9
Gambling and Drinking
Running head: GAMBLING AND DRINKING
The Relationship Between Gambling and Drinking: Possible Comorbidity
Matthew P. Canning
Lakehead University
March 22, 2005
Instructor: Dr. John Jamieson
Introduction
Social psychologists and other researchers have been spending a great deal of time and effort to successfully determine a relationship between drinking and gambling in terms of comorbidity. Part of this field of research has the goal in mind to help people reduce their drinking and gambling levels and thereby increase overall health, both physical and mental. Many people state that drinking and gambling exhibit a positive correlation. They use it as a technique to infer levels of one variable (either gambling or drinking) if a level of the other variable is known. This hypothesis would be explained in that gambling behaviour may be increased through the addition of alcohol or vice versa, or a possible third variable may covary positively with both of them. The purpose of this study was to examine some scales used to measure both problem gambling and problem drinking behaviours. One scale (SURPS) was used to measure personality dimensions that may indicate a risk for substance abuse. Also, an additional purpose was to determine if alcohol consumption is related to gambling behaviour, and if so, what that relationship is. More specifically, the goal of the study was to determine if a positive relationship exists whereby increased levels of alcohol consumption equate to increased levels of gambling behaviour (positive correlation) or if alcohol consumption levels are negatively correlated with gambling frequency, whereby increased or decreased levels of alcohol consumption relate directly to decreased or increased levels of gambling behaviour, respectively. This will determine if the causative factors vary together and can be traced to specific personality traits. Further, the study hoped to determine whether or not a variety of moods and emotions are related to either alcohol consumption or gambling behaviour or both in one or more ways. There have been many theories as to how alcohol consumption level relates to gambling behaviour. For example, it is known that intense and prolonged alcohol use or abuse is associated with a variety of poor behaviours and is possibly the result of lack of self control. Alcohol also potentially effects health in a negative way which may lead one to drown their sorrows in other possible self destructive tasks such as gambling; with one addiction feeding the other. As well, alcohol is a well known cause of impairment and it loosens an individual’s inhibitions, which may result in them taking up gambling behaviour without rationally thinking through the probability against success and with that, potential consequences, both financial and mental. Specifically, the following three hypotheses were present for this study:
1. Anxiety, sensitivity, and hopelessness should be related to the negative reinforcement drinking situations,
2. Impulsivity to the temptation situation factors, and
3. Sensation seeking to the positive reinforcement drinking situations.
Based on common sense observation, alcohol consumption levels should likely be positively correlated with gambling behaviours, as well as the other mood relationship hypotheses indicated in points 1-3 above.
Method
Participants
Participants were a group of Psychology 3911 students. There were 37 participants in total for the drinking behaviour questions and 43 students participating in total for the gambling behaviour questions. This number is not representative of the total number of students enrolled in the course, but rather, the number of students who completed the required questionnaires and submitted it for use in this lab. Mean age of students participating was not calculated for the purposes of the study. Sex of participants was also not an item of interest for the study.
Apparatus
Four questionnaires were used for this study. The substance Use Risk Profile Scale (SURPS), The Inventory of Drinking Situations (IDS-100), The Inventory of Drinking Situations (IDS-8), and The Canadian Problem Gambling Index (9-item version) were used.
Procedure
The class was told that the four questionnaires given to them was a part of the third lab report, while the purpose of the lab itself was hidden until after the data had been collected. Time constraints were not a fundamental part of the data collection, since students were given more than enough time to fill out the questionnaire (several days). This allowed students to work at their own leisure to complete the questionnaires and submit them when they were finished, whether that be 15 minutes or several days later. Data was analyzed by the course instructor with the aid of several volunteers. Participants remained anonymous for the purpose of this lab.
Results
Results showed significant correlations between introversion / hopelessness and unpleasant emotions (impulsivity) with a Pearson Correlation of r = .344 at the .05 level. Impulsivity and unpleasant emotion had r = .495 which was significant at the .01 level. Impulsivity and physical discomfort had r = .359 which was significant at the .05 level. Introversion / hopelessness and conflict with others showed r = .466 which was significant at the .01 level. Impulsivity and conflict with others showed r = .448 which was significant at the .01 level. Impulsivity and B1 showed r = .393 which was significant at the .05 level. Anxiety / sensitivity and B5 showed r = - .391 which was significant at the .05 level. Impulsivity and B8 showed r = .477 which was significant at the .01 level. B1 had the following correlations and levels of significance: unpleasant emotions (r = .577, significant at the .01 level), physical discomfort (r = .399, significant at the .05 level), pleasant emotions (r = .380, significant at the .05 level), testing personal control (r = .360, significant at the .05 level), urges and temptations (r = .438, significant at the .01 level), conflict with others (r = .396, significant at the .05 level), social pressure to drink (r = .512, significant at the .01 level), pleasant times with others (r = .445, significant at the .01 level). For B2, physical discomfort (r = .419) was significant at the .01 level. For B3, the following correlations and levels of significance were present: unpleasant emotions (r = .518, significant at the .01 level), physical discomfort (r = .422, significant at the .01 level), pleasant emotions (r = .659, significant at the .01 level), testing personal control (r = .496, significant at the .01 level), urges and temptations (r = .574, significant at the .01 level), conflict with others (r = .415, significant at the .05 level), social pressure to drink (r = .513, significant at the .01 level), pleasant times with others (r = .583, significant at the .01 level). For B4, the following correlations and levels of significance were present: unpleasant emotions (r = .364, significant at the .05 level), pleasant emotions (r = .702, significant at the .01 level), urges and temptations (r = .388, significant at the .05 level), conflict with others (r = .328, significant at the .05 level), social pressure to drink (r = .395, significant at the .05 level), pleasant times with others (r = .466, significant at the .01 level). For B5, the following correlations and levels of significance were present: unpleasant emotions (r = .383, significant at the .05 level), pleasant emotions (r = .361, significant at the .05 level). For B6, unpleasant emotions (r = .330) was significant at the .05 level. B7 had the following correlations and levels of significance: pleasant emotions (r = .387, significant at the .05 level), urges and temptations (r = .579, significant at the .01 level), social pressure to drink (r = .433, significant at the .01 level), pleasant times with others (r = .505, significant at the .01 level). B8 had the following correlations and levels of significance: unpleasant emotions (r = .472, significant at the .01 level), pleasant emotions (r = .655, significant at the .01 level), testing personal control (r = .490, significant at the .01 level), urges and temptations (r = .574, significant at the .01 level), conflict with others (r = .574, significant at the .01 level), social pressure to drink (r = .400, significant at the .05 level), pleasant times with others (r = .650, significant at the .01 level). Data analysis also revealed that gambling is positively correlated with physical discomfort (r = .368, significant at the .05 level) and conflict with others (r = .393, significant at the .01 level).
Discussion
To begin, it should be noted that the sample size for this study was based on a group of 37 people, all of which of a single population (university students). This sample size is too small to make any conclusive or easily generalizable claims based on the results. The number of problem gamblers in Ontario is low (only 4%) which would require a greater sample to yield practical results, and also require members from different population segments and age cohorts to create generalizable conclusions. The 8 and 100 item scales yielded very different results which make a comparison hard to determine. It seems as though both scales yielded important results, though, which make the 8 item scale a preferred one due to its brevity. As noted in the results section, gambling behaviour is positively correlated with physical discomfort and conflict with others. Physical discomfort was positively correlated with drinking behaviours B1, B2, B3, and conflict with others was positively correlated with drinking behaviours B1, B3, B4, B8. The first set of drinking behaviours could possibly relate to both drinking and gambling behaviour in that they both bring negative reinforcement (e.g., when things are going badly for the individual (B1) or the individual has trouble sleeping (B2), both drinking and gambling alleviate these problems. However, drinking behaviour is also related to item B3 – “When everything was going well” which is not an aspect of negative reinforcement. The second set of drinking behaviours is more representative of positive reinforcement (other than item B1 – “When everything was going badly for me”). From these results it seems that drinking and gambling behaviour occur in both events of negative and positive reinforcement, which gives either individual hypothesis less accountability. With a more diverse sample set, or a greater number of participants, it is quite possible that different results would have been found and original hypotheses would have been more predominant in the results of the study. To summarize, confidence in the original three hypotheses remain intact, but only within the confines of a study which allows results with practical application.
Appendix
From the IDS scale, a person’s drinking is evaluated with respect to 8 different types of drinking situations, shown below:
B1 - When everything was going badly for me.
B2 – When I had trouble sleeping.
B3 – When everything was going well.
B4 – When I felt confident I could handle a few drinks.
B5 – When I suddenly had an urge to drink.
B6 – When I had an argument with a friend.
B7 – When I was invited to someone’s home and they offered me a drink.
B8 – When I wanted to celebrate with a friend.