SOGS: South Oaks Gambling Screen
The SOGS (South Oaks Gambling Screen) is a 20-item screening questionnaire for pathological gambling, based on DSM-III criteria and developed by Lesieur & Blume (1987). It can be self-administered or interviewer-administered, and a score of 5 or more indicates probable pathological gambling.
For professional reference, research, and education only. Not for diagnosis or medical advice.
SOGS Score Interpreter
Enter a total score to see its range.
20 scored yes/no items (total scored items only; demographic questions excluded). Higher scores indicate greater severity. Developed for adult populations; the SOGS-RA uses different thresholds for adolescents.
Total score Interpretation 5+ Probable pathological gamblingScore ≥5 was the validated cutoff in the original clinical sample. A structured diagnostic interview is recommended to confirm. 2–4 Some gambling-related problemsScores in this range indicate gambling-related difficulties but fall below the probable pathological gambling threshold. Further assessment is advisable. 0–1 No problem indicatedScores of 0–1 suggest no significant gambling-related problems based on this screen. Lesieur HR & Blume SB (1987). ≥5 cutoff validated against DSM-III pathological gambling diagnosis. The 2–4 range reflects common clinical convention.
The SOGS (South Oaks Gambling Screen) is a 20-item questionnaire that screens for pathological gambling, based on the DSM-III criteria. It may be self-administered or given by an interviewer, and a total of 5 or more indicates probable pathological gambling [1].
About the SOGS
The SOGS was developed by Henry Lesieur and Sheila Blume at South Oaks Hospital in New York [1]. It was designed as a practical way to identify pathological gambling in clinical populations, such as people in treatment for alcohol and drug use, and in the general population.
It has been widely used in research, treatment settings and population surveys [2]. The DSM criteria have since been revised (DSM-IV, then the DSM-5-TR's gambling disorder), but the SOGS is still used as a screen, with validations in other countries and age groups [3] [4].
What does the SOGS measure?
The SOGS assesses the following dimensions of gambling behaviour:
- Preoccupation with gambling and urge to return and win back losses ("chasing")
- Financial consequences: borrowing money, selling possessions, or relying on others to cover gambling debts
- Social and family consequences: conflict, secrecy, or criticism from others about gambling
- Loss of control: failed attempts to stop or reduce gambling
- Criminal behaviour: e.g., writing bad cheques, theft to fund gambling
Items reflect both historical and current gambling-related experiences.
How do you give the SOGS?
The SOGS may be self-administered or given by non-professional or professional interviewers [1].
- Ages: developed for adults; an adolescent version (SOGS-RA) is available [4]
- Format: self-report questionnaire or interview
- Setting: clinical intake, population surveys, treatment programs
It was built to screen people with alcohol and drug problems [1], so it pairs naturally with the AUDIT or DAST-10. The BBGS is a shorter gambling screen.
How do you score and interpret the SOGS?
The SOGS includes 20 scored questions (plus additional demographic and gambling history items that are not scored).
Totals run from 0 to 20: 0–1 no gambling problem indicated, 2–4 some gambling-related problems, and 5 or more probable pathological gambling. The ≥5 cutoff comes from the original study [1]; the 2–4 range is a common clinical convention rather than a validated cutoff. The scorer at the top of this page shows each range with its note.
Psychometric properties
The SOGS has been studied in clinical and community samples:
- Development sample. 1,616 people: 867 with diagnoses of substance abuse and pathological gambling, 213 Gamblers Anonymous members, 384 university students and 152 hospital employees. Internal consistency and test-retest reliability were established, and family members and counsellors independently validated the results [1].
- Adults aged 50 and over. In 47 people in gambling treatment and 361 community participants, internal consistency was α = 0.90 for the global severity dimension and accuracy for DSM-5 gambling disorder was excellent (AUC = 0.97). The optimal cutoff in that sample was 4 for gambling disorder and 2 for problem gambling [3].
- Chinese adolescents. The adolescent version (SOGS-RA) had an optimal cutoff of ≥4 [4].
A review of its use in Australia questioned the scale's construct validity and its cutoff scores [2].
Limitations
- The SOGS was developed based on DSM-III criteria; it does not fully align with current DSM-5-TR criteria for gambling disorder
- In general population samples with lower base rates of pathological gambling, the SOGS may generate more false positives; interpret scores in context
- The SOGS is a screening tool; a positive screen needs a structured diagnostic interview
- Optimal cutoffs differ by population (for example, 4 in older adults and ≥4 on the adolescent SOGS-RA) [3] [4]
Who is the SOGS for?
The SOGS is appropriate when:
- A client presents with financial difficulties, relationship problems, or co-occurring substance use where gambling involvement is suspected
- Screening for gambling disorder as part of an addiction or behavioural health intake
- Monitoring treatment progress in clients receiving gambling disorder treatment, such as cognitive behavioural therapy or motivational interviewing
For individuals: This page is a clinical reference, not a diagnostic tool. If you have concerns about your own symptoms, bring this information to a qualified mental health professional.
Related
Billing
In the US, the SOGS: South Oaks Gambling Screen is usually billed under these CPT codes. Payer rules vary.
Assessments
- Alcohol, Smoking and Substance Involvement Screening Test (ASSIST v3.1)
- Assessment of Recovery Capital (ARC)
- AUDIT Scoring
- Bipolar Test (MDQ)
- MDQ: Mood Disorder Questionnaire
- Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS): Scoring and Cutoffs
Dot size shows how strongly each scale's condition is linked to this one in HiBoop's co-occurrence map.
FAQ
How is the SOGS scored?
Twenty items are scored yes/no; each "yes" on a scored item counts as one point, giving a total range of 0–20. Demographic and gambling history questions are not included in the total. A score of ≥5 indicates probable pathological gambling, 2–4 indicates some gambling-related problems, and 0–1 suggests no problem.
Is the SOGS self-report or clinician-administered?
The SOGS is primarily a self-report questionnaire, though it can also be administered by an interviewer, professional or not. It is brief and does not require clinical training to administer, which makes it practical for intake and population survey settings.
Can the SOGS diagnose gambling disorder?
No. The SOGS is a screening tool, not a diagnostic tool. A positive screen (score ≥5) indicates elevated risk and should prompt a structured clinical interview against current DSM-5-TR or ICD-11 criteria to confirm a diagnosis of gambling disorder.
What are the SOGS cutoff scores, and are they reliable?
The ≥5 cutoff comes from the original 1987 development study by Lesieur and Blume, based on DSM-III criteria for pathological gambling. Reviews have questioned that cutoff for general population samples, where false positives are more likely, and validation studies have found different optimal cutoffs in other groups (4 in adults aged 50 and over, for example). The right threshold depends on the population being screened.
References
- 1.Lesieur HR, Blume SB. The South Oaks Gambling Screen (SOGS): a new instrument for the identification of pathological gamblers. Am J Psychiatry. 1987;144(9):1184-1188.
- 2.Battersby MW, Thomas LJ, Tolchard B, Esterman A. The South Oaks Gambling Screen: a review with reference to Australian use. J Gambl Stud. 2002;18(3):257-271.
- 3.Granero R, Jiménez-Murcia S, Fernández-Aranda F, et al. Presence of problematic and disordered gambling in older age and validation of the South Oaks Gambling Scale. PLoS One. 2020;15(5):e0233222.
- 4.Zhou H, Chen JH, Ling H, Tong KK, Wu AMS. Psychometric Properties of the South Oaks Gambling Screen Revised for Adolescents in Chinese Adolescent Gamblers. Int J Public Health. 2022;67:1605182.
This library is an academic and clinical reference. A scale described here is not necessarily offered in HiBoop; each page says whether it is.