Adolescent Gambling: Relationships With Parent Gambling and Parenting Practices.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study explored the possible links between family risk factors (i.e., parent gambling and parenting practices) and adolescent gambling. A community sample of 938 adolescents (496 females and 442 males) completed the South Oaks Gambling Screen Revised for Adolescents (SOGS-RA; K. C. Winters, R. Stinchfield, & J. Fulkerson, 1993b) along with a questionnaire assessing parenting practices. Both parents completed the SOGS (H. R. Lesieur & S. B. Blume, 1987). Results showed that adolescent gambling frequency was related to both parents' gambling frequency and problems. However, adolescent gambling problems were linked only to fathers' severity of gambling problems. Low levels of parental monitoring enhanced adolescents' risk of getting involved in gambling activities and developing related problems. A higher level of inadequate disciplinary practices was also related to greater gambling problems in youth. These links were significant after controlling for socioeconomic status, gender, and impulsivity-hyperactivity problems.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".