The DOI matches its Crossref record; the references it cites are not checked yet.
Validation of a Spanish adaptation of the Gambling Self-Efficacy Questionnaire
Abstract
The US Spanish-speaking population has rapidly increased in recent years and there is a need for valid Spanish measures to assess gambling behaviour. This study reports on the development of a Spanish measure of self-efficacy to control gambling behaviour (Gambling Self-Efficacy Questionnaire [GSEQ]; May, Whelan, Steenbergh, & Meyers, 2003). One hundred and eighty-seven Spanish-speaking individuals residing in the south-east United States completed the 16-item measure. The GSEQ-Spanish version (GSEQ-S) showed high internal consistency (α = 0.99) and evidence of convergent and discriminant validity. Factor analytic data supported a single factor structure similar to that found with the English version. As expected, pathological gamblers scored significantly lower on the GSEQ-S than non-pathological gamblers. The results provide initial psychometric support for the GSEQ-S and suggest that the measure can be used as a valid assessment of gambling self-efficacy among Spanish-speaking gamblers. Further evaluation of the psychometric properties of this instrument is suggested.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
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?
The GSEQ has evidence of convergent and discriminant validity and high internal consistency (α = 0.99) in a community sample.
“There is evidence of convergent and discriminant validity, and the internal consistency is high (α = 0.99) in a community sample.”
From Efficacy of an internet-based psychological intervention for problem gambling and gambling disorder: Study protocol for a randomized controlled trial (2021) · cites this paper as Winfree et al., 2013
Citations
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 31 · Cited by 9
Research works printed but not linked: 3
- Annis H.M., 1988, Situational Confidence Questionnaire (SCQ) user's guide
- Echeburúa E., 1994, Análisis y Modificación de Conducta, 20, 769
- Marlatt G.A., 2005, Relapse prevention: Maintenance strategies in the treatment of addictive behaviors, 1
Metadata
- Authors
- Winfree, W. R., Meyers, A. W., & Whelan, J. P.
- Affiliations
- University of Memphis (US)
- Corresponding author
- Winfree, Walter R.
- Venue
- International Gambling Studies
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2013-08
- Volume
- 13
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 271-280
- ISSN
- 1445-9795 (ISSN-L)
- 1479-4276
- OpenAlex
- W2029826012
- Cited by
- 9
- References
- 31
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2024: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2016: 2 · 2014: 1
- FWCI
- 1.11
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- International Gambling Studies (publishedVersion)
- RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- University of Memphis
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Gambling Behavior and Treatments
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Substance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
- Keywords
- Spanish adaptation, gambling addiction, psychometric validation, scale development, factor structure, internal consistency, convergent and discriminant validity
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
