Unfortunately, such differences are common in the research literature on pathological and problem gambling (Volberg, 1998b), which creates problems in estimating prevalence rates in the United States.Īnother important limitation of the available prevalence research pertains to the different facets of the concept of prevalence. Here it is important to note that comparing and interpreting prevalence findings is problematic when different studies use different screening and/or diagnostic instruments or criterion levels to measure differing levels of intemperate gambling and associated problems. In Chapter 2 we described the difficulties involved in defining and measuring pathological gambling using various assessment instruments. This chapter also makes comparisons with the prevalence rates of alcohol and drug abusers, to help put the magnitude of excessive gambling and related problems into perspective.

We also attempt to examine trends in relation to the increased availability of legal gambling opportunities in the last decade. Of particular concern is determining prevalence among reportedly vulnerable demographic groups, such as men, adolescents, the poor, the elderly, and minorities (including American Indians). As limited by the available data, the discussion is often framed in terms of the proportion of pathological and problem gamblers reported in studies of U.S. This chapter discusses the prevalence of pathological and problem gamblers among the general U.S. Data describing the extent of pathological and problem gambling are useful for many purposes, including planning public health services and medical services. The perception of increased pathological and problem gambling is currently driving interest and concern among policymakers, treatment professionals, industry officials, gambling researchers, and the public. Pathological and Problem Gamblers in the United States

Pathological gambling