MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2562862163 · doi:10.4309/jgi.2016.34.9

Gambling and Video Game Playing Among Youth

2016· article· en· W2562862163 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Jessica McBride, Jeffrey L. Derevensky

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Gambling Issues · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicGambling Behavior and Treatments
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyVideo gameLotteryParallelsAddictionSocial psychologyMultimediaPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Gambling and video game playing represent two leisure activities in which adolescents and young adults participate. There are psychological and behavioural parallels between some forms of gambling (e.g., slot machines, video lottery terminals, electronic gambling machines) and some types of video games (e.g., arcade games). Both activities operate on behavioural principles of variable reinforcement schedules in order to reward and prolong play and use exciting and stimulating sound and light effects within game play. Additionally, both activities have similar negative effects associated with excessive play (e.g., poor academic performance, moodiness, loss of interest in activities previously enjoyed, and interpersonal conflict). Thus, there is concern that children and adolescents who are attracted to video games, for both psychological rewards and the challenge, may be at greater risk to gamble. We examined the gambling and video game playing behaviour among 1,229 adolescents and young adults. Results indicate that gamblers, relative to non-gamblers, were more likely to play video games. Video game players were more likely than non-players to gamble. Both social and problem gamblers had higher rates of video game playing than did non-gamblers, and addicted gamers had higher rates of gambling than did social and non-gamers. Results from the current study suggest significant overlap in youth participation in both gambling activities and video game playing. These results have implications for future research and the treatment of problem gambling and video game addiction.Les jeux de hasard et les jeux vidéo sont deux loisirs auxquels s’adonnent les adolescents et les jeunes adultes. Il existe des parallèles psychologiques et comportementaux entre certaines formes des jeux de hasard (p. ex., les appareils à sous, les appareils de loterie vidéo, les machines de jeux électroniques) et certains jeux vidéo (p. ex., les jeux d’arcade). Ces deux types de jeux exploitent les principes comportementaux du programme variable de renforcement pour récompenser le joueur et l’amener à jouer plus longtemps et utilisent des effets lumineux et sonores stimulants et excitants pour accroître l’attrait de l’expérience de jeu. De plus, ces deux activités entraînent des effets négatifs similaires chez les joueurs excessifs (p. ex., mauvais résultats scolaires, instabilité émotive, perte d’intérêt pour des activités qui autrefois procuraient du plaisir, conflits interpersonnels). On craint donc que les enfants et les adolescents qui sont attirés par les jeux vidéo, en raison des défis qu’ils proposent et des récompenses psychologiques qu’ils procurent, soient plus à risque de s’adonner aux jeux de hasard. La présente recherche a examiné les comportements de jeu de 1229 adolescents et jeunes adultes relativement aux jeux de hasard et aux jeux vidéo. Les résultats indiquent que les joueurs de jeux de hasard, par rapport aux non-joueurs, étaient plus susceptibles de jouer à des jeux vidéo, et que les joueurs de jeux vidéo étaient pareillement plus susceptibles de s’adonner aux jeux de hasard que les sujets ne jouant pas aux jeux vidéo. Le groupe des joueurs sociaux et celui des joueurs à problèmes présentaient tous deux un taux plus élevé de pratique des jeux vidéo que celui des non-joueurs, et les sujets ayant une dépendance aux jeux vidéo s’adonnaient également en plus forte proportion aux jeux de hasard que les sujets ne pratiquant par les jeux vidéo ou les pratiquant de manière sociale uniquement. Les résultats de la présente étude donnent à croire qu’il y a un chevauchement important entre la pratique des jeux de hasard et celle des jeux vidéo chez les jeunes. Ces résultats ont des incidences sur les futures recherches et le traitement de la dépendance aux jeux de hasard et aux jeux vidéo.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.063

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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

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 head0.264
GPT teacher head0.431
Teacher spread0.167 · 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

Citations38
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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