Abstract
Previous research has reported a strong relationship between endorsing gambling as an escape and problem/pathological gambling as measured by the South Oaks Gambling Screen (SOGS). The present study recruited 249 university students to complete the Gambling Functional Assessment-Revised (GFA-R), which measures the function of the respondent's gambling, as well as the SOGS and the Problem Gambling Severity Index (PGSI), which was designed to identify gambling problems in the general population. Endorsing gambling as an escape on the GFA-R was again predictive of SOGS scores. The function of one's gambling was also predictive of the respondents' PGSI scores, but whether gambling for positive reinforcement or as an escape was the significant predictor differed between male and female respondents. Scores on the GFA-R subscales also accounted for a significant amount of variance in PGSI scores above and beyond that accounted for by SOGS scores. The present results support the idea that both practitioners and researchers should be interested in the function of an individual's gambling as well as the presence or the absence of pathology. They also suggest that differences in the function of gambling might also exist between the sexes.
Highlights
Problem and pathological gambling are recognized as being major societal problems, with millions of individuals suffering from them
47 participants (18.9%) scored 0 on the Gambling Functional Assessment-Revised (GFA-R), suggesting that these participants either did not gamble or gambled for reasons not measured by the Gambling Functional Assessment (GFA)-R
When the nongamblers (i.e., GFA-R = 0) were excluded, scores remained signi cantly higher on the positive reinforcement subscale than on the escape subscale for both females (Z = −10.03, PP P PPPP) and males (Z = −6.95, PP P PPPP). us, participants endorsed gambling for positive reinforcement to a greater extent than they did gambling as an escape
Summary
Problem and pathological gambling are recognized as being major societal problems, with millions of individuals suffering from them (e.g., see [1]). Because of this fact, a great deal of effort has been exerted trying to identify who might have such problems. Far less effort has been focused on an important issue—why people might gamble. Having such information would seem important because it seems reasonable to believe that different individuals might gamble for different reasons. It may be the case that certain contingencies are more closely associated with gambling problems than are others. Instruments designed to assess the contingencies reinforcing gambling behavior are, necessary to obtain this information
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
