Psychometric Validation of the Chinese Version of Gambling Symptom Assessment Scale (C-GSAS).

IF 2.2 3区心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY

Journal of Gambling Studies Pub Date : 2025-09-04 DOI:10.1007/s10899-025-10414-x

Shu-Wei Liu, Su-Chen Fang, Li-Fen Chen, Pei-Chi Tu, Hsuan-Yun Su, Wei-Chien Huang, Po-Chiao Liao, Hu-Ming Chang, Ming-Chyi Huang

{"title":"Psychometric Validation of the Chinese Version of Gambling Symptom Assessment Scale (C-GSAS).","authors":"Shu-Wei Liu, Su-Chen Fang, Li-Fen Chen, Pei-Chi Tu, Hsuan-Yun Su, Wei-Chien Huang, Po-Chiao Liao, Hu-Ming Chang, Ming-Chyi Huang","doi":"10.1007/s10899-025-10414-x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Reliable tools for assessing gambling symptom severity in gambling disorder (GD) are critical for both research and clinical intervention. The Gambling Symptom Assessment Scale (GSAS) is widely used but lacks validation in Chinese-speaking populations. Our study aimed to evaluate the psychometric properties of the Chinese version of GSAS (C-GSAS) among 186 treatment-seeking GD patients. Internal consistency was excellent (Cronbach's α = 0.93), and exploratory factor analysis revealed a two-factor model: Cognitive-Preparatory and Emotional-Consequential Factors. Confirmatory factor analysis supported the two-factor structure with satisfactory model fit indices. Concurrent validity was established through significant correlations with the Chinese version of Problem Gambling Severity Index (β = 0.32, p < 0.01) and a Visual Analog Scale for gambling craving (β = 0.67, p < 0.01). The C-GSAS is a reliable and valid measure for assessing gambling severity in patients with GD.</p>","PeriodicalId":48155,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Gambling Studies","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-04","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/s10899-025-10414-x","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

Reliable tools for assessing gambling symptom severity in gambling disorder (GD) are critical for both research and clinical intervention. The Gambling Symptom Assessment Scale (GSAS) is widely used but lacks validation in Chinese-speaking populations. Our study aimed to evaluate the psychometric properties of the Chinese version of GSAS (C-GSAS) among 186 treatment-seeking GD patients. Internal consistency was excellent (Cronbach's α = 0.93), and exploratory factor analysis revealed a two-factor model: Cognitive-Preparatory and Emotional-Consequential Factors. Confirmatory factor analysis supported the two-factor structure with satisfactory model fit indices. Concurrent validity was established through significant correlations with the Chinese version of Problem Gambling Severity Index (β = 0.32, p < 0.01) and a Visual Analog Scale for gambling craving (β = 0.67, p < 0.01). The C-GSAS is a reliable and valid measure for assessing gambling severity in patients with GD.

查看原文本刊更多论文

中文版赌博症状评定量表（C-GSAS）的心理计量学验证。

评估赌博障碍（GD）中赌博症状严重程度的可靠工具对研究和临床干预都至关重要。赌博症状评估量表（GSAS）被广泛使用，但在汉语人群中缺乏有效性。本研究旨在评估186例求诊GD患者的中文版GSAS （C-GSAS）的心理测量特性。内部一致性极好（Cronbach’s α = 0.93），探索性因子分析显示两因素模型：认知-预备因素和情绪-后果因素。验证性因子分析支持双因子结构，模型拟合指标满意。通过与中文版本的问题赌博严重程度指数(β = 0.32, p

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

Journal of Gambling Studies Multiple-

CiteScore

5.00

自引率

16.70%

发文量

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.