If my restaurant's food is so good people are "addicted" to it, that's a good thing. If it's about applying psychological patterns to trigger the addictive behavior that applies to a large swath of marketing.
If my restaurant's food is so good people are "addicted" to it, that's a good thing. If it's about applying psychological patterns to trigger the addictive behavior that applies to a large swath of marketing.
If not it’s probably worth just starting with basic definitions of addiction.
The word 'addicted' is used informally in all kinds of contexts where it's a wild exaggeration. Just like people say they have OCD or autism when they sort something, or say they are hypochondriacs when they wash their hands more often than average. Of course people who actually have these conditions might do the same, but a lot of the time it's just perfectly neurotypical people using hyperbole and/or a flawed understanding of psychiatry.
Let's wait until psychiatrists agree on the existence of TikTok addiction and come up with a set of diagnostic criteria. Until such time we should take the existence of such addictions with a grain of salt, and refrain from moral panic.
The very specifically American diagnostic criteria are not particularly relevant, but more to the point
> we ought to at least stick to a science-based approach. Right now there is no basis to conclude that even a single person is addicted to TikTok,
I'd recommend reading the overview
https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/ip_26_...
> The Commission's preliminary views are based on an in-depth investigation that included an analysis of TikTok's risk assessments reports, internal data and documents and TikTok's responses to multiple requests for information, a review of the extensive scientific research on this topic, and interviews with experts in multiple fields, including behavioural addiction.