Harm from gambling is known to impact individuals, families, and communities; and these harms are not restricted to people with a gambling disorder. Currently, there is no robust and inclusive internationally agreed upon definition of gambling harm. In addition, the current landscape of gambling policy and research uses inadequate proxy measures of harm, such as problem gambling symptomology, that contribute to a limited understanding of gambling harms. These issues impede efforts to address gambling from a public health perspective. Data regarding harms from gambling was gathered using four separate methodologies, a literature review, focus groups and interviews with professionals involved in the support and treatment of gambling problems, interviews with people who gamble and their affected others, and an analysis of public forum posts for people experiencing problems with gambling and their affected others. The experience of harm related to gambling was examined to generate a conceptual framework. The catalogue of harms experienced were organised as a taxonomy. The current paper proposes a definition and conceptual framework of gambling related harm that captures the full breadth of harms that gambling can contribute to; as well as a taxonomy of harms to facilitate the development of more appropriate measures of harm. Our aim is to create a dialogue that will lead to a more coherent interpretation of gambling harm across treatment providers, policy makers and researchers.

While the financial and psychological burden on problem gamblers can be severe, at least some of the ill effects are also passed on to family or other close social ties. The present study estimated the number of affected-others for the typical problem gambler. Australian members of an online panel with gambling problems (N = 3076) and panel members who indicated that they had been affected by someone else’s gambling (N = 2129) were asked to estimate the number of other people who were negatively affected by their gambling. Using robust statistics to analyse this data, the study found lower estimates made by problem gamblers (four affected people) compared to estimates made by affected others (six affected people, including the respondent). It was concluded that a point-estimate of six people affected is a more accurate figure since it does not suffer from self-presentation effects of problem gamblers. Low-risk and moderate-risk gamblers, unsurprisingly, affected far fewer other people (one and three, respectively). Both gamblers and affected-others most often identified close family members, including spouses and children, as the people impacted by others’ gambling problems. These results provide an approximate measure of the number of people affected, per problem gambler, to facilitate accurate accounting of the harms accruing from gambling problems.

Prior estimates of the population-level impact of gambling have relied on economic costings. Recent work has derived disability weights for the Problem Gambling Severity Index, which measure per-person impact of gambling on quality of life on a scale of zero to one. This provided scope for the present study to calculate the ‘burden of gambling harm’, which captures the aggregate impact of harms arising from gambling on quality of life in a population. Gambling-related harm was associated with 101,675 years of life lost in Victoria, Australia: approximately two-thirds that of alcohol use and dependence, and major depressive disorder. Problem gamblers suffer more individually (disability weight = .44) compared to those in moderate (.29) and low (.13) risk categories. Nevertheless, moderate and low-risk gamblers account for 85% of population-level harm, due to greater prevalence of these groups. Overall, the scale of gambling-related harm is large relative to other significant health issues, with milder yet non-negligible harm accruing to a relatively broad segment of the gambling population. The article suggests that the tendency to conflate the (typically low) prevalence of problem gambling with total gambling impact is misleading, and argues for a broader population-health based measure.

We conceptualize self-concept as a self-organizing dynamical system and investigate implications of this perspective for the dynamic and fixed-point attractor tendencies of self-evaluative thought. Participants who differed in self-concept valence (self-esteem) and coherence (self-certainty, self-stability) engaged in verbal self-reflection for several minutes, then used a computer mouse to track the moment-to-moment self-evaluation expressed in their recorded narrative. Prior to self-reflection, participants recalled positive or negative past actions (positive vs. negative priming), or did not recall past actions (no priming). Priming affected overall self-evaluation (i.e., greatest positivity under positive priming), but only early in the narrative. The effects of self-concept, in contrast, became stronger over time. Self-esteem affected overall self-evaluation, whereas self-certainty and self-stability affected the dynamic properties (e.g., rate of movement between self-evaluative states) and attractor tendencies of self-evaluation. Discussion centers on the interplay between structure and dynamics in the self-system.