MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3153223638 · doi:10.4309/jgi.2021.47.9

Gambling and retirement: A qualitative study of non-problem gambling in the course of life of women

2021· article· en· W3153223638 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Bernadeta Lelonek-Kuleta

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Gambling Issues · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicGambling Behavior and Treatments
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyHumanitiesPsychoeducationSocial psychologyGerontologySociologyArtMedicinePsychological interventionPsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Studies show that differences exist in how women and men gamble. However, publications devoted to senior gamblers usually describe them as a homogeneous group without distinguishing between senior men and women. The purpose of this qualitative research was to explore the experience of gambling by older women. The article presents how interest in gambling developed in a group of older women who gamble recreationally. In-depth interviews conducted with 26 non-addicted women have revealed that in retirement they most often return to this activity known for many years, and the initiation of gambling rarely occurs during this period of life. Retired women gamble more often and more regularly than do younger women, explained by them having fewer responsibilities and more free time, yet they are able to maintain control over their spending on the game. The results of this study suggest that gambling can be valid a form of recreation in retirement, but psychoeducation about threats and the use of responsible gambling strategies is important.RésuméLes études montrent qu’il y a des différences dans la façon dont les femmes et les hommes jouent. Cependant, les publications consacrées aux aînés les décrivent généralement comme un groupe homogène, sans faire la distinction entre les hommes et les femmes. La recherche qualitative avait pour but d’examiner l’expérience du jeu chez les femmes âgées. L’article décrit la façon dont l’intérêt pour le jeu naît dans un groupe de femmes âgées qui jouent par plaisir. Des entrevues approfondies menées auprès de 26 femmes non dépendantes ont révélé qu’à la retraite, elles reviennent le plus souvent à des activités qu’elles pratiquent depuis de nombreuses années, et commencent rarement à jouer durant cette période de leur vie. Les femmes retraitées jouent plus souvent et plus régulièrement que les femmes plus jeunes, ce qu’elles expliquent par le fait qu’elles ont moins de responsabilités et plus de temps libre, mais elles arrivent toutefois à contrôler leurs dépenses en jeu. Les résultats de cette étude montrent que le jeu peut être une forme de loisir à la retraite, mais que la psychoéducation portant sur les menaces et l’emploi de stratégies de jeu responsable sont importants.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.055
Threshold uncertainty score0.743

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.289
GPT teacher head0.511
Teacher spread0.222 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations4
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Gambling IssuesSame topicGambling Behavior and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207