↓ Skip to main content

Loss of Control as a Discriminating Factor Between Different Latent Classes of Disordered Gambling Severity

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Gambling Studies, February 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
25 Mendeley
Title
Loss of Control as a Discriminating Factor Between Different Latent Classes of Disordered Gambling Severity
Published in
Journal of Gambling Studies, February 2016
DOI 10.1007/s10899-016-9592-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Richard J. E. James, Claire O’Malley, Richard J. Tunney

Abstract

Analyses of disordered gambling assessment data have indicated that commonly used screens appear to measure latent categories. This stands in contrast to the oft-held assumption that problem gambling is at the extreme of a continuum. To explore this further, we report a series of latent class analyses of a number of prevalent problem gambling assessments (PGSI, SOGS, DSM-IV Pathological Gambling based assessments) in nationally representative British surveys between 1999 and 2012, analysing data from nearly fifty thousand individuals. The analyses converged on a three class model in which the classes differed by problem gambling severity. This identified an initial class of gamblers showing minimal problems, a additional class predominantly endorsing indicators of preoccupation and loss chasing, and a third endorsing a range of disordered gambling criteria. However, there was considerable evidence to suggest that classes of intermediate and high severity disordered gamblers differed systematically in their responses to items related to loss of control, and not simply on the most 'difficult' items. It appeared that these differences were similar between assessments. An important exception to this was one set of DSM-IV criteria based analyses using a specific cutoff, which was also used in an analysis that identified an increase in UK problem gambling prevalence between 2007 and 2010. The results suggest that disordered gambling has a mixed latent structure, and that present assessments of problem gambling appear to converge on a broadly similar construct.

X Demographics

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 25 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 4%
Unknown 24 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 16%
Student > Master 4 16%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 8%
Professor 2 8%
Student > Bachelor 1 4%
Other 6 24%
Unknown 6 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 9 36%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 16%
Social Sciences 2 8%
Business, Management and Accounting 1 4%
Unknown 9 36%
Attention Score in Context

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 01 March 2016.
All research outputs
#16,048,009
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Gambling Studies
#627
of 989 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#168,191
of 312,018 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Gambling Studies
#10
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 34th percentile – i.e., 34% 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 34th percentile – i.e., 34% 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 312,018 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% 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 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.