Professional and Pathological Gamblers: Similarities and Differences

Abstract

Although much recent research has focused on the gambling practices and psychosocial functioning of pathological gamblers, few investigations have examined the characteristics of professional gamblers. The current project sought to address this gap in the literature by conducting a quantitative comparison of professional and pathological gamblers. Pathological gamblers were recruited and balanced with professional gamblers on demographic variables and preferred gambling activity. A total of 22 professional gamblers and 13 pathological gamblers completed an extensive self-report battery including instruments assessing demographics, gambling behaviors and problems, other psychiatric disorders, current psychosocial functioning, recent stressful events, personality characteristics, and intelligence. Pathological and professional gamblers reported similar rates of gambling frequency and intensity and types of games played. Pathological gamblers endorsed poor psychosocial functioning, whereas professional gamblers reported a rate of psychiatric distress within a normative range. Pathological gamblers also reported lower gambling self-efficacy, greater impulsivity, and more past-year DSM-IV Axis I disorders than professional gamblers. The results of the present study shed light on the unique circumstances of professional gamblers, as well as underscore important differences between such individuals and pathological gamblers that could prove fruitful in future research and intervention and prevention efforts.

Risk factors for pathological gambling along a continuum of severity: Individual and relational variables

“…For most individuals, gambling is a recreational activity that entails no associated problems. However, a small fraction of individuals develops a problematic relationship with gambling (Ashley & Boehlke, 2012;Dickson-Swift, James, & Kippen, 2005;Weinstock, Massura, & Petry, 2013) that is associated with various and severe financial, family-related, emotional and legal consequences, among others (Oliveira, Silveira, & Silva, 2008). Such problematic relationships with gambling might eventually become pathological, a state currently known as gambling disorder, which corresponds to an addictive behavior that is diagnosed when an individual exhibits four or more of the following symptoms during a 12-month period (American Psychiatric Association, 2013): that person (1) needs to gamble with increasing amounts of money to achieve the desired excitement; (2) is restless or irritable when attempting to reduce or stop gambling; (3) has made repeated unsuccessful efforts to control, reduce, or stop gambling; (4) is often preoccupied with gambling; (5) often gambles when feeling distressed; (6) after losing money gambling, often returns another day to recoup the losses; (7) lies to conceal the extent of an involvement with gambling; (8) has jeopardized or lost a significant relationship, job, or educational or career opportunity because of gambling; and (9) relies on others to provide money to relieve desperate financial situations caused by gambling.…”

Poker players with experience and skill are not “ill” – Exposing a discrepancy in measures of problem gambling

“…For example, Weinstock et al (2013) evaluated differences between professional and pathological gamblers and discovered that whereas both gambled in comparable frequencies and intensities, only pathological gamblers displayed poor psychosocial functioning, low self-efficacy, and impulsivity. Qualitative interviews of professional poker players suggested that they treat playing as work and, as compared with nonprofessional players, are less likely to take unnecessary risks and chase losses (McCormack and Griffiths 2012).…”

Gambling Behavior Severity and Psychological, Family, and Contextual Variables: A Comparative Analysis

“…Although most people engage in gambling as a form of entertainment with no adverse consequences, gambling is a serious problem for some individuals (Ashley & Boehlke, 2012;Dickson-Swift, James, & Kippen, 2005;Weinstock, Massura, & Petry, 2013). Previous literature references various typologies of gamblers (Custer & Milt, 1985;González, 1989;Kusyszyn, 1978;McCormick & Taber, 1987;Moody, 1990;Moran, 1970), many of which are based on the severity of the gambling problem.…”