Improved Self-exclusion Program: Preliminary Results (original) (raw)

We’re sorry, something doesn't seem to be working properly.

Please try refreshing the page. If that doesn't work, please contact support so we can address the problem.

Abstract

The gambling industry has offered self-exclusion programs for quite a long time. Such measures are designed to limit access to gaming opportunities and provide problem gamblers with the help they need to cease or limit their gambling behaviour. However, few studies have empirically evaluated these programs. This study has three objectives: (1) to observe the participation in an improved self-exclusion program that includes an initial voluntary evaluation, phone support, and a mandatory meeting, (2) to evaluate satisfaction and usefulness of this service as perceived by self-excluders, (3) to measure the preliminary impact of this improved program. One hundred sixteen self-excluders completed a questionnaire about their satisfaction and their perception of the usefulness during the mandatory meeting. Among those participants, 39 attended an initial meeting. Comparisons between data collected at the initial meeting and data taken at the final meeting were made for those 39 participants. Data showed that gamblers chose the improved self-exclusion program 75% of the time; 25% preferred to sign a regular self-exclusion contract. Among those who chose the improved service, 40% wanted an initial voluntary evaluation and 37% of these individuals actually attended that meeting. Seventy percent of gamblers came to the mandatory meeting, which was a required condition to end their self-exclusion. The majority of participants were satisfied with the improved self-exclusion service and perceived it as useful. Major improvements were observed between the final and the initial evaluation on time and money spent, consequences of gambling, DSM-IV score, and psychological distress. The applicability of an improved self-exclusion program is discussed and, as shown in our study, the inclusion of a final mandatory meeting might not be so repulsive for self-excluders. Future research directives are also proposed.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Frequency, time and money spent declared by the gamblers were calculated to represent a monthly period.
  2. This questionnaire is available from the authors upon request.
  3. The 9 statements specific to the participants who chose to have the initial voluntary meeting were excluded from those analyses. Answers falling into the “not applicable” category were also excluded.

References

Download references

Acknowledgement

This research was supported by grants from the Fondation Mise-sur-toi (Loto-Quebec).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Psychology, Laval University, 1030 Cherrier, bur 505, Montreal, QC, Canada, H2L 1H9
    Nicole Tremblay, Claude Boutin & Robert Ladouceur

Authors

  1. Nicole Tremblay
    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar
  2. Claude Boutin
    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar
  3. Robert Ladouceur
    You can also search for this author inPubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence toNicole Tremblay.

Rights and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Tremblay, N., Boutin, C. & Ladouceur, R. Improved Self-exclusion Program: Preliminary Results.J Gambl Stud 24, 505–518 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10899-008-9110-z

Download citation

Keywords