DSM-based problem gambling: Increasing the odds of heavy drinking in a national sample of U.S. college athletes?

Huang, Jiun-Hau; Jacobs, Durand F.; Derevensky, Jeffrey L.

doi:10.1016/j.jpsychires.2010.07.001

Cited by 26 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These findings were replicated in a recent study (Larimer et al, 2012), in which students who reported engaging in problematic gambling reported an average of nine negative consequences of current gambling, such as interference with studying and exams, spending too much money, getting into fights or arguments about their gambling, being told to stop or cut down their gambling, needing to wager larger amounts of money, and experiencing suicidal ideation. In addition to these negative consequences experienced across multiple domains, problematic gambling among college students is often comorbid with other risky behaviors, including heavy episodic drinking and sexual risk taking (Barnes, Welte, Hoffman, & Tidwell, 2010; Huang, Jacobs, & Derevensky, 2011). These findings underscore that college student gambling is a considerable problem for which the development of efficacious brief interventions is clearly needed.…”

Section: Gambling In College Studentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Efficacy of personalized normative feedback as a brief intervention for college student gambling: A randomized controlled trial.

Neighbors¹,

Rodriguez

Rinker

et al. 2015

Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective Social influences on gambling among adolescents and adults have been well documented and may be particularly evident among college students, who have higher rates of problem and pathological gambling relative to the general population. Personalized normative feedback (PNF) is a brief intervention designed to correct misperceptions regarding the prevalence of problematic behavior by showing individuals engaging in such behaviors that their own behavior is atypical with respect to actual norms. The current randomized controlled trial evaluated a computer-delivered PNF intervention for problem gambling college students. Method Following a baseline assessment, 252 college student gamblers scoring 2+ on the South Oaks Gambling Screen (SOGS) were randomly assigned to receive PNF or attention-control feedback. Follow-up assessments were completed 3 and 6 months postintervention. Results Results indicated significant intervention effects in reducing perceived norms for quantities lost and won, and in reducing actual quantity lost and gambling problems at the 3-month follow-up. All intervention effects except reduced gambling problems remained at the 6-month follow-up. Mediation results indicated that changes in perceived norms at 3 months mediated the intervention effects. Further, the intervention effects were moderated by self-identification with other student gamblers, suggesting that PNF worked better at reducing gambling for those who more strongly identified with other student gamblers. Conclusions Results support the use of PNF as a stand-alone brief intervention for at-risk gambling students. Extending this approach more broadly may provide an accessible, empirically supported gambling prevention option for universities and related institutions.

show abstract

Section: Gambling In College Studentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Efficacy of personalized normative feedback as a brief intervention for college student gambling: A randomized controlled trial.

Neighbors¹,

Rodriguez

Rinker

et al. 2015

Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Several cross-sectional studies have focused on the overlap between gambling and substance use among college students and have consistently observed significant positive associations between gambling, problem gambling, and alcohol use (Bhullar et al, 2012b; Engwall et al, 2004; Goudriaan et al, 2009; Huang et al, 2011; LaBrie et al, 2003; Martens et al, 2009; Martin et al, 2014; Stuhldreher et al, 2007; Vitaro et al, 2001). For example, Bhullar et al (2012b) found that, compared with students who did not meet criteria for binge drinking, binge drinking college students were more likely to participate in poker, Internet gambling, sports betting, and office pools.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Similarly, Engwall et al (2004) found that college student problem gamblers were more likely to be heavy drinkers and experience negative alcohol-related consequences compared with other students. Gambling is also significantly and positively associated with marijuana and other drug use (Engwall et al, 2004; Goudriaan et al, 2009; Huang et al, 2011; LaBrie et al, 2003; Lynch et al, 2004; Stuhldreher et al, 2007; Winters et al, 1998). …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Risk factors for gambling and substance use among recent college students

Caldeira

Arria

O’Grady

et al. 2017

Drug and Alcohol Dependence

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background While it is well known that substance use and gambling overlap, the degree to which this overlap can be explained by shared risk factors has not been fully explored. This study aimed to identify common and unique risk factors for gambling and substance use among young adults. Methods Young adults (n=1,019) in a longitudinal study since college entry were interviewed annually. Past-year frequency of seven gambling activities was assessed once (Year 5). Structural equation models evaluated suspected risk factors in two models, one for gambling with substance use as an intermediary variable, and one for substance use with gambling as the intermediary variable. Results Sixty percent gambled; 6% gambled weekly or more. Examination of the two structural models supported the existence of significant paths (a) from two of the five substance use variables (alcohol, drugs) to gambling frequency, and (b) from gambling frequency to all five substance use variables. Every risk factor associated with gambling was also associated with one or more substance use variables. Risk factors common to gambling and substance use were sex, race/ethnicity, extracurricular involvement (fraternity/sorority, athletics), impulsive sensation-seeking, and behavioral dysregulation. Risk factors unique to substance use were conduct problems, anxiety, and parent’s history of alcohol and mental health problems. Conclusions Gambling and substance use are interrelated, but with incomplete overlap in their respective risk factors. Results underscore the need for longitudinal research to elucidate their distinct etiologies.

show abstract

“…Most of the studies examining the gambling behavior of US D1 athletes come from the NCAA national surveys of problem gambling and health-risk behaviors (Huang et al 2010(Huang et al , 2011Huang et al 2007;St-Pierre et al 2014). One iteration of that survey found that 62.4 % of male D1 athletes and 42.8 % of female D1 athletes gambled in the past year and 4.3 % of males and 0.4 % of females endorsed three or more DSM-IV pathological gambling criteria (Huang et al 2007).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Game On: Past Year Gambling, Gambling-Related Problems, and Fantasy Sports Gambling Among College Athletes and Non-athletes

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

College students experience higher rates of gambling-related problems than most other population segments, including the general population. Although Division I (D1) athletes often have more at stake than the average student if and when they gamble (e.g., the potential to lose their athletic eligibility), relatively few studies have assessed the gambling behavior of this population and none have specifically assessed fantasy sports gambling. We conducted a study to examine gambling behavior (past-year gambling, gambling-related problems, and fantasy sport gambling) among a sample (N = 692) of college students at a private religiously affiliated university in the Southwest US. The sample for our study was unique in that approximately 30 % of the participants were D1 athletes. We compared the gambling behavior among three groups based on the athlete status: D1 athletes, club/intramural/recreational (CIR) athletes, and non-athletes (NAs). Compared to females in our sample, males observed higher rates of past year gambling, fantasy sports participation, fantasy sports gambling, and gambling-related problems. Among males, we found that CIR athletes observed the highest rates of past year gambling and fantasy sports participation and D1 athletes observed higher rates than NAs. We did not find differences in fantasy sport gambling and past year gambling-related problems based on athlete status in males or females.

show abstract

DSM-based problem gambling: Increasing the odds of heavy drinking in a national sample of U.S. college athletes?

Cited by 26 publications

References 31 publications

Efficacy of personalized normative feedback as a brief intervention for college student gambling: A randomized controlled trial.

Efficacy of personalized normative feedback as a brief intervention for college student gambling: A randomized controlled trial.

Risk factors for gambling and substance use among recent college students

Game On: Past Year Gambling, Gambling-Related Problems, and Fantasy Sports Gambling Among College Athletes and Non-athletes

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About