South Oaks Gambling Screen (SOGS) 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
- Never
- Sometimes (in less than half of losses)
- Almost always when I lose
- Always
- Never (or never played)
- Yes, in less than half of the times I lost
- Yes, almost always
- No
- Yes, in the past, but not now
- Yes
South Oaks Gambling Screen (SOGS) Test - Description and methodology of the test
For people examining gambling-related difficulties, the South Oaks Gambling Screen (SOGS) Test offers a focused way to organize signs that may otherwise be easy to minimize. As a gambling problem screening tool, it is intended for people who want to review gambling behavior, its consequences, and the effect on close relationships. The result gives an initial indication of problem severity and highlights areas worth discussing or examining more closely.
What This Assessment Explores
The questions cover gambling behavior, control, concealment, finances, relationships, and disruption to daily responsibilities. They address chasing losses, misrepresenting wins, spending beyond intention, guilt, difficulty stopping, and disapproval from others. Other items ask about borrowing, unpaid debts, missed work or school, and obtaining gambling money through household funds, credit, loans, or property.
The SOGS questionnaire treats gambling-related harm as a pattern of consequences rather than one isolated habit. Its displayed scale is Gambling Problem Severity (0-19), which reflects the apparent severity of gambling-related problems and preliminary risk; the result bands are:
- None/Minimal (0-1) indicates no or minimal problems.
- Some problems (2-4) indicates noticeable difficulties.
- High severity (5-19) indicates a strongly concerning pattern linked with problematic or pathological gambling.
Methodology and Scientific Basis
The format mixes graded frequency responses with yes/no questions. It captures patterns such as chasing losses and consequences involving conflict, concealment, debt, missed obligations, and access to money. Questions about household funds, credit, loans, property, and uncovered checks focus on financial strain.
Responses combine into one composite result. A higher band represents more gambling-related problems, but interpretation should consider context, frequency, and current circumstances. Since the questionnaire specifies no separate weighting rule for each response, focus on the composite result rather than any individual item.
The South Oaks Gambling Screen, developed by Henry R. Lesieur and Sheila B. Blume, matches these themes. Later studies by Randy Stinchfield and Adam S. Goodie examined reliability, validity, and classification accuracy, including DSM-IV and DSM-5 comparisons in a community sample. This questionnaire is conceptually consistent with SOGS but is not a separately validated adaptation. Those studies concern published SOGS and establish no norms for this online presentation. Self-report, memory, honesty, mood, and recent events can affect results, so it is best used as a gambling disorder risk assessment rather than a diagnosis.
- Lesieur, Henry R., and Sheila B. Blume. "The South Oaks Gambling Screen (SOGS): A New Instrument for the Identification of Pathological Gamblers." American Journal of Psychiatry 144, no. 9 (1987): 1184-1188. 10.1176/ajp.144.9.1184
- Stinchfield, Randy. "Reliability, Validity, and Classification Accuracy of the South Oaks Gambling Screen (SOGS)." Addictive Behaviors 27, no. 1 (2002): 1-19. 10.1016/S0306-4603(00)00158-1
- Goodie, Adam S., James MacKillop, Joshua D. Miller, Erica E. Fortune, Jessica Maples, Charles E. Lance, and W. Keith Campbell. "Evaluating the South Oaks Gambling Screen With DSM-IV and DSM-5 Criteria: Results From a Diverse Community Sample of Gamblers." Assessment 20, no. 5 (2013): 523-531. 10.1177/1073191113500522
Updated: