On the latent structure of problem gambling: a taxometric analysis

Aims To test whether problem gambling is a categorical or dimensional disorder on the basis of two problem gambling assessments. This distinction discriminates between two different conceptualizations of problem gambling: one that problem gambling is defined by its addictive properties, the other th...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Addiction (Abingdon, England) England), 2014-10, Vol.109 (10), p.1707-1717
Hauptverfasser: James, Richard J. E., O'Malley, Claire, Tunney, Richard J.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Aims To test whether problem gambling is a categorical or dimensional disorder on the basis of two problem gambling assessments. This distinction discriminates between two different conceptualizations of problem gambling: one that problem gambling is defined by its addictive properties, the other that it is a continuum of harm. Method Using The British Gambling Prevalence Survey 2010, a nationally representative sample of the United Kingdom conducted by the National Centre for Social Research, five different taxometric analyses were carried out on cases from two problem gambling screens: the Problem Gambling Severity Index (PGSI) and a measure derived from the DSM‐IV Pathological Gambling criteria. Two further analyses were conducted on the total scores for these measures. Results There was strong evidence that both scales were measuring a categorical construct. Fit indices consistently supported a categorical interpretation [comparison curve fit index (CCFI) > 0.6]. The PGSI analysis indicated the presence of a taxon (CCFIs = 0.633, 0.756). The analysis conducted on the adapted DSM‐IV criteria indicated stronger quantitative support for a taxon (CCFIs = 0.717, 0.811 and 0.756) but items probing a loss of control were inconsistent. The taxometric analyses of both scales support a categorical interpretation (CCFIs = 0.628, 0.567), but extreme caution should be used due to high nuisance covariance. Conclusions Two problem gambling screens (the Problem Gambling Severity Index and a measure derived from the DSM‐IV Pathological Gambling criteria) appear to measure a categorical construct that taps into a categorical, loss of control model of problem gambling. There is some evidence that the two screens measure different aspects of an addiction construct.
ISSN:0965-2140
1360-0443
DOI:10.1111/add.12648