|
|
ABSTRACT
The purpose of this study is to define 'problem gambling', provide a preliminary profile of the problem gambler in the state of Nevada, and offer the recommendations to the Nevada Council on Problem Gambling and future research.
Nevada legalized casino gambling in 1931, but no studies could be found relating to the prevalence of problem gambling or profiles of problem gamblers. This study will fill a void in the problem gambling literature by focusing on the profile of the problem gamblers in Nevada.
The results disclosed that the majority of the problem gamblers are married, white males, aged between 26 to 34, and the primary gambling activity is video poker. The majority of the callers knew of the helpline from the telephone book, they called for help for themselves, and more than half of them don't ask for further information from the Council. In addition, the majority of the gamblers are experiencing the following problems: problems with family or spouse, problems paying household bills, having debts from gambling, and borrowing money from family / friends.
INTRODUCTION
Eadington (1996), Professor at the University of Nevada-Reno, indicated there are three main historic arguments against gambling:
However, there has not been a commonly accepted definition of 'problem gambling' by industry representatives, scholars, practitioners, social scientists and other experts in the field. Sometimes, the term 'compulsive' reflects a political purpose more than a medical reality and is an inappropriate and inaccurate term describing the problem that some gamblers have (Bybee, 1988). Therefore, the statistics on problem gamblers and the social costs of problem gambling vary. For instance, gambling proponents pointed out that gambling addiction will be somewhere between one and two percent (Durand, 1995); gambling opponents argued that up to five percent of the adult population and eight percent of teenage population have some form of problem or pathological behavior (Longmman, 1994).
There is a need for research on problem gambling to develop a definition of a problem gambler and develop standards for measuring problem gambling. As Volberg (1996), president of Gemini Research, indicated the rapid expansion of legalized gambling in United States has produced tremendous demands for information about the number and characteristics of problem gamblers in the general population. Since 1980, fifteen states have conducted state wide prevalence studies of problem gambling in the United State. Additionally, there have been studies on the profile and characteristics of problem gamblers. Nevada legalized casino gambling in 1931, but no studies could be found relating to the prevalence of problem gambling or profiles of problem gamblers. This study will fill a void in the problem gambling literature by focusing on the profile of the problem gamblers in Nevada.
The Importance of the Study
This will be the first study of its kind in Nevada. The results of this research will provide useful information for the Nevada Council on Problem Gambling by enabling the Council to assess the efforts of its task force. It will also provide policy-makers with an information base upon which to assess the nature of the social problem and its social cost. The study also intends to arouse the gaming industry to take the proactive approach to problem gambling.
Research Objectives
There are three objectives of this research:
A lot of research regarding problem gambling indicates that the lack of consensus in the definition of problem gambling has been hindering the further work force for problem gambling. "The issue of problem gambling is fraught with inconsistencies, varying interpretations of data and obvious omissions of much-needed information. Compounding this situation is a lack of definitions agreed to by industry representatives, scholars, practitioners, social scientists and other experts in the field. As a result, communication is difficult when attempting to both describe the problem itself and the various means to alleviate the effects of problem gambling on employees, customers and the community at large." ( American Gaming Association, 1996).
Therefore, to look for workable definitions for "problem gambling" and "compulsive gambling" is imperative. According to the definition by the American Psychiatric Association, there are four major gambling behaviors: social gambling, pathological gambling, compulsive gambling, and problem gambling.
Social gambling can be appropriately described as "gaming." It is a kind of entertainment which provides enjoyment and relaxation to the players. Typically social gambling occurs with friends or colleagues and lasts for a limited period of time, with predetermined acceptable losses.
Pathological gambling is the most severe type of gambling problem and has been classified as an impulse-control disorder by the American Psychiatric Association. The essential feature of impulse-control disorder is the" failure to resist an impulse, drive, or temptation to perform an act that is harmful to the person or to others". Pathological gambling is a persistent and recurrent maladaptive gambling behavior that disrupts personal, family or vocational pursuits.
"Compulsive gambling is an illness, progressive in its nature, which can never be cured, but can be arrested. A compulsive gambler is described as a person whose gambling has caused growing and continuing problems in any department of his or her life" (Gamblers Anonymous, 1996).
Problem gambling is a habitual urge to gamble that, if left untreated, becomes worse over time. The problem gambler becomes dependent on gambling and ultimately loses the ability to control his or her gambling.
Problem gambling can be measured by the SOGS checklist. People who have a score of "3" or "4" on the 20-question instrument fall within the category of "problem gambler." Problem gambling refers to the gambling behavior which creates a mild to moderate problem, for the individual, but excludes more severe consequences included under pathological gambling, compulsive gambling, and addictive gambling. However, for problem gamblers gambling becomes problematic and they have the potential to be compulsive gamblers.
Actually, the distinction between pathological gambling and problem gambling is not very clear. There are two popular ways to look at this term:
Problem gambling refers to gambling behavior which in varying degree is uncontrollable, with disrupting effects on family, social and work life. It includes "pathological gambling," a more server condition which has element of compulsive and addiction similar to substance abuse, and is recognized as a medical disorder by the American Psychiatric Association. Therapists commonly treat problem gambling as a chronic and progressive illness; and
Problem gambling is casino gaming behavior which both (a) has element of compulsiveness, and (b) interferes with business operations or employee performance (American Gaming Association, 1996).
In this study, problem gambling is defined from the viewpoint of the Nevada Council on Problem Gambling. Similar to the definition provided by the Responsible Gaming Resource Guide from American Gaming Association, problem gambling is any gambling behavior that is damaging to the individual, the family, the community, the work place or the business. It means that the term "problem gambling" includes pathological gambling, compulsive gambling, and addictive gambling, the more severe problems along with the less severe situation of problem gambling itself.
The Nevada Council on Problem Gambling wants to help anyone who is suffering from gambling problems regardless of severity. This broad definition serves this purpose. However, this broad definition should not be used by the gambling opponents to calculate the social cost of the problem gambling.
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY AND DATA ANALYSIS
The Data and its Resource
The data for this analysis came from the callers who called the 800 helpline. This data was collected by the Nevada Council on Problem Gambling. The time frame during which this data was collected dated from September 1996 to April 1997.
Questionnaire Design
The questionnaire was designed by the Nevada Council on Problem Gambling. This questionnaire adopted nominal format.
Methodology
The Statistical Package for Social Science (SPSS) was utilized in the analysis of the data collected. The frequency analysis indicates the number of occurrences under each category of the question being determined. The participants' demographic backgrounds were displayed by the frequency analysis.
This questionnaire adopted nominal format; therefore, Cross-tabulations (Chi-square) was used to examine the correlation between variables, such as the relationship between the gender and the game preference of the gamblers.
Desired Level of Significance
A significant level can be set up for any degree of probability. Conventionally, a 0.05 significant level is the accepted level for business research. This study used this value (0.05) as a threshold to decide whether there is a significant difference among different groups of variables. Besides, due to the small size of the valid cases, even the data was collapsed, some groups just didn't have enough observers. Therefore, this study reported the significance even though Chi-square tests of some cells have expected counts less than 5.
DATA ANALYSIS AND RESULTS
Demographics of the Problem Gamblers
The gambler's gender
Regarding the gambler's gender, among the 114 valid cases : 64% are male and 36% are female.
The gambler's age
Regarding the gambler's age, among the 97 valid cases: 7.2% are between 18 to 25, 36.1% are between 26 to 34, 22.7% are between 35 to 44, 19.6% are between 45 to 54, 11.3% are between 55 to 64, and 3.1% are 65 and over.
The gambler's marital status
Regarding the gambler's marital status, among the 111 valid cases, 22.5% are single, 53.2% are married, 7.2% are divorce, 2.7% are separated, 13.5% are cohabiting, and 0.9% are others.
The gambler 's primary gambling activity
Regarding the gambler's primary gambling activity, among the 101 valid cases, 1% play horse racing, dog track, 4% play sports betting, 13.9% play slots, 56.4% play video poker, 18.8% play table games, and 6% play others.
The gambler's ethnicity
Regarding the gambler's ethnicity, among the 82 valid cases: 75.6% are Caucasian, 7.3% are Africa American, 12.2% are Hispanic, 3.7% are Asian, and 1.2% are other.
The gambler's residence
Regarding the gambler's residence, among the 116 valid cases, 85.3% live in Las Vegas or Henderson, 9.5% live in the other cities of Nevada, and 5.2% live in other states.
The problems which the gambler is experiencing
Among the 96 valid cases, 71.9% have the problem with family or spouse due to gambling. Among the 92 valid cases, 27.2% have the problems with job or school due to gambling. Among the 100 valid cases, 72% have problems paying household bills. Among the 95 valid cases, 71.6% have debts from gambling. Among the 92 valid cases, 70.7% have borrowed money from family or friends. Among the 73 valid cases, 11% have borrowed money from loan sharks. Among the 72 valid cases, 22.2% lost friends because of gambling. Among the 82 valid cases, 26.8% committed illegal acts due to gambling.
Whom the callers called the helplme for
There are 118 callers in this data set. Among these 83 valid cases: 60.2% call for self 18.1% call for spouse, 3.6% call for children, 1.2% call for parents, 6% call for other relatives, 8.4% call for friends and co-workers, and 2.4% call for others.
How the callers know about the helpline
Among the 108 valid cases, 10.2% of the callers learned about the helpline from casino signs or brochures, 0.9% from newspapers, 0.9% from the radio, 0.9% from the television, 68.5% from telephone book, 4.6% from friends and family, 13.9% from others.
Whether the callers ask for further information
Among the 117 valid cases, 47.9% of the callers asked the Council to send them further information.
Summary of the Findings
The majority of the problem gamblers are married, white males, aged between 26 to 34, and the primary gambling activity is video poker.
72% of the Clark County general population said that they gambled at least occasionally. The following respondent subgroups were more likely than others to say they gambled at least once a week: men, respondents aged 50 or over, separated and divorced respondents (Las Vegas Convention and Visitors Authority, 1996). In other words, the distributions of the problem gamblers' age groups and marital status differ from those of the general gambling population's.
The majority of the callers knew of the helpline from the telephone book, they called for help for themselves, and more than half of them don't ask for further information from the Council. In addition, the majority of the gamblers are experiencing the following problems: problems with family or spouse, problems paying household bills, having debts from gambling, and borrowing money from family/ friends.
In this study, 85% of the problem gamblers live in the Clark County and 56.4% of their primary gambling activity is video poker and 13.9% are slots. These results are consistent with the Clark County's general gambling population's. Among Clark County's general gambling population, 48% of them play video poker most often and 26% of them play slot most often (Las Vegas Convention and Visitors Authority, 1996).
Among the Clark Country general gambling population, "women were much likely to say they played video poker and bingo most often. Men were more likely to say they played blackjack, craps, and racebook / sportsbook most often" (Las Vegas Convention and Visitors Authority, 1996). But, video poker is the primary gambling activity for both male and female problem gamblers. However, among the male problem gamblers, 34.9% of their primary gambling activity is table games, and only 2.7% of the female problem gamblers' primary gambling activity is table games.
When comparing to the Texas network's and Maryland's statistics, there are two obvious difference of the demographic data between the problem gamblers in Nevada and in other states. First, the Nevada problem gamblers' primary gambling activity (video poker) differs much from the primary gambling activity of the problem gamblers in the other states. Second, the percentage of Hispanic problem gamblers in Nevada is much higher than other states'.
There is a relationship between the gambler's ethnicity and whether the gambler loses friends due to gambling. More Caucasian gamblers have this problem than other ethnic gamblers do.
There is a relationship between the gambler's ethnicity and whether the gambler commits illegal acts due to gambling. More Caucasian gamblers have this problem than other ethnic gamblers do.
There is a relationship between the gambler's gender and the gambler's primary gambling activity. 86.5% of the female problem gamblers primarily play video poker and 2.7% of them play table games. Among the male problem gamblers, 39.7% primarily play video poker and 34.9% of them play table games.
There is a relationship between the gambler's gender and whom the callers call the helpline for. More female gamblers called for self than called for spouses. Also, the gambler's gender influenced whether the gambler has problems paying household bills, borrowing money from a loan sharks. More male gamblers have these problems than female gamblers do.
There is a relationship between the gambler's primary gambling activity and whom the callers called the helpline for. More video poker gamblers called for help for themselves than others do. Also, whether the gambler has problems with job or school is influenced by the gambler's primary gambling activity. More gamblers whose primary gambling activities are not video poker, slot, or table games have this problem than others do.
There is a relationship between the gambler's marital status and whether the gambler has problems with family or spouse. More gamblers' whose marital statuses are not single or married have this problem than the gamblers who are single or married.
There is a relationship between the relationship between the gambler's marital and the callers and whether the callers ask for further information. More callers calling the helpline for the gamblers whose marital status are not single or married asked for further information than callers calling the helplme for the married or the single gamblers do.
There is a relationship between the gambler's residence and whether the gambler has problems with job or school. More gamblers who live in other states have this problem than the gamblers who live in Nevada.
There is a relationship between the gambler's residence and whether the gambler lost friends due to gambling. More gamblers who live in other states have this problem than the gamblers who live in Nevada.
The relationship between the gamblers and the callers influenced whether the callers asked for further information. More callers calling the helpline for spouses asked for further information than callers calling the helpline for self or others do.
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Conclusions
There are several limitations of this study:
1. Because of the total 118 small sample size, the results may not be representative of the entire population.
2. Due to the lack of the statistics of the general gambling population
in Nevada, some comparisons between the non-problem gamblers and problem
gamblers can not be conducted. For instance, there is no statistics of
the Hispanic non-problem gambling population; therefore, the study can
not find out whether the high percentage of the Hispanic problem gamblers
is inproportionate or not?
|
|
|
Pearson-Chi Square (Significant at 0.05 confidence level) |
| ethnicity & whether the gambler loses friends due to gambling | 3.947 | .047 |
| ethnicity & whether the gambler commits illegal acts due to gambling | 6.204 | .045 |
| gender & gambler's primary gambling activity | 21.999 | .000 |
| gender & whom the callers called the helpline for | 12.102 | .002 |
| gender & whether the gambler has problems paying household bills | 4.516 | .034 |
| gender & whether the gambler borrows money form loan sharks | 5.590 | .018 |
| gambler's primary gambling activity & whom the callers called the helpline for | 16.516 | .011 |
| gambler's primary gambling activity & whether the gambler has problem with job or school | 15.012 | .002 |
| gambler's marital status & whether the callers asked for further information | 8.86 | .012 |
| gambler's marital status & whether the gambler has problem with family or spouse | 24.96 | .000 |
| gambler's residence & whether the gambler has problems with job or school | 11.049 | .004 |
| gambler's residence & whether the gambler loses friends due to gambling | 6.712 | .035 |
| whom the callers called the helpline for & whether asked for further information | 6.833 | .033 |
4. Due to the nominal format questionnaire, only descriptive statistics
were generated. The descriptive analysis can only provide the frequency
and crosstab information and can't provide inferential sources. Therefore,
the results can only present the phenomenon, but can't figure out why this
phenomenon happens.
Nevertheless, the purpose of the study has been achieved. The workable
definition of problem gambling has been defined from the prospective of
the Nevada Council on Problem Gambling. Although due to the small sample
size of the data, the results were not generalizable. The results of the
study provide preliminary profile of the problem gamblers in the state
of Nevada. According to the results, recommendations to the Nevada Council
on Problem Gambling have been made.
Recommendations
Recommendations for the Nevada Council on Problem Gambling
In average, the Nevada Council on Problem Gambling received 15 to 20 calls every month. It is a very small volume of calls. In Maryland, the average calls per month is 150 in 1990. Nebraska Council on Compulsive Gambling received 3,550 calls in 1996. The Council should work with the legislature, to address the adverse effects of gambling addiction on the citizens of the state (Lorenz, 1990) and advertise the toll-free 800 number as well.
Lorenz (1990) recommended that the Maryland's" legislature mandate that the warnings of compulsive gambling and the Hotline toll-free 800 number be printed on all race track tickets, in racing forms, and on all lottery promotional materials, including billboards and newspaper advertisements." The Council should also encourage the casinos to put appropriate signs in visible places and print the warning signs and toll-free number in all related printed materials and advertisements.
The results of the data analysis show that 68.5% of the callers knew of the helpline from the telephone books. Therefore, the Council should widely promote the helpline by more media, such as in the newspaper, radio, television to increase the exposure so as to reach the broader audiences.
Video poker is the main problem for the Nevada problem gamblers, so
the Council should place more emphasis on the video poker players. At the
same time, the Council should conduct a thorough research to investigate
this matter. The current data showed that video poker players are more
willing to call the helpline when compare with the other groups of problem
gamblers. If the results represent reality of the population's primary
gambling activity, the Council ought to conduct a closer research to find
out why video poker is the most prevalent
gambling activity among the problem gamblers so as to facilitate the
prevention, awareness and education.
Besides, the Hispanic problem players are the second large group of the Nevada problem gamblers. The Council should conduct more awareness arousing to the Hispanic community. Similarly, it is necessary to conduct the other researches to find out whether the percentage of the Hispanic problem gamblers in Nevada is truly higher than in the other states, whether the current data was obtained only because other ethnic problem gamblers are reluctant to call the help line. From the author's personal experience, there are a lot of Asian problem gamblers, but they just don't find it necessary to call the helpline to ask for help.
In the meantime, the Council should investigate further about why in Nevada, the percentage of the Hispanic problem gamblers is much higher than in other states.
The current nominal formatted questionnaire provides only descriptive analysis, which manes the results generated can only present the phenomenon, but can't explain why this phenomenon happens. To better understand problem gamblers, the inferential statistics should be applied to display the relationship that can't otherwise be perceived. Therefore, the interval scale questionnaire should be designed and inferential statistic should be employed.
According to several helpline workers' experiences, it is tough to conduct an interval scale survey on the phone with the callers who are suffering from the gambling problems and need help. Nevertheless, the majority of the callers are willing to release their addresses and almost half of them ask for further information. The Council can conduct the survey by sending the questionnaire to the callers. Thus, the callers won't feel so stressed that they can file out the questionnaire under a better circumstance.
Recommendations for further research on problem gambling
First of all, the terms of problem gambling must be defined clearly and workable for each different discipline. Second, the research of the prevalence of problem gambling should be conducted both nationally and statewide. Third, to better understand problem gamblers, the research of the general gambling population or non-problem gambling population should be conducted so as to facilitate the analysis of the comparison between different groups. Fourth, all the helpline should adopt the same format questionnaire for research and comparison purposes.
REFERENCES
American Gaming Association (1996). Responsible Gaming Resource Guide: The Responsible Gaming Task Force of the American Gaming Association. American Gaming Association.
Bybee, S. (1988). Problem Gambling: One View from the Gaming Industry Side. Journal of Gambling Behavior, 4 (4), 301-308.
Durand, J. (1995). Opening the Door to More Effective Approaches. Ontario Conference on Problem Gambling.
Eadington, W. (1996). The legalization of casinos: Policy
objectives, regulatory alternatives, and cost/benefit considerations. Journal
of Travel Research, 34 (3), 3-8.
Ladouceur, R.(1994). Social Cost of Pathological Gambling.
Journal of Gambling Studies, 110(4), 399-409.
Las Vegas Convention and Visitor Authority. (1996). 1995/1996
Clark County Residents Study:
Survey of leisure activities and gaming behavior. Las
Vegas Convention and Visitor Authority'.
Longman, P. (1994). Business Dateline. Florida Trend, 37(2), 62.
Lorenz, V. (1990). Final Report of Task Force on Gambling Addiction in Maryland. Research Consultant, Academic Computing Facility Courant Institute of mathematical Sciences New York University.
Volberg, R.(1996). Prevalence Studies of Problem Gambling in the United States. Journal of Gambling Studies, 12(2), 111-127