1. Gambling Among Latinos: A Secondary Analysis of the California Prevalence Survey OPG Problem Gambling Summit March 6, 2012 Michael Campos, PhD UCLA Gambling Studies Program

2. Gambling Problems Pathological gambling impacts about 1-2% of the general population in North America. Gambling problems are associated with physical and mental health, legal, financial, relationship, and employment problems. Some data suggest that Latinos may be at increased risk for gambling problems relative to Non-Latino Whites (e.g., Welte et al., 2001; L = 7.9%, NLW = 1.8%), and some suggest that the rates are similar for these two ethnic groups (Alegria et al., 2009; L = 1.0%, NLW = 1.2%).

3. Current Data Data for this study come from the CA Prevalence Survey (Volberg et al., 2006). Data were collected via telephone interviews using a structured interview. Data were weighted by the original study team to account for sampling design and to reflect the population characteristics of CA. Used the Public Use File, which includes modifications to some variables to protect the privacy of study participants.

4. Current Analysis Examined the utility of splitting the CA Latino population on acculturation level when studying gambling problems. Three groups are compared: (1) Non-Latino Whites; (2) High-Acculturated Latinos; and, (3) Low-Acculturated Latinos. Looked for differences between groups on a number of gambling-related variables.

5. Operationalizing US Acculturation We operationalized US acculturation in our sample using a modification of methods detailed in Cruz et al., 2008. Created a scale with scores ranging from 0 – 4, with higher scores indicating higher US acculturation. Scale Items: (1) Interview language; (2) Language used at home; (3) US Nativity; (4) Proportion of life lived in the US. Latino individuals were divided into High- and Low-US acculturation using a median split on this scale.

6. NLWHALLAL (N=3110)(N=1082) Age Group (Years)** 18-29530 (17.1)386 (35.7)328 (30.5) 30-39520 (16.7)222 (20.6)340 (31.7) 40-49646 (20.8)227 (21.0)187 (17.4) 50-64799 (25.7)155 (14.4)148 (13.8) 65+611 (19.7)90 (8.3)71 (6.6) Gender Male1524 (49.0)561 (51.8)552 (51.0) Female1586 (51.0)521 (48.2)530 (49.0) Highest Grade Completed** < High School137 (4.4)163 (15.1)596 (56.0) High School/GED673 (21.7)380 (35.2)286 (26.9) Tech/Some College918 (29.5)289 (26.8)110 (10.3) College Graduate668 (21.5)138 (12.8)49 (4.6) Graduate/Professional712 (22.9)110 (10.2)23 (2.2) Marital Status** Married1787 (57.8)513 (47.5)596 (59.7) Widowed225 (7.3)39 (3.6)28 (2.8) Divorced377 (12.2)80 (7.4)40 (4.0) Separated42 (1.4)28 (2.6)54 (5.4) Never Married663 (21.4)419 (38.8)281 (28.1) Sample Demographics

7. NLWHALLAL (N=3110)(N=1082) Employment Status** Employed1930 (62.7)762 (71.0)632 (63.3) Unemployed78 (2.5)60 (5.6)76 (7.6) Retired650 (21.1)82 (7.6)31 (3.1) Disabled144 (4.7)42 (3.9)40 (4.0) Keeping House166 (5.4)52 (4.8)163 (16.3) Student55 (1.8)40 (3.7)14 (1.4) Other55 (1.8)35 (3.3)43 (4.3) Household Income (2005)** Up to 15,000144 (4.7)105 (9.8)247 (23.5) 15,001 to 25,000194 (6.3)85 (8.0)282 (26.8) 25,001 to 35,000258 (8.4)170 (15.9)236 (22.5) 35,001 to 50,000428 (13.9)214 (20.0)173 (16.5) 50,001 to 75,000737 (23.9)249 (23.3)89 (8.5) 75,001 to 100,000639 (20.7)127 (11.9)10 (1.0) 100,001 to 125,000298 (9.7)48 (4.5)5 (0.5) Over 125,000390 (12.6)71 (6.6)9 (0.9)

8. Demographics Findings from CA Prevalence survey mirror those for the 2010 census. Latinos may be characterized by the presence of some risk factors for pathological gambling. This may be particularly true for Low- Acculturated Latinos.

9. The Latino Immigrant Paradox Latino immigrants, particularly those of Mexican Origin, are healthier, less likely to report depression, and less likely to abuse or be dependent on substances than US-Born Latinos (Amaro, Whitaker, Coffman, & Heeren, 1990; Moscicki, Locke, Rae, & Boyd, 1989)(for a review see Vega & Sribney, 2011).

10. Latino Immigrant Paradox in the CA Prevalence Survey

11. Lifetime Gambling Activity

12. Age of First Gambling Complicated by use of age categories in PUF Rank order of youngest age of first gambling – 1 = High-Acculturated Latinos – 2 = Non-Latino Whites – 3 = Low-Acculturated Latinos Percent started gambling before 18 – 33.9% of HAL – 29.0% of NLW – 27.0% of LAL

13. Top Three First Games Played NLW – 1 = Electronic gaming machine (28.7%) – 2 = Cards, dice, game with family/friends (28.0%) – 3 = Sports event (12.8%) HAL – Cards, dice, game with family/friends (26.4%) – Electronic gaming machine (23.1%) – Sports event (18.5%) LAL – Lottery (30.5%) – Sports event (20.1%) – Electronic gaming machine (18.7%)

14. Percent Ranking Reasons for Gambling as Important or Very Important

15. Lifetime N Games Played by Ethnicity and Acculturation

16. Lifetime Games Played for Gamblers by Ethnicity and Acculturation

17. Lifetime Gambling Activities by Ethnicity and Acculturation (N=5,274)

18. Past Year Gambling Activity

19. Number of Individuals Reporting Past Year Gambling by Type, Ethnicity, and Acculturation NLWHALLAL Casino2360357136 Bingo Hall3608838 Track/OTB117827480 Card Room2188124 Private Game1215380158 Lottery2327798557 Internet100212 Other672271162

20. Past Year Gambling Activities by Ethnicity and Acculturation (N Varies)

21. Past Year Other Gambling Activities by Ethnicity and Acculturation (N=255)

22. Favorite Game by Ethnicity and Acculturation

23. What do prevalence rates look like without splitting by acculturation?

24. Gambling Problem Status by Ethnicity

25. What do prevalence rates look like when you account for acculturation?

26. Gambling Problem Status by Ethnicity and Acculturation

27. Past Year Gambling Problem Status by Ethnicity and Acculturation

28. Lifetime Gambling Problem Status by Ethnicity and Acculturation (Gambled)

29. Past Year Gambling Problem Status by Ethnicity and Acculturation (Gambled)

30. Impacts of Gambling on Society by Ethnicity and Acculturation

31. Gambling a Community Problem by Ethnicity and Acculturation

32. Top Three Reasons for Not Getting Help (N=267) NLW – 1 = Didn’t want to stop gambling (34.6%) – 2 = Didn’t think it would be effective (14.4%) – 3 = Shame or embarrassment (13.7%) HAL – 1 = Didn’t want to stop gambling (43.7%) – 2 = Denial (16.9%) – 3 = Shame or embarrassment (12.8%) LAL – 1 = Shame or embarrassment (30.2%) – 2 = Did not know treatment was available (20.9%) – 3 = Some other reason (16.3%)

33. PG Helpline by Ethnicity and Acculturation for Individuals with Problem or Pathological Gambling Aware of HelplineWilling to Use Helpline

34. Conclusions Among Latinos, acculturation impacts: – the likelihood of ever gambling – the types of games played – the prevalence of gambling problems – Attitudes about gambling – Barriers to treatment – Awareness of resources for help