# Tilt in Video Gaming: Development and Validation of the Video Gaming Tilt Scale (VGTS)

Emeline Chauchard, Marie Dupau, Yasser Khazaal, Axelle Moreau

► To cite this version:

Emeline Chauchard, Marie Dupau, Yasser Khazaal, Axelle Moreau. Tilt in Video Gaming: Development and Validation of the Video Gaming Tilt Scale (VGTS). European Review of Applied Psychology / Revue Européenne de Psychologie Appliquée, 2025, 75 (6), pp.101100. 10.1016/j.erap.2025.101100. hal-05501003

HAL Id: hal-05501003

https://hal.science/hal-05501003v1

Submitted on 27 Feb 2026

HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access
archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci-
entific research documents, whether they are pub-
lished or not. The documents may come from
teaching and research institutions in France or
abroad, or from public or private research centers.

L'archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est
destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents
scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non,
émanant des établissements d'enseignement et de
recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires
publics ou privés.

<figure><img src="image_1.png" /></figure>

Distributed under a Creative Commons CC BY 4.0 - Attribution - International License
Original article

# Tilt in Video Gaming: Development and Validation of the Video Gaming Tilt Scale (VGTS)

## Le tilt dans les jeux vidéo: Développement et validation de l'échelle de tilt dans les jeux vidéo (VGTS)

Emeline Chauchard<sup>a,b,*</sup>, Marie Dupau<sup>a</sup>, Yasser Khazaal<sup>c</sup>, Axelle Moreau<sup>d</sup>

<figure><img src="image_2.png" /></figure>

## ARTICLE INFO

### Keywords:

Online video game

Tilt

Rage

Anger

Scale validation

Emotion

## ABSTRACT

**Objective:** Tilt refers to a decrease in playing abilities, due to sudden manifestations of negative emotions (anger or frustration) and engagement in more aggressive behaviour within game play. Tilt is commonly experienced by gamers. The purpose of this article is to assess the psychometric properties of the Video Gaming Tilt Scale (VGTS).

**Method:** A sample of 454 players (81.7% men) completed a set of questionnaires comprising the VGTS and questionnaires assessing internet gaming disorder, anger, impulsivity, anxiety, and depression. The total sample was randomly divided into two distinct samples of a similar size, Group A and Group B, to conduct exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses.

**Results:** The exploratory factor analysis identified two factors of equal weight and fitted the data from Group A well. The confirmatory factor analysis reported an excellent fit with the data for Group B. Internal reliability was good and the correlation between the two factors was moderate.

**Conclusion:** The first factor, "Emotion dysregulation" describes the emotional dysregulation of tilt, particularly anger. The second factor, "cognitive dysregulation" measures cognitive dysregulation and its impact on decision-making and strategy judgement. This scale can contribute to a new area of research focusing on the role of emotion regulation in the trajectories of gamers and problem gamers.

## RÉSUMÉ

### Mots-clés:

Jeu vidéo en ligne

Tilt

Rage

Colère

validation d'échelle

Emotion

**Objectif:** Le tilt fait référence à une diminution des capacités de jeu, due à des manifestations soudaines d'émotions négatives (colère ou frustration) et à l'adoption d'un comportement plus agressif dans le cadre du jeu. Le tilt est un phénomène courant chez les joueurs. L'objectif de cet article est d'évaluer les propriétés psychométriques de l'échelle Video Gaming Tilt Scale (VGTS).

**Méthode:** Un échantillon de 454 joueurs (81,7 % d'hommes) a rempli une série de questionnaires comprenant l'échelle VGTS et des questionnaires évaluant le trouble du jeu sur Internet, la colère, l'impulsivité, l'anxiété et la dépression. L'échantillon total a été divisé au hasard en deux échantillons distincts de taille similaire, le groupe A et le groupe B, afin de réaliser des analyses factorielles exploratoires et confirmatoires.

<footnote><sup>a</sup> Nantes Université, Univ Angers, Laboratoire de Psychologie des Pays de la Loire, LPPL, UR 4638, F-44000 Nantes, France</footnote>

<footnote><sup>b</sup> UMR 7295 Centre de Recherches sur la Cognition et l'Apprentissage, CNRS, Université de Tours, Université de Poitiers, France</footnote>

<footnote><sup>c</sup> Addiction Médecine, Lausanne University Hospital and Lausanne University, Lausanne, Switzerland</footnote>

<footnote><sup>d</sup> Institut Universitaire sur les Dépendances, 950 Rue de Louvain Est, Montréal, QC H2M 2E8, Canada</footnote>

<footnote>* Corresponding author.</footnote>

<footnote>E-mail addresses: emeline.chauchard@univ-poitiers.fr (E. Chauchard), marie.dupau@etu.univ-nantes.fr (M. Dupau), Yasser.Khazaal@chuv.ch (Y. Khazaal), axelle.moreau.tlse@gmail.com (A. Moreau).</footnote>
**Résultats:** L'analyse factorielle exploratoire a permis d'identifier deux facteurs de poids égal et qui s'ajuste aux données du groupe A. L'analyse factorielle confirmatoire a montré une excellente adéquation du modèle avec les données du groupe B. La consistance interne était bonne et la corrélation entre les deux facteurs était modérée. **Conclusion:** Le premier facteur, « Dysrégulation des émotions », décrit la dysrégulation émotionnelle du tilt, en particulier la colère. Le second facteur, « Dysrégulation cognitive », mesure la dysrégulation cognitive et son impact sur la prise de décision et le jugement stratégique. Cette échelle peut contribuer à un nouveau domaine de recherche axé sur le rôle de la régulation des émotions dans les trajectoires des joueurs et des joueurs à problèmes.

# 1. Introduction

Tilt is a term commonly used by video games players and studied by researchers in the field of online poker and sport betting (Torrance et al., 2022). Tilt has been related to gambling disorder, sleep impairments, cognitive distortions, anxiety and depression (Hamel et al., 2021; Moreau, Chauchard, Sévigny, et al., 2020; Moreau, Sévigny, et al., 2020).

In the field of video gaming, the terms “tilt” and “rage” have been adopted by gamers, both describe the same phenomenon. Over time, the term tilt has emerged as the more widely adopted term to describe this phenomenon in video games. While no published scientific studies have yet documented this linguistic evolution, it is clearly reflected in gaming websites and players’ online discourse. Since these terms originate from player vernacular, their evolution over time is expected. Currently, we consider tilt to be the most appropriate term for describing this phenomenon, aligning with the perspectives of other researchers (e.g., McLinton & Pascale, 2023; Ortmann et al., 2023; Sharma et al., 2022; Wu et al., 2021) and consistent with the language used by players themselves. As a consequence, we will use the term tilt in this article.

Tilt is define as a state of frustration and anger, unmanaged by the gamer, which leads to a loss of control and a decrease in the abilities needed to perform in the game (Moreau et al., 2023; Przybylski et al., 2014; Wu et al., 2021). Tilt affects players on emotional, cognitive, and behavioural levels (Moreau et al., 2023). Tilt-related phenomena are discussed online by many gamers, on various websites (e.g., Reddit, forums). It is an integral part of the gaming experience. For instance, one outcome could be “rage quitting”, where a gamer suddenly quits the game to manage a high-intensity, negative emotional state (Przybylski et al., 2014).

Three qualitative studies on tilt while gaming – focusing on different samples: children (Kahila et al., 2021), adolescents engaged in esports (Wu et al., 2021) and young adult online gamers (Moreau et al., 2023) – have been published recently. All three studies gave similar descriptions of tilt. The triggers of tilt included interactions with other players, whether team members, friends, or strangers; disappointment with one's own game performance; comparisons with other players; repeated failure and loss; and technical problems (hardware, game or Internet). Participants also reported that the more competitive the game, the more likely they were to tilt (Kahila et al., 2021; Moreau et al., 2023; Wu et al., 2021), and described tilt as a transitory emotional reaction (Moreau et al., 2023). The main emotional states associated with tilt were anger and frustration, followed by feelings of annoyance, irritation, and guilt (Moreau et al., 2023; Wu et al., 2021). On a cognitive level, study participants described confusion, a decline in ability to concentrate, impulsive decision-making, and dissociative experiences (Moreau et al., 2023; Wu et al., 2021). When asked about behavioural responses, they reported a loss of control, physical (on hardware) and verbal aggression, and a difference in their usual game play.

Participants reported using various regulation strategies to control their tilt episodes. Some said they would quit the game, namely “rage quitting”, to cut off the source of tilt. Then, they would express their emotions by crying or screaming. They might also attempt to change their emotional state by trying to calm down or changing activity; and by rationalizing their anger (Kahila et al., 2021; Moreau et al., 2023; Wu et al., 2021). The possible consequences of tilt included losing the game,

broken equipment, loss of pleasure and interest in the game, and a spillover effect on other gamers. Few participants reported a feeling of emotional release (Moreau et al., 2023).

While most gamers experience some degree of tilt when gaming, some may experience problematic or repeated episodes. Tilt and its consequences should therefore be studied to better understand their possible role in gaming disorder (GD) and the negative effects of gaming (toxic behaviour, anger, sleep disturbance, emotional distress, problems with family and friends etc.). GD is defined in the ICD-11 as a “persistent or recurrent gaming behavior, which results in marked distress or significant impairment in personal, family, social, educational, occupational, or other important areas of functioning” (World Health Organisation, 2019). Emotion regulation and dysregulation play a critical role in the vulnerability to gaming disorders as well as in the negative outcomes associated with gaming (Hemenover & Bowman, 2018; Marchica et al., 2019). Emotional dysregulation such as tilt, during gaming sessions can contribute to toxic and aggressive behaviors, adversely affecting the well-being of both the player and co-players (Morrison et al., 2021; Yao et al., 2019; Zheng et al., 2021; Zsila et al., 2022). Moreover, the regulation of tilt could be a specific focus of prevention programmes that reinforce emotional and cognitive regulation. In a recent publication, Ortmann et al. (2023) describe the development of the ‘Tiltometer’, a system designed to mitigate the emotional effects of tilt for League of Legends (LOL) players. The authors draw upon previous work on tilt in online poker, integrating emotional, cognitive and behavioural components through in-game events and facial and vocal emotion recognition techniques in order to calculate a tilt level in real time (Ortmann et al., 2023). Such in-game highlights the necessity to conduct further research on tilt in video games (Sharma et al., 2022).

To better understand tilt and its implications, researcher need to develop scale to assess tilt. We developed the Video Gaming Tilt Scale (VGTS) based on the results of qualitative studies (Kahila et al., 2021; Moreau et al., 2023). The VGTS has been created to measure transitory loss of control and subjective experiences of unpleasant emotions while gaming from a psychological perspective. Concurrently, as the VGTS was being developed, a similar questionnaire, the TILT questionnaire, was recently created, validated and published (Bonilla et al., 2024). While the TILT questionnaire can be compared to our scale, there are notable differences in focus and methodology. First, our work focuses on defining and assessing tilt as a specific behavior, different from the causes and consequences of tilting. Secondly, in contrast to the approach adopted by Bonilla et al. (2024), our study design involved to perform exploratory and confirmatory factorial analysis on two distinct samples to ensure of the reliability and the robustness.

The present article assesses the psychometric properties of the Video Gaming Tilt Scale (VGTS). To this end, the structure of the questionnaire is firstly tested, with a view to reducing the number of items. Subsequently, the VGTS will be tested in a separate sample in order to confirm the reliability and robustness of the structure of the scale. Concurrent validity is then tested by correlating the VGTS and its factors with related constructs. A self-evaluation of tilt frequency and severity is to be correlated with the VGTS. Emotion dysregulation, anger, loss of control and impulsive decision-making are all part of the tilt phenomenon and are associated with internet gaming disorder (IGD) and related problems (Hemenover & Bowman, 2018; Marchica et al., 2019; Moreau et al.,
2023; Wu et al., 2021). Consequently, Internet gaming disorder severity, anger, impulsivity, depression and anxiety have been identified as the constructs to assess concurrent validity, and should be moderately related to the VGTS.

# 2. Methodology

## 2.1. Participants

To be included in the study, participants had to be at least 18 years old, fluent in French, and have played video games at least once in the last month. In total, 1054 people accessed the online questionnaire. The final sample consisted of 454 players who have completed the entire questionnaire, of whom 18.3% (n = 83) were women. Six hundred participants (57% of those who access to the questionnaire) provided incomplete data (all scales completed but incomplete) (n = 19) or stop to fill the questionnaire and close the web page before completion (n = 581). LimeSurvey recorded the answers participants had given, when they stopped responding.

The total sample was randomly divided into two distinct samples of similar size, through the implementation of a systematic classification system that assigned participants to each group based on their line number, distinguishing between even and odd lines. The first group has been named Group A and the second Group B. Sociodemographic and gaming characteristics are reported in Table 1. The two groups did not exhibit any significant disparities in their sociodemographic characteristics. However, a higher proportion of Group B participants reported participating in Massively Multiplayer Online (MMO) games, while a greater number of Group A participants engaged in Multiplayer Online

<table><caption>**Table 1**
Descriptive statistics for the samples.</caption><thead><tr><th></th><th>All Sample<br>N = 454</th><th>Group A<br>n = 227</th><th>Group B<br>n = 227</th><th>t-test/<br>Chi<sup>2</sup><br>p</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Age</td><td>25.7 (SD = 8,5)</td><td>25.3 (SD = 8.2)</td><td>26.1 (SD = 8.7)</td><td>0.353</td></tr><tr><td>Women</td><td>83</td><td>40 (17.6%)</td><td>43 (18.9%)</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Men</td><td>369</td><td>185 (81.5%)</td><td>184 (81.1%)</td><td>0.348</td></tr><tr><td><strong>Socio-professional category</strong></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Student</td><td>199 (44%)</td><td>103 (45%)</td><td>96 (42.3%)</td><td>0.129</td></tr><tr><td>Employee</td><td>190 (42%)</td><td>100 (44%)</td><td>90 (39.6%)</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Unemployed</td><td>59 (13%)</td><td>21 (9%)</td><td>38 (16.7%)</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Other</td><td>6 (1.6%)</td><td>3 (1.3%)</td><td>3 (1.3%)</td><td></td></tr><tr><td><strong>Gaming frequency</strong></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>More than once a day</td><td>213 (47%)</td><td>105 (46%)</td><td>108 (47.6%)</td><td>0.944</td></tr><tr><td>Once a Day</td><td>145 (32%)</td><td>71 (31%)</td><td>74 (32.5%)</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Two or three times a week</td><td>77 (17%)</td><td>41 (18%)</td><td>36 (16%)</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Once a week</td><td>14 (3%)</td><td>8 (3.5%)</td><td>6 (2.6%)</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Twice a month or less</td><td>5 (1%)</td><td>2 (1%)</td><td>3 (1.3%)</td><td></td></tr><tr><td><strong>Length of playing sessions</strong></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Less than 30 minutes</td><td>16 (3.5%)</td><td>8 (3.5%)</td><td>8 (3.5%)</td><td>0.844</td></tr><tr><td>Between 30 min and 1 h</td><td>26 (6%)</td><td>14 (6.2%)</td><td>12 (5.3%)</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Between 1 and 2 h</td><td>115 (25%)</td><td>57 (25%)</td><td>58 (25.6%)</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Between 2 and 3 h</td><td>146 (32%)</td><td>78 (34%)</td><td>68 (30%)</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Between 3 and 4 h</td><td>67 (15%)</td><td>31 (13%)</td><td>36 (15.9%)</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>More than 4 h</td><td>84 (18%)</td><td>39 (17%)</td><td>45 (19.8%)</td><td></td></tr><tr><td><strong>Multiplayers practice</strong></td><td>325 (71%)</td><td>158 (69%)</td><td>167 (73.6%)</td><td>0.349</td></tr><tr><td><strong>Type of game played (not exclusive)</strong></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Massively Multiplayer Online</td><td>252 (55%)</td><td>115 (51%)</td><td>137 (60%)</td><td>0.038</td></tr><tr><td>Multiplayer Online Battle Arena</td><td>170 (37%)</td><td>96 (42%)</td><td>74 (33%)</td><td>0.033</td></tr><tr><td>First Person Shooter</td><td>317 (70%)</td><td>157 (69%)</td><td>160 (70%)</td><td>0.564</td></tr><tr><td>Role Playing Game</td><td>250 (55%)</td><td>126 (56%)</td><td>124 (55%)</td><td>0.759</td></tr><tr><td>Strategy/Management</td><td>232 (51%)</td><td>115 (51%)</td><td>117 (52%)</td><td>0.851</td></tr><tr><td>Survival</td><td>166 (36%)</td><td>82 (36%)</td><td>84 (37%)</td><td>0.845</td></tr></tbody></table>

Battle Arena (MOBA) games.

## 2.2. Materials

The online survey included several questions on sociodemographic data, namely, age, gender and level of education, as well as gaming-related information such as gaming frequency, length of gaming sessions and types of gaming activity. Additionally, participants were invited to answer the following questionnaires:

### 2.2.1. The Video Gaming Tilt Scale (VGTS)

VGTS was developed based on a qualitative study describing tilt among gamers (Moreau et al., 2023), previous studies, and a questionnaire on online poker tilt (Moreau, Chauchard, Hamel, et al., 2020; Moreau et al., 2015, 2017). In a qualitative study (Moreau et al., 2023), authors identified nine main topics to characterise tilt: anger, impaired reasoning skills, verbal aggression, tension/restlessness, impulsivity, loss of game/decrease in level of play, loss of pleasure/interest, relationship with gaming partners/contagious aspects of tilt, and tilt quit. First, we created three items for each topic – 27 items in total. This first version was trialled with a sample of 25 gamers. They were asked to evaluate the linguistic quality of the items and their relevance to tilt. Specifically, they assessed whether the items accurately represented the phenomenon, the clarity of the wording, and suggest improvements or propose additional items. In view of comments from participants in this sample, we modified some wording and identified the “rage quit” aspect as an outcome of tilt rather than a component of the phenomenon. We decided to exclude it from the VGTS but recommend adding a subsidiary question about rage-quit frequency. The 24 items in the VGTS questionnaire are presented in Table 2. The instructions for the questionnaire were: “Please indicate how often you have encountered the following situation in the past three months – ‘When I play online video games, there are times when…’”. Participants answered the questionnaire on a Likert scale with five different responses: “Never” (0), “Rarely” (1), “Sometimes” (2), “Often” (3), “Almost Always” (4).

### 2.2.2. Severity of Tilting Scale

Two items from the Palomäki et al.'s study on tilt in poker (Palomäki et al., 2014) were adapted to video gaming to measure the perceived frequency of tilting episodes. The question “According to you, how many times have you raged in the past 3 months?” was rated on a 7-point Likert scale ranging from 0 to more than 10 times and “Rage has been a problem for me in the last 3 months” was rated on a seven-point Likert scale ranging from “Completely Disagree” (1) to “Completely Agree” (7). The questions have been translated into French and back into English by a bilingual translator.

### 2.2.3. Internet Gaming Disorder Test (IGDT-10)

The French version of the IGDT-10 (Király et al., 2015, 2019) was used to evaluate Internet Gaming Disorder (IGD) symptoms using the 9 criteria in DSM-5 (American Psychiatric Association, 2013). Participants answered 10 questions on a three-point Likert scale (“Never”, “Sometimes”, and “Often”). “Often” was scored as “Yes” (1) and “Never” and “Sometimes” were scored as “No” (0). Items 9 and 10 refer to the same criterion and are combined in the scoring. The composite score of IGDT-10 ranges from 0 to 9. A score of more than 5 indicates a potential internet gaming disorder. IGDT-10 had low reliability in our sample (ω = 0.658).

### 2.2.4. Clinical Anger Scale (CAS)

The CAS is a measure of anger (Snell et al., 1995), translates into French by Goulet (Goulet, n.d.). This scale is made up of 21 items that assess anger levels in a variety of situations to determine how the individual manages anger. Each item is composed of four statements and participants must choose the one that best corresponds to their feelings or situation. Each statement is associated with a score from 0 to 3. Total
<caption>**Table 2**</caption>

Themes associated to each item in the VGTS and factor matrix for the first exploratory analysis after oblic rotation (Sample A).

<table><thead><tr><th>Themes</th><th>Items from the original version</th><th>Factor 1</th><th>Factor 2</th><th>Factor 3</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td rowspan="3">Anger</td><td>1. I am angry [Je suis en colère]</td><td>.747</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>5. Others make meany [Les autres me mettent en colère]</td><td>.386</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>9. I feel anger [Je ressens de la colère]</td><td>.807</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td rowspan="3">Alteration in reasoning abilities</td><td>3. My decisions are no longer rational [Mes décisions ne sont plus rationnelles]</td><td></td><td>.354</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>26. I play poorly [Je joue mal]</td><td></td><td>.742</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>16. I make bad choices [Je fais de mauvais choix]</td><td></td><td>.762</td><td></td></tr><tr><td rowspan="3">Verbal Aggression</td><td>19. I insult others [J'insulte les autres]</td><td>.659</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>18. I criticise the game out loud [Je critique le jeu à voix haute]</td><td>.689</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>17. I swear [Je dis des gros mots]</td><td>.537</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td rowspan="3">Tension / restlessness</td><td>6. I hit my hardware hard (mouse, keyboard, gamepad) [Je tape fort sur mon matériel (souris, clavier, manette)]</td><td>.500</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>7. I am physically tense [Je suis tendu physiquement]</td><td>.535</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>14. I feel irritated [Je me sens énervé]</td><td>.814</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td rowspan="3">Impulsivity</td><td>15. I play without thinking about the consequences [Je joue sans penser aux conséquences]</td><td></td><td>.451</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>27. I act without thinking [J'agis sans réfléchir]</td><td></td><td>.741</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>10. I take more risks [Je prends plus de risque]</td><td></td><td>.387</td><td></td></tr><tr><td rowspan="3">Loss of the game/ decrease in level of play</td><td>12. I no longer apply the strategy necessary to succeed [Je n'applique plus la stratégie nécessaire pour réussir]</td><td></td><td>.723</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>8. I am below my usual level [Je suis en dessous de mon niveau habituel]</td><td></td><td>.547</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>11. I am not efficient [Je ne suis pas efficace]</td><td></td><td>.766</td><td></td></tr><tr><td rowspan="3">Loss of pleasure, lack of interest</td><td>23. I felt like I was wasting my time [J'ai eu l'impression de perdre mon temps]</td><td>.301</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>21. I thought the game was poorly done [J'ai trouvé que le jeu était mal fait]</td><td>.461</td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>13. I don't enjoy the game anymore [Je n'ai plus de plaisir à jouer]</td><td></td><td>.459</td><td></td></tr><tr><td rowspan="3">Contagious aspects/ relationship with partners</td><td>2. My gaming partners told me to calm down [Mes partenaires de jeu m'ont dit de me calmer]</td><td></td><td>.467</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>20. I annoy my teammates [J'énerve mes coéquipiers]</td><td></td><td>.503</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>4. My teammates reproach me [Mes coéquipiers me font des reproches]</td><td></td><td>.737</td><td></td></tr></tbody></table>

Note: The numeration of the items corresponds to the order in which they appear in the questionnaire the participants completed.

Items in bold correspond to the selected items included in the second round of the exploratory analysis of the VGTS.

scores range from 0 to 63. The CAS had good reliability in our sample (ω = 0.891).

### 2.2.5. UPPS Impulsive Behaviour Scale

The French version of the UPPS Impulsive Behaviour Scale-short form (Billieux et al., 2012) assessed five aspects of impulsivity: urgency, positive urgency, lack of premeditation, lack of perseverance, and sensation seeking. Participants answered on a Likert scale ranging from 1 "I strongly agree" to 4 "I strongly disagree". Overall scores range from 20 to 80. A high score on a sub-scale and on the overall score corresponds to a high level of impulsivity. In our sample, the UPPS had good reliability (ω = 0.821).

### 2.2.6. Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS)

The French version of the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) is used to evaluate depressive and anxiety symptoms (Roberge et al., 2013; Zigmond & Snaith, 1983). The HADS comprises 14 items divided into two aspects – anxiety and depression. For each item, there are four response options coded from 0 to 3. The score for the two subscales varies between 0 and 21. The higher the scores, the more severe the symptomatology. HADS presented good reliability in our sample (ω<sub>depression</sub> = 0.688; ω<sub>anxiety</sub> = 0.768).

## 2.4. Procedure

The questionnaire was created using LimeSurvey software and was available online from March 2019 to September 2019. Participants accessed the questionnaire via an announcement posted on social media groups focused primarily on video games and on the accounts of players (primarily Facebook and Twitter). We did not pay for any advertisements, either on Facebook or to players who agreed to post the study announcement on their personal profiles. Participants did not receive any incentives for their involvement in the study.

At the beginning of the questionnaire, all participants agreed to give their informed consent and participation was anonymous. This study followed the ethical guidelines set out in the Declaration of Helsinki and was approved by the ethics committee CERNI of Nantes Université (approval number: 07122022)

## 2.5. Statistical Analysis

First, the sample has been split in two random groups: Group A and group B. Each group corresponds to the half of the sample (Lorenzo-Seva, 2022). To begin, an exploratory factor analysis was performed on the 24 items in the VGTS questionnaire using an oblimin rotation and maximum likelihood estimation method, on the half of the study sample (Group A). As a first step, the scale, which was based on eight topics from a qualitative study, was reduced to two items per topic by deleting the item with the lowest saturation. Then, a second exploratory factor analysis was performed on these 16 items in the VGTS to identify the structure of the questionnaire. Parallel analysis was used to determine the number of factors. Items were assigned to a factor if they weighted greater than 0.45 on that factor (Tabachnick & Fidell, 2012). The Bayesian Information Criterion (BIC) (Schwarz, 1978) is the fit index developed specifically for model selection with a focus on parsimonious models, so that the structure with the lowest BIC value should be selected (Schwarz, 1978).

Finally, a confirmatory factor analysis was performed on the other half of the sample (Group B). We used the robust maximum likelihood estimation method (MLR) (Yuan & Bentler, 2000); and robust standard errors in our CFA. The two factors were identified using the marker method (constraining the first loading of the factor to 1). Several adjustment indices were used to evaluate the model fully (Hu & Bentler, 1999; Tabachnick & Fidell, 2012; Thompson, 2000): (1) the model chi square divided by degree of freedom (χ²/df). With a large sample size, this value should be lower than 2.00. The lower this value, the better the
fit). (2) The Tucker-Lewis index (TLI), this value should be 0.90 or higher for a good fit; the higher this value, the better the fit (Bentler & Bonett, 1980; Tucker & Lewis, 1973). (3) The Comparative Fit Index (CFI). This value should be 0.90 or higher for a good fit; the higher this value, the better the fit (Bentler, 1990). (4) The Standardized Root Mean Square Residual (SRMR. This value should be 0.08 or lower; the lower this value, the better the fit). (5) The Root Mean Square Error of Approximation (RMSEA. This value should be 0.08 or lower; the lower this value, the better the fit) (Steiger, 1980).

The internal consistency of the subdimensions was determined by the ω McDonald (McDonald, 2013).

To test for convergent validity, Pearson's correlations were conducted to examine relationships between scores on the VGTS and other variables (Sample A and B). All the statistics were generated using Jamovi software, version 2.3.28.0 (The jamovi project, 2022).

# 3. Results

## 3.1. Descriptive statistics

The overall population consisted of 454 participants, of whom 369 were men (81.3%) and the mean age was 25.7 years (SD = 8.5 years). Table 1 presents the sociodemographic and gaming characteristics of the overall population and for Groups A and B. When it came to gaming behaviour, 5% (n = 23) were potential problem gamers (Internet Gaming Disorder Test score > 5)

## 3.2. Exploratory analyses for VGTS

The graphics of the three parallel analyses are presented in the Supplementary material 1.

We conducted a first exploratory factor analysis (EFA) using the Group A sample and including the 24 items used to create the VGTS. The parallel analysis suggested a three-factors solution (Bartlett test, p < .001 and KMO = .899). This model explained 45% of the variance and BIC = -650. The factor matrix and the items associated with each theme are presented in Table 2. At this first step, and for each of the eight topics, in order to reduce the number of items of the scale, we deleted the item that had the lowest saturation (items 2, 3, 5, 6, 8, 10, 17, 23). Finally, we selected 16 items for the second step of the exploratory analyses.

Considering the sample for Group A, a second EFA was performed using the 16 items selected in the first EFA. The parallel analysis suggested a three-factors solution (Bartlett test, p < .001 and KMO = .861) explaining 51.2% of the variance, and BIC = -213. Six more items had to be deleted. Item 1 was deleted because its meaning and saturation were similar to those for item 9 and items 4, 13, 15, 20, 21 were rejected due to their low saturation (< .45). At this stage, the third factor remains exclusively with one item, (item 20). The factor matrix can be found in the Supplementary materials 2.

A third EFA was performed with the 10 remaining items (Table 3). This explained 53.7% of the variance. The Bartlett test was significant (p < .001) (Floyd & Widaman, 1995), and KMO = .833 and BIC = -67.4. The factor matrix for the 10 items in the VGTS is shown in Table 3. The analysis produced a two-factor solution: the first factor, combining items oriented toward cognitive regulation, named "cognitive dysregulation"; and the second, considering items oriented toward emotional regulation, named "emotion dysregulation". These factors presented an equivalent percentage of explained variance, respectively, 28.8 and 25%. The correlation between the two factors was moderate (r = 0.363).

The fit indexes of the three factors analysis are presented in the Supplementary material 3.

## 3.3. Confirmatory factor analysis for VGTS on Group B

The two-factor model derived from the EFA was tested on the second

<table><caption>**Table 3**
Factor matrix for the final exploratory analysis (Group A sample).</caption><thead><tr><th>VGTS Items</th><th>Factor 1 Cognitive dysregulation</th><th>Factor 2 Emotion dysregulation</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>1 I am not efficient [Je ne suis pas efficace]</td><td>.724</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>2 I make bad choices [Je fais de mauvais choix]</td><td>.781</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>3 I play poorly [Je joue mal]</td><td>.763</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>4 I act without thinking [J'agis sans réfléchir]</td><td>.754</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>5 I no longer apply the strategy necessary to succeed [Je n'applique plus la stratégie nécessaire pour réussir]</td><td>.711</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>6 I feel irritated [Je me sens énervé]</td><td></td><td>.803</td></tr><tr><td>7 I feel anger [Je ressens de la colère]</td><td></td><td>.813</td></tr><tr><td>8 I insult others [J'insulte les autres]</td><td></td><td>.700</td></tr><tr><td>9 I am physically tense [Je suis tendu physiquement]</td><td></td><td>.514</td></tr><tr><td>10 I criticize the game out loud [Je critique le jeu à voix haute]</td><td></td><td>.628</td></tr><tr><td>ω McDonald</td><td>0.865</td><td>0.857</td></tr><tr><td>Explained Variance</td><td>28.8%</td><td>25%</td></tr></tbody></table>

half of the sample, Group B, with confirmatory structural equation modelling (Fig. 1). The correlated model fitted the data well (χ² / df = 2, TLI = 0.946, CFI = 0.959, SRMR = 0.043, RMSEA = 0.067). All loadings were significant and the correlation between the two factors was moderate (from 0.45) (Fig. 1).

## 3.4. Reliability

The ω McDonald coefficient for reliability was 0.819 for emotional dysregulation and 0.818 for cognitive dysregulation on group B, indicating good internal reliability.

## 3.5. Correlation

The factors cognitive dysregulation (CD) and emotional dysregulation (ED) correlated with the number of episodes (r<sub>CD</sub> = 0.227; r<sub>ED</sub> = 0.603); estimation of tilt as a problem (r<sub>CD</sub> = 0.310; r<sub>ED</sub> = 0.534); the scores for Internet Gaming Disorder symptoms (r<sub>CD</sub> = 0.171; r<sub>ED</sub> = 0.287); the Clinical Anger Scale (r<sub>CD</sub> = 0.152; r<sub>ED</sub> = 0.349); Positive urgency (r<sub>CD</sub> = 0.163; r<sub>ED</sub> = 0.201); Negative urgency (r<sub>CD</sub> = 0.280; r<sub>ED</sub> = 0.283); Lack of perseverance (r<sub>CD</sub> = 0.200; r<sub>ED</sub> = 0.128); Lack of premeditation (r<sub>CD</sub> = 0.172; r<sub>ED</sub> = 0.128); Anxiety symptoms (r<sub>CD</sub> = 0.129; r<sub>ED</sub> = 0.205); and Depression symptoms (r<sub>CD</sub> = 0.107; r<sub>ED</sub> = 0.211).

# 4. Discussion

The aim of this study was to create and explore the psychometric properties of the VGTS. First, the exploratory factor analysis identified two factors of equal weight and fitted the data from the Group A sample well. Then, the confirmatory factor analysis reported an excellent fit to the data for the Group B sample. The final version of the scale included 10 items divided into two distinct factors. The first factor measures cognitive dysregulation and its incidence on decision-making and strategy judgement. The second factor refers to the emotional dysregulation of tilt, particularly anger. These two factors are concordant with the two aspects assessed by the Online Poker Tilt Scale (OPTS) (Moreau, Chauchard, Hamel, et al., 2020) and are in line with the results of qualitative studies published about tilt (Kahila et al., 2021; Moreau et al., 2023; Wu et al., 2021). The VGTS measures the occurrence of typical characteristics of tilt, without directly naming the tilt. The higher the score on the scale, the more frequent the episodes of tilt. No cut-off score was defined.
<figure><img src="image_3.png" /><figcaption>Fig. 1. Confirmatory structural equation modelling of the VGTS.</figcaption></figure>

Cog_Dys = Cognitive dysregulation.

Emo_Dys = Emotion Dysregulation.

During the preparation of this work the authors used Chat GPT in order to correct the English and improve the readability. After using this tool/service, the authors reviewed and edited the content as needed and take full responsibility for the content of the publication.

Components from three topics identified by the qualitative study of Moreau et al. (2023) were excluded, namely, “rage quit”, “relationship with partners” / “contagious aspects”, and “loss of pleasure” (Table 2). These three aspects represent the response or consequences of tilt episodes (Bonilla et al., 2024; Moreau et al., 2023; Sharma et al., 2022; Wu et al., 2021). However, we suggest the use of additional questions to the VGTS to assess the responses and outcomes of tilt on the behaviour of gamers (rage quit), their relations with gaming partners and on their own pleasure and interests in gaming (Supplementary material).

Low to medium correlations indicate that tilt is an independent construct from video game addiction symptoms, anger, and impulsivity. Bonilla et al. found tilt as a predictor of internet gaming disorder symptoms (Bonilla et al., 2024). These variables are related therefore, they deserve to be investigated in future research.

Tilt is a distinct and emerging construct. The VGTS is a new scale in the field of video gaming, which can be used to measure transitory loss of control and subjective experiences of unpleasant emotions while gaming. A similar questionnaire, the TILT questionnaire, was recently developed and validated (Bonilla et al., 2024). While the TILT questionnaire can be compared to our scale, there are notable differences in focus and methodology. First, Bonilla et al.'s scale describes the causes and consequences of tilt, whereas our work focuses on defining and assessing tilt as a distinct behavior. Second, Bonilla et al. appear to have conducted both the exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) on the same sample, which undermines the robustness of the validation process. To ensure reliability, the confirmatory analysis of the TILT questionnaire requires replication in independent samples.

This scale can contribute to new areas of research that focus on the trajectories of gamers and problem gamers and which aim to understand

emotional regulation and the emotional skills deployed while playing video games and e-sport. It could have clinical and preventative implications. The correlations found with Internet Gaming Disorder may indicate a possible contribution of such aspects to gaming disorder. Further longitudinal studies are called for. The phenomenon of tilt is of interest in the context of video games, with players seeking to control it in order to enhance their experience and level of play. The frequency of tilt episodes could help to detect problem players and could be central to prevention by encouraging gamers to develop emotional skills and regulation (Sharma et al., 2022). Emotional skills are identified as crucial for preventing addictive behaviours and could be used and well received by video game players (Marchica et al., 2019). This approach offers a more pertinent means of addressing gaming-related issues, emotion regulation and comorbidities without delving into the nuances of addiction or dependency.

This study has several limits. As we used online data collection, our sample could not be considered representative of the video gaming population. Indeed, the sample is mainly composed of men, while women constitute 48% of the online video gaming population (Entertainment Software Association., n.d.). The study design is cross-sectional, and data collection relied solely on self-reported questionnaires. As such, the results should be considered preliminary and interpreted with caution. Future studies could employ a longitudinal design to assess the reliability of the VGTS and its relationship with gaming disorder symptoms or toxic gaming behaviors. Finally, the psychometric properties of the scale were evaluated using a sample of French or French speaking gamers. Validation of the scale needs to be replicated among various samples of gamers, in different languages.
# 5. Conclusions

Tilt is well known and identified by gamers but has been under-studied in the research field. Tilt refers to a decrease in playing abilities, due to sudden manifestations of negative emotions (anger or frustration) and engagement in more aggressive behaviour. It is triggered by interactions with other players, disappointment with one's own game performance, repeated failure and loss, or technical issues (Kahila et al., 2021; Moreau et al., 2023; Wu et al., 2021). The VGTS is designed to assess tilt episodes. After performing exploratory and confirmatory analysis, the scale comprises ten items, divided into two factors: emotion dysregulation and cognitive dysregulation. The scale has good psychometric properties. The VGTS will be useful for developing studies in the field of problematic gaming and e-sport.

# Authors contributions

Emeline Chauchard: Conceptualization, Methodology, Supervision, Project administration, Writing - Original Draft, Writing - Review & Editing. Marie Dupau: Conceptualization, Methodology, Investigation, Data Curation, Review & Editing. Yasser Khazaal: Methodology, Writing - Original Draft, Writing - Review & Editing. Axelle Moreau: Conceptualization, Methodology, Supervision, Project administration, Writing - Original Draft, Writing - Review & Editing.

All authors approved the final manuscript. All authors had full access to all data in the study and take responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis

# Ethical statement

This study followed the ethical guidelines set out in the Declaration of Helsinki and was approved by the local ethics committee (approval number: 07122022).

# Funding

No funding sources was received for conducting this study.

# Data Availability Statement

The data supporting the conclusions of this article will be available from the corresponding author on request stating the research objectives.

# Declaration of competing interest

The authors have no relevant financial or non-financial interests to disclose.

# Acknowledgements

Thank you to Hubert Baillot who worked on building the questionnaire and testing the first version of the VGTS.

# Appendix A. Supplementary data

Supplementary material related to this article can be found, in the online version, at doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erap.2025.101100.

# References

* American Psychiatric Association. (2013). *Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders: Dsm-5*. American Psychiatric Publishing.

* Bentler, P. M. (1990). Comparative fit indexes in structural models. *Psychological Bulletin*, 107(2), 238–246.

* Bentler, P. M., & Bonett, D. G. (1980). Significance tests and goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance structures. *Psychological Bulletin*, 88(3), 588–606. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.88.3.588

* Billieux, J., Rochat, L., Ceschi, G., Carré, A., Offerlin-Meyer, I., Defeldre, A. C., Khazaal, Y., Besche-Richard, C., & Van Der Linden, M. (2012). Validation of a short French version of the UPPS-P Impulsive Behavior Scale. *Comprehensive Psychiatry*, 53 (5), 609–615. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.comppsych.2011.09.001

* Bonilla, I., Chamarro, A., Birch, P., Sharpe, B. T., Martín-Castellanos, A., Muriarte, D., & Ventura, C. (2024). Conceptualization and validation of the TILT questionnaire: Relationship with IGD and life satisfaction. *Frontiers in Psychology*, 15(1409368). https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1409368

* Entertainment Software Association (n.d.). The video game player community. 2022 Essential Fact about Video Games. Retrieved January 25, 2023, from https://www.theesa.com/resource/2022-essential-facts-about-the-video-game-industry/.

* Floyd, F. J., & Widaman, K. F. (1995). Factor analysis in the development and refinement of clinical assessment instruments. *Psychological Assessment*, 7(3), 286–299. https://doi.org/10.1037/1040-3590.7.3.286

* Goulet, J. (n.d.) Échelle clinique de colère—Clinical Anger Scale—Apprendre la Psychologie. Apprendre les TCC. Retrieved December 16, 2024, https://tcc.apprendre-la-psychologie.fr/catalogue/tests-psychologiques/echelle-clinique-de-colère-clinical-anger-scale.html.

* Hamel, A., Bastien, C., Jacques, C., Moreau, A., & Giroux, I. (2021). Sleep or Play Online Poker?: Gambling Behaviors and Tilt Symptoms While Sleep Deprived. *Frontiers in Psychiatry*, 11, Article 600092. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2020.600092

* Hemenover, S. H., & Bowman, N. D. (2018). Video games, emotion, and emotion regulation: Expanding the scope. *Annals of the International Communication Association*, 42(2), 125–143. https://doi.org/10.1080/23808985.2018.1442239

* Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. *Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal*, 6(1), 1–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/10705519909540118

* Kahila, J., Piispa-Hakala, S., Kahila, S., Valtonen, T., Vartiainen, H., & Tedre, M. (2021). If the game does not work, it is lagging, or you die in game, you just get furious (pp. 21–29). http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-2883/paper3.pdf.

* Király, O., Sleczka, P., Pontes, H. M., Urbán, R., Griffiths, M. D., & Demetrovics, Z. (2015). Validation of the Ten-Item Internet Gaming Disorder Test (IGDT-10) and evaluation of the nine DSM-5 Internet Gaming Disorder criteria. *Addictive Behaviors*. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addbeh.2015.11.005

* Király, O., Bóthe, B., Ramos-Diaz, J., Rahimi-Movaghar, A., Lukavska, K., Habrec, O., Miovsky, M., Billieux, J., Deleuze, J., Nuyens, F., Karila, L., Griffiths, M. D., Nagygyörgy, K., Urbán, R., Potenza, M. N., King, D. L., Rumpf, H.-J., Carragher, N., & Demetrovics, Z. (2019). Ten-Item Internet Gaming Disorder Test (IGDT-10): Measurement invariance and cross-cultural validation across seven language-based samples. *Psychology of Addictive Behaviors*, 33(1), 91–103. https://doi.org/10.1037/adb0000433

* Lorenzo-Seva, U. (2022). SOLOMON: A method for splitting a sample into equivalent subsamples in factor analysis. *Behavior Research Methods*, 54(6), 2665–2677. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-021-01750-y

* Marchica, L. A., Mills, D. C., Derevensky, J. L., & Montreuil, T. C. (2019). The Role of Emotion Regulation in Video Gaming and Gambling Disorder: A Systematic Review. *The Canadian Journal of Addiction*, 10(4), 19–29. https://doi.org/10.1097/CXA.0000000000000070

* McDonald, R. P. (2013). *Test Theory: A Unified Treatment*. Psychology Press. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781410601087

* McLinton, S. S., & Pascale, S. J. (2023). *Tilt in Esports: Understanding the Phenomenon in New Digital Contexts*. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4677368

* Moreau, A., Bethencourt, A., Turina, M., Moulinard, J., Chabrol, H., & Chauchard, E. (2023). Rage in video gaming, characteristics of loss of control among gamers: A qualitative study. *Psychology of Popular Media*. https://doi.org/10.1037/ppm0000481. No Punctuation Specified-No Punctuation Specified.

* Moreau, A., Delieuvin, J., Chauchard, E., & Chabrol, H. (2015). Le TILT au Poker en ligne: Un comportement pathologique transitoire? *Alcoolologie et Addictiologie*, 37(3), 245–252.

* Moreau, A., Delieuvin, J., Chabrol, H., & Chauchard, E. (2017). Online Poker Tilt Scale (OPTS): Creation and validation of a Tilt assessment in a French population. *International Gambling Studies*, 17(2). https://doi.org/10.1080/14459795.2017.1321680

* Moreau, A., Chauchard, E., Hamel, A., Penthier, L., Giroux, I., & Sévigny, S. (2020). Tilt in online poker: Development of a short version of the online poker tilt scale. *Journal of Gambling Issues*, 44, 45–60.

* Moreau, A., Chauchard, É., Sévigny, S., & Giroux, I. (2020). Tilt in online poker: Loss of control and gambling disorder. *International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health*, 17(14), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17145013

* Moreau, A., Sévigny, S., Giroux, I., & Chauchard, E. (2020). Ability to Discriminate Online Poker Tilt Episodes: A New Way to Prevent Excessive Gambling? *Journal of Gambling Studies*, 36(2), 699–711. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10899-019-09903-7

* Morrison, J. O., Elzy, M., & Jelsone-Swain, L. (2021). Sex differences in anger states after violent video game play and the relationship of empathy and emotional invalidation as pre-aggressive predictors in young adults. *Personality and Individual Differences*, 182, Article 111060. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2021.111060

* Ortmann, T., Maute, S., Heil, F., Hildebrandt, K., Jorshery, P. B., & Putzar, L. (2023). In *Tiltometer: Real-Time Tilt Recognition in Esports* (pp. 1–3). https://doi.org/10.1109/ACIWS9127.2023.10388192

* Palomäki, J., Laakasuo, M., & Salmela, M. (2014). Losing More by Losing It: Poker Experience, Sensitivity to Losses and Tilting Severity. *Journal of Gambling Studies*, 30 (1), 187–200. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10899-012-9339-4
Przybylski, A. K., Rigby, C. S., Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (2014). Competence-impeding electronic games and players' aggressive feelings, thoughts, and behaviors. *Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 106*(3), 441–457. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0034820

Roberge, P., Doré, I., Menear, M., Chartrand, É., Ciampi, A., Duhoux, A., & Fournier, L. (2013). A psychometric evaluation of the French Canadian version of the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale in a large primary care population. *Journal of Affective Disorders, 147*(1–3), 171–179. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2012.10.029

Schwarz, G. (1978). Estimating the Dimension of a Model. *The Annals of Statistics, 6*(2), 461–464.

Sharma, M. K., Anand, N., Amudhan, S., & Vashisht, A. (2022). Online gaming and tilting: Psychosocial exploration for promotion of emotional regulation. *International Journal of Social Psychiatry, 68*(3), 699–701. https://doi.org/10.1177/00207640211028602

Snell, W. E., Gum, S., Shuck, R. L., Mosley, J. A., & Kite, T. L. (1995). The clinical anger scale: Preliminary reliability and validity. *Journal of Clinical Psychology, 51*(2), 215–226. https://doi.org/10.1002/1097-4679(199503)51:2<215::AID-JCLP2270510211>3.0.CO;2-Z

Steiger, J. H. (1980). Tests for comparing elements of a correlation matrix. *Psychological Bulletin, 87*(2), 245–251.

Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2012). *Using Multivariate Statistics*. Pearson.

The jamovi project. (2022). *Jamovi (Version 2.3) [Computer software] (Version 2.3) [Computer software]*. https://www.jamovi.org.

Thompson, B. (2000). Ten commandments of structural equation modeling. *Reading and understanding MORE multivariate statistics* (pp. 261–283). American Psychological Association.

Torrance, J., Roderique-Davies, G., Greville, J., O'Hanrahan, M., Davies, N., Sabolova, K., & John, B. (2022). Conceptualising emotional and cognitive

dysregulation amongst sports bettors; an exploratory study of 'tilting' in a new context. *PLoS One, 17*(2), Article e0264000. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0264000

Tucker, L. R., & Lewis, C. (1973). A reliability coefficient for maximum likelihood factor analysis. *Psychometrika, 38*(1), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02291170

World Health Organisation. (2019). *International Classification of Diseases: ICD-11 (11th Revision)*. World Health Organisation. https://icd.who.int/en.

Wu, M., Lee, J. S., & Steinkuehler, C. (2021). In *Understanding Tilt in Esports: A Study on Young League of Legends Players* (pp. 1–9). https://doi.org/10.1145/3411764.3445143

Yao, M., Zhou, Y., Li, J., & Gao, X. (2019). Violent video games exposure and aggression: The role of moral disengagement, anger, hostility, and disinhibition. *Aggressive Behavior, 45*(6), 662–670. https://doi.org/10.1002/ab.21860

Yuan, K.-H., & Bentler, P. M. (2000). Robust mean and covariance structure analysis through iteratively reweighted least squares. *Psychometrika, 65*(1), 43–58. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02294185

Zheng, X., Chen, H., Wang, Z., Xie, F., & Bao, Z. (2021). Online violent video games and online aggressive behavior among Chinese college students: The role of anger rumination and self-control. *Aggressive Behavior, 47*(5), 514–520. https://doi.org/10.1002/ab.21967

Zigmond, A. S., & Snaith, R. P. (1983). The Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale. *Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica, 67*(6), 361–370. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0447.1983.tb09716.x

Zsila, Á, Shabahang, R., Aruguete, M. S., & Orosz, G. (2022). Toxic behaviors in online multiplayer games: Prevalence, perception, risk factors of victimization, and psychological consequences. *Aggressive Behavior, 48*(3), 356–364. https://doi.org/10.1002/ab.22023