Advertisement

Journal of Gambling Studies

, Volume 25, Issue 2, pp 215–225 | Cite as

Gambling Behaviour and the Prevalence of Gambling Problems in Adult EGM Gamblers when EGMs are Banned. A Natural Experiment

  • Ingeborg Lund
Original Paper

Abstract

In this article, findings of a panel study among former EGM gamblers are discussed. The data were collected in two waves during 2007, and 1293 people, 18 years or older, participated. The background for the study was the Norwegian ban on EGMs from 1 July 2007, and the aim was to investigate how this ban affected gambling involvement and problem levels in the sample. The analysis shows that gambling participation, gambling frequencies and gambling problems were reduced after EGMs disappeared from the market. There was no indication of the development of an illegal EGM market, or of substitution of EGMs with other types of gambling. A reduction in other types of gambling is interpreted as an indication of synergetic effects between games. Reduced gambling participation among the most active EGM gamblers, and among risk gamblers, shows that the reductions in gambling availability had an effect even on highly involved gamblers.

Keywords

EGMs Adult gambling Gambling problems Panel data 

Notes

Acknowledgement

This study is fully funded by the Norwegian Institute for Alcohol and Drug Research (SIRUS).

References

  1. Abbott, M. (2005). Commentaries. Addiction, 100, 1233–1234.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Abbott, M. (2006). Do EGMs and problem gambling go together like a horse and carriage? Gambling Research, 18, 7–38.Google Scholar
  3. Blaszczynski, A. (2005). Commentaries. Addiction, 100, 1230–1231.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Cantinotti, M., & Ladouceur, R. (2008). Harm reduction and electronic gambling machines: Does this pair make a happy couple or is divorce foreseen? Journal of Gambling Studies, 24, 39–54.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 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.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Doiron, J. P. (2006). Gambling and problem gambling in Prince Edward Island. Retrieved August 6, 2008, from http://www.gov.pe.ca/photos/original/doh_GambReport.pdf.
  7. Dowling, N., Smith, D., & Thomas, T. (2005). Electronic gaming machines: are they the ‘crack cocaine’ of gambling? Addiction, 100, 33–45.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Götestam, K. G., Johansson, A., Wenzel, H. G., & Simonsen, I.-E. (2004). Validation of the lie/bet screen for pathological gambling on two normal population data sets. Psychological Reports, 95, 1009–1013.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Grun, L., & McKeigue, P. (2000). Prevalence of excessive gambling before and after introduction of a national lottery in the United Kingdom: Another example of the single distribution theory. Addiction, 95, 959–966.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Gyllström, F. (2008, September 3). Pengespill. Utvikling etter reguleringer? (Gambling. Development after regulations?) Paper presented at the seminar “Pengespill og avhengighet – Er de nye automatene snille nok? Vil pengespill på nett overta?” Oslo: arranged by SIRUS.Google Scholar
  11. Johansson, A., & Götestam, K. G. (2003). Gambling and problematic gambling with money among Norwegian youth (12–18 years). Nordic Journal of Psychiatry, 57, 317–321.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Johnson, E. E., Hamer, R. M., & Nora, R. M. (1998). The Lie/Bet questionnaire for screening pathological gamblers: A follow-up study. Psychological Reports, 83, 1219–1224.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Johnson, E. E., Hamer, R., Nora, R. M., Tan, B., Eisenstein, N., & Engelhart, C. (1997). The lie/bet questionnaire for screening pathological gamblers. Psychological Reports, 80, 83–88.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Kavli, H. (2007). Spillevaner og spilleproblemer i den norske befolkningen. (Gambling habits and gambling problems in the Norwegian population.) Report, Oslo Norway: Synovate, MMI.Google Scholar
  15. Lesieur, H. R., & Blume, S. B. (1987). The south oaks gambling screen (SOGS): A new instrument for the identification of pathological gamblers. American Journal of Psychiatry, 144, 1184–1188.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Lund, I. (2006). Gambling and problem gambling in Norway: What part does the gambling machine play? Addiction Research and Theory, 14, 475–491.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Lund, I., & Nordlund, S. (2003). Pengespill og pengespillproblemer i Norge (Gambling and Gambling Problems in Norway) Report no 2, 2003, Oslo, Norway: SIRUS.Google Scholar
  18. Mizerski, D., Jolley, B., & Mizerski, K. (2002). Disputing the “crack cocaine of gambling” label for electronic gaming machines. In A. Blaszczynski (Ed.), Culture and the Gambling Phenomenon. Proceedings of the 11th Conference of the National Association for Gambling Studies, (pp. 276-283). Melbourne: National Association for Gambling Studies.Google Scholar
  19. Norsk, T. (2007). Social report. Retrieved August 6, 2008, from http://www.norsk-tipping.no/page?id=70&tp=lsub.
  20. O’Connor, J., & Dickerson, M. (2003). Definition and measurement of chasing in off-course betting and gaming machine play. Journal of Gambling Studies, 19, 359–386. O’Connor & Dickerson.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Room, R., Turner, N. E., & Ialomiteanu, A. (1999). Community effects of the opening of the Niagara casino. Addiction, 94, 1449–1466.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Shaffer, H. J. (2005). Commentaries. Addiction, 100, 1227–1229.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. The Norwegian Gambling Board. (2006). Norske pengespel 2005 (Gaming in Norway 2005). Førde, Norway: Lotteri- og stiftelsestilsynet.Google Scholar
  24. The Norwegian Gambling Board. (2008). Årsmelding 2007 (Yearly report 2007). Førde, Norway: Lotteri- og stiftelsestilsynet.Google Scholar
  25. The Norwegian Gambling Board. (2008b). Hjelpelinjen for Spilleavhengige. Samtalestatistikk. (The helpline for problem gamblers. Calls statistics.). Retrieved August 6, 2008, from http://www.lottstift.no/dav/d3cf09723d.pdf.
  26. Turner, N. E., Ialomiteanu, A., & Room, R. (1999). Chequered expectations: Predictors of approval of opening a casino in the Niagara community. Journal of Gambling Studies, 15, 45–70.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Welte, J. W., Barnes, G. M., Wierczorek, W. F., Tidwell, M.-C. O., & Hoffman, J. H. (2007). Type of gambling and availability as risk factors for problem gambling: A to bit regression analysis by age and gender. International Gambling Studies, 7, 183–198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Welte, J. W., Barnes, G. M., Wierczorek, W. F., Tidwell, M.-C. O., & Parker, J. C. (2004). Risk factor for pathological gambling. Addictive Behaviors, 29, 323–335.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Welte, J. W., Wierczorek, W. F., Barnes, G. M., & Tidwell, M.-C. O. (2006). Multiple risk factors for frequent and problem gambling: Individual, social and ecological. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 36, 1548–1568.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Norwegian Institute of Alcohol and Drug ResearchOsloNorway

Personalised recommendations