Parental influences and social modelling of youth lottery participation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Objective The present study sought to investigate the relationship between perceived parental lottery involvement and the bearing this has upon youth lottery participation. Participants One thousand seventy(two youth, 10–18 years of age participated from 20 elementary and nine high schools throughout the province of Ontario, Canada. Measurements Measuring Youth Lottery Participation and Playing Behaviour Questionnaire and the DSM(IV(MR(J Revised to screen for youth pathological gambling. Findings Youth reported playing all forms of lottery tickets with 77% reporting that their parents purchase scratch tickets, lottery draws (50%), and sports tickets (23%) for them. Parental purchases of lottery tickets for their children increased by level of gambling severity. Participants with significant gambling problems perceived higher parental participation in the lottery compared to non(gamblers and social gamblers. The majority of participants reported that their parents were aware of their lottery involvement and were not afraid of getting caught purchasing lottery tickets in spite of legal prohibitions. Conclusion The results suggest youths' perception of parental involvement with the lottery plays an important role in the initiation and maintenance of lottery participation for youth. Given that youth report receiving lottery tickets from their parents, it is clear that the lottery is perceived as an innocuous form of gambling. Public awareness programmes and education of this issue is critical. Copyright © 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".