| Title |
Does the General Strain Theory Explain Gambling and Substance Use?
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Gambling Studies, November 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10899-016-9654-2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Romy Greco, Antonietta Curci |
| Abstract |
General Strain Theory (GST: Agnew Criminology 30:47-87, 1992) posits that deviant behaviour results from adaptation to strain and the consequent negative emotions. Empirical research on GST has mainly focused on aggressive behaviours, while only few research studies have considered alternative manifestations of deviance, like substance use and gambling. The aim of the present study is to test the ability of GST to explain gambling behaviours and substance use. Also, the role of family in promoting the adoption of gambling and substance use as coping strategies was verified. Data from 266 families with in mean 8 observations for each group were collected. The multilevel nature of the data was verified before appropriate model construction. The clustered nature of gambling data was analysed by a two-level Hierarchical Linear Model while substance use was analysed by Multivariate Linear Model. Results confirmed the effect of strain on gambling and substance use while the positive effect of depressive emotions on these behaviours was not supported. Also, the impact of family on the individual tendency to engage in addictive behaviours was confirmed only for gambling. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 3 | 50% |
| Saudi Arabia | 1 | 17% |
| Unknown | 2 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 4 | 67% |
| Scientists | 1 | 17% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 17% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 52 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 51 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unspecified | 8 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 8 | 15% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 7 | 13% |
| Researcher | 5 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 8% |
| Other | 9 | 17% |
| Unknown | 11 | 21% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 13 | 25% |
| Social Sciences | 9 | 17% |
| Unspecified | 8 | 15% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 4 | 8% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 3 | 6% |
| Other | 2 | 4% |
| Unknown | 13 | 25% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 44. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 02 January 2018.
All research outputs
#940,804
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Gambling Studies
#58
of 989 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#18,929
of 415,429 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Gambling Studies
#1
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 989 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 415,429 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 17 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.