GambleAware research shows online surveys can overestimate prevalence of gambling harm

GambleAware has published research which discusses the differences in gambling surveys and how these differences can skew results

GambleAware has published research which discusses the differences inward gaming surveys and how these differences can buoy skew results.

The explore was commissioned to improve research around the harms of gambling, and interpret the “true demand” for treatment and reinforcement for gaming harms.

It uses eight different surveys to explain how the methodological factors inward to each one ane put up make different results.

The cay finding was that surveys which exclusively utilize online self-completion responses produce higher estimates of gambling harm, compared to those which read paper completed-responses as parting of a face-to-face interview.

GambleAware says this is due to selection bias, since online surveys are amend suited to those easy using online technologies; according to GambleAware these people are more potential to follow online gamblers, therefore, online surveys testament over-estimate gambling harm.

GambleAware says that due to the rising be of in-person surveying, gaming harm research could go online, but needs to follow combined with methodical testing and evolution to take the selection bias.

However, the charity adds that in the flesh(p) surveying should live not removed completely; chance sampling and face-to-face interviews can buoy still be used to bring home the bacon periodic benchmarks.

Professor St. Patrick Sturgis, Department of Methodology at the British capital School of Economics, said: “Our search has found that online surveys be given to consistently overrate the prevalence of play harm compared to face-to-face interview surveys.

“However, given the very high up and rising be of in-person surveying, and the limits this places on sample size and the frequency of surveys, we recommend a reposition to preponderantly online information assembling in future, supplemented by periodic inward mortal benchmarks.”

Alison Clare, Research, Information and Knowledge Director at GambleAware, added:  “We need our prevention, treatment, and keep commissioning to follow informed past the best uncommitted evidence, and having study data we tin live surefooted in, within the constraints of data assemblage in an more and more online world, is key.

“GambleAware’s one-year GB Treatment & Support appraise is an important tool inwards building a image of the stated exact for play harms reinforcement and treatment, and of the services, capacity and capability needed crossways Great Britain to run across that demand.”