‘Condemn the fault and not the actor of it?’ Moving beyond the limits of recidivism to enhancing (re)humanisation through a Shakespeare-focussed, prison-based approach

© 2023 The Author. Published by Taylor & Francis. This is an open access article available under a Creative Commons licence. The published version can be accessed at the following link on the publisher’s website: https://doi.org/10.1080/04250494.2023.2218880It is well researched, yet under-acknowledged in policy and practice, that prison alone is unsuccessful in reducing criminality. Though in the USA recidivism is high, recidivism is both a common and limited measure, rarely capturing individual nuances. This paper presents key findings from an ethnographically-informed exploration of a well-established multi-sited Shakespeare-focussed prison-based programme boasting broader positive outcomes, specifically surrounding one research question: What are the perceived outcomes of engagement in prison-based Shakespeare programmes, as reported by participants and practitioners? This paper outlines key overarching findings, surrounding perceived impacts of participation through the use of Shakespeare in multiple perceived roles (including playwright, character, mentor, friend, educator), work around literacy, emotional and expression skills and programme practices (including theatre-based activities, spaces, solo, group and ensemble activities, practitioner-participant interactions and ethos). These are connected to social-justice issues, concluding an overarching outcome of potential (re)humanisation of people in prison to society and themselves.This research was supported by the Department of Education at the University of York (PhD Studentship); A Derwent College Development Award; and A Santander Gold International Connections Award.Published onlin

Loot box engagement: relationships with educational attainment, employment status and earnings in a cohort of 16 000 United Kingdom gamers

© 2022 The Authors. Published by Wiley. This is an open access article available under a Creative Commons licence. The published version can be accessed at the following link on the publisher’s website: https://doi.org/10.1111/add.15837Background and Aims: Loot boxes are purchasable randomised rewards in video games that share structural and psychological similarities with gambling. Systematic review evidence has established reproducible associations between loot box purchasing and both problem gambling and problem video gaming. We aimed to measure the association between loot box engagement and socioeconomic correlates. Design: The study was a cross-sectional online survey using the recruitment platform, Prolific. Setting: United Kingdom (UK). Participants: A cohort of 16 196 UK adults (18 + years) self-reporting as video gamers. Measurements: Respondents were asked about their game-related purchasing behaviour (including loot boxes), recent monthly spend on loot boxes and gambling engagement (gambling in any form; gambling online; playing ‘social casino’ games). A range of demographic variables were simultaneously captured, including age, sex, ethnicity, earnings, employment and educational attainment. Findings: Overall, 17.16% of gamers in our cohort purchased loot boxes, with a mean self-reported monthly spend of £29.12. These loot box purchasers are more likely to gamble (45.97% gamble) than people who make other types of game-related purchases (on aggregate, 28.13% of non-loot box purchasers gamble), and even greater still than those who do not make any game related purchases (24.38% gamble P < 0.001). Loot box engagement (as binary yes/no or as monthly spend normalised to earnings) was significantly associated with younger age (P < 0.001 and P < 0.001; respectively, for binary yes/no and monthly spend, adjusted for false discovery rate correction), male sex (P < 0.001 and P = 0.025), non-university educational attainment (P < 0.001 and P < 0.001) and unemployment (P = 0.003 and P = < 0.001). Lower earners spent a higher proportion of monthly earnings on loot boxes (P < 0.001). Conclusions: The demographic associations of video game loot box engagement (younger age, male sex, non-university educational attainment and unemployment) mirror those of other addictive and problematic behaviours, including disordered gambling, drug and alcohol misuse.Gamble Aware.Published versio

Gambling and gaming in the United Kingdom during the COVID-19 lockdown

© 2022 The Authors. Published by MDPI. This is an open access article available under a Creative Commons licence. The published version can be accessed at the following link on the publisher’s website: https://doi.org/10.3390/covid2020007During the first UK national COVID-19 lockdown, there were fears that increased online gaming and gambling could negatively impact wellbeing. Using a cross-sectional retrospective change survey of 631 UK adult gamers and/or gamblers during the week the UK lockdown was partially lifted (June 2020), we investigated participation in gaming/gambling and relationships with problem gaming, problem gambling and wellbeing (using the following previously validated scales: the Internet Gaming Disorder Short Form; a short-form version of the Problem Gambling Severity Index; a short-form of the Warwick–Edinburgh Mental Well-Being Scale). Results indicated a near-doubling in gaming activity during lockdown and significant increases in problem gaming scores, but not in numbers of disordered gamers. Aggregate changes to gambling participation and problem gambling were negligible: decreases in offline and sports gambling were balanced by increases in online gambling. Wellbeing scores decreased during lockdown across the sample, particularly amongst women, and path analysis revealed moderate correlations between increases in problem gaming and gambling scores and reductions in wellbeing. We conclude that for some, maladaptive gaming/gambling coping strategies during the lockdown may have exacerbated its negative effects.This work was funded by the University of Plymouth School of Psychology. J.C., S.S., H.L., L.L.N. and J.L. were further supported by funding from GambleAware.Published onlin

Loot boxes and problem gambling: Investigating the “gateway hypothesis”

Loot boxes are purchasable items in video games with a chance-based outcome. They have attracted substantial attention from academics and legislators over recent years, partly because of associations between loot box engagement and problem gambling. Some researchers have suggested that loot boxes may act as a gateway into subsequent gambling and/or problem gambling. However, such “gateway effects” have not been formally investigated. Using a survey of 1102 individuals who both purchase loot boxes and gamble, we found that 19.87% of the sample self reported either “gateway effects” (loot boxes causally influencing subsequent gambling) or “reverse gateway effects” (gambling causally influencing subsequent loot box engagement). Both subsets of participants had higher scores for problem gambling, problem video gaming, gambling-related cognitions, risky loot boxes engagement, and impulsivity. These individuals also had a tendency for higher loot box and gambling spend; suggesting that potential gateway effects are related to measurable risks and harms. Moreover, the majority of participants reporting gateway effects were under 18 when they first purchased loot boxes. Content analysis of free text responses revealed several reasons for self-reported gateway effects, the most frequent of which were sensation-seeking, normalisation of gambling-like behaviours, and the addictive nature of both activities. Whilst the cross-sectional nature of our findings cannot conclusively establish directions of causality, thus highlighting the need for longitudinal research, we conclude that there is a case for legislation on loot boxes for harm minimisation purposes

Loot boxes and problem gambling: Investigating the “gateway hypothesis”

© 2022 The Authors. Published by Elsevier. This is an open access article available under a Creative Commons licence. The published version can be accessed at the following link on the publisher’s website: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.addbeh.2022.107327Loot boxes are purchasable items in video games with a chance-based outcome. They have attracted substantial attention from academics and legislators over recent years, partly because of associations between loot box engagement and problem gambling. Some researchers have suggested that loot boxes may act as a gateway into subsequent gambling and/or problem gambling. However, such “gateway effects” have not been formally investigated. Using a survey of 1102 individuals who both purchase loot boxes and gamble, we found that 19.87% of the sample self-reported either “gateway effects” (loot boxes causally influencing subsequent gambling) or “reverse gateway effects” (gambling causally influencing subsequent loot box engagement). Both subsets of participants had higher scores for problem gambling, problem video gaming, gambling-related cognitions, risky loot boxes engagement, and impulsivity. These individuals also had a tendency for higher loot box and gambling spend; suggesting that potential gateway effects are related to measurable risks and harms. Moreover, the majority of participants reporting gateway effects were under 18 when they first purchased loot boxes. Content analysis of free text responses revealed several reasons for self-reported gateway effects, the most frequent of which were sensation-seeking, normalisation of gambling-like behaviours, and the addictive nature of both activities. Whilst the cross-sectional nature of our findings cannot conclusively establish directions of causality, thus highlighting the need for longitudinal research, we conclude that there is a case for legislation on loot boxes for harm minimisation purposes.This project was funded by the charity GambleAware, with additional funding from the University of Plymouth School of Psychology. S. G. Spicer was additionally supported by the National Institute for Health Research Applied Research Collaboration South West Peninsula. The views expressed in this publication are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the funder/supporter organisations.Accepted versio

Exploring the relationships between psychological variables and loot box engagement, part 1: pre-registered hypotheses

Loot boxes are purchasable randomized rewards in video games that share structural and psychological similarities with gambling. Systematic review evidence has established reproducible associations between loot box purchasing and both problem gambling and problem video gaming, perhaps driven by a range of overlapping psychological processes (e.g. impulsivity, gambling-related cognitions, etc.) It has also been argued that loot box engagement may have negative influences on player financial and psychological wellbeing. We conducted a pre-registered survey of 1495 loot box purchasing gamers (LB cohort) and 1223 gamers who purchase other, non-randomized game content (nLB cohort). Our survey confirms 15 of our 23 pre-registered hypotheses against our primary outcome (risky loot box engagement), establishing associations with problem gambling, problem gaming, impulsivity, gambling cognitions, experiences of game-related ‘flow’ and specific ‘distraction and compulsion’ motivations for purchase. Results with hypotheses concerning potential harms established that risky loot box engagement was negatively correlated with wellbeing and positively correlated with distress. Overall, results indicate that any risks from loot boxes are liable to disproportionately affect various ‘at risk’ cohorts (e.g. those experiencing problem gambling or video gaming), thereby reiterating calls for policy action on loot boxes

Exploring the relationships between psychological variables and loot box engagement, part 2: exploratory analyses of complex relationships

In a pre-registered survey linked to this paper (Exploring the relationships between psychological variables and loot box engagement, part 1: pre-registered hypotheses), we confirmed bivariate associations between engagement with loot boxes (purchasable randomized rewards in video games) and measures of problem gambling, problem video gaming, impulsivity, gambling cognitions, experiences of game-related ‘flow’, psychological distress and reduced wellbeing. However, these variables have complex relationships, so to gain further insights, we analysed the dataset (1495 gamers who purchase loot boxes and 1223 purchasers of non-randomized content) in a series of Bayesian mixed-effects multiple regressions with a zero-inflation component. The results challenge some well-established results in the literature, including associations between loot box engagement and problematic gambling measures, instead suggesting that this relationship might be underpinned by shared variance with problem video gaming and gambling-related cognitions. An entirely novel discovery revealed a complex interaction between experiences of flow and loot box engagement. Distress and wellbeing are both (somewhat contradictorily) predictive of participants engaging with loot boxes, but neither correlate with increasing loot box risky engagement/spend (among those who engage). Our findings unravel some of the nuances underpinning loot box engagement, yet remain consistent with narratives that policy action on loot boxes will have benefits for harm minimization

Exploring the relationships between psychological variables and loot box engagement, part 1: pre-registered hypotheses

Loot boxes are purchasable randomized rewards in video games that share structural and psychological similarities with gambling. Systematic review evidence has established reproducible associations between loot box purchasing and both problem gambling and problem video gaming, perhaps driven by a range of overlapping psychological processes (e.g. impulsivity, gambling-related cognitions, etc.) It has also been argued that loot box engagement may have negative influences on player financial and psychological wellbeing. We conducted a pre-registered survey of 1495 loot box purchasing gamers (LB cohort) and 1223 gamers who purchase other, non-randomized game content (nLB cohort). Our survey confirms 15 of our 23 pre-registered hypotheses against our primary outcome (risky loot box engagement), establishing associations with problem gambling, problem gaming, impulsivity, gambling cognitions, experiences of game-related ‘flow’ and specific ‘distraction and compulsion’ motivations for purchase. Results with hypotheses concerning potential harms established that risky loot box engagement was negatively correlated with wellbeing and positively correlated with distress. Overall, results indicate that any risks from loot boxes are liable to disproportionately affect various ‘at risk’ cohorts (e.g. those experiencing problem gambling or video gaming), thereby reiterating calls for policy action on loot boxes

Development and Validation of the RAFFLE: A Measure of Reasons and Facilitators for Loot Box Engagement

Qualitative studies have identified a diverse array of motivations for purchasing items within video games through chance-based mechanisms (i.e., “loot boxes”). Given that some individuals—particularly those at risk of disordered gaming and/or gambling—are prone to over-involvement with loot box purchasing, it is important to have a reliable, valid means of measuring the role of different motivations in driving purchasing behaviour. Building on prior qualitative research, this paper reports the development and validation of the “RAFFLE” scale, to measure the Reasons and Facilitators for Loot box Engagement. A 23-item, seven-factor scale was developed through cognitive interviews (n = 25) followed by two surveys of UK-based gamers who purchase loot boxes; analysed via exploratory (n = 503) and confirmatory (n = 1495) factor analysis, respectively. Subscales encompassed “enhancement’; “progression’; “social pressure’; “distraction/compulsion’; “altruism’; “fear of missing out’; and “resale”. The scale showed good criterion and construct validity (correlating well with measures of loot box engagement; the risky loot box index (r = 0.63) and monthly self-reported spend (r = 0.38)), and good internal validity (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.84). Parallels with, and divergence from, motivations for related activities of gaming and gambling, and alignment with broader theoretical models of motivation, are discussed

An Ethnographic Exploration of Participant and Practitioner Perceptions of a Shakespeare-focussed Prison Education Programme

For over two decades, there has been a progressive emergence of Shakespeare-focussed programmes for use with prisoners in the USA. Prison-based criminal retribution, though controversial, remains prevalent. Despite this, evidence demonstrates that educational sentences have greater impact on reducing recidivism. This research considers a multi-sited Shakespeare-focussed rehabilitation programme deemed successful enough to practise for over two decades. Current UK statistics show that 45% of adults reoffend within five years of release and over 30% reoffend within six months (Ministry of Justice, 2015). In the USA, probability of reoffending is higher, at 70% (US National Institute of Justice, 2017). Yet there are Shakespeare-focussed education programmes that are a supplement to incarceration, that maintain a falling reoffending rate. Though this is an important measure of the success of these programmes, my research draws on the experiences of those engaging in a long-serving multi-sited Shakespeare programme, exploring the specifics of this programme, including practices, intentions and functions. This multi-sited ethnographically informed research asks: 1) What were the specific programme practices and how were they delivered? 2) What were practitioner and participant perceptions of the specific use of Shakespeare? 3) What were the perceived and intended programme outcomes reported by and for practitioners and participants? This research considers practices undertaken, identifying intended and experienced outcomes from the perspectives of participants, practitioners and the researcher’s experiences. Key findings identify individualised impacts that have been drawn from participation surrounding personal and community development and, crucially, the rehumanisation of prisoners through engagement in this programme. This includes outcomes relating to the impact of specifically using, reading, performing and interpreting Shakespeare, individual learning, skills-acquisition, development and expression. Further it considers the wider impact that participation has had on individuals and communities, behind and beyond prison bars, particularly surrounding rehumanisation of prisoners to their communities, wider society and themselves