CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 74Gambling Behavior and TreatmentsSubstance Abuse Treatment and OutcomesEducational Games and Gamification

Brief motivational interventions for college student problem gamblers

Open access
Petry, Nancy M., Weinstock, Jeremiah, Morasco, Benjamin J., Ledgerwood, David M.·2009·Addiction
DOI 10.1111/j.1360-0443.2009.02652.xPMC PMC2758481
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Aims College students experience high rates of problem and pathological gambling, yet little research has investigated methods for reducing gambling in this population. This study sought to examine the efficacy of brief intervention strategies. Design Randomized trial. Setting College campuses. Participants A total of 117 college student problem and pathological gamblers. Interventions Students were assigned randomly to: an assessment‐only control, 10 minutes of brief advice, one session of motivational enhancement therapy (MET) or one session of MET, plus three sessions of cognitive–behavioral therapy (CBT). The three interventions were designed to reduce gambling. Measurements Gambling was assessed at baseline, week 6 and month 9 using the Addiction Severity Index–gambling (ASI‐G) module, which also assesses days and dollars wagered. Findings Compared to the assessment‐only condition, those receiving any intervention had significant decreases in ASI‐G scores and days and dollars wagered over time. The MET condition decreased significantly ASI‐G scores and dollars wagered over time, and increased the odds of a clinically significant reduction in gambling at the 9‐month follow‐up relative to the assessment‐only condition, even after controlling for baseline indices that could impact outcomes. The Brief Advice and MET+CBT conditions had benefits on some, but not all, indices of gambling. None of the interventions differed significantly from one another. Conclusions These results suggest the efficacy of brief interventions for reducing gambling problems in college students.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1360-0443.2009.02652.x

Cites

56 of 56 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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 primary study from which these data were drawn demonstrated significant effects of the three brief interventions relative to assessment only control in reducing gambling problems.

    “The primary study from which these data were drawn (Petry et al., 2009) demonstrated significant effects of the three brief interventions relative to the assessment only control condition in reducing gambling problems.”

    From Internet gambling in problem gambling college students (2015) · cites this paper as Petry et al., 2009

  • The three brief interventions did not differ significantly from one another.

    “Because the three brief interventions did not differ significantly from one another, they were combined for the purposes of the present analyses, designed to assess if Internet gamblers fared differentially overall or in response to brief interventions.”

    From Internet gambling in problem gambling college students (2015) · cites this paper as Petry et al., 2009

  • In this sample, Cronbach's alpha of the gambling section was 0.71.

    “Cronbach's alpha of the gambling section in this sample was adequate--0.71 (Petry et al., 2009).”

    From Internet gambling in problem gambling college students (2015) · cites this paper as Petry et al., 2009

  • Participants were randomized to one of four conditions after completing baseline evaluation.

    “As described in the primary trial (Petry et al., 2009), participants were randomized to one of four conditions outlined below after completing the baseline evaluation.”

    From Internet gambling in problem gambling college students (2015) · cites this paper as Petry et al., 2009

  • The vast majority of students reported card/poker gambling as their primary form of gambling.

    “Although many students reported having wagered online, few noted the Internet to be their primary method of gambling; instead, the vast majority reported that card/poker gambling, not limited to the Internet, was their primary form of gambling (Petry et al., 2009).”

    From Internet gambling in problem gambling college students (2015) · cites this paper as Petry et al., 2009

    The introductory passage following Abstract > Conclusions lists cards and the internet among popular gambling activities, but does not say which activity students reported as their primary form. The Method > Assessments says the study collected types of gambling; searches for poker, cards, and primary gambling method found no passage reporting the claimed majority or the comparison with Internet gambling. (LLM, conf=0.75)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. [41]Nunnally JC Bernstein IH Psychometric Theory 1994 McGraw-Hill New York 3rd ed.
  2. [53]National Research Council Pathological Gambling: A Critical Review 1999 National Academy Press Washington, DC

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Petry, N. M., Weinstock, J., Morasco, B. J., & Ledgerwood, D. M.
Affiliations
University of Connecticut (US)
Corresponding author
Petry, Nancy M.
ORCID
Venue
Addiction
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2009-08-03
Volume
104
Issue
9
Pages
1569-1578
ISSN
  • 0965-2140 (ISSN-L)
  • 1360-0443
DOI
10.1111/j.1360-0443.2009.02652.x
PMC
PMC2758481
OpenAlex
W1972409247
Cited by
74
References
56
Citations by year
2025: 4 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 9 · 2013: 11 · 2012: 8
FWCI
5.59
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/termsAndConditions#vor (vor)
Locations
  • Addiction (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • Patrick and Catherine Weldon Donaghue Medical Research Foundation
  • National Institutes of Health (5p50aa003510-27, DA09241, AA03510)
  • National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (P-50-AA003510, P60AA003510, T32AA007290)
  • National Institute of Mental Health (R01MH060417)
  • National Institute on Drug Abuse (R01DA014618, R01DA022739, R01DA021567, R01DA018883, P50DA009241, R01DA016855, K23DA023467, P30DA023918, R01DA013444, R01DA024667)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Gambling Behavior and Treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Substance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Educational Games and Gamification
Keywords
problem gambling, gambling addiction, university students, brief motivational intervention, motivational enhancement therapy, cognitive behavioral therapy, brief advice
MeSH terms
Analysis of Variance, Female, Gambling, Humans, Male, Motivation, Patient Acceptance of Health Care, Students, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, Behavior, Addictive, Treatment Outcome, Young Adult

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