MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2070813770 · doi:10.4309/jgi.2014.29.8

Comparing the attitudes of recreational gamblers from Finland and France toward national gambling policies: A qualitative analysis

2014· article· en· W2070813770 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Virve Pöysti

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Gambling Issues · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicGambling Behavior and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRecreationAmbivalenceContext (archaeology)Government (linguistics)PsychologyQualitative researchPublic policySocial psychologyPolitical scienceSociologySocial scienceGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Survey data from several countries indicate that public attitudes toward gambling and its deregulation are negative, or at best ambivalent. However, comparative studies on the attitudes of gamblers themselves have not been conducted, despite the valuable firsthand experience with gambling institutions that these people have. Using qualitative group interview data from recreational gamblers in France and Finland, the study asked how players from two different gambling contexts experience their national gambling arrangements. The study found that although gambling is government regulated in both countries, the Finnish respondents were generally content with their national gambling system while the French were highly critical and supported greater protective measures. The way in which gambling is experienced, and the degree to which national gambling policies are accepted among players, depend not only on objective structures, but also on the institutional and cultural context in which gambling takes place.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.037
Threshold uncertainty score0.532

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
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 integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.400
GPT teacher head0.524
Teacher spread0.124 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations10
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Gambling IssuesSame topicGambling Behavior and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207