RESUMEN
Background and aims: Discrepancy between ideal self-guide and actual self-concept evoke dejection-related feeling, and often individuals with internet gaming disorder (IGD) use games as the tool to escape those negative emotions. The aim of this study was to evaluate the pattern of self-discrepancy based on actual and ideal self-images and elucidate the neural correlates underlying the distorted self in individuals with IGD. Methods: Nineteen male individuals with IGD and 20 healthy controls (HCs) underwent functional magnetic resonance imaging where they decided on whether they agreed with the adjectives describing their actual or ideal self on a four-point Likert Scale. Two-sample t-test on the self-discrepancy contrast was conducted for neuroimaging analysis and correlation analysis was performed between the behavioral data and regional activities. Results: The IGD group evaluated both their ideal self and actual self more negatively than the HC group. Actual self-concept was associated with satisfaction with psychological needs as opposed to ideal self-guide. Brain activity in the inferior parietal lobule was significantly decreased in individuals with IGD relative to HCs in the self-discrepancy contrast. In addition, neural activity during evaluating actual self-concept showed a significant group difference. Conclusion: These results provide novel evidence for distorted self-concept of people with IGD. Individuals with IGD had a negative ideal and actual self-image. Neurobiologically, dysfunction in the inferior parietal lobule associated with emotional regulation and negative self-evaluation was found in IGD. Considering the characteristics of IGD that often develop in adolescence, this self-concept problem should be noted and applied with appropriate therapy.
RESUMEN
Three studies tested whether individualism-collectivism moderates the extent to which values are endorsed as ideal self-guides and ought self-guides, and the consequences for regulatory focus and emotion. Across Studies 1 and 2, individualists endorsed values that are relatively central to the self as stronger ideals than oughts, whereas collectivists endorsed them as ideals and oughts to a similar degree. Study 2 found that individualists justified central values using reasons that were more promotion focused than prevention focused, whereas collectivists used similar amount of prevention-focused and promotion-focused reasons. In Study 3, individualists felt more dejected after violating a central (vs. peripheral) value and more agitated after violating a peripheral (vs. central) value. Collectivists felt a similar amount of dejection regardless of values centrality and more agitation after violating central (vs. peripheral) values. Overall, culture has important implications for how we regulate values that are central or peripheral to our self-concept.