Advertisement

Using the CPGI to Determine Problem Gambling Prevalence in Australia: Measurement Issues

  • Alun C. Jackson
  • Harold Wynne
  • Nicki A. Dowling
  • Jane E. Tomnay
  • Shane A. Thomas
Article

Abstract

Most states and territories in Australia have adopted the Problem Gambling Severity Index (PGSI) of the Canadian Problem Gambling Index as the standard measure of problem gambling in their prevalence studies and research programs. However, notwithstanding this attempted standardisation, differences in sampling and recruitment methodologies and in some cases the modification of the scoring methods used in the PGSI have lead to substantial difficulties in comparison of the prevalence rates obtained in different studies. This paper focuses on how these two actions may significantly underestimate the true prevalence percent of problem gambling in Australian studies of the prevalence of problem gambling. It is recommended that the original and validated version of the PGSI is used in future Australian prevalence studies and that prevalence in community studies is studied across the whole community not arbitrarily restricted sub-samples. The adoption of valid scoring methods and unbiased sampling procedures will lead to more accurate and comparable prevalence studies.

Keywords

Problem gambling Pathological gambling Prevalence Canadian Problem Gambling Index Problem Gambling Severity Index 

References

  1. Abbott, M. W., & Volberg, R. A. (2006). The measurement of adult problem and pathological gambling. International Gambling Studies, 6(2), 175–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. AC Nielson. (2007). Prevalence of gambling and problem gambling in New South Wales. Sydney: NSW Office of Liquor, Gaming and Racing.Google Scholar
  3. Arthur, D., Tong, W. L., Chen, C. P., Ai, Y. H., 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, 441–450.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Battersby, M. W., Thomas, L., Tolchard, B., & Esterman, A. (2002). The South Oaks Gambling Screen: a review with reference to Australian use. Journal of Gambling Studies, 18, 257–271.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Brown, D., Patton, D., Dhaliwal, J., Pankratz, C., & Broszeit, B. (2002). Gambling involvement and problem gambling in Manitoba. Winnipeg: Addictions Foundation of Manitoba.Google Scholar
  6. Cox, B. J., Yu, N., Afifi, T. O., & Ladouceur, R. (2005). A national survey of gambling problems in Canada. Canadian Journal of Psychiatry, 50, 213–217.Google Scholar
  7. Doiron, J. (2006). Gambling and problem gambling in Prince Edward Island. Submitted to Prince Edward Island Department of Health.Google Scholar
  8. Ferris, J., & Wynne, H. J. (2001a). The Canadian Problem Gambling Index. Ottawa: Canadian Centre on Substance Abuse.Google Scholar
  9. Ferris, J., & Wynne, H. J. (2001b). The Canadian Problem Gambling Index: Users manual. Ottawa: Canadian Centre on Substance Abuse.Google Scholar
  10. Gambino, B., & Lesieur, H. (2006). The South Oaks Gambling Screen (SOGS): a rebuttal to critics. Journal of Gambling Issues, 17. Available: http://www.camh.net/egambling/issue17.
  11. Gambling Policy Directorate and Office of the Government Statistician. (2002). Queensland gambling household survey, 2001. Brisbane: Queensland Treasury.Google Scholar
  12. Gambling Policy Directorate and Office of the Government Statistician. (2006). Queensland gambling household survey, 2003–04. Brisbane: Queensland Treasury.Google Scholar
  13. Gambling Policy Directorate and Office of the Government Statistician. (2008). Queensland gambling household survey, 2006–07. Brisbane: Queensland Treasury.Google Scholar
  14. Govini, R., Frisch, G. R., & Stinchfield, R. (2001). A critical review of screening and assessment instruments for problem gambling. Windsor: Problem Gambling Research Group, University of Windsor.Google Scholar
  15. Holtgraves, T. (2009). Evaluating the problem gambling severity index. Journal of Gambling Studies, 25, 105–120.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Ipsos-Reid and Gemini Research. (2003). British Columbia problem gambling prevalence study. British Columbia: Ministry of Public Safety and Solicitor General.Google Scholar
  17. Ipsos-Reid Public Affairs and Gemini Research. (2008). British Columbia problem gambling prevalence study: Final report. British Columbia: Ministry of Public Safety and Solicitor General.Google Scholar
  18. Lemaire, J., MacKay, T., & Patton, D. (2008). Manitoba gambling and problem gambling 2006. Winnipeg: Addictions Foundation of Manitoba.Google 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, 1184–1188.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Market Quest Research. (2009). 2009 Newfoundland and Labrador gambling prevalence study. Prepared for the Department of Health and Community Services. St. John’s: Government of Newfoundland and Labrador.Google Scholar
  21. Market Quest Research Group Inc. (2005). 2005 Newfoundland and Labrador gambling prevalence study. Prepared for the Department of Health and Community Services. St. John’s: Government of Newfoundland and Labrador.Google Scholar
  22. Marshall, K., & Wynne, H. (2003). Fighting the odds: Perspectives on labour and income. 4(12), Statistics Canada Catalogue no. 75-001-XIE.Google Scholar
  23. McCready, J., & Adlaf, E. (2006). Performance and enhancement of the Canadian Problem Gambling Index (CPGI): Report and recommendations. Ottowa: Canadian Centre on Substance Abuse and Healthy Horizons Consulting.Google Scholar
  24. McMillen, J., & Marshall, D. (2004). 2003 Victorian longitudinal community attitudes survey. Melbourne: Gambling Research Panel.Google Scholar
  25. McMillen, J., & Wenzel, M. (2006). Measuring problem gambling: assessment of three prevalence screens. International Gambling Studies, 6, 147–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. McMillen, J., Marshall, D., Wenzel, M., & Ahmed, A. (2004). Validation of the Victorian Gambling Screen. Melbourne: Gambling Research Panel.Google Scholar
  27. Ministry of Health. (2009). A focus on problem gambling: Results of the 2006/07 New Zealand health survey. Wellington: Ministry of Health.Google Scholar
  28. Neal, P., Delfabbro, P., & O’Neil, M. (2005). Problem gambling and harm: Towards a national definition. Melbourne: Gambling Research Australia.Google Scholar
  29. Productivity Commission. (1999). Australia’s gambling industries: Report no. 10. Canberra: AusInfo.Google Scholar
  30. School for Social and Policy Research. (2006). Northern Territory gambling prevalence survey 2005. Darwin: Charles Darwin University.Google Scholar
  31. Schrans, T., & Schellinck, T. (2004). 2003 Nova Scotia gambling prevalence study. Halifax: Nova Scotia Office of Health Promotion.Google Scholar
  32. Schrans, T., & Schellink, T. (2001). 2001 survey of gambling and problem gambling in New Brunswick. Fredericton: New Brunswick Department of Health and Wellness.Google Scholar
  33. Smith, G. J., & Wynne, H. J. (2002). Measuring gambling and problem gambling in Alberta using the Canadian Problem Gambling Index (CPGI): Final report. Edmonton: Alberta Gaming Research Institute.Google Scholar
  34. South Australian Centre for Economic Studies. (2008). Social and economic impact study into gambling in Tasmania. Adelaide: Author.Google Scholar
  35. South Australian Department for Families and Communities. (2006). Gambling prevalence in South Australia: October to December 2005. Adelaide: Author.Google Scholar
  36. Stinchfield, R. (2002). Reliability, validity, and classification accuracy of the South Oaks Gambling Screen (SOGS). Addictive Behaviors, 27, 1–19.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. Svetieva, E., & Walker, M. (2008). Inconsistency between concept and measurement: The Canadian Problem Gambling Index (CPGI). Journal of Gambling Issues, 22. Available: http://www.camh.net/egambling/issue22
  38. Thomas, S. A., & Jackson, A. C. (2008). Risk and protective factors, depression and comorbidities in problem gambling: A report to beyondblue. Melbourne: Problem Gambling Research and Treatment Centre. Retrieved July 5th 2009 from http://www.beyondblue.org.au/index.aspx?link_id=6.717.Google Scholar
  39. Thomas, S. A., Jackson, A. C., & Blaszczynski, A. (2003). Scoping study of the Victorian Gambling Screen. Melbourne: Gambling Research Panel.Google Scholar
  40. Volberg, R. A., & Bernhard, B. (2006). The 2006 study of gambling and problem gambling in New Mexico: Report to the Responsible Gaming Association of New Mexico. Northampton: Gemini Research.Google Scholar
  41. Walker, M. B., & Dickerson, M. G. (1996). The prevalence of problem and pathological gambling: a critical analysis. Journal of Gambling Studies, 12, 233–249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Wardle, H., Sproston, K., Orford, J., Erens, B., Griffiths, M., Constantine, R., et al. (2007). British gambling prevalence survey 2007. London: National Centre for Social Research.Google Scholar
  43. Wiebe, J., Single, E., & Falkowski-Ham, A. (2001). Measuring gambling and problem gambling in Ontario. Toronto: Canadian Centre on Substance Abuse and Responsible Gambling.Google Scholar
  44. Wiebe, J., Mun, P., & Kauffman, N. (2006). Gambling and problem gambling in Ontario 2005: Final report submitted to Ontario Problem Gambling Research Centre. Toronto: Responsible Gambling Council.Google Scholar
  45. Wynne, H. J. (2002). Gambling and problem gambling in Saskatchewan. Ottowa: Canadian Centre on Substance Abuse.Google Scholar
  46. Young, M., & Stevens, M. (2008). SOGS and CPGI: parallel comparison on a diverse population. Journal of Gambling Studies, 24, 337–356.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Alun C. Jackson
    • 1
  • Harold Wynne
    • 2
  • Nicki A. Dowling
    • 1
  • Jane E. Tomnay
    • 1
  • Shane A. Thomas
    • 3
  1. 1.Problem Gambling Research and Treatment CentreUniversity of MelbourneMelbourneAustralia
  2. 2.Wynne ResourcesAlbertaCanada
  3. 3.Problem Gambling Research and Treatment CentreMonash UniversityMelbourneAustralia

Personalised recommendations