Pop-up messages, dissociation, and craving: How monetary limit reminders facilitate adherence in a session of slot machine gambling.
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
A failure to set and adhere to monetary limits has been implicated in the development of problematic gambling. A randomized controlled experiment (N = 59) with 2 conditions (i.e., monetary limit pop-up reminder vs. no monetary limit pop-up reminder) was conducted to assess the value of monetary limit pop-up messages in increasing adherence to self-proclaimed monetary limits. The current research also examined dissociation as a potential mechanism by which gambling symptomatology may undermine adherence to monetary limits. Results revealed that participants who received a monetary limit pop-up reminder were significantly more likely to adhere to monetary limits than participants who did not. As predicted, dissociation mediated the relationship between gambling symptomatology and adherence to monetary limits, but only among those who did not receive a monetary limit pop-up reminder. Importantly, the forced stop in play created by the pop-up message did not heighten craving to continue gambling. The efficacy of monetary limit pop-up messages as a tool to facilitate responsible gambling is discussed.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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