Considering law in Germany - do adolescents gamble ...easg.org/media/file/loutraki2012/pres_pdf_loutraki_2012/...Duven & Giralt et al. (2011) 2.2% PAGE-Studie - Mayer et al. (2011)

Kompetenzzentrum Verhaltenssucht

Ambulanz für Spielsucht

Outpatient clinic for behavioral addictions Clinic and policlinic for psychosomatic medicine and psychotherapie

Considering law in Germany - do adolescents gamble? Results from a representative German survey

EASG, Loutraki 2012

S. Giralt,

E. Duven, K. Wölfling, M. E. Beutel, M. Dreier & K. W. Müller



2

Agenda Gambling and legislation … in Germany … and youth

Empirical background: Gambling -

Delinquency & emotional and conduct problems

Results from a representative German survey

Conclusion



3

Gambling State-

licenced Commercial

national Lotteries

Casinos

Roulette, Poker,

Black Jack

Slot-machines

Slot-machines

Gambling Halls

Internet

Implementation laws

State Treaty on Gambling Trade

Regulation

Gaming Ordinance

Gaming machines with profit

opportunity

First amendment of the state treaty on gambling

Gastro-nomy



Trümper (2012); Arbeitskreis gegen Spielsucht e. V.

Commercial Gambling Market Germany 2006 - 2012

4

Changes

Gambling hall conzessions

Gambling halls

Slotmachines

in total



75 Casinos in Germany

ID- Registration is mandatory Training of the staff

Employee in charge of the gamblers

protection

Nationwide system of exclusion of gamblers for state approved gambling offers (Exclusion period: ≥1 year)

Disclosure of financial situation and psychological assessment in order to be able to gamble again

5

Gambling in Germany



6

Gambling State-

licenced Commercial

national Lotteries

Casinos

Roulette, Poker,

Black Jack

Slot-machines

Slot-machines

Gambling Halls

Gastro-nomy

Internet

< 18 Years

Implementation laws

Trade Regulation

Gaming Ordinance

Protection of Young

Persons Act

Gaming machine

with profit opportunity

First amendment of the state treaty on gambling



International Prevalences: Pathological Gambling

7

PAGE-Study - Mayer et al. (2011) 1.0%

Prevalence within youths:

Welte et al. (2008) 2.1%

Volberg et al. (2010) 2.2%

Ipsos (2009) 6.0%

Jaakkola (2009) 2.3%

Olason et al. (2010) 2.2%

Duven & Giralt et al. (2011) 2.2%

PAGE-Studie - Mayer et al. (2011) 1.5%



Massive structural changes Increased drive to explore the world and discover new things Human reaction to new experiences: Dopamine release in important motivational / rewarding areas of the brain*** Permanent search for new experiences development of the control areas of the brain not synchronously

Youth and gambling: neurobiology in adolescence Why is gambling in that age hazardous?

***Ljungberg, Apicella & Schultz, 1992; Waelti, Dickinson & Schultz, 2001

Youths are more vulnerable for high-

risk behavior

High-risk behavior

New Experiences

risk of performing rewarding behaviors

excessively

combination of sensitivity towards

gratification control

Particularly rewarding for youths

8



Youth, gambling and delinquency Barnes et al., 2005: two regional longitudinal samples

Correlation of gambling, substance use and delinquency problem behaviors shared antecedents within three explanatory

domains sociodemographic factors, individual factors socialization factors Vitaro et al., 2001: longitudinal survey; 707 boys; 13/14 yrs.

Impulsivity, low parental supervision, deviant friends predict gambling and delinquency

9



Youth, gambling & Emotional and Conduct Problems

Tsitsika et al., 2011, cross-sectional study, n = 484 ECP associated with Internet Gambling Adolescent Internet gamblers: show higher mean Conduct and Peer Problems scores than

control group > 3x more likely to have Abnormal Conduct Problems Score greater likelihood of presenting with behavioral and social

problems in comparison to non-internet gambling controls

Hardoon et al., 2004: 2,336 students in Grades 7-13 probable PG show sign. higher levels of conduct problems

than other gamblers or non-gamblers

10



Survey: Procedure and

Results

11



Representative survey: Aim & Participants Main aim of the study: Prevalence of problematic gambling in youths in RLP

almost 4000 pupils from 12 to 18 years

• 41 comprehensive schools n= 2.355

• Secondary modern school (Hauptschule) • Junior high school (Realschule) • Comprehensive school (Gesamtschule) • Secondary school (Gymnasium)

• 14 Vocational schools n = 1.612

• Vocational preparatory school (BVJ) • Technical school (Berufsfachschule) • Vocational School (Höhere Berufsfachschule) • Berufliches Gymnasium • Fachschule • Berufsschule

12



Representative survey: Sampling points

13

Number of questionnaires 1-100 101-200 201-370 Sampling points < 10.000 > 10.000 > 100.000 > 100.000



Representative survey: Questionnaire 18 Pages in 45 min. (one period)

14

p<.05*; p<.01**; p<.001***

Assessed research fields Questionnaire

Problematic/PG DSM-IV-MR-J (Fisher, 1999; germ. Version Hurrelmann, 2003)

Personality & Behavioral Dispositions

• PANAS (Krohne, Egloff, Kohlmann & Tausch, 1996) • SWE (Schwarzer & Jerusalem, 1999) • NEO-FFI (Costa & McCrae, 1992) • Eating-Disorder-Inventory (EDI-2; Paul & Thiel, 2004)

Clinical screener • Strenghts and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ; Goodman, 1997)

Migration background

• Fragebogen zu Akkulturationsstrategien (Diehl & Ochsmann, 2000) • Skala zu Gewaltlegitimierenden Männlichkeitsnormen (Nisbett & Cohen, 1996)



Representative survey: Results

15

Prevalence of gambling within pupils

Gambling offer 12-months-prevalence

Lifetime-prevalence

Card games 23.7% 35.8%

Scratchcards 15.8% 34.0%

Slotmachines 14.2% 19.5%

Total 41.2% 64.3%




16

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

Bar Gambling hall Internet

Preferred gambling site

Total

male

female




17

Prevalence of at-risk & problem gambling within pupils

Classification Total Sample N = 3967

Problematic gambling 2.2% (n=87)

At- Risk gambling 3.7% (n=148)

Total 5.9% (n=235)




18

p<.05*; p<.01**; p<.001***

Frequency of delinquent behavior in gamblers & Problematic Gamblers

Delinquency: 6 Items „Have you ever …“

PrG Gamblers Effect size (φ) N = 57 N = 847

% (n) % (n)

… gotten in conflict with the law? 75.4% (43) 35.6% (300) .20***

… been charged with an offense by the police? 75.4% (43) 30.8% (261) .23***

… been convicted for a criminal offense? 63.2% (36) 16.7% (142) .28***

… served a prison sentence? 19.3% (11) 1.4% (12) .28***

… had to serve community service? 37.5% (21) 13.0% (110) .17***

… done something illegal to be able to gamble? 70.2% (40) 17.4% (147) .32***



Results: general delinquency in sample

19

Yes in % (n) male yes in %

female yes in % Sign.

Conflict with law 29.3% (473) 39.8% 17.4% .25***

Offense by police 25.4% (409) 36.3% 12.6% .27***

Criminal offense 14.8% (239) 21.4% 7.1% .20***

Prison sentence 1.6% (25) 2.6% 0.3% .10***

Community work 10.6% (171) 14.9% 5.6% .15***

Illegal act for gambling 12.5% (202) 18.6% 5.5% .20***

Delinquent behavior appears often in the sample; men are far more often delinquent then women

p<.05*; p<.01**; p<.001***



Results: Clininical groups (PrG) & delinquency

Experiences with delinquency:

20

Gambling No yes in %

Occasional yes in %

At risk yes in %

Problematic yes in % Sign.

Conflict with law 18.0% 32.6% 57.9% 74.1% .29***

Offense by police 14.6% 28.2% 51.3% 74.1% .30***

Criminal offense 8.5% 14.8% 32.9% 63.8% .31***

Prison sentence 0.3% 1.4% 1.3% 19.0% .28***

Community work 5.6% 11.0% 31.6% 36.8% .24***

Illegal act for gambling 2.2% 14.0% 51.3% 69.0% .46***

p<.05*; p<.01**; p<.001***

Problematic Gamblers show clearly heigthened delinquency in all items



Gamblers vs. non-gamblers and experiences with delinquency:

Results: Sum score delinquency

21

No Gambling Gambler

Delinquency (Mean value) 0.8*** 1.4***

p<.05*; p<.01**; p<.001***

The correlation of delinquency and gambling appears in a global manner as well. The correlation shows only in males.

0,0

0,5

1,0

1,5

2,0

2,5

3,0

3,5

Problematic At risk Occasional Non

Mea

n va

lue

delin

quen

cy

Gambler

Differences in delinquency & clinical groups

Inter-group difference highly significant (p<.001)

Interaction effect within

gender



Results: Emotional and conduct problems

22

p<.01**; p<.001***

*** ***

***

*** n.s.

The Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) Brief self-rating test for children and adolescents

Comprises conduct and emotional problems

5 subscales: - Prosocial behavior - Peer problems - Hyperactivity - Conduct problems - Emotional symptoms

Subscales and sum score

PrG M (SD)

Gambler M (SD) Effect size

Prosocial behavior 6.1 (2.8) 7.4 (2.2) .30**

Peer problems 3.2 (2.3) 2.2 (1.6) 1.2***

Hyperactivity 4.9 (2.2) 3.8 (2.2) .53***

Conduct problems 4.5 (2.5) 2.4 (1.7) .60***

Emotional Symptoms 3.4 (2.6) 2.7 (2.3) .56***

Sum score 16.1 (5.7) 11.0 (5.4) .92***

Problematic Gamblers show in all items worse scores



Results: Emotional and conduct problems

23

p<.001***

0

5

10

15

20

SD

Q

Non-Gambleroccasionalat riskProblematic

***

*** ***

***

*** n.s.



Conclusion Prevalence of problematic gambling in pupils between 12 to 18 years 2.2%

Young gamblers show…:

less prosocial behavior more peer problems / Hyperactivity / Conduct problems / Emotional Symptoms more problems on average

Gamblers: mostly male delinquent adolescences improved youth protection is necessary legal protection sufficient prevention projects (concepts in jails) Causality?

Antisocial personality disorder (PAGE: 12% PG; 3.6% ARG)

24



Do you have any questions? …thank you for your kind attention!!!

Sebastian Giralt [email protected]

Documents

Considering law in Germany - do adolescents gamble ...easg.org/media/file/loutraki2012/pres_pdf_loutraki_2012/...Duven & Giralt et al. (2011) 2.2% PAGE-Studie - Mayer et al. (2011)