Journal of Gambling Studies

, Volume 11, Issue 3, pp 287–301 | Cite as

Video game playing, dependency and delinquency: A question of methodology?

  • Maree Abbott
  • Barbara Palmisano
  • Mark Dickerson


A methodological challenge to Fisher's (1992) study of adolescent fruit machine gamblers was carried out with young video game players. Fisher (1992) described an association between frequency fruit machine playing, dependency and delinquency. Some methodological concerns were considered that might weaken this conclusion, in particular the use of heterogeneous measures that fail to distinguish between variables. As such measures feature elsewhere in contemporary gambling research it was deemed important to examine some of the potential problems that may arise. 183 11–16 year old video game players (152 males; 31 females) were recruited from four amusement arcades to answer a computerised questionnaire. Using an analysis similar to Fisher (1992) her results for adolescent fruit machine use were ‘confirmed’. However a separation of key variables and the use of a multiple regression analysis showed that of money spent, time spent and impaired choice, only the first was a significant predictor of delinquency. It is suggested that delinquents have higher disposable incomes to spend on their leisure activities. Video game playing and possibly fruit machine gambling appear to be independently associated with delinquency; in video game playing this association is not mediated by dependency. It was argued that a similar methodology should be used in the UK to re-examine Fisher's (1992) conclusions for children who use gaming machines.


Video Game Leisure Activity Disposable Income Methodological Challenge Similar Methodology 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Agnew, R., & Petersen, D. (1989). Leisure and delinquency.Social Problems, 36, 332–351.Google Scholar
  2. Anastasi, A. (1990).Psychological testing. Macmillan: NY.Google Scholar
  3. Creasey, G., & Myers, B. (1986). Video games and children: Effects on leisure activities, schoolwork and peer involvement,Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 32, 251–262.Google Scholar
  4. Dickerson, M. (1989). Gambling: a dependence without a drug.International Review of Psychiatry, 1, 157–172.Google Scholar
  5. Egli, E., & Meyers, L. (1984). The role of video game playing in adolescent life: Is there a reason to be concerned?Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 22, 309–312.Google Scholar
  6. Fisher, S. (1991). Governmental response to juvenile fruit machine gambling in the U.K.: Where do we go from here?Journal of Gambling Studies, 7, 217–248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Fisher, S. (1992). Measuring pathological gambling in children: The case of fruit machines in the U.K.Journal of Gambling Studies, 8, 263–285.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Gibb, G.D., Bailey, J.R., Lambirth, T.T. & Wilson, W.P. (1983). Personality differences between high and low electronic video game users.Journal of Psychology, 114, 159–165.Google Scholar
  9. Griffiths, M.D. (1990a). The acquisition, development and maintenance of fruit machine gambling in adolescents.Journal of Gambling Studies, 6, 193–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Griffiths, M.D. (1990b). Addiction to fruit machines: A preliminary study among young males.Journal of Gambling Studies, 6, 113–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Griffiths, M.D. (1991). Amusement machine playing in childhood and adolescence: A comparative analysis of video games and fruit machines.Journal of Adolescence, 14, 53–73.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. Harris, R.J. (1975).A primer of multivariate statistics. Academic Press: NY.Google Scholar
  13. Huff, G., & Collinson, F. (1987). Young offenders, gambling and video game playing.British Journal of Criminology, 27, 401–410.Google Scholar
  14. Huxley, J., & Carroll, D. (1992). A survey of fruit machine gambling in adolescents.Journal of Gambling Studies, 8, 167–179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Ladouceur, R., & Mireault, C. (1988). Gambling behaviour among high school students in the Quebec area.The Journal of Gambling Behaviour, 4, 3–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 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, 1184–88.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. Lesieur, H.R. & Blume, S.B. (1993). Revising the South Oaks Gambling Screen in different settings.Journal of Gambling Studies, 9, 213–224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Mclure, R.F. & Mears, F.G. (1984). Video game players: Personality characteristics and demographic variables.Psychological Report, 55, 271–276.Google Scholar
  19. Patterson, G., Debaryshe, B. & Ramsey, E. (1989). A developmental perspective on antisocial behavior.American Psychologist, 44, 329–335.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. Riley, D. (1987). Time and crime: The link between teenager lifestyle and delinquency.Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 3, 339–354.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Snyder, J. (1977). Reinforcement analysis of interaction in problem and nonproblem families.Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 86, 528–535.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Trott, J., & Griffiths, M. (1991). Teenage gambling: A pilot study.Psychological Reports, 68, 946.PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Human Sciences Press, Inc 1995

Authors and Affiliations

  • Maree Abbott
    • 1
  • Barbara Palmisano
    • 1
  • Mark Dickerson
    • 1
  1. 1.Australian Institute for Gambling ResearchUniversity of Western Sydney, MacarthurCampbelltown

Personalised recommendations