Department of Mathematics and Statistics, University of Guelph, Guelph, Canada.
Department of Psychology, University of Guelph, Guelph, Canada.
J Gambl Stud. 2023 Dec;39(4):1523-1536. doi: 10.1007/s10899-023-10243-w. Epub 2023 Aug 7.
The Problem Gambling Severity Index (PGSI) is considered the "gold standard" for measuring problem gambling. The PGSI provides a single score summed across nine items. The nine items of the PGSI comprise two subdomains: problematic behaviours and adverse consequences. The aim of the present study was to compare evidence of a one-factor structure to evidence of a two-factor structure representing the two subdomains. With a sample of 1,251 bettors, we conducted confirmatory factor analyses and Rasch analyses to assess evidence supporting the one-factor and the two-factor structures. In addition, stochastic search variable selection was conducted with the total PGSI score, PGSI behaviour score, and PGSI adverse consequences score as separate outcomes to examine whether information is lost when collapsing the two subdomains into a single factor. Overall, there was stronger support of a two-factor structure than a one-factor structure. However, the two-factors were highly correlated with one another and shared most predictors except for one. We recommend continued use of the one-factor structure of the PGSI unless one aims to better understand the relationship between problematic behaviours and adverse consequences.
问题赌博严重程度指数（PGSI）被认为是衡量问题赌博的“金标准”。PGSI 通过九个项目的总和提供一个单一分数。PGSI 的九个项目由两个子领域组成：问题行为和不良后果。本研究的目的是比较单因素结构和代表两个子领域的两因素结构的证据。我们对 1251 名赌徒进行了验证性因素分析和 Rasch 分析，以评估支持单因素和两因素结构的证据。此外，还进行了随机搜索变量选择，将总 PGSI 评分、PGSI 行为评分和 PGSI 不良后果评分作为单独的结果进行，以检查将两个子领域合并为一个单一因素时是否会丢失信息。总体而言，两因素结构比单因素结构更具优势。然而，这两个因素彼此高度相关，并且共享大多数预测因素，除了一个。我们建议继续使用 PGSI 的单因素结构，除非目的是更好地了解问题行为和不良后果之间的关系。
