Top

Published in:

01-12-2010 | Original Paper

Differences in Cognitive Distortions Between Pathological and Non-Pathological Gamblers with Preferences for Chance or Skill Games

Authors: Helga Myrseth, Geir Scott Brunborg, Magnus Eidem

Published in: Journal of Gambling Studies | Issue 4/2010

Abstract

Cognitive distortions have been thought to play an important role in the development and maintenance of pathological gambling. The present study investigated whether severity of gambling problems and gamblers’ preference for chance or skill games were related to two sub-factors of cognitive distortions as measured by the Gamblers Belief Questionnaire: Luck/Perseverance, which reflects an individual’s perception that chance is favorable to him/her, and Illusion of Control, which reflects an individual’s perception that his/her behavior influences chance occurrences. Participants (N = 166) were recruited from a race track (n = 79), off-course betting facilities (n = 50) and from an online treatment program for problem gamblers (n = 49). Gambling severity was measured by the South Oaks Gambling Screen, and 73 were classified as pathological gamblers whereas 93 were classified as non-pathological gamblers. The present study supports previous proposals that cognitive distortions are core processes related to gambling behavior as pathological gamblers reported more cognitive distortions than did non-pathological gamblers. A preference for skill games was also associated with greater Illusion of Control compared to a preference for chance games. For gamblers preferring skill games there were no differences in Luck/Perseverance or Illusion of Control between pathological and non-pathological gamblers.

Adkins, B., Kreudelbach, N., & Toomig, W. (1987). The relationship of gaming preferences to MMPI personality variables. In W. R. Eadington (Ed.), Gambling research: Proceedings of the seventh international conference on gambling and risk taking (Vol. 5). Reno: Bureau of Business and Economic Research, College of Business Administration, University of Nevada.

Alessi, S. M., & Petry, N. M. (2003). Pathological gambling severity is associated with impulsivity in a delay discounting procedure. Behavioural Processes, 64, 345–354.CrossRefPubMed

Bonnaire, C., Bungener, C., & Varescon, I. (2006). Pathological gambling and sensation seeking—How do gamblers playing games of chance in cafés differ from those who bet on horses at the racetrack? Addiction Research and Theory, 14, 619–629.CrossRef

Burger, J. M. (1991). The effects of desire for control in situations with chance-determined outcomes: Gambling behavior in lotto and bingo players. Journal of Research in Personality, 25, 196–204.CrossRef

Cantinotti, M., Ladouceur, R., & Jacques, C. (2004). Sports betting: Can gamblers beat randomness? Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 18, 143–147.CrossRefPubMed

Coventry, K. R., & Brown, I. F. (1993). Sensation seeking, gambling and gambling addiction. Addiction, 88, 541–554.CrossRefPubMed

Dixon, M. R., & Johnson, T. E. (2007). The gambling functional assessment (GFA): An assessment device for identification of the maintaining variables of pathological gambling. Analysis of Gambling Behavior, 1, 44–49.

Gaboury, A., & Ladoceur, R. (1989). Erroneous perceptions and gambling. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 4, 411–420.

Gooding, P., & Tarrier, N. (2009). A systematic review and meta-analysis of cognitive-behavioural interventions to reduce problem gambling: Hedging our bets? Behaviour Research and Therapy, 47, 592–607.CrossRefPubMed

Griffiths, M. D. (1994). The role of cognitive bias and skill in fruit machine gambling. British Journal of Psychology, 85, 351–369.

Joukhador, J., MacCallum, F., & Blaszczynski, A. (2003). Differences in cognitive distortions between problem and social gamblers. Psychological Reports, 92, 1203–1214.PubMed

Ladouceur, R., Giroux, I., & Jacques, C. (1998). Winning on the horses: How much strategy and knowledge are needed? Journal of Psychology: Interdisciplinary and Applied, 132, 133–142.CrossRef

Langer, E. (1975). The illusion of control. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 32, 311–328.CrossRef

Ledgerwood, D. M., & Petry, N. M. (2005). Current trends and future directions in the study of psychosocial treatments for pathological gambling. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 14, 89–94.CrossRef

Lesieur, H. R., & Blume, S. B. (1987). The South Oaks Gambling Screen (SOGS): A new instrument for the identification of pathological gamblers. American Journal of Psychiatry, 144, 1184–1188.PubMed

Lesieur, H. R., & Blume, S. B. (1993). Revising the South Oaks Gambling Screen in different settings. Journal of Gambling Studies, 9, 213–223.CrossRef

MacKillop, J., Anderson, E. J., Castelda, B. A., Mattson, R. E., & Donovick, P. J. (2006). Convergent validity of measures of cognitive distortions, impulsivity, and time perspective with pathological gambling. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 20, 75–79.CrossRefPubMed

Miller, N. V., & Currie, S. R. (2008). A canadian population level analysis of the roles of irrational gambling cognitions and risky gambling practices as correlates of gambling intensity and pathological gambling. Journal of Gambling Studies, 24, 257–274.CrossRefPubMed

Miller, J. C., Meier, E., & Weatherly, J. N. (2009). Assessing the reliability of the gamblingfunctional assessment. Journal of Gambling Studies, 25, 121–129.CrossRefPubMed

Myrseth, H., Pallesen, S., Molde, H., Johnsen, B. H., & Lorvik, I. M. (2009). Personality factors as predictors of pathological gambling. Personality and Individual Differences, 47, 933–937.CrossRef

Rogers, P. (1998). The cognitive psychology of lottery gambling: A theoretical review. Journal of Gambling Studies, 14, 111–134.CrossRefPubMed

Steenbergh, T. A., Meyers, A. W., May, R. K., & Wehlan, J. P. (2002). Development and validation of the Gamblers’ Beliefs Questionnaire. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 16, 143–149.CrossRefPubMed

Stewart, S. H., Zack, M., Collins, P., Klein, R. M., & Fragopoulos, F. (2008). Subtyping pathological gamblers on the basis of affective motivations for gambling: Relation to gambling problems, drinking problems, and affective motivations for drinking. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 22, 257–268.CrossRefPubMed

Stinchfield, R. (2002). Reliability, validity, and classification accuracy of the South Oaks Gambling Screen (SOGS). Addictive Behaviors, 27, 1–19.CrossRefPubMed

Toneatto, T. (1999). Cognitive psychopathology of problem gambling. Substance Use and Misuse, 34, 1593–1604.CrossRefPubMed

Toneatto, T., Blitz Miller, T., Calderwood, K., Dragonetti, R., & Tsanos, A. (1997). Cognitive distortions in heavy gambling. Journal of Gambling Studies, 13, 253–266.CrossRefPubMed

van Holst, R. J., van den Brink, W., Veltman, D. J., & Goudriaan, A. E. (2009). Why gamblers fail to win: A review of cognitive and neuroimaging findings in pathological gambling. Journal. doi:10.1016/j.neubiorev.2009.07.007.

Wohl, M. J. A., Young, M. M., & Hart, K. E. (2007). Self-perceptions of dispositional luck: Relationship to DSM gambling symptoms, subjective enjoyment of gambling and treatment readiness. Substance Use and Misuse, 42, 43–63.CrossRefPubMed

Xian, H., Shah, K. R., Phillips, S. M., Scherrer, J. F., Volberg, R. A., & Eisen, S. A. (2008). Association of cognitive distortions with problem and pathological gambling in adult male twins. Psychiatry Research, 160, 300–307.CrossRefPubMed

Title: Differences in Cognitive Distortions Between Pathological and Non-Pathological Gamblers with Preferences for Chance or Skill Games
Authors: Helga Myrseth
Geir Scott Brunborg
Magnus Eidem
Publication date: 01-12-2010
Publisher: Springer US
Published in: Journal of Gambling Studies / Issue 4/2010
Electronic ISSN: 1573-3602
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10899-010-9180-6

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

Springer Medicine

Differences in Cognitive Distortions Between Pathological and Non-Pathological Gamblers with Preferences for Chance or Skill Games

Abstract

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 4/2010

Never Smile at a Crocodile: Betting on Electronic Gaming Machines is Intensified by Reptile-Induced Arousal

Direct and Indirect Influences of Fate Control Belief, Gambling Expectancy Bias, and Self-Efficacy on Problem Gambling and Negative Mood Among Chinese College Students: A Multiple Mediation Analysis

The Victorian Gambling Screen: Reliability and Validation in a Clinical Population

Family Influences on Adolescent Gambling Behavior: A Review of the Literature

Using Fear Appeals in Warning Labels to Promote Responsible Gambling Among VLT Players: The Key Role of Depth of Information Processing

Comparing the Utility of a Modified Diagnostic Interview for Gambling Severity (DIGS) with the South Oaks Gambling Screen (SOGS) as a Research Screen in College Students