Family members of relatives with alcohol, drug and gambling problems: a set of standardized questionnaires for assessing stress, coping and strain

Orford, Jim; Templeton, Lorna; Velleman, Richard; Copello, Alex

doi:10.1111/j.1360-0443.2005.01178.x

Cited by 102 publications

(148 citation statements)

References 57 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

125

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The most common strategies family members reported were related to financial control and supportive engagement. Other studies also show family members of problem gamblers most often engage in controlling strategies, such as exercising control of the finances and searching for evidence of gambling (Krishnan & Orford, 2002;Orford et al, 2005). Although avoidance and withdrawal have been demonstrated in previous research on problem gamblers (Orford et al, 2005), they were the least commonly reported strategies in the current study.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 42%

Problem gambling and family violence: family member reports of prevalence, family impacts and family coping

Suomi

Jackson

Dowling

et al. 2013

Asian J of Gambling Issues and Public Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There exists only a small number of empirical studies investigating the patterns of family violence in problem gambling populations, although some evidence exists that intimate partner violence and child abuse are among the most severe interpersonal correlates of problem gambling. The current article reports on the Australian arm of a large-scale study of the patterns and prevalence of co-occurrence of family violence and problem gambling in Australia, New Zealand and Hong Kong. The current study screened 120 help-seeking family members of problem gamblers in a range of clinical services for both family violence and problem gambling. The main results showed that 52.5% reported some form of family violence in the past 12 months: 20.0% reported only victimisation, 10.8% reported only perpetration and 21.6% reported both victimisation and perpetration of family violence. Parents, current and ex-partners were most likely to be both perpetrators and victims of family violence. There were no gender differences in reciprocal violence but females were more likely to be only victims and less likely to report no violence in comparison to males. Most of the 32 participants interviewed in depth, reported that gambling generally preceded family violence. The findings suggest that perpetration of family violence was more likely to occur as a reaction to deeply-rooted and accumulated anger and mistrust whereas victimisation was an outcome of gambler's anger brought on by immediate gambling losses and frustration. While multiple and intertwined negative family impacts were likely to occur in the presence of family violence, gambling-related coping strategies were not associated with the presence or absence of family violence. The implications of the findings for service providers are discussed.

show abstract

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 42%

Problem gambling and family violence: family member reports of prevalence, family impacts and family coping

Suomi

Jackson

Dowling

et al. 2013

Asian J of Gambling Issues and Public Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A pool of 87 items was generated from previous research and discussion with gambling service providers (Gamblers Help services in Victoria, Australia). In line with related areas of research, items were multidimensional and included measurement of marital, legal, medical, financial, interpersonal relationships, social, emotional, and psychological issues (Kirby et al 2005;Orford et al 2005;Stein and Riessman 1980). These items were then reviewed by the research team and examined by two leading experts in the field of gambling clinical practice research.…”

Section: Family Impacts Of Problem Gamblingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These include a brief scale that has been specifically designed to measure the financial impact of gambling on the family (Abbott and Cramer 1993), the 16-item Family Member Impact (FMI) scale (Orford et al 2005) measuring two different aspects of perceived impacts (worry behavior characterized by disruption of family financial and social life and concern for the family member's health and wellbeing; and active disturbance characterised by the family member's moodiness and aggression), and the 43-item Inventory of Consequences Scale for the Gambler and the Concerned Significant Other (CSO) (Hodgins et al 2007a) which is comprised of three subscales (Gambler Consequences, CSO Emotional Consequences, and CSO Behavioural Consequences). These scales are generally limited by a failure to measure family impacts across multiple domains, being based on the consequences of substance abuse that may not be relevant for gambling populations, the inclusion of impacts of the individual gambler as well as their family members, and impractical lengths, particularly for research purposes.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Problem Gambling Family Impacts: Development of the Problem Gambling Family Impact Scale

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although family members of problem gamblers frequently present to treatment services, problem gambling family impacts are under-researched. The most commonly endorsed items on a new measure of gambling-related family impacts [Problem Gambling Family Impact Measure (PG-FIM: Problem Gambler version)] by 212 treatment-seeking problem gamblers included trust (62.5 %), anger (61.8 %), depression or sadness (58.7 %), anxiety (57.7 %), distress due to gambling-related absences (56.1 %), reduced quality time (52.4 %), and communication breakdowns (52.4 %). The PG-FIM (Problem Gambler version) was comprised of three factors: (1) financial impacts, (2) increased responsibility impacts, and (3) psychosocial impacts with good psychometric properties. Younger, more impulsive, non-electronic gaming machine (EGM) gamblers who had more severe gambling problems reported more financial impacts; non-EGM gamblers with poorer general health reported more increased responsibility impacts; and more impulsive non-EGM gamblers with more psychological distress and higher gambling severity reported more psychosocial impacts. The findings have implications for the development of interventions for the family members of problem gamblers.

show abstract

“…More extensive lists that concentrate on a specific dimension of third-party problems such those experienced by family members (e.g. Orford, Templeton, Vellemann, & Copello, 2005) or as intimate partner violence (Bergmark, Graham, & Nordvik, 2005) are few and little research, as mentioned, is to be found in the literature.…”

Section: Social Consequencesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Alcohol survey measures for Europe: A literature review

Bloomfield

Hope

Kraus

2012

Drugs: Education, Prevention and Policy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Family members of relatives with alcohol, drug and gambling problems: a set of standardized questionnaires for assessing stress, coping and strain

Cited by 102 publications

References 57 publications

Problem gambling and family violence: family member reports of prevalence, family impacts and family coping

Problem gambling and family violence: family member reports of prevalence, family impacts and family coping

Problem Gambling Family Impacts: Development of the Problem Gambling Family Impact Scale

Alcohol survey measures for Europe: A literature review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About