Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigSuggestions(1)
Exact(1)
Contrasts of Positive-Skew and Negative-Skew gamble preferences revealed that subjects preferred Positive-Skew to Negative-Skew gambles (Z = 2.59, p<0.01) and High-Variance to Negative-Skew gambles (Z = 3.68, p<0.001).
Similar(59)
Another possible mechanism is that these investors have gambling preferences.
However, different gambling preferences were associated with differences in the gamblers' age and gender profile.
However, there is gender difference in the types of gambling (males: strategic-typed preferences in gambling; and females' gambling preferences: non-strategic forms (e.g. slot machine) [ 47]).
Studies examining gambling preferences have identified the importance of the type of gambling practiced on distinct individual profiles.
New neurobiological PG research should include matched controls, account for comorbidity issues, and differentiate between gambling preferences.
The final aim of this study was to investigate whether specific gambling preferences could predict the severity of the disorder.
Studies examining gambling preferences have identified the important roles of accessibility and availability of gambling, as well as the technical and structural features associated with it.
There have been several research studies that have investigated sociodemographic variables (such as gender or academic level), psychopathology, personality profiles and gambling preferences [ 10- 13] in gamblers.
The aim of the present study was to assess clinical and psychopathological differences and personality profiles between two groups of pathological gamblers who were divided according to their gambling preferences.
Furthermore, gender differences in gambling have been described in aspects of incidence (males are at an increased risk), age of onset (earlier age of onset in males), course (females have quicker progression to pathological gambling), gambling preferences and comorbidity with alcohol abuse (more common in men) (Johansson et al., 2009; Martins et al., 2008; Tavares et al., 2001).
Write better and faster with AI suggestions while staying true to your unique style.
Since I tried Ludwig back in 2017, I have been constantly using it in both editing and translation. Ever since, I suggest it to my translators at ProSciEditing.

Justyna Jupowicz-Kozak
CEO of Professional Science Editing for Scientists @ prosciediting.com