MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2324349202 · doi:10.1037/a0032801

Identifying indicators of harmful and problem gambling in a Canadian sample through receiver operating characteristic analysis.

2013· article· en· W2324349202 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Lena C. Quilty, Daniela Avila Murati, R. Michael Bagby

Bibliographic record

VenuePsychology of Addictive Behaviors · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicGambling Behavior and Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
FundersOntario Problem Gambling Research Centre
KeywordsPsychologyContext (archaeology)AbstinenceGambling disorderSample (material)AdvertisingPsychiatrySocial psychologyAddictionBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many gamblers would prefer to reduce gambling on their own rather than to adopt an abstinence approach within the context of a gambling treatment program. Yet responsible gambling guidelines lack quantifiable markers to guide gamblers in wagering safely. To address these issues, the current investigation implemented receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis to identify behavioral indicators of harmful and problem gambling. Gambling involvement was assessed in 503 participants (275 psychiatric outpatients and 228 community gamblers) with the Canadian Problem Gambling Index. Overall gambling frequency, duration, and expenditure were able to distinguish harmful and problematic gambling at a moderate level. Indicators of harmful gambling were generated for engagement in specific gambling activities: frequency of tickets and casino; duration of bingo, casino, and investments; and expenditures on bingo, casino, sports betting, games of skill, and investments. Indicators of problem gambling were similarly produced for frequency of tickets and casino, and expenditures on bingo, casino, games of skill, and investments. Logistic regression analyses revealed that overall gambling frequency uniquely predicted the presence of harmful and problem gambling. Furthermore, frequency indicators for tickets and casino uniquely predicted the presence of both harmful and problem gambling. Together, these findings contribute to the development of an empirically based method enabling the minimization of harmful or problem gambling through self-control rather than abstinence.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.330
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.070
GPT teacher head0.409
Teacher spread0.339 · 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.

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

Citations40
Published2013
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePsychology of Addictive BehaviorsSame topicGambling Behavior and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207