Gambling Addiction Questionnaire Test

How the Scales are Structured
Who Usually Takes This Test?
See How You Compare
Below is a preview of how scores are typically distributed across each scale.
Example Questions From the Test
- True
- False
- Yes
- No
- Yes
- No
Gambling Addiction Questionnaire Test - Description and methodology of the test
People who want to examine how gambling is understood, justified, or allowed to influence everyday priorities may find this gambling self-reflection tool useful. The Gambling Addiction Questionnaire Test organizes responses into a structured profile that helps readers identify themes in their gambling-related thoughts, judgments, and priorities. It offers a modest starting point for further reflection, not a diagnosis.
What This Assessment Explores
This questionnaire examines gambling knowledge, beliefs, emotions, and recurring involvement, including whether gambling becomes central, overrides personal needs, or displaces activities. Readers can reflect on excitement, losses, escape, and gambling concepts. A gambling behavior questionnaire combines self-report with conceptual judgments.
The result is organized around three displayed scales:
- Validity (0-9) assesses the reliability and sincerity of answers: Low credibility (0-3), Moderate credibility (4-6), and High credibility (7-9).
- Gambling Awareness (0-9) reflects a characteristic involving gambling knowledge, beliefs, involvement, and critical evaluation of gambling information: Low awareness (0-3), Moderate awareness (4-6), and High awareness (7-9).
- Gambling Addiction (0-9) indicates persistent and pronounced preoccupation with gambling and emotional involvement, showing whether gambling becomes central, takes priority over personal needs, or substitutes for real-life activities: Low (0-3), Moderate (4-6), and High (7-9).
Methodology and Scientific Basis
Items cover gambling definitions, probability, language, beliefs, excitement, boredom, escape, loss chasing, emotional reactions, and recurring preoccupation. Responses are True/False or Yes/No, so careful reading matters as much as willingness to answer candidly.
Scoring separates answer credibility, gambling awareness, and addictive involvement rather than yielding one undifferentiated total. The questionnaire displays three bands for each scale, but no item-level weighting, single total-score rule, or norm-referenced interpretation is specified.
Its themes are conceptually consistent with the South Oaks Gambling Screen (Lesieur & Blume, 1987), but this does not establish that the online questionnaire is an adaptation of that instrument. Griffiths (1990) contributes a cognitive framework for gambling beliefs, excitement, distorted expectations, and continued play; Custer and Milt (1985) add context for loss of control and harmful consequences. Within this broader gambling addiction questionnaire, the awareness dimension contributes one perspective alongside credibility and addictive involvement. Memory, mood, defensiveness, self-awareness, and misunderstanding can affect self-report, while gambling knowledge alone does not prove gambling behavior or involvement.
- Lesieur, H. R., & Blume, S. B. (1987). The South Oaks Gambling Screen (SOGS): A new instrument for the identification of pathological gamblers. American Journal of Psychiatry, 144(9), 1184-1188. 10.1176/ajp.144.9.1184
- Griffiths, M. D. (1990). The cognitive psychology of gambling. Journal of Gambling Studies, 6(1), 31-42. 10.1007/BF01015747
- Custer, R. L., & Milt, H. (1985). When Luck Runs Out: Help for Compulsive Gamblers and Their Families. New York: Facts on File Publications.
Updated: