame, as early inability to satisfy the parents’ expectations of high grades in competitive schools frees children from social control. Once the forces of social control seize to operate, stressed Korean children escape to the virtual world, where their efforts and work pay off, where they find emotional fulfilment and where conformity becomes irrelevant (Vazsonyi & Belliston, 2007).Finally, the style of engagement in video gaming accurately predicts one’s risk of IGD. Using the Self-Determination Theory and the Dualistic Model of Passion, Przybylski et al. (2009) distinguished between harmonious vs. obsessive engagement in gaming. High levels of basic psychological need satisfaction lead to harmonious engagement, where the individual wants to play, whilst low levels foster obsessive passion and a feeling of having to play, which turns into addiction.Few studies have looked at pathological gamers in treatment (Beranuy et al., 2013). Application of pharmacological treatment follows reasoning that, as fMRI studies show the same neurobiological mechanism in pathological gaming and substance dependence (Ko et al., 2009; Huang et al., 2010), then pharmacology used in substance addiction treatment should be equally effective in IGD. For example, bupoprion used for treating drug abuse was shown to be effective in decreasing cravings and cue induced brain activity in pathological gamers (Han et al., 2011).Additional evidence comes from studies into the selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors and naltrexone in pathological gambling (Hung, et al., 2010). Grant et al. (2010) investigated the role of a mu opioid receptor antagonist used in treatment of alcoholism and opioid dependence in treatment of pathological gambling and internet addiction. Results of their study show promise for treatment of both behavioural addictions that share the same pattern of modulation of the dopaminergic mesolimbic pathway, whilst the very pathways were not found in sufferers of obsessive-compulsive disorder (Grant et al., 2010).As many IGD sufferers present Axis I and II disorders that need pharmacologic treatment, the goal is to optimise existing treatment whilst considering the additional symptoms of gaming addiction. Sattar and Ramaswamy (2004) studied an IGD patient who, after three months of receiving 30mg of escitalopram for anxiety and depression, stopped having urges to play online. Similarly, methylphenidate (MPH) appears to be effective in treatment of ADHD and IGD; Huang et al. (2010) reported significant reduction in impulsivity and cravings for excessive playing after 8 weeks of MPH treatment.Non-pharmacological treatment screening is based on the DSM symptoms checklist for substance dependence (Achab et al., 2011) followed by behavioural (BT) and cognitive-behavioural therapies (CBT) or online support groups (Griffiths & Meredith, 2009). CBT has been shown effective in treating compulsive disorders, substance abuse and emotional disorders (Young, 2009). Patients learn how to moderate and control their use of the internet, then use of games (behavioural stage) and how to address maladaptive thoughts (cognitive stage), e.g. distortions “Just a few minutes won’t hurt” (Young, 2007). CBT can be effective after only 8 weeks of treating IGD, where six-month follow-ups show sustained ability to control behaviour and cognitions management (Young, 2007; Du et al., 2010).Less research is available on the effects of psychoanalysis, gestalt or group counselling. Traditional substance addiction treatments combine the pharmacological and non-pharmacological approaches to maximise effects. However, Gooding and Tarrier (2009) call for more systematic review and meta-analyses of all types of interventions to avoid generalising of behavioural addictions’ treatment based on assumed links to substance addictions.An equally pressing matter is prevention of IGD. Despite calls to educate children with pre-existing psychosocial morbidities, Kim (2007) showed that, whilst prevention programmes in schools increase knowledge about online gaming, they do not result in a significant self-control change. This contradicts theoretical premises of the Self-Control and Self-Regulation models, which place IGD within a wider socio-cultural context. As the motivation to decrease playing must come from within the child, the behavioural theories appear more relevant.In summary, whilst internal and external risks are equally important in IGD development, psychological theories tend to explain them in isolation. Although online gaming addiction appears to be firmly fixed within the urban sociocultural context, social theories alone are insufficient in making predictions about one’s pathological gaming behaviour. In contrast, combined behavioural and cognitive approaches originating in Skinner’s and Bandura’s theoretical work show promise for treatment and prevention of IGD, with CBT remaining the most effective treatment for IGD at present.ReferencesAchab, S., Nicolier, M., Mauny, F., Monnin, J., Trojak, B., Vandel, P., Sechter, D., Gorwood, P., & Haffen, E. (2011). Massively multiplayer online role-playing games: comparing characteristics of addict vs. non-addict online recruited gamers in a French adult population. BMC Psychiatry, 11(144).Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior & Human Decision Processes, 50, 179-211.Anderson, C. A., & Bushman, B. J. (2001). Effects of violent video games on aggressive behavior, aggressive cognition, aggressive affect, physiological arousal, and prosocial behavior: a meta-analytic review of the scientific literature. Psychological Science, 12, 353-359.APA (2013). Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5). Arlington, VA: American Psychiatric Association.Bandura, A. (1986). Social Foundations of Thought and Action: A Social Cognitive Theory. London: Prentice Hall.Beranuy, M., Carbonell, X., & Griffiths, M. D. (2013). A Qualitative Analysis of Online Gaming Addicts in Treatment. International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction, 11, 149-161.Bioulac, S., Arfi, L., & Bouvard, M. P. (2008). Attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder and video games: A comparative study of hyperactive and control children. European Psychiatry, 23(2), 134-141.Block, J. J. (2008). Issues for DSM-V: Internet Addiction. American Journal of Psychiatry, 165(3), 306-307.Blum, K., Noble, E. P., Sheridan, P. J., et al. (1990). Allelic association of human dopamine D2 receptor gene in alcoholism. Journal of the American Medical Association, 263, 2055-2060.Brown, R. I. F. (1991). Gaming, gambling and other addictive play. In J. H. Kerr & M. J Apter (Eds.), Adult play: A reversal theory approach (pp.101-118). Amsterdam: Swets & Zeitlinger.Caplan, S. E. (2005). A social skill account of problematic internet use. Journal of Communication, 55, 721-736.Caplan, S. E., Williams, D., & Yee, N. (2009). Problematic internet use and psychosocial well-being among MMO players. Computers in Human Behavior, 25(6), 1312-1319.Christakis, D. A. (2010). Internet addiction: a 21st century epidemic? BMC Medicine, 8(61), 1741-1744.Chumbley, J. & Griffiths, M. (2006). Affect and the Computer Game Player: The Effect of Gender, Personality, and Game Reinforcement Structure on Affective Responses to Computer Game-Play. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 9(3), 308-316.Desai, R. A., Krishnan-Sarin, S., Cavallo, D., & Potenza, M. N. (2010). Video-gaming among high school students: health correlates, gender differences, and problematic gaming. Pediatrics, 126(6), 1414-1424.Du, Y. S., Jiang, W. & Vance, A. (2010). Longer term effect of randomized, controlled group cognitive behavioural therapy for Internet addiction in adolescent students in Shanghai. Australian & New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry, 44, 129-134.Elliott, L., Ream, G., McGinsky, E., & Dunlap, E. (2012). The Contribution of Game Genre and Other Use Patterns to Problem Video Game Play among Adult Video Gamers. International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction, 10, 948-969.Ferguson, C. J., & Ceranoglu, T. A., (2013). Attention Problems and Pathological Gaming: Resolving the ‘Chicken and Egg’ in a Prospective Analysis. Psychiatric Quarterly. Published online on 17 October 2013. Retrieved from Page on christopherjferguson.comFerguson, C. J., Coulson, M., & Barnett, J. (2011). A meta-analysis of pathological gaming prevalence and comorbidity with mental health, academic and social problems. Journal of Psychiatric Research, 45(12), 1573–1578.Gooding, P., & Tarrier, N. A. (2009). Systematic review and meta-analysis of cognitive-behavioural interventions to reduce problem gambling: hedging our bets? Behaviour Research and Therapy, 47(7), 592-607.Grant, J. E., Potenza, M. N., Weinstein, A. & Gorelick, D. A. (2010). Introduction to Behavioral Addictions. American Journal of Drug and Alcohol Abuse, 36(5), 233-241.Griffiths, M. D, & Meredith, A. (2009). Videogame Addiction and its Treatment. Journal of Contemporary Psychotherapy, 39, 247-253.Haagsma, M. C., King, D. L., Pieterse, M. E., & Peters, O. (2013). Assessing Problematic Video Gaming Using the Theory of Planned Behavior: A Longitudinal Study of Dutch Young People. International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction, 11, 172-185.Han, D. H., Lee, Y. S., Yang, K. C., Kim, E. Y., Lyoo, I. K., & Renshaw, P. F. (2007). Dopamine genes and reward dependence in adolescents with excessive internet video game play. Journal of Addiction Medicine, 1(3), 133-138.Han, D. H., Hwang, J. W., & Renshaw, P. F. (2011). Bupropion sustained release treatment decreases craving for video games and cue-induced brain activity in patients with Internet video game addiction. Psychology of Popular Media Culture, 1(S), 108-117.Hussain, Z., & Griffiths, M. D. (2009). The attitudes, feelings, and experiences of online gamers: a qualitative analysis. Cyberpsychology & Behavior, 12(6), 747-753.Kalivas, P. W., & Volkow, N. D. (2005). The neural basis of addiction: a pathology of motivation and choice. The American Journal of Psychiatry, 162, 1403-1413.Kim, S. J. (2007). Effects of Online Game Addiction Prevention Programme for Middle School Students in South Korean Urban City. Children’s Mental Health, 13.Kim, E. J., Namkoong, K., Ku T. & Kim, S. J. (2008). The relationship between online game addiction and aggression, self-control and narcissistic personality traits. European Psychiatry, 23, 212-218.Ko, C. H., Liu, G. C., Hsiao, S., et al. (2009). Brain activities associated with gaming urge of online gaming addiction. Journal of Psychiatric Research, 43, 739-747.Kuss, D. J., & Griffits, M. (2012). Internet Gaming Addiction: A Systematic Review of Empirical Research. International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction, 10, 278-296.Kuss, D. J., Louws, J. & Wiers, R. W. (2012). Online Gaming Addiction? Motives Predict Addictive Play Behavior in Massively Multiplayer Online Role-Playing Games. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 15(9), 480-485.LaRose, R. & Eastin, M. S. (2002). A Social Cognitive Explanation of Internet Uses and Gratifications: Toward a New Theory of Media Attendance. A paper submitted to the Communication and Technology Division, International Communication Association, Michigan State University. 1 November 2002. Retrieved fromToward a New Theory of Media AttendanceLee, O. & Shin, M. (2004). Addictive Consumption of Avatars in Cyberspace. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 7(4), 417-420.Lemmens, J. S., Valkenburg, P., & Peter, J. (2009). Development and validation of a game addiction scale for adolescents. Media Psychology, 12, 77-95.Mehroof, M. & Griffiths, M. D. (2010). Online Gaming Addiction: The Role of Sensation Seeking, Self-Control, Neuroticism, Aggression, State Anxiety, and Trait Anxiety. CyberPsychology, Behavior and Social Networking, 13(3), 313-316.Noble, E. P., Blum, K., Khalsa, M. E., et al. (1993). Allelic association of the D2 dopamine receptor gene with cocaine dependence. Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 33, 271-285.Przybylski, A. K., Weinstein, N. M. A., Ryan, R. M., & Rigby, S. C. (2009). Having to versus Wanting to Play: Background and Consequences of Harmonious versus Obsessive Engagement in Video Games. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 12(5), 485-492.Sattar, P. & Ramaswamy, S. (2004). Internet gaming addiction. Canadian Journal of Psychiatry, 49, 869-870.Skinner, B.F. (1953). Science and Human Behavior. New York: Macmillan.Smahel, D., Blinka, L., & Ledabyl, O. (2008). Playing MMORPGs: connections between addiction and identifying with a character. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 11, 715-718.Solomon, R. J., & Corbit, J. D. (197). An Opponent-Process Theory of Motivation. Temporal Dynamics of Affect. Psychological Review, 81, 119-145.Sublette, V. A., & Mullan, B. (2012). Consequences of Play: A Systematic Review of the Effects of Online Gaming. International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction, 10, 3-23.Turner, N. E., Paglia-Boak, A., Ballon, B., Cheung, J. T. W., Adlaf, E. M., Henderson, J., Chan, V., Rehm, J., Hamilton, H., & Mann, R. E. (2012). Prevalence of Problematic Video Gaming among Ontario Adolescents. International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction, 10, 877-889.Vazsonyi, A. T., & Belliston, L. M. (2007). The Family - Low Self-Control - Deviance: A Cross-Cultural and Cross-National Test of Self-Control Theory. Criminal Justice and Behavior, 34(4), 505-530.Walther, B., Morgenstern, M., & Hanewinkel, R. (2012). Co-Occurrence of Addictive Behaviours: Personality Factors Related to Substance Use, Gambling and Computer Gaming. European Addiction Research, 18, 167-174.Wood, R. T. A. (2008). Problems with the concept of video game ‘addiction’: Some case study examples. International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction 6(2):169-178.Yee, N. (2007). Motivations of play in online games. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 9, 772-775.Yoo, H. J., Cho, S. C., Ha, J., Yune, S. K., Kim, S. J., Chung, A., Sung, Y. H., & Lyoo, I. K. (2004). Attention deficit hyperactivity symptoms and Internet addiction. Psychiatry and Clinical Neurosciences, 58, 487-494.Young, K. S. (2007). Cognitive Behavior Therapy with Internet Addicts: Treatment Outcomes and Implications. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 10(5), 671-679.Young, K. S. (2009). Internet Addiction: Diagnosis and Treatment Considerations. Journal of Contemporary Psychotherapy, 39, 241-246.

Traditionally, the most effective communication is one that takes place face to face, looking into each other's eyes, digging little by little, until we reach the soul of others and click. Only then are we in a position to initiate the exchange of information, either as sender or receiver, or both.The first men made use of various supports and modes of communication that corresponded to their precarious state of life: the smoke signs, the hieroglyphs, the drawings on the walls of the caves, the inscriptions on stones, on the papyri, all of this. based on communicating something and creating information, knowledge networks, either for reasons of tribal security or for reasons of group survival. To cooperate with each other, they had to develop various forms of communication, revealing that both human characteristics, cooperation and communication, were inherent in the dawn of humanity, that is, one cannot exist without the other.Ancient peoples sought a means of registering language. They painted on cave walls to send messages and used signs and symbols to designate a tribe or membership. As human knowledge developed, writing became necessary to transmit information. The first writing, which was pictographic, with symbols representing objects, was the cuneiform writing, that is, with wedge-shaped features engraved in a certain style on a clay tablet.In this first primitive stage, the incidence radius was proportional to the human capacity to carry the message, to the possibility of spreading it by their own means and scope, generally from the interested tribe or social group. It was for that very limited reason.Already in our times, far from the stone and the fire, the situation is totally different but the purposes of man in that sense remain the same. The printing press, the radio, the phonograph, the telephone, the television, have been inventions of man, oriented equally to facilitate communication, to transmit the message, to position meanings, but also to shorten the distances between transmitters and receivers of information. . The age of technology reduced the gap of distances, but brought with it the replacement of the presence and touch of blood, by multiple relationships that were more impersonal, distant, colder, definitely better informed, but no less human.Communication today and its impact on social relationsIn the process of sharing meanings, communication uses technology, the characteristics of the senders and receivers of information, their cultural reference codes, their communication protocols and the scope of the process. Today that process of sharing meanings is different . It has changed from traditional mass communication platforms: cinema, radio stations, open or subscription television channels, whose common characteristic is unidirectionality, to self-communication tools, which are more horizontal in which the receiver has a relevant role. .And that role of the receiver, in this case user of networks such as the Internet, may have a purely personal purpose or instead be part of a strategy of immersion in social initiatives or of visibility of causes, projects or undertakings of group scope for new technologies it is undoubtedly faster, there is no effort and it is practically risk-free, but it seems to many - and me too - that it does not quench the thirst for full company. On the contrary, when used for altruistic purposes, network communication operates differently. The user of them is no longer the center of the universe, but the geographically ubiquitous social environment, interest groups with specific needs that become the cause of many, who do not hesitate for a second to offer the best of themselves to help their achievement.The truth is that whatever the tool or technology we use to communicate today, they do not constitute an end in itself, but rather a mechanism to make the process of sharing meanings viable.In this sense, digital social media plays a front-line role because they all have, in general terms, a friendly, easy-to-use interface, aimed at the interaction of people and facilitating the participation of interest groups that ordinarily could not do so. , regardless of the geographical location where they are. Starting from the previous ideas and in this context, we will analyze the impact that digital media, especially social networks, have today in the dissemination and exchange of content protected by copyright and related rights and how this contributes positively -or negatively - to the effective exercise of such rights.goods and servicesPerhaps few already remember today the beginnings of the Internet and the reasons that drove its creation as a nodal communication platform. And this occurs not because of lack of interest but because they are increasingly embedded in their own dynamics and in the benefits it offers in these times, fifty years later, as a tool for sharing content of all kinds.A first initiative in this genesis of the Internet was the MAC (Machine Aided Cognition) project, developed in the 1960s by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.As Lipszyc affirms, in that first initiative the main idea revolved around experimenting with new ways of using computers in “online” mode - online - with the aim of helping people in their intellectual and creative work.The prediction has been fulfilled. There are already more than 3 billion people connected to the Internet, which represents more than 40% of the world population. At the end of 2013, the global number of people connected to the Internet was 2,802,478,934, with a penetration rate of 39% and growth between 2000-2014 of 676.3%. Of this figure, Latin America corresponds to 302,006,016 users, a penetration rate of 49.3% and growth of 1,571.4% 7.Well, that is the reality of the Internet today. A showcase of 3 billion people worldwide who network with each other and exchange content-based meanings ranging from a simple online conversation about trivial topics of the day, to songs or videos shared with others for fun reasons and entertainment, even articles or essays on various topics for academic reasons. Everything is possible on the Internet and the limit - beyond legality - is common sense.Some common Internet practices related to the use of contentThere are several types of activities on the Internet, ranging from making creative content available to network users, through the provision of applications or platforms to facilitate its use, to digital storage or repository services for such content. But in this work we will mainly highlight two: i) provide content, ii) provide hosting services or content hosting. Implicit in both is, directly or indirectly, the use of works, services and productions protected by copyright and related rights and therefore both activities liable for illegal use.Provide contentThe content provider is the primary source from which the content that circulates on the network comes and who chooses the information that is published on it. These contents can be of two types: a) own, b) external. The own contents, as works protected by copyright or interpretations or productions protected by related rights, must have attributes of originality in the first case and reflect the personal imprint of their creator when expressed materially. As their own, the content thus created can be shared on the network, without more limitations than those established in the Law or set by the author himself. On the other hand, third-party content implies that they have been used by virtue of an assignment or license8 of the author or holder of the rights over them, or that it is done within the framework of a legal limit9 on copyright or related rights, or because the term of protection10 relating to artistic works, productions or services has fully elapsed.In the second stage, the ARPANET network emerged. This was created by the Department of Defense of the United States of America in 1969 as an experimental tool to connect their computers with those of the military industry and the universities that developed projects related to defense and weapons. In this way, researchers across the country could access computers that were located in few universities and laboratories.Well, given the origins of the quintessential network -Internet- what is relevant for the purposes of this study is to address how useful - or harmful? - it has been for the activity related to the exchange of intellectual goods and services. This leads us to analyze the network from two points of view: i) the quantitative growth of the Internet as a platform for the dissemination of content, ii) some common practices on the Internet related to the use of content.The growth of the Internet as a platform for the dissemination of creative contentThe 2014 Global Internet Report identifies several milestones in the development of the Internet as a communication platform. They range from the overcoming of Dial-Up by broadband, the launch of Iphone, the irruption and positioning of mobile broadband, the launch of the 5G network, videos as the largest component of Internet traffic, irruption and SmartPhone positioning and exponential growth in the number of users connected to the network.Indeed, the report expressly states, as a question mark to highlight the growth of the Internet, the following:“It is surprising that in 2004 broadband connections barely exceeded access by telephone line, that the number of users barely exceeded one billion at the end of 2005, or that the first smartphone was just introduced in 2007 How many of us could have imagined back then that mobile broadband would soon overtake fixed broadband, users in developing countries would outnumber users in developed countries, that video traffic would surpass all other types of traffic, and that in early 2015 we would be reaching three billion users? "Provide data hosting serviceAs it is maintained in the Milenium portal, it is the service of storage, access and maintenance of the files that make up a website. Web hosting services allow companies to share the cost of a fast Internet connection.The activity of hosting data is a service of the information society in the terms of Directive 2000/31 / EC of the European Parliament and of the Council, of June 8, 2000, regarding certain legal aspects of society services of information, in particular Electronic Commerce, considering 17, consisting of any service normally provided for consideration, remotely, by means of electronic equipment for the treatment (including digital compression) and data storage, and at the individual request of a recipient of a service. The information society services also cover services consisting of transmitting information through a communication network, or hosting information provided by the recipient of the service.The responsibility of the hosting service provider or hosting service providers on the Internet (ISP), act as intermediaries and make it possible for third-party content to circulate, stay and be accessible on the network, thus serving as a bridge between those who generate or edit such content and who access it.In this intermediation activity, the ISP deals with content, hosts it, allows it to be made available or redirects it, all based on a prior instruction from the recipient of the intermediation service.However, this service does not always entail a lawful use of the contents involved in the intermediation service in question. It may not be. If it is, for example, a hosting service, the service provider could incur an illegal act by allowing the hosting of data that does not have the authorization or license to use the authors or other holders of the respective rights over them. And in this case, Peguera Poch asks, is it possible to impute to those who provide these intermediation services some type of responsibility in cases where the content transmitted or hosted is illegal?Well in principle yes. In February 2012, in The Pirate Bay case, the High Court of Justice of the United Kingdom concluded that users of the site known as The Pirate Bay were infringers of rights of reproduction and public communication of phonograms, and that the operators of The said website were incidentally responsible for these infractions.Regarding the operators of The Pirate Bay, the Judge understood that they are not mere passive custodians of torrent files. In addition, he indicated that these operators induce, incite and persuade their users to commit infringements of third-party ownership rights. On May 21, 2012, the UK Supreme Court issued a court order requiring service providers to block their users' access to The Pirate Bay, upon verifying the massive copyright infringement by the web platform.In Venezuela, the argument to attribute responsibility for the illegal use of protected content must be based on the following premises: i) Intellectual Property (and creative content is part of it) is protected in accordance with article 98 of the Constitution. of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, ii) the declaration of the use of the Internet as a priority policy for cultural development, enshrined in Presidential Decree 825 of May 22, 2000, iii) the provision of article 1185 of the Civil Code according to which all he who with intention, or by negligence or recklessness has caused harm to another, is obliged to repair it, iv) the provisions of articles 40, 42 and 42, 119, 120 and 121 of the Law on Copyright, referring to public communication rights, including making available on digital networks, the reproduction of the system of limits to exploitation rights and the acc Criminal ions for illegal public communication and reproduction of works and services and v) the rule of article 25 of the Special Law against Computer crimes dated October 30, 2001, which establishes a sentence of one to five years in prison and a fine of one hundred to five hundred tax units for which, without authorization and with the purpose of obtaining an economic benefit, reproduce, modify, copy, distribute or disclose a work obtained through access to any system that uses information technology. (Featured ours).Data hosting services and disclaimerArticle 14.1 of Directive 2000/31 / EC of the European Parliament and of the Council, regarding certain legal aspects of information society services, in particular electronic commerce in the internal market, establishes two cases of exemption from liability : 1) that the service provider does not have effective knowledge that the activity or information is unlawful and 2) that as soon as they have effective knowledge, the service provider acts promptly to withdraw the data or make access to them impossible, all without prejudice to the duty of abstention or withdrawal in cases of jurisdictional or administrative requirement (Art. 14.3).It should be noted that with respect to effective knowledge, it should be asked whether the public authority should make a specific request to the service provider, or a general declaration of withdrawal with due publicity is sufficient.Article 16.1 b) of the Spanish Law on Services of the Information Society and Electronic Commerce of July 11, 2002, establishes that it will be understood that the service provider has effective knowledge when a competent body has declared the illegality of the data, ordered its removal or that access to them is impossible, or the existence of the injury has been declared and the provider knows the corresponding resolution, without prejudice to the procedures for detection and removal of content that providers apply under voluntary agreements and other effective means of knowledge that could be established.Digital social networks as platforms for content disseminationAnd right now we are in the Internet age, in the age of digital presence, of global interconnection. In this era, the most absolute interconnection has been decreed between global beings that are barely known but that, thanks to the infinite combination of zeros and ones, have created the perfect mechanism to communicate all from their multiple absences. The Internet is a global network that has changed from being, at first, a sector project for military purposes14, to the most effective tool for global interconnection between humans; It is global in its territorial scope, in the number of connected, in the infinite and varied information that circulates through it.Interconnected people could not miss this circumstance. They had to enhance their new role as human-nodes to generate interactivity on a large scale. Thus, digital social networks (RSD) were born.The digital social networks are, following the same model of the communication networks of the traditional world and from the point of view of the interests involved, a complex network of different levels of affection between human-nodes, which share all kinds of interests , from the most trivial as an artistic or family photograph without major creative attributes, or a song or video of common interest, to any other sensitive information that could be the leitmotif of a political campaign, for example, or of support for social causes in the framework of what Shirky calls the altruistic use of the cognitive surplus (2012, p. 136). The philosophy is to put into circulation from any of the nodes of the network a matter of interest that ends up being so for the entire nodal system. All this configures the zenith of the RSD: sharing.The role of digital social networks in communication todayManuel Castell has well defined the network operating system, as follows:"A network is a set of interconnected nodes. The nodes may have more or less relevance for the whole network, so that the especially important ones are called “centers” in some versions of network theories. In any case, any component of a network (including "centers") is a node, and its function and meanings depend on the programs of the network and their interaction with other nodes of the network ".Broadly, they can be understood as an information society service15, which offers users a communication platform through the Internet so that they generate a profile and thereby facilitate interaction with other network users. . Only two of them, such as Facebook and Twitter, have between them today about 1.5 billion users, which means more than 20% of the world population. Could we have imagined just a few years ago a larger audience to express and circulate our ideas, embodied in works protected by copyright, or artistic performances and phonographic productions protected by related rights, or intangible assets protected by industrial law?The power of digital social mediaThe man, even in the caves, had the vocation of a node. The precariousness of communications in this primitive environment was not a matter of man's own attitude towards isolation, but rather of the existence of scarce and primary material resources, the attributes of which could only generate truly incipient interaction results.That is why man opted for fire and made himself smoke, and in caves he recorded messages with images of animals and other diverse forms, he experimented with tribal dances, with the songs of wars, with the guttural sounds ... everything this with the purpose of being and going beyond it, of creating an environment, and why not: thus generating primitive interconnection networks that would ensure his own survival, and that of his tribe.Today, the phenomenon of digital social networks is based precisely on the interactive and multinodal logic of the Internet. Each connected citizen is a node and each node has a role. The strength of social networks is proportional to the degree of maturity and awareness of its parts, its nodes, and that strength creates paradigms, values, meanings, which end up being the guide of a community at a certain time and from which it is they shape their behaviors.We can summarize the power of global networks, like so:“The basic activities that shape and control human life in every corner of the planet are organized in global networks: financial markets; the transnational production, management and distribution of goods and services; highly skilled work; science and technology, including university education; the media; multi-object Internet communication networks; art, culture, entertainment, sport […] "So digital social networks have been rapidly developing into a kind of global laboratory where ideas are recycled and messages are produced. They are a kind of trigger pulled by many strings, globally articulated only by good conscience.The strength of RSD is summarized in its ability to influence. And this capacity has to do, among other aspects, with the following:to. Interconnectivity.It is one of the key elements of RSD. Beings in diverse and distant points of the planet are connected with communities of similar interests, without previously knowing each other and without having had to make significant prior mobilization investments to meet and get to know each other. Traditionally in the network marketing system the concept of 4P has prevailed, coined by Jerome McCarthy, with which he refers to Product, Price, Place and Promotion. Well, the ubiquitous conditions of the digital world shifted the focus to a new protagonist: the peer. This is represented by each of the nodes, and its role is no longer passive but rather of great interactivity and prominence in the generation of content that circulates through the system. As Reig maintains, users are now called rather prosumers because they have advanced to a larger stage where they play both consumers and content producers.b. InformationalismThis is a term coined by Manuel Castell in the Red Society to define the new technological paradigm that constitutes the material basis of the societies of the beginning of the 21st century. It is based on the increase in human communication and processing capacity, and its main characteristic is precisely this self-expanding capacity for communication and processing in terms of volume, complexity and speed.c. HorizontalityDigital social networks are horizontal in nature, as opposed to vertical systems of human interaction and control, typical of traditional or more conservative business or political organization systems. Horizontality is a happy consequence of the irruption of technology on a large scale, of massive access to interconnection devices, of spontaneity, of citizen empowerment.d. Link awarenessSocial networks are primarily made up of two major components: infrastructure and human beings. People are the living component of that great network system, they are nodes of consciousness that can choose to live or survive. If they live, act conscientiously, think, generate debates, think, disagree, contribute, agree, they are integrated according to deliberate purposes. If they only survive, they are passive, replicating actors, simple walkers on the path pointed out by others.and. Rooting for JusticeWith digital social networks there has been an awakening of consciousness; the citizen has self-empowered and that empowerment is not an end in itself but rather a tool to influence. Influence the environment, transmit ideas, points of view, meanings. A tool for sharing. Share experiences, information and create knowledge. In short, building new values, new forms of critical behavior whose ultimate goal is that eternal search for El Dorado, that is, the search for Justice.We believe with Castell that our challenge is to conceive and assume once and for all the interactive and nodal logic of the Internet as a tool for exchange, inclusion and collaboration.How to use digital social networks to position works and artistic servicesThere is no doubt then: digital social networks are a fantastic and very effective mechanism for sharing content of all kinds. For the purposes of this study, let us consider below how to make them a great ally in the task of making creative initiatives visible, either driven by the creators themselves in cases of personal entrepreneurship, or by virtue of an initiative by such entertainment companies. such as publishers, producers, media such as radio or television, digital content broadcasting platforms, etc., etc. Whatever the chosen route, these actions involve at least three specific activities: i) create content that can be protected in the field of copyright or related rights, ii) license them under a payment method or under a free Creative license Common, for example, and iii) make use of applications or digital social platforms.Regular activities to share content on RSDIn the act of creating content that can be protected in the field of copyright, what matters is originality, the imprint that each person prints on the way in which he expresses his ideas, whether in the literary, artistic or scientific field. Nothing matters the form of expression, merit or destiny of the created work, only the creative and original character with which it expresses itself18. (our highlight). In this sense, Antequera Parilli maintains: "the originality of the work points to its" individuality "(and not to the novelty stricto sensu, typical of invention law), that is, that the creative product, due to its form of expression, must have enough characteristics of their own to distinguish it from any other of the same genus. "Previous study, we grouped the activities carried out in digital social networks, as follows:i. Search and follow friends or acquaintances.ii. Create and upload images, songs, videos, texts.iii. Read and share news on various topics.iv. Share about events of social or sports interest.v. Make purchases and other commercial activities online.saw. Give an account of what is thought and done at a certain time.vii. Blogging: create post for web pages and blogs on the Internet.viii. Register and participate in thematic interest groups.Of all of them, it is of particular interest for the purposes of this work those related to the creation, search and exchange of information, since it is usual for a significant percentage of the content that is produced and exchanged through digital social networks to have a legal implication related to intellectual property, and specifically to copyright and related rights.It is enough to observe the typology of Facebook, for example, to realize it: conversations or chats in real time, exchange of audio and video data files, download of songs, photographs, sending of links that direct to pages of diverse content, among them summaries of novels, stories, essays, or poems, generally owned by third parties, but it may happen that they also exchange protected material whose authorship and ownership corresponds to the user of the network.In the case of Twitter, something similar happens: although it is true that the written interaction between users who follow each other is limited to 140 characters, this does not in any way diminish the effectiveness of this social network for exchanging content, generally protected by the right of author and related rights.Just a tweet of 140 characters is enough to answer the question What´s happening? to send information to the rest of the followers in the network, but that tweet is usually accompanied by a URL, reduced with a URL shortener like , for example. The grace of these shorteners is that they allow long addresses to shrink up to 90%, leaving behind those unsightly and uncomfortable web addresses.So the positioning of works and services through digital social networks involves a lot of interaction, that people talk and talk to us. And how do you get people to talk and talk to us? ... try using the 4C formula: create, share, converse, connect.The four C's in the dissemination of content on digital social networks.CreatesYou have to delve into a niche of expertise, imagine all possible topics, ask yourself a question, make a statement, or show how to solve a certain matter of general interest. Everything serves these purposes. Then turn the ideas into a short video, song, or post or article as lengthy as you want, though a 500- to 800-character post isn't bad. The incorporation of images and keywords should not be forgotten either in the case of articles or posts for a blog or web page. Then repeat the process over and over, until you create a habit.ShareThere is little point in creating content and not sharing it. People share what they like, from a word of mouth recommendation about a restaurant where he has eaten like the gods to an article or essay whose ideas have been so useful to him that he cannot resist the temptation to let others know. others. If you've created content you like, share it!… Oh, and don't worry so much about third-party judgment, total approval pats will come much later. If not, your success will be short-lived.TalkOnce the dynamics of creating and regularly sharing content through social media platforms have been established, talk! Use the profiles on Twitter, Facebook, Google+ or others not only to share your own content but also to spread the content of your followers and require help from them on various topics, points of view, opinions, etc. Media helpful discussions, make comments that add value to the discussion, don't shy away from virtual forums and listen.ConnectMake your actions on social networks relevant to others. Create to share, share to talk, talk to connect. The formula is not as simple as it seems, but to some extent it leads to loyalty and we already know that all loyalty is a voluntary commitment. Only people connected to each other are able to put down their resistance and offer themselves entirely to the pleasures of their mutual contributions.