Elsevier

Comprehensive Psychiatry

Volume 83, May 2018, Pages 79-83
Comprehensive Psychiatry

Impulsivity profiles in pathological slot machine gamblers

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.comppsych.2018.03.008Get rights and content

Highlights

  • Impulsivity is related to the origin, maintenance and severity of gambling disorder.

  • The study analyzes the impulsivity profile in pathological gamblers based on the UPPS-P Impulsive Behavior Scale.

  • The cluster analysis showed two clusters with different clinical variables.

  • The cluster with high impulsivity show more clinical psychopathology and worse personality functioning.

Abstract

Introduction

In gambling disorder (GD), impulsivity has been related with severity, treatment outcome and a greater dropout rate. The aim of the study is to obtain an empirical classification of GD patients based on their impulsivity and compare the resulting groups in terms of sociodemographic, clinical and gambling behavior variables.

Methods

126 patients with slot machine GD attending the Pathological Gambling Unit between 2013 and 2016 were included. The UPPS-P Impulsive Behavior Scale was used to assess impulsivity, and the severity of past-year gambling behavior was established with the Screen for Gambling problems questionnaire (NODS). Depression and anxiety symptoms and executive function were also assessed. A two-step cluster analysis was carried out to determine impulsivity profiles.

Results

According to the UPPS-P data, two clusters were generated. Cluster 1 showed the highest scores on all the UPPS-P subscales, whereas patients from cluster 2 exhibited only high scores on two UPPS-P subscales: Negative Urgency and Lack of premeditation. Additionally, patients on cluster 1 were younger and showed significantly higher scores on the Beck Depression Inventory and on the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory questionnaires, worse emotional regulation and executive functioning, and reported more psychiatric comorbidity compared to patients in cluster 2. With regard to gambling behavior, cluster 1 patients had significantly higher NODS scores and a higher percentage presented active gambling behavior at treatment start than in cluster 2.

Conclusions

We found two impulsivity subtypes of slot machine gamblers. Patients with high impulsivity showed more severe gambling behavior, more clinical psychopathology and worse emotional regulation and executive functioning than those with lower levels of impulsivity. These two different clinical profiles may require different therapeutic approaches.

Introduction

Gambling Disorder (GD) is characterized by persistent and recurrent maladaptive behavior that disrupts personal, family or vocational pursuits and is classified in the DSM-5 as an Addictive Disorder, due to similarities in etiological, biological, clinical terms and treatment outcomes with Substance-Related Disorders [1]. Indeed, high impulsivity is considered as an indicator of vulnerability for both disorders [2,3]. In a recent review, Grant and Chamberlain [4] concluded that there were similarities between substance abuse and GD on the cognitive and neurological components of impulsivity. In a prospective community-based study of 958 births analyzing the association between impulsivity at age 7 and the development of GD in adulthood, Shenassa et al. [5] found that children with impulsive behavior were three times more likely to develop GD in adulthood than non-impulsive children.

Impulsivity has been associated with various psychopathological disorders such as addiction, compulsive buying, problem gambling, attention deficit and hyperactivity disorders, eating disorders, aggressiveness, antisocial conduct, limit and antisocial personality disorders or risky sexual behaviors [6]. Although impulsivity has been widely used in mental health, its definition remains controversial [7,8]. It is a complex and multi-dimensional concept composed of different dimensions (i.e., cognitive, emotional and behavioral), which result in individual differences in its distribution and its degree of severity [8,9]. More than a criterion for a specific diagnosis, impulsivity could be considered a trans-diagnostic trait [10].

High impulsivity has also been associated with GD [2,[11], [12], [13], [14], [15]]. Whiteside and Lynam [15] described a multi-dimensional model of impulsivity and confirmed its heterogeneity. The four-factor model of impulsivity they developed was named the “Urgency-Premeditation-Perseverance-Sensation seeking model” (UPPS model). Negative urgency was defined as the tendency to act rashly as a result of intense negative affect; Lack of premeditation refers to the tendency to act without considering the potential consequences, without planning or adequate consideration of potential outcomes prior to action; Lack of perseverance as the inability to maintain involvement or persist in long, boring or difficult tasks; and Sensation seeking, defined as the tendency to enjoy and pursue exciting activities and openness to trying new experiences. Later, a fifth facet named, Positive urgency, defined as the tendency to act rashly or maladaptively in response to positive mood states, was added by Cyders et al. to create the UPPS-P model [2].

These five dimensions of the UPPS-P model have been empirically associated with different parameters of addictive behavior. Negative urgency has been associated with tobacco craving, severity of stimulant addiction, pathological gambling, compulsive purchases, as well as Internet abuse and risky sexual behavior. Lack of perseverance and lack of premeditation have both been linked with problematic use of substances (e.g., alcohol, cocaine and amphetamines). Sensation seeking has been associated with the frequency of drug use, alcohol consumption and pathological gambling. Finally, Positive urgency has been linked to the recreational use of alcohol and drugs and risky sexual behavior [7,16].

In GD, although some studies have established impulsivity as a predictor of GD severity, treatment outcomes and dropouts, they did not consider its multi-dimension nature [9,[17], [18], [19], [20]]. Some studies using the UPPS-P Impulsive Behavior Scale have found that pathological gamblers showed high impulsivity with a larger effect for both Positive and Negative urgency [[21], [22], [23]]. Considering the relationship between impulsivity and GD, a better understanding of the implications of impulsivity for the treatment and prevention of GD is essential. However, it is worth mentioning that gambling is not a single homogeneous activity, and although the chance of winning something of greater value than the amount invested is a common feature of the various forms of gambling activities, different types of gambling present different attributes [24]. Since lotteries, bingo, sport betting, or slot machines offer diverse experiences to gamblers, the motives for participating in particular forms of gambling probably vary from person to person [25]. Indeed, several studies have pointed out that certain forms of gambling are more likely to develop into problem behavior (e.g., slot machines, casino games, online gambling) than others (e.g., weekly lotteries, instant lottery tickets) [24,[26], [27], [28]]. Moreover, of all types of gambling, slot machines are the most addictive; in Spain they cause more gambling problems than any other type and require more specialized psychological treatment [29]. Therefore, including different types of gamblers in one study may introduce excessive variance, whereas focusing on one specific type of gambling may obtain more homogeneous results and a rapid understanding of its distinguishing features. Consequently, the main objective of the present study is to obtain an empirical classification of slot machine gamblers with GD based on their impulsivity. We also aimed to compare the resulting groups in terms of sociodemographic and clinical variables and gambling behavior.

Section snippets

Participants

The study population was derived from a prospective single-center registry of consecutive outpatients attended at a Pathological Gambling Unit between 2013 and 2016. Patients older than 18 years, diagnosed with GD and having problems only with slot machines were included. Patients with any other behavioral addiction (i.e., compulsive buying, internet addiction, sex addiction) or with addiction to other types of gambling were excluded. Illiterate subjects, those with difficulties in

Results

Based on the UPPS-P data, the cluster analysis showed two groups. The first cluster (cluster 1, n = 86) included subjects with the highest scores on all the UPPS-P scales, whereas the second cluster (cluster 2, n = 40) included those with high scores on Negative Urgency and Lack of Premeditation scales and low scores on the other scales. Negative Urgency, Positive Urgency and Sensation Seeking scales showed the highest differences between the two clusters (Table 1).

Participants in the two

Discussion

The results of our study demonstrate that individuals with slot machine GD do not represent a homogeneous population but differ in terms of impulsivity, one of the central aspects of addictive behavior. We identified two distinct clusters of slot machine gamblers depending on their impulsivity. Using the UPPS-P model [15], we found a group of pathological gamblers with higher impulsivity scores and with high scores on all scales of the UPPS-P questionnaire (cluster 1), and another group of

Conflict of interest

The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.

References (49)

  • D.C. Hodgins

    Using the NORC DSM Screen for Gambling problems as an outcome measure for pathological gambling: psychometric evaluation

    Addict Behav

    (2004)
  • A. Milosevic et al.

    The subtyping of pathological gambling: a comprehensive review

    Clin Psychol Rev

    (2010)
  • N. Canale et al.

    Trait urgency and gambling problems in young people by age: the mediating role of decision-making processes

    Addict Behav

    (2015)
  • L.G. Savvidou et al.

    Is gambling disorder associated with impulsivity traits measured by the UPPS-P and is this association moderated by sex and age?

    Compr Psychiatry

    (2017)
  • N.A. Dowling et al.

    Interventions for comorbid problem gambling and psychiatric disorders: advancing a developing field of research

    Addict Behav

    (2016)
  • American Psychiatric Association

    Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders

    (2013)
  • M.A. Cyders et al.

    Integration of impulsivity and positive mood to predict risky behavior: development and validation of a measure of positive urgency

    Psychol Assess

    (2007)
  • E.D. Shenassa et al.

    Childhood impulsive behavior and problem gambling by adulthood: a 30-year prospective community-based study

    Addiction

    (2012)
  • International society for research on impulsivity

  • P. Sánchez-Sarmiento et al.

    Impulsividad: una visión desde la neurociencia del comportamiento y la psicología del desarrollo

    Av Psicol Clin Latinonot

    (2013)
  • D.C. Hodgins et al.

    Components of impulsivity in gambling disorder

    Int J Ment Health Addiction

    (2015)
  • N. Albein-Urios et al.

    The value of impulsivity to define subgroups of addicted individuals differing in personality dysfunction, craving, psychosocial adjustment, and wellbeing: a latent class analysis

    Arch Clin Neuropsychol

    (2014)
  • D.M. Ledgerwood et al.

    Subtyping pathological gamblers based on impulsivity, depression, and anxiety

    Psychol Addict Behav

    (2010)
  • E.W. Leppink et al.

    Impulsivity and gambling: a complex clinical association across three measures

    Am J Addict

    (2016)
  • Cited by (17)

    • Impulsivity and loot box engagement

      2023, Telematics and Informatics
    • Do emotion regulation and impulsivity differ according to gambling preferences in clinical samples of gamblers?

      2022, Addictive Behaviors
      Citation Excerpt :

      In this sense, higher ER deficits have been associated with a higher GD severity (Elmas et al., 2017; Mestre-Bach et al., 2021; Rogier & Velotti, 2018; Williams et al., 2012). Impulsive tendencies/traits have also been described as a hallmark of GD (Aragay et al., 2018; Canale, Vieno, Bowden-Jones, & Billieux, 2017; Savvidou et al., 2017). In general terms, impulsive tendencies/traits allow quick decisions to be made in situations that require it and tend to be more accentuated in the young population and in the male gender (Chamorro et al., 2012).

    • Psychometric properties and normative data of the Brazilian version of UPPS-P Impulsive Behavior Scale

      2021, Current Research in Behavioral Sciences
      Citation Excerpt :

      In a recent published narrative review, Hook et al., (2021) found that UPPS-P is one of the most used self-report measures of impulsivity. Furthermore, UPPS-P model has been useful to elucidate the impulsivity subtypes concerning both clinical and nonclinical outcomes as procrastination (Wypych et al., 2018), traffic risk behavior (Luk et al., 2017), gender differences (Cyders, 2013), pathological gambling behavior (Aragay et al., 2018), eating disorders (Mallorquí-Bagué et al., 2020), alcohol problematic consumption (Tran et al., 2018), problematic phornography use (Shirk et al., 2021), suicide behavior (Millner et al., 2020) and personality disorders (Fossati et al., 2020). In Brazil there are some scales translated and adapted as, for example, Barratt Impulsiveness Scale (Malloy-Diniz et al., 2016), UPPS (Sediyama et al., 2016), S-UPPS-P (Pompeia et al., 2018) and Dickman Impulsivity Inventory (Gomes et al., 2017).

    • Comparison of gambling profiles based on strategic versus non-strategic preferences

      2020, Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences
      Citation Excerpt :

      More recent classification studies have also used psychological state and the level of the disordered gambling as key factors for identifying empirical subgroups among GD patients (inside a broad age range, from adolescence to old age). Researchers have also systematically identified groups ordered according to the level of dysfunctional distress [the most severe cluster being characterized by high levels of emotional vulnerability accompanied by higher psychopathological alterations (mainly depressive and anxiety symptoms, substance-related disorders and other impulse control disorders), poor coping skills and greater severity of the gambling behaviors] [8,9,18,19,10,11••,12,13,14••,15–17]. In these studies, this specific highly dysfunctional cluster has usually included a higher proportion of participants reporting many different forms of gambling preferences, but as a whole it seems that gambling subtypes differ mainly in relation to severity rather than to the type of the symptoms experienced or the gambling activities in which the subjects engaged.

    • The relationship between gambling and depression

      2020, The Nature of Depression: An Updated Review
    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text