Cookies on the Gambling Commission website

The Gambling Commission website uses cookies to make the site work better for you. Some of these cookies are essential to how the site functions and others are optional. Optional cookies help us remember your settings, measure your use of the site and personalise how we communicate with you. Any data collected is anonymised and we do not set optional cookies unless you consent.

Set cookie preferences

You've accepted all cookies. You can change your cookie settings at any time.

Skip to main content
  1. Home
  2. About us
  3. Lived experiences of affected others: Qualitative research

Report

Lived experiences of affected others: Qualitative research

Lived experiences of affected others: Qualitative research

Published
25 June 2026

Last updated
25 June 2026 - Changes

Document actions
Print or save (opens in new tab)

  1. Contents
  2. Implications and recommendations
  3. Lessons learnt

Lessons learnt

This research offered valuable insights into recruiting and working with affected others as a distinct participant group, and the process generated several insights that would inform future studies. The three-stage design including introductory calls, a pause and consider stage, and in-depth interviews, proved well suited to this population. As such, we recommend retaining this structure in any replication. The introductory call was especially valuable not only for rapport-building but for assessing participant readiness.

Recruiting participants with experience of severe adverse consequences required a different approach from standard recruitment channels, and earlier and deeper engagement with the Lived Experience Advisory Panel (LEAP) was critical to reaching this group. For future research, we would replicate this engagement to support efforts to find the most suitable participants. This approach also had a built-in safeguarding mitigation; participants engaged via LEAP were currently or have been recently in receipt of support services.

The exclusion of affected other participants with PGSI scores above 4 represents the most significant gap in the sample. Considering safeguarding risks and the limits of sample size, we do not see this as a shortcoming of this research. However, future research with this group should be scoped as a dedicated study rather than an addition to a general affected other sample and should be designed with specialist support structures in place from the start, especially if they are not currently or have been recently in receipt of services.

Finally, the experience of conducting emotionally intensive interviews with this group reinforced the importance of researcher well-being alongside participant well-being. Debriefing structures for researchers after difficult conversations proved beneficial in this research and should ideally be implemented in any future study of this kind.

Previous section
Recommendations for further research Next section
Companion report for gambling support ecosystem
Is this page useful?
Back to top