| Title |
Problem Gambling in Adolescents: An Examination of the Pathways Model
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Gambling Studies, June 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10899-012-9322-0 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Rina Gupta, Lia Nower, Jeffrey L. Derevensky, Alex Blaszczynski, Neda Faregh, Caroline Temcheff |
| Abstract |
This research tests the applicability of the Integrated Pathways Model for gambling to adolescent problem gamblers, utilizing a cross-sectional design and self-report questionnaires. Although the overall sample consisted of 1,133 adolescents (Quebec: n = 994, 87.7 %; Ontario: n = 139, 12.3 %: Male = 558, 49.5 %; Female = 569, 50.5 %), only problem gamblers were retained in testing the model (N = 109). Personality and clinical features were assessed using the Millon Adolescent Clinical Inventory, attention deficit hyperactivity (ADHD) using the Conners-Wells' Adolescent Self-Report Scale, and the DSM-IV-MR-J and Gambling Activities Questionnaire to determine gambling severity and reasons for gambling. Latent class analysis concluded 5 classes, yet still provided preliminary support for three distinct subgroups similar to those proposed by the Pathways Model, adding a depression only subtype, and a subtype of problem gamblers experiencing both internalizing and externalizing disorders. ADHD symptoms were found to be common to 4 of the 5 classes. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 2 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 67% |
| Scientists | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 117 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Canada | 2 | 2% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| New Zealand | 1 | <1% |
| Spain | 1 | <1% |
| Greece | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 111 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 21 | 18% |
| Researcher | 16 | 14% |
| Student > Master | 16 | 14% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 11 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 7% |
| Other | 28 | 24% |
| Unknown | 17 | 15% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 55 | 47% |
| Social Sciences | 14 | 12% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 13 | 11% |
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 2 | 2% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 2 | 2% |
| Other | 12 | 10% |
| Unknown | 19 | 16% |
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 18 February 2018.
All research outputs
#15,168,964
of 25,373,627 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Gambling Studies
#588
of 989 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#104,818
of 181,089 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Gambling Studies
#7
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,373,627 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% 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 39th percentile – i.e., 39% 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 181,089 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 10 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 3 of them.