Developing the DSM-IV-DSM-IV Criteria to Identify Adolescent Problem Gambling in Non-Clinical Populations

Abstract

This paper presents a revised version of DSM-IV-J criteria for youth, the DSM-IV-MR-J, together with psychometric data stemming from its use in a major prevalence study of adolescent gambling and problem gambling. The case is made for further development and testing of current and emerging instruments to screen for problem gambling in youth, with the aim of establishing one internationally accepted gold standard measure.

An Empirical Study Examining the Impact of Gambling Advertisements on Adolescent Gambling Attitudes and Behaviors

“…The instrument assesses a number of important variables related to gambling: progression and preoccupation, tolerance, withdrawal and loss of control, escape, chasing, lies, and deception, illegal activities and family or school disruption. Internal consistency reliability for this scale is adequate, with Cronbach's alpha=.75 (although slightly lower than .78 for the original DSM-IV-J screen) (Fisher 2000).…”

“…DSM-IV-MR-J (Fisher 2000)]. This instrument is a revised version of the DSM-IV-J and includes 12-items (nine-categories) used to screen for problem gambling during adolescence.…”

Prevention programmes for youth gambling: a review of the empirical evidence

“…An experimental design with random assignment of 469 participants to an experimental and an assessment-only control condition and a three-month follow-up were used. The questionnaires used to assess the impact of the intervention were adapted from empirically validated instruments such as the DSM-IV-MR-J (Fisher, 2000). In accordance with the study objectives, these questionnaires covered topics such as (1) knowledge and attitudes about gambling and ability to calculate gambling odds;…”

“…(3) problem-solving skills; (4) capacity to create a dialogue about gambling with adults and interest taken in the gambling habits of friends and family; (5) gambling involvement; and (6) DSM-IV-MR-J diagnostic criteria (Fisher, 2000). Apart from measures 4 and 5, all questionnaires were validated.…”

Evaluation of a School-Based Gambling Prevention Program for Adolescents: Efficacy of Using the Theory of Planned Behaviour

“…With the exception of items to measure NAEs, all scales used for this study were selected on the basis of their use in prior research that examined the applicability of the TPB to adolescent and young adult gambling behaviour (i.e., Martin et al, 2010Martin et al, , 2011Moore & Ohtsuka, 1997;Wu & Tang, 2012), their appropriate use with adolescent populations, and their adequate psychometric properties (i.e., Fisher, 2000;Moore & Ohtsuka, 1997;. All measures used constitute primary outcome measures.…”