Ah, what’s the new year without another look at “Internet addiction disorder,” especially since it’s being considered for inclusion into the DSM-V? Yours truly is quoted in this one, so at least it brings some balance to the topic. And I do note the tendency for researchers and policy makers working on the DSM-V to want to seem to err on the side of including more disorders according to what little information we have on the upcoming book (the DSM-V is being assembled in secret, so it’s pretty hard to tell what the heck they are doing over there).

What I do know is that the concept of “Internet addiction disorder” remains so muddled and contradictory, it would be a tragedy if this “diagnosis” was legitimized by the DSM-V, while other tragedies — such as TV addiction disorder, book addiction disorder, and socializing addiction disorder — remained unacknowledged (and therefore, ostensibly, untreated).