The study, led by Sergio Hidalgo-Fuentes of the Universitat de València together with Isabel Martínez-Álvarez and Elisa González-Pérez of the Universidad a Distancia de Madrid, pooled data from 14 studies encompassing 15 independent samples and a remarkable 79,760 participants. Following PRISMA guidelines and registered in PROSPERO, the researchers systematically searched PsycINFO, Scopus, PubMed, and Web of Science in February 2026. Their central finding: resilience and IGD symptomatology show a statistically significant, moderately negative correlation of r = −.24 (95% CI [−.29, −.20]). In plain terms, individuals who report higher resilience consistently report fewer symptoms of problematic gaming—and every single study included in the analysis reported a negative correlation, with effect sizes ranging from −.11 to −.46.

Resilience, broadly defined as the capacity to maintain or regain psychological equilibrium in the face of adversity, has long been recognized as a protective factor against addictive behaviours ranging from substance abuse to problematic internet use. But the construct itself is anything but simple. The literature distinguishes three complementary perspectives: resilience as a relatively stable personality trait marked by perseverance, emotional stability, and optimism; resilience as a dynamic, context-dependent process emerging from ongoing person–environment interactions; and resilience as a successful outcome despite significant adversity. These conceptual differences matter, because they shape how resilience is measured—and, as this meta-analysis reveals, how it is measured turns out to influence the size of its apparent relationship with IGD.

The measurement question proved to be the study’s most striking methodological insight. Among all the moderating variables examined, only the resilience assessment instrument significantly influenced the strength of the association, explaining 56.23% of the between-study variance. Instruments such as the Connor–Davidson Resilience Scale conceptualize resilience as a multidimensional trait reflecting personal competence and stress tolerance, while the Brief Resilience Scale focuses narrowly on the ability to “bounce back” from stressful situations. Because these tools capture partially distinct facets of the construct, the authors argue, they should not be treated as interchangeable—a caution with real consequences for how future studies of gaming disorder are designed and compared.

The theoretical framework underlying the findings is the I-PACE model—Interaction of Person–Affect–Cognition–Execution—one of the most influential accounts of behavioural addictions. According to this model, technology-related disorders arise from the interplay of personal vulnerabilities, dysfunctional affective states, biased cognitive processes, and deficits in executive functioning. Resilience, on this view, operates as a transversal personal resource: it buffers the emotional impact of stress, moderates gaming-related expectations of escape and reward, and supports inhibitory control, thereby reducing the likelihood that gaming becomes a vehicle for emotional regulation. This is especially pertinent for adolescents, whose heightened neuropsychological sensitivity to immediate rewards and immature inhibitory control help explain their overrepresentation in IGD epidemiology.

Complementary frameworks reinforce the same picture. The Self-Medication Hypothesis proposes that addictive behaviours emerge as maladaptive strategies for regulating psychological distress; from this angle, individuals with lower resilience may turn to gaming precisely because they lack more adaptive coping resources. Neuroscientific work by Ersche and colleagues suggests that dysfunction in self-regulation circuitry may underlie vulnerability to addiction, with resilient individuals partially compensating for reduced inhibitory control. Consistent with these accounts, prior studies have linked low resilience not only to greater IGD risk but also to more severe depression, stress, and difficulties with emotional regulation among young people.

The meta-analysis was not without statistical caveats. Heterogeneity was substantial—Cochran’s Q reached 144.09 with an I² of 95.20%—indicating that while the direction of the association was universal, its magnitude varied widely across studies. The prediction interval of −.40 to −.07 suggests future studies could observe effects anywhere in that range. Yet sensitivity analyses confirmed robustness: a leave-one-out procedure showed pooled estimates fluctuating only between r = −.24 and r = −.25 regardless of which study was excluded. Publication bias was also assessed through funnel plots, Egger’s regression test, and the Begg and Mazumdar rank correlation test; despite slight visual asymmetry, both statistical tests were non-significant, allowing the authors to reasonably dismiss publication bias.

The evidence base itself has clear demographic contours. Most included studies were conducted in Asia (57.14%), followed by Middle Eastern countries (28.57%) and Europe (14.29%), with all employing cross-sectional designs published between 2019 and 2025. Participants were predominantly adolescents and young adults, with mean ages ranging from 12.84 to 25.57 years, and sample sizes spanning from 71 to an extraordinary 50,855 individuals. The Internet Gaming Disorder Scale–Short Form dominated IGD assessment. Older adults, clinical populations, and non-student gamers remain markedly underrepresented, and the authors stress that the pooled estimate should be read as an average association rather than a uniform effect across all populations. Language restrictions to English and Spanish and exclusive reliance on self-report measures—which may inflate associations through shared method variance and social desirability—add further interpretive caution.

Perhaps the most important limitation is the field’s oldest problem: correlation is not causation. Because every included study was cross-sectional, the meta-analysis cannot determine whether low resilience drives gaming disorder, whether persistent gaming erodes resilience through sleep disruption, social withdrawal, and disengagement from adaptive activities, or whether both dynamics operate simultaneously. The authors call explicitly for longitudinal and experimental research to clarify temporal ordering and to test whether resilience-enhancing interventions actually reduce IGD symptoms. Prior meta-analytic evidence shows resilience interventions can improve mental health and adaptive coping among students, but whether those benefits translate into reduced problematic gaming remains an open question.

Even with those constraints, the practical implications are significant. Effects of this magnitude are typical for psychological risk and protective factors and can be meaningfully consequential at the population level. The findings argue for embedding resilience-building strategies—emotion regulation training, adaptive coping skills, stress management—into school-based and community prevention programmes targeting adolescents and young adults, the demographic where IGD prevalence climbs to 4–10% or higher and where East Asian estimates reach roughly 6%. For a disorder formally recognized by both major psychiatric classification systems, this synthesis provides researchers and clinicians with something they previously lacked: a rigorously quantified, robust, and bias-checked estimate of how psychological resilience relates to problematic gaming, along with a clear roadmap for the longitudinal, cross-cultural, and clinical work that must follow before causality can be claimed.

Subject of Research: The relationship between psychological resilience and internet gaming disorder, quantified through meta-analysis.

Article Title: The Association Between Internet Gaming Disorder and Resilience: A Meta-Analysis

Article References: Hidalgo-Fuentes, S., Martínez-Álvarez, I., & González-Pérez, E. (2026). The Association Between Internet Gaming Disorder and Resilience: A Meta-Analysis. International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11469-026-01715-2

Image Credits: AI Generated

DOI: 10.1007/s11469-026-01715-2

Keywords: internet gaming disorder, resilience, meta-analysis, behavioural addiction, adolescents, mental health, I-PACE model, gaming disorder, coping strategies, prevention, psychology, self-regulation