MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2536860624 · doi:10.4309/jgi.2016.34.4

Gambling Behaviour and Motivation in British Older Adult Populations: A Grounded Theoretical Framework

2016· article· en· W2536860624 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Julie Pattinson, Adrian Parke

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Gambling Issues · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicGambling Behavior and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyGrounded theoryDistressCoping (psychology)MediationHumanitiesSocial psychologyDevelopmental psychologyClinical psychologyQualitative researchSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Gambling participation among older adults aged 65 and above has increased in Great Britain. However, there is limited research and therefore understanding about cognitive and behavioural patterns of gambling for this demographic. The objective of this study is to develop a substantive framework that represents the gambling behaviour of older adults in Great Britain, with specific reference to motivational factors affecting behaviour. A systematic grounded theory approach (Strauss & Corbin, 1998) was used to produce an inductive set of theoretical propositions. A stratified sample of 17 British older adults aged 65 years and older, who gambled frequently, was recruited. Theoretical sampling was used to fully develop emerging concepts. Axial and selective coding revealed that gambling was often used as a coping mechanism to alleviate distress from psychological and physical lifestyle changes associated with the aging process. In total, four grounded theoretical propositions emerged that accounted for gambling participation, including facilitation of gambling, psychological stress reduction, physical stress mediation, and satisfaction of stimulation needs. Patterns emerged from the data that suggested unique motivational factors regarding gambling behaviour of older adults in Great Britain in contrast to other adult populations. This is the first study to investigate gambling behaviour in British older adults. New directions for future research are discussed in relation to emergent findings.Une augmentation de la participation des personnes âgées de 65 ans et plus au jeu a été observée en Grande-Bretagne. Il existe toutefois peu d’études sur le sujet et, par conséquent, on connaît peu les caractéristiques cognitives et comportementales de ce groupe de la population en ce qui a trait au jeu. La présente étude vise à concevoir un important cadre de travail représentant le comportement de jeu des personnes âgées en G.-B., faisant explicitement référence aux facteurs qui motivent le comportement. On a utilisé la méthode de la théorie ancrée (systematic grounded theory) (Strauss & Corbin, 1998) pour produire un ensemble inductif de propositions théoriques. Un échantillon stratifié de 17 Britanniques âgés de 65 ans et plus s’adonnant souvent au jeu a été formé. L’échantillonnage théorique a servi à élaborer de nouveaux concepts. Le codage axial et sélectif des données a révélé que le jeu était souvent employé comme mécanisme d’adaptation pour atténuer la détresse découlant des changements psychologiques et physiques du mode de vie associés au processus de vieillissement. Au total, quatre propositions de théorie ancrée ont émergé pour expliquer la participation au jeu : la facilitation du jeu, la réduction du stress psychologique, la médiation du stress physique et la satisfaction des besoins de stimulation. Les caractéristiques émergeant des données laissent entendre que par rapport à d’autres populations de personnes âgées, il y aurait des facteurs motivationnels uniques au comportement de jeu des personnes âgées en G.-B. Cette étude est la première à se pencher sur le comportement de jeu des personnes âgées britanniques et à discuter des nouvelles orientations à donner aux études futures compte tenu des conclusions qui y sont énoncées.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.553

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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 head0.184
GPT teacher head0.438
Teacher spread0.254 · 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

Citations6
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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