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...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
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 |