Questionnaires

ITEM MEAN RANKING

1. Students engage in other activities outside the school during

the school hours.

3.79 2

nd

2. Students absent themselves from school without due

permission from school authority

4.28 1

st

3. Students come to school anytime they like within the school

hours.

3.72 3

rd

4. Students come to school regularly but often go home whenever

they like

3.57 5

th

5. Students visit other places of interest other than school during

school hours

1. The Online Gambling Disorder Questionnaire

The components model has been used to develop scales measuring a range of
behavioural addictions, including gaming, social media, shopping (Griffiths, 2019)
and even the proposed construct of food addiction (Kircaburun et al., 2020). Recently,
the OGD-Q was developed to capture online gambling disorder in young people,
based on current diagnostic criteria and the components model of addiction
(González-Cabrera et al., 2020). The 11-item questionnaire uses a 5-point scale for
item responses, ranging from 1 (never) to 5 (every day), where higher scores indicate
higher level of online gambling behaviour. The scale developers dichotomised
responses to be > 3 = “problem” and item scores < 3 to be “no problem”. If a problem
 exists in 4 or more items in a 12-month period, then “online gambling disorder” is
considered established (González-Cabrera et al., 2020).
2. The OGD-Q, being based on the DSM-5 criteria, presents with high construct validity
and can be clinically useful for both prevention and intervention purposes.
Specifically, it may be applied as a screening instrument in the community for the
identification of individuals at risk or to monitor the progress of treatment in clinical
populations via repeated measures (González-Cabrera et al., 2020). For such
processes to be effective and reliable, a more specific examination of how the
different OGD-Q items perform when assessing problem gambling behaviour, aside
of the scale as a whole, could be particularly informative.
3. 1.4. Item response theory

Problem Gambling Severity Index

0 Never 1 Sometimes 2 Most of the time 3 Almost always
0 Never 1 Sometimes 2 Most of the time 3 Almost always
0 Never 1 Sometimes 2 Most of the time 3 Almost always
0 Never 1 Sometimes 2 Most of the time 3 Almost always
0 Never 1 Sometimes 2 Most of the time 3 Almost always
0 Never 1 Sometimes 2 Most of the time 3 Almost always
0 Never 1 Sometimes 2 Most of the time 3 Almost always
0 Never 1 Sometimes 2 Most of the time 3 Almost always
0 Never 1 Sometimes 2 Most of the time 3 Almost always
When you think of the past 12 months, have you bet more than you could
really afford to lose?
This self-assessment is based on the Canadian Problem Gambling Index.
It will help you decide if you wish to seek other forms of support or information.
When you gambled, did you go back another day to try to win back the
money you lost?
Have you borrowed money or sold anything to get money to gamble?
Have you felt that you might have a problem with gambling?
Has gambling caused you any health problems, including stress or anxiety?
Still thinking about the last 12 months, have you needed to gamble with
larger amounts of money to get the same feeling of excitement?
Have people criticized your betting or told you that you had a gambling
problem, regardless of whether or not you thought it was true?
Has your gambling caused any financial problems for you or your household?
Have you felt guilty about the way you gamble or what happens when you gamble?
Total your score. The higher your score, the greater the risk that your gambling is a problem.
Score of 0: Non-problem gambling.
Score of 1 or 2: Low level of problems with few or no identified negative consequences.
Score of 3 to 7: Moderate level of problems leading to some negative consequences.
Score of 8 or more: Problem gambling with negative consequences and a possible loss of
control.
Ferris, J., & Wynne, H. (2001). The Canadian problem gambling index: Final report.
Submitted for the Canadian Centre on
Construct Validity of the OPGBI – Exploratory Factor
Analysis
In order to test the construct validity of the OPGBI, an EFA was
conducted. Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) and Bartlett’s test in-
dicated that the KMO measure of sampling adequacy was higher
than .70 and Bartlett’s test of sphericity was signi cant (Kline,
2014), indicating a good structure (.87; p < .001). In order to nd
the number of latent factors, a scree test (i.e., scree plot) was
performed. It is recommended that factors should be retained if
they have an eigenvalue >1 (Kaiser, 1960; Yong & Pearce,
2013). Parallel analysis (Horn, 1965) compares the generated
data’s eigenvalues to those generated from simulated Monte-
Carlo data. The optimal coordinates and the acceleration factor
are non-graphical approaches in which the number of factors can
be determined (Raiche et al., 2006). Both these methods can
locate the point in the scree plot where there are the most abrupt
changes in the slope of the curve. Supplementary Figure 1
indicates the 12 items comprise three factors. Therefore, these
factors were further evaluated by carrying an EFA.
Table 2 reports the factor loadings for the 12 items and three
factors of the OPGBI. The column ‘H2’ is the communality
(explained variance) for each item. Factor loadings >0.4 are
displayed. The three factors explained 46% of the variance of the
OPGBI and Factor 1 summarizes all gambling behavioral spe-
ci c questions had the highest eigenvalue (2.9). Item 12 (“Do
you hit your [or the website’s] money spending limits [if you have
any]?”) had the highest communality (1%). Item 8 (“Do you use
different debit or credit cards to load up your wallet during an
online gambling session?”) did not load clearly on one of the
three factors as none of the loadings were greater than 0.4.
The three-factor solution’s goodness of t statistics were:
RMSEA: 0.077 (0.074–0.08); TLI: 0.891; chi-square: 1,985
(p < 0.001, df = 33). The p-value for the chi-square test (<.05)
was expected to be non-signi cant. Nevertheless, chi-square
results are sensitive to large sample sizes (n > 200), sometimes
producing false positives, in which case it is recommended to
weigh the indicators of the rest of the t exams before discarding
the proposed model (Hair et al., 2010). Cronbach’s alpha reli-
ability coef cient was 0.82 (0.82–0.83). Regardless of sample
size, Stevens (1992) recommends using a cut-off of 0.4 for factor
loadings. Following thes recommendations, the following in-
terpretations can be derived based on the factor loadings:
- F1 (Gambling Behavior): This factor loaded on seven
out of the 12 items and summarizes all the gambling
behavior related questions.
- F2 (Limits): This factor loaded on the two items re-
ferring to limit-setting.
- F3 (Communication): This factor loaded on two items
referring to communication with gambling operators.
External Validity
In order to compute the OPGBI score the 12 respective item
values were summed up for each participant. The sum of the
Table 2. Factor loadings for the three factor EFA solution with varimax rotation on the
OPGBI.
Number Item
Gambling
Behavior Limits Communication H 2
1 Do you reload your wallet during an online gambling session? 0.52 - - 0.29
2 Do you increase your stakes after losing in an online gambling session? 0.69 - - 0.51
3 Do you increase your stakes the following day after you have lost in an online
gambling session?
0.66 - - 0.52
4 Do you gamble online for longer than 4 hours a day? 0.55 - - 0.42
5 Do you gamble online with a variety of different stakes? 0.64 - - 0.44
6 Do you play more than ve types of online gambling games in a month? 0.55 - - 0.36
7 Do you re-gamble your online winnings straight after you have won? 0.57 - - 0.36
8 Do you use different debit or credit cards to load up your wallet during an online
gambling session?
- - - 0.19
9 Do you act aggressively in online gambling chat rooms? - - 0.70 0.52
10 Do you contact customer services to complain about your online gambling
losses?
- - 0.62 0.42
11 Do you hit your (or the website’s) money spending limits (if you have any)? - 0.97 - 0.1
12 Do you hit your (or the website’s) time spending limits (if you have any)? - 0.61 - 0.51
Eigenvalue 2.84 1.48 1.2 5.52
Explained percentage

Problem Gambling Severity Index (PGSI)

Instructions:
Answer the following questions when thinking about your gambling behaviour over the past
12 months.

Problem Gambling Severity Index (PGSI)

Instructions:
Answer the following questions when thinking about your gambling
behavior over the past 12 months. Do not indicate your name or
school.

Questions Never sometimes Most of the Always

Time
1 Have you participated in 0 1 2 3
betting for the last twelve
months?

2 Were you encouraged 0 1 2 3

into betting by a relative?

3 Does your 0 1 2 3
father/mother/relative
know that you bet?

4 Does your 0 1 2 3
father/mother /relative
encourage you to bet?

5 Does your 0 1 2 3
father/mother/Relative
discourage you from
betting?

6 Do you use a smartphone 0 1 2 3

for betting?

7 Have you bet using a 0 1 2 3

friends or relative’s
phone?

8 Have you bet from the 0 1 2 3

cyber during school time
including weekend?

9 Have you ever bet in 0 1 2 3

school?

1 Have you ever sneaked 0 1 2 3

0 out of school to go
betting?

1 Have you sneaked a 0 1 2 3

1 phone into school and
used it for betting?

1 Have you used money

2 meant for other things in
betting?

1 Have you bet more than 0 1 2 3

3 you could afford?

1 Have you needed to bet 0 1 2 3

 4 with a larger amount of
money to get the same
feeling of excitement?

1 Have you gone back on 0 1 2 3

5 another day to try and
win back the money you
lost?

1 Have you felt that 0 1 2 3

6 gambling is a problem to
you?

1
7

1 Have people criticized 0 1 2 3

8 your betting or told you
that you had a gambling
problem, whether or not
you thought it was true?

1 Have you felt guilty about 0 1 2 3

9 the way you gamble or
what happens after you
gamble?

2 Has gambling caused you 0 1 2 3

0 any health problem
including stress and
anxiety?

2 Has your gambling 0 1 2 3

1 caused any financial
problems for you or your
family?

90
Appendix A
Normative Deviance Scale (NDS)
Have you ever...?
Vandalism
1. Smashed bottles on the street, school grounds, or other areas?
2. Intentionally damaged or destroyed property belonging to your parents or other family
members (brothers or sisters)?
3. Intentionally damaged or destroyed property belonging to a school?
4. Intentionally damaged or destroyed other property (signs, windows, mailboxes, parking
meter, etc.) that did not belong to you?
5. Intentionally damaged or destroyed property belonging to your employer or at your
workplace?
6. Slashed or in any way damaged seats on a bus, in a movie theater, or something at
another public place?
7. Written graffiti on a bus, on school walls, on rest room walls, or on anything else in a
public place?
8. Committed acts of vandalism when coming or going to a football game or other sports
event?
Alcohol
9. Consumed hard liquor (e.g. tequila, whiskey, vodka, or gin) before you were 21?
10. Consumed alcoholic beverages (e.g. beer, wine, or wine coolers) before you were 21?
11. Got drunk (intentionally) just for the fun of it (at any age)?
12. Got drunk just to fit in and be part of the crowd (at any age)?
13. Lied about your age to buy alcohol before you turned 21?
14. Had an older brother/sister or friend buy alcohol for you?
15. Bought alcohol for a brother/sister or friend?
Drug use
16. Used tobacco products regularly (e.g., cigarettes, chew, snuff etc.)
17. Used "soft" drugs such as marijuana (grass, pot)?
18. Used "hard" drugs such as crack, cocaine, or heroin?
19. Gone to school when you were drunk or high on drugs?
20. Gone to work when you were drunk or high on drugs?
21. Gone to a concert when you were drunk or high on drugs?
22. Gone to a club/dance/party when you were drunk or high on drugs?
23. Gone to a club/dance/party to get drunk or high on drugs?
24. Sold any drugs such as marijuana (grass, pot), cocaine, or heroin?
School misconduct
25. Cheated on school tests (e.g., cheat sheet, copy from neighbor, etc.)?
26. Been sent out of a classroom because of "bad" behavior (inappropriate behaviors,
cheating etc.)?
27. Been suspended or expelled from school?
28. Stayed away from school/classes when your parent(s) thought you were there?
29. Intentionally missed classes over a number of days for "no reason," just for fun?
30. Been in trouble at school so that your parents received a phone call about it?
31. Skipped school/work (pretending you are ill)?
91
General deviance
32. Intentionally disobeyed a stop sign or a red traffic light while driving a vehicle?
33. Been on someone else's property when you knew you were not supposed to be
there.
34. Failed to return extra change that you knew a cashier gave you by mistake?
35. Tried to deceive a cashier to your advantage (e.g. flash a larger bill and give a
smaller
one)?
36. Let the air out of the tires of a car or bike?
37. Lied about your age to get into a nightclub/bar?
38. Made nuisance/obscene telephone calls?
39. Avoided paying for something (e.g. movies, bus or subway rides, food, etc.)?
40. Used fake money or other things in a candy, coke, or stamp machine?
41. Shaken/hit a parked car just to turn on the car's alarm?
42. Stayed out all night without informing your parents about your whereabouts?
Theft
43. Stolen, taken, or tried to take something from a family member or relative
(personal
items, money)?
44. Stolen, taken, or tried to take something worth $10 or less (newspaper, gum,
money)?
45. Stolen, taken, or tried to take something worth between $10 and $100 (shirt,
watch,
cologne, video game, shoes, money)?
46. Stolen, taken, or tried to take something worth more than $100 (leather jacket,
car stereo,
bike, money)?
47. Stolen, taken, or tried to take something that belonged to "the public" (street or
construction sign)?
48. Stolen or tried to steal a motor vehicle (car or motorcycle)?
49. Bought, sold, or held stolen goods or tried to do any of these things?
Assault
50. Hit or threatened to hit a person?
51. Hit or threatened to hit your parent(s)?
52. Hit or threatened to hit other students/peers or people?
53. Used force or threatened to beat someone up if they didn't give you money or
something
else you wanted?
54. Been involved in gang fights or other gang activities?
55. Beaten someone up so badly they required medical attention