Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36565358›Full record

ArticleJournal of gambling studies2023

Cognitive Factors that Predict Gambling Fallacy Endorsement.

Carrie A Shaw, Robert J Williams, V Toria Violo, Jennifer N Williams, Zsolt Demetrovics, Paul Delfabbro

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of gambling studies, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Carrie A ShawUniversity of Lethbridge, Lethbridge, Canada. carrieann.shaw1@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1949-0084
Robert J WilliamsUniversity of Lethbridge, Lethbridge, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9558-9588
V Toria VioloMount Royal University, Calgary, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5359-1789
Jennifer N WilliamsUniversity of Lethbridge, Lethbridge, Canada.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1878-9727
Zsolt DemetrovicsCentre for Excellence in Responsible Gaming, University of Gibraltar, Gibraltar, Gibraltar.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5604-7551
Paul DelfabbroSchool of Psychology, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0466-5611

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Gambling fallacies are a collection of error-stricken beliefs about gambling and how gambling works. Gambling fallacies, while common in the general public, appear to increase as a function of gambling severity. This being the case, many interventions have focused on reducing gambling fallacies as a means of treating problem-gambling. Less research, however, has investigated what factors contributes to gambling fallacy susceptibility in the first place. Available studies have identified associations between gambling fallacy susceptibility and isolated individual differences in, for example, statistical reasoning/understanding, intelligence, or cognitive ability. The current study aimed to assess these cognitive factors in conjunction, and their relative predictive potential for gambling fallacy susceptibility. In an Australian university student sample (n = 90) it was found that there were moderate to strong association between gambling fallacy endorsement and general intelligence, probabilistic reasoning ability, rational cognitive style and the ability to suppress intuitive thought, however, only probabilistic reasoning, rational cognitive style and the ability to suppress intuitive thinking contributed to the prediction of fallacy endorsement. Importantly, each of these factors are malleable. Interventions for the correction of gambling-specific fallacious beliefs should focus on these factors.

Indexed as

GamblingAustraliaCognitionHumansIndividualityThinkingCognitionCognitive abilityCognitive styleErroneous cognitionsGambling fallaciesProblem gambling

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.