Beyond gambling: The dangers of analogistic reasoning in addiction science, and how loot box psychology should create its own unique theory

As in other areas of science, understanding in the addictions can progress by analogy, by taking concepts from a relatively well-understood area and applying them to another domain. This process helped increase our understanding of gambling, by using prior insights from substance-based addictions, and gambling has, in turn, served as an analogy for loot boxes: gambling-liked elements in video games. Although this could be a good way to make rapid initial advances, it could also limit our ability in the long-run to produce a complete understanding of the new area of inquiry. In this think piece I argue that these conceptual links did in fact limit our understanding of gambling in several ways, and that the same pattern is now becoming apparent with loot boxes. Although loot box expenditure correlates robustly with disordered gambling severity, it does not appear to correlate strongly with impulsivity, a key driver of disordered gambling symptomology. People also often gamble to try to win money, but this motivation is rarely observed with loot boxes. Instead, I argue that the enjoyment and meaning that gamers derive from games is a core motivator for loot box expenditure. Video games can bring enjoyment both directly and via the social connections they can help create, and these are motivations seen less frequently in gambling. This example can act as a warning to addiction science on the risks of proceeding via analogy too strictly, and of the need to consider the unique context of each potentially addictive behavior of interest

Associations between recollected rates of Category D fruit machine use as a child and adult gambling in a young adult sample

There have been recent restrictions to the range of gambling products made available to UK children, with the industry association Bacta introducing a minimum age of 18 for Category D fruit machines, which can otherwise be legally used by children. Any potential government action on Category D fruit machines may want to consider limitations in the current evidence base. The present study addressed this issue, by conceptually replicating previous results associating recollected usage of Category D fruit machine usage as a child and adult gambling. Compared to previous studies, the present study used a younger adult sample, and also tested for potential moderation by subjective confidence. Three out of four main tested associations were significant and in the hypothesised direction, and a lack of significance on interaction terms yielded no evidence of potential moderation by subjective confidence. The present study therefore added to the limited evidence base on potential risks of legal Category D fruit machine usage as a child

Downside financial risk is misunderstood

The mathematics of downside financial risk can be difficult to understand: For example a 50% loss requires a subsequent 100% gain to break-even. A given percentage loss always requires a greater percentage gain to break-even. Instead, many non-expert investors may assume for example that a 50% gain is sufficient to offset a 50% loss. Over 3,498 participants and five experiments, the widespread illusion that a sequence of equal percentage gains and losses produces a zero overall return was demonstrated. Participants continued to err frequently, even with percentage returns of +/-100%, or when financially incentivized. Financial literacy, numeracy, and deliberation were all shown to independently contribute to accurate performance. These results have implications for promoting the understanding of downside financial risk

Behavioral complexity of British gambling advertising

Background: The scale and complexity of British gambling advertising has increased in recent years. ‘Live-odds’ TV gambling adverts broadcast the odds on very specific, complex, gambles during sporting events (e.g. in soccer, ‘Wayne Rooney to score the first goal, 5-to-1,’ or, ‘Chelsea to win 2-1, 10-to-1’). These gambles were analyzed from a behavioral scientific perspective (the intersection of economics and psychology).  Method: A mixed methods design combining observational and experimental data. A content analysis showed that live-odds adverts from two months of televised English Premier League matches were biased towards complex, rather than simple, gambles. Complex gambles were also associated with high bookmaker profit margins. A series of experiments then quantified the rationality of participants’ forecasts across key gambles from the content analysis (TotalN = 1467 participants across five Experiments).  Results: Soccer fans rarely formed rational probability judgments for the complex events dominating gambling advertising, but were much better at estimating simple events.  Conclusions: British gambling advertising is concentrated on the complex products that mislead consumers the most. Behavioral scientific findings are relevant to the active public debate about gambling

Stakeholders cannot simply wait for the gambling evidence-base to develop:We must all help to build it

Our opinion article, outlining how player-tracking technologies could enhance stakeholders’ ability to understand and reduce gambling-related harm [1], led to four thought-provoking commentaries from leading academics in the field. Gambling policymakers often say that they will not hesitate to act on the latest evidence [2, 3]. However, any harm-prevention approach as bold in scope as our proposed universal and independent player-tracking system would require a coalition of stakeholders to initiate, develop and assess its effectiveness for reducing gambling-related harm. We were therefore pleased that the Australian state of Queensland recently announced the introduction of a player-tracking system with many of our proposed features for land-based casino gambling [4, 5]. In time, this development could help to provide evidence to test our opinions against. For now, we respond to the important points raised within the commentaries, which help to define the key overarching features of a well-developed player-tracking system

How bookies play with your emotions to make you place unlikely bets

First paragraph: I first became aware of football “in-play” TV betting adverts around three years ago. In the first campaign of its type, Ray Winstone urges viewers to “bet in-play now” on the website Bet 365, by offering the odds on specific bets during high-profile football matches

Having a Positive Attitude or Doing Good Deeds? An Experimental Investigation of Poker Players’ Responses to the Gambling Fallacies Measure

Gambling fallacies are irrational beliefs about how gambling works, which are common among disordered gamblers, and measured by questionnaires such as the Gambling Fallacies Measure (GFM). Less is known about the potentially rational cognitions of some skilled gamblers, such as professional poker players. The present research experimentally manipulated item 5 from the GFM, “A positive attitude or doing good deeds increases your likelihood of winning money when gambling”, by comparing two new versions focusing only on a “positive attitude” or “doing good deeds” to the original version (control). Item 5 is scored so that “disagree” is the non-fallacious correct answer, but it was hypothesized that the words “a positive attitude” might increase rates of poker players selecting “agree” in a non-fallacious manner. Online experiments were conducted on samples of professional poker players (N = 379), and a broad sample of poker players with no inclusion criteria (N = 1,510). Participants’ responses to item 5 were associated with the rest of their GFM scores (GFM-9). Participants in both samples were more likely to disagree with the good deeds version, and less likely to disagree with the positive attitude version, compared to control. In comparison to the other conditions, good deeds responses were most strongly associated with GFM-9 scores among professionals, while positive attitude responses were least strongly associated with GFM-9 scores among the broad sample. The good deeds version of item 5 has advantageous measurement properties among professional poker players. New approaches are needed to better understand the potentially rational cognitions of skilled gamblers

How bookies make your money

UK bookies (bookmakers) herd geographically in less-affluent areas. The present work shows that UK bookies also herd with the special bets that they advertise to consumers, both in their shop window advertising and on TV adverts as shown to millions of viewers. I report an observational study of betting adverts over the 2014 soccer World Cup. Bet types vary in complexity, with complex types having the highest expected losses. Bookies herded on a common strategy of advertising special bets on two levels: by almost exclusively advertising complex bet types with high expected losses, and by advertising representative events within a given complex bet type. This evidence is most consistent with bookies’ advertising targeting a representativeness heuristic amongst bettors. Bookies may know how to nudge bettors toward larger losses

People invest their money illogically – but trying to help them can make things worse

First paragraph: In a world where financial experts are frequently proven badly wrong, it is hardly surprising that many people take charge of saving for their retirements themselves. The realities of the financial world don’t make this easy, though. And neither does the peculiar psychology of investing – as research in which I have been involved helps to show