Skip to main content
Log in

Upping the Reinforcement Rate by Playing the Maximum Lines in Multi-line Slot Machine Play

Journal of Gambling Studies Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Reinforcement is a key component of slot machine play. Multi-line video slot-machine play can lead to “losses disguised as wins” (LDWs) which are credit gains that total less than the wager on the spin. LDWs only occur on multi-line games, with their frequency increasing with the number of lines played. If perceived as wins, they will be reinforcing to the player despite actually being losses. It has been suggested that players may attempt to maximize their reinforcement rates by playing maximum lines with a minimum bet per line. We recorded the actual game play of 83 participants on two different machines having different LDW rates. On both machines, players, regardless of problem gambling status, seldom bet on a single line (<6 % of spins), preferring to bet on the maximum number of lines available (>70 % of spins). Post-reinforcement pauses indicated that players found LDWs significantly more rewarding than losses and as rewarding as small wins. Players significantly overestimated the number of times they won more than their spin wager (i.e., miscategorizing LDWs as wins). Players indicated a number of game traits that made them prefer one machine over the other. Players who preferred the game with many LDWs endorsed “lack of long losing streaks” and “frequency of wins” to a greater degree than those preferring the other game. In sum, gamblers prefer playing maximum lines. Maximum line-play increases the frequency of LDWs. Players may miscategorize LDWs as wins, thus increasing the perceived reinforcement rate of multi-line slot machine.

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

Access this article

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Dixon, M. J., Collins, K., Harrigan, K. A., Graydon, C., & Fugelsang, J. A. (2013b). Using sound to unmask losses disguised as wins in multiline slot machines. Journal of Gambling Studies. doi:10.1007/s10899-013-9411-8.

  • Dixon, M. J., Harrigan, K. A., Sandhu, R., Collins, K., & Fugelsang, J. A. (2010). Losses disguised as wins in modern multi-line video slot machines. Addiction, 105(10), 1819–1824.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Dixon, M. J., Harrigan, K. A., Santesso, D. L., Graydon, C., Fugelsang, J. A., & Collins, K. (2013a). The impact of sound in modern multiline video slot machine play. Journal of Gambling Studies. doi:10.1007/s10899-013-9391-8.

  • Dixon, M. J., MacLaren, V. V., Jarick, M., Fugelsang, J. A., & Harrigan, K. A. (2013). The frustrating effects of just missing the jackpot: Slot machine near-misses trigger large skin conductance responses, but no post-reinforcement pauses. Journal of Gambling Studies, 29(4), 661–674.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dixon, M. R., Maclin, O. H., & Daugherty, D. (2006). An evaluation of response allocations to concurrently available slot machine simulations. Behavior Research Methods, 38(2), 232–236.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Felton, M., & Lyon, D. (1966). The post-reinforcement pause. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, 9(2), 131–134.

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Ferris, J., & Wynne, H. J. (2001). The Canadian Problem Gambling Index. Ottawa: Canadian Centre on Substance Abuse.

    Google Scholar 

  • Griffiths, M. D. (1993). Fruit machine gambling: The importance of structural characteristics. Journal of Gambling Studies, 9(2), 101–120.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harrigan, K. A., Dixon, M. J., MacLaren, V. V., Collins, K., & Fugelsang, J. (2012). The maximum rewards at the minimum price: Reinforcement rates and payback percentages in multi-line slot machines. Journal of Gambling Issues, 26, 11–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haw, J. (2008). Random-ratio schedules of reinforcement: The role of early wins and unreinforced trials. Journal of Gambling Issues, 21, 56–67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • IJsselsteijn, W. A., de Kort, Y. A. W., & Poels, K. (2008). The game experience questionnaire: Development of a self-report measure to assess the psychological impact of digital games. Unpublished manuscript. Game experience lab, Department of Technology Management, University of Technology of Eindhoven, Eindhoven, The Netherlands.

  • Jefferson, S., & Nicki, R. (2003). A new instrument to measure cognitive distortions in video lottery terminal users: The informational biases scale (IBS). Journal of Gambling Studies, 19(4), 387–403.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Jensen, C., Dixon, M. J., Harrigan, K. A., Sheepy, E., Fugelsang, J. A., & Jarick, M. (2013). Misinterpreting ‘winning’ in multiline slot machine games. International Gambling Studies, 13(1), 112–126.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Langer, E. J. (1975). The illusion of control. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 32, 311–328.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Livingstone, C., Woolley, R., Zazryn, T., Bakacs, L., & Shami, R. (2008). The relevance and role of gaming machine games and game features on the play of problem gamblers. Adelaide: Independent Gambling Authority of South Australia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parke, J., & Griffiths, M. (2006). The psychology of the fruit machine: The role of structural characteristics (revisited). International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction, 4(2), 151–179.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Patton, J. H., Stanford, M. S., & Barratt, E. S. (1995). Factor structure of the Barratt impulsiveness scale. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 51(6), 768–774.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Peters, H., Hunt, M., & Harper, D. (2010). An animal model of slot machine gambling: The effect of structural characteristics on response latency and persistence. Journal of Gambling Studies, 26(4), 521–531.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Skinner, R. F. (1953). Science and human behavior. Oxford, England: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Steenbergh, T. A., Meyers, A. W., May, R. K., & Whelan, J. P. (2002). Development and validation of the gamblers’ beliefs questionnaire. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 16(2), 143–149.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Van Selst, M., & Jolicoeur, P. (1994). A solution to the effect of sample size on outlier estimation. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 47A, 631–650.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walker, M. (2004). The seductiveness of poker machines. Gambling Research, 16(2), 52–66.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williamson, A. & Walker, M. (2001). Strategies for solving the insoluble: Playing to win Queen of the Nile. In G. Coman (Ed.) Lessons of the Past: Proceedings of the 10th National Association for Gambling Studies Conference, Mildura, 2000 (202-209). Alphington, Victoria.

Download references

Acknowledgments

Funding for this research was provided by the Ontario Problem Gambling Research Centre.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jeffrey A. Templeton.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Templeton, J.A., Dixon, M.J., Harrigan, K.A. et al. Upping the Reinforcement Rate by Playing the Maximum Lines in Multi-line Slot Machine Play. J Gambl Stud 31, 949–964 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10899-014-9446-5

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10899-014-9446-5

Keywords

Navigation