Abstract
The South Oaks Gambling Screen (SOGS) is compared in reliability to a modified version of the Diagnostic Interview for Gambling Severity (DIGS-S) for use as a pathological gambling (PG) screen in college students. Seventy-two undergraduates (83.3% male, mean age of 18.8) from the University of Georgia completed the measures, completing a longitudinal design with 3 sessions over a 2-month time period. The DIGS-S and the SOGS demonstrated good internal consistency over the 3 sessions, with Cronbach’s Alphas ranging from 0.73 to 0.89, as well as strong concurrent validity, with correlations of .50 to .80 (Ps < .001) between the 2 measures across the 3 sessions. Both Cronbach’s alpha and test–retest reliability were higher with the DIGS-S than the SOGS. Given this, and given that the DIGS directly measures symptoms of pathological gambling, future research could benefit from the use of the DIGS-S as a PG screening tool in a college-aged sample.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Cicchetti, D. V. (1994). Guidelines, criteria, and rules of thumb for evaluating normed and standardized assessment instruments in psychology. Psychological Assessment, 6, 284–290.
Grant, J. E., Steinberg, M. A., Kim, S. W., Rounsaville, B. J., & Potenza, M. N. (2004). Preliminary validity and reliability testing of a structured clinical interview for pathological gambling. Psychiatry Research, 128, 79–88.
Lakey, C. E., Goodie, A. S., Lance, C. E., Stinchfield, R., & Winters, K. C. (2007). Examining DSM-IV criteria in gambling pathology: Psychometric properties and evidence from cognitive biases. Journal of Gambling Studies, 23, 479–498.
Lesieur, H. R., & Blume, S. B. (1987). The South Oaks gambling screen (SOGS): A new instrument for the identification of PGs. American Journal of Psychiatry, 144, 1184–1188.
Stinchfield, R. (2002). Reliability, validity, and classification accuracy of the South Oaks Gambling Screen (SOGS). Addictive Behaviors, 27, 1–19.
Stinchfield, R., Govoni, R., & Frisch, G. R. (2007). A review of screening and assessment instruments for problem and pathological gambling. In G. Smith, D. C. Hodgins, & R. Williams (Eds.), Research and measurement issues in gambling studies (pp. 179–213). New York: Academic Press.
Weinstock, J., Whelan, J. P., Meyers, A. W., & McCausland, C. (2007). The performance of two pathological gambling screens in college students. Assessment, 14, 399–407.
Winters, K. C., Specker, S., & Stinchfield, R. D. (1996). Diagnostic interview for gambling severity (DIGS). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Medical School.
Acknowledgments
This research was supported by National Institutes of Health research grant MH067827, by a grant from the Ontario Problem Gambling Research Centre, and by a grant from the Institute for Research on Gambling Disorders, to ASG.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Fortune, E.E., Goodie, A.S. Comparing the Utility of a Modified Diagnostic Interview for Gambling Severity (DIGS) with the South Oaks Gambling Screen (SOGS) as a Research Screen in College Students. J Gambl Stud 26, 639–644 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10899-010-9189-x
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10899-010-9189-x