Michelle Angela M. Nazar
February 5, 2013
Sociology 195 – T
Dr. Gloria Luz M. Nelson
Review of Related Literature
1. Individual, family, and peer correlates of gambling, (Langhinrichen-Rohling, Rohde, Rohling, & Seeley, 2004).
This study, which can be found in the Journal of Gambling Studies, took place on 2004. Its research question was to determine the family, individual, and peer factors that correlate with adolescent gambling.
The methodology employed was quantitative. Using convenience sampling, a total of 1,846 adolescents from three different high schools located in three different states – Alabama, Mississippi, and Oregon, were employed. The target for the data collection was sophomores, juniors, and seniors. These adolescents belonging to the upper level of high school were chosen because the researchers wanted to target individuals who had the potential to drive or who may have had peers who were driving. There were 46 individuals who completed the data packet that were characterized as freshmen. And thus, were removed from the data set (Langhinrichen-Rohling, Rohde, Rohling, & Seeley, 2004).
Aside from the ‘power’ to know the freshmen students, the data packet also included a 5-item scale which has a purpose of identifying invalid respondents. The condition is that if three or more items were scored as the invalid-direction, the person is then considered as an invalid respondent. A total of 58 or 3% of the participants were categorized to be invalid respondents. Thus they have been removed from the data set because their responses were inconsistent and invalid. Seven more individuals were removed from the data set because their answers were even more inconsistent – they have reported that they have never been to any gambling and at the same time they reported to have lost a total of 100 dollars due to gambling. A total of 111 or 6.01% of the students were removed from the data set, due to the being freshmen students and/or due to being inconsistent with the responses. Therefore, the final number of the final sample is 1,735. Thus, there vary in some of the actual sample size analyses because there are missing data for a particular measure or question.
There reported to be some differences in the three data collection samples. Majority of the differences were found between the Oregon samples and the two more Southern samples. The Oregon site had more male participants, more Caucasians, and more adolescents from two-parent households. Thus, these differences had found to be having small differences in effect and were consistent with the state-wide differences as reflected by the census data. In additional, the three high school samples did not vary significantly in average parental income or grade distribution as reported (Langhinrichen-Rohling, Rohde, Rohling, & Seeley, 2004).
The researchers provided consent for administering questionnaires for data collection both for the parents and school principals and boards. Once the consent was approved, they would then send the parents a personal letter informing that their child was chosen to be one of the respondents in their study. Thus, they were employed a passive parental consent procedure. Parents were given methods and instructions to prevent their child from participating.
An informed consent was read aloud to the participating students on the day of the data collection. They were actually told that they are free to choose not to participate or stop participating at any time without having any penalty. The data collection employed was purely voluntary and anonymous. Information were secured to be confident and anonymous. By employing this anonymous procedure, the participation refusal rates were relatively low – 4.6 % in Alabama, 5.2 % in Mississippi, and 8.5 % in Oregon. It was indicated that a trained research assistant was present at all times, ready to answer questions and any confusions, and also to...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document