| Title |
Who Really Wins? Efficacy of a Croatian Youth Gambling Prevention Program
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Gambling Studies, January 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10899-017-9668-4 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Aleksandra Huic, Valentina Kranzelic, Dora Dodig Hundric, Neven Ricijas |
| Abstract |
This paper reports on the development and pilot evaluation of a Croatian school-based youth gambling prevention program "Who really wins?". The program is aimed at minimizing risk and enhancing protective factors related to youth gambling. A short-term evaluation of the program was conducted with a sample of 190 first and second year high-school students (67.6% boys, aged 14-17 years; average age 15.61). An experimental design with two groups (Training vs. No Training) and two measurement sessions (pre-test and post-test sessions) was used to evaluate change in problem gambling awareness, cognitive distortions, knowledge of the nature of random events as well as in social skills. Results showed significant changes in the post-test sessions, which can be attributed to changes in the Training group. We observed a decrease in risk factors, namely better knowledge about gambling and less gambling related cognitive distortions. Immediate effects on protective factors such as problem solving skills, refusal skills, and general self-efficacy were not observed. Findings also show program effects to be the same for both boys and girls, students from different types of schools, for those with different learning aptitudes, as well as for those at different risk levels with regard to their gambling, which speaks in favour of the program's universality. The program had no iatrogenic effects on behaviour change and shows promise as an effective tool for youth gambling prevention. Future research and a long-term evaluation are needed to determine whether the observed changes are also linked to behavioural change. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 89 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 89 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 13 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 12 | 13% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 9 | 10% |
| Researcher | 8 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 6 | 7% |
| Other | 10 | 11% |
| Unknown | 31 | 35% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 20 | 22% |
| Social Sciences | 15 | 17% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 7 | 8% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 6% |
| Engineering | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 7 | 8% |
| Unknown | 33 | 37% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 23 January 2017.
All research outputs
#22,760,732
of 25,377,790 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Gambling Studies
#865
of 989 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#361,820
of 420,809 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Gambling Studies
#19
of 21 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,377,790 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
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 is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 420,809 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 21 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.