A second group of articles emphasizes that addiction-related behaviors develop within relational and environmental contexts. In a two-wave longitudinal study with children, Wei et al. found that a more positive school climate predicted lower internet gaming addiction after one year, with deviant peer affiliation acting as a mediator and sensation seeking as a moderator.Their findings underscore the importance of school environments as a potential risk or protective factor during development (4). Another study by Xu et al. showed that excessive parental psychological control was associated with greater psychological distress in Chinese university students with smartphone addiction. Importantly, inhibitory emotion regulation, rather than cognitive reappraisal, helped explain this relationship. This suggests that maladaptive family dynamics may increase addiction risk, not only directly but also through their impact on self-regulatory processes (5). Finally, Li et al. broadened the scope of the topic by examining cosmetic surgery addiction in Chinese adults and found that adverse childhood experiences (defined as a range of traumatic events before age 18) were linked to greater symptom severity, with insecure attachment and self-alienation serving as mediating factors.Although this specific form of addiction differs from digital and substance-related addiction, it similarly points to the long-term role of early adversity, disrupted attachment, and impaired self-related processes in compulsive, reward-driven behaviors (6).The contribution of neurobiological mechanisms is addressed by three complementary studies in the collection. Zhang et al. used resting-state fMRI and dynamic causal modeling to examine potential brain connectivity changes in adults with tobacco use disorder (TUD) relative to non-smokers. The results showed altered effective connectivity between the default mode and the central executive networks. Specifically, there was increased connectivity from the right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex and medial prefrontal cortex, which predicted increased motivation for smoking. If validated with larger samples, these results would support the view that addiction involves altered interactions between internally oriented and executive-control circuits, and they raise the possibility that network-level markers could eventually aid early assessment or risk stratification (7). Qianlan et al. examined sensation seeking, reward sensitivity, risk adjustment, and their relation to EEG measures in young adults under uncertain conditions. The results suggest that high sensation seeking was associated with poorer adjustment to different risk levels and weaker neural responses to reward. Their findings are particularly relevant to the present topic because they link reward-related traits, such as sensation-seeking, to reduced flexibility in decision-making under uncertainty. These promising results should be expanded upon using advanced neuroimaging and cognitive modeling techniques (8). Emond et al. further extended this work to childhood by genotyping two dopaminergic polymorphisms (ANKK1 rs1800497, or Taq1A, and COMT rs4680) and one nicotinic polymorphism (CHRNA4 rs1044396) in American children aged 9 to 12. These polymorphisms were previously linked to internet and video gaming addiction. Their results showed that the Taq1A polymorphism, associated with reduced dopamine sensitivity, was related to higher problematic media use scores. Although replication in larger samples is needed, this study illustrates how genetic differences in reward sensitivity may contribute to addiction vulnerability well before the transition to adolescence (9).Together, these studies strongly support the core premise of this Research Topic: addiction risk in youth is best understood through the dynamic interaction between genetic predisposition, reward sensitivity, emotion regulation systems, and executive functions. Heightened reward psychoeducation, behavioral control skills, and computerized tasks aimed at improving inhibition (i.e., reducing impulsivity). Participants reported greater self-efficacy in behavioral control, although there was no improvement in accuracy rates for visual and auditory Substance Stop Signal Tasks measuring motor inhibition related to drug cues. Even with this mixed pattern of results, this pilot study is valuable in suggesting that intervention-related gains in perceived control may emerge before measurable changes in more specific inhibitory processes (12). Therefore, multifaceted approaches to cognitive control may hold promise for addiction treatment.Finally, two articles examine addiction within a broader developmental framework. Using a very large national sample of South Korean adolescents, Jeong et al. showed that earlier alcohol use and smoking were associated with a later increase in addiction risk, and that smartphone overdependence interacted with substance-related behaviors. Their findings suggest that behavioral addictions and substance-related risk behaviors may interact in complex ways and reinforce each other over development rather than unfold in isolation (13). Complementing this empirical work, Lozano Wun et al. reviewed developmental models of addiction and argued for a dual-systems perspective in which an imbalance between reward-related systems and executive control during specific phases of adolescence, in interaction with individual differences, may increase vulnerability to reward-seeking behaviors. Importantly, this review reminds us that both developmental timing and individual differences matter: addiction risk is not static across adolescence, and future prevention efforts may need to be tailored to specific developmental windows, also considering individual differences (14).In conclusion, the articles in this Research Topic converge on a developmental and multilevel account of addiction in adolescents and young adults. Across digital media use, tobacco use, substance-related behaviors, and other compulsive patterns, the findings point to a common theme: addiction vulnerability emerges when heightened reward responsivity, emotional distress, and adverse social contexts interact with still-developing executive control systems. These studies also identify operational targets for prevention and intervention, including strengthening inhibitory control and emotion regulation, promoting resilience, addressing early adverse experiences, and improving family and school environments. Future longitudinal, multimodal, and cross-cultural research will be essential to clarify causal mechanisms, refine developmental models, and translate these findings into more precise and developmentally sensitive interventions.
Passarotti et al. (Fri,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: