Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Who Spends Money to Play for Free? Identifying Who Makes Micro-transactions on Social Casino Games (and Why)

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Journal of Gambling Studies Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Social casino games are online gambling-like games found on social networking sites. They are initially free to play, however, players are encouraged to make micro-transactions (i.e., in-game purchases) for additional game credits or functionality. As a result, they generate billions of dollars in revenue. Yet, little is known as to who purchases virtual credits, let alone why. In the present research, we assessed whether there are individual differences (impulsivity, reward sensitivity, competitiveness, and problem gambling severity) between who is and who is not likely to make micro-transactions during social casino game play. Moreover, we examined possible motivations for making micro-transactions (e.g., extend play, win back lost credits) and whether the individual difference variables of interest predict reported motivation(s) for making micro-transactions. Results showed that social casino gamers who engaged in micro-transactions reported significantly higher levels of impulsivity, reward sensitivity and problem gambling severity, but not competitiveness. In terms of motivation to make micro-transactions, desire to extend play was endorsed most frequently, followed by a desire to access additional features, chasing lost credits, and to speed up play. Lastly, among participants who made micro-transactions, reward sensitivity predicted making micro-transactions to chase lost credits. These results suggest the personality make-up of social casino gamers is important to understand who is likely to make micro-transactions as well as their motivation to do so—information that could prove useful for regulation of the industry.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. In addition to assessing whether the individual difference variables significantly predicted motivation for engaging in micro-transactions, we also conducted a multivariate regression with the number of motivations indicted as the dependent variable and problem gambling severity, impulsivity and reward sensitivity as the predictor variables. The results showed that reward sensitivity significantly predicted the number of motives indicted (p = .008). However, the number of motives indicated was not predicted by either impulsivity (p = .15) or problem gambling severity (p = .16).

References

  • Bramley, S., & Gainsbury, S. M. (2015). The role of auditory features within slot-themed social casino games and online slot machine games. Journal of Gambling Studies, 31, 1735–1751.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Buhrmester, M., Kwang, T., & Gosling, S. D. (2011). Amazon’s mechanical turk a new source of inexpensive, yet high-quality, data? Perspectives on Psychological Science, 6, 3–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Casual Games Association. (2012). Social network games 2012: Casual games sector report. Retrieved from http://www.superdataresearch.com/content/uploads/2011/12/CasualConnectSocialGames2012.pdf.

  • Cloninger, C. R. (1988). A unified biosocial theory of personality and its role in the development of anxiety states: A reply to commentaries. Psychiatric Developments, 5, 83–120.

    Google Scholar 

  • Delaney, L. (2014). Social gaming briefing. Presentation at discovery conference 2014, Toronto, ON.

  • Derevensky, J. L., & Gainsbury, S. M. (2016). Social casino gaming and adolescents: Should we be concerned and is regulation in sight? International Journal of Law and Psychiatry, 44, 1–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Derevensky, J., Gainsbury, S., Gupta, R., & Ellery, M. (2013). Play-for-fun/social casino gambling: An examination of our current knowledge. Final report to the Manitoba gambling research program.

  • Dowling, N., Smith, D., & Thomas, T. (2005). Electronic gaming machines: Are they the ‘crack-cocaine’ of gambling? Addiction, 100, 33–45.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Eilers Research. (2015). Social casino tracker—4Q14 and 2014. California: Eilers Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferris, J. A., & Wynne, H. J. (2001). The Canadian problem gambling index: User manual. Ottawa: Canadian Centre on Substance Abuse.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fong, T. W. (2005). The biopsychosocial consequences of pathological gambling. Psychiatry (Edgemont), 2, 22.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gainsbury, S., King, D., Delfabbro, P., Hing, N., Russell, A., & Blaszczysnki, A. et al. (2015). The use of social media in gambling. A report commissioned by Gambling Research Australia.

  • Gainsbury, S., Russell, A., & Hing, N. (2014). An investigation of social casino gaming among land-based and Internet gamblers: A comparison of socio-demographic characteristics, gambling and co-morbidities. Computers in Human Behavior, 33, 126–135.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gray, J. A. (1982). The neuropsychology of anxiety: An enquiry into the functions of the septo hippocampal system. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Griffiths, M. (1993). Fruit machine gambling: The importance of structural characteristics. Journal of Gambling Studies, 9, 101–120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Griffiths, M. D. (2015). Adolescent gambling and gambling-type games on social networking sites: Issues, concerns, and recommendations. Aloma: Revista de Psicologia, Ciències de l’Educació i de l’Esport Blanquerna, 33, 31–37.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hollingshead, S., Kim, H. S., Wohl, M. J. A., & Derevensky, J. (in press). The social casino gaming-gambling link: Motivation for playing social casino games determines whether self-reported gambling increases or decreases among problem gamblers. Journal of Gambling Issues.

  • Kim, H. S., Salmon, M., Wohl, M. J. A., & Young, M. (2016a). A dangerous cocktail: Alcohol consumption increases suicidal ideations among problem gamblers in the general population. Addictive Behaviors, 55, 50–55.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Kim, H. S., Wohl, M. J. A., Gupta, R., & Derevensky, J. (2016b). From the mouths of social media users: A focus group study exploring the social casino gaming—online gambling link. Journal of Behavioral Addictions, 5, 115–121.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Kim, H. S., Wohl, M. J. A., Salmon, M. M., Gupta, R., & Derevensky, J. (2015). Do social casino gamers migrate to online gambling? An assessment of migration rate and potential predictors. Journal of Gambling Studies, 3, 1819–1831.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ledgerwood, D. M., Alessi, S. M., Phoenix, N., & Petry, N. M. (2009). Behavioral assessment of impulsivity in pathological gamblers with and without substance use disorder histories versus healthy controls. Drug and Alcohol Dependence, 105, 89–96.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Maccallum, F., Blaszczynski, A., Ladouceur, R., & Nower, L. (2007). Functional and dysfunctional impulsivity in pathological gambling. Personality and Individual Differences, 43, 1829–1838.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martin, C. (2014). Big data and social casino gaming. Canadian Gaming Lawyer Magazine, 4–7.

  • Mason, W., & Suri, S. (2012). Conducting behavioral research on Amazon’s Mechanical Turk. Behavior Research Methods, 44, 1–23.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Matheson, K., Wohl, M. J., & Anisman, H. (2009). The interplay of appraisals, specific coping styles, and depressive symptoms among young male and female gamblers. Social Psychology, 40, 212–221.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Paolacci, G., Chandler, J., & Ipeirotis, P. G. (2010). Running experiments on Amazon Mechanical Turk. Judgment and Decision Making, 5, 411–419.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parke, J., Wardle, H., Rigbye, J., & Parke, A. (2013). Exploring social gambling: Scoping, classification and evidence review. Final report submitted to the UK Gambling Commission.

  • Petry, N. M., Stinson, F. S., & Grant, B. F. (2005). Comorbidity of DSM-IV pathological gambling and other psychiatric disorders: Results from the National Epidemiologic Survey on Alcohol and Related Conditions. Journal of Clinical Psychiatry, 66, 564–574.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Robinson, T. E., & Berridge, K. C. (2001). Incentive-sensitization and addiction. Addiction, 96, 103–114.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Rouse, S. V. (2015). A reliability analysis of Mechanical Turk data. Computers in Human Behavior, 43, 304–307.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sapsted, T. (2013). Social casino gaming: Opportunities for 2013 and beyond. London: FC Business Intelligence.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schneider, S. (2012). Social gaming and online gambling. Gambling Law Review and Economics, 16, 711–712.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schulze, T., Seedorf, S., Geiger, D., Kaufmann, N., & Schader, M. (2011). Exploring task properties in crowdsourcing-an empirical study on Mechanical Turk. In ECIS (Vol. 11, pp. 1–1).

  • Shapiro, D. N., Chandler, J., & Mueller, P. A. (2013). Using Mechanical Turk to study clinical populations. Clinical Psychological Science, 1, 213–220.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sinclair, B. (2015). 46 % of US social casino gamers spend money—Newzoo. Gamesindustry.biz. Retrieved from: http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2015-08-31-46-percent-of-us-social-casino-gamers-spend-money-newzoo.

  • Smither, R. D., & Houston, J. M. (1992). The nature of competitiveness: The development and validation of the competitiveness index. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 52, 407–418.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Steinberg, L., Sharp, C., Stanford, M. S., & Tharp, A. T. (2013). New tricks for an old measure: The development of the Barratt Impulsiveness Scale-Brief (BIS-Brief). Psychological Assessment, 25, 216–226.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Sztainert, T., Wohl, M. J., McManus, J. F., & Stead, J. D. (2014). On being attracted to the possibility of a win: Reward sensitivity (via gambling motives) undermines treatment seeking among pathological gamblers. Journal of Gambling Studies, 30, 901–911.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Wells, N. (2015). The shocking truth about mobile gaming, CNBC. Retrieved from: http://www.cnbc.com/2015/08/03/the-shocking-truth-about-mobile-gaming.html.

Download references

Acknowledgments

This research was funded by a Standard Research Grant from the Ontario Problem Gambling Research Centre to Wohl (#3515).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Addictive Behaviours Laboratory, University of Calgary, 2500 University Drive, NW, Calgary, AB, T2N 1N4, Canada

    Hyoun S. Kim

  2. Carleton University Gambling Lab, Department of Psychology, Carleton University, 1125 Colonel By Drive, B550 Loeb Building, Ottawa, ON, K1S 5B6, Canada

    Samantha Hollingshead & Michael J. A. Wohl

Authors
  1. Hyoun S. Kim
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Samantha Hollingshead
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Michael J. A. Wohl
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Michael J. A. Wohl.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

Kim has received research grants from the National Center for Responsible Gaming (NCRG), Alberta Gambling Research Institute (AGRI), and Gambling Research Exchange Ontario (GREO). Kim also holds a doctoral scholarship from AGRI. Wohl has received research grants from NCRG, GREO, Manitoba Gambling Research Program and the Ministry of Long Term Health and Care. Wohl has presented at the New Horizons Conference (British Columbia Lottery Corporation) and the Responsible and Problem Gambling Stakeholders Symposium (Alberta Gaming and Liquor Commission) with travel expenses covered. Hollingshead declares no conflict of interest.

Ethical Approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kim, H.S., Hollingshead, S. & Wohl, M.J.A. Who Spends Money to Play for Free? Identifying Who Makes Micro-transactions on Social Casino Games (and Why). J Gambl Stud 33, 525–538 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10899-016-9626-6

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10899-016-9626-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation