Self-Monitoring Questionnaire (SeMo)

Abstract

The Self-Monitoring Questionnaire (SeMo) is a psychological instrument designed to assess an individual’s awareness of their thoughts, feelings, and behaviors related to gambling. Developed by John Macdonald, Nigel Turner, and Matthew Somerset (2008), the scale is rooted in a curriculum aimed at the prevention of problem gambling through the development of essential life skills, including mathematical reasoning and critical thinking. The SeMo specifically evaluates the respondent’s understanding of the risks associated with gambling and their capacity for objective self-reflection regarding their engagement in potentially harmful activities. It acts as a screening tool and an educational aid, highlighting common misconceptions and cognitive distortions related to gambling behavior.

Keywords

Self-Monitoring, SeMo, Problem Gambling, Gambling Prevention, Cognitive Distortions, Risk Assessment, Critical Thinking, Life Skills.

Authors

John Macdonald, Nigel Turner, Matthew Somerset.

Purpose

The primary purpose of the SeMo is twofold: first, to serve as an educational component within a broader prevention curriculum by highlighting common misconceptions and risky behaviors associated with gambling; and second, to gauge the respondent’s level of self-monitoring ability regarding their personal gambling habits. By presenting statements that challenge common cognitive distortions (e.g., belief in winning back losses, ignoring emotional states), the instrument encourages reflective thought and risk recognition.

It is designed to identify individuals who may hold beliefs or engage in thinking patterns that increase vulnerability to developing a problem gambling disorder. The scale aims not only to measure current self-monitoring capabilities but also to promote the application of critical thinking skills to leisure activities and financial decision-making.

Construct

The SeMo measures the construct of Self-Monitoring specifically applied to high-risk behaviors, particularly gambling. This construct encompasses an individual’s capacity to objectively observe, assess, and regulate their own internal states (thoughts and emotions) and external behaviors related to gambling engagement. High scores reflecting accurate self-monitoring are indicative of a healthy capacity for self-assessment and protective behavior.

Key facets of the construct assessed include the recognition of cognitive distortions (e.g., the gambler’s fallacy, illusion of control), awareness of non-monetary losses (time, relationships), and the understanding that winning does not preclude a problem gambling issue. The instrument contrasts objective self-assessment with emotional or magical thinking, which are often precursors to addiction development.

Validity

Specific detailed psychometric studies documenting the validity of the Self-Monitoring Questionnaire (SeMo) were published within the context of the larger curriculum report (Macdonald et al., 2008). Given its inclusion in a formalized prevention curriculum developed for the Ontario Problem Gambling Research Centre, it is expected that the scale exhibits strong content validity, ensuring the items accurately reflect the key cognitive and behavioral markers targeted by the preventative educational intervention.

The scale items were carefully crafted to address specific misconceptions taught against in the curriculum, suggesting high face validity and relevance to the target population. The scale’s effectiveness in predicting future problem behavior or reflecting changes in attitude following the educational program would support its criterion validity.

Reliability

Detailed psychometric data, including measures of internal consistency (e.g., Cronbach’s alpha) and test-retest reliability, were likely reported in the full technical appendices of the 2008 final report to the Ontario Problem Gambling Research Centre. The scale’s utility in a preventative context requires that it reliably measures consistent attitudes toward self-assessment and risk perception over time.

Factor Analysis

Information regarding formal factor analysis of the SeMo is not explicitly available in the summarized source material. However, based on the item content, the scale appears to load onto several critical dimensions related to gambling risk perception. These dimensions likely include: 1) Awareness of Time and Emotional Investment; 2) Recognition of common Cognitive Distortions (e.g., belief in skill over chance); and 3) Capacity for Objective Self-Assessment. Further psychometric investigation would be required to confirm the empirical factor structure of the 28 response options.

Instrument

Test Type: Knowledge/Attitude Questionnaire; Self-Report Psychological Scale.

Format: True/False (T/F) response format across 20 primary statements, followed by 8 sub-statements (21a-21h), resulting in 28 total response points.

Language Available: English (Original development context in Ontario, Canada).

Population Group: Individuals at risk for or currently engaging in gambling, particularly adolescents and young adults targeted by educational prevention programs.

Age Group: Adolescents and Young Adults (Implied by content focusing on maturity and educational intervention).

Population Details: The scale was developed for use within a curriculum context designed for the prevention of problem gambling in educational settings, emphasizing life skills and critical thinking.

Test Methodology: Respondents indicate whether they believe the statement is True (T) or False (F). Scoring involves counting responses that align with scientifically supported or protective attitudes towards gambling risk, indicating higher levels of self-monitoring and critical awareness.

Keywords

Gambling Risk, Self-Assessment, Prevention Curriculum, Cognitive Biases, Self-Monitoring, Adolescent Health.

Authors

Author ORCID Identifier: N/A (Information not provided in source documentation).

Affiliation Email addresses: N/A (Information not provided in source documentation).

Correspondence Address: Centre for Addiction and Mental Health (CAMH), Toronto, Ontario, Canada (Affiliation derived from the 2008 Final Report reference).

Permissions & Fee and Test Year

Test Year: 2008 (Published as part of the Final Report).

Permissions and Fee: Developed under the sponsorship of the Ontario Problem Gambling Research Centre, the instrument is generally distributed as part of the “Life Skills, Mathematical Reasoning and Critical Thinking” curriculum. Usage for non-commercial research or educational purposes related to problem gambling prevention is often permissible, though formal written permission from the authors or the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health (CAMH) should be sought for large-scale replication or commercial use.

Reference’s

• Macdonald, J., Turner, N., & Somerset, M. (2008). Life Skills, Mathematical Reasoning and Critical Thinking: Curriculum for the Prevention of Problem Gambling. Final Report to the Ontario Problem Gambling Research Centre. Centre for Addiction and Mental Health. The instrument can be found on pages 38-39 of the curriculum. The citation is available online at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18095146.
• Turner, N., Littman-Sharp, N., Zengeneh, M. & Spence, W. (2002). Winners: Why do some develop gambling problems while others do not? Available at www.gamblingresearch.org.

Items of the Self-Monitoring Questionnaire (SeMo)

IMPORTANT: The following scale items must be preserved in their original language and must not be changed in any way.

1) T F Keeping track of how much time you spend thinking about gambling is a good way to see if gambling is too important to you.

2) T F Caring about safety takes the fun out of risky activities like skateboarding or bungee jumping.

3) T F Only problem gamblers get emotional while gambling.

4) T F People under age 24 usually aren’t mature enough to see they could be headed for trouble.

5) T F Thinking that gambling is a way to make extra spending money might indicate a gambling problem.

6) T F If you want to figure out if a friend has a gambling problem it doesn’t mater how much a person thinks about gambling‚ only how much they lose.

7) T F Problem gambling can be avoided if time is taken regularly to question if gambling losses are causing any sort of problems.

8) T F Being objective about what you do means objecting to people who criticize you.

9) T F Anyone who dreams about a big win has a gambling problem.

10) T F Ignoring emotions helps concentration and results in more wins.

11) T F The only thing people ever lose when they gamble is money.

12) T F A person that wins‚ does not have a gambling problem.

13) T F Gambling is risky in many ways‚ remembering these risks if you gamble makes it less risky.

14) T F Just about anyone can learn how to tell if they are headed for problems.

15) T F The excitement of wins can trick you into betting more.

16) T F Winning money at gambling is never connected with a gambling problem.

17) T F Being objective means sticking to the facts‚ not letting feelings control your opinion.

18) T F Getting mad‚ sad or carried away by excitement while gambling is harmless.

19) T F If you think about the risk as you gamble‚ you’ll lose.

20) T F It is impossible for the average person to keep track of how much they spend gambling.

21) A person who has a problem with gambling often:

• a) T F ends their problem by winning their money back.
• b) T F can be difficult to be around because their moods change so often.
• c) T F does not have problems in other areas of their life.
• d) T F expects that they are definitely due to win after they have lost several bets.
• e) T F keeps how often they gamble and how much money they bet a secret from everyone.
• f) T F feels that the only way to get back money lost by gambling is by more gambling.
• g) T F are no longer interested in most activities they used to like.
• h) T F remembers times when they win but tends to forget about the times when they lose.