Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Examining DSM-IV Criteria for Pathological Gambling: Psychometric Properties and Evidence from Cognitive Biases

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Journal of Gambling Studies Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

We examined the DSM-IV criteria for pathological gambling as assessed with the DSM-IV-based Diagnostic Interview for Gambling Severity (DIGS; Winters, Specker, & Stinchfield, 2002). We first analyzed the psychometric properties of the DIGS, and then assessed the extent to which performance on two judgment and decision-making tasks, the Georgia Gambling Task (Goodie, 2003) and the Iowa Gambling Task (Bechara, Damasio, Damasio, & Anderson, 1994), related to higher reports of gambling pathology. In a sample of frequent gamblers, we found strong psychometric support for the DSM-IV conception of pathological gambling as measured by the DIGS, predictive relationships between DIGS scores and all cognitive performance measures, and significant differences in performance measures between individuals with and without pathological gambling. Analyses using suggested revisions to the pathological gambling threshold (Stinchfield, 2003) revealed that individuals meeting four of the DSM-IV criteria aligned significantly more with pathological gamblers than with non-pathological gamblers, supporting the suggested change in the cutoff score from five to four symptoms. Discussion focuses on the validity of the DSM-IV criteria as assessed by the DIGS and the role of cognitive biases in pathological gambling.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. We computed RFI as \( {\text{RFI}} = 1 - \frac{{\chi _{{\text{Restricted}}}^2 /df_{{\text{Restricted}}} - \chi _{{\text{Unrestricted}}}^{\text{2}} /df_{{\text{Unrestricted}}} }} {{\chi _{{\text{Null}}}^{\text{2}} /df_{{\text{Null}}} - \chi _{{\text{Unrestricted}}}^{\text{2}} /df_{{\text{Unrestricted}}} }} \), where χ2 refers to the maximum likelihood χ2 statistic, df = model degrees of freedom, “restricted” refers to the more restricted model under comparison (e.g., Model 2), “unrestricted” refers to the less restrictive model (e.g., Model 1), and “null” refers to the null model.

  2. Following recommended practice (James, Demaree, & Mulaik, 1986), we converted factor loadings to z-scores, averaged them, and then backtransformed the M and SD of the zs to the loadings reported here. Complete CFA results are available from the 3rd author.

References

  • American Psychiatric Association (DSM-III). (1980). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders, 3rd ed. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • American Psychiatric Association (DSM-IV-TR). (2000). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders, 4th ed., text revision. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baboushkin, H. R., Hardoon, K. K., Derevensky, J. L., & Gupta, R. (2001). Underlying cognitions in gambling behavior among university students. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 31, 1409–1430.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bechara, A. (2001). Risky business: Emotion, decision-making, and addiction. Journal of Gambling Studies, 19, 23–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bechara, A., & Damasio, H. (2002). Decision-making and addiction (part I): Impaired activation of somatic states in substance dependent individuals when pondering decisions with negative future consequences. Neuropsychologia, 40, 1675–1689.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bechara, A., Damasio, A. R., Damasio, H., & Anderson, S. W. (1994). Insensitivity to future consequences following damage to human prefrontal cortex. Cognition, 50, 7–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bechara, A., Damasio, H., & Damasio, A. R. (2000a). Emotion, decision-making, and the orbitofrontal cortex. Cerebral Cortex, 10, 295–307.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bechara, A., Damasio, H., Tranel, D., & Damasio, A. R. (1997). Deciding advantageously before knowing the advantageous strategy. Science, 275, 1293–1295.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bechara, A., Dolan, S., & Hindes, A. (2002). Decision-making and addiction (part II): myopia for the future or hypersensitivity to reward? Neuropsychologia, 40, 1690–1705.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bechara, A., Tranel, D., & Damasio, H. (2000b). Characterization of the decision-making deficit of patients with ventromedial prefrontal cortex lesions. Brain, 123, 2189–2202.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bradford, J., Geller, J., Lesieur, H. R., Rosenthal, R., & Wise, M. (1996). Impulse control disorders. In T. A. Widger, A. J. Francis, H. A. Pincus, R. Ross, M. B. First, & W. Wakefield Davis (Eds.), DSM-IV sourcebook, vol. 2 (pp. 1007–1031). Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Camchong, J., Goodie, A. S., McDowell, J. E., Gilmore, C. S., & Clementz, B. A. (in press). A cognitive neuroscience approach to the role of overconfidence in pathological gambling. Journal of Gambling Studies.

  • Cronbach, L. J. (1951). Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika, 16, 297–334.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fischhoff, B., Slovic, P., & Lichtenstein, S. (1977). Knowing with certainty: The appropriateness of extreme confidence. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 3, 552–564.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goodie, A. S. (2003). The effects of control on betting: Paradoxical betting on items of high confidence with low value. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 29, 598–610.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goodie, A. S. (2005). The role of percieved control and overconfidence in pathological gambling. Journal of Gambling Studies, 21, 481–502.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hardy, D. J., Hinkin, C. H., Levine, A. J., Castellon, S. A., & Lam, M. N. (2006). Risky decision-making assessed with the Gambling Task in adults with HIV. Neuropsychology, 20, 355–360.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1998). Fit indices in covariance structure modeling. Sensitivity to underparameterized model misspecification. Psychological Methods, 3, 424–453.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hu, L., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling, 6, 1–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • James, L. R., Demaree, R. G., & Mulaik, S. A. (1986). A note on validity generalization procedures. Journal of Applied Psychology, 71, 440–450.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jöreskog, K. G., & Sörbom, D. (2005). LISREL 8.72 [Computer software]. Lincolnwood, IL: Scientific Software International.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ladouceur, R. (2004). Gambling: The hidden addiction. Canadian Journal of Psychiatry, 49, 501–503.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ladouceur, R., Bouchard, C., Rheaume, N., Jacques, C., Ferland, F., Leblond, J., & Walker, M. (2000). Is the SOGS an accurate measure of pathological gambling among children, adolescents and adults? Journal of Gambling Studies, 16, 1–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ladouceur, R., Ferland, F., Poulin, C., Vitaro, F., & Wiebe, J. (2005). Concordance between the SOGS-RA and the DSM-IV criteria for pathological gambling among youth. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 19, 271–276.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ladouceur, R., Sylvain, C., Boutain, C., Lachance, S., Doucet, C., & Leblond, J. (2003). Group therapy for pathological gamblers: A cognitive approach. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 41, 587–596.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lakey, C. E., Goodie, A. S., & Campbell, W. K. (in press). Frequent card playing and pathological gambling: The utility of the Georgia Gambling Task and Iowa Gambling Task for predicting pathology. Journal of Gambling Studies.

  • Lance, C. E., & Vandenberg, R. J. (2002). Confirmatory factor analysis. In F. Drasgow, & N. Schmitt (Eds.), Advances in measurement and data analysis (pp. 221–254). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lesieur, H. R., & Blume, S. B. (1987). The South Oaks Gambling Screen (SOGS): A new instrument for the identification of pathological gamblers. American Journal of Psychiatry, 144, 1184–1188.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lesieur, H. R., & Rosenthal, R. J. (1991). Pathological gambling: A review of the literature (prepared for the American Psychiatric Association Task Force on DSM-IV Committee on Disorders of Impulse Control not elsewhere classified). Journal of Gambling Studies, 7, 5–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lesieur, H. R., & Rosenthal, R. J. (1998). Analysis of pathological gambling. In T. A. Widger, A. J. Francis, H. A. Pincus, R. Ross, M. B. First, W. Davis, & M. Kline (Eds.), DSM-IV sourcebook, vol. 4 (pp. 393–401). Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory. New York: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Petry, N. M. (2005). Gamblers anonymous and cognitive-behavioral therapies for pathological gamblers. Journal of Gambling Studies, 21, 27–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Productivity Commission. (1999). Australia’s gambling industries: Final report. Canberra: Government Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Raylu, N., & Oei, T. P. S. (2004). The Gambling Related Cognitions Scale (GRCS): development, confirmatory factor validation and psychometric properties. Addiction, 99, 757–769.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Raylu, N., & Oei, T. P. S. (2002). Pathological gambling: A comprehensive review. Clinical Psychology Review, 22, 1009–1061.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shaffer, H. J., & Hall, M. N. (1996). Estimating the prevalence of adolescent gambling disorders: A quantitative synthesis and guide toward standard gambling nomenclature. Journal of Gambling Studies, 12, 193–214.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Steenbergh, T. A., Meyers, A. W., May, R. K., & Whelan, J. P. (2002). Development and validation of the Gamblers’ Beliefs Questionnaire. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 16, 143–149.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stinchfield, R. (2002). Reliability, validity, and classification accuracy of the South Oaks Gambling Screen (SOGS). Addictive Behaviors, 27, 1–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stinchfield, R. (2003). Reliability, validity, and classification accuracy of a measure of DSM-IV diagnostic criteria for pathological gambling. American Journal of Psychiatry, 160, 180–182.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stinchfield, R., Govoni, R., & Frisch, G. R. (2005). DSM-IV diagnostic criteria for pathological gambling: Reliability, validity, and classification accuracy. The American Journal on Addictions, 14, 73–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stinchfield, R., & Winters, K. C. (2001). Outcome of Minnesota’s gambling treatmentprograms. Journal of Gambling Studies, 17, 217–245.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stinchfield, R., & Winters, K. C. (1998). Gambling and problem gambling among youths. AAPSS Annals, 556, 172–185.

    Google Scholar 

  • Toce-Gerstein, M., Gerstein, D. R., & Volberg, R. A. (2003). A hierarchy of gambling disorders in the community. Addiction, 98, 1661–1672.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Toneatto, T. (1999). Cognitive psychopathology of problem gambling. Substance Use and Misuse, 34, 1593–1604.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Toneatto, T., Blitz-Miller, T., Calderwood, K., Dragonetti, R., Tsanos, A. (1997). Cognitive distortions in heavy gambling. Journal of Gambling Studies, 13, 253–266.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Toneatto, T., & Ladouceur, R. (2003). Treatment of pathological gambling: A critical review of the literature. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 17, 284–292.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Toneatto, T., & Millar, G. (2004). Assessing and treating problem gambling: Empirical status and promising trends. Canadian Journal of Psychiatry, 49, 517–525.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vandenberg, R. J., & Lance, C. E. (2000). A review and synthesis of the measurement invariance literature: Suggestions, practices, and recommendations for organizational research. Organizational Research Methods, 2, 4–69.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Winters, K. C., Bengston, P., Dorr, D., & Stinchfield, R. (1998). Prevalence and risk factors of problem gambling among college students. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 12, 127–135.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Winters, K. C., Specker, S., & Stinchfield, R. (2002). Measuring pathological gambling with The Diagnostic Interview for Gambling severity (DIGS). In J.J. Marotta, J.A. Cornelius, & W. R. Eadington (Eds.), The downside: Problem and pathological gambling (pp. 143–148). Reno, NV: University of Nevada, Reno.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yechiam, E., Busemeyer, J. R., Stout, J. C., & Bechara, A. (2005). Using cognitive models to map relations between neuropsychological disorders and human decision-making deficits. Psychological Science, 16, 973–978.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This research was supported in part by National Institute of Mental Health research grant R01 MH067827 to A.S. Goodie, National Institute on Aging research grant AG15321, National Institute of Drug Abuse research grant R01 DA019460, and National Institute of Health research grant R03 CA117470 to C.E. Lance, and National Institute on Drug Abuse research grant K02 DA15347 to K.C. Winters.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Psychology, University of Georgia, Athens, GA, 30602-3013, USA

    Chad E. Lakey, Adam S. Goodie & Charles E. Lance

  2. University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN, USA

    Randy Stinchfield & Ken C. Winters

Authors
  1. Chad E. Lakey
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Adam S. Goodie
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Charles E. Lance
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Randy Stinchfield
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Ken C. Winters
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Chad E. Lakey.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Lakey, C.E., Goodie, A.S., Lance, C.E. et al. Examining DSM-IV Criteria for Pathological Gambling: Psychometric Properties and Evidence from Cognitive Biases. J Gambl Stud 23, 479–498 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10899-007-9063-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10899-007-9063-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation