Current Psychology

, Volume 38, Issue 5, pp 1382–1391 | Cite as

Examining the Factor Structure of the Victorian Gambling Screen in Chinese Casino Workers

  • Imelu G. Mordeno
  • Ma. Jenina N. NalipayEmail author
  • Carla Coteriano
  • Sin U. Leong


This study examined the factor structure of the 21-item Victorian Gambling Screen (VGS) and its 15-item Harm to Self (HS) Scale in order to address the need for a valid, reliable, and culturally-adaptive tool that would provide a harm-based assessment of problem gambling and identify pathological gambling among Chinese casino workers (N = 817) in Macau, where the economy relies heavily on gambling industry. Competing models of VGS, as well as competing models of HS Scale, were tested and compared using confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and subsequent chi-square difference test. Moreover, the relationships of VGS and HS Scale factors with gambling behaviors (i.e., gambling frequency and amount spent in gambling) were investigated. Results revealed that: (1) the 3-factor model of VGS (enjoyment of gambling [EG], harm to self [HS], and harm to partner [HP]) and the 2-factor model of HS Scale (difficulty in impulse control and cognitive-emotional dissonance) best fit the data; (2) all factors of VGS and HS Scale, except for HP, were found to correlate with gambling behaviors; and (3) the association of EG with amount spent in gambling is stronger than its association with gambling frequency. The findings of the study support the validity and cross-cultural utility of the Victorian Gambling Screen in Asian, particularly Chinese, casino workers.


Victorian gambling screen Factor structure Problem gambling Casino workers 



This research received no specific grant from any funding agency, commercial or not-for-profit.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical Approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study. This article does not contain any studies with animals performed by any of the authors.


  1. American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (5th ed.). Arlington: American Psychiatric Publishing.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bentler, P. M. (2004). EQS 6 Structural Equation Program Manual. Encino: Multivariate Software.Google Scholar
  3. Ben-Tovim, D., Esterman, A., Tolchard, B., & Battersby, M. W. (2001). The Victorian Gambling Screen: Project report. Melbourne: Victorian Research Panel.Google Scholar
  4. Blaszczynski, A., & Nower, L. (2002). A pathways model of problem and pathological gambling. Addiction, 97(5), 487–499.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Byrne, B. M. (2006). Structural equation modeling with EQS: Basic concepts, applications, and programming (2nd ed.). Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Assoc. Inc..Google Scholar
  6. Chan, E. M. L., Dowling, N. A., Jackson, A. C., & Shek, D. T. L. (2016). Gambling related family coping and the impact of problem gambling on families in Hong Kong. Asian Journal of Gambling Issues and Public Health, 6(1).
  7. Cosenza, M., Ciccarelli, M., & Nigro, G. (2017). The blurred future of adolescent gamblers: Impulsivity, time horizon, and emotional distress. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 486. Scholar
  8. Cowlishaw, S., Suomi, A., & Rodgers, B. (2016). Implications of gambling problems for family and interpersonal adjustment: Results from the Quinte Longitudinal Study. Addiction, 111(9), 1628–1636.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  9. Donner, A., & Eliasziw, M. (1994). Statistical implications of the choice between a dichotomous or continuous trait in studies of interobserver agreement. Biometrics, 550–555.Google Scholar
  10. Dowling, N., Suomi, A., Jackson, A., Lavis, T., Patford, J., Cockman, S., et al. (2014). Problem gambling and intimate partner violence: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Trauma, Violence, & Abuse, 17(1), 43–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Dowling, N. A., Cowlishaw, S., Jackson, A. C., Merkouris, S. S., Francis, K. L., & Christensen, D. R. (2015). Prevalence of psychiatric co-morbidity in treatment-seeking problem gamblers: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Australian & New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry, 49(6), 519–539.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Dowling, N. A., Suomi, A., Jackson, A. C., & Lavis, T. (2016). Problem gambling family impacts: Development of the problem gambling family impact scale. Journal of Gambling Studies, 32(3), 935–955.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. Ellison, L. J., Vale, K., & Ladouceur, R. (2017). Disordered Gambling: The Effects of a Brief, Online Cognitive Intervention in an Australian Sample. Open Access Library Journal, 4(e3288).
  14. Flora, D. B., & Curran, P. J. (2004). An empirical evaluation of alternative methods of estimation for confirmatory factor analysis with ordinal data. Psychological Methods, 9(4), 466–491.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  15. Gainsbury, S. M., Russell, A. M., King, D. L., Delfabbro, P., & Hing, N. (2016). Migration from social casino games to gambling: Motivations and characteristics of gamers who gamble. Computers in Human Behavior, 63, 59–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Gainsbury, S. M., King, D. L., Russell, A. M., Delfabbro, P., & Hing, N. (2017). Virtual addictions: An examination of problematic social casino game use among at-risk gamblers. Addictive Behaviors, 64, 334–339.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. GGRAsia (2017). Macau residents gambled more in 2016: Study. Retrieved from:
  18. Hing, N., & Breen, H. (2008). How working in a gaming venue can lead to problem gambling: The experiences of six gaming venue staff. Journal of Gambling Issues, 21, 21–29.Google Scholar
  19. Hing, N., & Gainsbury, S. (2013). Workplace risk and protective factors for gambling problems among gambling industry employees. Journal of Business Research, 66(9), 1667–1673.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hu, L. T., & Bentler, P. M. (1999). Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 6(1), 1–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Lee, T. K., LaBrie, R. A., Rhee, H. S., & Shaffer, H. J. (2008). A study of South Korean casino employees and gambling problems. Occupational Medicine, 58(3), 191–197.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Lee, T. K., Lee, C. K., Lee, H. M., & Shaffer, H. J. (2014). Comparing stress perception and leisure type preference between South Korean smoking and nonsmoking casino employees. International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction, 12(5), 618–628.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Lesieur, H. R., & Blume, S. B. (1987). The South Oaks Gambling Screen (SOGS): a new instrument for the identification of pathological gamblers. American Journal of Psychiatry, 144, 1184–1188.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Macau Statistics and Census Service (2017). Employment Survey December 2016–February 2017. Macao, People’s Republic of China.Google Scholar
  25. Mackinnon, S. P., Lambe, L., & Stewart, S. H. (2016). Relations of five-factor personality domains to gambling motives in emerging adult gamblers: A longitudinal study. Journal of Gambling Issues, 34, 179–200.Google Scholar
  26. Markham, F., & Young, M. (2016). Commentary on Dowling et al. (2016): Is it time to stop conducting problem gambling prevalence studies? Addiction, 111(3), 436–437.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Marshall, D. (2009). Gambling as a public health issue: The critical role of the local environment. Journal of Gambling Issues, 23, 66–80.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. McMillen, J., & Wenzel, M. (2006). Measuring problem gambling: Assessment of three prevalence screens. International Gambling Studies, 6, 147–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Poole, J. C., Kim, H. S., Dobson, K. S., & Hodgins, D. C. (2017). Adverse childhood experiences and disordered gambling: Assessing the mediating role of emotion dysregulation. Journal of Gambling Studies.
  30. Shaffer, H. J., & Hall, M. N. (2002). The natural history of gambling and drinking problems among casino employees. Journal of Social Psychology, 142(4), 405–424.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Shaffer, H. J., LaPlante, D. A., LaBrie, R. A., Kidman, R. C., Donato, A. N., & Stanton, M. V. (2004). Toward a syndrome model of addiction: Multiple expressions, common etiology. Harvard Review of Psychiatry, 12(6), 367–374.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Steiger, J. H. (1980). Tests for comparing elements of a correlation matrix. Psychological Bulletin, 87(2), 245–251.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Support, E. Q. S. (2012). Multivariate Software, Inc. Retrieved from
  34. Svetieva, E., & Walker, M. (2008). Inconsistency between concept and measurement: the Canadian Problem Gambling Index (CPGI). Journal of Gambling Issues, 22, 157–173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Taylor, A. B., West, S. G., & Aiken, L. S. (2006). Loss of power in logistic, ordinal logistic, and probit regression when an outcome variable is coarsely categorized. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 66(2), 228–239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Tolchard, B., & Battersby, M. W. (2010). The Victorian Gambling Screen: Reliability and validation in a clinical population. Journal of Gambling Studies, 26(4), 623–638.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. Tolchard, B., & Delfabbro, P. (2013). The Victorian gambling screen: validity and reliability in an adolescent population. International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction, 11(5), 514–525.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Tolchard, B., & Stuhlmiller, C. M. (2016). The New England 4G framework for the treatment of a common health concerns: a gambling case analysis. Asian Journal of Gambling Issues and Public Health, 6(10).
  39. Welte, J. W., Barnes, G. M., Wieczorek, W. F., Tidwell, M. C. O., & Parker, J. C. (2004). Risk factors for pathological gambling. Addictive Behaviors, 29(2), 323–335.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. Wenzel, M., McMillen, J., Marshall, D. & Ahmed, E. (2004).Validation of the Victorian Gambling Screen (Gambling Research Panel Report No. 7). Melbourne: Department of Justice, Victorian Government.Google Scholar
  41. Williams, R. J., & Volberg, R. A. (2014). The classification accuracy of four problem gambling assessment instruments in population research. International Gambling Studies, 14(1), 15–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Wirth, R. J., & Edwards, M. C. (2007). Item factor analysis: Current approaches and future directions. Psychological Methods, 12(1), 58–79.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  43. Wohl, M. J., Young, M. M., & Hart, K. E. (2007). Self-perceptions of dispositional luck: Relationship to DSM gambling symptoms, subjective enjoyment of gambling and treatment readiness. Substance Use & Misuse, 42(1), 43–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Wu, A., Lai, M. H., & Tong, K. K. (2014). Gambling disorder: Estimated prevalence rates and risk factors in Macao. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 28(4), 1190–1197.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. Yi, S., Stewart, M., Collins, P., & Stewart, S. H. (2014). The activation of reward versus relief gambling outcome expectancies in regular gamblers: Relations to gambling motives. Journal of Gambling Studies, 31(4), 1515–1530.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Imelu G. Mordeno
    • 1
  • Ma. Jenina N. Nalipay
    • 2
    Email author
  • Carla Coteriano
    • 3
  • Sin U. Leong
    • 4
  1. 1.Mindanao State University-Iligan Institute of TechnologyIligan CityPhilippines
  2. 2.Philippine Normal UniversityManilaPhilippines
  3. 3.Galaxy MacauMacauPeople’s Republic of China
  4. 4.University of Saint JosephMacauPeople’s Republic of China

Personalised recommendations