Youth Gambling: The health and wellbeing of New Zealand secondary school students in 2012

Gambling has become a widely available activity in today’s society (Hardoon & Derevensky, 2002; Turchi & Derevensky, 2006). In fact, many researchers “have noted that an entire generation has now grown up in an era when lottery and casino gambling is widely available and heavily advertised” (Volberg, Gupta, Griffiths, Ólason, & Delfabbro, 2010, p. 3). Evidence suggests that it has become a popular past-time not only for adults, but also for children and young people (Derevensky & Gupta, 2000; Gupta & Derevensky, 1998a; Hardoon & Derevensky, 2002; Jacobs, 2000; Splevins, Mireskandari, Clayton, & Blaszczynski, 2010; Turchi & Derevensky, 2006). Moreover, research indicates that gambling is one of the first risky activities that adolescents become involved with (i.e. they begin gambling prior to experimentation with alcohol, drugs, sexual behaviour) (Volberg, et al., 2010). Whilst for many youth involvement in gambling does not result in problematic behaviour, others go on to experience serious problems (Dickson, Derevensky, & Gupta, 2003). A vast range of adolescent gambling prevalence studies that have been undertaken over the past 25 years, across different countries, and incorporating general populations as well as youth specifically. Rates of youth problem gambling have often been found to be higher than the rates identified for adults (Huang & Boyer, 2007; Shaffer & Hall, 1996; Welte, Barnes, Tidwell, & Hoffman, 2008; Williams, Page, Parke, & Rigbye, 2008), with some estimating them to be more than double those of adults (Gupta & Derevensky, 1998a; Jackson, Dowling, Thomas, Bond, & Patton, 2008; Lesieur, et al., 1991), or up to three times as high (Rigbye, 2010). However, it has also been recognised that there is far less research in this field compared to that which has explored other youth risk behaviours such as substance use (Blinn-Pike, Worthy, & Jonkman, 2010). The gap in New Zealand-based information regarding prevalence of youth gambling has been identified previously (Bellringer, et al., 2003; Rossen, Tse, & Vaidya, 2009) and in 2003 it was recommended that research be undertaken to measure the involvement of New Zealand youth in gambling as well as associated factors and gambling-related problems (Bellringer, et al., 2003). A limited body of research has since employed various sources of data to consider youth gambling in New Zealand (e.g. Gray, 2010; Ministry of Health, 2008, 2009; Rossen, 2008; Rossen, Butler, & Denny, 2011). An extremely valuable source of information on New Zealand youth is the University of Auckland’s (UoA) National youth health and wellbeing surveys. To date, the UoA’s Adolescent Health Research Group (AHRG) has completed three National youth health and wellbeing surveys. The Youth2000 Survey Series aim to provide nationally representative information on the health and wellbeing of young people attending New Zealand secondary schools. The Survey Series includes a wide range of questions about issues that contribute to the health and wellbeing of young people (such as substance use, injuries and violence, home and family) and allow researchers to take an ecological approach to identifying overall risk and protective factors in young people’s lives. Youth’12, a survey of 8,500 secondary school students throughout New Zealand, is the most recent survey to be undertaken by the AHRG. The inclusion of gambling items in the Youth’12 survey provides a unique opportunity to examine the impacts of gambling and problem gambling on secondary school students throughout New Zealand within an ecological framework. This report was commissioned by the Ministry of Health and begins with a comprehensive review of the local and international youth gambling literature, followed by an overview of the Youth2000 Survey Series and methodology for Youth’12. A thorough analysis of Youth’12 gambling items was undertaken with results being reported under the following eight categories (detailed results for each set of analyses are also provided in the appendices): - Students and their own gambling (Section Five); - Unhealthy gambling amongst students (Section Six); - Attitudes and motivating factors towards gambling (Section Seven); - The impacts of others’ gambling on students (Section Eight); and, - Risk and protective factors for student gambling (Section Nine); - Gambling and Māori taitamariki in Aotearoa (Section 10); - Gambling and Pacific young people in New Zealand (Section 11); and, - Gambling and Asian young people in New Zealand (Section 12). Finally, a discussion chapter provides an overview of the findings and implications

Too big or too thin? New Caledonian adolescents' perceptions of overweight and underweight

International audienc

The association between socioeconomic deprivation and secondary school students’ health: findings from a latent class analysis of a national adolescent health survey

BACKGROUND: The aims of this study were to examine indicators of socioeconomic deprivation among secondary school students and to determine associations between household poverty, neighbourhood deprivation and health indicators. METHODS: Data were from a nationally representative sample of 8500 secondary school students in New Zealand who participated in a health survey in 2012. Latent class analyses were used to group students by household poverty based on nine indicators of household socioeconomic deprivation: no car; no phone; no computer; their parent/s worry about not having enough money for food; more than two people sharing a bedroom; no holidays with their families; moving home more than twice that year; garages or living rooms used as bedrooms; and, no parent at home with employment. Multilevel generalized linear models were used to estimate the cross-level interaction between household poverty and neighbourhood deprivation with depressive symptoms, cigarette smoking and overweight/ obesity. RESULTS: Three groups of students were identified: 80 % of students had low levels of household poverty across all indicators; 15 % experienced moderate poverty; and 5 % experienced high levels of poverty. Depressive symptoms and cigarette smoking were 2–3 times higher in the poverty groups compared to student’s not experiencing poverty. There were also higher rates of overweight/ obesity among students in the poverty groups compared to students not experiencing poverty, but once covariates were accounted for the relationship was less clear. Of note, students experiencing poverty and living in affluent neighbourhoods reported higher levels of depressive symptoms and higher rates of cigarette smoking than students experiencing poverty and living in low socioeconomic neighbourhoods. This cross-level interaction was not seen for overweight/ obesity. CONCLUSIONS: Measures of household socioeconomic deprivation among young people should not be combined with neighbourhood measures of socioeconomic deprivation due to non-linear relationships with health and behaviour indicators. Policies are needed that address household poverty alongside efforts to reduce socioeconomic inequalities in neighbourhoods