School of Psychology.
Psychol Addict Behav. 2021 Dec;35(8):914-920. doi: 10.1037/adb0000687. Epub 2021 Feb 11.
Crowdsourcing is an increasingly popular source of participants in studies of problem gambling. Studies with crowdsourced samples have reported prevalence rates of problem gambling between 10 and 50 times higher than traditional sources of estimates. These elevated rates may be due to study framing motivating self-selection. In this preregistered study, we examined whether study framing influences self-reported problem gambling severity and harmful alcohol use in a sample of participants recruited from a popular crowdsourcing website.
Two recruitment notices for an online questionnaire were placed on Amazon Mechanical Turk (MTurk). Notices were framed as "Gambling and Health" or "Alcohol and Health." Only participants who passed data checks were retained for confirmatory analyses ( = 564; 44% of recruited participants). Participants in the gambling framing ( = 261) and in the alcohol framing ( = 303) were compared on the Problem Gambling Severity Index (PGSI) and Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT).
Problem gambling rates and severity scores were significantly greater for participants in the gambling framing compared to those in the alcohol framing. Self-reported scores of harmful alcohol use were significantly greater for participants in the alcohol framing compared to those in the gambling framing, but there was no significant difference in prevalence rates for harmful alcohol use.
Study framing is an important consideration for gambling and alcohol research. We found that study framing may substantially increase the observed rates of problem gambling severity in crowdsourced samples, potentially via encouragement of self-selection. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).
众包是一种越来越受欢迎的参与者来源,用于研究赌博问题。使用众包样本的研究报告的赌博问题患病率是传统估计来源的 10 到 50 倍。这些升高的比率可能是由于研究框架激励了自我选择。在这项预先注册的研究中,我们在一个受欢迎的众包网站上招募的参与者样本中,检验了研究框架是否会影响自我报告的赌博问题严重程度和有害酒精使用。
在亚马逊机械土耳其(MTurk)上发布了两个关于在线问卷的招聘通知。通知的框架是“赌博与健康”或“酒精与健康”。只有通过数据检查的参与者才保留用于确认性分析(=564;招募参与者的 44%)。赌博框架中的参与者(=261)和酒精框架中的参与者(=303)在赌博问题严重程度指数(PGSI)和酒精使用障碍识别测试(AUDIT)上进行了比较。
与酒精框架相比,赌博框架中的参与者的赌博问题发生率和严重程度得分显著更高。与赌博框架相比,酒精框架中的参与者的自我报告的有害酒精使用得分显著更高,但有害酒精使用的患病率没有显著差异。
研究框架是赌博和酒精研究的一个重要考虑因素。我们发现,研究框架可能会通过鼓励自我选择,大大增加众包样本中观察到的赌博问题严重程度的发生率。