The relationship between gambling activity, the occurrence of life stress, and differential coping styles in an adolescent sample /
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study empirically examined physiological, social, and emotional variables in order to extend the understanding of the vulnerability-stress interaction in relation to adolescent problem gambling behaviour. Specifically, the relationship between coping styles, life stress, depressive symptomatology, dissociative states, drug and alcohol use, and youth gambling problems were investigated from the framework of Jacobs' General Theory of Addictions . The current study also examined several potential protective factors (socioeconomic status, social support, and adaptive coping styles) that are believed to buffer against possible negative outcomes associated with youth gambling behaviour. Students consisted of 2,156 students in grades 7 to 12 (ages 11 to 19) recruited from various elementary and high schools in Ontario, Canada. Participants completed a questionnaire regarding gambling activities, social support, dissociation, drug and alcohol use (GAQ), gambling severity (DSM-IV-MR-J), arousal (AISS), stressful life events (APES), depressive symptomatology (RADS), and coping styles (CISS). Socioeconomic status was based on parental level of education and occupation. With respect to gambling severity as assessed by the DSM-IV-MR-J gambling screen, 2.7% of adolescents were found to be probable pathological gamblers, and 6.6% at-risk gamblers. Problem gamblers demonstrated significantly higher scores on measures of arousal, dissociation, and drug and alcohol use. Emotionally, they demonstrated increased problems related to depression, suicide ideation and attempts, and emotion-focused coping. This study expanded on Jacobs' General Theory of Addictions by investigating several protective factors thought to mediate between different types of life stressors and potential gambling problems. This study also sought to identify a set of predictor variables that would increase risk for youth gambling difficulties, including intensity seeking behaviour,
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".