Can Positive Play Deficits Explain the Associations Between Posttraumatic Stress Symptoms, Gambling Motives, and Problem Gambling? Results of a National U.S. Sample.

Past research has demonstrated a consistent connection between symptoms of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and problematic gambling in both general and clinical United States (U.S.) populations. Little is known, however, about the mediating role that responsible gambling practices related to positive play might have in the relationships between symptoms of PTSD, problem gambling (PG) severity, and different motives for gambling. Therefore, using mediation analysis, this study investigated these associations within a census-matched national sample of U.S. adults (N = 2,806). Results indicated PTSD symptoms and PG often co-occur in this population (r = .43, p < .01), and coping motives for gambling were the key mechanism connecting PTSD symptoms to PG severity rather than deficits in positive play practices or other gambling motives. Moreover, it was found that the average gambler who had sought treatment for gambling in the past not only had more severe PTSD symptoms and PG but also had the strongest gambling motives, the largest deficits in positive play, and was more likely to be younger than 50 years old. In this sample, approximately 1 in 10 people who gambled in the past year were classified as problem gamblers, 1 in 5 met criteria for a provisional PTSD diagnosis, and 1 in 33 sought out gambling treatment previously. These findings provide further evidence for the relationship between symptoms of posttraumatic stress and problematic gambling behaviors in the U.S. population and offer critical insights into the explanatory roles of coping motives and positive play practices in this connection.

A Comment: Positive Play is a Subset of Responsible Gambling.

Confronted with criticisms focused on the nature of Responsible Gambling (RG), this article suggests that Positive Play (PP) is a conceptual subset of Responsible Gambling and not a fully developed and independent harm prevention or reduction framework. To advance public health initiatives and focus public policy. This article reviews and clarifies some of the confusing and subtle difference between Responsible Gambling and Positive Play. The discussion defines the notion of responsibility, Responsible Gambling, and Positive Play. We recognize that well-developed RG activities permit and encourage the underpinnings of PP. However, when viewed as a dependent measure, PP does not intend to reduce the prevalence of gambling-related harms or prevent the incidence of gambling-related harms. These objectives are the two basic and fundamental requirements to classify any activity as a RG program.

A Comparison of Two GameSense Implementation Approaches: How Program Awareness and Engagement Relate to Gambling Beliefs and Behaviors.

Despite the size and scope of responsible gambling (RG) programs in the U.S., relatively few studies have evaluated these programs. Using survey data from 4795 subscribers to a casino loyalty program, we examined respondents' awareness of and engagement with the GameSense RG program, and gambling beliefs and behaviors. We compared how differences in the implementation structure and visibility of the GameSense program (i.e., state-regulated with a standalone, branded GameSense center vs. corporate-integrated as part of loyalty program desks) was associated with GameSense awareness and engagement, perceptions of gambling operator RG practices, three Positive Play subscales (i.e., behavior, personal responsibility, and gambling literacy), understanding of gambling concepts, and use of RG strategies. More respondents who had visited the property with a state-regulated, branded center were aware of GameSense (36.5%), compared to respondents who visited other properties (7.4%). Perceptions of the operator's RG practices were generally high for all respondents. Multivariate analyses revealed no relationship between GameSense awareness and gambling belief or behavior outcomes, yet showed that respondents who picked up a GameSense brochure used slightly more RG strategies. Our findings suggest that the visibility of an RG program might influence program awareness and engagement but not certain RG-related behavioral outcomes.

Validation and Application of the Positive Play Scale Adapted for Chinese Gamblers: Its Relation to Disordered Gambling and Gambling Attitudes.

The Positive Play Scale (PPS) was designed to track the effectiveness of responsible gambling (RG) policy, with a focus on positive changes in beliefs and behaviors instead of the absence of problem gambling symptoms. The current study aimed to (1) validate the Positive Play Scale Adapted for Chinese gamblers (PPS-AC) using a probability Chinese community sample in Macao, (2) explore the relationships between the PPS-AC and symptoms of gambling disorder (GD), and (3) evaluate the associations of gambling attitudes with the PPS-AC. Through a two-step random sampling procedure, we interviewed 1,002 locally dwelling Macao Chinese adults (44.3% males; M age = 44.28 years, SD age = 17.35 years) by phone, in which 237 were past-year gamblers (49.8% males; M age = 40.76 years, SD age = 15.78 years). Results showed that a two-dimension structure fitted the data well for both the positive play behaviors scale and the positive play beliefs scale of the PPS-AC among past-year gamblers. In addition to findings of satisfactory internal consistency, the convergent validity of the PPS-AC was supported by its significant association with RG self-efficacy. All four PPS-AC constructs were negatively correlated with GD symptoms, whereas two behavior constructs of the PPS-AC significantly explained the variance of GD symptoms with negative valences. All gambling attitude dimensions were associated with at least one PPS-AC construct. The current study was the first to adapt the PPS on a probability Chinese community sample and extended its applicability. The findings support the PPS-AC as a reliable and valid tool for assessing positive play, which was negatively associated with symptoms of disordered gambling. Further, the significant associations between gambling attitudes and the PPS-AC provide insights for RG policies.

Understanding Positive Play: An Exploration of Playing Experiences and Responsible Gambling Practices.

This study is one of the first to explore in detail the behaviors, attitudes and motivations of players that show no signs of at-risk or problem gambling behavior (so-called 'positive players'). Via an online survey, 1484 positive players were compared with 209 problem players identified using the Lie/Bet screen. The study identified two distinct groups of positive players defined according to their motivations to play and their engagement with responsible gambling (RG) practices. Those positive players that played most frequently employed the most personal RG strategies. Reasons that positive players gave for gambling were focused on leisure (e.g., playing for fun, being entertained, and/or winning a prize). By contrast, problem gamblers were much more focused upon modifying mood states (e.g., excitement, relaxation, depression and playing when bored or upset). The present study also suggests that online gambling is not, by default, inherently riskier than gambling in more traditional ways, as online gambling was the most popular media by which positive players gambled. Furthermore, most positive players reported that it was easier to stick to their limits when playing the National Lottery online compared to traditional retail purchasing of tickets. Problem players were significantly more likely than positive players to gamble with family and friends, suggesting that, contrary to a popular RG message, social play may not be inherently safer than gambling alone. It is proposed that players (generally) may identify more with the term 'positive play' than the term 'RG' which is frequently interpreted as being aimed at people with gambling problems, rather than all players.