Erica Viola1,2*
Emina Mehanović3
Marco Martorana1,4
Mariaelisa Renna3Alberto Sciutto1Giulia Giraudi3Maria Ginechesi5Claudia Vullo5Serena Vadrucci6Chiara Andrà1Adalgisa Ceccano5
Pietro Casella5
Fabrizio Faggiano1,7
Federica Vigna-Taglianti3 On behalf of the GAPUnplugged Coordination Group- 1Department of Sustainable Development and Ecological Transition, University of Piemonte Orientale, Vercelli, Italy
- 2Department of Psychology, eCampus University, Novedrate, Italy
- 3Department of Translational Medicine, University of Piemonte Orientale, Novara, Italy
- 4Department of Statistics, Computer Science, and Applications “Giuseppe Parenti” (DiSIA), University of Florence, Florence, Italy
- 5Department of Mental Health, Addiction Unit, ASL Roma 1, Rome, Italy
- 6Department of Prevention, Hygiene and Public Health Unit, ASL Città di Torino, Turin, Italy
- 7Epidemiology Unit, ASL Vercelli, Vercelli, Italy
Objective: This study aims to elucidate the role of parental factors on adolescents' gambling in a sample of Italian students, and to identify the mediating factors of the relationship between parental gambling and adolescents' gambling.
Methods: This is a secondary study based on data collected in the baseline survey of the experimental controlled trial “GAPUnplugged”. The analytical sample included 1,848 students 12–14 years old who participated in the study in Piedmont and Lazio Regions in Italy. Multilevel mixed-effect regression models were used to estimate the associations between correlates and the probability of adolescents' gambling. Mediation analysis was conducted to test the mediating effect of personal factors on the relationship between parental and adolescents' gambling.
Results: Overall, 55.7% of students reported gambling in the last 12 months. In the multivariate regression model, gambling with parents and parental permissiveness to gamble were the strongest correlates of adolescents' gambling. Parental gambling, parental permissiveness to use licit substances and perception of friends' gambling were also significantly associated with adolescents' gambling. Performance beliefs, attitudes toward gambling, and sensation-seeking emerged as potential mediators of the relationship between parental gambling and adolescents' gambling.
Conclusions: Parental factors appear to be important correlates of gambling behavior among adolescents. These results provide insights into the complex dynamics influencing adolescent gambling behavior and emphasize the importance of targeted interventions and parental guidance to promote healthier decision-making and mitigate adolescent gambling problems.
1 Introduction
Adolescent gambling is a serious public health problem (Armitage, 2021; Delfabbro et al., 2016). The first involvement in gambling activities appears to occur in early adolescence, between 11 and 12 years of age (Gambling Commission, 2023; Derevensky et al., 2019; Westphal et al., 2000), however scarce data are available on gambling prevalence at such an early age. Over the past 12 months, 22% of European 16-year-old students engaged in gambling, and among them, 5% exhibited problematic gambling behavior (ESPAD Group, 2020). In Italy, 32% of students gambled at least once in the last 12 months, and 3.9% of them had problem gambling (ESPAD Group, 2020). The prevalence of gambling behavior is decreasing over the years (HBSC, 2022). However, it remains a serious issue deserving deeper identification of risk factors and implementation of appropriate interventions.
Family plays a crucial role in the development of habits and behaviors among adolescents: parental behavior provides a strong role model for children behavior (Bandura, 1977, 1986). Indeed, the association between parental gambling and the risk of adolescents' gambling has been well-documented (Delfabbro et al., 2005; Gupta and Derevensky, 1997; Hardoon et al., 2004; Langhinrichsen-Rohling et al., 2004; McComb and Sabiston, 2010; Vachon et al., 2004). Moreover, some parental practices such as low parental monitoring and support may act as risk factors for adolescents' pro-gambling attitudes and engagement in gambling-related activities (Hardoon et al., 2004; Lee et al., 2014; McComb and Sabiston, 2010; Molinaro et al., 2014; Vachon et al., 2004).
The role of family socioeconomic status in influencing gambling behavior among adolescents is less clear. In most previous studies, family high socioeconomic status acted as risk factor, with dose-response association between the possession of money (e.g., higher weekly income) and the probability of adolescent gambling (Moñino-García et al., 2022; Buja et al., 2019; Welte et al., 2008). However, other studies found that adolescents who gamble are more likely to come from lower social classes (Griffiths and Wood, 2000; Barnes et al., 2005).
Finally, personal risk factors for adolescents' gambling have been extensively studied in the literature, including attitudes, beliefs and expectancies, risk perceptions, self-esteem, depression, impulsiveness, sensation-seeking and many others (Dussault et al., 2011; Hurt et al., 2008; Dowling et al., 2017; Derevensky and Gilbeau, 2015; Kaltenegger et al., 2019; Reardon et al., 2019; Renna et al., 2025). To our knowledge, no prior studies investigated the mediation effect of the relationship between parental factors and adolescents' gambling.
A deep understanding of parental factors related to gambling behaviors in early adolescents is needed to correctly address the problem and develop prevention interventions. This study aims to elucidate the role of parental factors, and particularly socio-economic status, parental behaviors, and permissiveness, on adolescents' gambling in a sample of 12–14 years old Italian students. A second aim is to test the mediating effect of adolescent beliefs, attitudes, risk perceptions, impulsiveness and sensation-seeking on the relationship between parental gambling and gambling with parents, and adolescents' gambling.
2 Methods
2.1 Study design and sample
This is a secondary study based on data collected in the baseline survey of the experimental controlled trial “GAPUnplugged” (Vigna-Taglianti et al., 2024). The baseline survey involved 1874 students 12-14 years old of 29 secondary schools located in the territories of nine National Health Service (NHS) districts (Rome, Alessandria, Torino 3, Torino 5, Vercelli, Cuneo 1, Cuneo 2, city of Torino, Novara) of Piedmont and Lazio Regions in Italy between November 2022 and January 2023. The analytical sample of the present study included 1,848 students who provided the answer to the question of gambling in the last 12 months.
2.2 Data collection
A self-completed anonymous questionnaire was used to collect information on sociodemographic characteristics, substance use, gambling behaviors, beliefs, attitudes and risk perceptions toward gambling, the perception of peers' and friends' substance use and gambling, friend's approval of gambling, parental gambling, parenting monitoring, parental support, disappointment of parents, parental permissiveness toward use of licit substances and gambling, refusal skills, school climate, relation with mathematics and grades, impulsiveness, self-esteem, antisocial behaviors (e.g., violence, stealing) and sensation-seeking. Only students whose parents or caregivers gave consent to participate were involved in the study. Before the administration of questionnaires, information on the study was provided to the pupils and consent to participate was asked. The questionnaire was developed ad hoc and included previously validated questions derived from the Unplugged evaluation survey (https://eudap.eu/), EDDRA data bank of EMCDDA (https://www.euda.europa.eu/) and other international sources and projects (ESPAD, HBSC, Project ALERT, RATING Swedish cohort, SOGS-RA Italian validated version, BSSS Italian version). To preserve confidentiality of the data a 9-digit individual code was self-generated by the student. The questionnaires were filled in by students in the classroom during the school time through online application. In cases of lack of computers or problems of connection, the researchers administered to the students the paper version of the questionnaire.
2.3 Measures
Individual socio-demographic information included gender, age (based on birth date), languages spoken in family, family composition (living with “Both parents”, “One parent”, and “Others”), and indicators of socioeconomic status (father and mother occupation, and family holidays). Mother and father occupation was assessed by asking “What job does your mother do?” and “What job does your father do?”. Based on the answers we created two new indicators of socioeconomic status. The first one was “Employment status” categorized as “Work”, “Doesn't work” and “Retired” for each parent separately. The second one was “Parental income” categorized as “Two salaries”, “One salary” and “No salary” depending on each parents' employment status. Family holidays were measured by using the question “During the last year, how many times did you travel away on holidays with your family?” with possible answers “Never”, “Once”, “Twice” and “More than twice”.
A 3-item question assessed how often adolescents received money from their parents, allowing the answers “Almost never”, “Rarely”, “Sometimes” and “Often”.
Gambling behavior was investigated by asking students if they gambled (scratch cards, lottery, bingo, slot machines, sport betting, event betting, poker, cards) during the last 12 months, with response categories ranging on a scale from 0 to 13 times or more for each specific game. A unique variable of gambling behavior was created, and all the answers were summed up into a dichotomous indicator “Yes” and “No”.
Exposure to parental gambling was measured using the question “Does any of your parents gamble?” allowing the following answers “Yes, only father”, “Yes, only mother”, “Yes, both”, “No” and “Don't know”. The answers were then recategorized into “Yes”, “No” and “Don't know”. Gambling with family components was measured by asking “Have you ever gambled together with your father, mother, siblings, other relatives?” with possible answers “Never gambled in general”, “Never gambled with father, mother, siblings, and other relatives”, “Sometimes” and “Often” for each family member separately.
Perceived parental permissiveness toward licit substances was assessed by asking students if their parents would allow them smoking and drinking alcohol (separate questions), with possible responses “Would not allow at all”, “Would not allow at home”, “Would allow”. Perceived parental permissiveness toward gambling allowed responses “Would not allow” and “Would allow”. Parental monitoring was investigated by asking students to provide responses on the following statements: “My parents set clear rules” and “My parents know where I am in the evening”. Parental disappointment was explored through the statement “It is very important for me not to disappoint my parents”. Parental support was investigated through the statement “I can easily get support from my father and/or mother”.
Questions on the perceived number of friends gambling in presence and online allowed the answers “None”, “Less than half of them”, “About half of them”, “More than half of them” and “All of them”. Answers were collapsed into a dichotomous variable of friend's gambling “Yes” and “No”.
Performance beliefs toward gambling were assessed through the following statements “I have an ability to predict my gambling winnings”, “Gambling is a sure way of becoming rich”, “If I gamble often, I have higher probability of winning”, “Winning and losing in gambling depends only on chance”, “Those who play sport have higher probability of winning the sports betting”, “If I come close to winning now, next time I will win” and “In the lottery, if a number doesn't come out for a long time, it will certainly come out soon”. The reliability of the scale was good (Cronbach's alpha α = 0.78). Positive attitudes toward gambling were assessed through the items “I find it funny”, “I find it enthusiastic” and “I will become rich”. The reliability of the scale was good (Cronbach's alpha α = 0.68). Negative attitudes were assessed through the items “I find it risky”, “I think it could become a habit”, “I could lose the money”. The reliability of the Cronbach's alpha was α = 0.41. Risk perceptions were measured by using the question “How much do you think people risk harming themselves if they gamble” with possible answers “No risk”, “Slight risk”, “Great risk” and “Don't know”.
Impulsiveness was measured through five items retrieved from the Eyseneck Impulsiveness scale (Eysenck and Eysenck, 1978), later on used by Vitaro et al. (1999): “I often say or do things without thinking”, “I often get in troubles because I do things without thinking it through”, “I am impulsive person”, “I weight up all the choices before I decide on something”, and “I often say something off the top of my head”. The reliability of the scale was good (Cronbach's alpha α = 0.77).
Finally, sensation-seeking was evaluated with the Italian version of Brief Sensation Seeking Scale (BSSS), including questions on experience seeking (e.g. “I would like to explore strange places”), boredom susceptibility (e.g. “I get restless when I spend too much time at home”), thrill and adventure seeking (e.g. “I like to do frightening things”), and disinhibition (e.g. “I like wild parties”) (Primi et al., 2011). The reliability of the scale was good (Cronbach's alpha α = 0.76).
Questions on parental monitoring, disappointment, support, beliefs and attitudes toward gambling, impulsiveness and sensation-seeking allowed response alternatives on a 4-point Likert scale (very likely/likely/unlikely/very unlikely and strongly agree/agree/disagree/strongly disagree). The answers on questions on parental monitoring, beliefs, attitudes, impulsiveness and sensation seeking were scored 1–4 and summed, means were calculated, and categories of high, middle, and low level of each indicator were created by using tertiles.
2.4 Statistical analysis
The main outcome under study was whether the adolescent had gambled in the last 12 months (yes/no).
Descriptive data were summarized as frequency and percentage for categorical variables and as mean and SD for continuous variables. The p-values for continuous variables were obtained through t-test, and through Pearson's Chi-square test for categorical variables.
The associations of sociodemographic characteristics, parental gambling, gambling with parents, parental permissiveness, parental monitoring, parental support, and normative perceptions of friend's gambling with the probability of adolescent's gambling in the last 12 months were estimated through multivariate regression models. Collinearity between variables were checked before building the final models. Non-collinear and statistically significant variables from the bivariate model were included in the final multivariate regression model simultaneously. Variables “Gambling with father”, “Gambling with mother”, “Gambling with siblings” and “Gambling with other relatives” were collinear. Due to the important effect of gambling with both parents on adolescents' gambling, two multivariable models were then built: the first including the variable “Gambling with mother”, whereas the second including the variable “Gambling with father”.
Multilevel mixed-effect modeling was used to control for the hierarchical nature of the data, with two grouping levels: center (NHS district) as I level, and class as II level. The LR test showed that adding the third level “school” did not make a statistically significant difference (p=0.7), so the two-level model was used. Some levels in the variable “Center” were merged because of similarities of the context and low sample size in NHS districts, so the final variable had four levels instead of nine, i.e., Rome, Torino3/Torino5/Torino, Vercelli/Cuneo1/Cuneo2, and Alessandria/Novara. Adjusted Odds Ratios (AORs) and 95% Confidence Interval (95%CI) were estimated as measures of association between the studied factors and the outcome. Categorical variables were re-coded in order to reduce the number of items included in the model, i.e., categories were merged. Due to the correlation between the two variables (r = 0.60) and for the purpose of building the multivariate model, “Parental permissiveness to smoke” and “Parental permissiveness to drink” were merged into a single variable “Parental permissiveness to use licit substances”. A tetrachoric correlation matrix was used to assess the correlations between the two permissiveness variables.
Mediation analysis was conducted to test the mediating effect of personal factors (beliefs, attitudes, risk perceptions, impulsiveness and sensation-seeking) on the relationship between parental behaviors (parental gambling, gambling with mother and gambling with father) and adolescents' last 12 months gambling behavior using the PROCESS macro for SPSS (Hayes, 2018). The multivariate mediation effect was tested adjusting for confounders (gender, age, parental income and center). The indirect effect and 95% Confidence Interval were obtained through bootstrapping (10,000).
Missing data were < 4% for all studied variables, except for “Gender” that had 5.6% of missing information. Applying listwise deletion to handle missing data, the final model was run on 88% of the initial sample.
Statistical analysis was carried out using STATA software release 18.0 and SPSS software release 28 (StataCorp, 2023; IBM Corp, 2021).
3 Results
The prevalence of pupils gambling in the 12 months preceding the survey was 55.7% overall (56.1% males, 54.0% females).
The sample originated from 9 different centers (NHS districts) in Northern (64.9%) and Central Italy (35.2%) (Table 1). The mean age of the students participating in the survey was 13.1 (± 0.8) years. About half of the sample were boys (51.9%). No statistically significant differences emerged with respect to gender, age, languages spoken in family, father's employment status, family composition and disappointing parents between those who have gambled (G) and those who have not gambled (NG) at least once in the previous year.
Table 1. Socio-demographic and family factors by gambling behavior in the last 12 months.
As regards socioeconomic status indicators, the number of holidays undertaken by the family in the last year appear to be significantly associated with gambling behavior among children (p = 0.003), as well as a higher parental income as measured through the number of salaries in the family (p = 0.005). No differences emerged for father's employment status, but a significantly greater proportion of adolescents in group G compared to group NG had a working mother (82.0% vs. 77.2%, p = 0.012). About 40% of adolescents received money from their parents, 43.3% of those who gambled in the previous year compared to 36.4% of those who have not gambled (p=0.003).
About 22% of the students reported that their parents gambled, 29.5% among G vs. 14.5% among NG, and the proportion was higher also among those who were unsure whether their parents gambled or not (p < 0.001). Adolescents who gambled reported that they gamble with parents, siblings or relatives to a greater extent compared to NG (p < 0.001). Adolescents who gambled more frequently perceived parental permissive attitudes toward alcohol (28.3% vs. 20.3%, p < 0.001), smoking (13.8% vs. 8.6%, p = 0.001) and gambling (14.7% vs. 2.3%, p < 0.001). Low parental monitoring and lack of parental support were declared by a significantly higher proportion of G compared NG students (22.3% vs. 15.8%, p < 0.001 and 15.5% vs. 11.6%, p = 0.016, respectively). G students had a higher perception of the prevalence of friends' gambling than NG students (38.7% vs. 17.6%, p < 0.001).
As regards adolescent personal factors, high performance beliefs toward gambling (37.0% vs. 16.8%, p < 0.001), high positive attitudes (40.0% vs. 13.9%, p < 0.001), low negative attitudes (37.1% vs. 24.7%, p < 0.001), low risk perceptions (32.8% vs. 20.0%, p < 0.001), high impulsiveness (35.7% vs. 27.9%, p < 0.001) and high sensation-seeking (37.4% vs. 24.7%, p < 0.001) were more prevalent among pupils in group G compared to NG (Table 2).
Table 2. Personal factors of the study sample by gambling behavior in the last 12 months.
In bivariate regression models, parental gambling, gambling with parents and other family members, parental permissiveness to drink alcohol, smoke and gamble, middle/low parental monitoring, low parental support, having received money from parents, and perception of friend's gambling were significantly associated with adolescent gambling. Low parental income, non-working mother and no/rare family holidays were associated with lower odds of adolescents' gambling (data not shown).
3.1 Multivariate regression model with “gambling with mother”
In the multivariate regression model including “gambling with mother” variable, several indicators (gender, age, received money from parents, parental monitoring and parental support) lost significance (Table 3).
Table 3. Correlates of adolescent's gambling in the last 12 months: multilevel multivariate regression models.
Gambling with mother (OR 4.52, 95%CI 3.27–6.26) and parental permissiveness to gamble (OR 3.67, 95%CI 2.04–6.59) were the strongest correlates of adolescents' gambling. Both parental gambling (OR 1.62, 95%CI 1.21–2.18), and not knowing if parents gambled (OR 1.74, 95%CI 1.16–2.63) were associated with gambling. The odds of gambling were higher among adolescents who perceived parental permissive attitudes toward the use of licit substances (OR 1.40, 95%CI 1.07–1.84). Adolescents who perceived their friends gambled had about twice greater odds of gambling themselves (OR 2.42, 95%CI 1.85–3.17). Low parental income was marginally associated with adolescents' gambling (OR 0.77, 95%CI 0.59–1.01).
3.2 Multivariate regression model with “gambling with father”
In the multivariate regression model including “gambling with father” variable, again, the indicators of gender, age, parental monitoring and parental support lost significance (Table 3).
Similarly, gambling with father (OR 3.90, 95%CI 2.96–5.16) and parental permissiveness toward gambling (OR 3.37, 95%CI 1.88–6.05) were the strongest correlates of adolescent gambling. However, as regards parental gambling, only not knowing if parents gambled was a significant correlate of adolescent gambling (OR 1.62, 95%CI 1.08–2.43). The odds of gambling were associated also with adolescents perceived parental permissive attitudes toward use of licit substances (OR 1.33, 95%CI 1.02–1.74). Perception of friends gambling was associated with adolescents' engagement in gambling (OR 2.31, 95%CI 1.77–3.02). Low parental income (OR 0.80, 95%CI 0.61–1.03), parental gambling (OR 1.33, 95%CI 0.98–1.80) and receiving money from parents (OR 1.23, 95%CI 0.97–1.56) were only marginally associated with adolescents' gambling.
3.3 Mediation model
Parental gambling was significantly associated with high performance beliefs toward gambling (p < 0.001), high positive attitudes toward gambling (p < 0.001), low negative attitudes toward gambling (p = 0.003), low risk perceptions toward gambling (p = 0.001), impulsiveness (p < 0.001) and sensation-seeking (p < 0.001) (Path a, Figure 1). High performance beliefs toward gambling, high positive attitudes toward gambling, low negative attitudes toward gambling and sensation-seeking suggested a potential partially mediated pathway between parental gambling and adolescents' gambling, as the direct effect remained significant (β = 1.655, p = 0.006). The same factors were associated with adolescents' gambling in a manner consistent with mediation in the models using gambling with mother and gambling with father as exposure (data not shown).
Figure 1. Mediators of parental gambling on last 12 months adolescent's gambling. Multivariate mediation model adjusted for age, gender, parental income and center. Path a: effect of parental gambling on targeted mediators. Path b: effect of targeted mediators on adolescents' gambling. Path a*b: indirect or mediation effect of targeted mediators.
4 Discussion
The present study investigated parental factors related to gambling behaviors in early adolescents, as well as the mediating effect of adolescent factors on the relationship between parental gambling behaviors and adolescents' gambling. Parental gambling, gambling with parents, parental permissiveness to gamble and use licit substances, and perceived friends' gambling were significantly associated with higher odds of adolescent gambling. Adolescent performance beliefs, attitudes toward gambling, and sensation-seeking mediated the effect of parental gambling and gambling with parents on the probability of adolescent gambling.
The high prevalence of gambling behavior in our sample corroborates the early onset of gambling behavior (Gambling Commission, 2023; Derevensky et al., 2019; Westphal et al., 2000), highlighting the need of prevention interventions dedicated to early adolescents. The prevalence (55,7%) is higher than what previously observed in Italy both among 16-years old students participating in the ESPAD survey (32%) and among 15-years old students participating in the HBSC survey (37.5% among males and 14% among females) (ESPAD Group, 2020; HBSC, 2022). Socio-economic status, proportion of males and females, and of students with migratory background are comparable between our sample, ESPAD and HBSC participants, so the main difference appears to be the younger age of students of our sample, making these results particularly concerning. However, the higher prevalence of gambling behavior we observed could also be due to differences in recruitment procedures, sampling and timing. Our sample include only students of two Italian Regions, and of schools that voluntarily participated in the study, and whose parents provided consent for participation. The timing of data collection could also have impacted, since the ESPAD data were collected pre-COVID (2019), whereas our study took place post-COVID (2022/2023). Pandemic-related factors may have influenced adolescents' susceptibility to risk behaviors.
The early onset and the high percentage of underage individuals who engaged in gambling can be due to today widespread gambling opportunities, even in socially acceptable forms (Delfabbro and Thrupp, 2003). For example, in Italy, national lottery results are broadcasted on public television in a festive tone, potentially contributing to a perception of gambling as a normalized activity. Whereas these factors alone do not account for the high prevalence observed, they may contribute to a broader cultural and environmental context that deserves further investigation, especially regarding early prevention (Lupu and Todirita, 2013).
Although only marginally significant in multivariate model, gambling behavior appears to be associated with higher family socioeconomic status, consistently with some previous studies (Moñino-García et al., 2022; Buja et al., 2019; Welte et al., 2008). This association may be explained with a tendency of adolescents to spend money on gambling if available (Forrest and McHale, 2012) and can be favored by owning personal devices (smartphones, tablets, PCs) facilitating online gambling. Moreover, considering gambling as a type of financial behavior, it is conceivable that parents who emphasize savings, proper money management, and provide allowances for their children may encourage more responsible money usage and a more realistic approach to earnings, thereby mitigating gambling risks (Delfabbro and Thrupp, 2003). On the other side, the inverse association between low SES and gambling may also reflect specific contextual factors, such as limited gambling access and fewer technological resources in low-SES households. The relationship between SES and gambling is complex: lower SES can increase risk in some domain, whereas higher SES may relate to gambling as a leisure activity. Jessor's Problem Behavior Theory (PBT) posit that gambling results from the interaction between individual characteristics, behavioral tendencies, and environmental influences (Palomäki et al., 2025). Future research is needed to further explore the contextual mechanisms underlying the relationship between socioeconomic status and adolescent gambling.
Gambling with parents (both mother and father), and parental gambling were associated with adolescent gambling. The significant effect of parental gambling on adolescents' behavior is extensively recognized (Delfabbro et al., 2005; Donati et al., 2023; Gupta and Derevensky, 1997; Hardoon et al., 2004; Langhinrichsen-Rohling et al., 2004; McComb and Sabiston, 2010; Vachon et al., 2004). Parental behavior serves as a powerful role model for children shaping their beliefs, attitudes, and behaviors through observational learning and imitation (Bandura, 1977, 1986; Gupta and Derevensky, 1998). The social learning theory highlights the interaction between personal and environmental factors, explaining how parental influence shapes both adolescents' actions and their risk-taking tendencies, including gambling (Canale et al., 2016; Savard et al., 2015). Moreover, parental involvement in gambling behavior may convey a harmless image of gambling, favoring the perception of gambling as acceptable activity, and fostering positive attitudes toward gambling which in turn increase the likelihood of child's first engagement in gambling (Griffiths and Wood, 2000; Hanss et al., 2014; Pallesen et al., 2016). Notably, in our study adolescents who were uncertain about their parents' gambling had higher odds of engaging in gambling themselves. This may reflect limited family communication or parental monitoring, which may increase vulnerability to risky behaviors. Coherently, in our study parental permissiveness toward gambling was associated with greater adolescent engagement in gambling activities, as already observed in previous studies (Delfabbro and Thrupp, 2003; Hardoon et al., 2004; Wickwire et al., 2010; Leeman et al., 2014). Moreover, not only parental permissiveness to gamble had a significant effect on adolescent gambling behavior, but also permissiveness to use licit substances (alcohol and tobacco). This finding suggests that parental influence is not limited to a single risk behavior, but it can generalize to various risk behaviors. Several other studies found that parental approval of one substance can influence the use of different substances (Li et al., 2002; Koning et al., 2020; Mehanović et al., 2022).
The normative role of perceived friends' gambling was associated with engaging in gambling, aligning with the substantial existing literature (Renna et al., 2025; Casey et al., 2011; Vegni et al., 2019; Pallesen et al., 2016; Langhinrichsen-Rohling et al., 2004; Delfabbro and Thrupp, 2003; Hardoon et al., 2004; Mazar et al., 2018). Adolescents' subjective perception of norms may not accurately reflect peers' actual gambling behavior, since can be subject to cognitive biases. However, it is recognized that among adolescents, it may even be more impactful on the adoption of risk behaviors than the actual norms (Elek et al., 2006; Perkins et al., 2019).
Finally, we investigated paths that may explain the association of parental factors with adolescents' gambling. Through mediation models, we found that both parental gambling and gambling with parents were associated with their child's performance beliefs and positive attitudes toward gambling, which were in turn associated with adolescent gambling. Therefore, adolescents' own beliefs and attitudes, recognized risk factors for gambling behavior (Derevensky and Gilbeau, 2015; Griffiths and Wood, 2000; Hanss et al., 2014; Hurt et al., 2008; Pallesen et al., 2016), were potentially modeled by their parental behavior. High sensation-seeking, a well-known risk factor for adolescent gambling (Hurt et al., 2008; Dowling et al., 2017; Derevensky and Gilbeau, 2015) was another potential mediator in the above-mentioned relationship. This again underscores the role of parental behaviors in shaping adolescents' personal characteristics, attitudes, and skills, influencing their risk behaviors (Canale et al., 2016). Understanding these dynamics can help prevention practitioners to develop appropriate interventions to promote healthier decision-making in children. On the contrary, in our study impulsiveness and risk perceptions were not statistically significant as potential mediators of the relationship between parental and adolescent gambling. So, we can confirm certain cognitive and personality traits (sensation-seeking and gambling-related attitudes) as potentially mediating factors, whilst the role of others appears to be less clear.
The results of our study suggest that, whereas interventions at the broader societal level are essential, certain family-related aspects should be enhanced, particularly by raising parents' awareness. Undoubtedly, a parental stance explicitly opposed to any form of gambling can serve as a protective factor. A more attentive monitoring of the adolescents, without compromising their autonomy, has also demonstrated effectiveness (Floros et al., 2013). Additionally, instilling the values of responsible money management is highly recommended (Delfabbro and Thrupp, 2003).
Prevention programs should actively engage parents to enhance their awareness and responsibility. Feasible strategies may include school-based workshops aimed at educating parents about gambling risks and their role-model influence, media campaigns addressed to parents, as well as general media campaigns aimed to raise broader public awareness. These interventions should be focused to enhance parental monitoring and communication, and to strengthen protective factors against youth gambling.
In research, the development and the use of standardized validated tools should be promoted to objectively measure parental factors and parenting styles. Furthermore, more research should be conducted to compare adolescents' subjective perceptions of parental behavior with parents' self-reported responses.
Finally, our study measured gambling activity rather than gambling-related harm. Early gambling activity is a known risk factor for later harm and may signal risk (Volberg et al., 2010), however, it does not necessarily imply a future development of problematic patterns. More studies are needed to explore the progression from gambling activity to gambling harm to better tailor prevention efforts.
This study has several strengths. The survey used a standardized questionnaire containing previously validated questions derived from recognized international sources, minimizing possible misclassifications related to data collection and measures. Multilevel mixed-effect regression models were performed to evaluate the association between correlates and gambling, according to higher order clustering (center and class). The information collected through the questionnaires allowed the analysis of a large set of correlates.
However, the study has also limitations. The cross-sectional nature of the study prevents inferring causality. Indeed, some variables included in the analyses are likely to precede the outcome, e.g., sociodemographic characteristics, family composition and parental gambling, but for most other variables, including parental factors, bidirectional or reverse causality cannot be excluded. Missing values reduced the sample in the adjusted regression models; however, the models were run on 88% of the sample, a value that should maintain low the risk of attrition bias. The sample was not equality distributed between the nine NHS districts; therefore, it was needed to merge some to perform multilevel analysis. All the information was self-reported by the students; therefore, the student's subjective perceptions of their friends' gambling, parent's gambling and permissiveness may not accurately reflect the reality. Nevertheless, students' perceptions may have a strong impact on their behavior. The proxies of SES used in this study (family holidays and parental occupational status) may not fully distinguish the financial and social capital of the families, so limiting the reliability of the association between SES and adolescent gambling we observed. Finally, despite recruiting participants from schools located in different geographic areas, the possibility of selection bias cannot be ruled out. The sample includes indeed only students who participated in the trial and whose parents provided informed consent. It is possible that the participating schools were those most engaged in prevention, or those where the issue was more strongly perceived. Parents from different socio-economic backgrounds or with varying attitudes toward gambling may have declined to give consent for various reasons. All these reasons can limit the generalizability of the findings.
In conclusion, parental gambling and gambling with parents were significantly associated with adolescents' beliefs, attitudes, and sensation-seeking, and these in turn were related to the probability of gambling behavior. Parental permissiveness toward gambling and licit substance use was associated with adolescent engagement in gambling activities, corroborating the need for intervention efforts on parental awareness. This study provides insights into the complex dynamics influencing adolescent gambling behavior and emphasize the importance of targeted interventions and parental guidance in promoting healthier decision-making and mitigating adolescent gambling problems.
Data availability statement
The raw data supporting the conclusions of this article will be made available by the authors, without undue reservation.
Ethics statement
The study was conducted following the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki. The protocol of the study including details on the study design, materials, intervention, instruments, and procedures for enrolment was submitted to the Novara Ethical Committee, and approval was obtained on 18/11/2022 (prot. 943/CE; study code CE228/2022). Small amendments to the procedures were requested and applied. Informed letters were sent to the participants' legal guardians/next of kin and written informed consent for the participation of the children in the study was asked and obtained before the baseline survey. Students were informed about the objectives of the study and provided consent to participate before filling the baseline questionnaire. Questionnaires were anonymous. The studies were conducted in accordance with the local legislation and institutional requirements.
Author contributions
EV: Conceptualization, Investigation, Methodology, Project administration, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. EM: Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis, Methodology, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. MM: Conceptualization, Investigation, Methodology, Project administration, Writing – original draft. MR: Data curation, Investigation, Methodology, Software, Writing – original draft. AS: Data curation, Funding acquisition, Methodology, Project administration, Writing – original draft. GG: Writing – review & editing, Data curation, Investigation, Project administration. MG: Writing – review & editing, Conceptualization, Data curation, Investigation, Project administration. CV: Writing – review & editing, Conceptualization, Data curation, Investigation, Project administration. SV: Writing – review & editing, Investigation, Project administration, Visualization. CA: Writing – review & editing, Investigation, Project administration, Visualization. AC: Writing – review & editing, Investigation, Project administration, Supervision. PC: Writing – review & editing, Funding acquisition, Resources, Visualization. FF: Writing – review & editing, Funding acquisition, Resources, Supervision. FV-T: Methodology, Resources, Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing, Conceptualization, Data curation, Formal analysis, Investigation. GAPUnplugged Coordination Group: Investigation, Methodology, Project administration, Resources, Visualization, Writing – review & editing.
Funding
The author(s) declare that financial support was received for the research and/or publication of this article. This study was supported by funding of ASLRoma1, regulated through contract no. 0005406, 15/10/2020 and by funding of Ministry of University and Research (D.D. no. 1159, 23/07/2023 - bando PROBEN, project PROBEN_0000009).
Acknowledgments
We thank school principals, teachers and students for participating, and the members of the GAPUnplugged Coordination Group for the contribution to the study. The GAPUnplugged Coordination Group includes: Federica Vigna-Taglianti, Emina Mehanović, Mariaelisa Renna, Chiara Sacchi, Giulia Giraudi (Department of Translational Medicine, University of Piemonte Orientale, Novara); Adalgisa Ceccano, Maria Ginechesi, Claudia Vullo, Pietro Casella (Department of Mental Health, Addiction Unit, ASL Roma1, Roma); Serena Vadrucci (Department of Prevention, Hygiene and Public Health Unit, ASL Città di Torino, Torino); Fabrizio Faggiano, Chiara Andrà, Alberto Sciutto, Erica Viola, Marco Martorana, Matteo Pezzutto, Cristina Scalvini (Department of Sustainable Development and Ecological Transition, University of Piemonte Orientale, Vercelli); Gian Luca Cuomo, Laura Donati (Piedmont Centre for Drug Addiction Epidemiology, ASL TO3, Grugliasco, Torino).
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Generative AI statement
The author(s) declare that no Gen AI was used in the creation of this manuscript.
Publisher's note
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
References
Armitage, R. (2021). Gambling among adolescents: an emerging public health problem. Lancet Public Health 6:e143. doi: 10.1016/S2468-2667(21)00026-8
Barnes, G. M., Welte, J. W., Hoffman, J. H., and Dintcheff, B. A. (2005). Shared predictors of youthful gambling, substance use, and delinquency. Psychol. Addict. Behav. 19:165. doi: 10.1037/0893-164X.19.2.165
Buja, A., Mortali, C., Mastrobattista, L., Minutillo, A., Pichini, S., Genetti, B., et al. (2019). Pathways connecting socioeconomic variables, substance abuse and gambling behaviour: a cross-sectional study on a sample of Italian high-school students. BMJ Open 9:e031737. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2019-031737
Canale, N., Vieno, A., Ter Bogt, T., Pastore, M., Siciliano, V., and Molinaro, S. (2016). Adolescent gambling-oriented attitudes mediate the relationship between perceived parental knowledge and adolescent gambling: Implications for prevention. Prevent. Sci. 17, 970–980. doi: 10.1007/s11121-016-0683-y
Casey, D. M., Williams, R. J., Mossière, A. M., Schopflocher, D. P., el-Guebaly, N., Hodgins, D. C., et al. (2011). The role of family, religiosity, and behavior in adolescent gambling. J. Adolesc. 34, 841–851. doi: 10.1016/j.adolescence.2011.02.002
Delfabbro, P., King, D. L., and Derevensky, J. L. (2016). Adolescent gambling and problem gambling: Prevalence, current issues, and concerns. Curr. Addict. Rep. 3, 268–274. doi: 10.1007/s40429-016-0105-z
Delfabbro, P., Lahn, J., and Grabosky, P. (2005). Further evidence concerning the prevalence of adolescent gambling and problem gambling in Australia: A study of the ATC. Int. Gambl. Stud. 5, 209–228. doi: 10.1080/14459790500303469
Delfabbro, P., and Thrupp, L. (2003). The social determinants of youth gambling in South Australian adolescents. J. Adolesc. 26, 313–330. doi: 10.1016/S0140-1971(03)00013-7
Derevensky, J. L., and Gilbeau, L. (2015). Adolescent gambling: twenty-five years of research. Can. J. Addict. 6, 4–12. doi: 10.1097/02024458-201509000-00002
Derevensky, J. L., Hayman, V., and Gilbeau, L. (2019). Behavioral addictions: excessive gambling, gaming, internet, and smartphone use among children and adolescents. Pediat. Clini. 66, 1163–1182. doi: 10.1016/j.pcl.2019.08.008
Donati, M. A., Beccari, C., Sanson, F., Iraci Sareri, G., and Primi, C. (2023). Parental gambling frequency and adolescent gambling: a cross-sectional path model involving adolescents and parents. PLoS ONE 18:e0280996. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0280996
Dowling, N. A., Merkouris, S. S., Greenwood, C. J., Oldenhof, E., Toumbourou, J. W., and Youssef, G. J. (2017). Early risk and protective factors for problem gambling: A systematic review and meta-analysis of longitudinal studies. Clin. Psychol. Rev. 51, 109–124. doi: 10.1016/j.cpr.2016.10.008
Dussault, F., Brendgen, M., Vitaro, F., Wanner, B., and Tremblay, R. E. (2011). Longitudinal links between impulsivity, gambling problems and depressive symptoms: A transactional model from adolescence to early adulthood. J. Child Psychol. Psychiat. 52, 130–138. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-7610.2010.02313.x
Elek, E., Miller-Day, M., and Hecht, M. L. (2006). Influences of personal, injunctive, and descriptive norms on early adolescent substance use. J. Drug Issues 36, 147–172. doi: 10.1177/002204260603600107
ESPAD Group (2020). ESPAD Report 2019: Results from the European School Survey Project on Alcohol and Other Drugs. Luxembourg: EMCDDA Joint Publications, Publications Office of the European Union. Available online at: https://www.espad.org/espad-report-2019 (Accessed November 5, 2024).
Eysenck, S. B., and Eysenck, H. J. (1978). Impulsiveness and venturesomeness: their position in a dimensional system of personality description. Psychol. Rep. 43, 1247–1255. doi: 10.2466/pr0.1978.43.3f.1247
Floros, G. D., Siomos, K., Fisoun, V., and Geroukalis, D. (2013). Adolescent online gambling: The impact of parental practices and correlates with online activities. J. Gambl. Stud. 29, 131–150. doi: 10.1007/s10899-011-9291-8
Forrest, D., and McHale, I. G. (2012). Gambling and problem gambling among young adolescents in Great Britain. J. Gambl. Stud. 28, 607–622. doi: 10.1007/s10899-011-9277-6
Gambling Commission (2023). Young People and Gambling 2023. Available online at: https://www.gamblingcommission.gov.uk/report/young-people-and-gambling-2023
Griffiths, M., and Wood, R. T. (2000). Risk factors in adolescence: The case of gambling, videogame playing, and the Internet. J. Gambl. Stud. 16, 199–225. doi: 10.1023/A:1009433014881
Gupta, R., and Derevensky, J. (1997). Familial and social influences on juvenile gambling. J. Gambl. Stud. 13, 179–192. doi: 10.1023/A:1024915231379
Gupta, R., and Derevensky, J. L. (1998). Adolescent gambling behavior: a prevalence study and examination of the correlates associated with problem gambling. J. Gambl. Stud. 14, 319–345. doi: 10.1023/A:1023068925328
Hanss, D., Mentzoni, R. A., Delfabbro, P., Myrseth, H., and Pallesen, S. (2014). Attitudes toward gambling among adolescents. Int. Gambl. Stud. 14, 505–519. doi: 10.1080/14459795.2014.969754
Hardoon, K. K., Gupta, R., and Derevensky, J. L. (2004). Psychosocial variables associated with adolescent gambling. Psychol. Addict. Behav. 18, 170–179. doi: 10.1037/0893-164X.18.2.170
Hayes, A. F. (2018). Introduction to Mediation, Moderation, and Conditional Process Analysis: a Regression-Based Approach (2nd edn). New York: The Guilford Press.
HBSC (2022). Principali risultati. Istituto Superiore di Sanità (ISS). Available online at: https://www.epicentro.iss.it/hbsc/pdf/temi2022/HBSC%20-%20Schede%20Sintesi_2022.pdf (Accessed November 5, 2024).
Hurt, H., Giannetta, J. M., Brodsky, N. L., Shera, D., and Romer, D. (2008). Gambling initiation in preadolescents. J. Adolesc. Health 43, 91–93. doi: 10.1016/j.jadohealth.2007.12.018
Kaltenegger, H. C., Låftman, S. B., and Wennberg, P. (2019). Impulsivity, risk gambling, and heavy episodic drinking among adolescents: a moderator analysis of psychological health. Addict. Behav. Rep. 10:100211. doi: 10.1016/j.abrep.2019.100211
Koning, I., de Looze, M., and Harakeh, Z. (2020). Parental alcohol-specific rules effectively reduce adolescents' tobacco and cannabis use: a longitudinal study. Drug Alcohol Depend. 216:108226. doi: 10.1016/j.drugalcdep.2020.108226
Langhinrichsen-Rohling, J., Rohde, P., Seeley, J. R., and Rohling, M. L. (2004). Individual, family, and peer correlates of adolescent gambling. J. Gambl. Stud. 20, 23–46. doi: 10.1023/B:JOGS.0000016702.69068.53
Lee, G. P., Stuart, E. A., Ialongo, N. S., and Martins, S. S. (2014). Parental monitoring trajectories and gambling among a longitudinal cohort of urban youth. Addiction 109, 977–985. doi: 10.1111/add.12399
Leeman, R. F., Patock-Peckham, J. A., Hoff, R. A., Krishnan-Sarin, S., Steinberg, M. A., Rugle, L. J., et al. (2014). Perceived parental permissiveness toward gambling and risky behaviors in adolescents. J. Behav. Addict. 3, 115–123. doi: 10.1556/JBA.3.2014.012
Li, C., Pentz, M. A., and Chou, C. P. (2002). Parental substance use as a modifier of adolescent substance use risk. Addiction 97, 1537–1550. doi: 10.1046/j.1360-0443.2002.00238.x
Lupu, V., and Todirita, I. R. (2013). Updates of the prevalence of problem gambling in Romanian teenagers. J. Gambl. Stud. 29, 29–36. doi: 10.1007/s10899-012-9296-y
Mazar, A., Williams, R. J., Stanek, E. J., Zorn, M., and Volberg, R. A. (2018). The importance of friends and family to recreational gambling, at-risk gambling, and problem gambling. BMC Public Health 18:1080. doi: 10.1186/s12889-018-5988-2
McComb, J. L., and Sabiston, C. M. (2010). Family influences on adolescent gambling behavior: a review of the literature. J. Gambl. Stud. 26, 503–520. doi: 10.1007/s10899-010-9181-5
Mehanović, E., Vigna-Taglianti, F., Faggiano, F., and Galanti, M. R. (2022). Does parental permissiveness toward cigarette smoking and alcohol use influence illicit drug use among adolescents? A longitudinal study in seven European countries. Soc. Psychiat. Psychiat. Epidemiol. 2022, 1–9. doi: 10.1007/s00127-021-02118-5
Molinaro, S., Canale, N., Vieno, A., Lenzi, M., Siciliano, V., Gori, M., et al. (2014). Country-and individual-level determinants of probable problematic gambling in adolescence: a multi-level cross-national comparison. Addiction 109, 2089–2097. doi: 10.1111/add.12719
Moñino-García, M., Ballesta, M., Huerta, J. M., Correa-Rodríguez, J. F., Cabrera-Castro, N., Llorens, N., et al. (2022). The adolescent problem gambling prevalence associated with leisure-time activities and risky behaviors in Southern Spain. Int. J. Ment. Health Addict. 2022, 1–15. doi: 10.1007/s11469-022-00950-7
Pallesen, S., Hanss, D., Molde, H., Griffiths, M. D., and Mentzoni, R. A. (2016). A longitudinal study of factors explaining attitude change towards gambling among adolescents. J. Behav. Addict. 5, 59–67. doi: 10.1556/2006.5.2016.017
Palomäki, J., Castrén, S., Männikkö, N., and Latvala, T. (2025). Gambling and other addictive behaviors among higher education students in Finland—insights from a large-scale survey. Front. Psychol. 16:1529051. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1529051
Perkins, J. M., Perkins, H. W., Jurinsky, J., and Craig, D. W. (2019). Adolescent tobacco use and misperceptions of social norms across schools in the United States. J. Stud. Alcohol Drugs 80, 659–668. doi: 10.15288/jsad.2019.80.659
Primi, C., Narducci, R., Benedetti, D., Donati, M., and Chiesi, F. (2011). Validity and reliability of the Italian version of the Brief Sensation Seeking Scale (BSSS) and its invariance across age and gender. Test. Psychomet. Methodol. Appl. Psychol. 18, 231–241. Available online at: http://hdl.handle.net/2158/570697
Reardon, K. W., Wang, M., Neighbors, C., and Tackett, J. L. (2019). The personality context of adolescent gambling: better explained by the Big Five or sensation-seeking? J. Psychopathol. Behav. Assess. 41, 69–80. doi: 10.1007/s10862-018-9690-6
Renna, M., Mehanović, E., Giraudi, G., Sciutto, A., Viola, E., Martorana, M., et al. (2025). Correlates of gambling behaviour among adolescents: the role of psychological factors, school behaviours, and normative perceptions. Behav. Sci. 15:653. doi: 10.3390/bs15050653
Savard, A. C., Tremblay, J., and Turcotte, D. (2015). Problem gambling among adolescents: toward a social and interactionist reading. Int. Gambl. Stud. 15, 39–54. doi: 10.1080/14459795.2014.985693
Vachon, J., Vitaro, F., Wanner, B., and Tremblay, R. E. (2004). Adolescent gambling: relationships with parent gambling and parenting practices. Psychol. Addict. Behav. 18, 3–9. doi: 10.1037/0893-164X.18.4.398
Vegni, N., Melchiori, F. M., D'Ardia, C., Prestano, C., Canu, M., Piergiovanni, G., et al. (2019). Gambling behavior and risk factors in preadolescent students: a cross sectional study. Front. Psychol. 10:1287. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01287
Vigna-Taglianti, F. D., Martorana, M., Viola, E., Renna, M., Vadrucci, S., Sciutto, A., et al. (2024). Evaluation of effectiveness of the Unplugged program on gambling behaviours among adolescents: study protocol of the experimental controlled study “GAPUnplugged”. J. Prev. (2022) 45, 405–429. doi: 10.1007/s10935-024-00772-4
Vitaro, F., Arseneault, L., and Tremblay, R. E. (1999). Impulsivity predicts problem gambling in low SES adolescent males. Addiction 94, 565–575. doi: 10.1046/j.1360-0443.1999.94456511.x
Volberg, R. A., Gupta, R., Griffiths, M. D., Olason, D. T., and Delfabbro, P. (2010). An international perspective on youth gambling prevalence studies. Int. J. Adolesc. Med. Health 22, 3–38. doi: 10.1515/9783110255690.21
Welte, J. W., Barnes, G. M., Tidwell, M. C. O., and Hoffman, J. H. (2008). The prevalence of problem gambling among US adolescents and young adults: results from a national survey. J. Gambl. Stud. 24, 119–133. doi: 10.1007/s10899-007-9086-0
Westphal, J. R., Rush, J. A., Stevens, L., and Johnson, L. J. (2000). Gambling behavior of Louisiana students in grades 6 through 12. Psychiat. Serv. 51, 96–99. doi: 10.1176/ps.51.1.96
Keywords: gambling, adolescents, parents, correlates, mediation, Italy
Citation: Viola E, Mehanović E, Martorana M, Renna M, Sciutto A, Giraudi G, Ginechesi M, Vullo C, Vadrucci S, Andrà C, Ceccano A, Casella P, Faggiano F and Vigna-Taglianti F (2025) Parental correlates of adolescent gambling behavior: a study on 12–14 years old students in Italy. Front. Psychol. 16:1563936. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2025.1563936
Received: 20 January 2025; Accepted: 15 July 2025;
Published: 09 September 2025.
Edited by:
Debora Marques Miranda, Federal University of Minas Gerais, BrazilReviewed by:
Alice E. Hoon, Swansea University Medical School, United KingdomNicoletta Vegni, University Niccolò Cusano, Italy
Claudia Prestano, University Niccolò Cusano, Italy
Dapeng Zhang, The Third People's Hospital of Fuyang, China
Copyright © 2025 Viola, Mehanović, Martorana, Renna, Sciutto, Giraudi, Ginechesi, Vullo, Vadrucci, Andrà, Ceccano, Casella, Faggiano and Vigna-Taglianti. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
*Correspondence: Erica Viola, ZXJpY2EudmlvbGFAdW5pdXBvLml0