Development and content validation of the Comprehensive Gaming Behaviour and Addiction Scale

The current instruments that are present in the problematic gaming behavior field focus primarily on addiction symptoms, leaving skills and psychological dimensions untouched. This paper reports the first stage of developing the Comprehensive Gaming Behaviour and Addiction Scale (CGBAS), a multidimensional self-report measure spanning three modules. The three modules that were created are Skills and Positive Outcomes, Addiction and Problematic Use, and Psychological Profile. An initial pool of 135 items spanning 18 domains, along with a 22-item Lie Scale, was created. The items were then evaluated by a 26-member heterogeneous panel. The panel consisted of academic experts, practitioners, gamers, and other professionals. This panel was asked to evaluate the items using a structured Content Validity Index (CVI) procedure across seven quality criteria. Scale-level content validity was strong (S-CVI/Ave = .92); four items were revised, and the original Lie Scale was replaced with six Impression Management items after qualitative panel feedback. The feedback indicated the original items measured substantive constructs rather than response bias. A 90-item pilot instrument was then administered to N = 101 gaming-community respondents. All 20 theoretically specified subscales showed good to excellent internal consistency (Cronbach’s α = .802–.937). A preliminary exploratory factor analysis produced a five-factor solution offering early support for the distinctiveness of skill-related items from addiction-related items. The EFA flagged seven items including one Avatar Identification item with a comparatively weak item-total correlation. One item was reworded, and six were retained for monitoring in the main study. These findings suggest that the pilot administration with N = 101 participants provided preliminary support for the item pool. The results from this study helped set up the next phase. A second, substantially larger study evaluated the scale’s factor structure and psychometric properties in an independent sample. The larger validation study is reported separately.