Sex on the internet: Observations and implications for internet sex addiction
By Mark D. Griffiths. 2001
264 citations recorded by the source corpus.
Subfields: Clinical Psychology, Gender Studies, Sociology and Political Science
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/89373c3a1e95a0a2ba946079bffc739142610f6d
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
In Clinical Psychology
In Gender Studies
In Sociology and Political Science
- Ofir Turel
- Mark D. Griffiths
- Laura Widyanto
- Alexander Serenko
- Paul Giles
- F. Aysan
- M. Savci
- J. Phillips
Citations in the corpus
- A review of research ethics in internet-based research (2012, background): “For example, Davis et al. (2010) highlight the disinhibiting effects of internet communication (see also griffiths, 2001).”
- ‘Internet Addiction’: A Critical Review (2006, background): “However, there is also the observation that some behaviours engaged on the Internet (e.g., cybersex, cyberstalking, etc.) may be behaviours that the person would only carry out on the Internet because the medium is anonymous, non-face-to-face, and disinhibiting (Griffiths, 2000c, 2001).”
- Internet sex addiction: A review of empirical research (2012, background): “He supplements those already mentioned with other sexual behaviors related to criminal activities, namely displaying, downloading, or distributing illegal material such as paedophilic images and movies, and sexual menace online, which includes harassment and cyberstalking (Griffiths, 2001).”
- Inventory of problematic Internet experiences encountered in clinical practice. (2005, unknown): “This seems to be a common theme among a relatively small group of people who use the Internet for sexual reasons or to excess, and they have been identified as exhibiting addiction-, compulsive-, and impulse control-related problems (e.g., Carnes, 2001; Cooper, Delmonico, & Burg, 2000; Cooper et al.”
- Preliminary Development of a Model and Measure of Computer-Mediated Communication (CMC) Competence (2006, unknown): “…2000) are expected to facilitate Internet addiction, especially cybersex addiction (Brenner, 1997; Cooper, Delmonico, & Burg, 2000; Davis, 2001; Griffiths, 1999, 2001; McGrath & Casey, 2002; Morahan-Martin & Schumacher, 2000; Pratarelli, Browne, & Johnson, 1999; Schneider, 2000; Schwartz &…”
- Technological addictions and social connectedness: predictor effect of internet addiction, social media addiction, digital game addiction and smartphone addiction on social connectedness (2017, background): “In addition to internet addiction, social media addiction, digital game addiction and smart phone addiction, TV addiction (67), phubbing (68), online pornography addiction (69), online shopping addiction (70), and online sex addiction (71) are considered within the scope of technological addictions ”
- Integrating Technology Addiction and Use: An Empirical Investigation of Online Auction Users (2011, background): “On the other hand, prior studies have demonstrated the existence of addiction with respect to various information technologies (Griffiths 2001; Lin 2004; Turel et al. 2010), and there have been recent calls for further study and formal recognition of this condition (Block 2008).”
- Personality and self reported mobile phone use (2008, background): “Like Internet e-mail, mobile phone text messaging is not visually based and therefore has been suggested to make people feel more comfortable when communicating because it is disinhibiting (Griffiths, 2001; Suler, 2004).”
- Problematic internet use: Proposed classification and diagnostic criteria (2003, unknown): “For example, it has been estimated that over half of all money spent on the internet is sexually related and some estimates suggest the industry may be worth as much as $1 billion [Griffiths, 2001].”
- The Role of Sexual Compulsivity, Impulsivity, and Experiential Avoidance in Internet Pornography Use (2012, background): “This is in line with conceptualizations of problematic IP use involving cycles of impulsive and compulsive behavior (Mick & Hollander, 2006) and behavioral addiction (Putnam, 2000; Griffiths, 2001).”