4.2 Article Proceedings Paper

Divergent validity of measures of cognitive distortions, impulsivity, and time perspective in pathological gambling

期刊

JOURNAL OF GAMBLING STUDIES
卷 22, 期 3, 页码 339-354

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10899-006-9021-9

关键词

pathological gambling; assessment; cognitions; impulsivity; time perspective; cognitive therapy

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The present study assessed the divergent validity of several self-report and objective behavioral measures for assessing pathological gambling using three samples divided by South Oaks Gambling Scale score [Lesieur, & Blume (1987). American Journal of Psychiatry, 144, 1184-1188]: pathological gamblers, potential pathological gamblers, and non-pathological gamblers. Self-report measures included the Gamblers' Beliefs Questionnaire [GBQ; Steenbergh, Meyers, May, & Whelan (2002). Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 16, 143-149], the Gambling Passion Scale [GPS; Rousseau, Vallerand, Ratelle, Mageau, & Provencher, (2002). Journal of Gambling Studies, 18, 45-66], the Eysenck Impulsivity Questionnaire [EIQ; Eysenck, & Eysenck (1978). Psychological Reports, 43, 1247-1255], and the Stanford Time Perspective Inventory [STPI; Zimbardo, & Boyd (1999). Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 77, 1271-1288]. Behavioral tasks included the delay discounting task [Madden, Petry, Badger, & Bickel (1997). Experimental & Clinical Psychopharmacology, 5, 256-263] and the Future Time Perspectives [FTP; Wallace (1956). Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 52, 240-245]. The GBQ, GPS, Impulsivity subscale of the EIQ, and DDT all exhibited robust divergent validity, however, neither measure of time perspective discriminated between groups. Applications of these findings to etiological research and clinical contexts are discussed.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据