网络游戏障碍的跨阶段性特征：基于小学、中学与大学三组访谈的质性研究

Cross-Stage Characteristics of Internet Gaming Disorder: A Qualitative Study of Interviews across Primary, Secondary, and University Student Groups

摘要: 目的：基于发展阶段视角，考察不同学段受访者的游戏动机与游戏控制(外部控制/自主调节)结构特征及其随年龄变化的迁移机制，揭示“共性结构”与“阶段差异”的生成方式。方法：采用质性研究取向，对小学、中学与大学三个阶段的受访者进行半结构式访谈，围绕游戏体验、使用情境与控制实践获取叙事材料，并以主题分析对跨阶段共性与差异进行比较归纳，形成“动机–控制”双维度的发展性解释框架。结果：三阶段游戏动机在总体结构上呈现“类目一致、表述迁移”。其一，内在满足是跨阶段最稳定的核心，受访者普遍将游戏体验为“好玩、开心、有趣”的过程性愉悦；其二，情绪功能化使用在各阶段高度覆盖，游戏常被用作放松与情绪缓冲，但随学段上升触发情境与心理机制更复杂；其三，社交连接与成就和能力在三组中均可观察，差异主要体现为叙述方式与突出情境的变化。控制维度呈现稳定的“双轨结构”：外部控制(家长、规则)与自主调节并存，并普遍伴随“能控、控不住”的张力；但主导权与稳定性随学段迁移——小学组以外控主导且更可接受，中学组外控——自控并存最突出且体验分化更强，大学组控制重心进一步内化，自控策略更丰富且更反思，但在压力情境下仍可能出现阶段性回流。结论：不同学段的游戏使用并非动机或控制的“有无差异”，而是同一结构在发展过程中的“重心迁移”与“叙事再组织”。理解青少年游戏行为需同时关注稳定的动机和控制框架与阶段性情境压力对自我调节的影响，为家庭规则制定、学校引导与个体自我管理支持提供分阶段的干预启示。

Abstract: Objective: From a developmental-stage perspective, this study examines the structural characteristics of game motivation and game control, including external control and autonomous regulation, among respondents at different educational stages. It further explores how these characteristics shift with age, aiming to reveal the formation of both “common structures” and “stage-specific differences”. Methods: A qualitative research approach was adopted. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with respondents from primary school, secondary school, and university. Narrative materials were collected around gaming experiences, usage contexts, and control practices. Thematic analysis was used to compare and summarize cross-stage similarities and differences, leading to the construction of a developmental explanatory framework based on the dual dimensions of “motivation-control”. Results: Across the three educational stages, game motivations showed a general pattern of “consistent categories with shifting expressions”. First, intrinsic satisfaction emerged as the most stable core motivation across stages, with respondents commonly describing gaming as a process that is “fun”, “enjoyable”, and “interesting”. Second, the functional use of games for emotional regulation was widely present across all stages. Games were often used for relaxation and emotional buffering, although the triggering contexts and psychological mechanisms became more complex as educational stage increased. Third, social connection, achievement, and competence were observed in all three groups, with differences mainly reflected in modes of narration and prominent situational contexts. In terms of control, a stable “dual-track structure” was identified: external control, such as parental regulation and rules, coexisted with autonomous regulation, often accompanied by a tension between “being able to control” and “being unable to control”. However, the locus and stability of control shifted across stages. The primary school group was mainly characterized by external control, which was more readily accepted. The secondary school group showed the most prominent coexistence of external and self-control, along with greater experiential differentiation. In the university group, control became further internalized, with more diverse and reflective self-regulation strategies, although temporary regression could still occur under stressful conditions. Conclusion: Game use across different educational stages does not reflect a simple difference in the presence or absence of motivation or control. Rather, it represents a developmental process in which the same underlying structure undergoes shifts in emphasis and narrative reorganization. Understanding adolescents’ gaming behavior requires attention to both stable motivational and control frameworks and the influence of stage-specific contextual pressures on self-regulation. These findings provide stage-sensitive implications for family rule-setting, school guidance, and individual self-management support.