Assessment

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Free Access - Register Here

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Weinstock, J.
Right arrow Articles by McCausland, C.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Weinstock, J.
Right arrow Articles by McCausland, C.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
Assessment, Vol. 14, No. 4, 399-407 (2007)
DOI: 10.1177/1073191107305273

The Performance of Two Pathological Gambling Screens in College Students

Jeremiah Weinstock

University of Connecticut Health Center, weinstock{at}psychiatry.uchc.edu.

James P. Whelan

University of Memphis

Andrew W. Meyers

University of Memphis

Claudia McCausland

University of Memphis

The psychometric properties of two pathological gambling (PG) screening instruments, the South Oaks Gambling Screen (SOGS) and the Massachusetts Gambling Screen—DSM-IV subscale (MAGS), were explored in a sample of college students (N = 159). Participants completed the two screening instruments, a diagnostic interview for PG, the Gambling—Timeline Followback (G-TLFB), Gambling Self-E ficacy Questionnaire (GSEQ), and the Hopkins Symptom Checklist (HSCL). Both screening measures were found to have adequate internal consistency and were highly correlated with each other and the diagnostic interview. The screening measures demonstrated convergent and discriminant validity. Using the diagnostic interview as the criterion measure, the SOGS demonstrated better sensitivity in identifying PG college students than the MAGS. The MAGS demonstrated better specificity in identifying non-PG college students than the SOGS. The results of this study suggest that although neither measure is perfect in identifying PG college students, the SOGS is a more appropriate measure for screening purposes.

Key Words: pathological gambling • college students • screening • psychometric properties


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?