Crossover Effects of Protective Behavioural Strategies for Drinking on Gambling Consequences Among College Gamblers With Alcohol or Drug Abuse
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Protective behavioural strategies (PBS) for drinking are behaviours that individuals engage in to reduce the amount they drink and drinking-related consequences. To date, little is known about associations that PBS might have with other risky behaviours that frequently coincide with drinking, such as gambling. The goal of this study was to examine the associations between three subscales of the Protective Behavioral Strategies Scale (PBSS) and gambling consequences in a college sample of gamblers who also met criteria for alcohol or drug abuse. We hypothesized that engaging in more drinking PBS would be associated with lower levels of gambling consequences. A sample of 316 students (55% female) completed an online survey and met criteria for problematic gambling behaviour (3 or more on the South Oaks Gambling Screen and 1 or more consequences on the Gambling Problem Index). Those endorsing a higher score on the Serious Harm Reduction subscale (but not the Stopping or Limiting Drinking or Manner of Drinking subscales) showed a lower level of lifetime gambling consequences, suggesting a crossover effect. Strategies to reduce serious harm represent a treatment target that could potentially reduce negative consequences associated with both drinking and gambling.Résumé Les personnes aux prises avec des problèmes d’abus d’alcool adoptent des stratégies comportementales de protection pour réduire leur consommation et ses conséquences. À ce jour, on sait peu de choses sur les possibles associations entre ces comportements et d’autres comportements à risque qui coïncident souvent avec l’abus d’alcool, comme le jeu. L’objectif de cette étude était d’examiner les associations entre trois sous-échelles de stratégies comportementales et les conséquences du jeu à l’aide d’un échantillon de joueurs universitaires qui répondaient également aux critères de consommation abusive d’alcool/de drogue. On a émis l’hypothèse que le fait d’adopter des stratégies comportementales à l’égard de la consommation d’alcool diminuerait l’importance des conséquences relatives au jeu. Un échantillon de 316 étudiants sondés en ligne (55 % de femmes) a répondu aux critères de comportement de jeu problématique (3 critères ou plus sur le South Oaks Gambling Screen [SOGC] et une ou plusieurs conséquences sur l’Indice de jeu excessif [PGSI]). Les personnes qui entrent dans des sous-échelles de réduction importante des méfaits (mais pas les sous-échelles d’arrêt ou de limitation de consommation ou de mode de consommation) ont montré, au fil du temps, une diminution des effets du jeu, ce qui laisse croire à un certain effet de croisement. On aborde dans cet article la portée de cette analyse sur la prévention et l’intervention.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".