Funding the Problem in Independent Research Sample for Student

Question: However Funding May Be The Problem In Independent Research? Answer: Introduction: Gambling addiction is an urge to gamble constantly without taking into consideration undesirable consequences of this addiction. Certain criteria are established to classify gambling as clinical pathological gambling. Intensity and severity of gambling addiction can be decided by the problems experienced by gambler rather than behavior of gambler. Pathological gambling affects both social and family life of gambler and family members. Gambling addiction is considered as addiction like any other substance abuse or substance addiction. However, American Psychiatric Association considered gambling as impulse control disorder rather than addiction. Most of the research indicated that there is a closer relationship between gambling and addiction rather than impulse control disorder and gambling (Nancy, 2006). Research indicated that pathological gamblers are associated with lower levels of norepinephrine as compared to the normal gamblers. It is also evident in the MRI neuroimaging studie s that financial gain in the gambling can result in the brain activation similar to the cocaine addiction. These gamblers also exhibit similar withdrawal symptoms like addiction individuals. Deficiency of serotonin plays an important role in the development of compulsive behavior as well gambling addiction (Potenza, 2008). Objective of the research: To identify the social, financial and health impact of gambling addiction on the gambler and family members of gambler. Impact of this research problem: Most of the studies related to the gambling research are planned to estimate prevalence of gambling. These prevalence studies are helpful in finding problem gamblers in the society Psychology. These surveys are helpful in finding total number of pathological gamblers, number of people at risk of gambling, percentage of people with experience of gambling as a problem and amount of profit obtained from the gambling. Out of their interest, industry people always try to downplay these numbers. Main problem with research on gambling is source of data. Data related to gambling is not available from the valid source and it is difficult to believe completely on such type of evidence. Very less information is available for who produced the data, who initiated the research, what is funding source and what is policy behind the research. Answers for these questions are not promising. Most of the research about gambling is done by the industries. Researchers participated in the gambling research are unable to disclose the data under the influence of industry. In other fields of research, researchers usually produce productive data. However, in case of gambling researcher try to present data on the negative side mentioning very less business. As a result, very less accurate data about gambling is available (Bensimon et al., 2013). These studies also tend to exhibit social class bias. It is evident that these studies reported about more involvement of low class people in gambling. However, it is difficult to accept this fact. Most of the research quoted gambling is a harmless leisure activity. However, in reality it has many harmful effects on the family and society. There are few gamblers without negative impacts of gambling. Such gamblers are termed as problem gamblers. This ill effect of gambling varies from person to person. However, most of the gambling studies are population based and not on the individual basis. Hence, these results cant be applied to each and every in dividual in the society. Few researches apposed industry funding for the gambling research because it can influence outcome of the research. Moreover, these researchers seek funding from public health remit. However, it is a distance dream. There is discrimination in the data generated by the research in gambling and real life condition of the people. In Australia, it has been found that people in Australia spend more money and loses it on gambling as compared to people of any other country. These people also spend more money on gambling as compared to alcohol and petrol (Christensen et al., 2015). One of the prominent reasons for availability of less data on gambling research is researches perception on gambling research. These researchers dont want to spend money and time on silly thing like gambling. Moreover, these researches believe that it very difficult to do research on gambling because most of the gamblers may lie about gambling. There is truth deficit in this research. It should be noted that quality of gambling research can be improved by conducting independent research. Valid data can be generated by conducting independent research, however funding may be the problem in independent research. Implication Causes and trigger: Gambling addiction is considered as the compulsive act with lack of sensitivity of family, work related and financial consequences. Gamblers never think of win or lose as their main focus is act of gambling. Psychological disorder like obsessive-compulsive disorder is primarily responsible for the act of gambling. Obsessive part is responsible for only a single act which is gambling and compulsive part comprises of gamblers action to lessen stress and anxiety. In the research, it is evident that abstaining from gambling can lead to impatience and irritability, which are the prominent symptoms of any addiction. Genetic factors are also responsible for gambling. It can be inherited form either parents (Weinstock and Rash, 2015). Winning and losing in the gambling activate the dopamine level in the brain and increases inclination of the individual towards gambling. Pathological coping mechanism which helps individual to escape from the outside world problems is also responsible for the addiction of gambling. Gambling addiction can also happen to escape from past trauma. Childhood traumas like exploitation and neglect are responsible for gambling addictions. Different psychological factors like anxiety and depression are also responsible for gambling addiction. People who cant find natural ways of happiness are more inclined to gambling. Social influence, nervousness and negative emotions are also responsible for the gambling addiction (Sauchelli et al., 2014). People with gambling are always tend to lose control on them. They are aware of loss of money and time, however they cant control it. They are conscious about their responsibities and family problems, however gambling seems important for them. People with gambling have mixed feelings about themselves. These people are anxious and unhappy about their wrong doings, however they cant control it. This can trigger to psychological implications in people with gambling. Gambling provoke wrong beliefs in person. These people always tend to believe that at some time point they are going to win and after that they can stop it. On some occasions, they may win small amount and it keep them float for more gambling (Johannes et al., 2010). Gambling brings negative thoughts in a person like feeling of loser if he quits gambling. Gambling can trigger problems like leaving family members, fighting among the family members, lying to family members, hiding from the society members, damage to reputation , bankruptcy, distraction from the job, physical and mental illness. Gambling can have very strong impact on the children. Children feel like forgotten by the gambling parent, depressed and angry on the parent because gambling parent cant give enough attention to the children. Children may become totally disturbed because it would be very difficult for them to take side of either of the parents. It would be difficult for the children to believe parent with gambling. Physical and emotional abuses can be increased in the family with gambling. There are possibilities of suicidal attempts in families with gambling (Cunningham et al., 2011). Intervention: Intervention for gambling can be divided into four steps. These steps include validation, documentation, recommendation and consequences. In the validation step, there should be setting of foundation of love and care for the gambling person. It should be kept in mind that other than gambling, other positive things are there in the person. Family member needs to explore these positive things in the validation step (Gainsbury, 2014). Gambling person may deny the problems of gambling. Some gambling persons may deny instructions given by the family members to quit gambling. In the long term this negative approach of denial can have significant impact of the gambling person and family. Hence, record should be maintained related to conversations among family members. These conversations can be used as proof in the later stage. Documentation can also be done for the negative consequences observed due to gambling. Intervention can be provided to prevent occurrence of these consequences or pr ecautionary measures against these consequences (Meyer et al., 2009). In recommendation step actions should be taken against the problems. There should be rectification of the problem. Gambling assessment test should be performed and decision should be made to provide intervention. Gambling person should be allowed to attend meetings and counseling sessions to cope up with this addiction. By this, gambling person can be positively influenced and try to quit gambling. Case studies discussed in these meetings would be helpful for gambling person to relate to his activities and take action against it. Training for money management also would be helpful for gambling person. Gambling person would direct his money towards family instead of gambling. Incorporation of addiction therapist and admission of aPsychology person to gambling addiction treatment facility would be helpful to prevent gambling addiction (Kuperman and Crawford, 2014). Making realization of the positive consequences of the quitting gambling would be helpful. Explaining difference between the problematic gambling and happy life with loved people, can make positive changes in the gambling person (McCown and Howatt, 2007). Medication intervention is also useful in gambling addiction. Antidepressants with action on the serotonin uptake inhibitors and which acts as 5-HT1/5-HT2 receptor antagonists are proved to be useful in pathological gambling. Being a division of obsessive-compulsive disorder, pathological gambling requires higher doses of antidepressants. Antidepressants can be useful in pathological gambling with minimal symptoms of depression also (Nestler, 2013). Outcome: Gambling intervention can be applicable in the community setting. Hence, large number of gamblers can be benefited from the intervention. Gambling intervention can be applicable in the heterogeneous population and at multiple sites. Outcomes from the gambling addiction can be useful in the establishment of the national health policy for gambling addiction. It would be useful in developing uniform criteria, rules and regulations. Outcome of the gambling addiction intervention would be useful in the identification of at-risk and transient gamblers. Hence, timely action can be taken in such gamblers to prevent exaggeration of addiction. These outcomes would be helpful in addressing most of the aspects of the gambling addiction and improving quality of life of the gambler. It would provide better treatment to the gamblers. It would also be useful in the improving the knowledge about the gambling and establishment of cost effective treatment for gambling addiction. Positive outcome of the gambling addiction would be helpful in reducing illegal acts because it is evident that most of the gamblers try to arrange money for gambling through illegal ways. Large amount of debts can be reduced in gamblers and consequently many family issues can be resolved. It would also be helpful in preventing work absenteeism, lost productivity, marital discord and family estrangement. Comorbidities like depression, suicidal thoughts and personality disorders can be prevented by providing gambling addiction intervention (Nguyen, 2016). Cognitive theory: According to cognitive theory, wrong beliefs, cognitive misrepresentation and misinterpretation of concepts associated with the uncertainty, possibility and shared independence of chance events, and illustration of faulty cause are responsible for the etiology, occurrence and continuation of the gambling and gambling related problems. Source of illogical and incorrect cognitive beliefs are unknown, however social influence of gambling from the family and friends, media display, cultural influence and personal experience play major role in gambling addiction. These aspects force individual to incline towards gambling. These individuals believe that gambling is an entertaining opportunity and it also increases their income by winning gambling. Cognitive distortions in people with gambling comprises of: 1) possession of own characters which increase chances of win, belief in luck, superstitious behavior and belief in fate, 2) recall of events related to win only and ne gligence of loses, though loses are more as compared to the wins, and 3) wrong opinion of faulty probabilities and false expectations of win after series of loses. Early wins in gambling make belief of the person that gambling is a easy way to earn money and such individual follow number of loses to get a win. According to cognitive theory persistence in the gambling is influenced by the factors like occasional wins, erroneous belief, cognitive regret and entrapment. Erroneous belief is due to belief in win after many loses. Cognitive regret is related to the finishing in the early stage and missing out future wins. Entrapment is due to already large number of investments and trying to get it back (Zangeneh et al., 2007; Lassiter and Culbreth, 2017). Psychodynamic theory : Psychodynamic theory states that complex intrapsychic developments or disagreements can lead to the gambling addiction. Superego demand and egotistical appeals are responsible for development and maintenance of gambling addiction. This theory mentioned that acquisition of gambling can occur at the unconscious level and it can be driven by instinctual drive. Belief in viable ego and self is energy are mainly responsible for gambling addiction. Gambler develops different behavior which is not socially acceptable. According to this theory, characters mainly responsible of the occurrence of gambling are escape behavior, affect regulation, ego inflation, and actions directed towards self love. Gambling addiction can be developed to control anger and guilt and to control inner and outer world. This theory divided gambler in two classes like real gambler and professional gambler. Real gambler usually plays to escape from the real world and professional gambler plays f or earning money and livelihood. This theory considered gambling as a regression in time (Dixon et al., 2006; Lassiter and Culbreth, 2017). Environmental theory: Environmental theory which is also known as social learning model. This model deals with the operant modification by reinforcing or inhibiting effect of its own consequences. In the initial period money was considered as the positive reinforcement however, in recent times physiological arousal is considered as the reinforcement for gambling addiction. This reinforcement of physiological arousal is supported by the research. According to this theory, increased inclination towards gambling is due to initial success in the gambling. This gambling can continue, even though there is decline in the success rate in the gambling. Moreover, big win in the initial period can lead to the development of pathological gambling. Few justifications are given for the persistence of gambling behavior even after the continuous loses. One of them is partial reinforcement extinction effect. This effect is due to the intermittent positive outcomes of the gambling. This intermittent s uccess in gambling leads in the persistent gambling instead of stopping the gambling after significant success. Gambler experience success in gambling, if gambler continues to gamble on the regular basis. Different people have different psychological arousal needs. These people try to satisfy these arousal needs by learning gambling. According to this theory, arousal in the primary reinforcement but not the winning is responsible for gambling. According to this theory, anxiety of depression, cognitive disturbance about gambling, behavioral reinforcement scheduling, opportunities in gambling prevail attitude, social and institutional determinants and internal fantasy for luck, are responsible for development of gambling addiction (Malenka et al., 2009; West and Brown, 2013). Etiology theory : According to etiology theory, people are more susceptible for gambling with rush for risk and seek materialistic goals. Effects of gambling can results in the financial ruin because gamblers cant decide a point, where they wish to stop it (West and Brown, 2013). References: Bensimon, M., Baruch, A., and Ronel, N. (2013). The experience of gambling in an illegal casino: The gambling spin process. European Journal of Criminology, 10(1), 321. Brown, R. J. (2013). Theory of Addiction. John Wiley Sons. Darren, C. R., Nicki, D. A., Alun, J. C., and Shane, T. A. (2015). Gambling Participation and Problem Gambling Severity in a Stratified Random Survey: Findings from the Second Social and Economic Impact Study of Gambling in Tasmania. Journal of Gambling Studies, 31(4), 13171335. Dixon, M., Ghezzi, P., Lyons, C., and Wilso, G. (2006). Gambling: Behavior Theory, Research, and Application. New Harbinger Publications. Gainsbury, S.M. (2014). Review of self-exclusion from gambling venues as an intervention for problem gambling. Journal of Gambling Studies, 30(2), 229-51. Granero, R., Penelo, E., Stinchfield, R., Fernndez-Aranda, F., Aymam, N. (2014). Contribution of illegal acts to pathologicalgamblingdiagnosis: DSM-5implications. Journal of Addictive Diseases, 33(1), 41-52. Johannes, H., Nora, K., Ralf, T., Holger, H., Michael, C., et al. (2010). (2010). Hypersensitivity to Reward in Problem Gamblers. Biological Psychiatry, 67(8), 781783. John, C. A., Joanne, C., David, H. C., and Tony, T. (2011). Beliefs about gambling problems and recovery: results from a general population telephone survey. Journal of Gambling Studies, 27 (4), 625631. Kuperman , A., and Crawford, T. (2014). Gambling on Humanitarian Intervention. Routledge. Lassiter, P. S., and Culbreth, J. R. (2017). Theory and Practice of Addiction Counseling. SAGE Publications. Malenka, R.C., Nestler, E.J., and Hyman, S.E. (2009). Reinforcement and Addictive Disorders. In Sydor A, Brown RY. Molecular Neuropharmacology: A Foundation for Clinical Neuroscience (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill Medical. 364375. McCown, W.G., and Howatt, W. (2007). Treating Gambling Problems. John Wiley Sons. Meyer, G., Hayer, T., and Griffiths, M. (2009). Problem Gambling in Europe: Challenges, Prevention, and Interventions. Springer Science Business Media. Nancy, P. (2006). Should the Scope of Addictive Behaviors be Broadened to Include Pathological Gambling?. Addiction, 101(s1), 15260. Nestler, E.J. (2013). Cellular basis of memory for addiction. Dialogues in Clinical Neuroscience, 15(4), 431443. Nguyen, T. (2016). Understand and Overcome Gambling Addiction. EnCognitive.com. Potenza, M. N (2008). The neurobiology of pathological gambling and drug addiction: an overview and new findings. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 363(1507), 31813189. Weinstock, J., and Rash, C.J. (2014). Clinical and Research Implications of Gambling Disorder in DSM-5. Current Addiction Reports, 1(3), 159-165. Zangeneh, M., Blaszczynski, A., and Turner, N. (2007). In the Pursuit of Winning: Problem Gambling Theory, Research and Treatment. Springer Science Business Media