Abstract
Gambling help services typically evaluate treatment outcomes using self-reported responses and measurements. However, gamblers’ conceptualisations and prioritisations with respect to these measurements may shift over time. Thus, changes in the self-reported responses may not always reflect true change in the individuals. This study investigated for response shift in self-report measures of psychological distress and impairment in 293 help-seeking problem gamblers. We used confirmatory factor analysis to model data structures from pre-treatment to post-treatment. The findings indicated that a response shift had occurred. Two items became less important and one item became more important in measuring psychological distress. Measurement invariance was achieved for the complete set of items for impairment. These findings provide a more in-depth understanding of the nature of self-report outcomes in otherwise routinely collected data.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Acock, A. (2013). Discovering structural equation modeling using Stata. College Station, TX: Stata Press.
American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental health disorders: DSM-5 (5th ed.). Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Publishing.
Andrews, G., & Slade, T. (2001). Interpreting scores on the Kessler psychological distress scale (K10). Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health, 25, 494–497.
Australian Mental Health Outcomes Classification Network. (2013). Mental health national outcomes and casemix collection: Technical specification of state and territory reporting requirements, version 1.6. Canberra: Department of Health and Ageing.
Balodis, S., Thomas, A., & Moore, S. (2014). Sensitivity to reward and punishment: Horse race and EGM gamblers compared. Personality and Individual Differences, 56, 29–33.
Battersby, M., Oakes, J., Tolchard, B., Forbes, A., & Pols, R. (2008). Cognitive behavioural treatment for problem gamblers. In M. Zangeneh, A. Blaszczynski, & N. E. Turner (Eds.), In the pursuit of winning (pp. 179–197). New York: Springer.
Blaszczynski, A., & Nower, L. (2002). A pathways model of problem and pathological gambling. Addiction, 97(5), 487–499.
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. doi:10.1007/s10899-009-9142-z.
Brooks, R. T., Beard, J., & Steel, Z. (2006). Factor structure and interpretation of the K10. Psychological Assessment, 18(1), 62.
Carlbring, P., Jonsson, J., Josephson, H., & Forsberg, L. (2010). Motivational interviewing versus cognitive behavioral group therapy in the treatment of problem and pathological gambling: A randomized controlled trial. Cognitive Behaviour Therapy, 39(2), 92.
Carlbring, P., & Smit, F. (2008). Randomized trial of internet-delivered self-help with telephone support for pathological gamblers. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 76(6), 1090–1094.
Deane, F. P., Kelly, P. J., Crowe, T. P., Lyons, G. C., & Cridland, E. K. (2014). The feasibility of telephone follow-up interviews for monitoring treatment outcomes of australian residential drug and alcohol treatment programs. Substance Abuse, 35(1), 21–29.
Dowling, N. (2006). Treatment of female pathological gambling: The efficacy of a cognitive-behavioural approach. Journal of Gambling Studies, 22(4), 355.
Dowling, N., Smith, D., & Thomas, T. (2007). A comparison of individual and group cognitive-behavioural treatment for female pathological gambling. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 45(9), 2192–2202.
Fokkema, M., Smits, N., Kelderman, H., & Cuijpers, P. (2013). Response shifts in mental health interventions: An illustration of longitudinal measurement invariance. Psychological Assessment, 25(2), 520.
Gooding, P., & Tarrier, N. (2009). A systematic review and meta-analysis of cognitive-behavioural interventions to reduce problem gambling: Hedging our bets? Behaviour Research and Therapy, 47(7), 592–607.
Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1–55.
Jackson, A., Francis, K., Byrne, G., & Christensen, D. (2013). Leisure substitution and problem gambling: Report of a proof of concept group intervention. International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction, 11(1), 64–74.
Kline, R. B. (2011). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling. New York: Guilford Press.
Ladouceur, R., Sylvain, C., Boutin, C., Lachance, S., Doucet, C., Leblond, J., & Jacques, C. (2001). Cognitive treatment of pathological gambling. Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 189, 774–780.
Ledgerwood, D. M., & Petry, N. M. (2006). Psychological experience of gambling and subtypes of pathological gamblers. Psychiatry Research, 144(1), 17–27.
Marceaux, J. C., & Melville, C. L. (2011). Twelve-step facilitated versus mapping-enhanced cognitive-behavioral therapy for pathological gambling: A controlled study. Journal of Gambling Studies, 27(1), 171–190.
Meade, A. W., Johnson, E. C., & Braddy, P. W. (2008). Power and sensitivity of alternative fit indices in tests of measurement invariance. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93(3), 568.
Melville, C. L., Davis, C. S., Matzenbacher, D. L., & Clayborne, J. (2004). Node-link-mapping-enhanced group treatment for pathological gambling. Addictive Behaviors, 29(1), 73–87.
Mundt, J. C., Marks, I. M., Shear, M. K., & Greist, J. M. (2002). The work and social adjustment scale: A simple measure of impairment in functioning. British Journal of Psychiatry, 180(5), 461–464.
Oort, F. J. (2005). Using structural equation modeling to detect response shifts and true change. Quality of Life Research, 14(3), 587–598.
Pallesen, S., Mitsem, M., Kvale, G., Johnsen, B.-H., & Molde, H. (2005). Outcome of psychological treatments of pathological gambling: A review and meta-analysis. Addiction, 100(10), 1412–1422.
Pasche, S. C., Sinclair, H., Collins, P., Pretorius, A., Grant, J. E., & Stein, D. J. (2013). The effectiveness of a cognitive-behavioral intervention for pathological gambling: A country-wide study. Annals of Clinical Psychiatry, 25(4), 250–256.
Petry, N., Ammerman, Y., Bohl, J., Doersch, A., Gay, H., Kadden, R., & Molina, C. (2006). Cognitive-behavioral therapy for pathological gamblers. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 74(3), 555–567.
Petry, N., Weinstock, J., Ledgerwood, D., & Morasco, B. (2008). A randomized trial of brief interventions for problem and pathological gamblers. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 76(2), 318–328.
Raylu, N., & Oei, T. (2004). The gambling related cognitions scale (GRCS): Development, confirmatory factor validation and psychometric properties. Addiction, 99(6), 757–769.
Schattner, A. (2014). The three facets of the patient’s history. The Lancet, 384(9958), 1928.
Slade, T., Grove, R., & Burgess, P. (2011). Kessler psychological distress scale: Normative data from the 2007 Australian national survey of mental health and wellbeing. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry, 45, 308–316.
Smith, D., Harvey, P., Battersby, M., Pols, R., Oakes, J., & Baigent, M. (2010). Treatment outcomes and predictors of drop out for problem gamblers in South Australia: A cohort study. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry, 44, 911–920.
Sörbom, D. (1989). Model modification. Psychometrika, 54(3), 371–384.
Sprangers, M. A., & Schwartz, C. E. (1999). Integrating response shift into health-related quality of life research: A theoretical model. Social Science and Medicine, 48(11), 1507–1515.
StataCorp. (2013). Stata: Release 13. Statistical software. College Station, TX: StataCorp LP.
Terwee, C. B., Bot, S. D. M., de Boer, M. R., van der Windt, D. A., Knol, D. L., Dekker, J., et al. (2007). Quality criteria were proposed for measurement properties of health status questionnaires. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 60(1), 34–42.
Thomas, A. C., Allen, F. C., & Phillips, J. (2009). Electronic gaming machine gambling: Measuring motivation. Journal of Gambling Studies, 25(3), 343–355.
Turner, N. E., Jain, U., Spence, W., & Zangeneh, M. (2008). Pathways to pathological Gambling: Component analysis of variables related to pathological gambling. International Gambling Studies, 8(3), 281–298. doi:10.1080/14459790802405905.
Vandenberg, R. J., & Lance, C. E. (2000). A review and synthesis of the measurement invariance literature: Suggestions, practices, and recommendations for organizational research. Organizational Research Methods, 3(1), 4–70.
Walker, M., Toneatto, T., Potenza, M. N., Petry, N., Ladouceur, R., Hodgins, D. C., et al. (2006). A framework for reporting outcomes in problem gambling treatment research: The Banff, Alberta Consensus. Addiction, 101(4), 504–511.
Westbrook, D., & Kirk, J. (2005). The clinical effectiveness of cognitive behaviour therapy: Outcome for a large sample of adults treated in routine practice. Behaviour Research and Therapy, 43(10), 1243–1261.
Wong, D., Chung, C., Wu, J., Tang, J., & Lau, P. (2015). A preliminary study of an integrated and culturally attuned cognitive behavioral group treatment for Chinese Problem gamblers in Hong Kong. Journal of Gambling Studies, 31(3), 1015–1027.
Acknowledgments
The Statewide Gambling Therapy Service is funded through Gamblers Rehabilitation Fund administered by the Department for Communities and Social Inclusion and the Office for Problem Gambling in South Australia. In addition to this funding for service provision, the research presented here has been conducted through the Flinders Centre for Gambling Research.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
None to declare.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Smith, D., Woodman, R., Harvey, P. et al. Self-Perceived Distress and Impairment in Problem Gamblers: A Study of Pre- to Post-treatment Measurement Invariance. J Gambl Stud 32, 1065–1078 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10899-016-9598-6
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10899-016-9598-6