MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2914399724

Obilježja roditeljstva i odnos roditelja prema kockanju kao prediktori kockanja muške djece

2018· dissertation· hr· W2914399724 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Toni Maglica

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languagehr
FieldPsychology
TopicGambling Behavior and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyPerceptionDevelopmental psychologyPerspective (graphical)HumanitiesSocial psychology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The research of youth gambling in Croatia and the world have mostly been approached from a child's point of view. This dissertation, beside including child's perspective, includes parents’ personal characteristics through different way of assessment and self-assessment. The impact of parenthood on a negative child outcomes has been proven through many researches (Farrington, Loeber i Ttofi, 2007; Andrews i Bonta, 2006, Feric, 2002, Ricijas, 2012), as well as on gambling as a risky behaviour (Gupta i Derevensky, 1997; Dickson, Derevensky i Gupta, 2000, Wood i Griffiths, 2002; Griffiths, 2003), although literature holdings in this field are rather moderate and recent. The aim of this research is to provide an insight into characteristics of parenthood, particularly those related to relationship with youth gambling, parents’ attitudes toward gambling, frequency of parent gambling and the differences in perception between parents and their children. Moreover, the goal was to determine how those characteristics explain the frequency of their children’s gambling and the way in which child’s perception of parents and parenthood, and child’s personal characteristics, experiences and attitudes to gambling explain the frequency of their gambling. The important attribute of this research is that both, parents (n=244) and their male children (n=244) were involved, so comparison between parents’ perception and their children self-assessment could be done. Subsample of parents consists of n=126 mothers (51.6%) and n=118 fathers (48.4%). Parents’ age ranges from 30 to 63 with the average age Mage=45.98 (SDage=5.59). Age of boys ranges from 14 to 19, with the average age Mage=16 (SDage=1.21). The research was conducted on a convenience sample in Split and Zagreb. In order to conduct this research, a wide battery of instruments was used: (1) Questionnaire about general and socio- demographic data, (2) Questionnaire of risk perception for the youth, (3) Questionnaire of communication assessment about youth risks, (4) Questionnaire of assessment of the experiences of a child with risky behaviour, (5) Questionnaire of family interaction quality – KOBI (Vulic-Prtoric, 2002), (6) Questionnaire of parent behaviour URP-29 (Kuterovac Jagodic, Kerestes I Brkovic, 2007), (7) Gambling attitudes scale (Jelic, Huic I Dinic, 2013), (8) Questionnaire of gambling activities (shorten version): parents’ self-assessment, partners’ assessment, parents’ self- assessment about gambling with their child (Ricijas et all., 2011), (9) South Oaks Gambling Screen- SOGS (Lesieur and Bloom, 1987), (10) Questionnaire of child’s gambling activities (shorten version) (Ricijas et all., 2011), (11) General Problem Severity Subscale (GPSS) as a part of Canadian Adolescent Gambling Inventory- CAGI (Wiebe, Tremblay, Wynne and Stinchfield, 2010), (12) Questionnaire of self- assessment of probability of parents’ disciplining their children for risky behaviour and (13) Questions about whether they gamble together with their child. In order to reach the aforementioned goals, the following data analyses methodology was used: (1) Descriptive statistics (means, standard deviation, frequencies), (2) Wilcox range test, (3) Hi-square test, (4) Mann-Whitney U- Test with the calculation of effect sizes, and (5) Hierarchical regression analysis. The results of the research have shown that parents do not rank gambling that high as the risks related to psychoactive substances use and that they perceive gambling as a greater risk then their children do. When compared to communication with their children, parents communicate more often about substance use (alcohol, cigarettes, drugs) and other behavioural addictions, that is technological risks such as Internet and video games, rather than gambling and they assess their communication more frequent their children do. In relation with parents’ perception of type, frequency and consequences related to gambling, the results show that parents believe sport betting to be the most frequent with the children, but also children self-assessed to gamble more frequent then their parents think so. That difference is shown also in disciplining risky behaviour in a way that parents report to be more prone to disciplining the children, whereas the children do not have the same perception. As far as psychosocial consequences connected to gambling, 88.0% of parents assess that their children do not have any of the consequences, while 64.3% of their children think so. The total of 8.4% of parents assess low and medium level of the problem, while 21.6% of their male children is self-assessed to be in this range of the problem. Finally, 2.8% of parents assessed that their male children have serious psychosocial consequences related to gambling, while 14.1% of children self-assesses to suffer the consequences, which is significant. Related to differences between mothers and fathers, the results show that the fathers have a more positive attitude towards gambling, they gamble more often and have more developed problems connected to gambling. When questioning the contribution of parents’ personal characteristics, parenthood characteristics, parenting related to youth gambling, attitudes toward gambling, frequency and intensity of the problems related to parents gambling in prediction of self- expressed gambling frequency of their male children, the results demonstrate that the frequency of male children gambling cannot be described completely by parents’ self-assessment since only 20% of the variance is explained in that way. However, the set of predictors which measures, from child’s perspective, the assessment of family and parenthood, and also includes children’s self-expression and self-assessment of their attitudes and experiences while gambling, the results show that frequency of boys gambling can be explained through inadequate parenting styles which include restrictive control and permissiveness and parents’ knowledge about their children gambling, a child’s positive attitude toward gambling, experience of winning a great amount of money which motivates the child to gamble more, which explains about 59% variance of criterion.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.049

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.002

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 head0.076
GPT teacher head0.400
Teacher spread0.324 · 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

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGambling Behavior and Treatments→French-language works237,207→