MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2340639661 · doi:10.1007/s10899-016-9605-y

The Temporal Relationship Between Faulty Gambling Cognitions and Gambling Severity in Young Adults

2016· article· en· W2340639661 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Ryan Nicholson, Chad Graves, Michael Ellery, Tracie O. Afifi

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Gambling Studies · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicGambling Behavior and Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchResearch ManitobaManitoba Health Research Council
KeywordsPsychologyCognitionLongitudinal studyYoung adultGambling disorderDevelopmental psychologyClinical psychologyPsychiatryAddiction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Disordered gambling in young adults is hypothesized as being related to mistaken gambling-related cognitions. Few studies have examined the temporal order of this relationship using longitudinal data. The purpose of this study is to understand the directionality of the relationship between gambling cognitions and gambling severity in a longitudinal sample of young adults. Young adults (N = 578), initially aged 18-21 years, completed the Manitoba Longitudinal Survey of Young Adults at two time points approximately 2-3 years apart. Measures of beliefs about randomness related to gambling and gambling severity, as measured by the Problem Gambling Severity Index, were utilized. A cross-sectional relationship between gambling severity and gambling-related cognitions was observed with greater gambling severity being associated with increased endorsement of mistaken cognitions. Evidence for a bidirectional longitudinal relationship was observed with faulty gambling cognitions leading to later problematic gambling behaviors and vice versa when examining a total beliefs scale. When examining specific beliefs about randomness, initial gambling group membership predicted later endorsement of certain beliefs about randomness while initial belief ratings did not impact later gambling group membership. The results of this study suggest a bidirectional relationship between gambling severity and erroneous gambling-related cognitions. However, when examining specific beliefs about randomness, evidence was found for problem gambling behaviors leading to erroneous gambling beliefs. These findings suggest that prevention efforts targeting cognitions may not be as effective in impacting those not yet demonstrating disordered gambling behaviors.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.051

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.227
GPT teacher head0.457
Teacher spread0.230 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations23
Published2016
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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