Cyber Addiction Test for Children and Teens

CHRISTOPHER MULLIGAN LCSW

3685 Motor Avenue, Suite 150

Los Angeles, California 90034

310/287-1640

www.cyberaddictionrecovery.com

                              

CHILD/TEEN TECHNOLOGY ADDICTION TEST

SCORING:

DOES NOT APPLY= O

RARELY=1

OCCASIONALLY=2

FREQUENTLY=3

OFTEN=4

ALWAYS=5

1. How much time does your child spend playing video games per day?

__ none

__ 1 to 2 hours

__ 3 to 5 hours

__ 6 to 8 hours

__ more than 8 hours

2. How much time does your child spend on the internet per day (playing on-line games, researching areas of interest, down loading music and videos, YouTube, chat rooms, instant messaging)?

__ none

__ 1 to 2 hours

__ 3 to 5 hours

__ 6 to 8 hours

__ more than 8 hours

3. Does your child refuse to accept time limits set for video gaming and on-line use?

___ does not apply

___ rarely

___ occasionally

___ frequently

___ often

___ always

0-1-2-3-4-5 score _____

4. Does your child eat meals while online or when gaming?

___ does not apply

___ rarely

___ occasionally

___ frequently

___ often

___ always

0-1-2-3-4-5 score _____

5. Does your child reject physical activities (swimming, biking, hiking, sports, park play, camping) in favor of gaming and/or being online?

___ does not apply

___ rarely

___ occasionally

___ frequently

___ often

___ always

0-1-2-3-4-5 score _____

6. Does your child engage in lengthy discussions/monologues about video games and/or on-line activities?

___ does not apply

___ rarely

___ occasionally

___ frequently

___ often

___ always

0-1-2-3-4-5 score _____

7. Has your child gained weight as a result of video gaming and on-line activities?

___ no

___ yes

(If yes, how much weight? _________lbs)

 

8. Does your child complain of body aches/pains related to video gaming and/or on-line use? (carpal tunnel syndrome, stiff neck, back pain, eye strain)

___ does not apply

___ rarely

___ occasionally

___ frequently

___ often

___ always

0-1-2-3-4-5 score _____

9. Does your child neglect household chores in order to continue gaming or staying on-line?

___ does not apply

___ rarely

___ occasionally

___ frequently

___ often

___ always

0-1-2-3-4-5 score _____

10. Does your child prefer to spend time gaming or being on-line rather than spend time with family?

___ does not apply

___ rarely

___ occasionally

___ frequently

___ often

___ always

0-1-2-3-4-5 score _____

11. Does your child say s/he has made friends via gaming and on-line activities but spends the majority of his/her time alone gaming and/or being online?

___ does not apply

___ rarely

___ occasionally

___ frequently

___ often

___ always

0-1-2-3-4-5 score _____

12. Do your child’s grades suffer as a result of gaming and/or on-line use?

___ does not apply

___ rarely

___ occasionally

___ frequently

___ often

___ always

0-1-2-3-4-5 score _____

13. Does your child play a video game, check his/her email or go online to chat before doing anything else (e.g., chores, homework, saying hello, having a check-in conversation, etc.).

___ does not apply

___ rarely

___ occasionally

___ frequently

___ often

___ always

0-1-2-3-4-5 score _____

14. Does your child complain that all activities are boring/useless except for gaming or being on-line?

___ does not apply

___ rarely

___ occasionally

___ frequently

___ often

___ always

0-1-2-3-4-5 score _____

15. Does your child lose track of time when gaming or on-line (time warp)?

___ does not apply

___ rarely

___ occasionally

___ frequently

___ often

___ always

0-1-2-3-4-5 score _____

16. Does your child argue any time limit on gaming or on-line use is “unfair”?

___ does not apply

___ rarely

___ occasionally

___ frequently

___ often

___ always

0-1-2-3-4-5 score _____

17. Does your child attempt to hide how long s/he has been gaming or on-line?

___ does not apply

___ rarely

___ occasionally

___ frequently

___ often

___ always

0-1-2-3-4-5 score _____

18. Does your child become defensive and/or secretive when asked what s/he is doing on-line or what game s/he is playing?

___ does not apply

___ rarely

___ occasionally

___ frequently

___ often

___ always

0-1-2-3-4-5 score _____

19. Does your child spend time alone in his/her room when on-line or when playing video games?

___ does not apply

___ rarely

___ occasionally

___ frequently

___ often

___ always

0-1-2-3-4-5 score _____

20. Does your child snap, yell and/or act annoyed if interrupted when on-line or when  gaming?

___ does not apply

___ rarely

___ occasionally

___ frequently

___ often

___ always

0-1-2-3-4-5 score _____

21. Does your child experience fatigue during the day due to staying up late gaming or being on-line?

      ___ does not apply

___ rarely

___ occasionally

___ frequently

___ often

___ always

0-1-2-3-4-5 score _____

22. Does your child use energy drinks or caffeinated beverages while gaming or when on-line?

___ does not apply

___ rarely

___ occasionally

___ frequently

___ often

___ always

0-1-2-3-4-5 score _____

23. Does your child prefer to engage in gaming or on-line activities rather than spend time with peers from school or peers from the community?

___ does not apply

___ rarely

___ occasionally

___ frequently

___ often

___ always

0-1-2-3-4-5 score _____

24. Does your child become angry or belligerent when you place a time limit on gaming, on-line activities, or using a smart phone?

___ does not apply

___ rarely

___ occasionally

___ frequently

___ often

___ always

0-1-2-3-4-5 score _____

25. Does your child appear depressed, moody, or agitated when “unplugged” from gaming and/or the internet?

___ does not apply

___ rarely

___ occasionally

___ frequently

___ often

___ always

0-1-2-3-4-5 score _____

26. Does your child seem to use video gaming and/or being on-line as a way of coping with social skills problems, anxiety, depression, and/or social isolation?

___ does not apply

___ rarely

___ occasionally

___ frequently

___ often

___ always

0-1-2-3-4-5 score _____

27. Does your child use the internet for viewing pornography?

___ does not apply

___ rarely

___ occasionally

___ frequently

___ often

___ always

0-1-2-3-4-5 score _____

28. Does your child use a smartphone (or other cell phone) to send sexually explicit images or text messages?

___ does not apply

___ rarely

      ___ occasionally

      ___ frequently

      ___ often

      ___ always

0-1-2-3-4-5 score _____

29. Does your child engage in compulsive texting, Facebook checking, and/or instant messaging? (100 texts per day? Multiple hours per day on Facebook posting messages and photos? Switch tasking between texting, Facebook, and instant messaging?)

___ does not apply

___ rarely

___ occasionally

___ frequently

___ often

___ always

0-1-2-3-4-5 score _____

30. Does your child use Ebay, Amazon or other on-line retail businesses in excess of time and financial limits that you have set?

___ does not apply

___ rarely

___ occasionally

___ frequently

___ often

___ always

0-1-2-3-4-5 score _____

TOTAL SCORE= _________________

Scoring:

26 – 64  Average gaming and online use (child is spending no more than 1.5 hours per day on-line or gaming and is able to participate successfully in home, school, and social roles and functions).

65 – 103 Gaming and online use are causing significant day-to-day problems (child is spending more than 3 hours per day on-line and/or gaming, is constantly arguing about screen time, is refusing to attend to chores and homework, is beginning to show signs of social isolation and is preferring electronic forms of entertainment to all “off-line” forms of recreation).

104 – 130 Gaming and online use are causing severe problems (these problems include complete social isolation, depression, chronic fatigue, school failure, defiance/non-compliance related to limits on technology use, weight gain, orthopedic problems, loss of sense of reality, and addiction symptoms such as emotional agitation and/or depression when “off-line).

Key risk factors:

Childhood onset depression and anxiety disorders, social skills deficits, Asperger’s Syndrome, ADHD, preferring technology to “off-line” forms of recreation and socialization, preferred social isolation, preferred withdrawal from family, secretive behaviors, emotional agitation and/or depression when “off-line, school performance problems, viewing and storing of pornography, and physical symptoms such as back and joint pain and weight gain.

Games that pose the greatest risk:

0 to 10 scale (0=no risk and 10=risk for addiction)

10/10: MMORPG’s (massively multiplayer online role-playing games) such as Entropia Universe, RuneScape, Final Fantasy, and World of Warcraft.

8/10: RTS (real time strategy games) such as Civilization, Age of Empires, Command and Conquer.

7/10: FPS (first person shooter) such as Halo, Call of Duty, and Counterstrike.

5/10: Manage and Control Games (God Games) such as Sims, Roller Coaster Tycoon, Black and White.

4/10: Educational Games that include geography, math, economics, politics, and history.

3/10: Old School Games such as mazes, races, battles that can be played by the entire family played on old platforms like Nintendo 64, PlayStation 1, or Sega’s Dreamacast.

2/10: Physical Simulation Games such as Dance Dance Revolution or WII teenic, bowling, baseball, and boxing.

1/10: Puzzle Games that include logic, language and trivia.

Resources:

Books: Caught in the Net (Kimberly Young), Tangled in the Web (Kimberly Young), Cyber Junkie (Kevin Roberts), The Digital Diet (Daniel Sieberg), Video Games and Your Kids ( Hilarie Cash), and PlayStation Nation (Olivia and Kurt Bruner).

Websites: webwisekids, Center for Media and Child Health, common sense media, netfamilynews, enoughisenough, connectsafely, Berkman Center for Internet and Society.

Professional Consultation: I am available to consult with parents, mental health professionals, physicians, and schools on how to create group and individualized programs to help children, teens and adults who are manifesting symptoms consistent with technology dependence and addiction.

www.cyberaddictionrecovery.com

Kimberly Young's Cybersexual Addiction Index

Are you addicted to cybersex? Take this quiz

When does dabbling in cybersex become a destructive addiction? Psychologist Kimberly Young has created the Cybersexual Addiction Index to help people determine whether they've crossed the line to an unhealthy dependency.

Select the response that best fits the frequency of behavior described. 0 = not applicable; 1 = rarely; 2 = occasionally; 3 = frequently; 4 = often; 5 = always.

1 How often do you neglect other responsibilities to spend more time having cybersex?

2 How often do you prefer cybersex to sexual intimacy with your partner?

3 How often do you spend significant amounts of time in chat rooms and private messaging with the sole purpose of finding cybersex?

4 How often do others in your life complain about the amount of time you spend online?

5 How often does your job performance or productivity suffer because of cybersex activities at work?

6 How often do you become defensive or secretive when anyone asks what you do online?

7 How often do you become anxious, nervous or upset when you are unable to access sexually oriented Web sites?

8 How often do you fear that life without cybersex would be boring, empty and joyless?

9 How often do you masturbate during cybersex?

10 How often do you snap, yell or act annoyed if someone bothers you while you are online?

11 How often do you lose sleep because of late-night log-ins having cybersex?

12 How often do you feel pre occupied with cybersex when off line and/or fantasize about having cybersex?

13 How often do you bookmark or subscribe to sexually oriented Web sites?

14 How often do you use cybersex as a reward for accomplishing something (e.g., stressful day, end of a task)?

15 How often do you use anonymous communication to engage in sexual fantasies not typically carried out in real life?

16 How often do you anticipate your next online session with the expectation that you will find sexual arousal or gratification?

17 How often do you hide your online sexual interactions from your significant other?

18 How often do you move from cybersex to phone sex (or even real-life meetings)?

19 How often do you feel guilty or shameful after cybersex?

20 How often do you engage in deceptive or deviant online sexual behavior?

Scoring: Add the numbers for each response to obtain a final score. The higher the score, the greater the level of addiction:

None: 0-30 points

Mild: 31-49 points

Moderate: 50-79 points

Severe: 80-100 points

The 5 Stages of Cybersexual Addiction

According to Dr. Kimberly Young (from her groundbreaking book Tangled in the Web) cybersexual addiction proceeds in five stages:

1) Discovery: during this stage a user (teen or adult) begins to explore the world of online sexual activity -- porn, sex chat rooms, web cams, etc. At first there is a typical curiosity -- "Wow, what is this? This is fun! What else can see? What else can I do."

2) Experimentation: due the anonymous nature of cyberspace the user begins to try on new and different sexual experiences. Eventually the user begins to develop a clear preference for a new style/genre of sexual expression that provides optimal sexual stimulation (such as a particular chat room). In this stage the user believes he/she can control cybersex and is excited by the opportunities.

3)Habituation: with repeated exposure the user begins to develop a need for greater and greater levels of sexual stimulation. Just as a drug addict eventually craves more and more of their favored chemical, the cybersex user craves more and more of the drug of sexual stimulation (which has it's own powerful chemical reactions in the brain). The cybersex user begins to engage in high risk behaviors -- behaviors that cause interference at home, work and potentially lead to contact with law enforcement (such as child porn).

4) Compulsivity: the cybersex user cannot stop -- they pursue images and sexual experiences with greater and greater risk and negative consequences. The user may spend full nights on the net while his/her spouse sleeps in the next room -- or stays at work in order to use the computer to download thousands of images of porn.

5) Hopelessness: the user -- now the full blown addict -- hits bottom. They feel hopeless and helpless because they have tried to curtail their use without success. At this point the addict may cancel their internet connection or make a deal with themselves to stop for a period of time. However, inevitably, the addict comes back for more cybersex -- and the compulsive behavior returns with a vengeance.

Is there hope for the cybersex addict? YES. In my next blog I will outline a course of action. If you feel out of control and fear negative consequences such as marital problems, being fired, or an arrest you can get help immediately through many different sources. Del Amo Hospital has an excellent inpatient program and Sex Addicts Anonymous is available 7 days a week, 365 days a year. Or, please feel free to call me at 310/287-1640.

Media Consumption and the Quality of Child Sleep

Media Use and Child Sleep: The Impact of Content, Timing, and Environment

1. Michelle M. Garrison, PhD^a,
2. Kimberly Liekweg, BA^a,
3. Dimitri A. Christakis, MD, MPH^a,^b

+ Author Affiliations

1. ^aSeattle Children's Research Institute, Center for Child Health, Behavior and Development, Seattle, Washington; and
2. ^bDepartment of Pediatrics, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Media use has been shown to negatively affect a child's sleep, especially in the context of evening use or with a television in the child's bedroom. However, little is known about how content choices and adult co-use affect this relationship.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the impact of media content, timing, and use behaviors on child sleep.

METHODS: These data were collected in the baseline survey and media diary of a randomized controlled trial on media use in children aged 3 to 5 years. Sleep measures were derived from the Children's Sleep Habits Questionnaire. Media diaries captured time, content title, and co-use of television, video-game, and computer usage; titles were coded for ratings, violence, scariness, and pacing. Nested linear regression models were built to examine the impact of timing, content, and co-use on the sleep problem score.

RESULTS: On average, children consumed 72.9 minutes of media screen time daily, with 14.1 minutes occurring after 7:00 pm. Eighteen percent of parents reported at least 1 sleep problem; children with a bedroom television consumed more media and were more likely to have a sleep problem. In regression models, each additional hour of evening media use was associated with a significant increase in the sleep problem score (0.743 [95% confidence interval: 0.373–1.114]), as was daytime use with violent content (0.398 [95% confidence interval: 0.121–0.676]). There was a trend toward greater impact of daytime violent use in the context of a bedroom television (P = .098) and in low-income children (P = .07).

CONCLUSIONS: Violent content and evening media use were associated with increased sleep problems. However, no such effects were observed with nonviolent daytime media use.

Yikes: more evidence of changes in brain functioning with video gamers

Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking

Changes in Cue-Induced, Prefrontal Cortex Activity with Video-Game Play

---

To cite this article:
Doug Hyun Han, Yang Soo Kim, Yong Sik Lee, Kyung Joon Min and Perry F. Renshaw. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, and Social Networking. December 2010, 13(6): 655-661. doi:10.1089/cyber.2009.0327.

---

Published in Volume: 13 Issue 6: December 13, 2010
Online Ahead of Print: May 11, 2010

---

Full Text: • HTML • PDF for printing (292.9 KB) • PDF w/ links (224.7 KB)

Doug Hyun Han, M.D., Ph.D.,¹

Yang Soo Kim, M.D., Ph.D.,²

Yong Sik Lee, M.D., Ph.D.,¹

Kyung Joon Min, M.D., Ph.D.,¹ and

Perry F. Renshaw, M.D., Ph.D., M.B.A.³

¹Department of Psychiatry, Chung Ang University, College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.

²Department of Radiology, Chung Ang University, College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.

³Brain Institute, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah.

Address correspondence to:

Dr. Perry F. Renshaw

Brain Institute, University of Utah

383 Colorow Drive, Room 309

Salt Lake City, UT 84108

E-mail: perry_renshaw@yahoo.com

Abstract

Brain responses, particularly within the orbitofrontal and cingulate cortices, to Internet video-game cues in college students are similar to those observed in patients with substance dependence in response to the substance-related cues. In this study, we report changes in brain activity between baseline and following 6 weeks of Internet video-game play. We hypothesized that subjects with high levels of self-reported craving for Internet video-game play would be associated with increased activity in the prefrontal cortex, particularly the orbitofrontal and anterior cingulate cortex. Twenty-one healthy university students were recruited. At baseline and after a 6-week period of Internet video-game play, brain activity during presentation of video-game cues was assessed using 3T blood oxygen level dependent functional magnetic resonance imaging. Craving for Internet video-game play was assessed by self-report on a 7-point visual analogue scale following cue presentation. During a standardized 6-week video-game play period, brain activity in the anterior cingulate and orbitofrontal cortex of the excessive Internet game-playing group (EIGP) increased in response to Internet video-game cues. In contrast, activity observed in the general player group (GP) was not changed or decreased. In addition, the change of craving for Internet video games was positively correlated with the change in activity of the anterior cingulate in all subjects. These changes in frontal-lobe activity with extended video-game play may be similar to those observed during the early stages of addiction.

Creating a "sexting" typology

Sexting typology: Crimes Against Children Research Center.

The Crimes Against Children Research Center (CACRC) recently conducted a survey of 550 cases of “sexting” obtained from a national survey of law enforcement agencies. To promote an objective discussion of the problem of sexting and to develop strategies to minimize the dangers and harm related to sexting the researchers created a typology. The aim of the typology is to show the diversity of  sexting incidents and organize sexting behaviors in a way that helps, school officials, parents, law enforcement and other community-based organizations and leaders to respond effectively to needs of teens who engage in sexting.

What is sexting?

The term sexting has been used in a wide range of  media and by researchers to refer to sexual communications with content that includes sexually explicit pictures and text messages, typically sent using cell phones and other electronic media. Due to the fact the term has been used in a variety of ways (most recently in "Weiner-Gate"), the researchers at CACRC selected an alternative term: "youth-produced sexual images." The CACRC defines youth-produced sexual images as pictures created by minors (age 17 or younger) that depict minors in a manner that could be categorized as child pornography under applicable criminal statutes. The researchers include the sending of such images by any electronic technology, such as cell phone, WebCam, or digital camera.

What is child pornography?

Child pornography is broadly defined in the United States. Laws vary but are often modeled on federal statutes which define a child as anyone under 17 and child pornography as the "visual depiction of sexually explicit conduct." Sexually explicit conduct includes intercourse, oral sex, bestiality, and masturbation as well as "lascivious exhibition of the genitals." The US Supreme Court has defined "lascivious exhibition" to include images that focus on the genitals even of clothed children.

How many minors have created youth-produced sexual images?

Several studies have suggested sexting is widespread among teens, but the actual number of teens that make and send sexual images is unclear. One widely cited study by the National Campaign to Prevent Teen and Unplanned Pregnancy found that 20% of teens had created sexual images of themselves. Due to methodological problems with this study, the 20% figure reported is considered to be exaggerated. A better designed study by the Pew Research Center, using a nationally representative sample of youth ages 12 to 17, estimated that only 4% of youth had created and sent images and texts of a sexual nature. The Pew research suggests that creating such images is not yet a statistically normative behavior among teens.

Typology described

The researchers at the CACRC determined that the 550 cases studied could be divided into two categories: aggravated and experimental. Aggravated incidents involved criminal or abusive behaviors beyond the creation, sending, or possession of youth-produced sexual images. These additional behaviors included 1) adults soliciting sexual images from minors, other instances of minors sending images to adults, or other illegal adult involvement or 2) criminal or abusive behavior by minors, such as sexual abuse of another youth, extortion, deception, threats, malicious conduct arising from interpersonal conflicts and the creation and sending of images without the knowledge or against the will of the minors who were pictured.

In experimental incidents youth created and sent sexual images without any criminal elements. That is, there was no criminal behavior beyond the creation and sending of images, no apparent malice and no lack of willing participation by the youths pictured. Generally speaking, in these experimental episodes, youth took pictures of themselves to send to an established boy or girlfriend, to create romantic interest in another youth, or for attention seeking, or other reasons that did not involve elements of the aggravated cases. The researchers at that CACRC use the term experimental because these incidents, although they did not represent normative behavior, did appear to grow out of typical adolescent impulses to flirt, find romantic partners, and experiment with sex and get attention from peers.

The category that involved criminal abusive elements beyond the creation or sending or possession of youth-produced sexual images was conceptually divided by the researchers into two distinct sub-groups: adult involved cases that included sexual offending by adults and cases that involve youth only (no adults).

In most of the adult involved cases, adult offenders developed relationships with and seduced underage teenagers, in what were clearly criminal sex offenses even without the added element of youth-produced sexual images. Some of these adult offenders had face-to-face relationships with victims as family members, friends, relatives, or community members. In other cases, offenders used the Internet to meet victims. The youth-produced sexual images were generally solicited by the adult offenders.  The CACRC states that the cases involving adults are a distinct public policy concern because they typically include violations of criminal statutes prohibiting sex between adults and underage minors (i.e., statutory rape), in addition to child pornography charges

.

The other category of “aggravated” cases involves youth only. In these cases, adults did not solicit youth-produced sexual images or interact sexually with youth, either knowingly or unknowingly. The researchers determined there were two subgroups of youth only cases: 1) intent to harm and 2) reckless misuse. The key in distinguishing the “intent to harm” group from the “reckless misuse” group was in the intent of one of the youth participants. If a youth took or used images intending to harm, harass, or embarrass someone, then the incident was coded as “intent to harm.” This included retaliation for relationship breakup or actions directly taken to discredit someone's reputation. In the “reckless misuse” category, by contrast, pictures were taken or sent without the knowing or willing participation of the youth, but there was no apparent specific intent to cause harm. For example, in a frequent reckless misuse scenario, a youth who received images would show or forward the images to others without permission.

The researchers determined there were three subgroups in the “aggravated incidents, youth only” category: 1) cases that arose from interpersonal conflicts such as breakups and fights among friends 2) cases that involved criminal or abusive conduct such as blackmail, threats, or deception and 3) criminal sexual abuse or exploitation by juvenile offenders.

The “youth only-reckless misuse” group did not appear to involve any intent to harm despite the fact images were taken or sent without the participation or acknowledgment of the youth that was pictured. In these cases, pictures were taken or sent impulsively or recklessly and the victim may have been harmed as a result, but the intent was not malicious.

Within the experimental category the researchers determined there were three subcategories: 1) romantic episodes in which teens in an ongoing relationship made images for themselves or each other and these images were not intended to be distributed beyond the pair, 2) sexual attention seeking in which images were made and sent between or among youth who were not known to be romantic partners, or where one youth took pictures and sent them to multiple other youth or posted them online, presumably to draw sexual attention, and 3) there was a small subset of miscellaneous episodes which the researchers termed “other.” In these incidents youth created and often sent or posted youth-produced images for motives that seemed to involve some other intent that is often harder to determine.

Within the romantic subgroup of the experimental category, these incidents included couples in an ongoing romantic and sexual relationship who made images of each other. Within the sexual attention seeking subgroup these images were made and sent but not within an ongoing relationship. Often the intent was to interest someone in a relationship. In some cases, youth were offended by receiving sexual images. However, this reaction did not, by itself, put the episode in the aggravated category unless there was evidence the sender intended to offend or shock. If the sending of images was repeated when interest was not reciprocated, it could, however, become harassing and thus malicious and reclassified as aggravated. This scenario is rare according to the researchers. Most cases that involve malicious and harassing behavior arose from interpersonal conflicts which were not apparent in the cases categorized as experimental.

In the "other" experimental category the researchers stated there was a small number of cases that did not appear to have aggravating elements, like adult involvement, malicious motives or reckless misuse, but also did not fit into the romantic or attention seeking subtypes. These tended to involve either youth who took pictures of themselves for themselves or pre-adolescent children who did not appear to have sexual motives at all.

Implications

According to the researchers the most important implication of their analysis is the recognition that youth-produced images are made and disseminated under a wide range of circumstances. It is important, according to the researchers, that no single stereotype be permitted to dominate  popular thinking or influence public policy. Youth-produced sexual images are not all just "impulsive" acts or "romantic exchanges." Some aggravated “youth only” cases entailed a considerable amount of malice, such as youth who engaged in blackmail by threatening to send pictures that included sexual acts.

Cases that involved adults were also diverse. Some featured exploitative adults who tricked or seduced teens into sending graphic pictures, while others involved teens, often troubled, who initiated sexual interactions with adults. These were largely non-forcible crimes by adults who had illegal sexual contact with underage youth or what is generally referred to as statutory rate. Statutory rape is relatively prevalent crime although there is no information about how often it includes youth-produced sexual images. Certain characteristics histories of physical or sexual abuse, delinquency, depression, conflict with parents appear to increase the risk that youth will be drawn into statutory rape type relationships. It is important to keep in mind that crimes charged as statutory rape are diverse in their dynamics. The participation of  underage youth, while generally deemed voluntary, is a voluntary to varying degrees.

Young teens have little experience with intimate relationships. They often do not know how to negotiate with older partners about sexual activity. Some youth are pressured or coerced into sexual activity and some are intimidated into sexual activity. Nonetheless, many youth in these situations believe they are in love, are resistant to viewing a relationship as criminal, and feel considerable loyalty to the adult offender.

Even cases with only juveniles can be serious. As described above, there are cases featuring minors alone as producers and recipients of images that have very abusive and exploitative dimensions. Some youth used images to blackmail youth, some youth sexually abused and photographed younger or vulnerable youth and some used images to tarnish reputations. 

With this said, and researchers found many cases between juveniles that not appear to have any malicious or coercive behavior whatsoever. These included teens who took pictures of themselves with cell phones without disseminating or intending to disseminate them and teens in relationships who only share pictures with each other.There were also images of teens who were almost 18 and engaged in legal sexual activity.

The researchers recommend considering the developmental context of sexting behaviors. In evaluating the seriousness of episodes the researchers state it is important to consider the behavior of young people in the context of child development. The research supports the view that sexting is not simply teens acting "stupid” or “reckless.” Learning about romantic and sexual relationships is a key task of adolescent development in our culture, which provides mixed messages about appropriate sexual behavior. A large part of sexual development involves negotiating behaviors that are heavily weighted with moral, interpersonal and life course implications. How much intimacy do I want or should I allow? What kinds of activities will create bonds and trust? What is the meaning of various forms of sexual contact? 

Sending photographs have reputational consequences but so do most kinds of sexual interactions for teens. Teens have to try to balance reputational concerns against the sense of trust and safety that romantic attachments create. The sharing of sexual images, although risque’ in one social dimension, may also be a form of sexual sharing that actually involves comparative safety for teens. In contrast to face-to-face sexual encounters, cyber encounters can be engaged in outside the presence of the other person. As a result, these encounters can decrease feelings of immediate embarrassment and may be more manageable as the teen can control how she or he appears. Additionally, the pressure for additional sexual intimacy is not as intense and immediate as it is in face-to-face encounters and allows for teens to opt out at will simply by logging off or turning off their phone

.

In summary, sexting is a diverse activity that needs to be responded to with diverse approaches – from addressing clearly illegal actions through consensual sharing of images. Creating community based forums where teens and adults can speak and share and problem solve about sexting is the best possible approach at this time.

Teen Internet Addiction Changes the Brain?

Below is a very interesting article on internet addiction and changes in brain functioning.

Teen Internet enthusiasts, beware: Your Web surfing habit might be rewiring your brain.

For nearly two decades, psychiatric experts have debated whether to diagnose die-hard Web users as veritable junkies, who get their fix from the ’Net rather than illicit substances.

Now, in research that could take Internet addiction disorder from fringe condition to mainstream medical problem, scientists have concluded that the brains of teenagers who use the Internet excessively exhibit dramatic structural changes similar to those of hardcore drug addicts.

Motivated by mounting concerns about Internet dependency among teens in Asian nations — in China, an estimated 14 percent of teenagers are deemed “Internet addicts” by the country’s Youth Internet Association — researchers in China and the U.S. teamed up to conduct brain scans on 36 college students.

Half the students were self-professed Internet addicts, often playing online games for 10 hours a day, while those in a control group spent fewer than two hours a day online.

Brain scans revealed shrunken brain regions among Web addicts compared to low-key online users. In some instances, regions were 10 to 20 percent smaller — and the atrophying occurred in many of the same areas vulnerable among “heroin dependent individuals and cocaine users.”

“There are brain changes being found in most addiction studies,” Dr. Kimberly Young, one of the first researchers to lobby for recognition of Internet addiction disorder and founder of the Center for Internet Addiction Recovery, told The Daily. “So it makes sense that Internet addiction would follow the same outcome.”

Young has long suspected that Internet addiction was a significant mental health problem: In 1998, she developed a questionnaire that has become the go-to diagnostic tool for Internet addiction researchers. Questions, including “How often do you fear that life without the Internet would be boring, empty and joyless?” and “How often do you check your email before something else you need to do?” are designed to parse out conventional Web users from obsessive ones.

Brain scans could further refine her work. While the long-term implications of such structural changes to cognition are unknown, researchers speculate they could include reduced inhibition, diminished goal-setting ability, poor impulse control and impaired memory.

“The brains of Internet addicts are literally not functioning at full capacity anymore; those tiny structural changes involve hundreds of thousands of neurons,” Dr. Timothy Fong, director of the Impulse Control Center at UCLA, told The Daily. “Maybe they want to stop — but this damage makes them vulnerable to keep engaging in the damaging behavior.”

A study out of the University of Maryland, published last year, found that students asked to abstain from the Internet for 24 hours described their feelings in terms akin to substance addiction: “In withdrawal ... extremely antsy ... miserable.”

“I clearly am addicted and the dependency is sickening,” an anonymous study participant said. “I feel like most people these days are in a similar situation ... unable to shed their media skin.”

Until now, a dearth of concrete evidence led experts to dismiss the legitimacy of a diagnosis of Internet addiction disorder, or IAD. Rather, they deemed obsessive, Internet use a means of self-medicating for other mental health problems, like depression and social phobia.

Reluctance to acknowledge IAD has made diagnosis and treatment a challenge for therapists: Because the ailment isn’t included in the “bible” of mental health problems, the DSM-IV, there’s no universal diagnostic criteria, and insurance doesn’t cover treatment.

“I’ll have a patient who is suffering, whose family is suffering,” Fong said. “I need them to get reimbursed so they can get treatment.”

But outside of research institutions, most counselors aren’t trained to provide adequate care.

“Therapists from all backgrounds are seeing patients with this problem ... and they don’t know how to deal with it,” Young said. “I see patients who have seen two or three psychologists, who didn’t have a clue what Internet addiction was.”

Despite the study’s startling findings, some neuroscientists suspect that because some brain regions among heavy Web users also demonstrated atypical growth, minds might be adapting rather than atrophying.

“Our brains grow wildly until our early teens, then we start pruning and toning areas to work more efficiently,” Dr. Karl Friston at the University College London told Scientific American. “So these areas may just be relevant to being a good online gamer, and were optimized for that.”

Most experts, however, simply want to see more research — largely to determine whether sufferers are born with vulnerable brains or develop them through addictive behaviors.

“Fundamentally, I think it’s the same overarching disease as drug abuse, or gambling — but to become its own disease, we’d need to know what exactly makes this unique,” Fong said. “It begs the question: Are they born this way, or does clicking that mouse, over and over, become toxic to the brain?”

—Katie.Drummond@thedaily.com

United Kingdom: A Country of Internet Addicts?

Below is an article published today out of the UK!

UK becoming nation of internet addicts

Friday 8th July 2011

The UK is becoming a nation of internet addicts.

The average Briton now spends a staggering two days of their week online according to new research by uSwitch.com.

By using the web for work, rest and play, they are clocking up an astonishing 50 hours a week on the internet - an unprecedented jump of 20 hours a week in just two years.

A typical working day in 2009 saw the average Brit spent five hours online.

Now our web-hungry nation spends nine hours online - four hours for professional purposes and five for pleasure and leisure, including social networking, online shopping, managing finances, watching films and downloading music.

But our addiction isn't just contained to the working week. During weekend "downtime", the average Brit spends four hours a day online.

The uSwitch.com research suggests that young adults take this even further. A staggering 14% of 18-24 year olds spend over ten hours a day online at the weekend, surfing the net, watching TV and keeping in touch with friends and family.

In fact, social networking is one of the main reasons that Brits now spend so much time online.

Some 93% of 18-24 year olds regularly using sites such as Facebook and Twitter compared to 41% of silver surfers (aged 55 years or over).

Online shopping has also contributed to the dramatic increase. With cash-strapped consumers keen to hunt down bargains, 90% of the UK now shops on the internet. On top of this, 85% of Brits spend time managing their money online, more than half (57%) watch TV, films and video online, and one third (31%) download music.

Ernest Doku, technology expert at uSwitch.com, said: "These figures show just what an impact the internet has had on our lives. It's become such a life essential that it's very hard to imagine how we would cope without it.

"It's likely that our reliance will only increase as the younger generations come to the fore and smartphones become more prolific. In fact many young people seem to prefer touchscreen technology to getting in touch with people face to face."

Mike Jones (from Investor Today).

New Study on Video Game Addiction: kids look they have Asperger's!

Below is a really interesting article from the website: My Asperger's Child

According to a recent study conducted by researchers at the University of Bolton (England), video game addicts show the same personality traits as people who are suffering from Aspergers. People with this disorder find social situations stressful. The study has fueled concerns that video gaming may lead to a rise in mental health problems like depression.

During the study, researchers examined nearly 400 gamers (most of whom were male). The subjects were questioned about how much they played video games (researchers did not specifically test people with Aspergers during the study). The research revealed that the higher the time the participants spent playing video games, the more likely they were to show 3 specific traits usually associated with Aspergers: (1) neuroticism, (2) lack of extraversion, and (3) lack of agreeableness.

This outcome suggests that people with Aspergers may have a higher likelihood of becoming video game addicts, because it allows them to escape into a world where they can avoid face-to-face interactions. People with Aspergers may be prone to addiction to MMORPGs (massive multi-player online role playing games).

People with Aspergers often can’t make eye contact and fail to pick up social cues (e.g., boredom in others). The researchers say that Aspergers tends to isolate kids and can trigger depression, which video games may encourage.

Treatment for Aspergers usually consists of improving social skills and breaking repetitive behavior, the very things video games discourage. Video games don’t prepare Aspergers kids for interacting with real people. Also, as an older teen or young adult, video game addiction is known to cause problems with motivation, going to college, and finding employment (you can’t walk into a college or job interview and say that you are really good at playing Xbox).

(It should be noted that playing video games does not cause Aspergers.)

While most people associate addiction with substances (e.g., drugs or alcohol) therapists recognize addictive behaviors as well:

1. If the person does not get more of the substance or behavior, he becomes irritable and miserable.
2. The person needs more and more of a substance or behavior to keep him going.

Compulsive gaming meets these criteria, and many therapists have reported seeing severe withdrawal symptoms in game addicts. They become angry, violent, or depressed. If moms and dads take away the computer, their Aspergers youngster may sit in the corner and cry, refuse to eat, sleep, or do anything else.

Unlike substance abuse, the biological aspect of video game addiction is uncertain. Research suggests gambling elevates dopamine, and gaming is in the same category. But there's more to addiction than brain chemistry. Even with alcohol, it's not just physical. There's a psychological component to the addiction (e.g., knowing you can escape or feel good about your life). The addict is trying to change the way he feels by taking something outside of himself. The cocaine addict, for example, learns, 'I don't like the way I feel, I take a line of cocaine.' For gamers, it's the fantasy world that makes them feel better.

The lure of a fantasy world is especially pertinent to online role-playing games. These are games in which a player assumes the role of a fictional character and interacts with other players in a virtual world. An intelligent youngster who is unpopular at school can become dominant in the game. The virtual life becomes more appealing than real life.

Too much gaming may seem relatively harmless compared with the dangers of a drug overdose, but video game addiction can ruin lives. Kids who play 4 - 5 hours per day have no time for socializing, doing homework, or playing sports. That takes away from normal social development (e.g., you can have a 20-year-old Aspie still living at home with the emotional intelligence of a 12-year-old … he's never learned to talk to girls …never learned to play a sport ...never learned to hold down a job).

Spending a lot of time gaming doesn't necessarily qualify as an addiction. Most people play games safely. The question is: Can you always control your gaming activity? According to the Center for On-Line Addiction, warning signs for video game addiction include:

• Feeling irritable when trying to cut down on gaming
• Gaming to escape from real-life problems, anxiety, or depression
• Lying to friends and family to conceal gaming
• Playing for increasing amounts of time
• Thinking about gaming during other activities

In addition, video game addicts tend to become isolated, dropping out of their social networks and giving up other hobbies. It's about somebody who has completely withdrawn from other activities.

The overwhelming majority of video game addicts are males under 30. It's usually kids with poor self-esteem and social problems. They're intelligent and imaginative, but don't have many friends at school. A family history of addiction may also be a factor.

Unfortunately, many - if not most - parents with Aspergers children view their child's constant game playing as self-soothing behavior with few - if any - negative consequences (e.g., "he's entertaining himself ...he's not hurting or bothering anyone ...he's happy"). But what parents fail to realize is that, as the clock tics and the years pass, their child is losing opportunity after opportunity to develop emotional muscles (a big problem with Aspergers anyway - but exacerbated by years of gaming).

If you're concerned your Aspergers youngster may be addicted to video games, don't dismiss it as a phase. Keep good documents of the youngster's gaming behavior, including:

• How the youngster reacts to time limits
• Logs of when the youngster plays and for how long
• Problems resulting from gaming

You need to document the severity of the problem. Don't delay seeking professional help. If there is a problem, it will only get worse. Treatment for video game addiction is similar to detox for other addictions, with one important difference. Computers have become an important part of everyday life, as well as many jobs, so compulsive gamers can't just look the other way when they see a PC. It's like a food addiction. You have to learn to live with food. Because video game addicts can't avoid computers, they have to learn to use them responsibly. That means no gaming. As for limiting game time to an hour a day, I compare that to an alcoholic saying he's only going to drink beer.

The toughest part of treating video game addicts is that it's a little bit more difficult to show somebody they're in trouble. Nobody's ever been put in jail for being under the influence of a game. The key is to show gamers they are powerless over their addiction, and then teach them real-life excitement as opposed to online excitement.

(It should be noted that  am only recommending "abstinence" for the child who is truly an "addict" -- it will be up to parents to make that determination.)