| Title |
A Resource Model of Change: Client Factors that Influence Problem Gambling Treatment Outcomes
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Gambling Studies, August 2014
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10899-014-9493-y |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Kevin Gomes, Antonio Pascual-Leone |
| Abstract |
This study examined a resource-based model of change whereby poor problem gambling (PG) treatment outcomes and relapse are viewed as resulting from client coping resources being diminished or overwhelmed. Specifically, client factors that work like resources to facilitate treatment (i.e., social support, self-efficacy, motivation, readiness for change, and emotion-focused coping) or use up resources and hinder treatment (i.e., co-morbid depression and life stress) were examined. The 50 participants were followed for 4 months after entering treatment for PG and were assessed at baseline, 1 month into treatment, 2 months into treatment, and during a follow-up 4 months after treatment began. Of the 50 participants, 20 dropped-out of treatment and 24 completed the follow-up measure. The results suggest that self-efficacy and depression, measured at baseline, are good predictors of 1- and 2-month outcomes, whereas depression and life stress, measured after 2 months of treatment, are good predictors of 4-month outcomes. In the strongest of these models, baseline scores of client self-efficacy and depressed affect explained as much as 48.7 % of the variance in gambling behaviors 2 months later. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Finland | 1 | 50% |
| Canada | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 74 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 73 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 12 | 16% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 11 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 11 | 15% |
| Student > Bachelor | 11 | 15% |
| Researcher | 6 | 8% |
| Other | 7 | 9% |
| Unknown | 16 | 22% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 40 | 54% |
| Social Sciences | 7 | 9% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 3 | 4% |
| Neuroscience | 2 | 3% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 1% |
| Other | 4 | 5% |
| Unknown | 17 | 23% |
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 27 August 2014.
All research outputs
#17,285,668
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Gambling Studies
#692
of 989 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#145,550
of 243,236 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Gambling Studies
#10
of 16 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% 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 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% 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 243,236 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 16 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.