MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Influence of Smoke-free Policies on Gambling Revenues and Intentions to Gamble: A Review of the Literature

2015· review· en· W3016883879 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Daniel S. McGrath

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of Addiction · 2015
Typereview
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicGambling Behavior and Treatments
Canadian institutionsAlberta Gambling Research InstituteGreoUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRevenueSmokeAdvertisingBusinessPsychologyPublic economicsEconomicsLaw and economicsEngineeringAccountingWaste management

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objectives. A large body of research suggests that tobacco use and gambling are highly co-morbid addictive behaviours. Since the early-2000s’, many jurisdictions in North America, Europe, and Australia have introduced smoke-free legislation for indoor public places in an effort to protect citizens from exposure to second-hand smoke. While this may be the primary purpose of smoking bans, an indirect effect of smoking restrictions may be a reduction in other addictive behaviours such as gambling. The goal of this paper is to provide a review of the empirical literature examining the effects of smoking bans on gambling revenues and intentions to gamble. Methods. The publications included in the review were gathered from several electronic databases and government sources. Studies which examined the effects of smokefree policies on gambling-related revenues or intentions to gamble as primary outcomes of interest were included. Results. Overall, the current research evidence is mixed. Some studies suggest that smoke-free policies have a negligible impact on gambling revenues; whereas others find a substantial decrease. Studies employing regression analyses which incorporate other economic variables and competitive forces more consistently find that smoking bans decrease gaming revenues. Studies with gambling intentions as the primary outcome variable indicate that non-smokers are more responsive than smokers to the introduction of smoke-free regulations. Conclusions. The extent to which smoke-free legislation influences gambling remains unclear. More research is needed, especially studies incorporating longitudinal designs, to better understand how individual gamblers who smoke are affected by these policies. Objectifs. Un grand nombre de recherche suggère que l'usage du tabac et les jeux de hasard et d'argent sont des comportements à haut risque de dépendance. Depuis le début des années 2000, plusieurs juridictions nord-américaines, européennes et australiennes ont mis en application une loi anti-tabac dans les lieux publics fermés dans le but de protéger les citoyens d'une exposition à la fumée secondaire. Bien que ce soit fort probablement la principale raison pour appliquer l'interdiction de fumer, un effet indirect pourrait être une diminution de la fréquence d'autres comportements à risque de dépendance comme les jeux de hasard et d'argent. Le but de cet article est de passer en revue les écrits empiriques ayant examiné les effets d'une interdiction de fumer sur les revenus obtenus par les jeux de hasard et d'argent et les intentions d'y jouer. Méthodes. Les publications inclues dans la recension des écrits ont été tirées de nombreuses bases de données électroniques et de sources gouvernementales. Les études inclues ont examiné les revenus liés au jeu ou les intentions de jouer comme principaux résultats d'intérêts et les effets des politiques anti-tabac sur ces résultats. Résultats. Dans l'ensemble, les données disponibles sont partagées. Certaines études suggèrent que les politiques anti-tabac ont un effet négligeable sur les revenus obtenus par les jeux de hasard et d'argent alors que d'autres rapportent une diminution considérable. Les études ayant utilisé des analyses de régression et qui ont contrôlé pour des facteurs économiques et des forces concurrentielles rapportent davantage que les interdictions de fumer diminuent les revenus. Les études avec comme principal résultat d'intérêt les intentions de jouer indiquent que les non-fumeurs sont plus sensibles que les fumeurs à l'introduction d'une loi anti-tabac. Conclusions: À quel point les lois anti-tabac influencent la pratique des jeux de hasard et d'argent demeure incertain. D'autres travaux de recherche sont requis, particulièrement des études longitudinales, pour mieux comprendre comment les fumeurs et fumeuses qui jouent à des jeux de hasard et d'argent sont affectés par ces lois.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.885
Threshold uncertainty score0.481

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.133
GPT teacher head0.420
Teacher spread0.287 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations2
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of AddictionSame topicGambling Behavior and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207