Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
This paper on the gambling behaviour of Australian Indigenous people is part of a series of papers published by the research team at the Centre for Gambling Education and Research at Southern Cross University. Hing, N., Breen, H., Buultjens, J., & Gordon, A. (2012). A profile of gambling
behaviour and impacts amongst Indigenous Australians attending a cultural event in New South Wales Australia. Australian Aboriginal Studies, 2, 1-‐20.
Hing, N., Breen, H., Gordon, A., & Russell, A.. (2013). The gambling behavior of
Indigenous Australians. Journal of Gambling Studies. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10899-‐013-‐9358-‐9
Hing, N., Breen, H., Gordon, A., & Russell, A.. (2013). Risk factors for gambling
problems among Indigenous Australians: An empirical study. Journal of Gambling Studies. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10899-‐013-‐9364-‐y
Hing, N., Breen, H., Gordon, A. & Russell, A.. (2013). Gambling harms and
gambling help-‐seeking amongst Indigenous Australians. Journal of Gambling Studies. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10899-‐013-‐9388-‐3
Hing, N., Breen, H., Gordon, A., & Russell, A.. (2013). Gambling behaviour and
gambling risk factors for Indigenous Australian women. International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction, 12(1), 1-‐20. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11469-‐013-‐9458-‐x
Hing, N., Breen, H., Gordon, A., & Russell, A.. (2014). Gambling among Indigenous
men and problem gambling risk factors: An Australian study. International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11469-‐014-‐9480-‐7
Hing, N., Breen, H., Gordon, A., & Russell, A.. (accepted for publication). Aboriginal
card gamblers and non-‐card gamblers: Do they differ? International Gambling Studies.
Breen, H. & Hing, N. (accepted for publication). Using a life course approach to
investigate gambling by Indigenous Australians. International Gambling Studies.
1
Hing, N., Breen, H., Gordon, A., & Russell, A. (2014). Gambling among Indigenous men
and problem gambling risk factors: An Australian study. International Journal of
Mental Health and Addiction. DOI 10.1007/s11469-014-9480-7
Gambling among Indigenous men and problem gambling risk factors: An Australian
study
Abstract
This paper aims to analyse the gambling activities and problem gambling risk factors for
Indigenous Australian men, a topic which has previously drawn very little research attention.
Using quantitative methods, we obtained a convenience sample of 1,259 women and men at
Indigenous festivals, online and in several communities. This paper reports only on the
responses of all 489 men in this sample. Risk factors significantly associated with problem
gambling were being separated, divorced or widowed, working part-time, early gambling
onset, using alcohol and/or drugs while gambling and spending high amounts of money on a
favourite gambling form. Motivations significantly associated with risks of problem
gambling were gambling to relax, because most family members and friends also gamble and
self-reported addiction to gambling. However men who gamble to socialise with family and
friends were significantly less likely to be problem gamblers. Risk factor identification may
facilitate the development of effective preventative measures and risk management plans for
Indigenous men.
Keywords: Indigenous; Aboriginal; men; gambling; problem gambling; risk factors;
Australia
2
Introduction
With increased availability of gambling opportunities, risks associated with gambling have
become a pressing social and public health concern. Although research into risk factors for
problem gambling has advanced (see for example Mason & Arnold 2007; Shaffer 2005;
Volberg et al. 2001; Vong 2007), risk factors for small population groups such as Indigenous
people have not attracted rigorous research attention and few studies have examined how
these might differ for men and women. While some studies and reviews have indicated that
Indigenous people face higher risks with their gambling compared to the general population
(Alegría et al. 2009; McMillen & Donnelly 2008; Ministry of Health 2009; Petry et al. 2005;
Sproston et al. 2012; Wardman et al. 2001), except for research in New Zealand, Indigenous
samples have been generally very small and unrepresentative with gender differences rarely
explored (Welte et al. 2007; Young et al. 2007). Even in New Zealand, apart from specific
female gambling studies (Morrison 2004; Schluter et al. 2007), there has been little
distinction of gambling risk factors based on the gender of Indigenous people. Yet male
gender has been identified as a significant predictor of lifetime problem gambling in past
research in general population samples (Abbott et al. 2004; Bondolfi et al. 2000; Delfabbro
2011; Perese et al. 2005; Wardle et al. 2011; Welte et al. 2007). A lack of research about
Indigenous men who gamble has meant that little is known about their potential gambling
risks and gambling-related problems. In order to reduce this gap, this paper aims to examine
gambling among Australian Aboriginal men to identify and analyse risk factors that
contribute to some men developing gambling problems.
Background
Many activities involve some risk but meanings of risk have evolved over time. Risk was
known as fate, an act of God, or force majeure (Giddens 1990) where human fault or
3
responsibility for an event was negligible. In contemporary society the perception of risk has
altered. ‘Good’ risk is mostly limited to economic speculation and adventurous pursuits while
conceptualising risk as ‘bad’ and even dangerous has become more widespread as bad risks
usually lead to losses (Douglas 1992; Tulloch & Lupton 2003). With risk perceived in more
negative ways, risk now usually means deviation from standard norms of society or some
lack of control (Lupton 1999b). Currently, people are expected to take control of their actions
and responsibility for their consequences, thus highlighting the important role of public
health policy and models to reducing risk. These approaches depend on rational men and
women perceiving themselves as vulnerable to a risk and believing that taking preventive
action will effectively minimise or outweigh that risk (Becker 1974; Slovic 2000). Therefore
it is important to know what the risk factors are so that preventative action can be taken.
Characteristics of men’s gambling and gambling risks
While multiple biological, socioeconomic, cultural, and environmental factors play a role in
gender differences in perceptions of risks and their reality (Courtenay 2003), affect and
feelings tend to underpin certain judgements about risk and benefit (Slovic et al. 2000). Thus,
if people like an activity they are usually predisposed to judging risks as low and benefits as
high. To the contrary for an activity they dislike people tend to judge the risks as high and the
benefits as low. Across many domains men engage in more risky behaviours than do women,
including gambling (Harris et al. 2006). Compared to women, men are more likely to be
gamblers (Gray 2004), to commence gambling when young (under 18 years) (Ellenbogen et
al. 2007), to become regular gamblers (Sproston et al. 2012) and to develop gambling
problems (Abbott et al. 2004; Petry et al. 2005; Queensland (QLD) Department of Justice and
of Attorney-General 2012; Wardle et al. 2011). Relative to women, men tend to rate risky
gambling scenarios as more enjoyable with less negative consequences and less severe
4
outcomes (Harris et al. 2006) even though men are more likely than women to agree with
erroneous statements relating to faulty gambling cognitions (Sproston et al. 2012) or
inaccurate perceptions of randomness and skill.
Gender is a strong predictor of gambling (Delfabbro 2011). Men are usually seen as
preferring games of strategy and skill (blackjack, poker) and engaging in competition based
gambling (sports betting, racing) while women are more likely to prefer non-strategic
gambling (poker machines) and games based on chance (bingo) (Hing & Breen 2001; Nower
& Blaszczynski 2006; Perese et al. 2005; Potenza et al. 2006). For example, in a survey of
15,000 Queensland (QLD) adults, men had higher participation rates on strategic and
competitive gambling types than women for betting on horse, harness and greyhound races
(22% of men, 15% of women), playing table games at a casino (10% of men, 4% of women),
betting on sporting events (9% of men, 2% of women), playing card games privately for
money (5% of men, 1% of women), and using the Internet to play casino games or poker
(1.5% of men, 0.2% of women). In contrast, both men and women preferred poker machine
gambling equally (QLD Department of Justice and of Attorney-General 2012 p. 17).
Motivations for men’s gambling may not vary much with maturity. Young male
college students’ gambling is often underpinned by impulsivity and sensation seeking
(Langewisch & Frisch 1998). Adolescent males with gambling-related problems are likely to
be preoccupied with gambling, wanting to engage in more frequent gambling to achieve
similar levels of excitement and to chase losses (Ellenbogen et al. 2007; Splevins et al. 2010).
For both older and younger men, playing poker machines is motivated by seeking excitement
and wanting to win (or winning money back) (Fernandez-Alba & Labrador 2005; Southwell
et al. 2008). Across all age groups, Walker et al. (2005) found with 900 casino patrons in a
Canadian telephone survey that men rated excitement and skills more highly compared to
5
women. Sensation-seeking, excitement and winning appear to be common gambling
motivations for men.
High risk gambling behaviour for both genders is strongly associated with
participation in table games at a casino, with sports betting and using poker machines
(Victorian Responsible Gambling Foundation 2012). Young et al. (2008) found that being
male was a risk factor for regular gamblers and that significant predictors for regular
gambling were betting on sporting events and racing, both characterised “by a culture of risk
and dangerous consumption” (Young et al. 2008 p. 89). With 146 pathological gamblers in
treatment Ledgerwood and Petry (2006) report that male gambling was motivated by ego and
that egotism appears to be a key element of an impulsive or sensation-seeking gambling style
among men compared to women. Further evidence was seen with gambling help-line callers
in the United States (349 males or 62% of the sample) where Potenza et al. (2001) found men
were more likely to experience problems with strategic or ‘face-to-face’ forms of gambling
than women. Male help-line callers were also more likely to report problems with debt, drug
misuse and arrest related to gambling than women (Potenza et al. 2001). Typically, gambling-
related crimes are committed by males, with an average age of about 37 years who have
gambled for approximately 17 years, with nine of these years at problematic levels
(Australian Institute of Criminology and Pricewaterhouse Coopers 2003). Male problem
gamblers consume alcohol at higher levels than female problem gamblers and male non-
problem gamblers (Victorian Responsible Gambling Foundation 2012). Thus high risk
gambling involvement appears to be complex and closely linked with anti-social behaviour,
illegal acts and substance misuse for some men.
Initially, when gambling problem impacts are severe, financial and relationship crises
arise quickly for both genders (Evans & Delfabbro 2005; Hodgins et al. 2002). However,
men with gambling problems often have higher debts, are younger and more likely to be
6
single compared to women (Crisp et al. 2004). Men are less likely than women to seek help
for any problem (health, psychological, substance use) including gambling, regardless of age,
ethnicity or social status (McMillen et al. 2004). In a review, Suurvali, Cordingley, Hodgins
and Cunningham (2009) conclude that men might be somewhat more vulnerable than women
to shame, embarrassment, pride and stigma as barriers to gambling help-seeking. Then after
trying self-help first, many men appear to prefer group support to professional counselling
services (McMillen et al. 2004). Thus, men appear reluctant to recognise gambling problems
or to seek gambling help and only act to resolve gambling problems at a critical point.
Indigenous men’s gambling and gambling risks
Indigenous people may be vulnerable to the negative impacts of gambling for complex health
and social reasons (Korn et al. 2003 p. 241) including social disadvantage and cultural
acceptability (Cultural & Indigenous Research Centre Australia (CIRCA) 2011). However,
similar to men elsewhere Oakes and Currie (2004) with a mixed sample of 192 First Nations
people in Ontario reported that men typically are motivated to gamble for a challenge and for
recreation. As a challenge Goodale (1987) suggests that traditional card gambling for
Indigenous Australian men resembles hunting, a high risk activity where success is less likely
but is essential for personal status and for cultural continuity. For commercial gambling,
wagering on horse and dog racing at the off-course betting outlets is very popular with
Indigenous men (Aboriginal Health & Medical Research Council of NSW (AHMRC) 2007;
Breen et al. 2011; Dickerson et al. 1996; Holden 1996; McMillen & Togni 2000).
Motivations for race wagering are underpinned by the prospect of a social outing for
Indigenous men in rural towns with limited leisure options (AHMRC 2007; McMillen &
Donnelly 2008). Indigenous men appear to be motivated to gamble for social reasons, the
opportunity to win money and to maintain cultural ties with each other.
7
For gambling preferences, both Indigenous men and women prefer poker machine
gambling about equally (Aboriginal Health & Medical Research Council of NSW (AHMRC)
2007; Breen et al. 2011; Dickerson et al. 1996; Holden 1996; McDonald & Wombo 2006;
McMillen & Togni 2000). In a quantitative but unrepresentative survey, Hing et al. (2013)
report that Indigenous men are more likely than women to engage in traditional card games,
keno, betting on horse/dog races, sports betting, casino table games, online casino gambling
and poker tournaments. For frequency, men more than women tend to gamble significantly
more frequently on poker machines, horse/dog races, sports betting and instant scratch cards.
Further, younger men were more likely than older men to engage in poker machine gambling,
table games and playing poker. Indigenous men seem to gamble more frequently and on more
gambling forms than Indigenous women (Hing et al. 2013).
High rates of problem gambling have been reported for some international Indigenous
populations (McGowan & Nixon, 2004; Ministry of Health 2009; Wardman et al. 2001;
Williams et al. 2011). In Canada, with a mixed sample of over 960 Aboriginal adolescents in
Alberta, Hewitt and Auger (1995) found that males were more likely than females to be
problem gamblers. Some began gambling while young (10 years). The authors speculated
that co-existing disorders and high levels of substance misuse were contributing factors here.
From New Zealand, with a mixed sample of 345 people roughly equivalent to four major
population groups in Auckland, Pasifika men (originating mainly from Samoa, Cook Islands,
Tonga, Fiji), who gamble were found to face significantly high risks of developing
pathological gambling (Clarke et al. 2006). Further, they are less likely than women to
identify themselves as having gambling-related problems or to seek gambling help. For
Pasifika and Maori men who do seek gambling help, poker machines are their preferred
gambling form (Ministry of Health 2007). Pasifika fathers at risk with their gambling are six
times more likely to spend NZ$60 or over per month on gambling than non-problem male
8
gamblers, to face high risk health and social problems with hazardous alcohol and drug use,
and to be perpetrators and/or victims of verbal aggression and physical violence (Bellringer et
al. 2008). Thus, high risk gambling involvement appears to be associated with co-occurring
health issues, substance abuse and anti-social behaviour for some Indigenous men.
Intensive, high risk gambling can become obsessive, with traditional responsibilities
and obligations increasingly ignored by Indigenous Australian men (Christie & Greatorex
2009). Indigenous men tend to participate in large, high-risk card games (Breen 2013;
McDonald & Wombo 2006; Young et al. 2007). With a mixed sample including 115 remote
Indigenous men, Hunter (1993 p. 244) observed that male card gambling was undertaken by
“big spenders” with statistically significant anxiety scores. Hunter (1993) speculated that this
anxiety was linked to a reduced sense of security about regular income. For commercial
gambling, Dickerson et al. (1996) in a mixed survey of 222 Indigenous people found younger
single men were more likely to be problem gamblers. These younger men had limited
resources to cope with the negative consequences of their gambling. Cultural duties reduced
and health and financial difficulties increased with higher, more problematic gambling
involvement for some Indigenous Australian men.
Although not specific to men only, barriers to gambling help-seeking for Indigenous
Australian people generally appear similar to other populations (shame and stigma), but
additional barriers include an unwillingness to attend mainstream gambling-help services
with no Indigenous staff, with no culturally appropriate Indigenous programs, and in isolation
from social and physical resources (CIRCA 2011; McMillen 2009). In fact Breen et al.
(2013) found with 34 Indigenous respondents that awareness of professional gambling help
services was low and the cultural appropriateness of online and telephone services, self-
exclusion, mutual support groups and non-Indigenous face-to-face services was yet to be
determined. Most Indigenous Australians, after trying self-help, turn to families, friends and
9
their social network for support (CIRCA 2011). Apart from these meagre findings, little is
documented about gambling help-seeking by Indigenous Australians based on gender.
Although Indigenous research into poor male health and disadvantage (Blair et al.
2005; Wenitong 2006), housing scarcity (Stevens & Bailie 2012), family violence and trauma
(Cheers et al. 2006), remote area card gambling and high alcohol use (Nagel et al. 2011;
Phillips 2003) and demand sharing for gambling funds (Blagg 2008) mention negative
gambling consequences, there is a dearth of gender studies associated with Indigenous
gambling issues. Yet Wenitong (2006 p. 467) describes how Indigenous men in one
community have organically developed group principles to uphold, one of which is “don’t
gamble money away”. Thus an information gap exists regarding gambling involvement and
its inherent risks resulting in gambling-related problems for some Indigenous Australian men.
Methods
This paper analyses data relating only to men extracted from a survey of both women and
men Indigenous Australians. Research methods for the study have been explained in detail
elsewhere (deleted for anonymity) but are summarised below.
Ethics
With a focus on working cooperatively with Indigenous Australians, one of whom was a
member of the research team, wide ranging consultations were held before the research was
proposed and conducted. The research team consulted with Elders, leaders and members of
communities and community organisations, health and welfare boards, local, state and
national organisation representatives and event organisers. Ethics approval was sought and
granted by the AHMRC (760/10) and from the authors’ University Human Ethics Committee
(ECN-11-244). The core values which characterised our research practice were respect for
participants, voluntary participation, informed consent, and privacy and confidentiality based
10
on principles identified in the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC)
guide (2007). Principles supporting research with Indigenous Australians include specific
ethical guidelines, funding for local programs, support for Indigenous positions and
community networks (Australian Institute of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies
(AIATSIS) 2012) and these were followed closely in practice by our team. Using these
frameworks ensured that appropriate respect and recognition was provided to all people
involved in the project.
Data collection and research instrument
Using quantitative methods, a gambling survey was conducted at three Indigenous festivals,
where the bulk of the participants and spectators were Indigenous Australians. The survey
was also available online and in hard copy in several Indigenous communities. Questions in
the survey covered many aspects of participants’ gambling behaviour including their
participation, frequency, duration and expenditure on card gambling; their frequency of
gambling on ten forms of legal commercial gambling; the duration, venue and expenditure
for their most frequent commercial gambling activity; reasons for gambling; consequences of
gambling; help-seeking for gambling-related problems; erroneous beliefs about gambling;
drug and alcohol use while gambling; gambling commencement age; household gambling
activity as a child; and demographic characteristics including Aboriginality, age, gender,
marital status, employment status and source of income. The Problem Gambling Severity
Index (PGSI) (Ferris & Wynne 2001) was used to identify and analyse groups of gamblers.
The PGSI contains nine items scored as “never” = 0, “sometimes” = 1, “most of the time” = 2
and “almost always” = 3. Scores are summed for a total between 0-27, with respondents
classified as 0 = non-problem gambler; 1-2 = low risk gambler; 3-7 = moderate risk gambler,
and 8+ = problem gambler. Bellringer et al. (2008) suggested that the PGSI provided good
internal reliability and validity for their research with Pasifika people who gamble. Further,
11
Williams et al. (2011) maintain that the PGSI does not discriminate against Indigenous
people being identified as problem gamblers based on any general financial difficulties
associated with low incomes.
Indigenous research assistants (33) were trained and employed to approach and explain the
research aims and ask Indigenous Australians to complete the survey. When completed, the
survey was placed in a sealed envelope and then into a locked box for security or returned by
pre-paid post or by email to the researchers. Thus, the research sample was self-selected.
There was a $200 shopping voucher offered as a random draw prize for survey participants at
each event, online and in the communities.
Participants
Within the sample of 489 adult male participants, the vast majority (91.9%) indicated that
they were of Aboriginal origin, while 4.3% were of Torres Strait Islander origin and 3.7%
were of both Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander origin. Responses were gathered from
three festivals, the Bathurst Knockout (35.2%), Brisbane Festival (29.7%) and Saltwater
Freshwater Festival (23.7%) and from New South Wales (NSW) communities (6.3%) and
online (5.1%).
Analysis
The data were analysed using SPSS v20.0.0.2 on an Apple Intel MacBook Pro. Analyses
were conducted using an alpha of 0.05 (unless stated otherwise). As the survey was self-
completed, some questions were not answered by some respondents. Percentages reported
throughout are based on the number of people who answered each particular question unless
reported otherwise. This paper analyses only the useable information collected from 489
Indigenous Australian men in the total sample of 1,259 participants. Participants included
gamblers and non-gamblers. Results are presented below.
12
Results
Nearly half the sample (47.6%) were aged between 18 and 34 years, with the most common
age group being 20-24 years. The most common marital status for the 489 Indigenous men
was single (39.0%) and the most common work status was in full time employment (57.5%)
(see Table 1)
Insert Table 1 about here.
Gambling Behaviours
Almost half (43.2%) of the respondents started gambling when they were under the legal age,
with 12.6% first gambling when they were nine years old or younger and 19.1% first
gambling between the ages of 15 and 17.
Only 37.2% of these participants reported never using alcohol and drugs while
gambling, while 36.7% sometimes gambled under the influence, 17.2% used drugs or alcohol
most of the time while gambling and 9.0% used alcohol and/or drugs almost always when
gambling.
Of the eleven forms of gambling surveyed, these men took part in an average of 4.00
(SD=3.18) different types of gambling during the last 12 months. Of the 489 men in the
sample, 77 respondents (15.7%) indicated they did not use any of the forms of gambling,
while 18 respondents (3.7%) stated that they used all eleven forms of gambling in the past
year.
The most popular form of gambling amongst the Indigenous men was poker machines
(69.5%), followed by horse and dog racing (53.7%) and keno (51.4%). The least popular
forms were online gambling (12.5%), poker tournaments (18.6%) and casino table games
(19.7%) (see Table 2).
Insert Table 2 about here
Gambling activity on which the most money is spent
13
Participants were asked about the commercial form of gambling (i.e., excluding Indigenous
card games) on which they spent most of their money. Of the 331 men who answered the
question, 52.0% responded with poker machines, followed by betting on horse or dog racing
(23.0%), lotto or lottery-type games (9.1%) and keno (5.4%).
Most men (51.3%) engaged in the form on which they spent most of their money in a
club, with a further 21.0% in a hotel, 11.3% at a newsagent, 5.2% in a stand-alone off-course
betting agency, 4.7% in a casino and another 4.7% online.
Approximately 18.9% of the Indigenous men spend less than 15 minutes per session
on their most costly gambling activity, while 19.9% spent between 15 minutes and one hour,
24.8% between one and two hours and 13.0% between two and three hours per gambling
session. Approximately 13.8% reported spending more than four hours in a gambling session
on the activity on which they spend the most money.
In terms of fortnightly expenditure on the activity on which they spend most of their
gambling money, 11.8% said they spent $10 or less, 15.6% said $11-$20, and 25.9% reported
spending between $21 and $50. Furthermore 31.7% reported spending more than $100
fortnightly, including 5.4% who reported spending more than $500 fortnightly.
Reasons for gambling
The most common reported reason for gambling (multiple responses allowed) was a chance
to win extra money (64.6%), closely followed by “pleasure and fun” (63.8%). Approximately
49.2% and 45.9% of the men reported that they gamble to relax and to socialize with family
and friends, respectively, while 41.4% reported gambling as a hobby. Furthermore, 38.1%
gamble as a challenge to try to beat the odds, while 36.8% gamble to reduce boredom and
32.5% gamble to take their mind off their problems. Almost one-third (29.9%) gamble
because their friends and family gamble, and 28.9% gamble because they think that they are
lucky, while 28.1% gamble to reduce stress, depression and anger. Almost one-quarter of the
14
men (24.9%) gamble because gambling locations are a safe and pleasant place. Finally,
17.2% reported that they gamble because they are addicted, while 11.9% reported gambling
as a cultural tradition.
Problem gambling
Four hundred and six Indigenous men (83.0%) completed the PGSI. Of those, 31.8% were
classified as non-problem gamblers, 15.0% as low risk gamblers, 24.1% as moderate risk
gamblers and 29.1% as problem gamblers.
Characteristics statistically differentiating problem gamblers from non-problem, low-risk
and moderate-risk gamblers
A logistic regression was run to compare problem gamblers (PGSI scores of 8 or higher,
coded as 1) with other levels of problem gambling severity (PGSI scores of 7 or less, coded
as 0). A total of 330 men were included in the analysis as they had answered questions related
to all variables of interest. The predictors were tested for tolerance using a linear regression
model and some predictors (state of residence and exposure to gambling as a child) were
removed due to low tolerance, particularly because age of first gamble and exposure to
gambling as a child appeared to be related variables. The remaining predictors all had a
tolerance of above 0.33. The independent variables and reference groups for categorical
predictors are shown in Table 3.
Overall, the model was significant (χ2 (28, N = 330)= 190.25, p < 0.001) and
successfully predicted the problem gambling status of 86.1% of the 330 men in the model.
The model was more successful with non-problem, low-risk and moderate-risk gamblers,
successfully predicting 92.2% of them, compared to the successful prediction of 71.4% of
problem gamblers.
Men who were single were significantly less likely to be problem gamblers compared
to married men, while those who were separated, divorced or widowed were significantly
15
more likely to be problem gamblers compared to those who were married. Those who did not
rely solely on work or solely on a pension were significantly more likely to be problem
gamblers, as were those who first gambled under the age of 10 (compared to those who first
gambled at the age of 18 or older). Men who used alcohol and/or drugs sometimes or most of
the time while gambling were significantly more likely to be problem gamblers compared to
those who never did, controlling for all other variables in the model. Those who spent more
on their favourite form of gambling were significantly more likely to be problem gamblers,
but not those who bet on a higher number of commercial forms of gambling. In terms of
reasons for gambling, men who gambled to relax, because they felt they were addicted or
because most of their family and friends gamble were significantly more likely to be problem
gamblers, while men who gambled to socialize with family and friends were significantly less
likely to be problem gamblers, compared to those who did not.
Insert Table 3 about here
All men who perceived they were addicted to gambling (66) were classified as
moderate risk or problem gamblers according to the PGSI. So, some men who felt they had a
gambling problem acknowledged it. In contrast, of the men who perceived they were not
addicted to gambling, 45.6% were classified as moderate risk gamblers or problem gamblers
with a further 17.8% classified as low risk gamblers. Notwithstanding PGSI classifications,
some men who considered they did not have a gambling problem appeared not to recognise
or admit their problem.
PGSI responses
Answers for each of the PGSI items amongst male problem gamblers are shown in Table 4.
Based on the PGSI scale, the responses below indicate very problematic items amongst these
male problem gamblers. More than 95% reported at least sometimes gambling more than they
16
could afford to lose, being criticized about their gambling, feeling like they might have a
problem with gambling and going back another day to win back their losses.
Insert Table 4 about here
Harms arising from gambling
The most commonly reported impacts of gambling amongst male problem gamblers were
arguments within the household (47.4%) and depression (40.9%). More than one quarter of
respondents reported separation from partners due to gambling and incidents of violence with
family or friends due to gambling (see Table 5).
Insert Table 5 about here
When asked what they did when their money was exhausted due to gambling
(multiple responses allowed), the most popular responses amongst male problem gamblers
were to rely on family, relatives or friends (59.3%), to go without (57.9%) and to not pay or
put off urgent bills (51.4%) (see Table 6).
Insert Table 6 about here
Help seeking
Of the 120 male problem gamblers in the sample, 83 reported not seeking help for their
gambling-related problems. More than half of the 83 men thought that they could beat the
problem on their own (58.6%) and/or did not seek help because they did not want anyone to
tell them to stop gambling (50.6%). Table 7 shows other popular responses, such as
embarrassment (44.7%), concerns about confidentiality (40.9%) and not believing that they
have a gambling problem (38.8%).
Insert Table 7 about here
Many of the male problem gamblers who indicated that they had not sought help for
their gambling subsequently indicated seeking help from one or more sources, which also
included non-professional sources of help. Therefore the figures in Table 8 include missing
17
responses and thus indicate the percentage of all problem gamblers who reported that they
had sought help from the sources listed. The most common response was from family,
relatives or friends (45.0%), followed by a respected member of the community (29.2%).
Insert Table 8 about here
The most popular responses for help services that were likely to best help Aboriginal
Australians affected by gambling problems were for services run by Aboriginal people such
as a local liaison person who could give advice on gambling issues (80.7%) or an Aboriginal
gambling counselling service, as seen in Table 9. Non-Aboriginal gambling counselling
services were preferred by less than half of male problem gamblers, but were still seen as a
useful resource by 48.0% of respondents.
Insert Table 9 about here
Discussion
From these results, risk factors significantly associated with problem gambling for these
Indigenous men include being separated, divorced or widowed, working part-time, having
begun in gambling as a child, using alcohol and/or drugs while gambling and spending high
amounts of money on their favourite form of gambling. Motivations significantly associated
with risks of problem gambling for this sample consist of gambling to relax, because most
family members and friends also gamble and self-reported addiction to gambling. In contrast,
men who gamble to socialise with family and friends are significantly less likely to be
problem gamblers.
Culture, Douglas (1992) argues, is an integral part of risk. People calculate likely risks
based on their cultural understandings. The findings that many of these men started gambling
as youth, that traditional card gambling is a culturally acceptable Indigenous Australian
activity and that many of them engage in both strategic and non-strategic gambling forms
18
possibly means that they either really like gambling or they have few other leisure options. If
people gamble because they prefer it over other activities, then this sample of Indigenous
men may see gambling risks as low and benefits as high, as pointed out by as Harris et al.
(2006) and Slovic et al. (2000). This may explain some high gambling expenditure, mixing
socially with people who also gamble and gambling to relax. Cultural, historic and social
influences appear to underpin some gambling behaviour, motivations and risks in this
research with Indigenous men.
Generally, men with few social networks face higher risks of experiencing poor health
and social exclusion (Greig et al. 2003). Being separated, divorced or widowed is often
followed by reduced social support and isolation. For Indigenous men already experiencing
poor health (AMA 2009), historic marginalisation (Atkinson 2002), wide discrepancies in
relationships of power, social and economic status compared to Australian men generally
(Adams & McCoy 2011; Wenitong 2006) and grief and shame related to cultural and
personal losses (Cheers et al. 2006), a debilitating cycle of risk may be established. In this
cycle, any or all of the significant gambling risks revealed in this research has led to some
men feeling and reporting that they are addicted to gambling. With about two-thirds of the
men who completed the PGSI (Ferris & Wynne 2001) appearing to be at some risk with their
gambling, it could be speculated that the outward subjugation of their internal tension seems
to support theories of hegemonic masculinity (Connell 1987; Connell & Messerschmitt 2005)
whereby some men turn in on themselves. They tend to ignore or mask their problems that
then exacerbate their marginalisation and their health difficulties with escalating risky
behaviour, a situation somewhat similar to that identified for Pasifika fathers in New Zealand
(Bellringer et al. 2008). Thus, risky gambling behaviours for some of these Indigenous men
may be embedded in a complex mix of historic, cultural, sociological and psychological
factors.
19
From a contrasting view, men who gambled to socialise with family and friends
actively reduced their social isolation by drawing on Indigenous cultural origins to establish
and reinforce their collective relationships. Positive social interactions appear to generate
goodwill and maintain wellbeing through reciprocal dealings and social connectedness with
other people especially within large, fluid Indigenous family networks (Atkinson 2002;
McMillan & Donnelly 2008; Phillips 2003). It could be speculated that gambling in this
situation presents a low risk activity with positive outcomes, reducing some of the restrictive
ties of hegemonic masculinity (Connell & Messerschmitt 2005). Further assumptions about
strengthening men’s cultural identity could include growing resilience within the company of
the Indigenous collective.
Despite findings indicating harm emanating from problem gambling within this
sample of Indigenous men, our evidence shows the proportion who seek formal treatment is
low, but somewhat similar to that of the general population (Breen et al. 2013). This situation
occurs despite many free gambling treatment services being available in Australia (Hing et al.
2011). After unsuccessful attempts at self-help, family and friends are more likely to be asked
for help with gambling problems, although as Hing et al. (2011) point out, this can raise
further problems when relatives are keen gamblers themselves. However these findings fuel a
need for publicity, education and resource materials to be developed with and for Indigenous
men. These resources may heighten men’s awareness of gambling-related problems and assist
them with targeted gender-specific self-help measures. They may also provide practical and
informed risk management plans for improving the protective capacity of only gambling to
socialise. These plans should give Indigenous men tools to act to reduce gambling harms and
potentially improve their general health by lowering one risk, that of developing or escalating
gambling-related problems.
20
For limitations, this paper obviously concentrated solely on Indigenous male
gambling, excluding female participants. The survey also was conducted mostly at
Indigenous festivals and while capturing responses from the largest sample of Indigenous
men for a gambling survey in Australia, it was not representative. Further Indigenous male
research could be undertaken in other Australian states and territories and internationally to
compare these findings. Given the inequity experienced by many marginalised Indigenous
groups who have been colonised by European nations, it would be useful to investigate the
effects of cultural and historic control on Indigenous gambling involvement.
Conclusions
The current study described some characteristics of Indigenous Australian men’s gambling
and problem gambling risk factors. Cultural, historic, social and psychological factors appear
to be influential in affecting gambling behaviours, motivations and risks for this sample of
men. The high level of gambling problems reported here and significant associations noted
between gambling problems, early onset of gambling, working part-time, being separated,
divorced or widowed, high gambling expenditure, use of alcohol and drugs while gambling,
and gambling motivations related to relaxation and the influence of family and friends who
gamble, all lead to the conclusion that gambling is causing significant harm including self-
reported addiction for some Indigenous men. The identification of significant risk factors is
important for the development of effective preventative measures and risk management plans
focussing on high-risk groups likely to develop gambling-related problems.
Acknowledgements
The authors are grateful for the support of Indigenous communities and organisations in this
research and funding provided by an Australian Research Council Discovery Grant.
21
References
Abbott, M., Solberg, R., & Romberg, S. (2004). Comparing the New Zealand and Swedish
national surveys of gambling and problem gambling. Journal of Gambling Studies,
20(3), 237-258.
Aboriginal Health & Medical Research Council of NSW (AHMRC) (2007). Pressing
problems, gambling issues and responses for NSW Aboriginal communities. Sydney:
AHMRC of NSW.
Adams, M., & McCoy, B. (2011). Lives of Indigenous Australians men. In Thackrah, Rosalie
& Scott, Kim (eds), Indigenous Australian health and cultures, (pp.127-151). Sydney:
Pearson Australia.
adolescent problem gambling, related harms and help-seeking behaviours among an
adolescents with gambling-related problems. Journal of Gambling Studies, 23, 133-
143.
Alegría, A., Petry, N., Hasin, D., Liu, S-M., Grant, B., & Blanco, C. (2009). Disordered
gambling among racial and ethnic groups in the US: Results From the National
Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions. CNS Spectrums, 14(3), 132-
142.
Atkinson, J. (2002). Trauma trails recreating songlines: The transgenerational effects of
trauma in Indigenous Australia, Melbourne: Spinifex Press.
Australian Institute of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Studies (AIATSIS) (2012).
Guidelines for ethical research in Australian Indigenous studies. Canberra: Author.
Australian Institute of Criminology & Pricewaterhouse Coopers (2003). Serious fraud in
Australia and New Zealand. Research and Public Policy Series, no. 48, Canberra:
Australian Institute of Criminology.
22
Australian Medical Association (AMA) (2009). The health of Indigenous males: Building
capacity, securing the future. Report Card Series 2009. Canberra: Aboriginal & Torres
Strait Islander Health.
Australian population. Journal of Gambling Studies, 26, 189-204.
Becker, M. (1974). The health belief model and personal health behaviour. Education
Monographs, 2(4), 324-508.
behaviour. Melbourne: Gambling Research Australia.
Bellringer, M., Abbott, M., Williams, M. & Gao, W. (2008). Problem gambling: Pacific
Islands families longitudinal study. Final report. Auckland University of Technology,
Auckland.
Blagg, H. (2008). Crime, Aboriginality and the decolonisation of justice. Sydney: Hawkins
Press.
Blair, E., Zubrick, S., & Cox, A. (2005). The Western Australian Aboriginal Child Health
Survey: Findings to date on adolescents. Medical Journal of Australia, 183(6), 433-
435.
Blaszczynski, A., & Nower, L. (2002) A pathways model of problem and pathological
gambling. Addiction, 97, 487- 499.
Bondolfi, G., Osiek, C., & Ferrero, F. (2000). Prevalence estimates of pathological gambling
in Switzerland. Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica, 101(6), 473-475.
Breen, H. (2013). Indigenous Australian gambling in north Queensland. Cologne: Lap
Lambert Academic Publishing.
Breen, H., Hing, N., & Gordon, A. (2011). Indigenous gambling motivations, behaviour and
consequences in Northern New South Wales, Australia. International Journal of
Mental Health and Addiction, 9(6), 723–739.
23
Breen, H., Hing, N., Gordon, A., & Holdsworth, L. (2013). Indigenous Australians and their
gambling help-seeking behaviour. In Youngkyun Baek (ed.), Psychology of gaming, Ch
6, 93-120, New York: Nova Science Publishers Inc.
Cheers, B., Binell, M., Coleman, H., Gentle, I., Miller, G., Taylor, J., & Weetra, C. (2006).
Family violence: An Australian Indigenous community tells its story. International
Social Work, 49(1), 51-63.
Christie, M., & Greatorex, J. (2009). Workshop report: Regulated gambling and problem
gambling among Aborigines from remote Northern Territory communities: A Yolgnu
case study. Darwin: Charles Darwin University.
Clarke, D., Tse, S., Abbott, M., Townsend, S., Kingi, P., & Manaia, W. (2006). Gender, age,
ethnic and occupational associations with pathological gambling in a New Zealand
urban sample. New Zealand Journal of Psychology, 35(2), 84-91.
Connell, R. (1987). Gender and power. Sydney: Allen and Unwin.
Connell, R., & Messerschmidt, J. (2005). Hegemonic masculinity: Rethinking the concept.
Gender and Society, 19(6) 829-859.
Courtenay, W. (2003). Key determinants of the health and well-being of men and boys,
International Journal of Men’s Health, 1(2), 1-30.
Crisp, B. R., Thomas, S. A., Jackson, A. C., Smith, S., Borrell, J., Ho, W. Y., Holt, T. A., &
Thomason, N. (2006). Not the same: a comparison of female and male clients seeking
treatment from problem gambling counselling services. Journal of Gambling Studies,
20(3), 283-299.
Cultural & Indigenous Research Centre Australia (CIRCA) (2011). Development of culturally
appropriate problem gambling services for Indigenous communities. Canberra:
Commonwealth of Australia.
24
Day, A., & Howells, K. (2008). Psychological treatments for rehabilitating offenders. In Day,
Andrew, Nakata, Martin and Howells, Kevin, Anger and Indigenous men, Chapter 1, 6-
19, Sydney: The Federation Press.
Delfabbro, P. (2011). Australasian gambling review (5th ed.). Adelaide: Independent
Gambling Authority of South Australia.
Dickerson, M., Allcock, C., Blaszczynski, A., Nicholls, B., Williams, J., & Maddern, R.
(1996). A preliminary exploration of the positive and negative impacts of gambling and
wagering on Aboriginal people in NSW. Sydney: Australian Institute for Gambling
Research.
Douglas, M. (1992). Risk and blame: Essays in cultural theory. London: Routledge.
Douglas, M., & Wildavsky, A. (1982). Risk and culture. Berkeley: University of California
Press.
Ellenbogen, S., Derevensky, J. L., & Gupta, R. (2007). Gender differences among
Evans, L., & Delfabbro, P. H. (2005). Motivators for change and barriers to help-seeking in
Australian problem gamblers. Journal of Gambling Studies, 21(2), 133-155.
Fernandez-Alba, A. & Labrador, F. (2005). Sociodemographic, psychopathological and
clinical characteristics of pathological slot-machine gamblers in treatment: A
descriptive study of Spanish male gamblers. International Gambling Studies, 5(1), 113-
122.
Ferris, J. & Wynne, H. (2001). The Canadian Problem Gambling Index: Final report, [CPGI]
Ottawa: Canadian Centre on Substance Abuse.
Giddens, A. (1990). The consequences of modernity. Polity Press, UK: Cambridge.
Giddens, A. (1991). Modernity and self-identity: Self and society in the late modern age.
Polity Press, UK: Cambridge.
Goehring, B. (1993). Indigenous peoples of the world. Saskatoon: Purich Publishing.
25
Gray, P. (2004). Evolutionary and cross cultural perspectives on gambling. Journal of
Gambling Studies, 20(4), 347-XXX
Greig, A., Lewins, F., & White, K. (2003). Inequality in Australia. Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press.
Harris, C., Jenkins, M., & Glaser, D. (2006). Gender differences in risk assessment: Why do
women take fewer risks than men. Judgement and Decision Making, 1(1), 48-63.
Hewitt, D., & Augur, D. (1995). Firewatch on First Nations adolescent gambling. Edmonton:
Nechi Training, Research and Health Promotions Institute.
Hing, N., & Breen, H. (2001). Profiling lady luck: An empirical study of gambling and
problem gambling amongst female club members. Journal of Gambling Studies, 12,
47-69.
Hing, N., Breen, H., Gordon, A., & Russell, A. (2013). The gambling behavior of Indigenous
Australians. Journal of Gambling Studies. DOI:10.1007/s10899-013-9358-9 .
Hing, N., Nuske, E., & Gainsbury, S. (2011). Gamblers at-risk and their help-seeking
Hodgins, D., Makarchuk, K., el-Guebaly, N., & Peden, N. (2002). Why problem gamblers
quit gambling: Comparison of methods and samples. Addiction Research and Theory,
10(2), 203–218
Holden, A. (1996). Long term study into the social impact of gaming machines in
Queensland. Brisbane: Queensland Department of Families, Brisbane: Youth and
Community Care.
Hussey, D. & Dobbie, F. (2011). British Gambling Prevalence Survey 2010. London:
National Centre for Social Research.
impulsivity, sensation seeking, and risky behavior in male college students. Journal of
Gambling Studies, 14(3), 245-262.
26
Korn, D., Gibbins, R., & Azmier, J. (2003). Framing public policy towards a public health
paradigm for gambling. Journal of Gambling Studies, 19(2), 235-256.
Langewisch, M., & Frisch, G. R. (1998). Gambling behavior and pathology in relation to
Ledgerwood, D., & Petry, N. (2006). Psychological experience of gambling and subtypes of
pathological gamblers. Psychiatry Research, 144(1), 17-27.
Lupton, D. (1999a). Risk. London: Routledge.
Lupton, D. (1999b). Introduction: Risk and sociocultural theory. In D. Lupton (ed), Risk and
sociocultural theory: New directions and perspectives, (pp. 1-12). Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press.
Mason, K., & Arnold, R. (2007). Problem gambling risk factors and associated behaviours
and health status: Results from the 2002/03 New Zealand Health Survey. The New
Zealand Medical Journal (online), 29 June, 120.1257.
http://ezproxy.scu.edu.au/login?url=http://search.proquest.com.ezproxy.scu.edu.au/doc
view/1034236004?accountid=16926
McCoy, B. (2008). Holding men, Kanyirninpa and the health of Aboriginal men. Canberra:
Aboriginal Studies Press.
McDonald, H., & Wombo, B. (2006). Indigenous gambling scoping study: Draft report.
Darwin: Charles Darwin University.
McGowan, V., & Nixon, G. (2004). Blackfoot traditional knowledge in resolution of problem
gambling: Getting gambled and seeking wholeness. Canadian Journal of Native
Studies, 24(1), 7-35.
McMillen, J., & Donnelly, K. (2008). Gambling in Australian Indigenous communities: The
state of play. Australian Journal of Social Issues, 43(3), 397-426.
McMillen, J., & Togni, S. (2000). A study of gambling in the Northern Territory 1996-97.
Sydney: Australian Institute for Gambling Research.
27
McMillen, J., Marshall, D., Murphy, L., Lorenzen, S., & Waugh, B. (2004). Help-seeking by
problem gamblers, friends and families: A focus on gender and cultural groups.
Canberra: ACT Gambling and Racing Commission.
Ministry of Health (2007). Problem gambling intervention services in new zealand: 2006
service-user statistics. Wellington: Ministry of Health.
Ministry of Health. (2009). A focus on problem gambling: Results of the 2006/07 New
Zealand Health Survey. Wellington: Ministry of Health.
Moreton-Robinson, A. (2000). Talkin’ up to the white women: Indigenous women and
feminism. Brisbane: University of Queensland Press.
Morrison, L. (2004), Pokie gambling and Maori women: Friend or foe? eGambling: The
Electronic, Journal of Gambling Issues, 12,
http://www.camh.net/egambling/issue12/jgi_12_morrison.html (accessed on 3 June
2013)
Nagel, T., Hinton, R., Thompson, V., & Spencer, N. (2011). Yarning about gambling in
Indigenous communities: An Aboriginal and Islander mental health initiative.
Australian Journal of Social Issues, 46(4), 371-388.
National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) (2007). National statement on
ethical conduct in human research. Canberra: National Health and Medical Research
Council.
Nower, L., & Blaszczynski, A. (2006). Characteristics and gender differences in casino self-
excluders: Missouri data. Journal of Gambling Studies, 22, 82-99.
Oakes, J. & Currie, C. (2004). Gambling and problem gambling in First Nations
communities. Ontario: Ontario Problem Gambling Research Centre.
28
Perese, L., Bellringer, M., & Abbott, M. (2005). Literature review to inform social marketing
and approaches, and behaviour change indicators, to prevent and minimise gambling
harm, Wellington: Health Sponsorship Council.
Petry, N., Stintson, F., & Grant, B. (2005). Comorbidity of DSM-IV pathological gambling
and psychiatric disorders: Results from the National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol
and Related Conditions. Journal of Clinical Psychiatry, 66, 564-574.
Phillips, G. (2003). Addictions and healing in Aboriginal Country. Canberra: Aboriginal
Studies Press.
Potenza, M., Maciejewski, P. & Mazure, C. (2006). A gender-based examination of past-year
recreational gamblers. Journal of Gambling Studies, 22(1), 41-64.
Potenza, M., Steinberg, M., McLaughlin, S., Wu, R., Rounsaville, B., & O'Malley, S. (2001).
Gender-related differences in the characteristics of problem gamblers using a gambling
helpline. American Journal of Psychiatry, 158(9), 1500-5.
Queensland Department of Justice and of Attorney-General (2012). Queensland Household
Gambling Survey 2011–12,. Brisbane: QLD Government.
Reynolds, H. (2005). Nowhere people: How international race thinking shaped Australia's
identity. Melbourne: Viking Penguin Books.
Rockloff, M. J., & Schofield, G. (2004). Factor analysis of barriers to treatment for problem
gambling. Journal of Gambling Studies, 20(2), 121–126.
Schluter, P., Bellringer, M., & Abbott, M. (2007). Maternal gambling associated with
families’ food, shelter, and safety needs: Findings from the Pacific Island families
study. Journal of Gambling Issues, 19, 87–90.
Shaffer, H. (2005), From disabling to enabling the public interest: Natural transitions from
gambling exposure to adaptation and self-regulation. Addiction, 100(9), 1227–1230.
29
Slovic, P. (2000). Introduction and overview. In P. Slovic (ed), The Perception of risk, pp.
xxi-xxxvii, London: Earthscan Publications Ltd.
Slovic, P., Fischhoff, B., & Lichtenstein, S. (2000). Rating the risks. In P. Slovic (ed), The
perception of risk, pp. 104-120. London: Earthscan Publications Ltd.
Southwell, J., Boreham, P. & Laffan, W. (2008). Problem gambling and the circumstances
facing older people: A study of gaming machine players aged 60+ in licensed clubs.
Journal of Gambling Studies, 24(2), 151-174.
Splevins, K., Mireskandari, S., Clayton, K., & Blaszczynski, A. (2010). Prevalence of
Sproston, K., Hing, N., & Palankay, C. (2012). Prevalence of gambling and problem
gambling in New South Wales. Sydney: NSW Office of Liquor, Gaming and Racing.
Stevens, M., & Bailie, R. (2012). Gambling, housing conditions, community contexts and
child health in remote Indigenous communities in the Northern Territory, Australia.
BMC Public Health, 12, 377.
Stevens, M., & Young, M. (2009). Reported gambling problems in the Indigenous and total
Australian population. Melbourne: Gambling Research Australia.
Suurvali, H., Cordingley, J., Hodgins, D. & Cunningham, J. (2009). Barriers to seeking help
for gambling problems: A review of the empirical literature. Journal of Gambling
Studies, 25, 407–42.
United Nations (2004). The concept of Indigenous Peoples. New Yrok: Department of
Economic and Social Affairs.
Victorian Responsible Gambling Foundation (2012). The Victorian Gambling Study: A
longitudinal study of gambling and public health : Wave three findings. Melbourne:
Victorian Responsible Gambling Foundation.
Volberg, R., & Abbott, M. (1997). Gambling and problem gambling among indigenous
peoples. Substance Use & Misuse, 32, 1525–1538.
30
Volberg, R., & Wray, M. (2007). Legal gambling and problem gambling as mechanisms of
social domination? Some considerations for future research. American Behavioral
Science, 51(1), 56-85.
Volberg, R., Abbott, M., Rönnberg, S. & Munck, I. (2001). Prevalence and risks of
pathological gambling in Sweden. Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica, 104(4), 250-256.
DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0447.2001.00336.x
Vong, F. (2007). The psychology of risk-taking in gambling among Chinese visitors to
Macau. International Gambling Studies, 7(1), 29-42.
Walker, G. J., Hinch, T. D. & Weighill, A. (2005). Inter- and intra-gender similarities and
differences in motivations for casino gambling. Leisure Sciences, 27(2) 111–30.
Walker, S., Abbott, M., & Gray, R. (2012). Knowledge, views and experiences of gambling
and gambling-related harms in different ethnic and socio-economic groups in New
Zealand. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health, 36, 153-159.
Wardle, H., Moody, A., Spence, S., Orford, J., Volberg, R., Jotangia, D., Griffiths, M.,
Wardman, D, el-Guebaly, N., & Hodgins, D. (2001). Problem and pathological gambling in
North American populations: A review of the empirical literature. Journal of Gambling
Studies, 17(2), 81-100.
Welte, J., Barnes, G., Wieczorek, W., Tidwell, M-C., & Hoffman, J. (2007). Type of
gambling and availability as risk factors for problem gambling: A tobit regression
analysis by age and gender. International Gambling Studies, 7(2), 183-198.
Wenitong, M. (2006). Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander male health, wellbeing and
leadership. Medical Journal of Australia, 185(8), 466-467.
Williams, R., Stevens, R., & Nixon, G. (2011). Gambling and problem gambling in North
American Aboriginal people. In Y. Belanger (Ed.), First Nations gambling in Canada:
Current trends and issues (pp. 166-194). Winnipeg: University of Manitoba Press.
31
Young, M., Barnes, T., Stevens, M., Paterson, M. & Morris, M. (2007), The changing
landscape of Indigenous gambling in Northern Australia: Current knowledge and future
directions. International Gambling Studies, 7(3), 327-343.
Young, M., Stevens, M. & Morris, M. (2007). Problem gambling within the non-Indigenous
population of the Northern Territory of Australia: A multivariate analysis of risk
factors. International Gambling Studies, 8(1), 77-93.
32
Table 1 – Demographic profile of the sample.
Age group N % Work status N %
18-19 years old 44 9.1 (multiple response)
20-24 years old 68 14.1 Full time 248 57.5
25-29 years old 65 13.5 Part time/casual 79 20.1
30-34 years old 51 10.6 Self employed 13 3.7
35-39 years old 62 12.8 Sick or disability
pension
38 9.6
40-44 years old 52 10.6
45-49 years old 56 11.6 Single parent
allowance
10 2.6
50-54 years old 36 7.5
55-59 years old 20 4.1 Age pension 14 3.6
60-64 years old 18 3.7 Unemployment
benefits
78 19.9
65-69 years old 4 0.8
70 years old or more 7 1.4 Other 22 5.7
Unknown 6
Marital status N %
Married 126 26.3
Living with partner 129 26.9
Single 187 39.0
Separated/divorced 32 6.7
Widowed 5 1.0
Unknown 10
33
Table 2 – Percentage of males who engage in each form of gambling activity (multiple
response)
Gambling activity Valid percent N
Poker machines 69.5 339
Horse and dog racing 53.7 262
Keno 51.4 251
Lotteries 43.4 212
Scratchies 41.4 202
Card games 38.8 188
Sports betting 35.2 172
Table games 19.7 96
Poker tournaments 18.6 91
Bingo 16.8 82
Online 12.5 61
34
Table 3 – Logistic regression of characteristics differentiating problem gamblers from non-
problem, low-risk and moderate-risk gamblers for N = 330, significant predictors in bold
Predictor B
Std
Error
(B) Wald Sig. Exp(B)
Age 0.040 0.091 0.194 0.660 1.041
Marital Status (reference: married)
Living with partner -0.540 0.524 1.063 0.303 0.583
Single -1.274 0.577 4.869 0.027 0.280
Separated/divorced/widowed 1.460 0.713 4.189 0.041 4.307
Work status (reference: work only)
Pension only 0.418 0.465 0.807 0.369 1.519
Other 2.398 1.051 5.206 0.023 11.004
Age of first gamble (reference: 18 or older)
Less than 9 years old 1.477 0.558 7.015 0.008 4.378
10-14 years old -0.406 0.644 0.399 0.528 0.666
15-17 years old 0.495 0.458 1.167 0.280 1.641
Alcohol and drugs while gambling (reference:
never)
Sometimes 1.465 0.503 8.491 0.004 4.327
Most of the time 1.423 0.634 5.044 0.025 4.148
Almost always 1.018 0.738 1.904 0.168 2.768
Expenditure on favourite commercial gambling
activity
0.622 0.122 25.795 <0.001 1.862
Number of different commercial gambling activities 0.066 0.074 0.793 0.373 1.068
35
Main reasons for gambling (reference: No)
Helps to relax 0.924 0.448 4.259 0.039 2.521
Pleasure and fun -0.538 0.463 1.349 0.245 0.584
Hobby and interest 0.378 0.446 0.721 0.396 1.460
Cultural tradition -0.665 0.703 0.894 0.344 0.514
Reduce stress, depression, anger 0.880 0.548 2.577 0.108 2.410
Safe and pleasant place 0.679 0.537 1.598 0.206 1.972
Socialise with family and friends -1.066 0.491 4.719 0.030 0.344
Chance to win extra money -0.543 0.455 1.424 0.233 0.581
Challenge to try to beat the odds -0.200 0.466 0.184 0.668 0.819
I think I am lucky -0.210 0.529 0.158 0.691 0.810
Most family and friends gamble 1.188 0.551 4.654 0.031 3.281
Less bored -1.266 0.539 5.510 0.019 0.282
Takes mind off things that worry me -0.458 0.591 0.600 0.439 0.633
I am addicted to gambling 2.435 0.553 19.358 <0.001 11.412
36
Table 4 – Responses to PGSI questions amongst 120 male problem gamblers in the sample.
Valid percentages shown.
Item Never Sometimes Most of
the time
Almost
always
Have you bet more money than you
could really afford to lose?
4.2 43.2 37.3 15.3
Have you needed to gamble with
larger amounts of money to get the
same feeling of excitement?
8.5 50.0 31.4 10.2
When you gambled, did you go back
another day to try to win back the
money you lost?
3.5 53.0 31.3 12.2
Have you borrowed money or sold
anything to get money to gamble?
17.9 46.2 27.4 8.5
Have you felt you might have a
problem with gambling?
4.4 46.5 31.6 17.5
Have other people criticized your
gambling or told you that you have a
gambling problem?
2.6 50.9 34.5 12.1
Have you felt guilty about the way
you gamble or what happens when
you gamble?
6.9 52.6 28.4 12.1
Has your gambling caused you any
health problems, including stress or
anxiety?
21.6 50.9 20.7 6.9
37
Has your gambling caused any
financial problems for you or your
household (you ran out of money to
pay bills, or buy household
essentials, etc)?
15.5 50.9 25.9 7.8
Question stem: “In the last 12 months”
38
Table 5 - Impacts of gambling responses amongst 120 male problem gamblers. Valid
percentages shown, multiple responses possible.
Item Valid %
Arguments within your household
Suffering from depression
47.4
40.9
Separating or divorcing your partner 28.9
Incidents of violence with family, friends, others 26.5
Being evicted from your house 20.2
Having problems with police or committing a crime 19.5
Losing a job 19.3
Borrowing without permission/illegally 18.6
Children not attending school 15.0
Losing contact with your children 14.0
Being declared bankrupt 11.4
Question stem: “Has your gambling ever led to any of the following?”
39
Table 6 – – Responses to how male problem gamblers dealt with financial problems as a
result of gambling (N=120). Valid percentages shown, multiple responses possible.
Item Valid %
Relied on family, relatives or friends 59.3
Went without 57.9
Did not pay or put off urgent bills 51.4
Sold personal property and assets 30.4
Obtained emergency help 28.3
Got a loan 28.0
Humbugged or begged 27.4
Obtained money illegally 27.4
Obtained advance money from social security 24.3
Question stem: “What did you do when the money ran out?”
40
Table 7 – Responses to questions about why help was not sought for gambling issues
amongst 83 male problem gamblers who had not sought help for their gambling problems.
Valid percentages shown, multiple responses possible.
Item Valid %
I thought I could beat the problem on my own 58.6
I didn’t want anyone to tell me to stop gambling 50.6
I was too embarrassed to seek help 44.7
I was concerned about my confidentiality 40.9
I don’t have a gambling problem 38.8
I didn’t know where to seek help 36.1
The kind of help I wanted wasn’t available locally 32.9
I didn’t think a help service would understand my cultural background 30.6
Question stem: “Why didn’t you seek help for problems related to gambling?”
41
Table 8 – Responses to questions about where help was sought from amongst male problem
gamblers. Actual percentages shown (i.e. including missing values), multiple responses
possible.
Item %
From my family, relatives or friends 45.0
From a respected member of my community 29.2
From the Gambling Online Counseling Service 17.5
From an Aboriginal community health service 16.7
Self-excluded from one or more gaming venues 16.7
From Gamblers’ Anonymous 16.7
From a gambling counseling service 15.8
From the Gambling Help Telephone Hotline 13.3
Used written information on how to address a gambling problem 13.3
Don’t know where to get help 11.7
Question stem: “When you sought help for problems related to your gambling, where did you
look for help?”
42
Table 9 – Responses to the question “Which of these services would work best to help
Aboriginal Australians affected by gambling problems?” amongst 120 male problem
gamblers. Valid % shown, multiple responses possible.
Item Valid %
Local Aboriginal gambling liaison person to assist people to seek help
for gambling problems
80.7
Local Aboriginal gambling counseling service 79.3
Local money management and budgeting service 61.7
Local non-Aboriginal gambling counseling service 48.0
Other 37.5
