4.6 Article

Independent Correlates of Reported Gambling Problems Amongst Indigenous Australians

Journal

SOCIAL INDICATORS RESEARCH
Volume 98, Issue 1, Pages 147-166

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s11205-009-9536-4

Keywords

Aboriginal populations; Public health policy; Gambling

Ask authors/readers for more resources

To identify independent correlates of reported gambling problems amongst the Indigenous population of Australia. A cross-sectional design was applied to a nationally representative sample of the Indigenous population. Estimates of reported gambling problems are presented by remoteness and jurisdiction. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify independent correlates of reported gambling problems amongst individuals and their social and family networks. The analysis was stratified by remoteness. Indigenous people living in remote locations reported significantly more gambling problems than those living in non-remote locations. In non-remote areas, being female, having high personal income, being more socially connected (i.e. involved in an Indigenous organisation or living in a household where all members were Indigenous) and reporting community problems were associated with higher levels of reported gambling problems. In remote areas, multifamily households, participation in sports and cultural events, and reporting of community problems were associated with higher reported gambling problems, while having a relative removed from their natural family was associated with lower reported problems. Problematic gambling is clearly related to the social and environmental contexts in which it occurs. Harm minimisation policies that focus on a reduction in crowding (especially in remote locations), increased public awareness of the negative consequences of gambling, improving access to support services, and lifting the socioeconomic status of Indigenous people may reduce gambling related harm in the medium to long term.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available