Youth gambling in Alberta : the Alberta Youth Experience Survey 2002

2005·3.6 MB·English

by  Alberta Alcohol and Drug Abuse Commission

TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 3 TABLES
Part I: T AYES Methods Table 1: Measuring gambling problem
and Findings 3 severity 7
Part II: Related Youth Gambling Table 2: The prevalence of gambling
Research 3 among Alberta young people in
grades 7 t o 12 8
INTRODUCTION 4
Table 3: Frequency of participation in
About TAYES 4
gambling activities, all Alberta youth
About This Report 4 (as percentages) 9
Gambling Defined 4 Table 4: Participation in gambling activities,
non-problem gamblers versus hazardous
Gambling in Alberta 4
or problem gamblers (as percentages) 1 1
PART I:
Table 5: Participation in gambling in
TAYES METHODS AND FINDINGS 6 the last 12 months, all Alberta youth
Method 6 (as percentages) 12
TAYES Results 8 Table 6: Prevalence of gambling problems among
Alberta youth who gamble
PART II:
(as percentages) 13
RELATED YOUTH GAMBLING
Table 7; SOGS-RA problems experienced by
RESEARCH— A LITERATURE REVIEW 19 Alberta youth who gamble (as percentages).... 14
Research Methods 19 Table 8: A p rofile of gambling among
Gambling Screens 19 Canadian youth 21
FIGURES
Gambling Behaviour 20
Youth Gambling: Figure 1: Participation in gambling activities
at least once in last 12 months, all Alberta
A Demographic Profile 22
youth, by grade (as percentages) 10
Risk Factors 23
Figure 2: Use of other substances
Discussion and Conclusions 24
by gambling problem severity level 15
REFERENCES 26 Figure 3: Grade level as an indicator
APPENDIX 29 of gambling participation levels
(as percentages) 15
South Oaks Gambling Screen-Revised Figure 4: Risk behaviour of peers as
for Adolescents (SOGS-RA) 29 an indicator of gambling participation
levels (as percentages) 16
Figure 5: Number of close friends who
gamble as an indicator of gambling
participation levels (as percentages) 16
Figure 6: Family history of substance
abuse as an indicator of gambling
participation levels (as percentages) 17
Figure 7; School disconnection as
an indicator of gambling participation
levels (as percentages) 17
Figure 8: Signs of leaving school early
as an indicator of gambling problem
severity (as percentages) 18
Alberta Alcohol and Drug Abuse Commission (AADAC)
Suggested citation
Alberta Alcohol and Drug Abuse Commission. (2005). Youth Gambling in Alberta: The Alberta Youth
Experience Survey 2002. Edmonton, Alberta, Canada; Author.
Citation of this source is appreciated.
The Albena Youih Experience Siu rvey 2002
o
c
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY *
Youth Gambling in Alberta is one of a series of • Alberta young people who are hazardous or
summary reports developed from The Alberta problem gamblers are more likely to have
Youth Experience Survey 2002 (TAYES). It focuses a number of risk factors. They are more likely to
on the gambling behaviour of Alberta adolescents - b e older
in grades 7 to 12.
- h ave close friends who smoke, drink, abuse
The report is structured in two parts:
drugs, break the law, or gamble
• Part I p resents TAYES methods and findings family
- h ave a h istory of substance abuse in their
about youth gambling in Alberta.
• Part II e xplores youth gambling research - f eel disconnected from school
literature that relates to the TAYES findings.
- show signs of leaving school early
Part I: TAYES Methods and Findings
Part II: Related Youth Gambling
• The majority of young people in Alberta Research
(58.8%) do not gamble.
• Young people in Alberta exhibit the same
• An additional third of Alberta youth (31 .7%) general patterns of gambling participation as
are non-problem gamblers. other North American youth.
• A s mall proportion of Alberta youth are • Research about adolescent gambling is
classified as either hazardous gamblers (5.7%) a relatively new field. Further studies are
or problem gamblers (3.8%). This represents needed to establish
13,075 and 8,821 young people respectively.
- risk factors and underlying causes
• The most common youth gambling activities
- g ambling patterns, prevalence, and trends
(based on a pre-selected list) are playing scratch
- l evels of harm related to adolescent gambling
tabs (30.8%), playing cards for money (23.0%),
and betting on sporting events with friends - valid, reliable screening tools to identify
(21.1%). the prevalence and consequences of youth
gambling and problem gambling
• Grade, gender, and ethnicity are all significantly
related to Alberta young people's levels of - standardized operational terminology to
participation in gambling. Young people are describe gambling behaviour and facilitate
more likely to have gambled or to be hazardous
cross-jurisdictional comparisons of youth
or problem gamblers if they are
gambling research
- i n grades 10 to 12 - t he impact of newer, electronic forms
- male
of gambling (including Internet gambling
and video lottery terminals [VLTs]) on young
- A boriginal
• Neither the region of Alberta nor the size
people
of the community in which young people live
is significantly related to levels of participation
in gambling.
INTRODUCTION
About TAYES lem gambling among youth is defined and
measured. It discusses the prevalence of youth
The Alberta Youth Experience Survey 2002 (TAYES)
gambling, the factors that make young people
sought to answer questions about the proportion
susceptible to gambling problems, and the
of Alberta youth who gambled or used alcohol,
consequences of problem gambling.
tobacco or other drugs and the proportion of
Alberta youth who gambled or used substances
Gambling Defined
in a harmful way. The survey also sought to
investigate the factors that AADAC defines gambling as "the act of risking
money or something else of value on an activity
• helped protect adolescents from harmful
substances with an uncertain outcome" (AADAC, 2004).
AADAC (2005) defines problem gambling as
• increased adolescents' risk of substance use
gambling behaviour that adversely affects gamblers
or abuse or gambling
or their families, friends, or communities. It defines
in 2003, the Alberta Alcohol and Drug Abuse the characteristics of problem gambling as
Commission (AADAC) prepared three reports
• continuous or periodic loss of control over
based on TAYES: a summary report (Alberta
Alcohol and Drug Abuse Commission [AADAC], gambling behaviour
2003c), a technical report (AADAC, 2003d), • preoccupation with gambling and with obtain-
and an overview of risk and protective factors ing money to gamble
(AADAC, 2003b). The current report is one of • irrational thinking
a series of special topical reports intended for use
• continuation of gambling behaviour despite
by professional educators and addictions workers.
Like other TAYES topical reports, it is intended to negative consequences
provide more detail on TAYES results and relevant Problem gambling can create ongoing, serious
literature than is contained in the summary report
consequences such as depression, stress-related
(AADAC, 2003c). conditions such as insomnia and back pain,
Additional copies of this and other reports interpersonal conflict, alienation from family and
related to TAYES can be ordered from AADAC or friends, criminal behaviour, and poor performance
downloaded for free from the AADAC website. at school or at work (AADAC, 2005).
Some researchers suggest there is no clear
About This Report
transition point between gambling and problem
The introduction to this report provides a working gambling. Rather, gambling behaviour varies over
definition of gambling and an overview of the
the course of a gambler's lifetime and can move
gambling scene in Alberta. back and forth between non-problematic and
Part I of the report summarizes TAYES results severely problematic (Ontario Problem Gambling
Research Centre, 2003; Canadian Health
related to youth gambling. It also describes
Network, n.d.).
the study sample and method.
Part II o f the report explores youth gambling
Gambling in Alberta
research literature that relates to the TAYES
Gambling is a rapidly growing industry that creates
findings. It discusses youth gambling within
the context of gambling in Alberta and Canada employment and generates billions of dollars for
government programs, for the tourism industry, for
< as a whole. It outlines the various ways that prob-
arts and culture, and for charities and communities
Ea The Alberta Youth Experience Survey 2002
The Alberta Youth Experience Survey Ji..
across the province. In 2003-2004, gambling raised Horse racing is regulated by the Alberta Racing
$226 million for Alberta charities (an increase of Corporation under the Horse Racing Alberta Act.
9.7% from the previous year) and contributed Internet gambling, playing cards for money (except
more than 4% ($1.2 billion) to the province's total in casinos), and online or in-person betting on
revenue (Alberta Finance, 2004; P. Arnold-Schutta, sporting events are covered under the Criminal
persona! communication, April, 2005). Code of Canada.
Although the personal and social costs of gambling Gambling age restrictions are set by the Gaming
are still not well understood, most Canadians view and Liquor Act and Alberta Gaming and Liquor
gambling as a socially accepted activity (Azmier, Commission policy (Alberta Gaming, 2005; J.
2001a). Annett, personal communication, March 2005).
Policy dictates that minors cannot buy or redeem
Most gambling in Alberta (James, 2003) is
lottery tickets, raffle tickets, or pull tickets.
governed by Canada's Criminal Code* and
The Gaming and Liquor Act dictates that VLTs
by the province's Gaming and Liquor Act.
The Act is administered and regulated by are allowed only on premises that are off-limits
to minors — although the law does not actually
the Alberta Gaming and Liquor Commission.
It covers prohibit minors from playing VLTs. The Gaming
and Liquor Act also prohibits minors from entering
• charitable gaming (including bingos, casinos, casinos and bingo facilities that offer electronic
raffles, pull tickets)
gaming.
• provincial lotteries (including VLTs, slot machines
and ticket lotteries)
• liquor sales and consumption
* The Criminal Code gives provinces sole authority to manage and conduct gambling activities.
PART I
TAYES METHODS AND FINDINGS
Method The young people in the sample ranged from 1 1 to
20 years old, although most (96.2%) were between
TAYES 2002 was based on an 84-question survey
administered to a representative sample of Alberta 12 and 17. Two per cent (2%) of the sample were
between 18 and 20 years old.
young people in grades 7 to 12. This report
analyzes the data collected for TAYES 2002. Data Collection and Analysis
The survey methods are reported in detail in
TAYES participants completed an 84-question survey
The Alberta Youth Experience Survey 2002: Technical administered by research staff in October and
Report {AADAC, 2003d). November 2002. The survey and the process for
Ethics, Confidentiality and Consent administering it were tested in one school with
TAYES 2002 was conducted in compliance with the students in grades 7 t o 12. (The French-language
Health Information Act and the Freedom of version of the survey was tested in a French
immersion class.)
Information and Protection of Privacy Act. Ethics
approval was granted by the Community Research Details about the survey process are outlined in
Ethics Board of Alberta. the TAYES technical report (AADAC, 2003d).
The report also describes the quality control
Active, informed parental consent was obtained in
accordance with the requirements of the ethics measures taken to ensure the validity of the data.
review board (see the TAYES technical report
Chi-square tests were conducted on the six demo-
[AADAC, 2003d] for details). The TAYES parental graphic variables used to analyze the gambling
consent response rate of 52% is consistent with behaviour of TAYES participants. Details about
those of similar surveys that required active analysis methods, statistical significance measures,
informed consent.
and confidence intervals are provided in the TAYES
Schools that took part in the survey kept the technical report (AADAC, 2003d).
names of participants and their parents confiden- The Gambling Screen
tial. Research staff had no access to these names,
TAYES 2002 included 14 questions designed to
nor were the names of participating schools collect information about youth gambling. One survey
made public. Survey results were reported on question established the prevalence and frequency
an aggregate basis and did not identify individuals,
of gambling by asking respondents to indicate how
communities, or schools.
often they participated in eight gambling or betting
The Sample activities. Another question determined survey
The TAYES 2002 survey sample of 3,394 is represen- participants' age when they first gambled or bet
tative of m ost Alberta young people in grades 7 t o for money or possessions. The South Oaks Gambling
12. The survey sample was designed as a stratified Screen-Revised for Adolescents (SOGS-RA)* comprised
random cluster sample with selection proportionate an additional 12 questions designed to identify
to classroom size. It was stratified by five regions hazardous (at-risk) and problem gambling behaviour.
This screen has been used extensively in adolescent
aggregated from regional health authority bound-
aries as t hey existed in April 2002 and by school gambling studies in Canada and the United States
grade. The survey was administered in randomly (Rossen, 2001; Langhinrichsen-Rohling, Rohling,
selected classrooms in 89 schools in 39 school Rohde, & S eeley, 2004). SOGS-RA includes
divisions throughout the province. Private, federal 16 questions, 12 of which are scored to identify
and provincial schools were excluded. problem gambling behaviour (Derevensky
s
< * The original South Oaks Gambling Screen (SOGS) — published by Henry Lesieur and Sheila Burns
in 1987 — was revised and adapted for adolescents by Winters, Stinchfield, and Fulkerson in 1993.
MB The Alberta Youth Experience Survey 2002
The Albefia Youih £»pei>ehce Survey 2002
& G upta, 2000; Langhinrichsen-Rohling et al., identify individuals who showed signs of having
2004). Each question deals with a possible gambling problems. Most research studies based
gambling problem: a score of 1 (rather than 0) on SOGS-RA use the terms "at-risk gamblers"
indicates that the problem applies. The overall and "problem gamblers" instead This report uses
SOGS-RA score, which is the sum of the points the terms "hazardous" and "problem gamblers."
for all 12 questions, can range from 0 t o 12.
In the TAYES study, SOGS-RA scores were used in
Only the 12 scored questions of the SOGS-RA conjunction with gambling frequency to construct
screen were included in the TAYES questionnaire. a f our-level scale of gambling problem severity
The questions and details about how each was
• Non-gamblers indicated no gambling behaviour
scored are included in the appendix.
• Non-problem gamblers reported
SOGS-RA scores identify problem gambling in one
of two ways (Poulin, 2000); - g ambling about once a week and having
no problems (SOGS-RA = 0 ), or
• by using narrow criteria, which consider only
the question scores - g ambling less frequently (from once a month
to several times a y ear) and having one
• by using broad criteria, which consider SOGS-RA
of 1 2 p ossible problems (SOGS-RA = 1 )
scores in conjunction with gambling frequency
• Hazardous ("at-risk") gamblers reported
In both approaches, predetermined cut-off scores
- g ambling weekly and having one problem
are used to classify adolescents as non-gamblers,
(SOGS-RA = 1), or
non-problem gamblers, at-risk gamblers, or prob-
lem gamblers. - g ambling less frequently and having two or
TAYES 2002 used broad criteria to interpret survey more problems (SOGS-RA ^ 2 )
participants' SOGS-RA scores. (This approach was • Problem ("potential problem") gamblers reported
also used in adolescent gambling studies conduct-
- g ambling daily (regardless of the SOGS-RA
ed in t he Atlantic provinces in 1998.) To facilitate score), or
comparisons of the study's gambling results with
its results for alcohol, tobacco, and illicit drug use, - g ambling weekly and having two or more
problems (SOGS-RA ^ 2 )
TAYES used the labels "hazardous gamblers" to
identify individuals at risk of developing gambling Table 1 shows how gambling severity levels were
assigned.
problems and "potential problem gamblers" to
Table 1: Measuring gambling problem severity
Gambling frequency SOGS-RA score 0 SOGS-RA score 1 SOGS-RA score 2 or higher
Not at all Non-gamblers N/A
N/A
Several times a y ear Non-problem gamblers Non-problem gamblers Hazardous gamblers
Less than once a month Non-problem gamblers Non-problem gamblers Hazardous gamblers
About once a month Non-problem gamblers Non-problem gamblers Hazardous gamblers
About once a week Non-problem gamblers Hazardous gamblers Problem gamblers
Daily
Problem gamblers Problem gamblers Problem gamblers
Limitations TAYES results cannot be generalized to youth who
Methodological limitations of TAYES are identified are not attending school (e.g., street youth), or
in the technical report (AADAC, 2003d). Only limi- to youth who go to private, federal, or provincial
tations relevant to the analysis of youth gambling schools since these groups were not included
behaviour are identified in the following section. in the sample.
Using a multi-stage stratified sample design The SOGS-RA screening tool used in the TAYES
requires weighting to adjust the sample propor- study imposes additional limitations (see
tions to reflect the subpopulation values in their "Gambling Screens" in Part II o f this report). More
true proportions. Using weighted data has two research is needed to assess the construct validity
implications: of the SOGS-RA. As well, the cut-off points used
in this study may overestimate the prevalence of
1) If t he sample is not representative of the strata,
problem gambling. Because the area of adolescent
applying a weight factor exaggerates the bias.
gambling is fairly new and different studies of
2) Using weighted data increases level of
youth gambling use different screens and cut-off
significance. points, comparisons across studies are difficult.
As a result, for better representation of the popula-
TAYES Results
tion, the frequencies reported in this summary
were based on weighted data. However, statistical Gambling Behaviour
tests were conducted on unweighted data so TAYES findings for Alberta young people in grades
that significance levels could be estimated more 7 to 12 show that the majority (58.8%) do not
accurately.
gamble. Almost a third (31.7%) gamble, but have
The small number of young people in some no gambling problems. A s mall percentage (5.7%)
subgroups precluded the use of statistical tests are classified as hazardous gamblers, and 3.8%
for some proportional differences. For this reason, have gambling problems (see Table 2)
hazardous and problem gamblers were often
reported together.
Table 2: The prevalence of gambling among Alberta young people in
grades 7 t o 12*
Gambling classification level Percentage of Alberta youth
58.8
Non-gamblers (no gambling behaviour)
Non-problem gamblers (gamble and report 0 o r 1 of 12 possible problems) 31.7
Hazardous gamblers (gamble frequently and report 1 problem
OR gamble less frequently and report 2 o r more problems)
5.7
Problem gamblers (gamble daily OR gamble weekly and report 2 o r more problems) 3.8
s
* G ambling problems were identified by using SOGS-RA scores in conjunction with gambling frequency. See p. 7 f or details.
The Alberta Youth Experience Survey 2002