Feasibility Of Brief Screening For At-risk Gambling In Consumer Credit Counseling

Gambling disorder can manifest in different ways, including financial distress. As an attempt to find those that may be suffering from at-risk gambling problems, Dr. Sacco, an ICRG Large grant recipient, and his team set out to test the feasibility of finding at risk gamblers that are seeking credit counseling. The hope is that gambling screenings could become a part of credit counseling protocol in the future to help identify gambling problems within respondents.

What is the aim?

Dr. Sacco and his team set out to examine the feasibility of implementing a brief screening for gambling problems during consumer credit counseling screenings. They aimed to quantify the prevalence of at-risk gambling in credit counseling samples compared to national estimates. They also compared the at-risk gamblers within the sample to low-risk gamblers in the same sample to attempt to find any significant differences. Finally, the most important goal of this study was to assess the overall feasibility of integrating a gambling screen into credit counseling.

What did researchers do?

Sacco et al., 2019 collaborated with a non-profit consumer credit counseling organization to implement a routine screening for gambling participation and at risk gambling. Credit counselors were trained on how to administer the Brief Biosocial Gambling Survey (Gebauer et al., 2010) and it became a part of the standard procedure for credit counseling. All callers between March 2017 and February 2018 were screened using the BBGS. Demographic information was collected as part of the standard credit counseling assessment. In addition to implementing this screen into the standard procedure, two focus groups and three key informant interviews were completed to gauge the acceptability and feasibility of this gambling screen.

Why is this Important?

This study is important because credit counseling may serve as a potential setting for detecting at-risk gambling, as it may manifest as financial distress and/or bankruptcy. Additionally, credit counseling has not yet been considered a setting for detecting at risk gamblers and this serves as a pilot study.

What did they find?

Researchers found a study group of 68% female, average age 48 years old with 20% of respondents reporting gambling behaviors. Among those that reported gambling behavior, they found higher rates of gambling problems in this sample than the general U.S. population. Additionally, they found that low risk gamblers were slightly younger than non-gamblers. Focus groups were completed and found that credit counselors and program administers that took part in administering the gambling screen saw a benefit in integrating this screening permanently. Overall, researchers confirmed that a gambling screening during credit counseling is reasonable and acceptable.

Limitations

This study was a pilot study that contained limitations. This sample is not generalizable to a national sample and analyses did not control for socio-demographic differences within the sample. As a pilot study, they were able to conclude that a gambling screen within a credit counseling call is reasonable, but further research must be done to fully understand any benefits.

Gebauer, L., LaBrie, R., & Shaffer, H. J. (2010). Optimizing DSM-IV-TR classification accuracy: A brief biosocial screen for detecting current gambling disorders among gamblers in the general household population.Canadian Journal of Psychiatry,55(2), 82–90.

Sacco, P., Jacobson, J., Callahan, C., Hochheimer, M., Imboden, R., & Hyde, D. (2019). Feasability of brief screening for at-risk gambling in consumer credit counseling.Journal of Gambling Studies,35(4), 1423–1439. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10899-019-09836-1.

ICRG staffResearch UpdateAt-risk gamblingConsumer Credit Counseling

/by

Gambling Research And Funding Biases

The gambling industry is often scrutinized for its influence on gambling research studies. This scrutiny is based upon the belief that industry funders have an agenda that seeks to influence the research that it funds. A previous study by Ladouceur et al., 2018 found that there are no significant differences between gambling research funded by the industry and those supported by non-industry sources. In an attempt to expand upon these findings and make them more applicable, Shaffer and his colleagues completed a large-scale systematic review to look at the differences in hypothesis confirmation and rejection between industry funded and non-industry funded sources.

What is the aim?

The aim of this study by Shaffer et al., 2019 was to determine the extent to which funding sources may influence characteristics of research design and outcomes. A recent study completed for the same outcomes found that there were no differences between gambling industry and non-industry funded research. This current study expanded upon this prior research to determine the generalizability of these findings. More specifically, this study expanded from “responsible gambling” research to all “gambling-related” research findings.

What did the researchers do?

Researchers completed a comprehensive review of 18 data bases that examined gambling studies from June 2008 to August 2018. The sample included 720 studies from four gambling journals and 14 addiction journals and were all quantitative with clear gambling hypotheses. Researchers used hypothesis confirmation and funding source information contained within the publications to determine the presence or absence of funding biases. Industry-funded studies were defined as studies funded by gambling industry operators, excluding federally operated programs. Statistical analyses were completed to determine if there were any significant differences between studies that were industry funded and those that were not.

Why is this important?

This study Is important because the role of research funding, especially industry funding, is a source of considerable debate. The nature of the concern of bias due to funding source warrants close consideration. Prior to this study, only one study had explored the effect of industry funding on gambling research outcomes, and this study aimed to expand and generalize those findings.

What did they find?

Researchers found that within the 720 studies in the sample, gambling industry-funded studies were no more likely to report confirmed or rejected hypotheses than non-industry funded. Additionally, studies funded by the industry were more likely to include a Conflict of Interest Statement within the publication. More than 30 percent of studies within the sample included no funding source, 49.7% failed to include any COIs, and only 6.4% of the studies were industry-funded. The researchers concluded that this study helps highlight the necessity of transparency and disclosure when it comes to research publications, especially those regarding gambling disorder.

Limitations

Although this study builds upon and strengthens previous findings on the effect of industry funding on gambling research, there are still some notable weaknesses. This is still a beginning effort, with a coding system that was chosen by the researchers and which others may not agree with. Additionally, researchers reported that each study was limited to one hypothesis, and, therefore, secondary hypotheses were not examined within the sample.

Ladouceur, R., Shaffer, H., Blaszczynski, A., & Shaffer, H. J. (2018). Responsible gambling research and industry funding biases.Journal of Gambling Studies,25(3), 725–730.

Shaffer, P., Ladouceur, R., Williams, P., Wiley, R., Blaszczynski, A., & Shaffer, H. (2019). Gambling research and funding biases.Journal of Gambling Studies,35(3), 875–886.

NCRG staffResearch Updategambling researchfunding

/by

Gambling Disorder Screening Day

This year’s Gambling Disorder Screening Day is Tuesday, March 10, 2020. Sponsored by the Division on Addiction, Cambridge Health Alliance, a teaching hospital of Harvard Medical School, the event offers free resources to make hosting Screening Day easier than ever. Any provider or organization can host. Registration is not required to use these free resources. To learn more about the Toolkit and how to navigate it, visitwww.divisiononaddiction.org. The ICRG participates in Screening Day by making available the Brief Biosocial Gambling Screen (BBGS) available in magnet form. Contact Lisa Cohen (lcohen@icrg.org) to request your free magnets.

ICRG staffResponsible Gaminggambling disorders

/by

Does Pareto Rule Internet Gambling?

Internet gambling has grown substantially over the past decade and with this growth, comes the risk of gambling problems among participants. In order to study the economic tendencies of online gambling subscribers, Tom, et al. (2019). tested the Pareto Principle using Internet Gambling subscriber data. The ‘Pareto Principle’ claims that about 20% of customers (“vital few”), make up 80% of the gambling activity within the sample.

What is the aim?

The aim of this study by Tom, et al. (2019), was to perform the very first study that analyzes gambling activity and losses with respect to gambling clinical status. Researchers sought to use actual expenditure information to better understand gambling revenue distribution. More specifically, researchers hope to determine whether internet gambling fit the Pareto Principle that 20% of customers would constitute 80% of gambling revenue while also examining the proportions of individuals that screened positive for gambling problems in these same groups. Researchers hypothesized that the level of gambling activity will be higher among those players that screened positive for gambling-related problems and the percentage of the ‘vital few’ who have gambling problems will be higher in comparison to the percentage that have gambling problems that are in the other ‘trivial many’ group.

What did the researchers do?

Researchers used a pool of online gambling subscribers (n=1384,) from bwin.party. Inclusion criteria included: restricting the study to seven products for which wagering data was available, must have demonstrated six months of activity prior to enrollment in study, and all gambling records used must have occurred with 365 days of gambling problems being screened using the Brief Biosocial Gambling Screen (BBGS) (Gebauer, LaBrie, & Shaffer, 2010). The researchers distributed a web-based version of BBGS which measured withdrawal symptoms, lying, and the borrowing of money. The researchers pulled the subsequent daily betting data from bwin.party, which included various demographics, gambling product types, amount of money wagered, the net loss of betting activities, and the total number of bets.

Why is this important

This study is important because it is the first of its kind to look at actual gambling activity and losses with respect to clinical status (gambling problems). Additionally, it looks at gambling activities related to the internet, which has increased exponentially over the last 15 years. Researchers emphasize the importance of finding that internet gamblers loosely fit the Pareto Principle, but that the expected ratio is smaller than the original 1%-20%. This could indicate that a smaller percentage of the customer base can be influencing the internet gambling service. This study has the potential to further the study of online gambling and potential to advance prevention, treatments, and inform public policies.

What did they find?

Researchers found that the “vital few” of internet gamblers were between 4.6%-17.8%, slightly lower than the 20% that the Pareto Principle suggests. Additionally, 38%-67% of the “vital few” screened positive for gambling-related problems, while only 24%-35% of the “trivial many” screened positive. They were able to confirm that, although it is not a perfect fit, the notion of internet gambling following the Pareto Rule does indeed apply and that a higher percentage of the “vital few” tested positive for gambling problems than the “trivial many”. They stress the need for future research to further this finding.

Limitations

No study goes without limitations. This study utilized data from bwin.party but they were unable to confirm that account sharing did not occur between multiple individuals. If multiple individuals were to have shared a single account, this could misclassify participants into the wrong “trivial many” or “vital few” category. Additionally, the online survey did not include a control question to verify the accuracy of the participants’ responses, which also could have swayed data due to inattention. Furthermore, the authors point out that the BBGS is not a clinical diagnosis, so participants may also have been incorrectly assigned to a problem gambling group and vice/versa. Finally, a low response rate may affect the representativeness of the sample as well.

References

Gebauer, L., LaBrie, R., & Shaffer, H. J. (2010). Optimizing DSM-IV-TR classification accuracy: A brief biosocial screen for detecting current gambling disorders among gamblers in the general household population.Canadian Journal of Psychiatry,55(2), 82–90.

Tom, M., LaPlante, D., & Shaffer, H. (2014). Does Pareto Rule Internet Gambling? Problems among the “Vital Few” and “Trivial Many.”The Journal of Gambling Business and Economics,8(1), 73–100.

NCRG staffResearch Update

/by

NCRG Grants Yield More Than 400 Publications

The National Center for Responsible Gaming is pleased to announce that it has, to this date, funded 418 scientific publications relating to gambling disorder. The NCRG, which began funding research in 1996, has allocated more than $18 million dollars for Seed Grants, Large Grants, New Investigator Grants, and Center of Excellence Grants. These projects are sorted by year athttp://www.ncrg.org/research-center/ncrg-funded-research/project-grants.

This investment has produced 418 scientific publications that have been cited in other journal articles over 28,500 times. These NCRG-funded publications have included journal articles, books, book chapters, and reports. The topics of these publications vary widely from prevalence studies to treatment options, with various subpopulations including adolescents and U.S. veterans. These publications can be found athttp://www.ncrg.org/research-center/ncrg-funded-research/project-grants.

NCRG staffICRG News

/by

Daily Fantasy Sports: What Is Typical?

Daily Fantasy Sports (DFS) is growing rapidly within the gambling industry, as it allows players the opportunity to create their own “fantasy teams” of individual players and compete for cash-prizes. Some stakeholders have expressed concerns over the dangers of DFS and related harm players may experience from its accelerated nature of play. Sarah Nelson, PhD, from Cambridge Health Alliance and Harvard Medical School, set out to explore DFS data.

What is the aim?

The aim of this study by Nelson, (2019), was to conduct and create the first descriptive dataset summary of Daily Fantasy Sports participation. The research team aimed to create, more specifically, the first description of the distribution of DFS play among DraftKings participants that includes NFL involvement.

What did the researchers do?

Researchers worked with DraftKings, a prominent DFS operator to create descriptive data based upon adults that participated during the 2014 NFL season. The study population included 10,385 adults, average age of 34, from 49 US states, 9 Canadian provinces, and various military bases. The researchers examined the “typical play” of the DFS players, including financial involvement, time involvement, and contest type preference. They then examined whether they could separate players into distinct player categories. These categories were based on their entry fees and net losses, and number of contests entered. Researchers hypothesized that overall, typical play will be moderate for the cohort, with a small subset exhibiting extreme levels of financial engagement, time engagement, or both.

Why is this important

This study is very important because there is a dearth of research on DFS and this is one of the first studies to use actual data derived from participants that use DraftKings to place their bets. This study aims to be one of the first to provide descriptive data regarding DFS players and their tendencies, and avoids the limitations that come along with self-report data collection. This study will hopefully lead to a better understanding of the play patterns of DFS players and inform further research on the negative outcome association with different play patterns.

What did they find?

Researchers found that players entered a median of two contest per active day and a single entry within those contests. A median entry fee of $87, and median loss of $30.70 was also found for this cohort of players. They found they were able to identify heavily involved sub-groups, which they designated the “1%”. This group was less likely to restrict their activity to NFL games, presented greater time involvement, and had a higher winning percentage of contests then those not within the group. These findings were in line with the hypothesis that most of the cohort would show moderate play involvement, while a small number would exhibit heavy play.

Limitations

This study only utilized data from DraftKings, which is one of a handful of DFS platforms. Those participants that use DraftKings may be systematically different than players that use other platforms. The players may also have played on other platforms, but this study only looks at DraftKings participation. Additionally, this study also only used data from one season of an NFL season and does not show any changes over time or season to season.

References

Nelson, S., Edson, T., Singh, P., Tom, M., Martin, R., LaPlante, D., … Shaffer, H. (2019). Patterns of Daily Fantasy Sport Play: Tackling the Issues.Journal of Gambling Studies.

NCRG staffResearch UpdateDaily Fantasy SportsDraftKingsgambling disordergambling research

/by

What Makes Us Tick? Recovery Capital As A Framework For Gambling Disorder Recovery

Recovery capital (RC) has been used as a conceptual framework for substance abuse disorders that pinpoints internal and external resources that individuals can use to facilitate recovery[CR1]from disorder. More specifically, these resources can include: resources one has from relationships, assetts such as housing and diet, hopes, skills, education, and personal value and belief systems. Belle Gavriel-Fried, PhD, an NCRG Seed Grant recipient from Tel Aviv University, set out to extend this conceptual framework to Gambling Disorder, a behavioral addiction.

Aim

The aim of this study by Gavriel-Fried, (2018), was to extend the Recovery Capital conceptual framework to Gambling Disorder (GD) and to identify and conceptualize RC resources used by individuals who have recovered from gambling disorder. The findings of this study could be used as a first step for creating a comprehensibe RC model directly applicable to GD.

What did Researchers do?

The researchers performed interviews and administered self-report questionnaires on qualifying respondents from five adult outpatient gambling treatment centers from five large cities in Israel. The study included 91 individuals over the age of 18 who; had recovered from GD and had a self-reported lifetime history of DS-M 5 GD but had not exceeded this GD threshold in the last 12 months, a recovery period of 1-5 years, and no substance use disorders in the last 12 months. This population, which had an average age of 48.6, participated in face-face interviews that asked them to describe their recovery process and the things they used to assist them in the recovery process, and self-reported sociodemographic characteristics using a software program.

Why is this important?

Recovery capital as a conceptual framework is emerging in the addiction field because of its ability to pinpoint resources that are used by individuals to aid in recovery from addiction. Currently this framework is developed and applied to individuals with substance addiction. Gambling, classified as a behavioral disorder, shares many similarities with SUD, but also many differences. Therefore, it is viable to use a similar framework, but necessitates a GD specific framework to address these differences. A GD specific framework can enable therapists to tailor intervention programs to each individual. Additionally, it with help highlight resources areas that may need to strengthened and improved, and develop new services and responses that may be missing.

What did they find?

Researchers were able to separate responses into four main domains: human capital, social capital, community capital, and financial capital, and also sub categories of these main domains.

Human Capital: Researchers found that there were 6 categories of human capital, or personal characteristics and skills that aided in recovery, that emerged from participant’s answers: subjective well-being (44%), self-efficacy (48%), self-control skills (67%), proactive coping skills (66%), socioemotional skills (60%), and reconstructions skills (62%).

Community Capital: Researchers found that community capital, or resources related to gambling legislation, and treatment recovery resources, contained three subcategories: pro-recovery environment (11%), therapeutic space (59%), Recovering gambler’s support group (47%).

Social Capital: Researchers found that social capital, or resources related to social setting had 3 sub characteristics: social friendship with recovering gambling addict (23%), friends without GD (26%), Family (63%).

Financial Capital: Researchers found one category within this domain: Pro-recovery financial state (27%)

Limitations

Although this study did an excellent job paving the way for a GD specific RC framework, there are some limitations. One limitation concerns the population, which only addressed individuals that had been in recovery for 1-5 years. A second limitation was geographical, as the participants were from Israel and may have faced cultural pressures. Here, generalizability to other cultures may be a concern. Additionally, there were some limitations with data collection, including the allowance of positive recovery resources only, open-ended questions that leave the answers open to interviewer bias, and also the self-report aspect of demographics run the risk of self-report bias.

References

Gavriel-Fried, B., & Lev-el, N. (2018). Mapping and Conceptualizing Recovery Capital of Recovered Gamblers.American Journal of Orthopsychiatry. https://doi.org/10.1037/ort0000382

NCRG staffIssues & Insightsgambling disordersGavriel-FriedRecovery capital

/by

NCRG Announces New Request For Applications On The Spectrum Of Gambling Behaviors And Policy-relevant Research

The Scientific Advisory Board of the National Center for Responsible Gaming (NCRG) is pleased to invite grant applications for research that explores the full spectrum of gambling behaviors from healthy to disordered. In addition, we are specifically interested in policy-relevant research. We invite applicants from a wide range of disciplines to apply, including economics, public health, cultural anthropology, neuroscience, psychology, psychiatry and public policy. This request for applications (RFA) is in effect for both Large Grant and Seed Grant applicants, Jan. 1, 2019 – Dec. 31, 2019.

The consensus in the scientific literature is that the process of policy-making should be based on strong evidence in order to increase the quality, credibility and relevance of a policy (Soare, 2013). However, there is a dearth of scientific research aimed at informing policy. For example, several reviews have noted the lack of peer-reviewed research on responsible gambling policy (Harris & Griffiths, 2016; Drawson et al., 2017).

The Scientific Advisory Board has determined there is a need for empirical research on the following topics:

  • Public health policy on prevention and treatment of gambling disorder, with special focus on health disparities
  • Public policy, such as laws and regulations designed to reduce gambling-related harms
  • Tribal gaming policy designed to reduce gambling-related harms
  • Social and economic impact of gambling
  • Treatment provider policy on screening, diagnosis and treatment of gambling disorder
  • Policies of private entities designed to address gambling-related harms
  • Population studies with ramifications for policy
  • The efficacy and safety of self-exclusion from gaming venues and internet gambling sites
  • Education and awareness for the public, gambling patrons and gambling employees
  • Structural changes to gambling devices designed to moderate excessive gambling behavior
  • The impact of the physical and informational environment
  • Pre-commitment and mandatory or voluntary limits on wagering amounts and time
  • Gambling on a continuum from healthy to disordered
  • Lower risk gambling guidelines
  • Tracking behavioral characteristics, especially in internet gambling

There is no geographic limitation. Applications from investigators outside the US are welcome. Applicants for Seed Grants and Large Grants should go towww.ncrg.org/research-centerfor application announcements, forms and deadlines.

REFERENCES

Drawson, A.S., Tanner, J., Mushquash, C.J. et al. (2017). The use of protective behavioural strategies in gambling: A systematic review. International Journal of Mental Health,15, 1302-1319. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11469-017-9754-y

Harris, A., & Griffiths, M. D. (2016). A critical review of the harm-minimisation tools available for electronic gambling. Journal of Gambling Studies, 33, 187-221. http://doi.org/10.1007/s10899-016-9624-8

Soare, L. (2013). Creating a linkage between academic research and policy-making. Europolity, 7 (2), 89-102.

NCRG staffIn the NewsChristine Reillydisordered gamblinggambling behaviorsgambling guidelinesgaming policyGrant applicationpublic policy

/by

Bridging The Gap: Responsible Gambling Collaborative

The NCRG is excited to announce its participation in a newly convened Responsible Gaming Collaborative, made up of key stakeholders in the gambling industry and other sectors. This collaboration includes the National Council on Problem Gambling, the National Center for Responsible Gaming, the University of Nevada-Las Vegas International Gaming Institute, Harvard University’s T.H. Chan Public School of Health, Yale School of Medicine, the National Indian Gaming Association, the Association of Gaming Equipment Manufacturers, the North American Association of State and Provincial Lotteries and the National Thoroughbred Racing Association. It was formed to provide a diverse set of stakeholders that will aim to align the industry and create transformative change in the Responsible Gaming landscape. This collaborative will also open discussion for effective and cost effective responsible gaming programs and hopes to bridge the gap between scientific research and gambling regulation and policies.

See full press release here:https://www.americangaming.org/newsroom/press-releasess/industry-academics-and-advocates-unite-launch-responsible-gaming

NCRG staffICRG NewscollaborationNCRGresponsible gaming

/by

Calling All Early Stage Investigators!

The NCRG is accepting applications for their Early Stage Investigator Grant until May 1, 2018.

Who

  • Are you interested in Gambling Disorder Research?
  • Are you within 10 years of completing your terminal degree?
  • Are you looking for mentoring and research experience?

If so, we invite you to submit an application for grant funding of up to 65,000/ per year for two years.

What

Applications must contain a research plan that has intrinsic research importance in the area of gambling disorder and must serve as a vehicle for learning methodology, theories and concepts needed to become an independent researcher in the field of Gambling Research.

When

Applications are accepted on a rolling basis until May 1, 2018

Past Early Stage Investigator Awardees include:

  • Jennifer L. Tackett, PhD, University of Houston
    Aim: Investigate the extent to which dispositional traits (i.e. Extraversion and Neuroticism) and motivational pathways (i.e. approach and avoidance motivations) predict distinct pathways to youth gambling.
  • Heather Gray, PhD, Cambridge Health Alliance
    Aim: Use the actual online gambling transactions to describe the gambling behavior of the most active and “high risk” gamblers and to examine gamblers’ adaptation to new gambling opportunities.
  • Iris Balodis, PhD, Yale University School of Medicine
    Aim: Better understand the mechanisms underlying the relationship between the stress response and engagement in risky behaviors in populations with gambling disorder.
  • Katherine Nautiyal, PhD, Columbia University and Research Foundation for Mental Hygiene, Inc.
    Aim: Determine the role played by the serotonin 1B receptor in the development of impulsive behavior through a mouse gambling behavioral model.

How

Download the detailed announcement and application form athttp://www.ncrg.org/research-center/apply-ncrg-funding-0

Please feel free to email Program Officer, Shayna Adams, atsadams@ncrg.orgwith any questions.

NCRG staffICRG Newsgambling disordergrant

/by