Gambling Disorder in the College Student-Athlete Population: An Overview
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This review examines research from 1991 to the present regarding college student-athlete gambling addiction and disorder issues, with an emphasis on prevalence rates, motivations, and comorbid disorders, as well as National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) national studies and derivative research. Subsets of the college student-athlete population, specifically minority athletes, are also examined. Databases PsycINFO, PsycARTICLES, ERIC, SPORTDiscus, MEDLINE, and Dissertation Abstracts International (ProQuest), were searched for possible contributions to this review. It was determined that student-athletes, and male student-athletes in particular, are vulnerable to disordered gambling problems, which, if university administration and athletic departments do not address, may result in severe negative consequences for the student-athlete. The research suggests that, for the most part, student-athletes have a higher rate of pathological gambling than non-athletes, though the rate of “normal” gambling behavior is about the same. Additionally, it appears that athletes in certain high profile team sports (football, basketball, etc.), as well as athletes belonging to a minority group, are more likely to report problems with gambling than their counterparts. Recommendations for working with student-athletes with a gambling disorder, as well as directions for future research in this burgeoning area, are offered. These proposals include screening for the disorder by mental health professionals and counsellors, as well as training for coaches and financial aid personnel.Résumé Cette étude fait l’examen de la recherche effectuée de 1991 à nos jours sur les problèmes de dépendance et de désordre chez les étudiants-athlètes, en mettant l’accent sur les taux de prévalence, les motivations et les troubles concomitants, ainsi que les études nationales de la National Collegiate Athletic Association et des travaux de recherche dérivés. Des sous-ensembles de la population d’étudiants-athlètes universitaires, en particulier des athlètes faisant partie de minorités, sont également sousmis à l’étude. Des recherches ont été faites dans les bases de données PsycINFO, PsycARTICLES, ERIC, SPORTDiscus, MEDLINE et Dissertation Abstracts International (ProQuest) pour trouver d’éventuelles contributions à la présente étude. On a établi que les étudiants-athlètes, masculins en particulier, sont vulnérables aux problèmes de jeu compulsifs, et s’ils ne sont pas pris en main par l’administration universitaire et les départements sportifs, ces troubles peuvent avoir de graves conséquences pour eux. La recherche laisse entendre que, pour la plupart, les étudiants-athlètes ont un taux de jeu pathologique plus élevé que les non-athlètes, bien que le taux de jeu « normal » soit à peu près le même. De plus, il semble que les athlètes de certains sports d’équipe de haut niveau (football, basketball, etc.), ainsi que les athlètes appartenant à un groupe minoritaire, sont plus susceptibles de montrer des problèmes de jeu que leurs homologues. Des recommandations sont faites pour travailler avec des étudiants-athlètes ayant un trouble du jeu, ainsi que des orientations pour de futures recherches dans ce domaine en progression. Ces propositions comprennent le dépistage du trouble par des professionnels de la santé mentale et des conseillers, ainsi que la formation des entraîneurs et du personnel de l’aide financière.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".