Zhai Zu Wei, Yip Sarah W, Steinberg Marvin A, Wampler Jeremy, Hoff Rani A, Krishnan-Sarin Suchitra, Potenza Marc N
Department of Psychiatry, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, 06510, USA.
The National Center on Addictions and Substance Abuse, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, 06510, USA.
J Gambl Stud. 2017 Dec;33(4):1169-1185. doi: 10.1007/s10899-017-9670-x.
The study systematically examined the relative relationships between perceived family and peer gambling and adolescent at-risk/problem gambling and binge-drinking. It also determined the likelihood of at-risk/problem gambling and binge-drinking as a function of the number of different social groups with perceived gambling. A multi-site high-school survey assessed gambling, alcohol use, presence of perceived excessive peer gambling (peer excess-PE), and family gambling prompting concern (family concern-FC) in 2750 high-school students. Adolescents were separately stratified into: (1) low-risk, at-risk, and problem/pathological gambling groups; and, (2) non-binge-drinking, low-frequency-binge-drinking, and high-frequency-binge-drinking groups. Multinomial logistic regression showed that relative to each other, FC and PE were associated with greater likelihoods of at-risk and problem/pathological gambling. However, only FC was associated with binge-drinking. Logistic regression revealed that adolescents who endorsed either FC or PE alone, compared to no endorsement, were more likely to have at-risk and problem/pathological gambling, relative to low-risk gambling. Adolescents who endorsed both FC and PE, compared to PE alone, were more likely to have problem/pathological gambling relative to low-risk and at-risk gambling. Relative to non-binge-drinking adolescents, those who endorsed both FC and PE were more likely to have low- and high-frequency-binge-drinking compared to FC alone or PE alone, respectively. Family and peer gambling individually contribute to adolescent at-risk/problem gambling and binge-drinking. Strategies that target adolescents as well as their closely affiliated family and peer members may be an important step towards prevention of harm-associated levels of gambling and alcohol use in youths.
该研究系统地考察了所感知到的家庭和同伴赌博与青少年危险/问题赌博及酗酒之间的相对关系。研究还确定了危险/问题赌博及酗酒的可能性与存在赌博行为的不同社会群体数量之间的函数关系。一项多地点高中调查评估了2750名高中生的赌博、饮酒情况、所感知到的同伴过度赌博情况（同伴过度赌博-PE）以及引发担忧的家庭赌博情况（家庭担忧-FC）。青少年被分别分层为：（1）低风险、有风险以及问题/病态赌博组；以及（2）非酗酒、低频酗酒以及高频酗酒组。多项逻辑回归分析表明，相对于彼此，FC和PE与有风险及问题/病态赌博的更高可能性相关。然而，只有FC与酗酒相关。逻辑回归分析显示，与未认可相比，单独认可FC或PE的青少年相对于低风险赌博而言，更有可能出现有风险及问题/病态赌博。相对于单独认可PE，同时认可FC和PE的青少年相对于低风险和有风险赌博而言，更有可能出现问题/病态赌博。相对于非酗酒青少年，同时认可FC和PE的青少年分别与单独认可FC或PE相比，更有可能出现低频和高频酗酒。家庭和同伴赌博分别对青少年危险/问题赌博及酗酒有影响。针对青少年及其密切相关的家庭成员和同伴的策略可能是预防青少年赌博和饮酒危害相关水平的重要一步。
