Gillian W Shorter

Dr. Gillian W Shorter

Queen's University, Belfast
orcid

Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

20Years (2007-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
1 September 2013 in Computers in Human Behavior
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
DKDaria J. Kuss
Daria J. Kuss
ARAntonius J. van Rooij
Antonius J. van Rooij
GSGillian W Shorter
Gillian W Shorter
Mark D GriffithsMark D Griffiths
Mark D Griffiths
DMD. van de Mheen
D. van de Mheen

1 September 2014 in Journal of Behavioral Addictions
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
ARAntonius J. van Rooij
Antonius J. van Rooij
DKDaria J. Kuss
Daria J. Kuss
Mark D GriffithsMark D Griffiths
Mark D Griffiths
GSGillian W Shorter
Gillian W Shorter
TSTim M. Schoenmakers
Tim M. Schoenmakers
DMDike van de Mheen
Dike van de Mheen
Aims The current study explored the nature of problematic (addictive) video gaming (PVG) and the association with game type, psychosocial health, and substance use. Methods Data were collected using a paper and pencil survey in the classroom setting. Three samples were aggregated to achieve a total sample of 8478 unique adolescents. Scales included measures of game use, game type, the Video game Addiction Test (VAT), depressive mood, negative self-esteem, loneliness, social anxiety, education performance, and use of cannabis, alcohol and nicotine (smoking). Results Findings confirmed problematic gaming is most common amongst adolescent gamers who play multiplayer online games. Boys (60%) were more likely to play online games than girls (14%) and problematic gamers were more likely to be boys (5%) than girls (1%). High problematic gamers showed higher scores on depressive mood, loneliness, social anxiety, negative self-esteem, and self-reported lower school performance. Nicotine, alcohol, and cann...

1 September 2014 in Personality and Individual Differences
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
VEVincent Egan
Vincent Egan
SCStephanie Chan
Stephanie Chan
GSGillian W Shorter
Gillian W Shorter

25 October 2012 in Journal of Gambling Studies
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
AMAbby McCormack
Abby McCormack
GSGillian W Shorter
Gillian W Shorter
Mark D GriffithsMark D Griffiths
Mark D Griffiths

1 January 2011 in Drug and Alcohol Dependence
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
GSGillian W Shorter
Gillian W Shorter
MFMichael Farrell
Michael Farrell
BBBrendan P. Bunting
Brendan P. Bunting
JHJames E. Houston
James E. Houston
MSMark Shevlin
Mark Shevlin

9 November 2019 in Trials
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
BPBeth Parkinson
Beth Parkinson
RMRachel Meacock
Rachel Meacock
MSMatt Sutton
Matt Sutton
EFEleonora Fichera
Eleonora Fichera
NMNicola Mills
Nicola Mills
PBPeter Bower
Peter Bower
Background: Recruitment and retention of participants are both critical for the success of trials, yet both remain significant problems. The use of incentives to target participants and trial staff has been proposed as one solution. The effects of incentives are complex and depend upon how they are designed, but these complexities are often overlooked. In this paper, we used a scoping review to ‘map’ the literature, with two aims: to develop a checklist on the design and use of incentives to support recruitment and retention in trials; and to identify key research topics for the future. Methods: The scoping review drew on the existing economic theory of incentives and a structured review of the literature on the use of incentives in three healthcare settings: trials, pay for performance, and health behaviour change. We identified the design issues that need to be considered when introducing an incentive scheme to improve recruitment and retention in trials. We then reviewed both the theoretical and empirical evidence relating to each of these design issues. We synthesised the findings into a checklist to guide the design of interventions using incentives. Results: The issues to consider when designing an incentive system were summarised into an eight-question checklist. The checklist covers: the current incentives and barriers operating in the system; who the incentive should be directed towards; what the incentive should be linked to; the form of incentive; the incentive size; the structure of the incentive system; the timing and frequency of incentive payouts; and the potential unintended consequences. We concluded the section on each design aspect by highlighting the gaps in the current evidence base. Conclusions: Our findings highlight how complex the design of incentive systems can be, and how crucial each design choice is to overall effectiveness. The most appropriate design choice will differ according to context, and we have aimed to provide context-specific advice. Whilst all design issues warrant further research, evidence is most needed on incentives directed at recruiters, optimal incentive size, and testing of different incentive structures, particularly exploring repeat arrangements with recruiters.