Advertisement

Canadian Journal of Public Health

, Volume 97, Issue 6, pp 448–453 | Cite as

Engaging Youth About Gambling Using the Internet

The YouthBet.Net Website
  • David Korn
  • Martha Murray
  • Meg Morrison
  • Jennifer Reynolds
  • Harvey A. SkinnerEmail author
Public Health Intervention
  • 1 Downloads

Abstract

Objective

YouthBet.net’s () goal is to prevent gambling problems among youth through an interactive, multimedia website based on a public health approach.

Participants

YouthBet.net was designed by youth for youth. A youth working group spent several months designing the look and feel of the site to ensure that it would appeal to youth aged 10–19. In total, 34 youth from the Greater Toronto Area participated in the first 3 phases of the usability testing of the site using Video Capture of User Site Interaction methodology.

Setting

Urban Toronto.

Intervention

Utilizing public health strategies such as health promotion, harm reduction and problem prevention, YouthBet.net features games, information and help resources to protect youth from gambling-related harm.

Outcomes

Youth participants indicated that they liked the interactive way gambling information was presented via realistic games and quizzes, often citing that YouthBet.net would be a fun and educational tool to be used by teachers in the classroom. Participants had no difficulties navigating the site, finding content and playing games. Additionally, all youth said that they would return to the site and would recommend it to a friend if they were having a problem with gambling.

Conclusion

YouthBet.net is one of the first comprehensive websites designed for youth gambling. Findings from this research will inform future health promotion, harm reduction and problem prevention efforts for youth gambling using Internet technology.

MeSHterms

Gambling health promotion adolescent Internet 

Résumé

Objectif

YouthBet.net (), un site Web interactif et multimédia fondé sur une démarche de santé publique, a pour but de prévenir les problèmes de jeu chez les jeunes.

Participants

YouthBet.net est conçu par et pour les jeunes. Un groupe de travail de jeunes a passé plusieurs mois à concevoir le style du site pour qu’il plaise aux jeunes de 10 à 19 ans. En tout, 34 jeunes de la région du Grand Toronto ont participé aux trois premières phases de validation de la convivialité du site par la méthode de capture d’images vidéo des interactions site-utilisateurs.

Lieu

la zone urbaine de Toronto

Intervention

À l’aide de diverses stratégies de santé publique (promotion de la santé, réduction des méfaits, prévention des problèmes), YouthBet.net présente des jeux, de l’information et des ressources de dépannage pour prévenir les méfaits des jeux de hasard et aider les jeunes à s’en prémunir.

Résultats

Les jeunes participants ont dit apprécier la présentation interactive de l’information sur les jeux de hasard (par le biais de jeux et de devinettes réalistes), en mentionnant souvent que YouthBet.net serait un outil amusant et éducatif pour les enseignants en milieu scolaire. Les participants n’ont eu aucun mal à parcourir le site, à y trouver des renseignements et à jouer aux jeux. De plus, tous les jeunes ont dit qu’ils reviendraient sur le site et qu’ils le recommanderaient à un ami aux prises avec un problème de jeu.

Conclusion

YouthBet.net est l’un des premiers sites Web «tout-en-un» conçus pour les jeunes qui s’adonnent à des jeux de hasard. Les résultats de notre étude seront utiles pour de futurs projets de promotion de la santé, de réduction des méfaits et de prévention des problèmes de jeu menés auprès des jeunes en faisant appel à la technologie Internet.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Wiebe J, Cox B, Mehmel B. The South Oaks Gambling Screen revised for Adolescents (SOGS-RA): Further psychometric findings from a community sample. J Gambling Studies 2000;16(2/3):275–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Stinchfield RD, Winters KC. Adolescent gambling: A review of prevalence, risk factors and health implications. Ann Am Acad Political Soc Sci 1998;556:172–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Jacobs DF. Juvenile gambling in North America: An analysis of long-term trends and future prospects. J Gambling Studies 2000;16:119–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Shaffer HJ, Hall MN. Updating and refining prevalence estimates of disordered gambling behaviour in the United States and Canada. Can J Public Health 2001;92(3):168–72.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Gupta R, Derevensky JL. An empirical examination of Jacobs’ General Theory of Addictions: Do adolescent gamblers fit the theory? J Gambling Studies 1998;14:17–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Winters KC, Stinchfield RD, Botzet A, Anderson N. A prospective study of youth gambling behaviors. Psychol Addict Behav 2002;16(1):3–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Skinner HA, Biscope S, Murray M, Korn D. Dares to addiction: Youth definitions and perspectives on gambling. Can J Public Health 2004;95(4):264–67.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Korn DA, Shaffer HJ. Gambling and the health of the public: Adopting a public health perspective. J Gambling Studies 1999;15(4):289–365.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Skinner HA. Promoting Health Through Organizational Change. San Francisco, CA: Benjamin Cummings. Chapter 7: What motivates people to change. 2002.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Skinner HA, Maley O, Smith L, Chirrey S, Morrison M. New frontiers: Using the Internet to engage teens in substance abuse prevention and treatment. In: Monte P, Colby S (Eds.), Adolescence, Alcohol, and Substance Abuse: Reaching Teens Through Brief Interventions. New York: Gilford Press, 2001.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Skinner HA, Morrison M, Bercovitz K, Haans D, Jennings MJ, Magdenko L, et al. Using the Internet to engage youth in health promotion. Int J Health Promot Educ 1997;4:23–25.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Skinner HA, Maley O, Norman CD. Developing eHealth promotion Internet-based programs: The Spiral Technology Action Research (STAR) model. Health Promotion Practice 2006;7(2):1–12.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Strecher VJ, Rosenstock IM. The health belief model. In: Glanz K, Lewis FM, Rimer BK (Eds.), Health Behavior and Health Education: Theory, Research, and Practice, 2nd edition. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers, 1997.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Fishbein M, Ajzen I. Belief, Attitude, Intention and Behavior: An Introduction to Theory and Research. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley, 1975.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ajzen I. The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes 1991;50:179–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Bandura A. Self-efficacy. The Exercise of Control. New York: W.H. Freeman & Company, 1997.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Baranowski T, Perry CL, Parcel GS. How individuals, environments, and health behavior interact: Social cognitive theory. In: Glanz K, Lewis FM, Rimer BK (Eds.), Health Behavior and Health Education: Theory, Research and Practice. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1997.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Ryan R, Deci E. Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. Am Psychol 2000;55(1):68–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Prochaska J, DiClemente C, Norcross J. In search of how people change. Applications to addictive behaviors. Am Psychol 1992;47:1102–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Virzi RA. Refining the test phase of usability evaluation: How many subjects is enough? Human Factors 1992;34:457–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Neilsen J. Why you need to test with five users, Jakob Nielsen’s Alertbox. Available online at: https://doi.org/www.useit.com/alertbox/20000319.html (Accessed March 19, 2000).Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Faulkner L. Beyond the five-user assumption: Benefits of increasing sample sizes in usability testing. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers 2003;35(3):379–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Spool J, Schroeder W. Testing Web sites: Five users is nowhere near enough. In: CHI 2001 Extended Abstracts. New York: ACM Press, 2001;285–86.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Eysenbeck G, Kohler C. How do consumers search for and appraise health information on the world wide web? Qualitative study using focus groups, usability testing, and in-depth interviews. BMJ 2002;324(7337):573–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Hansen D, Derry H, Resnick P, Richardson C. Adolescents searching for health information on the Internet: An observational study. J Med Internet Res 2003;5(4):e25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Canadian Public Health Association 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • David Korn
    • 1
  • Martha Murray
    • 1
  • Meg Morrison
    • 1
  • Jennifer Reynolds
    • 1
  • Harvey A. Skinner
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  1. 1.Department of Public Health SciencesUniversity of TorontoTorontoCanada
  2. 2.Faculty of HealthYork UniversityTorontoCanada

Personalised recommendations