MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1506900632 · doi:10.11575/prism/9897

Prevention of problem gambling: Lessons learned from two Alberta programs

2004· book-chapter· en· W1506900632 on OpenAlexaffabout
Robert J. Williams, Dennis Connolly, Robert Wood, Shawn R. Currie

Bibliographic record

VenuePRISM (University of Calgary) · 2004
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicGambling Behavior and Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Lethbridge
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSession (web analytics)PsychologyOddsMedical educationApplied psychologySocial psychologyAdvertisingComputer scienceMedicineLogistic regression

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The development of effective problem gambling prevention programs is in its infancy. The present paper discusses results of randomized control trials of two programs that have been implemented in Alberta, Canada. The first is a 10 session program delivered to several classes of university students taking Introductory Statistics. This program focused primarily on teaching the probabilities associated with gambling and included several hands-on demonstrations of typical casino table games. The second is a 5 session program delivered to high school students at several sites in southern Alberta. This program was more comprehensive, containing information and exercises on the nature of gambling and problem gambling, gambling fallacies, gambling odds, decisionmaking, coping skills, and social problem-solving skills. Data concerning gambling attitudes, gambling fallacies and gambling behaviour at 3 and 6-months postintervention are presented. The findings of these studies are somewhat counter-intuitive and have important implications for the design of effective prevention programs.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.867
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.122
GPT teacher head0.333
Teacher spread0.211 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreOther

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2004
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePRISM (University of Calgary)Same topicGambling Behavior and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207