The Rise In Online Youth Gambling In Ireland – A Commercial Determinant Of Health (CDoH) Perspective

Choose the topic titled ‘The Rise in Online Youth Gambling In Ireland – A Commercial Determinant of Health Perspective’ and write a thesis in a case study style

Criteria for assessment

Section 1: Context 15%

• Choice of sub-topic: your ability to carve out a SMART angle within the CDoH field shows you have been engaged throughout the module, and have read deeply and widely.
• Depth of reading: your integration of literature with the context you are building shows great judgement of what to include and exclude.
• Fluidity of expression: your own voice and craft in the context-building.
• You are able to build a clear, multi-dimensional rationale.
• Your work has an element of originality, creativity and authenticity.

Section 2: Evidence, Infographic/Collation & Appendices (20%):

• Quality of evidence source: choosing the source required reflection, an element of training to access it/use it, and offers a credible, objective and interesting source from which to derive deep insight.
• Relevance: the evidence base is important, and is related to the question/topic/problem under investigation.
• Consistent: it is clear that you have taken into account what other researchers have used in similar situations, and you build on it.
• There is a judicious use of appendices; not too many so that it overwhelms the focus, but enough to demonstrate the background work that went into the case study.
• There is an attempt to synthesise some aspect of the field into an infographic, a table, an image or a diagram. This synthesis condenses and clarifies some aspect of the case study context.
• Originality: the extent to which the resource/source/evidence base is non-obvious or requires deeper thought to come at evidence in this way.

Section 3: Methodology (15%):

• There is an element of primary research in the case study.
• This primary research builds on the research that is already there and constitutes about 20% of the workload for the module.
• Whether it is qualitative, quantitative, or mixed methods, the design shows that you understand what type of investigation would best address the issue you are raising.
• Validity and reliability: There is a part in the case that explains the validity and reliability of this type of research, explaining how you are trying to ensure that the work you produce is accurate and trustworthy.
• Ethical considerations: Where appropriate, you have completed the research ethics application, and taken great care to approach the case ethically. This means (i) objectively analysing the literature; (ii) being transparent in how you approached the primary research piece, (iii) ensuring deeply respectful interaction with participants, including assurance of anonymity if they require it, and (iv) making conclusions that you believe to be true based on your experience.

Section 4: Analytical Skills (25%)

• ‘Analysis’ will not be a separate section in the case study, rather you will demonstrate analytical ability in the following:
  • Contextualisation: You are able to integrate diverse literature into thematic concerns that reflect your own case study topic, sequenced in a way that shows craft and depth.
  • Primary research: you have engaged with a methodology (discourse analysis, statistical methods, ethnography, media content analysis, social network analysis etc) during the semester, learning the skills to do it independently through a book or online course [can be documented in an Appendix].
  • Reflection on your own primary research: you are able to present the insights with clarity and integrate your insights into the existing body of work, in ways that can either extend, refute or confirm existing analyses.
  • Analytical theme or frame: you can tie together the insights from your own research using a concept, model or framework that you have already engaged with, either existent within the CDoH literature, or brought in from another subject domain. This ‘Theme or Frame’ is not decorative: it really gives the case a powerful conceptual shorthand that is credible and non-obvious

Section 5: Conclusion (15%)

• The conclusion is not a pedantic restatement of everything that has gone before; it is a new burst of energy that heightens the case by tying all insights together, reflecting deeply on where the phenomenon is heading, and offering one (or max two) deeply informed policy recommendations.
• Reflexivity: You should have a part in the case study that problematises your own contextualisation and insights derived from the research, demonstrating the limits to the existing research and your own judgement, without pre-emptive or performative critique.

Section 6: Formatting and Presentation (10%)

• You have a cover sheet listing anywhere you have used AI [the new cover sheet is in ‘Assessment’ folder.
• You have a really professional presentation, with clearly defined headings, appendices etc.
• Spelling, syntax, grammar is faultless.
• Your ‘voice’ is present: it is clear you wrote this, and not an AI.
• Referencing is Harvard Style and consistently deployed throughout.

Evidence-Base

To create a sub-topic in the area of CDoH

To synthesis literature and evidence thereunder (rationale-generating, contextualisation, ability to thematically analyse, problematise)

Then, your own primary input. To demonstrate research skill, ability to add evidence/generate novel knowledge within a field.

To do this: you need an evidence base (data-base).

These are the criteria

• Quality of evidence source: choosing the source required reflection, an element of training to access it/use it, and offers a credible, objective and interesting source from which to derive deep insight.
• Relevance: the evidence base is important, and is related to the question/topic/problem under investigation.
• Consistent: it is clear that you have taken into account what other researchers have used in similar situations, and you build on it.
• There is a judicious use of appendices; not too many so that it overwhelms the focus, but enough to demonstrate the background work that went into the case study.
• There is an attempt to synthesise some aspect of the field into an infographic, a table, an image or a diagram. This synthesis condenses and clarifies some aspect of the case study context.
• Originality: the extent to which the resource/source/evidence base is non-obvious or requires deeper thought to come at evidence in this way.

Examples of evidence bases:

Interviews with key informants

Focus group with key informants

Government-Industry interaction

Oireachtas Joint Committees (on Health, on Agriculture Food & Marine, on Public Accounts, on Health & Children). The entire meeting is recorded, and is available as a recording or on PDF.

Freedom of Information request (FoI) to access industry submissions to public consultations on certain piece of legislation, like the Vaping Bill:
https://www.gov.ie/en/consultation/a6f8f-public-consultation-on-further-regulation-of-tobacco-and-nicotine-inhaling-products/
or extending alcohol sales bill.

Industry activity

Lobbying Register https://www.lobbying.ie/about-us/
EU Transparency Register (lobbying returns at Europe of industries: https://transparency-register.europa.eu/index_en

Industry Trade Magazines

For example:

The Irish Farmer’s Journal: https://www.farmersjournal.ie/
Drinks Industry Ireland: https://www.drinksindustryireland.ie/

Quantitative bases

Euromonitor

Central Statistics Office

Lobby groups

Food Drink Ireland (a subsidiary of IBEC)

International databases

Industry Documents Library USCF (archival research)

OpenSecrets Database