↓ Skip to main content

Evolutionary and Cross-Cultural Perspectives on Gambling

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Gambling Studies, December 2004
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (89th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet

Citations

dimensions_citation
34 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
56 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Evolutionary and Cross-Cultural Perspectives on Gambling
Published in
Journal of Gambling Studies, December 2004
DOI 10.1007/s10899-004-4579-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Peter B. Gray

Abstract

Few attempts have been made to incorporate evolutionary and cross-cultural perspectives on gambling. This paper begins with the assumption that gambling represents a risky endeavor undertaken for the purpose of winning stakes. This assumption leads to the derivation from evolutionary theory of two hypotheses concerning the socio-demographic characteristics of gamblers: (1) gambling should be over-represented among males, and (2) among young adults. To test these hypotheses, data are drawn from three sources. A cross-cultural sample of 60 societies reveals that males are more often identified as gamblers than females, and these results do not appear to reflect reporting biases. The data are insufficient to enable conclusions about age patterns associated with gambling within this cross-cultural sample. Nationally representative studies of problem and pathological gamblers drawn from seven nation states show that such gamblers tend to be over-represented by young males, as predicted. Lastly, available demographic data on casino gambling hint at sex differences in the games played and the stakes wagered, but require further research for robust conclusions to be drawn.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 56 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Korea, Republic of 1 2%
Australia 1 2%
Brazil 1 2%
Unknown 53 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 18%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 16%
Professor 7 13%
Researcher 7 13%
Student > Bachelor 3 5%
Other 10 18%
Unknown 10 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 19 34%
Medicine and Dentistry 8 14%
Social Sciences 7 13%
Business, Management and Accounting 5 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 2%
Other 2 4%
Unknown 14 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 8. 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 04 April 2013.
All research outputs
#4,370,146
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Gambling Studies
#210
of 989 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#15,252
of 151,957 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Gambling Studies
#2
of 4 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 82nd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
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 has done well, scoring higher than 78% 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 151,957 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.