Advertisement

Journal of Gambling Studies

, Volume 22, Issue 1, pp 101–120 | Cite as

The Four Es of Problem Gambling: A Psychological Measure of Risk

  • Matthew J. Rockloff
  • Victoria Dyer
Article

Abstract

A focus group of Reno area Gamblers Anonymous members identified four psychological traits contributing to risk for problem gambling, including: Escape, Esteem, Excess and Excitement. A panel of four experts authored 240 Likert-type items to measure these traits. By design, none of the items explicitly referred to gambling activities. Study 1 narrowed the field of useful items by employing a quasi-experimental design which compared the answers of Reno area Gamblers Anonymous members (N = 39) to a control sample (N = 34). Study 2 submitted successful items, plus new items authored with the knowledge gained from Study 1, to validation in a random sample telephone survey across Queensland, Australia (N=2577). The final 40 item Four Es scale (4Es) was reliable (α=.90); predicted gambling problems as measured by the Canadian Problem Gambling Index of Severity (PGSI, Ferris & Wynne (2001). The Canadian Problem Gambling Index: Final Report: Canadian Centre on Substance Abuse); and distinguished problem gamblers from persons with alcohol abuse problems. The new scale can provide a basis for further study in harm minimization, treatment, and theory development.

Keywords

personality aboriginal native 4Es 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This research was supported by a grant from the Queensland Treasury Department, Australia. We gratefully acknowledge the efforts of Catherine Byrne, Judy Calder, Benjamin Hayes, Virginia Hayes and Kathi Heffner in the conduct of Study 1.

References

  1. American Psychiatric Association (1994). DSM-IV: Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th edn., Washington, DC: American Psychiatric AssociationGoogle Scholar
  2. Baumeister R. F., (1997). Esteem threat, self-regulatory breakdown, and emotional distress as factors in self-defeating behavior Review of General Psychology 1(2):145–174CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Blaszcvznski A., (2002). A pathway model of problem and pathological gambling Addiction 97:487–499CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Blaszczynski A., Steel Z., McConaghy N., (1997). Impulsivity in pathological gambling: The antisocial impulsivist Addiction 92(1):75CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Eber G. B., Shaffer H. J., (2000). Trends in bio-behavioral gambling studies research: Quantifying citations Journal of Gambling Studies 16(4):461CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Ferris, J., & Wynne, H. (2001). The Canadian Problem Gambling Index: Final Report: Canadian Centre on Substance AbuseGoogle Scholar
  7. Hoyle R. H., (2000). Personality processes and problem behavior Journal of Personality 68(6):953CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. Ibanez A., Blanco C., Donahue E., Lesieur H. R., Perez de Castro I., Fernandez-Piqueras J., et al., (2001). Psychiatric comorbidity in pathological gamblers seeking treatment American Journal of Psychiatry 158(10):1733CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Langewisch M. W., Frisch G. R., (1998). Gambling behavior and pathology in relation to impulsivity, sensation seeking, and risky behaviors in male college students Journal of Gambling Studies 14(3):245–262CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 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(9):1184–1188PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Parsons K., Webster D., (2000). The consumption of gambling in everyday life Journal of Consumer Studies and Home Economics 24(4):263–271CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Rosenberg M., (1989). Society and the adolescent self-image (Rev. ed.). Wesleyan University Press Middletown, CTGoogle Scholar
  13. Saunders J. B., Aasland O. G., Babor T. F., De La Fuente J. R., Grant M., (1993). Development of the alcohol use disorders identification test (AUDIT): WHO collaborative project on early detection of persons with harmful alcohol consumptionAddiction 88(6):791–803CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Zuckerman M., Kuhlman D. M., (2000). Personality and risk-taking: common biosocial factors Journal of Personality 68(6):999CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, Inc. 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Psychology and SociologyCentral Queensland UniversityRockhamptonAustralia
  2. 2.Department of Psychology and SociologyCentral Queensland UniversityRockhamptonAustralia

Personalised recommendations