Patterns and trends in gambling participation in the Quebec population between 2009 and 2012.
Kairouz, Sylvia ; Paradis, Catherine ; Nadeau, Louise 等
Since the legalization of gambling in Canada in 1969, increased
public funding has been allotted to the prevention of risky gambling
practices and the treatment of gambling disorders. The allocation of
public resources for prevention and treatment services should rest on
valid prevalence rates and knowledge of the evolution of patterns and
trends in vulnerable subgroups of the population. This paper reports on
the patterns and trends in gambling practices between 2009 and 2012 in
the province of Quebec.
Internationally, repeated prevalence surveys developed in Sweden,
Great Britain and Australia have shown trends regarding gambling habits
and gambling problems. The Swedish Longitudinal Gambling Study comprised
three tracks of data collection (epidemiological, in-depth and
follow-up) and used the Problem Gambling Severity Index (PGSI), which
allowed comparison with the first Swedish national study conducted in
1997 and 1998.1 The results indicated that, at a population level,
gambling participation declined markedly, from 88% in 1998/ 1999 to 70%
in 2008/2009. On the basis of the PGSI, in 2008/ 2009, 0.3% of the adult
population were classified as problem gamblers (with PGSI scores of 8
and above) and an additional 1.9% were classified as moderate risk
gamblers (scores between 3 and 7). (2) According to the revised South
Oaks Gambling Screen, the lifetime prevalence of probable pathological
gambling increased (1.2% to 2.0%), but changes in the prevalence of
lifetime problem gambling, and 12-month probable pathological and
problem gambling did not change significantly. Some forms of gambling,
such as poker and electronic gaming machines, increased in specific
subgroups. High-risk groups were identified: males, people aged 18-24,
people with low levels of education and people born outside of Sweden.
The British Gambling Prevalence Surveys were conducted in 1999,
2007 and 2010 in Great Britain. These large-scale representative surveys
found that past-year gambling prevalence in 2010 was higher than in 2007
but similar to the levels observed in 1999. Five activities accounted
for the recent increase: 1) scratchcards, 2) lotteries other than the
national lottery draw, 3) betting on other events and sports, 4)
gambling online on bingo, casino or slot machine-style games and 5)
gambling on fixed odds betting terminals. Problem gambling prevalence
estimates (past year) as measured by the PGSI were 0. 5. in 2007. In
2010, comparable estimates were 0.7%. These changes were not
statistically significant (p = 0.23). (3)
In Tasmania, Australia, six gambling prevalence studies have been
conducted since 1994, most recently in 2011.4 In 2011, 64.8% of the
population reported gambling on any activity in the previous 12 months,
compared with 71.7% in 2008. The rate of reported problem gambling
severity increased from 0.5% in 2008 to 0.7% in 2011. (4)
In Canada, the last national survey using a representative sample
across provinces was conducted in 2001. The Canadian Community Health
Survey (cycle 1.2) estimated that the prevalence rate of gambling was
76%.5 Since 2002, only individual provincial surveys have been carried
out. Across Canada, gambling rates vary depending on the province, Nova
Scotia and Saskatchewan reporting the highest prevalence (87%). (6, 7)
Without taking into account differences in methodologies and time
frames, on average it can be estimated that 79.2% of the adult
population gamble each year in Canada, (8) and 3.7% of adult Canadians
can be classified as moderate risk or problem gamblers. (9) Rates,
again, vary by province, from 1.6% in Prince Edward Island to 6.1% in
Manitoba. (10, 11)
In Quebec, the prevalence of gambling habits and problem gambling
has been measured since 1991. At that time, a survey was conducted with
a representative sample of 1,002 participants using the South Oaks
Gambling Screen (SOGS). Eighty-eight percent of the Quebec population
reported gambling in the previous 12 months. The prevalence of problem
gambling was estimated at 2.6% and the prevalence of probable
pathological gambling at 1.2%. (12) In 1996, as measured by the SOGS
with a sample of 1,275 participants, 90% of the Quebec population
reported having gambled in the previous year. The prevalence of at-risk
gamblers was 1.4% and that of potential pathological gamblers was 1.0%.
In 2002, a representative sample of 8,842 adults was studied using both
the SOGS and the PGSI. The results showed that 81% of the population
reported having gambled in the previous 12 months. The prevalence of
probable pathological gambling measured by the PGSI was 0.8%. The survey
also measured preferred gambling practices. The most frequent gambling
practices were buying lottery tickets (68%), participating in
fundraising draws (40%), gambling in casinos (18%), playing cards with
family or friends (10%), playing bingo (9%) and playing video lotteries
(8%). (13) The percentage of gamblers in the general adult population
decreased steadily after 1991, as did the prevalence of probable
pathological gamblers. However, confidence intervals were not reported
in the three surveys. As a result, valid trend comparisons cannot be
performed with these databases.
Identifying trends across surveys has been somewhat problematic for
a number of reasons, such as regular changes in the instruments used to
measure problem gambling severity, relatively low base rates of problem
gambling severity and high standard errors for some prevalence
estimates. Nonetheless, the most recent results indicate an overall
trend of declining participation and an apparent stabilization of
problem gambling severity rates. Using two large representative samples
drawn from the adult population of the province of Quebec, this study
aims to investigate four-year trends in the prevalence of gambling and
of problem gambling across different demographic groups.
METHODS
Data sources
The data were derived from the 2009 and 2012 cross-sectional waves
of the Enquete sur les habitudes de jeu des Quebecois (ENHJEU-Quebec),
which aims to monitor trends in the gambling habits of the
non-institutionalized population aged 18 and over who speak French or
English and live in private households throughout the province of Quebec
(N = 11,888 in 2009; N = 12,008 in 2012). Data were collected using
computer-assisted telephone interviews from June to September in both
2009 and 2012, except for the Laurentians administrative region, where
data collection in 2009 was completed by June 23-before the opening of a
casino in the city of Mont-Tremblant. The Research Ethics Board of
Concordia University approved the study, and informed consent was
obtained from each participant.
Sampling design
In both surveys, sampling was conducted in two stages, stratified
and non-proportional. Private households were selected by random digit
dialing, and one adult per household was selected randomly. The 2009
sample was stratified geographically according to the 16 health regions
comparable with the Ministry of Health planning areas. Sample sizes were
proportional to the square root of the number of census households in
each region. In 2012, stratification was performed by drawing samples
from seven distinct regions according to Statistics Canada's
classifications: 1) the census metropolitan area (CMA) of Montreal; 2)
the five remaining CMAs (including Quebec City, Sherbrooke,
Ottawa-Gatineau, Trois-Rivieres and Saguenay); and 3) all non-CMA areas.
Given the under-representation of young men in the 2009 survey, male
participants aged 18 to 35 were oversampled in the 2012 survey to
replicate their proportion in the general population according to census
data.
Data were weighted to adjust for non-response and the multistage
cluster sampling design, as well as to align the results with the
information on the Quebec adult population available from the census.
Survey measures
Participation in Gambling Activities
Respondents' gambling participation during the previous 12
months was assessed for 11 activities, including lotteries, bingo, horse
racing, slot machines, video lottery terminals (VLTs), poker, table
games excluding poker, keno, sports betting, card games and games of
skill. Potential responses were "yes", "no",
"don't know", and "refuse to answer". The
gambler group consisted of those who reported betting or spending money
on at least one of the 11 listed activities. To identify lifetime
non-gamblers, past-year non-gamblers were asked to report whether they
have ever bet or spent money on games of chance.
Problem Gambling Status
The overall score on the PGSI, a quantitative subsection of the
Canadian Problem Gambling Index, was used to assess the severity of
gambling problems. The PGSI consists of nine items calling for responses
reported on a 4-point Likert scale ("never",
"sometimes", "most of the time", "almost
always"). The PGSI demonstrates strong internal validity and
reliability as well as satisfactory temporal reliability. (14)
Respondents were categorized as 1) non-problem gamblers (score of 0);2)
low-risk gamblers (1 or 2); 3) moderate-risk gamblers (3 to 7);and 4)
problem gamblers (8+). Because of low numbers of problem gamblers,
moderate-risk and problem gambler categories were merged to prevent any
risk of disclosure and provide reliable estimates. Information was
gathered on the respondents' sex, age, level of education, income
and work status.
Analyses
Analyses were conducted to reveal gambling prevalence and gambling
problem severity among Quebec adults and to verify whether these habits
varied between 2009 and 2012. Descriptive analyses and pairwise
comparisons based on estimated marginal means were performed using Stata
(Statcorp LP, TX). Logistic regressions were further performed to verify
whether changes in individual gambling habits between 2009 and 2012 were
distributed equally across sex, age, socio-economic status and education
level. All standard errors were obtained by taking into account the
sampling plan with clustering effects. As we were dealing with large
sample sizes, the level of significance was set at p [less than or equal
to] 0.01.
RESULTS
The prevalence of lifetime non-gamblers in Quebec's adult
population increased from 13.6% in 2009 to 16.4% in 2012, and past-year
gambling participation decreased from 70.5% to 66.2% (Table 1).
An inspection of trends for specific gambling activities reveals a
significant decrease in participation rates from 2009 to 2012 for
lotteries (65.2% vs. 60.6%) and a significant increase in participation
in games of skill (3.8% vs. 4.9%). Participation in other popular games,
including table poker, bingo, slot machines and VLTs, remained steady
over the four-year period. Regarding gambling settings, the results
indicate that, between 2009 and 2012, the prevalence of gambling on the
Internet remained stable, whereas the prevalence of gambling in
casinos--in Quebec or elsewhere--increased significantly from 10.3% to
13.5%.
Logistic regression analyses were performed to examine the effect
of socio-demographic characteristics on changes in gambling
participation (Table 2).
The results reveal that interaction terms between the year of study
and demographic variables, including sex, age, marital status, household
income, employment status and education, were not statistically
significant. Thus, changes in gambling patterns between 2009 and 2012
were not contingent on the demographic characteristics of gamblers, and
a decrease in gambling prevalence was observed across the board.
Generally, in 2009 and 2012, gambling participation was significantly
higher among men, middle-aged respondents, people who were active in the
labour market, and those holding a high school diploma or college
degree. Gambling participation was also significantly higher among
married, widowed, separated or divorced people and those reporting a
household income of $20,000 or more.
Comparing the prevalence of various types of gambler reveals that
the proportion of the moderate-risk and problem gamblers combined and
the proportion of low-risk gamblers remained unchanged between 2009 and
2012, whereas the prevalence of non-problem gamblers decreased
significantly from 66.1% in 2009 to 61.5% in 2012 (Figure 1).
DISCUSSION
Gambling patterns and trends in Quebec's population between
2009 and 2012 reveal a significant decrease in the proportion of
past-year gamblers, which is mostly attributable to a decline in the
proportion of non-problem gamblers. This decline occurred in spite of an
increase in opportunities for gambling in the province. In 2009, the
state monopoly, Loto-Quebec, opened a new casino in the tourist area of
Mont-Tremblant. In 2010, it launched the first regulated online gambling
site, Espacejeux, with increasingly diversified offerings over the
years. The observed decrease in Quebec accompanies a general worldwide
downward trend in gambling, which followed a significant worldwide
increase in overall gambling participation between the 1970s and the
turn of the millennium. (15)
We suggest two hypotheses for this observed downward trend in
gambling. Shaffer has proposed the adaptation hypothesis, which states
that after the novelty of initial exposure, individuals and populations
gradually adapt to the risks and hazards associated with potential
objects of addiction; thus, prevalence rates plateau or decline. (16)
Another explanation might be that gambling offerings have failed to
respond to the demand of the younger generation for new types of games
and new forms of gambling entertainment in Quebec over the last decade.
For example, the niche of sports betting is on the rise in worldwide
popularity. However, unlike Great Britain and France, (3, 17) where many
types of sports betting are available and where gambling participation
is not declining, Quebec has not yet taken advantage of sports
betting's popularity in its population. Hockey is the national
sport, and hockey pools are a favourite among fans and supporters at an
informal level. Yet, there are no attractive options for this type of
sports betting offered by the state monopoly. However, in September
2014, a process was opened to solicit proposals for the acquisition of a
platform that would allow a greater selection of hockey pools for
Quebecers. (18) The commercial results of this endeavour are not yet
known.
Although overall gambling prevalence is declining, the prevalence
of gambling problems in Quebec presents a different pattern. The
proportion of gambling problems remained stable over the four-year
period. One cannot exclude the possibility of low service utilization
and low retention in treatment. (19) Indeed, limited health literacy
with regard to addiction services or uncertainty about their efficacy
and the shame of gambling problems may represent obstacles to accessing
services. (20) Furthermore, problem gamblers present a complex clinical
picture marked by co-occurring disorders and associated problems, which
often pose a barrier to support and treatment. Therefore, better
detection and referral systems by first-line workers are the key to
providing easier access to treatment. In addition, we recommend that
health care services should be sensitive to all associated problems of
gamblers.
This study's findings converge with overall global trends of
decreasing gambling participation and a stabilization of problem
gambling. Given the scarcity of national Canadian data on gambling, the
lack of data on trends and the variability among provincial rates of
gambling participation and problems, further focus is needed with regard
to interprovincial comparisons to tease out the role of potential
contextual factors. Variations among provinces could be examined from
the perspective of factors such as elements of population demographic
composition, gambling market characteristics (e.g., offerings and
advertisements) and, more recently, the availability of regulated online
gambling. For example, comparisons could be drawn between provinces that
offer regulated online gambling (e.g., British Columbia, Quebec,
Manitoba and, shortly, Ontario) and those where online gambling is
unregulated. This diversity of provincial contexts provides a unique
opportunity to conduct a quasi-experimental design study in which all
provinces are tied to the federal Criminal Code, but each provincial
government has the legal responsibility to manage and conduct gambling
within its own jurisdiction.
The findings of this study need to be interpreted with caution.
Inherent in all self-reported data, including survey data, is the issue
of under-reporting. Studies on alcohol use have shown an under-reporting
of alcohol consumption, especially among heavy drinkers, and the same
concern may apply to gamblers, particularly problem gamblers. (21-23)
Williams and Volberg have extensively documented the influence of
surveys' methodological characteristics on the under-reporting and
underestimation of problem gambling. (24)
CONCLUSION
Given the potential for under-reporting of gambling problems and
the stability of the proportion of problem gamblers over the four-year
span, the allocation of public resources for health care services should
be maintained, as it should for secondary prevention measures aimed at
those repeatedly identified as most vulnerable. Finally, information
about gambling harm is paramount for all the population. Although,
gambling is part of a larger issue, and its complexity cannot be
addressed in full in a single study, problems deriving from gambling
should nonetheless be taken into account in social policy, social
services, and treatment settings.
REFERENCES
(1.) Romild U, Volberg R, Abbott M. The Swedish longitudinal
gambling study (Swelogs): Design and methods of the epidemiological (EP)
track. Int J Method Psych 2014;23(3):372-86. PMID: 24942902. doi:
10.1002/mpr.1449.
(2.) Abbott MW, Romild U, Volberg RA. Gambling and problem gambling
in Sweden: Changes between 1998 and 2009. J Gambl Stud
2014;30(4):985-99. PMID: 23832754. doi: 10.1007/s10899-013-9396-3.
(3.) Wardle H, Moody A, Spence S, Ordord J, Volberg R, Jotangia D,
et al. British Gambling Prevalence Survey 2010. London, UK: National
Centre for Social Research, 2010. Available at:
http://www.gamblingcommission.gov.uk/PDF/British%20Gambling%20Prevalence%20Survey%202010.pdf (Accessed October 9, 2014).
(4.) Christensen DR, Dowling NA, Jackson AC, Thomas SA. Gambling
participation and problem gambling severity in a stratified random
survey: Findings from the second Social and Economic Impact Study of
Gambling in Tasmania. J Gambl Stud 2014;29:1-19. PMID: 25167843.
(5.) Cox BJ, Yu N, Afifi TO, Ladouceur R. A national survey of
gambling problems in Canada. Can J Psychiatry 2005;50(4):213-17. PMID:
15898460.
(6.) Focal Research Consultants. 2007 Adult Gambling Prevalence
Study. Halifax, NS: Nova Scotia Health Promotion and Protection, 2008.
Available at: http://www.nsgamingfoundation.org/uploads/Adult_Gambling_Report.pdf (Accessed October 9, 2014).
(7.) Wynne H. Gambling and Problem Gambling in Saskatchewan: Final
Report. Ottawa, ON: Canadian Centre on Substance Abuse, 2002. Available
at: http://www.health.gov.sk.ca/adx/aspx/adxGetMedia.aspx?DocID=317,94,88, Documents&MediaID=166&Filename=gambling-final-report.pdf
(Accessed December 29, 2014).
(8.) Canadian Partnership for Responsible Gambling. Canadian
Gambling Digest, 2012-2013, 2014. Available at:
http://cprg.ca/articles/Canadian%20Gambling%20Digest%202012-13.pdf
(Accessed December 29, 2014).
(9.) Canadian Partnership for Responsible Gambling. Canadian
Gambling Digest, 2011-2012, 2013. Available at:
http://cprg.ca/articles/Canadian%20Gambling%20Digest%202011-12.pdf
(Accessed October 9, 2014).
(10.) Doiron J. Gambling and problem gambling in Prince Edward
Island. Submitted to Prince Edward Island Department of Health, 2006.
Available at: http://www.gov.pe.ca/photos/original/doh_GambReport.pdf
(Accessed October 9, 2014).
(11.) Manitobans and Gambling III. Winnipeg: Manitoba Gaming
Control Commission, 2010. Available at:
http://lgamanitoba.ca/documents/manitobans-and-gambling-iii-report.pdf
(Accessed October 9, 2014).
(12.) Ladouceur R. The prevalence of pathological gambling in
Canada. J Gambl Stud 1996;12(2):129-42. PMID: 24233912.
(13.) Ladouceur R, Jacques C, Chevalier S, Sevigny S, Hamel D,
Allard D. Prevalence des habitudes de jeu et du jeu pathologique au
Quebec en 2002, Quebec, QC: Universite de Laval, 2004.
(14.) Currie SR, Hodgins DC, Casey DM. Validity of the Problem
Gambling Severity Index interpretive categories. J Gambl Stud
2013;29:311-27. PMID: 22426971. doi: 10.1007/s10899-012-9300-6.
(15.) Williams RJ, Volberg RA, Stevens RMG. The Population
Prevalence of Problem Gambling: Methodological Influences, Standardized
Rates, Jurisdictional Differences, and Worldwide Trends. Lethbridge, AB:
Ontario Problem Gambling Research Centre and Ontario Ministry of Health
and Long-Term Care, May 8, 2012. Available at:
http://hdl.handle.net/10133/3068 (Accessed October 9, 2014).
(16.) Shaffer HJ. From disabling to enabling the public interest:
Natural transitions from gambling exposure to adaptation and
self-regulation. Addiction 2005;100(9):1227-30. PMID: 16128708.
(17.) Tovar M-L, Costes J-M, Eroukmanoff V. Les jeux d'argent
et de hasard sur Internet en France en 2012, 2013. Available at:
http://www.ofdt.fr/BDD/publications/docs/eftxmtt6.pdf (Accessed December
29, 2014).
(18.) Marsan J-S. Loto-Quebec mise sur les pools de hockey. Journal
de Montreal 2014 September 4;Sect. Economie. Available at:
http://www.journaldemontreal.com/2014/09/04/loto-quebec-mise-sur-les-
pools-de-hockey (Accessed December 29, 2014).
(19.) Evans L, Delfabbro PH. Motivators for change and barriers to
help-seeking in Australian problem gamblers. J Gambl Stud
2005;21:133-55. PMiD: 15870984.
(20.) Simoneau H, Contant E, Chauvet M. Obstacles au traitement du
jeu pathologique dans la region des Laurentides. Montreal, QC: Centre
Dollard-Cormier --Institut universitaire sur les dependances, 2012.
(21.) Stockwell T, Donath S, Cooper-Stanbury M, Chikritzhs T,
Catalano P, Mateo C. Under-reporting of alcohol consumption in household
surveys: A comparison of quantity-frequency, graduated-frequency and
recent recall. Addiction 2004;99(8):1024-33. PMID: 15265099.
(22.) Knibbe RA, Bloomfield K. Alcohol consumption estimates in
surveys in Europe: Comparability and sensitivity for gender differences.
Subst Abus 2001;22(1):23-38. PMID: 12466667.
(23.) Dawson DA. Alcohol consumption, alcohol dependence, and
all-cause mortality. Alcohol Clin Exp Res 2000;24(1):72-81. PMID:
10656196.
(24.) Williams RJ, Volberg RA. Best Practices in the Population
Assessment of Problem Gambling. Guelph, ON: Ontario Problem Gambling
Research Centre, 2010.
Received: October 10, 2014
Accepted: January 12, 2015
Sylvia Kairouz, PhD, [1, 2] Catherine Paradis, PhD, [2] Louise
Nadeau, PhD, [3] Denis Hamel, MSc, [4] Chantal Robillard, PhD [1, 2]
Author Affiliations
[1.] Department of Sociology and Anthropology, Concordia
University, Montreal, QC
[2.] Research Chair on Gambling, Concordia University, Montreal, QC
[3.] Department of Psychology, Universite de Montreal, Montreal, QC
[4.] Institut national de sante publique du Quebec (INSPQ), Quebec,
QC
Correspondence: Sylvia Kairouz, Department of Sociology and
Anthropology, Concordia University, 1455, De Maisonneuve West, Montreal,
QC H3G 1M8, Tel: [telephone] 514-848-2424, ext. 2162, E-mail:
sylvia.kairouz@concordia.ca
Acknowledgement: We acknowledge Mike Benigeri for his contribution
to the statistical analysis. This research received financial support
from the Fonds de recherche du Quebec--Societe et Culture and the
Ministere de la Sante et des Services sociaux.
Conflict of Interest: None to declare.
Table 1. Gambling prevalence among Quebec adults
2009 (N = 11,888) 2012 (N = 12,008)
% CI% % CI%
Lifetime non-gamblers 13.6 12.6-14.8 16.4 15.1-17.8
Past-year gambling 70.5 69.1-71.9 66.2 64.5-67.9
Games (12 months)
Lotteries 65.2 63.7-66.7 60.6 58.9-62.3
Slot machines 10.1 9.2-11.1 9.7 8.6-10.9
Skill games 3.8 3.1-4.6 4.9 4.2-5.7
Table poker 4.7 3.9-5.5 4.7 4.0-5.4
Bingo 4.6 4.0-5.2 4.2 3.5-4.9
VLTs 4.6 3.9-5.4 4.1 3.4-5.0
Table games 2.4 1.9-3.0 2.7 2.2-3-3
Sport lotteries/pools 3.0 2.4-3.7 2.5 2.1-3.1
Card/board games 3.2 2.7-3.7 2.4 1.8-3.1
Casino 10.3 9.4-11.4 13.5 12.3-14.8
Internet 1.4 1.0-1.9 1.5 1.2-2.0
Odds 99% confidence
ratio interval
(CI OR)
Lifetime non-gamblers 1.24 ** 1.09-1.42
Past-year gambling 0.82 ** 0.74-0.91
Games (12 months)
Lotteries 0.82 ** 0.74-0.91
Slot machines 0.95 0.81-1.13
Skill games 1.32 * 1.01-1.72
Table poker 1.00 0.79-1.27
Bingo 0.91 0.73-1.14
VLTs 0.90 0.69-1.17
Table games 1.12 0.82-1.54
Sport lotteries/pools 0.85 0.63-1.14
Card/board games 0.75 0.55-1.02
Casino 1.36 ** 1.17-1.58
Internet 1.09 0.72-1.66
VLT, video lottery terminals.
Significant odds ratio: * p [less than or equal to] 0.01, ** p
[less than or equal to] 0.001.
Table 2. Gambling prevalence among Quebec adults by socio-demographic
characteristic
2009 (N = 11,888) 2012 (N = 12,008)
% CI% % CI%
Overall gambling 70.5 69.1-71.9 66.2 64.5-67.9
Sex
Female 68.1 66.2-69.9 64.0 61.5-66.5
Male 73.1 70.8-75.2 68.5 66.3-70.7
Age group (years)
18-24 62.0 55.3-68.2 59.0 53.1-65.5
25-44 70.0 67.4-72.5 65.4 62.1-68.5
45-64 76.8 75.0-78.6 71.2 68.7-73.6
65 and older 64.3 61.1-67.3 62.2 59.1-65.1
Employment status
Self-employed 68.3 63.7-72.6 69.3 63.4-74.6
Employed 75.9 73.8-77.8 70.3 67.9-72.6
Student, on leave, 61.7 57.5-65.6 56.4 51.6-61.0
stay at home
or unemployed
Retired 68.5 65.9-71.0 65.2 62.5-67.8
Household income
< $20,000 59.2 54.4-63.9 50.1 45.1-55.0
$20,000 to $39,999 71.1 67.8-74.2 66.3 62.7-69.7
$40,000 to $59,999 74.2 70.7-77.5 69.0 65.1-72.7
$60,000 to $79,999 78.3 74.3-81.9 74.9 70.6-78.7
[greater than 75.7 72.8-78.3 71.3 68.1-74.4
or equal to]
$80,000
Household income
Low income 55.9 50.0-61.7 46.6 40.5-52.9
Lower middle income 70.2 66.6-73.5 63.6 59.6-67.5
Upper middle income 75.3 72.6-77.7 70.8 68.0-73.5
Higher income 76.1 73.6-78.4 71.7 68.9-74.4
Marital status
Single, never married 65.6 61.9-69.2 60.4 56.3-64.4
Married 71.3 69.1-73.4 66.1 63.3-68.7
De facto union 75.9 73.2-78.3 74.2 71.2-77.0
Widowed, separated, 69.5 66.3-72.5 65.3 61.7-68.9
divorced
Education
Some high school 68.6 64.8-72.2 62.4 58.4-66.3
High school diploma 75.0 72.5-77.4 69.9 66.9-72.8
College (CEGEP) degree 72.2 69.0-75.1 70.2 66.5-73.6
University degree 65.3 62.6-68.0 61.8 58.6-64.8
Main effect Main effect
Year Socio-demographic
OR CI OR OR CI OR
Overall gambling 0.82 ** 0.74-0.91 -- --
Sex
Female 0.82 ** 0.74-0.91 ref. ref.
Male -- -- 1.24 ** 1.12-1.38
Age group (years)
18-24 0.82 ** 0.74-0.90 ref. ref.
25-44 -- -- 1.37 ** 1.10-1.70
45-64 -- -- 1.86 ** 1.51-2.30
65 and older -- -- 1.13 0.91-1.40
Employment status
Self-employed 0.82 ** 0.74-0.91 ref. ref.
Employed -- -- 1.24 * 1.03-1.49
Student, on leave, -- -- 0.66 ** 0.53-0.81
stay at home
or unemployed
Retired -- -- 0.92 0.77-1.11
Household income
< $20,000 0.78 ** 0.70-0.87 ref. ref.
$20,000 to $39,999 -- -- 1.83 ** 1.53-2.19
$40,000 to $59,999 -- -- 2.11 ** 1.75-2.55
$60,000 to $79,999 -- -- 2.74 ** 2.22-3.38
[greater than -- -- 2.32 ** 1.96-2.77
or equal to]
$80,000
Household income
Low income 0.77 ** 0.69-0.86 ref. ref.
Lower middle income -- -- 1.93 ** 1.56-2.38
Upper middle income -- -- 2.59 ** 2.13-3.16
Higher income -- -- 2.71 ** 2.22-3.30
Marital status
Single, never married 0.82 ** 0.74-0.91 ref. ref.
Married -- -- 1.29 ** 1.12-1.49
De facto union -- -- 1.77 ** 1.51-2.07
Widowed, separated, -- -- 1.22 * 1.03-1.43
divorced
Education
Some high school 0.83 ** 0.75-0.92 ref. ref.
High school diploma -- -- 1.39 ** 1.19-1.62
College (CEGEP) degree -- -- 1.30 ** 1.10-1.53
University degree -- -- 0.92 0.79-1.07
Interaction
effect
p value
Overall gambling --
Sex
Female 0.6234
Male --
Age group (years)
18-24 0.1745
25-44 --
45-64 --
65 and older --
Employment status
Self-employed 0.1087
Employed --
Student, on leave, --
stay at home
or unemployed
Retired --
Household income
< $20,000 0.8008
$20,000 to $39,999 --
$40,000 to $59,999 --
$60,000 to $79,999 --
[greater than --
or equal to]
$80,000
Household income
Low income 0.7322
Lower middle income --
Upper middle income --
Higher income --
Marital status
Single, never married 0.4673
Married --
De facto union --
Widowed, separated, --
divorced
Education
Some high school 0.3884
High school diploma --
College (CEGEP) degree --
University degree --
CI, 99% confidence interval; OR, odds ratio; CEGEP, College
d'enseignement general et professionnel.
Significant OR: * p [less than or equal to] 0.01, ** p [less than
or equal to] 0.001.
Figure 1. Severity of gambling problems among Quebec adults
(2009, N = 11,888; 2012, N = 12,008)
2009 2012
Non-problem gamblers 66.1% 61.5%
Low-risk gamblers 2.4% 2.9%
Moderate-risk and problem gamblers 2.0% 1.8%
Note: Table made from bar graph.
