This commentary paper critically discusses the recent debate
paper by Petry et al. (2014) that argued there was now an
international consensus for assessing Internet Gaming
Disorder (IGD). Our collective opinions vary considerably
regarding many different aspects of online gaming.
However, we contend that the paper by Petry and
colleagues does not provide a true and representative
international community of researchers in this area. This
paper critically discusses and provides commentary on
(i) the representativeness of the international group that
wrote the ‘consensus’ paper, and (ii) each of the IGD
criteria. The paper also includes a brief discussion on
initiatives that could be taken to move the field towards
consensus. It is hoped that this paper will foster debate
in the IGD field and lead to improved theory, better
methodologically designed studies, and more robust
empirical evidence as regards problematic gaming and
its psychosocial consequences and impact.