For some adolescent gamers, playing online games may become problematic, impairing functioning in personal, family, and other life domains. Parental and family factors are known to influence the odds that adolescents may develop problematic gaming (PG), negative parenting and conflictual family dynamics increasing the risk, whereas positive parenting and developmentally supportive family dynamics protecting against PG. This suggests that a treatment for adolescent PG should not only address the gaming behaviors and personal characteristics of the youth, but also the parental and family domains. An established research-supported treatment meeting these requirements is multidimensional family therapy (MDFT), which we adapted for use as adolescent PG treatment. We report here on one adaptation, applying in-session gaming. In-session demonstration of the “problem behavior” is feasible and informative in PG. In the opening stage of therapy, we use in-session gaming to establish an alliance between the therapist and the youth. By inviting them to play games, the therapist demonstrates that they are taken seriously, thus boosting treatment motivation. Later in treatment, gaming is introduced in family sessions, offering useful opportunities to intervene in family members' perspectives and interactional patterns revealed in vivo as the youth plays the game. These sessions can trigger strong emotions and reactions from the parents and youth and give rise to maladaptive transactions between the family members, thus offering ways to facilitate new discussions and experiences of each other. The insights gained from the game demonstration sessions aid the therapeutic process, more so than mere discussion about gaming. 相似文献
People hold different perspectives about how they think the world is changing or should change. We examined five of these “worldviews” about change: Progress, Golden Age, Endless Cycle, Maintenance, and Balance. In Studies 1–4 (total N = 2733) we established reliable measures of each change worldview, and showed how these help explain when people will support or oppose social change in contexts spanning sustainability, technological innovations, and political elections. In mapping out these relationships we identify how the importance of different change worldviews varies across contexts, with Balance most critical for understanding support for sustainability, Progress/Golden Age important for understanding responses to innovations, and Golden Age uniquely important for preferring Trump/Republicans in the 2016 US election. These relationships were independent of prominent individual differences (e.g., values, political orientation for elections) or context-specific factors (e.g., self-reported innovativeness for responses to innovations). Study 5 (N = 2140) examined generalizability in 10 countries/regions spanning five continents, establishing that these worldviews exhibited metric invariance, but with country/region differences in how change worldviews were related to support for sustainability. These findings show that change worldviews can act as a general “lens” people use to help determine whether to support or oppose social change. 相似文献