Journal of Gambling Studies

, Volume 18, Issue 2, pp 161–183 | Cite as

Adolescent Accounts of the UK National Lottery and Scratchcards: An Analysis Using Q-Sorts

  • Richard T. A. Wood
  • Mark D. Griffiths
  • Jeffrey L. Derevensky
  • Rina Gupta
Article

Abstract

The study examined adolescents' accounts of the UK National Lottery and scratchcards. Q-sorts were used to examine the views of 62 participants aged between 11 and 15 years of age. Findings identified four distinct accounts in relation to the National Lottery (Moral Opposition, Luck Seeking, Rationalist, & Uncertainty), and four distinct accounts in relation to scratchcards (Scepticism, Thrill-Seeking, Rationalist, & Libertarian). Some of the accounts identified described the UK National Lottery and scratchcards as bona fide forms of gambling. Reports indicated that adolescents were pessimistic about the chances of winning large sums of money, while other accounts demonstrated gambling misperceptions particularly in relation to their belief in luck and the laws of probability. It is argued that to fully understand why adolescents take part in these activities it is important to consider the diverse ways that adolescents represent these activities. These differing representations will have consequences for measures aimed at reducing, preventing, or treating adolescent problem gambling. The utility of Q-sorts as a technique for examining the views of problem and non-problem gamblers is also discussed.

adolescence gambling accounts The National Lottery scratchcards Q-methodology 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

REFERENCES

  1. Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  2. Browne, B. A., & Brown, D. J. (1993). Using students as subjects in research on state lottery gambling, Psychological Reports, 72, 1295–1298.Google Scholar
  3. Browne, B. A., & Brown, D. J. (1994). Predictors of lottery gambling among American college students, Journal of Social Psychology, 134, 339–347.Google Scholar
  4. Derevensky, J. L., & Gupta, R. (1996). A developmental perspective of gambling behavior in children and adolescents. Journal of Gambling Studies, 12, 49–66.Google Scholar
  5. Fisher, S. E. (1992). Measuring pathological gambling in children: The case of fruit machines in the U.K. Journal of Gambling Studies, 8, 263–285.Google Scholar
  6. Fisher, S.E. (1993). Gambling and pathological gambling in adolescents. Journal of Gambling Studies, 9, 277–288.Google Scholar
  7. Fisher, S. E., & Balding, J. (1998). Gambling and problem gambling among young people in England and Wales. A report commissioned by the Office of the National Lottery.Google Scholar
  8. Griffiths, M. D. (1995). Adolescent gambling. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  9. Griffiths, M.D. & Wood, R.T.A. (2001). The psychology of lottery gambling. International Gambling Studies, 1, 27–44.Google Scholar
  10. Gupta, R. & Derevensky, J. L. (1996). The relationship between gambling and video-game playing behavior in children and adolescents. Journal of Gambling Studies, 12, 375–395.Google Scholar
  11. Gupta, R. & Derevensky, J. L. (1997). Familial and social influences on juvenile gambling behavior. Journal of Gambling Studies, 13, 179–192.Google Scholar
  12. Ide-Smith, S. & Lea, S. E. G. (1988). Gambling in young adolescents. Journal of Gambling Behaviour, 4, 110–118.Google Scholar
  13. Keynes, J.M. (1921). A treatise on probability. London: Wiley.Google Scholar
  14. Leary, J. (1995). Stress and coping strategies in community psychiatric nurses—a Q-methodological study. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 21, 230–237.Google Scholar
  15. McKeown, B., & Thomas, D. (1988). Q-Methodology. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  16. Shaffer, H. J., & Hall, M. N. (1996). Estimating the prevalence of pathological gambling disorders: A quantitative synthesis and guide toward standard gambling nomenclature. Journal of Gambling Studies, 12, 193–214.Google Scholar
  17. Stainton Rogers, R. (1995). Q-Methodology. In, J. A., Smith, Harre, R. & Van Langenhove, L. (Eds). Rethinking methods in psychology. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  18. Stainton-Rogers, R. (1988, September). Deconstructing addiction. Paper presented in the symposium “Discourse, Social Construction and Health” at the Annual Conference of the Social Psychology Section of The British Psychological Society, Canterbury.Google Scholar
  19. Stainton-Rogers, R. & Kitzinger (1995). A decalogue of human rights: what happens when you let people speak, Social Science Information, 34, 87–106.Google Scholar
  20. Stainton-Rogers, W. (1991). Explaining health and illness: An exploration of diversity. Hemel Hempstead: Harvester Wheatsheaf.Google Scholar
  21. Stenner, P & Marshall, H. (1995). A Q-methodological study of reblliousness. European Journal of Social Psychology, 25, 621–636.Google Scholar
  22. Winters, K. C., Stinchfield, R. D., Fulkerson, J. (1993). Patterns and characteristics of adolescent gambling, Journal of Gambling Studies, 9, 371–386.Google Scholar
  23. Wood, R. T. A. & Griffiths, M. D. (1998). The acquisition, development and maintenance of lottery and scratchcard gambling in adolescence. Journal of Adolescence, 21, 265–273.Google Scholar
  24. Wynne, H. J., Smith, G. J. & Jacobs, D. F. (1996). Adolescent gambling and problem gambling in Alberta. Report prepared for the Alberta Alcohol and Drug AbuseCommission. Edmonton; Wynne Resources LTD.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Human Sciences Press, Inc. 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • Richard T. A. Wood
    • 1
  • Mark D. Griffiths
    • 1
  • Jeffrey L. Derevensky
    • 2
  • Rina Gupta
    • 2
  1. 1.Psychology DivisionNottingham Trent UniversityNottinghamUK
  2. 2.McGill UniversityCanada

Personalised recommendations