PROBLEM GAMBLING, GENERAL STRAIN THEORY AND GENDER

The prevalence of problem gambling has increased in the late 20th Century. Prior research has identified a host of factors that increase the likelihood that an individual will become a problem gambler, most of which would be identified by criminologists as “strains” under the framework of General Strain Theory (GST). Yet, GST has not been widely used as a possible explanation for why people become problem gamblers. In addition, there has been no examination of how gender interacts with those variables to affect problem gambling. In this dissertation, I use propositions from General Strain Theory to determine if it provides a framework for understanding why people become problem gamblers and whether gender is a moderating factor in this relationship. Secondary analysis of data collected from the Social and Economic Impacts of Gambling in Massachusetts (SEIGMA) study is analyzed to assess types of non-gambling strains, their relationship to problem gambling, and the role gender plays in this relationship. Findings demonstrate that non-gambling strains play a minor role in why people become problem gamblers. More relevant factors include having a non-substance behavioral problem and experiencing strain from a spouse/partner who is a problem gambler. Gender was found to have a strong direct effect on problem gambling (with men more likely to be problem gamblers than women), but few moderating effects were found, with one exception—men were more likely be problem gamblers than women if they experienced strain from their spouse/partner’s gambling behavior.