MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3027482965 · doi:10.52922/sb04527

Changes in online gambling during the COVID-19 pandemic

2020· book· en· W3027482965 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Rick Brown, Amelia Hickman

Bibliographic record

VenueAustralian Institute of Criminology eBooks · 2020
Typebook
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicGambling Behavior and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Quarter (Canadian coin)PandemicSocial distance2019-20 coronavirus outbreakPsychologySevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)Sample (material)Social mediaDemographyAdvertisingMedicineSociologyPolitical scienceGeographyBusinessVirologyDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study explores the potential for increased online gambling as a result of COVID-19 social distancing measures. Questions were included in an omnibus survey employing an online panel sample, with data collected in early April 2020. The results showed that almost a quarter of respondents had participated in online gambling in the previous month. Ten percent had increased their participation in at least one form of online gambling, while 14 percent had decreased their involvement. Those betting on sporting events in Australia were the most likely to increase their participation in online gambling. When demographic factors were examined, being male, aged under 30 and in full-time employment were all associated with increased participation in online gambling in the last month.

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)0.004
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.031
Threshold uncertainty score0.061

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.457
GPT teacher head0.436
Teacher spread0.021 · 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

Citations12
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAustralian Institute of Criminology eBooksSame topicGambling Behavior and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207