| Title |
Psychological Vulnerability and Problem Gambling: The Mediational Role of Cognitive Distortions
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Gambling Studies, January 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10899-017-9740-0 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
David Lévesque, Serge Sévigny, Isabelle Giroux, Christian Jacques |
| Abstract |
Despite numerous studies demonstrating the influence of cognitive distortions on gambling problem severity, empirical data regarding the role of psychological vulnerability on the latter is limited. Hence, this study assesses the mediating effect of cognitive distortions between psychological vulnerability (personality and mood), and gambling problem severity. It also verifies whether the relationships between these variables differs according to the preferred gambling activity. The sample is composed of 272 male gamblers [191 poker players; 81 video lottery terminal (VLT) players] aged between 18 and 82 years (M = 35.2). Bootstrap analysis results revealed that cognitive distortions mediate the effect of narcissism on gambling problem severity for both groups. The level of depression for VLT players significantly predicted gambling problem severity, both directly and indirectly via the mediating effect of cognitive distortions. Mediation analyses also indicated that narcissism had an indirect impact on problem gambling through cognitive distortions for both groups. These findings suggest that certain vulnerabilities related to personality and mood may influence cognitive distortion intensity and gambling problem severity. In addition, psychological vulnerabilities could differ based on preferred gambling activity. These results may be useful for prevention policies, identifying high risk gamblers and planning psychological interventions. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 3 | 75% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 75% |
| Unknown | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 63 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 63 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 8 | 13% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 7 | 11% |
| Researcher | 6 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 4 | 6% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 6% |
| Other | 11 | 17% |
| Unknown | 23 | 37% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 24 | 38% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 3 | 5% |
| Computer Science | 2 | 3% |
| Environmental Science | 1 | 2% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 6 | 10% |
| Unknown | 26 | 41% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 13 October 2018.
All research outputs
#16,725,651
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Gambling Studies
#656
of 990 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#271,123
of 450,297 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Gambling Studies
#11
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 990 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.3. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% 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 450,297 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
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 is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.