Links between casino proximity and gambling participation, expenditure, and pathology.
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Two studies investigated the relationship between casino proximity and gambling participation, expenditure, and pathology. In Study 1, 8,842 participants were categorized into 1 of 4 driving distances from their home to the nearest casino in the province of Quebec: 0-100 km, 100.01-200 km, 200.01-300 km, or 300.01-981 km. In Study 2, 5,158 participants, who lived within a 100-km driving distance from the Montreal casino, were classified into 1 of 5 equidistant, 20-km driving distances. A survey company interviewed participants regarding their gambling habits. Results indicated a positive link between casino proximity and gambling participation (at the provincial and Montreal levels) and expenditure (at the provincial level only) but no link with the current prevalence rate of probable pathological gambling or of problem gambling. In a setting in which many types of gambling activities are available, casino proximity in itself does not appear to explain the rate of gambling-related problems. It is necessary to continue prospective research on exposure and adaptation theories as potential explanations for the development of pathological gambling.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it