Exploring Internet Gambling

Policy, Prevention and Treatment

Sally Gainsbury, Alex Blaszczynski, Sally Gainsbury, Alex Blaszczynski

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2016
• Print ISBN: 9781138377721
• eBook ISBN: 9781134919055
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Psychology
• Subtopic: Addiction in Psychology
• Index: Psychology

Internet gambling has emerged as the most radical change to gambling in recent years. Interactive gambling opportunities using computers and wireless devices have transformed the ways in which players engage in gambling. The technological advances that have allowed gambling to expand across physical borders and beyond venues has had a profound impact on gambling policy, regulation, research, treatment and prevention strategies. This book provides a compilation of current research findings by prominent international researchers, including the incidence of Internet gambling, how online gambling is used, sub-groups of online gamblers, and the difference between Internet and non-Internet gamblers in the general population and among treatment-seekers.

This book is highly relevant for researchers, students, regulators, policy makers, gambling industry operators, treatment providers and community groups interested in research findings relevant to online gambling. It was originally published as a special issue of International Gambling Studies.

Early detection items and responsible gambling features for online gambling

Joerg Haefeli^a, Suzanne Lischer^a and Juerg Schwarz^b

^aDepartment of Social Work, Lucerne University of Applied Sciences and Arts, Switzerland;

^bDepartment of Business, Lucerne University of Applied Sciences and Arts, Switzerland

Early detection is an effective building block for the prevention of problem gambling. This study aims to identify communication-based indicators for gambling-related problems in the setting of online gambling. In the framework of a semi-structured interview, customer service employees of three online gambling operators were surveyed, to identify indicators in customer correspondence could be used as a predictor for gambling-related problems. In a confirmatory part of the study, we investigated to what degree these indicators are able to predict problem gambling in a prospective empirical design. An optimally parsimonious log-linear model, was able to correctly predict 76.6% of the cases. Discussed in the light of this evidence, communication-based indicators could constitute an effective component of early detection. Due to the fact that the internet offers optimal conditions for consistent monitoring and objective analysis, the suggested predictive model could be combined with other models, relying on the analysis of gambling behaviour.

Introduction

Online gambling

As an innovation of the late 1990s, online gambling quickly aroused both the interest and concerns of the scientific community. In a detailed treatise on the design characteristics of gambling products, Griffiths (1999) refers to the internet as a central factor that will lead to a sudden surge in the availability of gambling and concluded that it would therefore increase the number of pathological gamblers. This concern is again specifically expressed by Parke, Griffiths and Irwing (2004) as well as Orford (2005) in relation to the deregulation of online gambling under the UK Gambling Act.

In particular, these risks were derived from the easier accessibility and higher availability of gambling on the internet. The supposition that the higher availability of gambling services would necessarily lead to higher prevalence rates of disordered gambling was first expressed by Kallick, Suits, Dielman and Hybels (1976). It was supported by the meta-analysis conducted by Shaffer, Hall and Vander Bilt (1999), which analysed prevalence surveys conducted between 1975 and 1996. According to the authors of that study, the prevalence rate among adults between 1974 and 1997 rose continually with the increasing supply of lotteries, casinos and other forms of gambling (Volberg, 2004). The authors concluded that, if there are more opportunities to gamble, more people will gamble, so the prevalence rate of disordered gambling will increase (Meyer & Bachmann, 2005). At the same time, however, a number of studies failed to find a correlation between the availability of gambling products and the prevalence disordered gambling (see Volberg (2004) for an overview). The linear relation between availability and prevalence rate is questionable and might instead be moderated by effects like adaptation (LaPlante, Schumann, LaBrie & Shaffer, 2008). Volberg also hypothesizes that the greater availability of gambling products may have differential effects on different groups of gamblers. It might lead to increased exposure among moderate gamblers, whereas risk tends to decrease especially among frequent gamblers, if appropriate preventive measures are established in parallel (Volberg, 2001).

Responsible gambling

The term responsible gambling generally refers to concepts applied to a broad range of issues and policies, from individual behaviours and attitudes to public health (Dickson-Gillespie, Rugle, Rosenthal & Fong, 2008; IPART, 2004). Responsible gambling practices are part of the responsibility of the gambling industry and should be distinguished from treatment, which is aimed at gamblers whose gambling has already resulted in obvious consequences: ‘The treatment of gamblers who already have developed gambling-related harm remains the domain of specialists working in public health programmes, including counseling and other health services’ (Blaszczynski, Ladouceur & Shaffer, 2004, p. 308). Player protection seems almost to have become a competitive advantage within the gambling industry, especially on the internet, where players can easily move from one operator to another. A study by Parke, Rigbye, Parke and Williams (2007), in which over 10,000 gamblers were interviewed, revealed a very high level of acceptance for protective measures. Wood and Williams (2009) showed that the good general reputation of an online gambling operator is the main reason for choosing this operator over another. The most frequently considered responsible gambling measures relate to the display of messages, assisting in the process of informed choice (Blazczynski, Ladouceur, Nower & Shaffer, 2008), (self-) limitation, (self-) exclusion and the structural design of the games themselves (Parke & Griffiths, 2007).

All electronic forms of gambling – be it EGMs or gambling on the internet – can be modified to provide automated pop-up messages to the player, displaying responsible gambling messages or information about the total amount wagered or the duration of the gambling session. Informative pop-ups after specific session durations asking the players whether they wanted to continue was shown to have a small effect in decreasing the gambling duration and expenditure only for the sub-group of high-risk players (Schellinck & Schrans, 2002). On-screen messages presented to the player were able to correct irrational beliefs and erroneous perceptions about the independence of the games (Steenbergh, Whelan, Meyers, May & Floyd, 2004; Benhsain, Taillefer & Ladouceur, 2004; May, Whelan, Meyers & Steenbergh, 2005; Cloutier, Ladouceur & Sevigny, 2006). However no evidence for a change in gambling persistence behaviour could be provided. One possible explanation could be found in the message content. Monaghan and Blaszczynski (2010) demonstrate that messages, encouraging self-appraisal (e.g. ‘Have you spent more than you intended? Do you need to think about a break?’), resulted in a greater behavioural change than purely informative messages (e.g. ‘Your chances of winning the maximum price are generally no better than one in a million’). But also the timing of the pop-up messages could be a determining factor. Jardin and Wulfert (2009) show that even very simple informative popup messages are able to affect not only a player’s attitude but also his gambling behaviour when displayed within the gambling session, instead of displaying it at the beginning.

Table 1. Protective measures for gamblers in land-based and online gambling. Measures which are covered by self-regulatory best practice standards marked accordingly

Protective measure	Land-based gambling	Online gambling
Exclusion
Partial exclusion from single types of games	not possible	common practice
Self-exclusion	common practice	common practice
Prescribed exclusion	common practice	common practice
Limitation
Limit to gambling volume	not possible	common practice
Limit to gambling time	not possible^1	possible
Limit to gambling frequency	possible^2	possible
Design of the gaminge structure
Pop-up messages	Possible (for EGMs)	Possible
Succinct presentation of the gambling time	possible^3	common practice
Succinct presentation of the gambling volume	not possible	common practice
Succinct presentation of the gambling frequency	possible	common practice
Information offering
Awareness material and responsible gambling advice	common practice	common practice
Self tests	possible	common practice
Interactive Sself-help tools	not possible	possible
Contact with qualified support structure	common practice	common practice
Under-age protection
Access limitations	possible (but with many forms of land-based gambling not implemented)	common practice
Handling credit
No award of credit	common practice	common practice

Self-limitation is a type of voluntary agreement between the customer and the operator. For example, it is possible to limit the amount gamblers may deposit on their gambling accounts each week, which creates direct control over the potential losses incurred. It is, however, quite difficult to apply such protective measures in land-based gambling, since once the customer is inside the casino, it is impossible for the operator to control this gambler’s further behaviour. Land-based gambling operators can monitor only the gamblers’ frequency of visits, not their gambling behaviour itself. Smart-card systems might enable land-based venues to introduce self-limitation in the future, but the gambling industry is still hesitant about adapting this technology (Bernhard, Lucas & Jang, 2006; Parke, Rygbie & Parke, 2008) and to the author’s knowledge, there is no venue yet that has introduced such a system for all its customers. In the online sector, in principle, all the characteristics of gambling behaviour (deposits, wagers, losses, duration of gambling, etc.) can be observed and therefore limited in real time. In practice, however, it is only deposit limits that have proven effective as a means of pre-commitment (Nelson et al., 2008), while imposed limits displayed very limited effectiveness (Broda et al., 2008). For other types of self-limitation, especially time limits, a thorough evaluation of effectiveness as well as possible side effects is still necessary. As pointed out in the thought experiment by Bernhard and Preston (2004) forms of time limitation could potentially trigger a frenzied gambling behaviour associated with a loss of control as the limit gets closer.

The option available to problem gamblers to voluntarily exclude themselves, or for the gambling operator to forcibly exclude them, is – in combination with other gambler protection measures – an effective means of gambler protection in land-based gambling (Ladouceur, Sylvain & Gosselin, 2007; Meyer & Bachmann, 2005). In the online gambling sector, too, voluntary or prescribed exclusion from gambling – in combination with other gambler protection measures – constitutes an effective means of gambler protection. Meyer and Hayer (2010) show that in the online setting compared to land-based gambling, self-exclusion is more frequently used as a preventive measure, before actual harm has occurred. Reasons for this difference could be the fact that self-exclusion on the internet is easily accessible and players are less daunted than they would be when having to personally contact a casino employee (Wood & Griffiths, 2007; Wood & Wood, 2009). Since the identity of the customer is known to the operator, it is possible to enforce the exclusion by deactivating the current account and disallowing the user to register a new account (TUV, 2009). The following table shows player protection measures in land-based gambling vs online gambling. It is intended to clarify both the differences and commonalities of the two.

Numerous findings argue against the concerns expressed in the past to the effect that the structural characteristics of online gambling make it an especially dangerous type of gambling. While in population-based prevalence studies online gambling is often associated with an increased risk (Griffiths, Wardle, Orford, Sproston & Erens, 2008; Wood & Williams, 2009), this finding might be the consequence of a statistical artefact. When analysed in a multivariate framework (Welte, Barnes, Tidwell & Hoffman, 2009) or corrected for the number of different types of games played (LaPlante, Nelson, LaBrie & Shaffer, 2009b), no additional risk related to online gambling remains. At the same time, analyses of the actual gambling behaviour have shown that the vast majority of gamblers exhibit a moderate gambling behaviour (LaBrie, LaPlante, Nelson, Schumann & Shaffer, 2007; LaBrie, Kaplan, LaPlante & Nelson, 2008; LaPlante, Kleschinsky, LaBrie, Nelson & Shaffer, 2009a). However the data for these analyses of gambling behaviour were derived from one gambling operator. It is therefore possible that some players could have several accounts with other gambling operators which were not conside...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Title
• Copyright
• Contents
• Citation Information
• Introduction: Exploring the opportunities and impacts of Internet gambling
• 1. Early detection items and responsible gambling features for online gambling
• 2. Online self-guided interventions for the treatment of problem gambling
• 3. Internet gambling policy in critical comparative perspective: the effectiveness of existing regulatory frameworks
• 4. Are online pathological gamblers different from non-online pathological gamblers on demographics, gambling problem severity, psychopathology and personality characteristics?
• 5. Defining the online gambler and patterns of behaviour integration: evidence from the British Gambling Prevalence Survey 2010
• 6. Incidence of Internet gambling in Sweden: results from the Swedish longitudinal gambling study
• 7. Analysis of casino online gambling data in relation to behavioural risk markers for high-risk gambling and player protection
• 8. Analyses of multiple types of online gambling within one provider: an extended evaluation framework of actual online gambling behaviour
• 9. Cognitive distortions as a problem gambling risk factor in Internet gambling
• Index