Advertisement

Journal of Gambling Studies

, Volume 29, Issue 4, pp 765–774 | Cite as

An Assessment of the Psychometric Properties of Italian Version of CPGI

  • Emanuela Colasante
  • Mercedes Gori
  • Luca Bastiani
  • Valeria Siciliano
  • Paolo Giordani
  • Mario Grassi
  • Sabrina Molinaro
Original Paper

Abstract

The aim of this study was to adapt to the Italian context a very commonly used international instrument to detect problem gambling, the canadian problem gambling index (CPGI), and assess its psychometric properties. Cross-cultural adaptation of CPGI was performed in several steps and the questionnaire was administered as a survey among Italian general population (n = 5,292). Cronbach’s alpha reliability coefficient was 0.87 and can be considered to be highly reliable. Construct validity was assessed first by means of a principal component analysis and then by means of confirmatory factor analysis, showing that only one factor, problem gambling, was extracted from the CPGI questionnaire (an eigenvalues of 4,684 with percentage of variance 52 %). As far as convergent validity is concerned, CPGI was compared with Lie/Bet questionnaire, a two-item screening tool for detecting problem gamblers, and with both depression and stress scales. A short form DSM-IV CIDI questionnaire was used for depression and VRS scale, a rating scale, was used for rapid stress evaluation. A strong convergent validity with these instruments was found and these findings are consistent with past research on problem gambling, where another way to confirm the validity is to determine the extent to which it correlates with other qualities or measures known to be directly related to problem gambling. In sum, despite the lack of a direct comparison with a classic gold-standard such as DSM-IV, the Italian version of CPGI exhibits good psychometric properties and can be used among the Italian general population to identify at-risk problem gamblers.

Keywords

Problem gambling Survey Psychometric properties CPGI 

Notes

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank Daniela Capitanucci for helpful suggestions.

References

  1. American Psychiatric Association. (2000). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders: DSM-IVTR (4th, text revision ed.). Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association.Google Scholar
  2. Amministrazione Autonoma dei Monopoli di Stato, AAMS. (2011). I dati ufficiali AAMS ‘‘Official data AAMS’’. Retrieved from http://www.aams.gov.it/.
  3. Arthur, D., Tong, W. L., Chen, C. P., Hing, A. Y., Sagara-Rosemeyer, M., Kua, E. H., et al. (2008). The validity and reliability of four measures of gambling behaviour in a sample of singapore university students. Journal of Gambling Studies, 24, 451–462. doi: 10.1007/s10899-008-9103-y.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bastiani L, Gori M, Colasante E, Siciliano V, Capitanucci D, Jarre P, Molinaro S (2011). Complex factors and behaviors in the gambling population of Italy. J Gambl Stud 2011 Dec 4 [Epub ahead of print].Google Scholar
  5. Beaton, D. E., Bombardier, C., Guillemin, F., et al. (2000). Guidelines for the process of crosscultural adaptation of self-report measures. Spine, 25, 3186–3191.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bolen, D. W., & Boyd, W. H. (1968). Gambling and the gambler: A review and preliminary findings. Archives of General Psychiatry, 18(5), 617–629.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Brace, N., Kemp, R., & Snelgar, R. (2009). SPSS for psychologists. Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  8. Brooker, I. S., Clara, I. P., & Cox, B. J. (2009). The Canadian problem gambling index: Factor structure and associations with psychopathology in a nationally representative sample. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science, 41(2), 109–114.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Cortina, J. M. (1993). What is coefficient alpha? An examination of theory and applications. Journal of Applied Psychology, 78(1), 98–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. De Oliveira, M. P., Da Silveira, D. X., De Carvalho, S. V., Collakis, S. T., Bizeto, J., & Silva, M. T. (2009). Reliability, validity and classification accuracy of the South Oaks gambling screen in a Brazilian sample. Journal Gambling Studies, 25(4), 557–568.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Dipartimento per le Politiche Antidroga (DPA), Presidenza del Consiglio dei Ministri. (2008). Relazione Annuale al Parlamento sullo Stato delle Tossicodipendenze In Italia 2007. Retrieved from http://www.governo.it/GovernoInforma/Dossier/relazione_droga_2007/.
  12. Ferris J,Wynne H (2001a). The Canadian problem gambling index: User manual. Ottawa: The Canadian centre on substance abuse. Ottawa, ON: Canadian centre on substance abuse.Google Scholar
  13. Ferris, J., & Wynne, H. (2001b). The Canadian problem gambling index: Final report. Ottawa, ON: Canadian Centre on Substance Abuse.Google Scholar
  14. Hong, S., Malik, M. L., & Lee, M. (2003). Testing configural, metric, scalar, and latent mean invariance across genders in sociotropy and autonomy using a non-western sample. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 63(4), 636–654.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Johnson, E. E., Hamer, R., & Nora, R. M. (1998). The lie/bet questionnaire for screening pathological gamblers: A follow-up study, in. Psychological Reports, 83, 1219–1224.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Johnson, E. E., Hamer, R., Nora, R. M., & Tan, B. (1997). The lie/bet questionnaire for screening pathological gamblers, in. Psychological Reports, 80, 83–88.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Joseph, L., Gyorkos, T. W. & Coupal, L. (1995). Bayesian estimation of disease prevalence and the parameters of diagnostic tests in the absence of a gold standard. American Journal of Epidemiology, 141(3), 263–272.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Kerber, C. S., Black, D. W., & Buckwalter, K. (2008). Comorbid psychiatric disorders among older adult recovering pathological gamblers. Issues in Mental Health Nursing, 29(9), 1018–1028.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 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), 1184–1188.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Loo, J. M. Y., Oei, T. P. S., & Raylu, N. (2011). Psychometric evaluation of the problem gambling severity index-chinese version (PGSI-C). Journal of Gambling Studies, 27, 453–466.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. McMillen, J., Marshall, D., Ahmed, E., & Wenzel, M. (2004). 2003 Victorian longitudinal community attitudes survey. Canberra, Australia: The Centre for Gambling Research, Australian National University.Google Scholar
  22. McMillen, J., & Wenzel, M. (2006). Measuring problem gambling: Assessment of three prevalence screens. International Gambling Studies, 6(2), 147–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Neal, P., Delfabbro, P. H., & O’Neill, M. (2004). Problem gambling and harm: Towards a national definition. Melbourne: National Gambling Research Program Working Party.Google Scholar
  24. Nunnally, J. (1978). Psychometric theory (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
  25. Orford, J., Sproston, K., & Erens, B. (2003). SOGS and DSM-IV in the British gambling prevalence survey: Reliability and factor structure. International Gambling Studies, 3, 53–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Pancheri, P., Martini, A., Tarsitani, L., Rosati, M. V., Biondi, M., & Tomei, F. (2002). Assessment of subjective stress in the municipal police force of the city of Rome. Stress and Health, 18, 127–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Patten, S. B. (1997). Performance of the composite international diagnostic interview short form for major depression in community and clinical samples. Chronic Diseases in Canada, 18, 109–112.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Patten, S. B., Brandon-Christie, J., Devji, J., & Sedmak, B. (2000). Performance of the composite international diagnostic interview short form for major depression in community samples. Chronic Diseases in Canada, 21(2), 68–72.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Petry, N. M. (2005). Pathological gambling: Etiology, comorbidity, and treatment. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Raylu, N., & Oei, T. P. S. (2002). Pathological gambling: A comprehensive review. Clinical Psychology Review, 22(7), 1009–1061.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Rosenthal, R. J. (2003). Distribution of the DSM-IV criteria for pathological gambling. Addiction, 98(12), 1674–1675.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Roy Morgan Research. (2006). The fourth study into the extent and impact of gambling in Tasmania with particular reference to problem gambling: Follow-up to the studies conducted in 1994, 1996, and 2000. Hobart, Tasmania: Gambling Support Bureau, Department of Health and Services.Google Scholar
  33. Stinchfield, R. (2002). Reliability, validity, and classification accuracy of the South Oaks gambling screen (SOGS). Addictive Behaviors, 27, 1–19.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Tarsitani, L., & Biondi, M. (1999). Sviluppo e validazione della scala VRS (valutazione rapida dello stress). Development and validation of the VRS, a rating scale for rapid stress assessment. Medicina Psicosomatica, 3, 163–177.Google Scholar
  35. Treasury, Queensland. (2006). Queensland household gambling survey 2003–04. Brisbane: Queensland Government.Google Scholar
  36. Walter, S. D. & Irwig, L. M. (1988). Estimation of test error rates, disease prevalence and relative risk from misclassified data: a review. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 41(9), 923–937.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Yang, I. & Becker, M. P. (1997). Latent variable modeling of diagnostic accuracy. Biometrics, 53(3), 948–958.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Zheng, W. Y., Walker, M. & Blaszczynski, A. (2010). Mahjong gambling in the chinese-australian community in sydney: A prevalence study. Journal of Gambling Studies, 26(3), 441–454. doi: 10.1007/s10899-009-9159-3.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Emanuela Colasante
    • 1
  • Mercedes Gori
    • 1
  • Luca Bastiani
    • 1
  • Valeria Siciliano
    • 1
  • Paolo Giordani
    • 2
  • Mario Grassi
    • 3
  • Sabrina Molinaro
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute of Clinical PhysiologyNational Council of ResearchPisaItaly
  2. 2.Department of Statistical SciencesSapienza University of RomeRomeItaly
  3. 3.Department of Applied Health SciencesPavia UniversityPaviaItaly

Personalised recommendations