Abstract
Most economists believe that people would value an additional $1,000 in income more if they were poor than if rich, but if so, people should not gamble according to standard expected utility theory. Thus, economists have been challenged to explain the pervasiveness of gambling in human behavior. A recently proposed solution to this theoretical challenge (Nyman 2004; Nyman et al. in Journal of Socio-Economics 37:2492–2504, 2008) suggests that, because having to work for one’s income is a fact of life in market economies, many individuals view the winnings from gambling not only as additional income, but as additional income for which one does not need to work. As a result, individuals, and especially those who are disadvantaged in the labor market, attach a utility premium to gambling winnings and gamble because of that. This utility premium would explain the pervasiveness of gambling in society, especially among the economically disadvantaged. This paper reviews the economic approaches to explaining non-pathological gambling, presents an overview of the new theory, and uses data from the National Epidemiological Survey of Alcohol and Related Conditions from 2001 to test it. The results indicate that the respondent’s work characteristics explain the decision to gamble in a way that is consistent with theory.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
American Psychiatric Association. (1994). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association.
Applebaum, E., & Katz, E. (1981). An institutional rationale for the Friedman-Savage utility function. Journal of Political Economy, 89, 319–324.
Bernoulli, D. (1738). Exposition of a new theory on the measurement of risk. Trans. Louise Sommer (1954) Econometrica, 22, 23–36.
Brenner, R., & Brenner, G. A. (1990). Gambling and speculation: A theory, a history and a future of some human decisions. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Clotfelter, C., Cook, J. P., Edell, J. A., & Moore, M. (1999). State lotteries at the turn of the century: Report to the national gambling impact study commission. Duke University.
Conlisk, J. (1993). The utility of gambling. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 6, 255–275.
Coups, E., Haddock, G., & Webley, P. (1998). Correlates and predictors of lottery playing in the United Kingdom. Journal of Gambling Studies, 13, 285–303.
Currie, S. R., Hodgins, D. C., Wang, J., el-Guebaly, N., Wynne, H., & Chen, S. (2006). Risk of harm among gamblers in the general population as a function of level of participation in gambling activities. Addiction, 101, 570–580.
Currie, S. R., Hodgins, D. C., Wang, J., el-Guebaly, N., Wynne, H., & Miller, N. V. (2008). Replication of low-risk gambling limits using Canadian provincial gambling prevalence data. Journal of Gambling Studies, 24, 321–335.
de la Vina, L., & Berstein, D. (2002). The impact of gambling on personal bankruptcy rates. Journal of Socio-Economics, 31, 503–509.
Diecidue, E., Schmidt, U., & Wakker, P. P. (2004). The utility of gambling reconsidered. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 29, 241–259.
Dobbs, I. M. (1988). Risk aversion, gambling and the labour-leisure choice. Scottish Journal of Political Economy, 35, 171–175.
Eden, B. (1979). An expected utility function for the insurance buying gambler. Review of Economic Studies, 46, 741–742.
Feldstein, S. A. (1998). President of SMR Research Corporation, testimony before the House Judiciary Commercial and Administrative Law Bankruptcy Revision.
Fishburn, P. C. (1980). A simple model for the utility of gambling. Psycholmetricka, 45, 435–448.
Fisher, S. E. (2000). Measuring the prevalence of sector-specific problem gambling: A study of casino patrons. Journal of Gambling Studies, 16, 25–51.
Friedman, M., & Savage, L. J. (1948). The utility analysis of choices involving risk. Journal of Political Economy, 56, 279–304.
Gerstein, D., Murphy, S., & Toce, M., et al. (1999). Gambling impact and behavior study: Report to the National Gambling Impact Study Commission. Chicago, Illinois: National Opinion Research Center, University of Chicago.
Grant, B. F., Moore, T. C., Shepard, J., & Kaplan, K. (2003). Source and accuracy statement: Wave 1 national epidemiological survey on alcohol and related conditions (NESARC). Bethesda, MD: National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism.
Hakansson, N. H. (1970). Friedman-Savage utility functions consistent with risk aversion. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 84, 472–487.
Kearney, M. S. (2004). State lotteries and consumer behavior. NBER Working Paper 9330. Cambridge, MA: NBER.
Kim, Y. C. (1973). Choice in the lottery-insurance situation augmented-income approach. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 87, 148–156.
Luce, R., & Marley, A. J. (2000). On elements of chance. Theory and Decision, 49, 97–126.
Machina, M. (1987). Choice under uncertainty: Problems solved and unsolved. Journal of Economics Perspectives, 1, 121–154.
Machina, M. (1989). Dynamic consistency and non-expected utility models of choice under uncertainty. Journal of Economic Literature, 27, 1622–1668.
Markowitz, H. (1952). The utility of wealth. Journal of Political Economy, 56, 151–158.
Mikesell, J. L. (1994). State lottery sales and economic activity. National Tax Journal, 47, 165–171.
Ng, Y.-K. (1965). Why do people buy lottery tickets? Choices involving risk and the indivisibility of expenditure. Journal of Political Economy, 7, 530–535.
Nichols, M. W., Stitt, B. G., & Giacopassi, D. (2000). Casino gambling and bankruptcy in new United State casino jurisdictions. Journal of Socio-Economics, 29, 247–261.
Nyman, J. A. (2004). A theory of demand for gambles. Department of Economics Working Paper #322. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota.
Nyman, J., Welte, J. W., & Dowd, B. E. (2008). Something for nothing: A model of gambling behavior. Journal of Socio-Economics, 37, 2492–2504.
Sauer, R. D. (1998). The economics of wagering markets. Journal of Economic Literature, 36, 2021–2064.
Schmidt, U. (1998). A measurement of the certainty effect. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 42, 32–47.
Shaffer, H. J., & Korn, D. A. (2002). Gambling and related mental disorders: A public health analysis. Annual Review of Public Health, 23, 171–212.
Simon, J. (1998). Dreams and disillusionment: A dynamic model of lottery demand. In J. Simon (Ed.), Four essays and a not on the demand for lottery tickets and how lotto players choose their numbers. Florence: European University Institute.
Starmer, C. (2000). Developments in non-expected utility theory: The hunt for a descriptive theory of choice under risk. Journal of Economics Literature, 38, 332–382.
von Neumann, J., & Morgenstern, O. (1944). Theory of games and economic behavior. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Welte, J. W., Barnes, G. M., Wieczorek, W. F., Tidwell, M.-C. O., & Parker, J. C. (2002). Gambling participation in the U.S.—results from a national survey. Journal of Gambling Studies, 18, 313–337.
Welte, J. W., Barnes, G. M., Wieczorek, W. F., Tidwell, M.-C. O., & Parker, J. C. (2004). Risk factors for pathological gambling. Addictive Behaviors, 20, 323–335.
Acknowledgments
This study was funded by a grant from the Institute for Research into Gambling Disorders of the National Center for Responsible Gambling. The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the U.S. Census Bureau.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Nyman, J.A., Dowd, B.E., Hakes, J.K. et al. Work and Non-Pathological Gambling. J Gambl Stud 29, 61–81 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10899-011-9290-9
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10899-011-9290-9