About the contributors |
| |
Authors: | Jim Orford Heather Wardle Mark Griffiths |
| |
Affiliation: | 1. School of Psychology , University of Birmingham , UK j.f.orford@bham.ac.uk;3. National Centre for Social Research (NatCen) , London , UK;4. International Gaming Research Unit , Psychology Division, Nottingham Trent University , Nottingham , UK |
| |
Abstract: | ![]() The paper reports secondary analysis of data from the 2010 British Gambling Prevalence Survey, a household survey of a representative sample of the population aged 16 years and over (N = 7756). Responses to questions about frequency of gambling and average monthly spend on each of 15 forms of gambling, and responses to two different problem gambling screens (DSM-IV and PGSI), were used to derive estimates, for each form of gambling separately, of the percentage of (1) all days play (two estimates), and (2) all spend (four estimates), attributable to problem gamblers. Although these estimates must be treated as approximations only, they demonstrate that problem gamblers make a far greater contribution to total gambling attendances and losses than problem gambling prevalence figures would suggest. There are certain forms of British gambling to which problem gamblers may be contributing as much as 20–30% of all days play and spend, and moderate risk gamblers a possible further 10–20%. |
| |
Keywords: | United Kingdom expenditure economics epidemiology problem gambling |
|
|