Journal of Gambling Studies

, Volume 31, Issue 1, pp 211–224 | Cite as

Adaptation Study of the Turkish Version of the Gambling-Related Cognitions Scale (GRCS-T)

  • K. Arcan
  • A. N. Karanci
Original Paper


This study aimed to adapt and to test the validity and the reliability of the Turkish version of the Gambling-Related Cognitions Scale (GRCS-T) that was developed by Raylu and Oei (Addiction 99(6):757–769, 2004a). The significance of erroneous cognitions in the development and the maintenance of gambling problems, the importance of promoting gambling research in different cultures, and the limited information about the gambling individuals in Turkey due to limited gambling research interest inspired the present study. The sample consisted of 354 voluntary male participants who were above age 17 and betting on sports and horse races selected through convenience sampling in betting terminals. The results of the confirmatory factor analysis following the original scale’s five factor structure indicated a good fit for the data. The analyses were carried out with 21 items due to relatively inadequate psychometric properties of two GRCS-T items. Correlational analyses and group comparison tests supported the concurrent and the criterion validity of the GRCS-T. Cronbach’s alpha coefficient for the whole scale was 0.84 whereas the coefficients ranged between 0.52 and 0.78 for the subscales of GRCS-T. The findings suggesting that GRCS-T is a valid and reliable instrument to identify gambling cognitions in Turkish samples are discussed considering the possible influence of the sample make-up and cultural texture within the limitations of the present study and in the light of the relevant literature.


Turkish Gambling Cognitions Validity Reliability 


Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.


  1. Bagby, R. M., Vachon, D., Bulmash, E. L., Toneatto, T., Quilty, L. C., & Costa, P. T. (2007). Pathological gambling and the five factor model of personality. Personality and Individual Differences, 43(4), 873–880.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Beck, A. T. (1976). Cognitive therapy and the emotional disorders. New York: New American Library.Google Scholar
  3. Blaszczynski, A. P., Buhrich, N., & McConaghy, N. (1985). Pathological gamblers, heroin addicts and controls compared on the E.P.Q. ‘Addiction Scale’. British Journal of Addiction, 80(3), 315–319.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. Bonnaire, C., Bungener, C., & Varescon, I. (2009). Subtypes of French pathological gamblers: Comparison of sensation seeking, alexithymia, and depression scores. Journal of Gambling Studies, 25(4), 455–471.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Breen, R. B., & Zuckerman, M. (1999). Chasing in gambling behavior: Personality and cognitive determinants. Personality and Individual Differences, 27(6), 1097–1111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Chiu, J., & Storm, L. (2010). Personality, perceived luck, and gambling attitudes as predictors of gambling involvement. Journal of Gambling Studies, 26(2), 205–227.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. Clarke, D., & Clarkson, J. (2009). A preliminary investigation into motivational factors associated with older adults’ problem gambling. International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction, 7(1), 12–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cloutier, M., Ladouceur, R., & Sevingy, S. (2006). Responsible gambling tools: Pop-up messages and pauses on video lottery terminals. The Journal of Psychology, 140(5), 434–438.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Coups, E., Haddock, G., & Webley, P. (1998). Correlates and predictors of lottery play in the United Kingdom. Journal of Gambling Studies, 14(3), 285–303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Delfabbro, P., Lambos, C., King, D., & Puglies, S. (2009). Knowledge and beliefs about gambling in Australian secondary school students and their implications for education strategies. Journal of Gambling Studies, 25(4), 523–539.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Delfabbro, P. H., & Winefield, A. H. (2000). Predictors of irrational thinking in regular slot machine gamblers. The Journal of Psychology, 134(2), 117–128.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Duvarcı, İ., & Varan, A. (2001). Reliability and validity study of the Turkish Form of the South Oaks Gambling Screen. Turkish Psychiatry Journal, 12(1), 34–45.Google Scholar
  13. Esmer, Y. (2012). Atlas of Turkey Values 2012 [Türkiye Değerler Atlası 2012]. Accessed 10 July 2013.
  14. Eysenck, S. B., Eysenck, H. J., & Barrett, P. (1985). A revised version of the psychoticism scale. Personality and Individual Differences, 6(1), 21–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Faregh, N., & Leth-Steensen, C. (2011). The gambling profiles of Canadians young and old: Game preferences and play frequencies. International Gambling Studies, 11(1), 23–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Francis, L. J., Brown, L. B., & Philipchalk, R. (1992). The development of an abbreviated form of the Revised Eysenck Personality Questionnaire (EPQR-A): Its use among students in England, Canada, the USA and Australia. Personality and Individual Differences, 13(4), 443–449.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Gencoz, T. (2000). Positive and negative affect schedule: A study of validity and reliability. Turkish Journal of Psychology, 15(46), 27–28.Google Scholar
  18. Government Inspection Board (2009). Inspection of activities of races and games of chances within the years of 2006 and 2007 & Evaluation of shares from those activities for public services. Accessed 11 May 2011.
  19. Grall-Bronnec, M., Bouju, G., Sebille-Rivain, V., Gorwood, P., Boutin, C., Venisse, J., et al. (2012). A French adaptation of the Gambling-Related Cognitions Scale (GRCS): A useful tool for assessment of irrational thoughts among gamblers. Journal of Gambling Issues,. doi: 10.4309/jgi.2012.27.9.Google Scholar
  20. Jefferson, S., & Nicki, R. (2003). A new instrument to measure cognitive distortions in the video lottery terminal users: The Informational Biases Scale (IBS). Journal of Gambling Studies, 19(4), 387–403.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Johansson, A., Grant, J. E., Kim, S. W., Odlaug, B. L., & Götestam, K. G. (2009). Risk factors for problematic gambling: A critical literature review. Journal of Gambling Studies, 25(1), 67–92.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Joukhador, J., Maccallum, F., & Blaszczynski, A. (2003). Differences in cognitive distortions between problem and social gambler. Psychological Reports, 92(3), 1203–1214.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. Kaare, P., Mottus, R., & Konstabel, K. (2009). Pathological gambling in Estonia: Relationships with personality, self esteem, emotional states and cognitive ability. Journal of Gambling Studies, 25(3), 377–390.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Karanci, A. N., Dirik, G., & Yorulmaz, O. (2007). Reliability and validity studies of Turkish translation of Eysenck Personality Questionnaire Revised-Abbreviated. Turkish Psychiatry Journal, 18(3), 254–261.Google Scholar
  25. Kessler, R. C., Hwang, I., Labries, R., Petukhova, M., Sampson, N. A., Winters, K. C., et al. (2008). DSM-IV pathological gambling in the National Comorbidity Survey Replication. Psychological Medicine, 38(9), 1351–1360.CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 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), 1184–1198.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. MacKillop, J., Anderson, E. J., Castelda, B. A., Mattson, R. E., & Donovick, P. J. (2006). Convergent validity of measures of cognitive distortions, impulsivity, and time perspective with pathological gambling. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 20(1), 75–79.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. Matthews, N., Farnsworth, B., & Griffiths, M. D. (2009). A pilot study of problem gambling among student online gamblers: mood states as predictors of problematic behavior. CyberPsychology and Behavior, 12(6), 741–746.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Miller, N. V., & Currie, S. R. (2008). A Canadian population level analysis of the roles of irrational gambling cognitions and risky gambling practices as correlates of gambling intensity and pathological gambling. Journal of Gambling Studies, 24(3), 257–274.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Mitrovic, D. V., & Brown, J. (2009). Poker mania and problem gambling: A study of distorted cognitions, motivation and alexithymia. Journal of Gambling Studies, 25(4), 489–502.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Moodie, C. (2008). Student gambling, erroneous cognitions, and awareness of treatment in Scotland. Journal of Gambling Issues, 21, 30–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Myrseth, H., Brunborg, G. S., & Eidem, M. (2010). Differences in cognitive distortions between pathological and non-pathological gamblers with preferences for chance or skill games. Journal of Gambling Studies, 26(4), 561–569.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. Namrata, R., & Oei, T. P. S. (2009). Factors associated with the severity of gambling problems in community gambling treatment agency. International Journal of Mental Health Addiction, 7(1), 124–137.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Oei, T. P. S., Lin, J., & Raylu, N. (2007). Validation of the Chinese Version of the Gambling Related Cognitions Scale (GRCS-C). Journal of Gambling Studies, 23(3), 309–322.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. Petry, N. (2003). A comparison of treatment-seeking pathological gamblers based on preferred gambling activity. Addiction, 98(5), 645–655.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. Petry, N. M., Litt, M. D., Kadden, R., & Ledgerwood, D. M. (2007). Do coping skills mediate the relationship between cognitive-behavioral therapy and reductions in gambling in pathological gamblers? Addiction, 102(8), 1280–1291.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. Petry, N., & Mallya, S. (2004). Gambling participation and problems among employees at a university health center. Journal of Gambling Studies, 20(2), 155–170.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. Raylu, N., & Oei, T. P. (2002). Pathological gambling: A comprehensive review. Clinical Psychology Review, 22(7), 1009–1061.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. Raylu, N., & Oei, T. P. S. (2004a). The Gambling Related Cognitions Scale (GRCS): Development, confirmatory factor validation and psychometric properties. Addiction, 99(6), 757–769.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. Raylu, N., & Oei, T. P. (2004b). Role of culture in gambling and problem gambling. Clinical Psychology Review, 23(8), 1087–1114.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. Sylvain, C., Ladouceur, R., & Boisvert, J. M. (1997). Cognitive and behavioral treatment of pathological gambling: A controlled study. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 65(5), 727–732.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. Toneatto, T. (1999). Cognitive psychopathology of problem gambling. Substance Use and Misuse, 34(11), 1593–1604.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. Toneatto, T., Blitz-Miller, T., Calderwood, K., Dragonetti, R., & Tsanos, A. (1997). Cognitive distortions in heavy gambling. Journal of Gambling Studies, 13(3), 253–266.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. Watson, D., Clark, L. A., & Tellegen, A. (1988). Development and validation of brief measures positive and negative affect: The PANAS scales. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54(6), 1063–1070.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. Wiebe, J., Cox, B., & Falkowski-Ham, A. (2003b). Psychological and social factors associated with problem gambling in Ontario: A one year follow-up study. Accessed 15 Jan 2012.
  46. Wiebe, J., Single, E., & Falkowski-Ham, A. (2003a). Exploring the evolution of problem gambling: A one year follow-up study. Accessed 15 Jan 2012.
  47. Wonq, S. S., & Tsanq, S. K. (2012). Validation of the Chinese version of the Gambler’s Belief Questionnaire (GBQ-C). Journal of Gambling Studies, 28(4), 561–572.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Psychology, Faculty of Arts and ScienceMaltepe UniversityIstanbulTurkey
  2. 2.Department of PsychologyMiddle East Technical UniversityAnkaraTurkey

Personalised recommendations