Cargando…

Gamblers’ (mis-)interpretations of Problem Gambling Severity Index items: Ambiguities in qualitative accounts from the Swedish Longitudinal Gambling Study

The Problem Gambling Severity Index (PGSI) is a screening instrument frequently used to identify risk and problem gambling. Even though the PGSI has good psychometric properties, it still produces a large proportion of misclassifications. AIMS: To explore possible reasons for misclassifications in p...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Samuelsson, Eva, Wennberg, Peter, Sundqvist, Kristina
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: SAGE Publications 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7434121/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32934556
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1455072519829407
_version_ 1783572077564919808
author Samuelsson, Eva
Wennberg, Peter
Sundqvist, Kristina
author_facet Samuelsson, Eva
Wennberg, Peter
Sundqvist, Kristina
author_sort Samuelsson, Eva
collection PubMed
description The Problem Gambling Severity Index (PGSI) is a screening instrument frequently used to identify risk and problem gambling. Even though the PGSI has good psychometric properties, it still produces a large proportion of misclassifications. AIMS: To explore possible reasons for misclassifications in problem gambling level by analysing previously classified moderate-risk gamblers’ answers to the PGSI items, in relation to their own current and past gambling behaviours. METHODS: Semi-structured telephone interviews were conducted with 19 participants reporting no negative consequences from gambling. They were asked the PGSI questions within an eight-year time frame (2008 to 2016). Ambiguous answers to PGSI items were subject to content analysis. RESULTS: Several answers to the PGSI items contained ambiguities and misinterpretations, making it difficult to assess to what extent their answers actually indicated any problematic gambling over time. The item about feelings of guilt generated accounts rather reflecting self-recrimination over wasting money or regretting gambling as a meaningless or immoral activity. The item concerning critique involved mild interpretations such as being ridiculed for buying lottery tickets or getting comments for being boring. Similar accounts were given by the participants irrespective of initial endorsement of the items. Other possible reasons for misclassifications were related to recall bias, language difficulties, selective memory, and a tendency to answer one part of the question without taking the whole question into account. CONCLUSIONS: Answers to the PGSI can contain a variety of meanings based on the respondents’ subjective interpretations. Reports of lower levels of harm in the population should thus be interpreted with caution. In clinical settings it is important to combine use of screening instruments with interviews, to be able to better understand gamblers’ perceptions of the gambling behaviour and its negative consequences.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7434121
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher SAGE Publications
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-74341212020-09-14 Gamblers’ (mis-)interpretations of Problem Gambling Severity Index items: Ambiguities in qualitative accounts from the Swedish Longitudinal Gambling Study Samuelsson, Eva Wennberg, Peter Sundqvist, Kristina Nordisk Alkohol Nark Research Reports The Problem Gambling Severity Index (PGSI) is a screening instrument frequently used to identify risk and problem gambling. Even though the PGSI has good psychometric properties, it still produces a large proportion of misclassifications. AIMS: To explore possible reasons for misclassifications in problem gambling level by analysing previously classified moderate-risk gamblers’ answers to the PGSI items, in relation to their own current and past gambling behaviours. METHODS: Semi-structured telephone interviews were conducted with 19 participants reporting no negative consequences from gambling. They were asked the PGSI questions within an eight-year time frame (2008 to 2016). Ambiguous answers to PGSI items were subject to content analysis. RESULTS: Several answers to the PGSI items contained ambiguities and misinterpretations, making it difficult to assess to what extent their answers actually indicated any problematic gambling over time. The item about feelings of guilt generated accounts rather reflecting self-recrimination over wasting money or regretting gambling as a meaningless or immoral activity. The item concerning critique involved mild interpretations such as being ridiculed for buying lottery tickets or getting comments for being boring. Similar accounts were given by the participants irrespective of initial endorsement of the items. Other possible reasons for misclassifications were related to recall bias, language difficulties, selective memory, and a tendency to answer one part of the question without taking the whole question into account. CONCLUSIONS: Answers to the PGSI can contain a variety of meanings based on the respondents’ subjective interpretations. Reports of lower levels of harm in the population should thus be interpreted with caution. In clinical settings it is important to combine use of screening instruments with interviews, to be able to better understand gamblers’ perceptions of the gambling behaviour and its negative consequences. SAGE Publications 2019-04-09 2019-04 /pmc/articles/PMC7434121/ /pubmed/32934556 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1455072519829407 Text en © The Author(s) 2019 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 License (http://www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage).
spellingShingle Research Reports
Samuelsson, Eva
Wennberg, Peter
Sundqvist, Kristina
Gamblers’ (mis-)interpretations of Problem Gambling Severity Index items: Ambiguities in qualitative accounts from the Swedish Longitudinal Gambling Study
title Gamblers’ (mis-)interpretations of Problem Gambling Severity Index items: Ambiguities in qualitative accounts from the Swedish Longitudinal Gambling Study
title_full Gamblers’ (mis-)interpretations of Problem Gambling Severity Index items: Ambiguities in qualitative accounts from the Swedish Longitudinal Gambling Study
title_fullStr Gamblers’ (mis-)interpretations of Problem Gambling Severity Index items: Ambiguities in qualitative accounts from the Swedish Longitudinal Gambling Study
title_full_unstemmed Gamblers’ (mis-)interpretations of Problem Gambling Severity Index items: Ambiguities in qualitative accounts from the Swedish Longitudinal Gambling Study
title_short Gamblers’ (mis-)interpretations of Problem Gambling Severity Index items: Ambiguities in qualitative accounts from the Swedish Longitudinal Gambling Study
title_sort gamblers’ (mis-)interpretations of problem gambling severity index items: ambiguities in qualitative accounts from the swedish longitudinal gambling study
topic Research Reports
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7434121/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32934556
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1455072519829407
work_keys_str_mv AT samuelssoneva gamblersmisinterpretationsofproblemgamblingseverityindexitemsambiguitiesinqualitativeaccountsfromtheswedishlongitudinalgamblingstudy
AT wennbergpeter gamblersmisinterpretationsofproblemgamblingseverityindexitemsambiguitiesinqualitativeaccountsfromtheswedishlongitudinalgamblingstudy
AT sundqvistkristina gamblersmisinterpretationsofproblemgamblingseverityindexitemsambiguitiesinqualitativeaccountsfromtheswedishlongitudinalgamblingstudy