EXECUTIVE SUMMARY. Gambling and Problem Gambling in Massachusetts: Results of a Baseline Population Survey

Similar documents
Problem Gambling Within a Public Health Framework in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts

Presentation Overview

Executive Summary. Key Findings

NEW ZEALAND NATIONAL GAMBLING STUDY: WAVE 3 (2014) REPORT NUMBER 5. Provider Number: Agreement Number: /00 FINAL REPORT

FY 17 DPH Problem Gambling Services July 11 th, Victor Ortiz Director of Problem Gambling Services

2015 Survey on Prescription Drugs

Gambling and Problem Gambling in Massachusetts: In-Depth Analysis of Predictors

Welcome & Introductions. General Rules, Expectations and Housekeeping

GAMBLING ATTITUDES AND BEHAVIORS IN IOWA. MCPGSA 2015 Ki Park, Ph.D.; UNI-CSBR Eric Preuss, MA, IAADC, CCS, LICDC; IDPH

Statement of Keith S. Whyte, Executive Director National Council on Problem Gambling

Gambling Expansion in North America: A Public Health Perspective

Facing the Social and Public Health Impacts of Gambling

Links between gambling availability, participation and harm a 28 year New Zealand case study and relevant findings from Sweden and Victoria

The National Longitudinal Study of Gambling Behaviour (NLSGB): Preliminary Results. Don Ross Andre Hofmeyr University of Cape Town

IOM Conceptualization and Problem Gambling Public Health Interventions

Gambling in Kentucky

GAMBLING PROBLEMS AND THE CHEMICAL DEPENDENCY PROFESSIONAL

Iowa Gambling Treatment Program. Iowa Department of Public Health

THE ETIOLOGY OF PROBLEM GAMBLING

Overview. SB 66 -The Kansas Expanded Lottery Act The Problem Gambling and Addictions Grant Fund Planning Efforts in Kansas

G PS. GPS Prevention Practice: Problem Gambling. Gambling Overview

The Massachusetts Gambling Impact Cohort (MAGIC) Study:

Gambling and gambling problems in Sweden Results from a one-year follow-up

GAMBLING ADDICTION STATISTICS IN GREECE - HOW THE DEREGULATION OF GAMBLING WILL CHANGE THE SCENE

Giving and Volunteering in Quebec

Problem Gambling Efforts: Who is responsible? Elizabeth Lanza, Director of the Office of Compulsive and Problem Gambling PA Gaming Control Board

Title of Poster: Gambling and Other Problem Behaviors Among Nebraska Youth. Results of the Risk and Protective Factor Survey ( ).

Iowa Gambling Treatment Outcomes System: Year 5

Americans Current Views on Smoking 2013: An AARP Bulletin Survey

What is the problem?

Reflections on the Results of the 4 th. Italian prevalence study

Problem Gambling Impacts Individual and Families I N C R E A S I N G AWA R E N E S S

CHS 2009 Baltimore City Community Health Survey: Summary Results Report

National dementia survey reveals Scots have positive attitudes and improved knowledge

2016 Indiana College Substance Use. Survey SAMPLE UNIVERSITY

Gambling Disorder. Compulsive Gambling

Adult Gambling and Problem Gambling in Alberta, 1998

Iowa Gambling Treatment Outcomes System: Year 4

PROBLEM GAMBLING 2018

eilibridfjo, Aibcria GAMBLING AND PROBLEM GAMBLING AMONG NATIVE AMERICANS IN NORTH DAKOTA

APPLICATION FOR Page 1/8 RESIDENTIAL TREATMENT

2011 Parent Survey Report

South African Responsible Gambling Foundation

EVALuATING RESPONSIBLE GAMBLING TOOLS

Problem Gambling and Suicide. Overview. Purpose of the Literature Review. Richard Wallington, BA, BSc, MA and Lindsey Krawchuk, MEd.

Preventing Relapse among Problem Gamblers using a Minimal Intervention

SECOND AUSTRALIAN CHILD AND ADOLESCENT SURVEY OF MENTAL HEALTH AND WELLBEING HIGHLIGHTS

2007 Yellow Flag Post-Campaign Evaluation Among Young Adults in Nova Scotia. October Final Report

A REPORT ON THE INCIDENCE AND PREVALENCE OF YOUTH TOBACCO USE IN DELAWARE

RELAPSE PREVENTION: AN EVIDENCE-BASED REVIEW. David C. Hodgins University of Calgary October

Stand On Your Own: Youth Dialogue on Life Transitions and Gambling

Chatham. Student Survey Report 2016

Prevention Counseling Assessment/Admission Form Reassessment / Readmission:

Arizona Youth Tobacco Survey 2005 Report

A Survey of Public Opinion on Secondhand Smoke Related Issues in Bourbon County, KY

Young men & problem gambling in geelong. A Brief Literature Review

Building, Maintaining and Evaluating a Statewide Treatment Program for Problem Gambling

Public opinion on gambling. Australian National Institute for Public Policy

Indiana Local Government Officials and Service

pwc Smoking Ban Economic Effect Analysis

NATIONAL COUNCIL OF LEGISLATORS FROM GAMING STATES COMMITTEE ON RESPONSIBLE GAMING ATLANTIC CITY, NEW JERSEY FRIDAY, JUNE 12, 2015 DRAFT MINUTES

RESPONSIBLE CONSUMPTION OF GAMBLING: RESULTS FROM A SURVEY OF EXPERTS

TOBACCO USE 2011 SURVEY RESULTS REPORT AND RELATED BEHAVIORS. Figure 1 n Trends in current tobacco use, Grades 9 12, New Mexico,

Self Exclusion Experiences in Iowa and Missouri

When Maria Bellringer first asked me to do a presentation at the Think Tank, she wanted me to just discuss brief screens for PG.

M E M O R A N D U M. Peter D. Hart Research Associates, Inc./ American Viewpoint

Lessons Learned from Quitline and BETS OFF Simulated Client Call Evaluation

A New Look at the Awareness and Use of Personal Medication Records: Five Years Later

East Cleveland Community Perceptions Baseline Survey. Final Report October 2012

BLACK RESIDENTS VIEWS ON HIV/AIDS IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

Legislative Report. Annual Report on Percentage of Gambling Revenues that Come From Problem Gamblers. Alcohol and Drug Abuse Division.

Why is Problem Gambling Awareness Month Important? Have the Conversation about Problem Gambling

American Views on Stem Cell Research Summary of Survey Findings. Results for America

Invisible Islington: living in poverty in inner London Executive summary of a report for Cripplegate Foundation by Rocket Science (UK)

2013 New Jersey Student Health Survey DRUG USE

Flipping the iceberg on gambling harm a public health perspective on gambling and gambling-related harm

Living with Problem Gambling

Psychological and Social Factors Associated with Problem Gambling in Ontario: A One Year Follow- Up Study

College Students and the! Misuse, Abuse and Diversion of! ADHD Prescription Stimulant Medications

Tobacco 21 in Kansas: Measuring the Impact KANSAS PREVENTION CONFERENCE SEPTEMBER 23, 2018

Tobacco Use Percent (%)

Problem Gambling and Crime: Impacts and Solutions

Pacific Islands Families: The First Two Years of Life: Gambling Amongst Pacific Mothers

HIV in the UK: Changes and Challenges; Actions and Answers The People Living With HIV Stigma Survey UK 2015 Scotland STIGMA SURVEY UK 2015

NEW ZEALAND NATIONAL GAMBLING STUDY: WAVE 2 (2013) REPORT NUMBER 4. Provider Number: Contract Numbers: /00, 01 and 02 FINAL REPORT

October 5, 2006 Stress and Mind/Body Health Hispanics. Summary

Grade 7 Lesson Substance Use and Gambling Information

Public Attitudes and Knowledge about HIV/AIDS in Georgia Kaiser Family Foundation

Quantifying the Harms of Internet Gambling Relative to Other Gambling Products

MetLife Foundation Alzheimer's Survey: What America Thinks

Cannabis Culture Poll. November 2018

2017 Health Report ACHA-NCHA-II Data

Milk Taste Test. Prepared by Shelley Kuklish Epidemiologist. September 2008

Dr. Robert Williams Faculty of Health Sciences & Alberta Gambling Research Institute University of Lethbridge, Alberta, Canada November 2015

AN OVEVIEW OF GAMBLING ADDICTION

Name Last First Middle Date. Completed by: If not client, relationship to client. Reason for Seeking Counseling:

SUNSET Russian Tobacco Education Project

Gambling KTE Policy Forum Pantages Hotel Toronto, Ontario March 10 th -11 th 2016

The First Asia Pacific Conference on Gambling & Commercial Gaming Research. Macau, November 6 th, 2012

David C. Hodgins University of Calgary Financial Forum III, 2009

Transcription:

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Gambling and Problem Gambling in Massachusetts: Results of a Baseline Population Survey September 15, 2017 This report summarizes findings from a large baseline general population survey of Massachusetts to assess gambling behavior and problem gambling before any of the state s new casinos became operational. The survey was mandated by the Expanded Gaming Act and funded by the Massachusetts Gaming Commission. This report is revised from the original report, published in May 2015, to reflect changes to the data weighting procedure. Executive Summary 0

SUGGESTED CITATION FOR THE FULL REPORT: Volberg, R. A., Williams, R. J., Stanek, E. J., Houpt, K. A., Zorn, M., Rodriguez-Monguio, R. (2017). Gambling and Problem Gambling in Massachusetts: Results of a Baseline Population Survey. Amherst, MA: School of Public Health and Health Sciences, University of Massachusetts Amherst. A PDF OF THE FULL REPORT CAN BE DOWNLOADED AT: www.umass.edu/seigma

Executive Summary Background In November 2011, an Act Establishing Expanded Gaming in the Commonwealth was passed by the Massachusetts Legislature. This legislation permits casinos and slot parlors to be introduced in Massachusetts for the first time. Section 71 of the Expanded Gaming Act requires the Massachusetts Gaming Commission (MGC) to establish an annual research agenda to understand the impacts of these new venues. This includes a comprehensive, first-of-its-kind baseline study of problem gambling prevalence and available treatment services before any of the new gaming facilities become operational. Data will be collected and analyzed each year to identify the true social and economic impacts of gambling expansion. Data and findings will be made public to regulators, policymakers, public health practitioners, researchers, and the general population in order to inform policymaking and planning across the state. In 2012, the MGC selected a team from the University of Massachusetts Amherst School of Public Health and Health Sciences to carry out the Social and Economic Impacts of Gambling in Massachusetts (SEIGMA) study. Internationally, this study is unique in obtaining information about gambling involvement and problem gambling prevalence prior to the introduction of casino gambling. While the SEIGMA study will establish baselines for virtually all social and economic variables that may be affected by expanded gaming, this report summarizes findings from the large baseline general population survey mandated by the Expanded Gaming Act and completed by the SEIGMA research team and its partners in 2013 and 2014. Methods The SEIGMA team obtained a probability sample of all Massachusetts adults and allowed survey respondents to complete the survey online, on paper, or by telephone. The Baseline General Population Survey took place between September 11, 2013 and May 31, 2014, had a response rate of 36.6%, and achieved a final sample size of 9,578 respondents. This report presents a comprehensive compilation of descriptive statistical results from the baseline survey. Comparisons described as higher or lower are based on statistical tests of significance. This first report does not include deeper exploration of the data; the SEIGMA research team will conduct indepth analyses over the course of the next year, releasing findings as they become available. Key Findings Attitudes about Gambling in Massachusetts There is a range of opinion among Massachusetts residents concerning the legalization, availability, and impact of gambling. Over half of the population (55.2%) believe that some forms of gambling should be legal and some should be illegal, with only a third (32.0%) reporting that all forms should be legal, and a tenth (12.8%) reporting that all forms should be illegal Nearly two thirds (61.3%) believe that the current availability of gambling in the Commonwealth is acceptable Over half (61.1%) perceive the impact of gambling expansion on the state to be neutral, beneficial, or very beneficial while 39.0% perceive the impact to be somewhat or very harmful Executive Summary 1

Percent Perceived impact of expanded gambling in Massachusetts 40.0 30.0 20.0 10.0 13.0 26.0 19.0 32.7 9.4 0.0 Very Harmful Somewhat Harmful Equal harm or benefit Somewhat Beneficial Very Beneficial Gambling in Massachusetts We define gambling as betting money or material goods on an event with an uncertain outcome in the hopes of winning additional money or material goods. This includes things such as lottery games, bingo, betting against a friend on a game of skill or chance, and betting on horse racing or sports. Overall, nearly three quarters of Massachusetts residents report participating in one of these gambling activities in the past year. Gambling participation by activity Overall All lottery Raffles Casino Sports betting Private wagering Horse racing Bingo Online 3.4 3.4 1.6 12.6 11.1 21.5 31.5 61.7 73.1 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% Percent While a quarter of the population do not gamble, 34.6% gamble yearly, 20.4% gamble monthly, and 18.1% gamble weekly Approximately 6 in 10 people report playing the lottery Just under a quarter (21.5%) of Massachusetts adults report visiting casinos to gamble. Over half of people who do so (66.3%) visit casinos in Connecticut Executive Summary 2

Percent Past-year gamblers in Massachusetts are most likely to say that winning money is the main reason they gamble, followed by excitement/entertainment, socializing with family/friends, and supporting worthy causes There are significant differences in overall gambling participation associated with gender, age, race/ethnicity, education, employment, income level, and geographic region: Men are more likely to gamble than women Middle-aged adults (25-64) are more likely to gamble than younger adults (18-24) or older adults (65+) Whites are more likely to gamble than Hispanics, Blacks, or Asians 100% Gambling by gender, age, and race/ethnicity 80% 60% 77.3 69.6 67 78.6 71.0 63.1 65.6 76.4 56.1 40% 20% 0% Male Female 18-34 35-64 65+ Hispanic Black White Asian Gender Age Race/Ethnicity Problem Gambling in Massachusetts Based on their answers to a standard set of questions, we classified people who gambled in the past year as recreational gamblers, at-risk gamblers, and problem gamblers. Recreational gamblers gamble because they enjoy these activities. At-risk gamblers engage in a range of behaviors, such as persistently betting more than planned, spending more time gambling than intended, chasing losses, and borrowing money to gamble, that place them at greater risk of experiencing a gambling problem. Problem gamblers are individuals who experience significant impaired control over their gambling and negative consequences as a result of their impaired control. The current prevalence of problem gambling in Massachusetts is 2.0% of the adult population An additional 8.4% of the population are at-risk gamblers Based on the percentages above, we estimate that between 83,152 and 135,122 adult residents are problem gamblers and between 389,776 and 488,519 adult residents are at-risk gamblers Additionally, nearly 2 in 10 Massachusetts adults (18.5%) reported knowing someone who they considered gambled too much Executive Summary 3

Percent The prevalence of problem gambling in Massachusetts is very similar to prevalence rates identified in other U.S. states Problem gambling prevalence 2.0% 8.4% 62.9% 26.6% Non gambler Recreational gambler At-risk gambler Problem gambler There were significant differences in problem gambling associated with gender, race/ethnicity, and education. The graph below illustrates that: Men are 3 times more likely to have a gambling problem than women Blacks are 4 times more likely to have a gambling problem than Whites Individuals with only a high school diploma are 3 times more likely to have a gambling problem than individuals with a college degree Problem gambling by gender, race/ethnicity, and education 7% 6% 5% 4% 3% 2% 1% 0% 3.1 1.1 6.1 1.7 3.8 1.5 1.3 Male Female Hispanic* Black White Asian* HS or GED Some college BA Gender Race/Ethnicity Education MS+* Note: An asterisk * indicates estimates are unreliable, relative standard error > 30%. Executive Summary 4

Recreational At-risk Problem Recreational At-risk Problem Recreational At-risk Problem Percent Comparing Recreational, At-Risk, and Problem Gamblers in Massachusetts There are notable distinctions between recreational, at-risk, and problem gamblers. At-risk and problem gamblers in Massachusetts are significantly more likely than recreational gamblers to be: Male Black Unemployed 100% Comparing characteristics of recreational, at-risk and problem gamblers in Massachusetts 80% 72.3% 60% 47.9% 59.5% 40% 20% 5.2% 9.9% 20.2% 4.8% 9.6% 20.1% 0% Male Black Unemployed Initial survey results show that, compared to recreational gamblers, at-risk and problem gamblers are more likely to report: Serious problems with depression, anxiety, and other mental health problems Using tobacco Consuming large amounts of alcohol at one time Problem Gambling Services in Massachusetts Awareness of existing problem gambling prevention initiatives in Massachusetts is quite variable. About 4 in 10 Massachusetts residents are aware of media campaigns to prevent problem gambling. However, just over 1 in 10 of adults is aware of non-media prevention programs in schools and communities around the state. Of these, only a very small number had participated in such programs. Executive Summary 5

Awareness of media campaigns Awareness of non-media programs to prevent problem gambling 41.0% 59.0% no yes 13.1% 86.9% no yes Among problem gamblers in the survey, only a very small number indicated that they would like help for a gambling problem or had sought help for such a problem. This contrasts with our earlier estimate that between 83,152 and 135,122 Massachusetts adults currently have a gambling problem. The gap between this estimate and the small number of individuals who reported desiring or seeking treatment highlights a potentially underserved population that may be in need of treatment. Future Directions While the statistics presented in this report tell us a lot about gambling attitudes, behavior, problems, and prevention awareness, additional analysis of the Baseline General Population Survey data will enrich our understanding of gambling and problem gambling in Massachusetts. Deeper analyses will allow us to examine factors that may contribute to or cause problem gambling, relationships between gambling attitudes and gambling participation, and factors associated with particular types of gambling. We also plan deeper analyses of data that were not highlighted in this report because of the small numbers of respondents who reported certain behaviors. For example, survey respondents in military service since September 11, 2001 reported a particularly high rate of problem gambling. We plan to look at this group more closely in the future to clarify this preliminary finding. Additionally, although estimates of suicidal ideation and attempted suicide obtained in the Baseline General Population Survey were too small to be reliable, the data do indicate that suicidality is somewhat higher among problem gamblers in Massachusetts compared with others in the population. We plan to investigate this further to clarify the relationship between problem gambling status and suicidality. Since the Baseline General Population Survey is just one component of the broader SEIGMA study, we will analyze other sources of data to verify and enhance the findings presented in this report. Additionally, all of the data collected by the SEIGMA team will be made public over time. This will enable other researchers and stakeholders to interact with the data and conduct their own analyses, adding to the body of knowledge about gambling in Massachusetts. Moreover, because the SEIGMA research plan calls for the same survey to be repeated one year after all of the new gaming facilities have become operational in Massachusetts, future data will allow us to measure the impacts of gambling expansion in Massachusetts more directly. Measuring the same behaviors and using the same methods at subsequent points in time will be useful in monitoring changes over time in attitudes, gambling participation, and problem gambling prevalence in Massachusetts. Results of the Baseline General Population Survey and subsequent surveys will be useful in developing data-driven strategies to promote responsible gambling, raise awareness about problem gambling, and design general and targeted prevention and treatment programs for problem gamblers and their families in Massachusetts. Executive Summary 6

A NOTE ABOUT THE STRENGTHS AND LIMITATIONS OF THE BASELINE GENERAL POPULATION SURVEY: Two major strengths of the Baseline General Population Survey are its sample size and its representativeness. With a sample of 9,578 respondents, the Baseline General Population Survey is the largest problem gambling survey ever conducted in the United States. Due to the sampling strategy and strenuous recruitment efforts used, the sample is representative of the broader Massachusetts population. Four potential limitations of the Baseline General Population Survey include a relatively low response rate, exclusion of adults who do not live in households, limited language translation, and small sample sizes of some population subgroups. In tandem, these possible limitations limit the generalizability of the results presented.