A work‐individual‐family inquiry on mental health and family responsibilities of dealers employed in the Macau gaming industry
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The anxiety, depression and sleep quality levels of a sample of 1124 Macau casino dealers are examined in this study which uses a mixed method study with a work‐individual‐family approach. In total, 113 dealers are interviewed on the impacts of casino employment on their family life. The results of the quantitative analysis shows that over half of the participants (55.4%) have a score that is over the cut‐off point for depression, a quarter (25.8%) are considered to have anxiety, and about two‐thirds (77%) report poor sleep quality. The qualitative analysis results indicate that despite the financial benefits, family responsibilities and dynamics, such as family activities and plans, parental care and guidance, child‐parent interaction and bonding, marital intimacy, communication patterns, and gender roles are negatively affected to some degree by casino employment. Practitioner points Sensitivity towards work‐family conflicts, families‐in‐transition, gender and class can facilitate engagement and intervention with the families of dealers in Macau Gender is a significant predictor of depression and anxiety levels Respondents with a lower income range have lower quality of sleep Absence from family activities, missed opportunities to carry out parental care, reduced marital intimacy and communication with family members are key concerns
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".