A systematic review and meta-analysis of the relative and complementary effects of motivational interviewing and cognitive-behavioral treatment for problem gambling and gambling disorder.
Mark R Hastings, David P Forman, Hyoun S Kim, Rory A Pfund
{"title":"A systematic review and meta-analysis of the relative and complementary effects of motivational interviewing and cognitive-behavioral treatment for problem gambling and gambling disorder.","authors":"Mark R Hastings, David P Forman, Hyoun S Kim, Rory A Pfund","doi":"10.1037/adb0001186","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To compare the relative and complementary effects of motivational interviewing (MI) and cognitive-behavioral treatment (CBT) for problem gambling and gambling disorder.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Four bibliographic databases were searched to identify published and unpublished studies of randomized controlled trials of participants with problem gambling and gambling disorder. Participants were randomized to a combined MI + CBT condition and a control condition of either MI only or CBT only. A correlated, hierarchical effects meta-analysis was conducted, pooling Hedges's g effect sizes for MI + CBT versus MI only and MI + CBT versus CBT only at posttreatment and follow-up. Outcomes included gambling behavior (i.e., number of times gambled, money spent gambling, time spent gambling) and gambling disorder severity.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Eight studies representing 1,078 participants were included. Five studies examined the additive effect of MI (i.e., MI + CBT vs. CBT only), and three studies examined the additive effect of CBT (i.e., MI + CBT vs. MI only). Compared with CBT only, MI + CBT showed significantly less gambling behavior and gambling disorder severity at posttreatment (<i>g</i> = -0.17, 95% CI = -0.31, -0.04) but not at follow-up (<i>g</i> = -0.17, 95% CI = -0.48, 0.13). By contrast, MI + CBT did not significantly differ from MI only at posttreatment (<i>g</i> = -0.05, 95% CI = -0.51, 0.41) or follow-up (<i>g</i> = -0.10, 95% CI = -0.47, 0.26).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Overall, findings were more consistent with a complementary and context-dependent model in which MI and CBT interact rather than exert uniform additive effects. The effectiveness of motivational and skills-based components for treating problem gambling and gambling disorder may depend on how they are integrated. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2026 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":48325,"journal":{"name":"Psychology of Addictive Behaviors","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2026-09-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychology of Addictive Behaviors","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/adb0001186","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objective: To compare the relative and complementary effects of motivational interviewing (MI) and cognitive-behavioral treatment (CBT) for problem gambling and gambling disorder.
Method: Four bibliographic databases were searched to identify published and unpublished studies of randomized controlled trials of participants with problem gambling and gambling disorder. Participants were randomized to a combined MI + CBT condition and a control condition of either MI only or CBT only. A correlated, hierarchical effects meta-analysis was conducted, pooling Hedges's g effect sizes for MI + CBT versus MI only and MI + CBT versus CBT only at posttreatment and follow-up. Outcomes included gambling behavior (i.e., number of times gambled, money spent gambling, time spent gambling) and gambling disorder severity.
Results: Eight studies representing 1,078 participants were included. Five studies examined the additive effect of MI (i.e., MI + CBT vs. CBT only), and three studies examined the additive effect of CBT (i.e., MI + CBT vs. MI only). Compared with CBT only, MI + CBT showed significantly less gambling behavior and gambling disorder severity at posttreatment (g = -0.17, 95% CI = -0.31, -0.04) but not at follow-up (g = -0.17, 95% CI = -0.48, 0.13). By contrast, MI + CBT did not significantly differ from MI only at posttreatment (g = -0.05, 95% CI = -0.51, 0.41) or follow-up (g = -0.10, 95% CI = -0.47, 0.26).
Conclusions: Overall, findings were more consistent with a complementary and context-dependent model in which MI and CBT interact rather than exert uniform additive effects. The effectiveness of motivational and skills-based components for treating problem gambling and gambling disorder may depend on how they are integrated. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2026 APA, all rights reserved).
期刊介绍：
Psychology of Addictive Behaviors publishes peer-reviewed original articles related to the psychological aspects of addictive behaviors. The journal includes articles on the following topics: - alcohol and alcoholism - drug use and abuse - eating disorders - smoking and nicotine addiction, and other excessive behaviors (e.g., gambling) Full-length research reports, literature reviews, brief reports, and comments are published.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
