A Comparison of Horse-Race, Bingo, and Video Poker Gamblers in Brazilian Gambling Settings

Abstract

In the present study Brazilian gamblers from different settings were compared on sociodemographic characteristics, gambling the behavior, and use of drugs. The SOGS was administered to 171 subjects at bingo (BG), video poker (VP), and horse-racing clubs (HR) of São Paulo. BG concentrated most women, VP the youngest and single gamblers, and HR the lowest income subjects. More VP than HR or BG gamblers reported taking time off work to gamble, as well as returning another day to win back lost money. They also had a higher number of scorable responses on the SOGS. The differences observed suggest that VP gamblers bear a greater risk of developing a pathological gambling pattern. The authors suggest that measures should be taken aimed at the prevention of pathological gambling, particularly among the young population of video poker gamblers.

Problem and Pathological Gambling in a Sample of Casino Patrons

“…In the current study of casino patrons, we found higher rates of pathological gambling relative to some previous work (Fisher 2000; Gerstein et al 1999), but lower rates than work conducted in Brazilian gambling venues (Oliveira and Silva 2000, 2001). Gambling related variables were significantly different in that pathological gamblers were more likely to report a family history of gambling problems, to report more frequent gambling with larger sums of money, to report engaging in sports betting and skilled gambling, and to report gambling to make money.…”

“…Oliveira and Silva (2000, 2001) used the SOGS scores to classify pathological gamblers and found a higher rate of probable pathological gamblers than we found in our data. In the current study, we employed the NODS, which has been shown to more strictly define gambling problems (Hodgins 2004); further, the SOGS has been shown to have good agreement with DSM-IV criteria for pathological gambling, but may overestimate gambling problems in non-clinical, general population samples (Stinchfield 2002).…”

“…Four studies in the literature (Fisher 2000; Gerstein et al 1999; Oliveira and Silva 2000, 2001), all published nearly 10 years ago, have examined the prevalence of pathological gambling among gambling venue patrons in three countries (e.g., the UK, the US, and Brazil). In summary, these studies indicate that: (a) although more stringent methodology yields lower estimates, the percentage of problem/pathological gambers among casino patrons [2.2% in the UK (Fisher 2000); 7.9% in the US (Gerstein et al 1999); and 43.5% in Brazil (Oliveira and Silva 2000)] is elevated in these samples relative to the estimates for pathological gambling among the North American general public (0.42–4.0%) (Gerstein et al 1999; Petry et al 2005; Shaffer and Hall 2001; Shaffer et al 1999; Stucki and Rihs-Middel 2007; Welte et al 2001); (b) many problem/pathological gamblers perceive themselves to have a problem with gambling; (c) despite some recognition of problems with gambling, very few individuals in these samples report having sought treatment for gambling problems, which is consistent with the previous literature on treatment seeking among individuals with gambling problems in the US (Kessler et al 2008; Slutske 2006); and (d) individuals with pathological gambling are more likely to have substance problems, which is consistent with findings from other studies of gambling and substance abuse (Cunningham-Williams et al 1998; Grant and Potenza 2005; Petry and Oncken 2002; Potenza et al 2004; Welte et al 2001; Welte et al 2004).…”

Player Preferences and Social Harm: An Analysis of the Relationships Between Player Characteristics, Gambling Modes, and Problem Gambling

“…In particular, a number of nationallevel studies have used multivariate techniques to isolate the risk factors for problem gambling and found a consistent association between problem gambling and low socioeconomic status, male gender and membership of an ethnic minority (Clarke et al 2006;Currie et al 2006;Volberg et al 2001;Welte et al 2002Welte et al , 2004. Second, there exists a relationship between different gambling activities and problem gambling (Wohl et al 2005;Oliveira and Silva 2001). For example, the link between casino gambling and problem gambling has been documented in the US and in Canada (Currie et al 2006;Welte et al 2004).…”

“…Therefore, the significant association between factor 3 and the CPGI is predominantly driven by relationships of these individual relationships. It is the particular activity, rather than the more general orientation, that is significant (Blanco et al 2006;Bonnaire et al 2006;Fabian 1995;Fisher 2000;Oliveira and Silva 2001;Welte et al 2007). These findings suggest it would be ineffectual to use the broad orientations of agôn or alea to develop multi-game harm minimisation strategies.…”