The field of problematic Internet use (PIU) has seen significant academic interest in recent years. In the absence of a universally accepted definition of PIU, a multitude of scales have been developed to evaluate it. Notably, the Generalized Problematic Internet Use Scale 2 (GPIUS-2), formulated on the cognitive-behavioral model by Caplan, emerges as a significant instrument in this domain. This research conducts a systematic review and meta-analysis of the GPIUS-2. The central aim is to assess its internal structure and reliability. This is achieved by a meta-analysis of the Cronbach’s alpha and the factorial structure, which is carried out in the framework of the Meta-Analytic Structural Equation Modeling. The results reveal high internal consistency of the GPIUS-2, support the multidimensional nature of the scale, and provide evidence about the presence of a generalized factor supporting the use of a total scale value as indicator of GPIUS. In addition, the study delineates potential areas for future research aimed at further refining the validity of the GPIUS-2.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
CaplanSE. Problematic internet use and psychosocial well-being: Development of a theory-based cognitive–behavioral measurement instrument. Compu Human Behavior, 2002; 18(5):553–575; doi: 10.1016/S0747-5632(02)00004-3
2.
ChamberlainSR, IoannidisK, GrantJE. The impact of comorbid impulsive/compulsive disorders in problematic internet use. J Behav Addict, 2018; 7(2):269–275; doi: 10.1556/2006.7.2018.30
3.
Ortuño-SierraJ, Pérez-SáenzJ, MasonO, et al.Uso problemático de internet en adolescentes: Validación en español de la Escala de Uso Compulsivo de Internet (CIUS). Adicciones, 2022; doi: 10.20882/adicciones.1801
4.
Hidalgo-FuentesS, Martí-VilarM, Ruiz-OrdoñezY. Problematic internet use and resilience: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Nurs Rep, 2023; 13(1):337–350; doi: 10.3390/nursrep13010032
5.
RuckwongpatrK, ChirawatP, GhavifekrS, et al.Problematic Internet use (PIU) in youth: A brief literature review of selected topics. Curr Opin Behavioral Scie, 2022; 46:101150; doi: 10.1016/j.cobeha.2022.101150
6.
AlimoradiZ, BroströmA, PotenzaMN, et al.Associations between behavioral addictions and mental health concerns during the COVID-19 pandemic: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Curr Addict Rep, 2024; 11(3):565–587; doi: 10.1007/s40429-024-00555-1
7.
JolinE, WellerR. Problematic internet use and suicidal behavior in adolescents: A review. Ann Clin Psychiatry, 2023; 35(4):272–279; doi: 10.12788/acp.0119
8.
BlinkaL, ŠkařupováK, ŠevčíkováA, et al.Excessive internet use in European adolescents: What determines differences in severity? Int J Public Health, 2015; 60(2):249–256; doi: 10.1007/s00038-014-0635-x
9.
DurkeeT, KaessM, CarliV, et al.Prevalence of pathological internet use among adolescents in E urope: Demographic and social factors. Addiction, 2012; 107(12):2210–2222; doi: 10.1111/j.1360-0443.2012.03946.x
10.
ChengC, LiAY. Internet addiction prevalence and quality of (Real) Life: A meta-analysis of 31 nations across seven world regions. Cyberpsychol Behav Soc Netw, 2014; 17(12):755–760; doi: 10.1089/cyber.2014.0317
11.
PanY-C, ChiuY-C, LinY-H. Systematic review and meta-analysis of epidemiology of internet addiction. Neurosci Biobehav Rev, 2020; 118:612–622; doi: 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2020.08.013
12.
DahlD, BergmarkKH. Persistence in problematic internet use—A systematic review and meta-analysis. Front Sociol, 2020; 5:30; doi: 10.3389/fsoc.2020.00030
13.
BesserB, RumpfH-J, BischofA, et al.Internet-related disorders: Development of the short compulsive internet use scale. Cyberpsychol Behav Soc Netw, 2017; 20(11):709–717; doi: 10.1089/cyber.2017.0260
14.
BrandM, YoungKS, LaierC, et al.Integrating psychological and neurobiological considerations regarding the development and maintenance of specific Internet-use disorders: An Interaction of Person-Affect-Cognition-Execution (I-PACE) model. Neurosci Biobehav Rev, 2016; 71:252–266; doi: 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2016.08.033
15.
BarkeA, NyenhuisN, Kröner-HerwigB. The German version of the generalized pathological internet use scale 2: A validation study. Cyberpsychol Behav Soc Netw, 2014; 17(7):474–482; doi: 10.1089/cyber.2013.0706
16.
BeardKW. Internet addiction: A review of current assessment techniques and potential assessment questions. Cyberpsychol Behav, 2005; 8(1):7–14; doi: 10.1089/cpb.2005.8.7
17.
ChowSL, LeungGM, NgC, et al.A screen for identifying maladaptive internet use. Int J Ment Health Addiction, 2009; 7(2):324–332; doi: 10.1007/s11469-008-9170-4
18.
LaconiS, Kaliszewska-CzeremskaK, TricardN, et al.The generalized problematic internet use scale-2 in a French sample: Psychometric evaluation of the theoretical model. Encephale, 2018; 44(3):192–199; doi: 10.1016/j.encep.2017.09.001
19.
CaplanSE. Theory and measurement of generalized problematic internet use: A two-step approach. Comput Human Behavior, 2010; 26(5):1089–1097; doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2010.03.012
20.
DavisRA. A cognitive-behavioral model of pathological internet use. Comput Human Behavior, 2001; 17(2):187–195; doi: 10.1016/S0747-5632(00)00041-8
21.
CiżkowiczB. Validation of theoretical and measurement model of the generalized problematic internet use scale 2 in a polish sample. RPsych, 2022; 25(1):67–85; doi: 10.18290/rpsych2022.0004
22.
Gámez-GuadixM, OrueI, CalveteE. Evaluation of the cognitive-behavioral model of generalized and problematic internet use in Spanish adolescents. Psicothema, 2013; 25(3):299–306; doi: 10.7334/psicothema2012.274
23.
Gámez‐GuadixM, Villa‐GeorgeFI, CalveteE. Measurement and analysis of the cognitive‐behavioral model of generalized problematic internet use among Mexican adolescents. J Adolesc, 2012; 35(6):1581–1591; doi: 10.1016/j.adolescence.2012.06.005
24.
MarzoJC, García-OlivaC, PiquerasJA. Factorial analysis and gender invariance of GPIUS2 scale and evaluation of Caplan’s cognitive-behavioral model of problematic internet use in adolescents. An Psicol, 2022; 38(3):469–477; doi: 10.6018/analesps.508461
25.
PontesHM, CaplanSE, GriffithsMD. Psychometric validation of the generalized problematic internet use scale 2 in a Portuguese sample. Comput Human Behavior, 2016; 63:823–833; doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2016.06.015
26.
YoshimuraS, ShibataM, KyuragiY, et al.The Japanese version of the Generalized Problematic Internet Use Scale 2 (GPIUS2): Psychometric evaluation and analysis of the theoretical model. Concerto C. ed. PLoS One, 2022; 17(11):e0273895; doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0273895
27.
PageMJ, McKenzieJE, BossuytPM, et al.The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. Int J Surg, 2021; 88:105906; doi: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2021.105906
28.
Caner-YıldırımS, YıldırımZ. Psychometric properties of Turkish version of generalized problematic internet use scale-2 and the relationship between internet use patterns and problematic internet use. Int J Ment Health Addiction, 2023; 21(6):3749–3771; doi: 10.1007/s11469-022-00819-9
29.
ProbierzE, GaluszkaAI, GaluszkaA. Generalized problematic internet use scale 2: Results of validation on polish sample. IEEE Access, 2020; 8:117615–117622; doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2020.3004652
30.
MokkinkLB, De VetHCW, PrinsenCAC, et al.COSMIN risk of bias checklist for systematic reviews of patient-reported outcome measures. Qual Life Res, 2018; 27(5):1171–1179; doi: 10.1007/s11136-017-1765-4
31.
BonettDG. Sample size requirements for estimating intraclass correlations with desired precision. Stat Med, 2002; 21(9):1331–1335; doi: 10.1002/sim.1108
32.
KnappG, HartungJ. Improved tests for a random effects meta‐regression with a single covariate. Stat Med, 2003; 22(17):2693–2710; doi: 10.1002/sim.1482
33.
HigginsJPT, ThompsonSG. Quantifying heterogeneity in a meta‐analysis. Stat Med, 2002; 21(11):1539–1558; doi: 10.1002/sim.1186
34.
SteinmetzH, BlockJ. Meta-analytic structural equation modeling (MASEM): New tricks of the trade. Manag Rev Q, 2022; 72(3):605–626; doi: 10.1007/s11301-022-00293-6
ViechtbauerW. Conducting meta-analyses in R with the Metafor package. J Stat Soft, 2010; 36(3); doi: 10.18637/jss.v036.i03
37.
CheungMW-L. metaSEM: An R package for meta-analysis using structural equation modeling. Front Psychol, 2014; 5:1521; doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01521
38.
HuL, BentlerPM. Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Stru Equ Model: A Multidis J, 1999; 6(1):1–55; doi: 10.1080/10705519909540118
39.
GioiaF, RegaV, BoursierV. Problematic internet use and emotional dysregulation among young people: A literature review. Clin Neuropsychiatry, 2021; 18(1):41–54; doi: 10.36131/cnfioritieditore20210104
40.
AduenPA. Resilience builder program therapy addresses core social deficits and emotion dysregulation in youth with high-functioning autism spectrum disorder. J Psychol Abnorm Child, 2014; 03(02); doi: 10.4172/2329-9525.1000118
41.
IliescuD, BartramD, ZeinounP, et al.The Test Adaptation Reporting Standards (TARES): Reporting test adaptations. Inter J Test, 2024; 24(1):80–102; doi: 10.1080/15305058.2023.2294266
42.
Anonymous. ITC Guidelines for translating and adapting tests (Second Edition). Inter J Test, 2018; 18(2):101–134; doi: 10.1080/15305058.2017.1398166
43.
HuangY-T, RuckwongpatrK, ChenJ-K, et al.Specific internet disorders in university students in Taiwan and Hong Kong: Psychometric properties with invariance testing for the traditional Chinese version of the assessment of criteria for specific internet-use disorders (ACSID-11). Int J Ment Health Addiction, 2024; doi: 10.1007/s11469-024-01270-8
44.
MüllerSM, WegmannE, OelkerA, et al.Assessment of Criteria for Specific Internet-use Disorders (ACSID-11): Introduction of a new screening instrument capturing ICD-11 criteria for gaming disorder and other potential Internet-use disorders. J Behav Addict, 2022; 11(2):427–450; doi: 10.1556/2006.2022.00013
45.
OelkerA, RumpfH-J, BrandM, et al.Validation of the ACSID-11 for consistent screening of specific Internet-use disorders based on ICD-11 criteria for gaming disorder: A multitrait-multimethod approach. Compr Psychiatry, 2024; 132:152470; doi: 10.1016/j.comppsych.2024.152470
46.
SaffariM, ChenC-Y, ChenI-H, et al.A comprehensive measure assessing different types of problematic use of the internet among Chinese adolescents: The Assessment of Criteria for Specific Internet-use Disorders (ACSID-11). Compr Psychiatry, 2024; 134:152517; doi: 10.1016/j.comppsych.2024.152517
47.
YangY-N, SuJ-A, PimsenA, et al.Validation of the Thai Assessment of Criteria for Specific Internet-use Disorders (ACSID-11) among young adults. BMC Psychiatry, 2023; 23(1):819; doi: 10.1186/s12888-023-05210-z
48.
PoonLYJ, TsangHWH, ChanTYJ, et al.Psychometric properties of the Internet Gaming Disorder Scale–Short-Form (IGDS9-SF): Systematic review. J Med Internet Res, 2021; 23(10):e26821; doi: 10.2196/26821
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
