Relative deprivation and disordered gambling in youths
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Previous research has found that area-level income inequality and individual-level relative deprivation both contribute to disordered gambling in adults. However, the socioeconomic factors that contribute to disordered gambling in youths and protective factors in their social environment have not been fully explored. This study examined the association between relative deprivation and youth disordered gambling and the potential moderating role of social support in this association. METHODS: We used data on family material assets and self-reported symptoms of disordered gambling symptoms in 19 321 participants of the 2013/2014 Italian Health Behaviour in School-aged Children study. Relative deprivation was measured using the Yitzhaki index and classmates as a social reference group. Its association with disordered gambling was tested using multilevel negative binomial regression analyses. We also tested moderated effects of relative deprivation on disordered gambling by four sources of social support: families, peers, teachers and classmates. RESULTS: Relative deprivation related to a fourfold increase in the rate of disordered gambling symptoms (incidence rate ratio=4.18) after differences in absolute family wealth and other variables were statistically controlled. Symptoms were also more prevalent in males, first-generation immigrants and less supported youth. Peer support moderated the association between relative deprivation and symptoms, suggesting that high deprivation and low peer support have interactive links to disordered gambling. CONCLUSION: Relative deprivation among classmates relate to youth symptoms of disordered gambling. Youth who live in economically unequal settings and perceive a lack of social support may be at greatest risk.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".