Article

Behavioural Addictions in Adolescents and Young Adults: Results from a Prevalence Study

Institute of Psychiatry and Psychology, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Largo Francesco Vito 1, Rome, Italy.
Journal of Gambling Behavior (Impact Factor: 1.28). 06/2011; 27(2):203-14. DOI: 10.1007/s10899-010-9206-0
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Our study aims to assess the prevalence of behavioural addictions in an adolescent population, evaluating the effects of gender and age, and to assess the correlations among different behavioural addictions. 2853 high school students were assessed in order to evaluate the prevalence of behavioural addictions such as Pathological Gambling (PG), Compulsive Buying (CB), Exercise Addiction (EA), Internet Addiction (IA), and Work Addiction (WA), in a population of Italian adolescents. The South Oaks Gambling Screen-Revised Adolescent (SOGS-RA), the Compulsive Buying Scale (CBS), the Exercise Addiction Inventory (EAI), the Internet Addiction Test (IAT), and the Work Addiction Risk Test (WART), were compiled anonymously by the students. Overall prevalence was 7.0% for PG, 11.3% for CB, 1.2% for IA, 7.6% for WA, 8.5% for EA. PG and EA were more common among boys, while gender had no effect on the other conditions. CB was more common among younger (<18 years old) students. The scores of all of these scales were significantly correlated. The strong correlation among different addictive behaviours is in line with the hypothesis of a common psychopathological dimension underlying these phenomena. Further studies are needed to assess personality traits and other clinical disorders associated with these problems behaviours.

Download full-text

Full-text

Available from: Giovanni Martinotti, Jan 08, 2014
1 Follower
 · 
175 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The aim of this study was to explore the relations between gambling, brain emotion systems, personality, self/other perception, and hopelessness in an Italian community. Dimensions of gambling, positive and negative emotions, self/other perception, personality and hopelessness were assessed in a community sample of 235 adults aged 19-59 years. Two structural models were tested. We found a significant correlation between problem gambling and impulsivity, which in association with aggressivity and negative personality dimensions may help explain the psychopathology factor, i.e. a latent variable involving neurotic personality, hopelessness, high sensation seeking, low metacognitive responsiveness, and disorganized patterns of interpersonal relationships. These results contribute to develop a theoretical framework of gambling in relation with personality factors and provide a new approach for clinical intervention of problem gambling that relies on a solid multidimensional perspective.
    Journal of Gambling Behavior 04/2015; DOI:10.1007/s10899-015-9543-0 · 1.28 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Due to the problems of measurement and the lack of nationally representative data, the extent of compulsive buying behaviour (CBB) is relatively unknown. The validity of three different instruments was tested: Edwards Compulsive Buying Scale (ECBS; Edwards, E.A., 1993. Development of a new scale for measuring compulsive buying behaviour. Financial Counseling and Planning. 4, 67-85), Questionnaire About Buying Behavior (QABB; Lejoyeux, M., Ades, J., 1994. Les achats pathologiques: une addiction comportementale. Neuro-Psy. 9, 25-32.) and Richmond Compulsive Buying Scale (RCBS; Ridgway, N.M., Kukar-Kinney, M., Monroe, K.B., 2008. An expanded conceptualization and a new measure of compulsive buying. Journal of Consumer Research. 35, 622-639.) using two independent samples. One was nationally representative of the Hungarian population (N=2710) while the other comprised shopping mall customers (N=1447). As a result, a new, four-factor solution for the ECBS was developed (Edwards Compulsive Buying Scale Revised (ECBS-R)), and confirmed the other two measures. Additionally, cut-off scores were defined for all measures. Results showed that the prevalence of CBB is 1.85% (with QABB) in the general population but significantly higher in shopping mall customers (8.7% with ECBS-R, 13.3% with QABB and 2.5% with RCBS-R). Conclusively, due to the diversity of content, each measure identifies a somewhat different CBB group. Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.
    Psychiatry Research 12/2014; 225(3). DOI:10.1016/j.psychres.2014.11.080 · 2.68 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Pathological gambling (PG) is an addictive disorder with harm related to the high psychiatric comorbidity and increased suicidal risk. Prevalence rates in general population range from 0.2% to 2.1%. Problem gamblers are hard to attract to treatment programs for several proper reasons and for obstacles (e.g., accessibility). To address these obstacles, primary care (where the problem gambling (PrG) prevalence seems to be 6.2%) has a crucial role to play (i.e., identifying and referring patients to specialized treatment programs and treating at first line when needed and possible) in the era of online gambling offer expansion. The present work aimed to collect data on resources in the field from GPs themselves, using a 24-item online questionnaire. Swiss French-speaking participants were asked about their screening practice and knowledge. The results state that the vast majority of them are aware of the existence and the potential impact of PrG on their patients. However, PrG screening is not systematic and their knowledge of adequate treatments or referral methods is scarce. GPs being central to health screening in general, targeted advice and training on short screening tools and better knowledge of referral pathways should be promoted and continued to empower the GP's management skills in a public health approach.
    BioMed Research International 09/2014; special issue(Novel Psychoactive Substances and Behavioral Addictions (NPS)):(In Press). DOI:10.1155/2014/360585 · 2.71 Impact Factor