Table 4.
Sample Characteristics | Not Gambling during Lockdown | Gambling during Lockdown | p-Value |
(n = 49) | (n = 61) | ||
Gender | 0.19 | ||
Female | 14 (28.6%) | 11 (18.0%) | |
Male | 35 (71.4%) | 50 (82.0%) | |
Age, mean (SD) | 33.25 (13.06) | 33.69 (10.49) | 0.56 |
Language Region | 0.348 | ||
German | 31 (63.3%) | 33 (54.1%) | |
French | 10 (20.4%) | 20 (32.8%) | |
Italian | 8 (16.3%) | 8 (13.1%) | |
Marital Status | 0.002 | ||
Single | 19 (38.8%) | 17 (27.9%) | |
In a relationship | 6 (12.2%) | 28 (45.9%) | |
Married/In a registered partnership | 8 (16.3%) | 9 (14.8%) | |
Divorced/Dissolved registered partnership |
1 (2.0%) | 0 (0.0%) | |
No response | 15 (30.6%) | 7 (11.5%) | |
Education | 0.676 | ||
Compulsory schooling | 6 (12.2%) | 9 (14.8%) | |
Apprenticeship | 22 (44.9%) | 24 (39.3%) | |
Diploma/College | 10 (20.4%) | 16 (26.2%) | |
University degree | 9 (18.4%) | 7 (11.5%) | |
Other | 2 (4.1%) | 5 (8.2%) | |
Net income (Swiss Francs, per Month) | <0.001 | ||
Less than 3000 | 17 (34.7%) | 10 (16.4%) | |
3000–7000 | 21 (42.9%) | 9 (14.8%) | |
7001–9000 | 4 (8.2%) | 22 (36.1%) | |
More than 9000 | 4 (8.2%) | 18 (29.5%) | |
No response | 3 (6.1%) | 2 (3.3%) | |
Gambling Exclusion | 0.019 | ||
No exclusion | 37 (75.5%) | 56 (91.8%) | |
Exclusion | 12 (24.5%) | 5 (8.2%) | |
SOGS, mean (SD) | 2.36 (2.99) | 2.05 (2.35) | 0.874 |
L-1, mean (SD) | 7.12 (1.73) | 6.18 (1.42) | 0.002 |
PHQ-4, mean (SD) | 2.63 (2.58) | 5.83 (3.30) | <0.000 |
Note: The table shows the number of participants who gambled or did not gamble during the lockdown, per category for each of the categorical variables. For continuous variables the mean and standard deviation are reported. The second column reports the predicted marginal effects of the variables on the probability that an individual had gambled during lockdown. The last column shows the p-values from χ2 tests for categorical variables or Wilcoxon–Mann–Whitney tests for continuous variables.