THE MA GAMBLING IMPACT COHORT: ANALYSES ACROSS THREE WAVES Abstract This report details analyses and findings from the first three waves of the Massachusetts gambling impact cohort—the first adult longitudinal cohort study of gambling and problem gambling in the US. Principally, we focus on Wave 3 data collection and changes across the three waves in terms of (1) gambling participation, (2) incidence of problem gambling, and (3) transitions within the cohort. Alissa Mazar Rachel A. Volberg Robert J. Williams Edward J. Stanek III Martha Zorn June 28, 2019 Authorship Alissa Mazar, PhD, Research Associate and Project Manager, University of Massachusetts Amherst School of Public Health and Health Sciences, is lead author of the current report. Rachel A. Volberg, Research Associate Professor, University of Massachusetts Amherst School of Public Health and Health Sciences, is the study Principal Investigator and responsible for overall leadership of the project as well as oversight of the cohort study design, implementation, and analysis. Dr. Volberg is a co-author of the current report. Robert J. Williams, Professor, University of Lethbridge, Faculty of Health Sciences, is Co-Principal Investigator on the project and provided oversight of the study design, implementation, and analysis. Dr. Williams is a co-author of the current report. Edward J. Stanek, Professor Emeritus, University of Massachusetts Amherst School of Public Health and Health Sciences, provided technical oversight and review of the study design and analysis. Dr. Stanek contributed sections of the report related to weighting and imputation. Martha Zorn, Data Manager, University of Massachusetts Amherst School of Public Health and Health Sciences, was responsible for data management, data cleaning, and data analysis and contributed to all sections of the report. Authorship | i Acknowledgements Support for this study came from the Massachusetts Gaming Commission under ISA MGC10500001UMS15A establishing the Massachusetts Gambling Impact Cohort (MAGIC) study. This multi-year project was competitively bid via a Massachusetts Gaming Commission Request for Proposals (RFP) issued on November 20, 2013 and awarded to the University of Massachusetts Amherst in April 2014. This study could not have been carried out without the cooperation and good will of the thousands of Massachusetts residents who agreed and continue to participate in our cohort study. We are also grateful to the many individuals at NORC at the University of Chicago who helped in collecting the data for this unique and important study. We would like to thank Valerie Evans, SEIGMA Biostatistician, who participated in weekly discussions of the analytic findings. We would also like to thank the members of the Massachusetts Gaming Commission’s Research Review Committee (RRC). Members of this committee represent a range of perspectives and their careful review of draft versions of this report contributed to its clarity as well as utility to multiple audiences. Finally, we would like to thank Mark Vander Linden, Director of Research and Responsible Gaming, former Chairman Stephen P. Crosby, and Commissioner Enrique Zuniga of the Massachusetts Gaming Commission for their thoughtful input and clear guidance over the course of the project. The Commission’s broad vision for the expansion of gambling in Massachusetts and commitment to the research needed to maximize the benefits and minimize harms related to gambling in the Commonwealth made this project possible. SUGGESTED CITATION: Mazar, A., Volberg, R. A., Williams, R. J., Stanek, E. J., Zorn, M. (2019). The MA Gambling Impact Cohort: Analyses Across Three Waves. Amherst, MA: School of Public Health and Health Sciences, University of Massachusetts Amherst. A PDF OF THIS REPORT CAN BE DOWNLOADED AT: www.umass.edu/macohort Acknowledgements | ii Table of Contents Authorship ..................................................................................................................................................... i Acknowledgements ....................................................................................................................................... ii Table of Contents ......................................................................................................................................... iii List of Tables ................................................................................................................................................ iv List of Figures ............................................................................................................................................... iv Abbreviations/Glossary ................................................................................................................................. v Executive Summary ...................................................................................................................................... vi Introduction .................................................................................................................................................. 1 Overview of Methods ................................................................................................................................... 8 Results ......................................................................................................................................................... 23 Discussion.................................................................................................................................................... 35 References .................................................................................................................................................. 41 Appendix A1: NORC Methodology Report .................................................................................................. 44 Appendix A2: AAPOR Response Rates ........................................................................................................ 61 Appendix A3: Weighting Procedures .......................................................................................................... 65 Appendix A4: Item Response Rate by Mode and Wave ........................................................................... 100 Appendix B: Questionnaire for Wave 3 .................................................................................................... 122 Table of Contents | iii List of Tables Table 1: Comparing Five Cohort Studies of Gambling and Problem Gambling ............................................ 4 Table 2: Sampling Strategy for MAGIC .......................................................................................................... 9 Table 3: Respondent Mismatches in Gender, Year of Birth, or Both Across Three Waves ........................ 15 Table 4: Sample Composition by Risk Groups ............................................................................................. 19 Table 5. Details of the Different Waves of MAGIC ..................................................................................... 21 Table 6: Completion Across Waves ............................................................................................................. 23 Table 7: Pairwise Comparison of Gambling Participation Activities Across Three Waves (unweighted) ... 25 Table 8: Pairwise Comparison of Gambling Involvement Measures Across Three Waves (unweighted) .. 26 Table 9: Problem Gambling Status in Wave 1 and Wave 2 ......................................................................... 27 Table 10: Problem Gambling Status in Wave 2 and Wave 3 ....................................................................... 27 Table 11: Problem Gambling Status, Wave 1 to Wave 2 and Wave 2 to Wave 3 ....................................... 28 Table 12. Incidence and Remission Rates, Wave 1 to Wave 2.................................................................... 29 Table 13. Incidence and Remission Rates, Wave 2 to Wave 3.................................................................... 30 Table 14: Transitions Between PPGM Groups Across Three Waves (unweighted) .................................... 32 Table 15. Comparing Five Cohort Studies and MAGIC ................................................................................ 34 Table 16: Stability of Pathological Gamblers compared to Problem Gamblers ......................................... 37 Table 17: Sample Breakdown by Risk Groups .......................................................................................... 50 Table 18: Wave 3 Mailing Schedule ............................................................................................................ 53 Table 19: Wave 3 Disposition Codes ........................................................................................................... 57 Table 20: Wave 3 Variables Requiring Back-Coding ................................................................................... 58 Table 21: Counts by AAPOR Disposition Category ...................................................................................... 61 Table 22: MAGIC AAPOR Response Rates, Wave 3 ..................................................................................... 63 Table 23: MAGIC Cumulative AAPOR Response Rates, Cumulative Rates of Three Waves ....................... 63 Table 24: Demographics of MAGIC Wave 2 and Wave 3 Sample ..............................................................