Executive Function in Problem Gamblers with and without History of Depression
Executive function deficits are well-documented in gambling disorder as well as major depressive disorder. The literature also demonstrates that these clinical problems are highly comorbid. Despite the high rates of comorbidity and the transdiagnostic nature of executive function deficits, few studies have explored executive function in gamblers with a history of depression. As a preliminary investigation, the current work characterized executive function in a sample of problem gamblers with a history of depression (N = 19), problem gamblers without a history of depression (N = 19), and healthy controls (N = 40). Consistent with predictions, both gambler groups showed deficits in planning relative to controls. However, contrary to predictions, gamblers with a history of depression performed better than gamblers without a history of depression on a measure of cognitive flexibility. Results reveal that examining differences in executive function among different subtypes of problem gamblers may be a promising area for future study.
KeywordsGambling Problem gambling Depression Executive function
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of Interest Statement
Authors David Ledgerwood, Jennifer Ellis and Meagan Carr declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Informed Consent Statement
All procedures followed were in accordance with the ethical standards of the responsible committee onhuman experimentation (institutional and national) and with the Helsinki Declaration of 1975. Informedconsent was obtained from all participants included in this study.
- American Psychiatric Association. (2000). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (4th ed.),text revision. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association.Google Scholar
- First, M. B., Spitzer, R. L., Gibbon, M., & Williams, J. B. W. (1997). Structured clinical interview for DSM-IV axis I disorders (SCID-I). Washington: American Psychiatric Publishing.Google Scholar
- Gerstein, D., Murphy, S., Toce, M., Hoffman, J., Palmer, A., Johnson, R., Larison, C., Chuchro, L., Bard, A., Engelman, L., Hill, M. A., Buie, T., Volberg, R., Harwood, H., Tucker, A., Christiansen, E., Cummings, W., & Sinclair, S. (1999). Gambling impact and behavior study: report to the national gambling impact study commission. Chicago: National Opinion Research Center.Google Scholar
- Ledgerwood, D. M., Orr, E. S., Kaploun, K. A., Milosevic, A., Frisch, G. R., Rupcich, N., Lundahl, L. H. (2012). Executive function in pathological gamblers and healthy controls. Journal of Gambling Studies, 28(1), 89–103.Google Scholar
- Marshall, D. F., Walker, S. J., Ryan, K. A., Kamali, M., Saunders, E. F. H., Weldon, A. L., Adams, K. M., McInnis, M. G., & Langenecker, S. A. (2012). Greater executive and visual memory dysfunction in comorbid bipolar disorder and substance use disorder. Psychiatry Research, 200, 252–257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Moon, M., Lister, J.J., Milosevic, A., & Legerwood, D. M. (2016). Subtyping non-treatment-seeking problem gamblers using the pathways model. Journal of Gambling Studies, 33(3), 841-853.Google Scholar
- Puente, A. E. (1985). Wisconsin card sort test. Test Critiques, 4, 677–682.Google Scholar
- Quigley, L., Yakovenko, I., Hodgins, D. C., Dobson, K. S., el-Guebaly, N., Casey, D. M., Currie, S. R., Smith, G. J., Williams, R. J., & Schopflocher, D. P. (2015). Comorbid pathological gambling and major depression in a community sample. Journal of Gambling Studies, 31(4), 1135–1152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- van Holst, R. J., van den Brink, W., Veltman, D. J., & Goudriaan, A. E. (2010). Why gamblers fail to win: areview of cognitive and neuroimaging findings in pathological gambling. Neuroscience & BiobehavioralReviews, 34(1), 87–107.Google Scholar
- Wechsler, D. (1997) Weschler Memory Scale – 3rd edition (WMS III). San Antonio, TX: The PsychologicalCorporation.Google Scholar
- Wechsler, D. (1999). Wechsler abbreviated intelligence scale. San Antonio: The Psychological Corporation.Google Scholar