Why You Gamble Matters: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of the Association Between Gambling Motivation and Problem Gambling.

IF 2.4 3区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Youssef Allami, Nolan B Gooding, Matthew M Young, David C Hodgins
{"title":"Why You Gamble Matters: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of the Association Between Gambling Motivation and Problem Gambling.","authors":"Youssef Allami, Nolan B Gooding, Matthew M Young, David C Hodgins","doi":"10.1007/s10899-024-10356-w","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The propensity for individuals to experience problem gambling (PG) varies depending on their motivation to gamble. The present meta-analysis assessed the effect sizes associated with various gambling motives identified in representative population samples. Studies were sourced through PsycINFO, PudMed, and databases maintained by the Alberta Gambling Research Institute and the Greo Evidence Insights. Quantitative studies and technical studies were included if they reported on gambling motivation as a correlate of PG; were published in English, French, or Spanish; used valid and reliable measures PG as an outcome variable; and targeted the general adult population. A random effects meta-analysis was conducted to estimate pooled odds ratios. A total of 26 studies were included from 17 jurisdictions, with most studies conducted in Canadian provinces (k = 17) or specific states of the United States (k = 7). Number of participants varied, depending on the gambling motivation analyzed, and ranged from 2,835 to 51,685. Fourteen unique motives were identified with odds ratios ranging from 0.53 (95% CI, 0.45, 0.63) for gambling for charity to 6.20 (95% CI, 3.83, 10.05) for the motive \"to be alone\", with high study heterogeneity being observed for many gambling motives, given variability in important study characteristics. The results generally indicate that coping motives were associated with large effect sizes, enhancement motives with medium effect sizes, and all other motives with small or nil effects. Coping motives are on par with other strong risk factors such as participation in online gambling or electronic gaming machines, and are therefore important elements to consider when screening for PG or designing public health messages.</p>","PeriodicalId":48155,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Gambling Studies","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Gambling Studies","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10899-024-10356-w","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The propensity for individuals to experience problem gambling (PG) varies depending on their motivation to gamble. The present meta-analysis assessed the effect sizes associated with various gambling motives identified in representative population samples. Studies were sourced through PsycINFO, PudMed, and databases maintained by the Alberta Gambling Research Institute and the Greo Evidence Insights. Quantitative studies and technical studies were included if they reported on gambling motivation as a correlate of PG; were published in English, French, or Spanish; used valid and reliable measures PG as an outcome variable; and targeted the general adult population. A random effects meta-analysis was conducted to estimate pooled odds ratios. A total of 26 studies were included from 17 jurisdictions, with most studies conducted in Canadian provinces (k = 17) or specific states of the United States (k = 7). Number of participants varied, depending on the gambling motivation analyzed, and ranged from 2,835 to 51,685. Fourteen unique motives were identified with odds ratios ranging from 0.53 (95% CI, 0.45, 0.63) for gambling for charity to 6.20 (95% CI, 3.83, 10.05) for the motive "to be alone", with high study heterogeneity being observed for many gambling motives, given variability in important study characteristics. The results generally indicate that coping motives were associated with large effect sizes, enhancement motives with medium effect sizes, and all other motives with small or nil effects. Coping motives are on par with other strong risk factors such as participation in online gambling or electronic gaming machines, and are therefore important elements to consider when screening for PG or designing public health messages.

为什么赌博很重要:赌博动机与问题赌博之间关系的系统回顾和元分析》(A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of the Association Between Gambling Motivation and Problem Gambling.
个人出现问题赌博(PG)的倾向因其赌博动机而异。本荟萃分析评估了在代表性人群样本中发现的与各种赌博动机相关的效应大小。研究来源包括 PsycINFO、PudMed 以及由阿尔伯塔赌博研究所和 Greo Evidence Insights 维护的数据库。如果定量研究和技术研究将赌博动机作为 PG 的相关因素进行了报告;以英语、法语或西班牙语发表;使用有效可靠的方法将 PG 作为结果变量;并以普通成年人为研究对象,则将其纳入研究范围。研究人员采用随机效应荟萃分析法来估算汇总的几率比。共纳入了来自 17 个辖区的 26 项研究,其中大多数研究是在加拿大各省(k = 17)或美国特定州(k = 7)进行的。参与人数因分析的赌博动机而异,从 2,835 人到 51,685 人不等。研究发现了 14 种独特的赌博动机,其几率比从 "为慈善而赌博 "的 0.53(95% CI,0.45,0.63)到 "独处 "动机的 6.20(95% CI,3.83,10.05)不等。研究结果普遍表明,应对动机具有较大的效应,增强动机具有中等效应,而所有其他动机的效应较小或为零。应对动机与参与在线赌博或电子游戏机等其他强风险因素具有同等作用,因此是筛查 PG 或设计公共健康信息时需要考虑的重要因素。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.00
自引率
16.70%
发文量
72
期刊介绍: Journal of Gambling Studies is an interdisciplinary forum for the dissemination on the many aspects of gambling behavior, both controlled and pathological, as well as variety of problems attendant to, or resultant from, gambling behavior including alcoholism, suicide, crime, and a number of other mental health problems. Articles published in this journal are representative of a cross-section of disciplines including psychiatry, psychology, sociology, political science, criminology, and social work.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信