What’s in a Name? Assessing the Accuracy of Self-identifying as a Professional or Semi-Professional Gambler
- 227 Downloads
Growing interest in pursuing a professional gambling career has been accompanied by a rise in individuals self-identifying as professional gamblers. Whether this trend reflects an actual increase in individuals sustaining livelihoods from gambling or inaccurate appropriation of a now glamorized identity is unclear. Adopting a self-image of professional gambler in the absence of ability to earn a sustainable income from the activity may increase risk of problem gambling and deter help-seeking. However, extent of problem gambling in this cohort is uncertain. This study aimed to: (1) determine any differences that might validate the self-reported identity of professional and semi-professional gamblers by investigating characteristics and behaviors that distinguish them from amateur gamblers; and (2) identify characteristics and behaviors that distinguish between self-identified semi-professional/professional gamblers with and without gambling problems. In an online survey of 4,594 Australian gamblers, 1.2 % identified as professional gamblers, 6.8 % as semi-professional gamblers, and 92.0 % as amateur gamblers. Self-identified professional and semi-professional gamblers were distinguished from amateur gamblers by preference for skill-based gambling, higher reported likelihood of winning, and greater use of online gambling and multiple online operators. Two-fifths of professional and three-fifths of semi-professional gamblers scored as moderate risk or problem gamblers, but negative consequences were more likely personal, interpersonal and work/study related, rather than financial. Although results support the general accuracy of self-reported semi/professional gambling status, measures are needed to help semi/professional gamblers distinguish whether their gambling is a problem or profession.
KeywordsProfessional gamblers Semi-professional gamblers Self-identity Self-image Problem gambling Internet gambling
The study that this paper is based on was commissioned by Gambling Research Australia—a partnership between the Commonwealth, State and Territory Governments. Gambling Research Australia provided financial support for this project and approved this manuscript for publication. We would also like to thank Anastsia Hronis who completed a literature search and summary to inform this paper.
Conflict of interest
All the authors declares that they have no conflict of interest. They have received research funds from government and industry sources.
- Carroll, A., Rodgers, B., Davidson, T., & Sims, S. (2013). Stigma and help-seeking for gambling problems. Canberra: ACT Gambling and Racing Commission.Google Scholar
- Cotte, J. (1997). Chances, trances, and lots of slots: Gambling motives and consumption experiences. Journal of Leisure Research, 29(4), 380–406.Google Scholar
- Delfabbro, P. H. (2012). Australasian gambling review (5th ed.). Adelaide: Independent Gambling Authority.Google Scholar
- Ferris, J., & Wynne, H. (2001). The Canadian problem gambling index: Final report. Ottawa, ON: Canadian Centre on Substance Abuse.Google Scholar
- Gainsbury, S, Russell, A., Hing, N., Wood, R., Lubman, D., & Blaszczynski, A. (2013). How the Internet is changing gambling: Findings from an Australian prevalence survey. Journal of Gambling Studies. Advance online publication. doi: 10.1007/s10899-013-9404-7.
- Goffman, E. (1967). Interaction ritual: Essays on face to face behavior. Garden City, NY: Anchor Books.Google Scholar
- Griffiths, M. D., Parke, A., Wood, R., & Parke, J. (2012). Internet gambling: An overview of psychosocial impacts. UNLV Gaming Research & Review Journal, 10(1), 4.Google Scholar
- Herman, R. D. (1967). Gambling as work: A sociological study of the race track. In R. D. Herman (Ed.), Gambling (pp. 87–106). New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
- Lee, J. (2004). Prize and risk-taking strategy in tournaments: Evidence from professional poker players. The Institute for the Study of Labor, discussion paper no. 1345, 1–23.Google Scholar
- McMullan, J. L. (2011). Submission to the Joint Select Committee on Gambling Reform Inquiry into Interactive Gambling. Retrieved 3 September 2013 from: http://www.aph.gov.au/senate/committee/gamblingreform_ctte/interactive_online_gambling_advertising/submissions.htm.
- Productivity Commission (1999). Australia’s gambling industries (Report No. 10). Canberra: Ausinfo.Google Scholar
- Radburn, B., & Horsley, R. (2011). Gamblers, grinders, and mavericks: The use of membership categorisation to manage identity by professional poker players. Journal of Gambling Issues, 26, 30–50.Google Scholar
- Selin, S. W., & Howard, D. R. (1988). Ego involvement and leisure behavior: A conceptual specification. Journal of Leisure Research, 20(3), 237–244.Google Scholar
- Veblen, T. (1899). The theory of the leisure class. New York: Penguin.Google Scholar
- Williams, R. J., West, B. L., & Simpson, R. I. (2012). Prevention of problem gambling: A comprehensive review of the evidence and identified best practices. Guelph, ON: Ontario Problem Gambling Research Centre.Google Scholar
- Wood, R. T., & Williams, R. J. (2010). Internet gambling: Prevalence, patterns, problems, and policy options. Guelph: Ontario Problem Gambling Research Centre.Google Scholar