Evaluating the South Oaks Gambling Screen With DSM-IV and DSM-5 Criteria

Abstract

Despite widespread use, the South Oaks Gambling Screen (SOGS) has been criticized for excessive false positives as an indicator of pathological gambling (PG), and for items that misalign with PG criteria. We examine the relationship between SOGS scores and PG symptoms and convergent validity with regard to personality, mood, and addictive behaviors in a sample of 353 gamblers. SOGS scores correlated r = .66 with both DSM-IV and DSM-5 symptoms, and they manifested similar correlations with external criteria (intraclass correlation of .95). However, 195 false positives and 1 false negative were observed when using the recommended cut point, yielding an 81% false alarm rate. For uses with DSM-IV criteria, a cut point of 10 would retain high sensitivity with greater specificity and fewer false positives. For DSM-5 criteria, we advocate a cut point of 8 for use as a clinical screen and a cut point of 12 for prevalence and pseudo-experimental studies.

The Modified Gambling Motivation Scale: Confirmatory Factor Analysis and Links With Problem Gambling

“…This proportion of probable pathological gamblers was higher than that in an average college sample of 8% probable pathological gamblers (Blinn-Pike, Worthy, & Jonkman, 2007). This may be attributable to the fact that we recruited only people who gambled in the past 12 months and that the SOGS often produces high false positive rates (Goodie et al, 2013).…”

Examining links between posttraumatic stress and gambling motives: The role of positive gambling expectancies.

“…Sample 1 Results. In our sample of treatment-seeking veterans, using the more conservative cutoff score of 8 on the SOGS, as recommended for clinical settings (Goodie et al, 2013), 93.4% (n = 310) of the sample scored in the probable GD range. These findings are consistent with the nature of the sample as treatment seeking for GD.…”

“…4 Using more liberal cutoff scores (e.g., 8 for clinical samples, as specified by Goodie et al, 2013; or 5 as specified in the SOGS original development Lesieur & Blume, 1987) a larger proportion screened positive for possible GD (cutoff = 5, n = 136, 23%; cutoff = 8, n = 68, 12%). 5 We additionally tested a model in which the PCL total score was replaced by a dichotomous indicator of PTSD Neuroticism was positively associated with PTSD, but not with gambling symptom severity.…”

Independent Versus Co-occurring Substance Use in Relation to Gambling Outcomes in Older Adolescents and Young Adults

“…Although the SOGS is typically given as a lifetime measure, a past-6-month time frame was used in the original study, and the current study, to assess recent gambling problem severity. The SOGS correlates with the DSM-IV [24] and DSM-5 [25] with demonstrated validity and reliability in assessing gambling problems. Internal consistency in the current sample was α = 0.83.…”