An exploratory study of anxiety-motivated gambling in adolescents: Associations with minority status and gambling, health and functioning measures.

Gambling and anxiety are major public health concerns in adolescents and have been linked to emotion dysregulation and mood-modulating behaviors. While previous studies have shown links between positively reinforcing excitement-motivated gambling, health and functioning measures, and gambling perceptions and behavioral correlates in adolescents, few studies have examined such relationships relative to negatively reinforcing anxiety-motivated gambling (AMG). This study systematically examined relationships between adolescents reporting gambling to relieve anxiety (compared to those who gambled but did not report AMG) and measures of health/functioning and gambling-related measures. Participants included 1,856 Connecticut high-school students. Chi-square and logistic regression models were conducted. AMG was reported by 6.41% of the sample and was associated with identifying with a minority group (Black, Asian-American, Hispanic), at-risk/problem gambling, more permissive attitudes towards gambling, and higher odds of heavy alcohol, tobacco and other drug use, and violence-related measures. Adolescents with AMG were more likely to report non-strategic gambling, and gambling to escape/relieve dysphoria and due to feeling pressure. Additional between-group differences were found for gambling types, locations, motivations, and partners. Together, AMG may represent a mood-modulating behavior indicative of multiple problematic concerns, suggesting that emotional dysregulation may be an important factor in understanding the relationship between anxiety, problem gambling, and risky behaviors in youth. Additionally, the negative reinforcing motivations to gamble to relieve anxiety may be relevant particularly to adolescents from underrepresented minority racial/ethnic groups, and the specific factors underlying this relationship warrant further investigation.

Moving beyond panaceas in fisheries governance.

In fisheries management-as in environmental governance more generally-regulatory arrangements that are thought to be helpful in some contexts frequently become panaceas or, in other words, simple formulaic policy prescriptions believed to solve a given problem in a wide range of contexts, regardless of their actual consequences. When this happens, management is likely to fail, and negative side effects are common. We focus on the case of individual transferable quotas to explore the panacea mindset, a set of factors that promote the spread and persistence of panaceas. These include conceptual narratives that make easy answers like panaceas seem plausible, power disconnects that create vested interests in panaceas, and heuristics and biases that prevent people from accurately assessing panaceas. Analysts have suggested many approaches to avoiding panaceas, but most fail to conquer the underlying panacea mindset. Here, we suggest the codevelopment of an institutional diagnostics toolkit to distill the vast amount of information on fisheries governance into an easily accessible, open, on-line database of checklists, case studies, and related resources. Toolkits like this could be used in many governance settings to challenge users' understandings of a policy's impacts and help them develop solutions better tailored to their particular context. They would not replace the more comprehensive approaches found in the literature but would rather be an intermediate step away from the problem of panaceas.