MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4311134095 · doi:10.3390/ijerph192416603

Gamblers’ Perceptions of the Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Their Gambling Behaviours: Analysis of Free-Text Responses Collected through a Cross-Sectional Online Survey

2022· article· en· W4311134095 on OpenAlexaff
Marianne Renard, Sophie Audette-Chapdelaine, Annie-Claude Savard, Sylvia Kairouz, Magaly Brodeur

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicGambling Behavior and Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalConcordia UniversityUniversité de SherbrookeUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)PandemicCross-sectional study2019-20 coronavirus outbreakSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)PerceptionPsychologyMedicineVirologyOutbreak

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The COVID-19 pandemic has brought drastic changes to the lives of a substantial portion of the world's population. Many stakeholders have expressed concern about the impact of the pandemic on gambling practices, which have historically increased during times of crisis. The purpose of this study was to provide a snapshot of the impact of the pandemic on gambling practices, focusing on the lived experiences of people who gamble. An online cross-sectional survey was conducted between 16 February and 15 March 2021. An open-ended question allowed the participants to describe in their own words the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on their gambling practices. A qualitative analysis was conducted based on 724 responses to this question. Among the participants, 57% were problem gamblers, according to their Problem Gambling Severity Index score. Three themes were identified: (1) changes in gambling practices perceived by the respondents during the pandemic, (2) the impacts of these changes, and (3) the factors that influenced the changes in their gambling practices. A meaningful proportion of the sample of gamblers felt that their gambling practices had increased during the pandemic. Many of them did not report the deleterious effects of this increase, whereas others were devastated. Thus, variations in gambling practices during the pandemic must be interpreted with caution, as they may reflect a variety of realities.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.463
GPT teacher head0.563
Teacher spread0.101 · 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

Citations2
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health→Same topicGambling Behavior and Treatments→French-language works237,207→