Figures & data
Figure 1. Conceptual map of applied multiple mediator models with mediators (m) and predictor (x) assessed at T0 (SG = simulated gambling). Annotation: M9 an M10 (dashed boxes) were only included in the mediation models to predict problem gambling (y1 at T1), not to predict gambling onset (y2 at T1)
![Figure 1. Conceptual map of applied multiple mediator models with mediators (m) and predictor (x) assessed at T0 (SG = simulated gambling). Annotation: M9 an M10 (dashed boxes) were only included in the mediation models to predict problem gambling (y1 at T1), not to predict gambling onset (y2 at T1)](/cms/asset/670f05b3-1686-44e7-afec-6d8bfc0bf34d/rigs_a_1799426_f0001_b.gif)
Table 1. Unstandardized effect sizes and 95% confidence intervals of mediation models to predict the sum score of problematic gambling after one year (N = 1,178)
Figure 2. Unstandardized effect sizes of substantial mediators, grouped by game type. Annotation: CIUS = Compulsive Internet Use, IGD = Internet Gaming Disorder
![Figure 2. Unstandardized effect sizes of substantial mediators, grouped by game type. Annotation: CIUS = Compulsive Internet Use, IGD = Internet Gaming Disorder](/cms/asset/13007505-1280-4952-86ca-330906cf338d/rigs_a_1799426_f0002_b.gif)
Table 2. Unstandardized effect sizes and 95%-confidence intervals of mediation models to predict onset of any gambling after one year (N = 531)
Table A1. 12-month-prevalence of online or offline gambling (n; % [95%-Confidence]). N = 1,905
Table A2. 12-month-prevalence of simulated gambling activities from home or via mobile device (n; % [95%-Confidence]). N = 1,905
Table A3. Bivariate Spearman-correlations between individual simulated gambling activities. N = 1,905 (unweighted data set)