CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 99Gambling Behavior and TreatmentsSubstance Abuse Treatment and OutcomesMental Health Treatment and Access

The impacts of problem gambling on concerned significant others accessing web-based counselling

Dowling, Nicki A., Rodda, Simone N., Lubman, Dan I., Jackson, Alun C.·2014·Addictive Behaviors
DOI 10.1016/j.addbeh.2014.04.011
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

The 'concerned significant others' (CSOs) of people with problem gambling frequently seek professional support. However, there is surprisingly little research investigating the characteristics or help-seeking behaviour of these CSOs, particularly for web-based counselling. The aims of this study were to describe the characteristics of CSOs accessing the web-based counselling service (real time chat) offered by the Australian national gambling web-based counselling site, explore the most commonly reported CSO impacts using a new brief scale (the Problem Gambling Significant Other Impact Scale: PG-SOIS), and identify the factors associated with different types of CSO impact. The sample comprised all 366 CSOs accessing the service over a 21 month period. The findings revealed that the CSOs were most often the intimate partners of problem gamblers and that they were most often females aged under 30 years. All CSOs displayed a similar profile of impact, with emotional distress (97.5%) and impacts on the relationship (95.9%) reported to be the most commonly endorsed impacts, followed by impacts on social life (92.1%) and finances (91.3%). Impacts on employment (83.6%) and physical health (77.3%) were the least commonly endorsed. There were few significant differences in impacts between family members (children, partners, parents, and siblings), but friends consistently reported the lowest impact scores. Only prior counselling experience and Asian cultural background were consistently associated with higher CSO impacts. The findings can serve to inform the development of web-based interventions specifically designed for the CSOs of problem gamblers.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.addbeh.2014.04.011

Cites

22 of 22 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 23 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Dowling, N. A., Rodda, S. N., Lubman, D. I., & Jackson, A. C.
Affiliations
  • Deakin University (AU)
  • Eastern Health (AU)
  • The University of Melbourne (AU)
Corresponding author
Dowling, Nicki A.
ORCID
Venue
Addictive Behaviors
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2014-08
Volume
39
Issue
8
Pages
1253-1257
ISSN
0306-4603 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.addbeh.2014.04.011
OpenAlex
W2065278038
Cited by
99
References
23
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 15 · 2020: 10 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 4
FWCI
9.83
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Addictive Behaviors (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • ResearchSpace (University of Auckland) (submittedVersion)
Funders
U.S. Department of Justice
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Gambling Behavior and Treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Substance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Mental Health Treatment and Access
Keywords
problem gambling, concerned significant others, help-seeking, emotional distress, relationship impact, financial impact, intimate partners, cultural background
MeSH terms
Adult, Australia, Counseling, Cross-Sectional Studies, Family, Family Relations, Female, Gambling, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Risk Factors, Internet, Young Adult, Self Report

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review