| Title |
Public Stigma Across Addictive Behaviors: Casino Gambling, eSports Gambling, and Internet Gaming
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Gambling Studies, April 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10899-018-9775-x |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Samuel C. Peter, Qian Li, Rory A. Pfund, James P. Whelan, Andrew W. Meyers |
| Abstract |
The negative psychological effects of public stigma on disordered gamblers have been well documented. Public stigma deters treatment-seeking and other help-seeking behaviors, and negatively impacts individuals' view of themselves. Different types of disordered gambling activities may attract different degrees of stigma. One increasingly popular form of gambling involves placing bets on the outcomes of competitive video games, also called eSports gambling. This activity shares characteristics with Internet gaming and gambling. The purpose of this study was to compare the degree of public stigma held towards traditional casino gamblers, eSports gamblers, and Internet gamers, as compared to an individual experiencing comparable levels of impairment and distress due to a financial crisis. Using an experimental between-groups vignette study design, we found that all three types of behavioral addictions were more heavily stigmatized than the control condition. The three behavioral addictions were seen as being highly controllable, engendered a significant amount of anger and blame, and resulted in higher levels of desired social distance. Traditional casino gamblers were seen as significantly more dangerous to be around and created a higher level of desired social distance than the Internet gamer. Differences between the Internet gamer and eSports better were less pronounced. These findings underscore the importance of reducing public stigma for gambling and other behavioral addictions, and provide information that can be used when developing interventions to impact stigma. |
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 % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 50% |
| Unknown | 2 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 75% |
| Scientists | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 140 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 140 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 19 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 16 | 11% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 14 | 10% |
| Researcher | 9 | 6% |
| Other | 7 | 5% |
| Other | 24 | 17% |
| Unknown | 51 | 36% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 32 | 23% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 13 | 9% |
| Sports and Recreations | 7 | 5% |
| Social Sciences | 7 | 5% |
| Computer Science | 6 | 4% |
| Other | 19 | 14% |
| Unknown | 56 | 40% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 283. 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 16 February 2023.
All research outputs
#125,069
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Gambling Studies
#6
of 990 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#3,023
of 343,332 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Gambling Studies
#1
of 19 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
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 has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 343,332 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 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 19 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.