Geänderte Inhalte

Background: In the early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic, many restrictions hit people in ways never seen before. Mental wellbeing was affected and burden was high, especially for high-risk groups such as parents. However, to our knowledge no research has yet examined whether being a parent was not only a risk for psychological burden but also a way to cope with the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: An online survey was used to collect data from 1,121 participants from April to June 2020. In addition to demographic variables, risk factors (financial burden, problems complying with COVID-19 restrictions, and pre-treatment due to mental health problems) and protective factors (emotion regulation, humor, and crisis self-efficacy) were collected. The dataset was divided into three groups: parents whose children lived at home (n = 395), parents whose children did not (no longer) live at home (n = 165), and people who were not parents (n = 561). Results: A linear mixed effect model showed that parents had no higher burden than non-parents, and even less when children did not live at home. Expected risk factors were generally less important, and there were no differences between parents and non-parents. In contrast, parents had advantages in protective factors. Conclusion: In the early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic, it was shown that parents (with and without their children at home) were not necessarily at risk due to additional burden, but also had prospects of coping better with the situation than people without children.

Casino exclusion programs are intended to prevent or limit gambling-related harm. Although previous research showed that self-exclusion is associated with reduced gambling, it remains unknown whether self- and forced excluded subjects show different patterns of gambling behavior and if exclusion from casino gambling affects all gambling activities. The present study retrospectively investigated (1) the role of voluntariness of exclusion for the first time, and (2) general gambling behavior of excluded individuals before and after exclusion. A total of N = 215 casino excluders (self-excluders: n = 187, forced excluders: n = 28) completed an online survey or a face-to-face interview up to 8 years after enrollment. Self- and forced excluders showed similar rates of abstinence (self-excluders: 19.3%, forced excluders: 28.6%) and reduction (self-excluders: 67.4%, forced excluders: 60.7%), even though forced excluders reported a significantly greater initial gambling intensity compared to self-excluders (e.g., pre-exclusion gambling time; self-excluders: 3.2 days/week, forced excluders: 4.3 days/week). Overall, results indicated that 20.5% of excluders stopped all gambling activities and another 66.5% reduced their gambling. Those who continued gambling significantly reduced this behavior in every segment, except for gambling halls. Findings indicate that self- and forced exclusion are associated with similarly reduced gambling behavior, even in non-excluded segments. However, unchanged gambling in gambling halls emphasizes the importance to implement consistent exclusion programs over all gambling segments.