Social Explanations of Lottery Play: New Evidence Based on National Survey Data

Abstract

This study examines the social contexts of gambling and analyzes social motivations for playing the lottery. We test three sociological approaches simultaneously: network effects, consumption theory, and strain theory. The data used (SOEP-IS, N = 5868 individuals) has several advantages beyond being a large-scale representative sample of the German population. With information on households, we can analyze social network effects while avoiding the problems of egocentric network data. Another benefit of the SOEP-IS is the panel structure. We use the panel structure to improve measurements of strain theory by using the decline in income over time as a measure for it. Our results suggest that the three theories explain different aspects of lottery play. Networks seem to have an influence on lottery play. Having another person in the household playing the lottery is positively associated with both the probability of playing (regularly) and expenditures on lottery tickets. Daydreams and the belief in good luck are positively associated with lottery play as well. Strain theory is confirmed insofar as we find that a decline in income is significantly related to expenditures but not to the probability of playing the lottery. Overall, this study suggests that people play the lottery depending on their social surroundings, their desire to participate in a world normally out of their reach, and the tensions they feel from the distance between their aspirations and their actual social position.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Notes

  1. 1.

    For data access, see SOEP-IS (2014). For more information on SOEP-IS, see Richter and Schupp (2012).

  2. 2.

    The equivalized income is calculated according to the OECD-modified equivalence scale. This scale assigns a value of 1 to the household head, a value of 0.5 to each additional adult household member (above age 14), and a value of 0.3 to each child (below age 14).

  3. 3.

    Results of the Scree test and the big gap between the eigenvalues of the second (0.8) and third factors (0.3) indicate that there are two latent variables.

References

  1. Adams, D. J. (1996). Playing the lottery. Social action, social networks and accounts of motive. Ph.D. Dissertation, Department of Sociology, University of Arizona.

  2. Adams, D. J. (2001). My ticket, my ‘self’: Lottery ticket number selection and the commodification and extension of the self. Sociological Spectrum, 21(4), 455–477.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Ariyabuddhiphongs, V. (2011). Lottery gambling: A review. Journal of Gambling Studies, 27(1), 15–33. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10899-010-9194-0.

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Ariyabuddhiphongs, V., & Chanchalermporn, N. (2007). A test of social cognitive theory reciprocal and sequential effects: Hope, superstitious belief and environmental factors among lottery gamblers in Thailand. Journal of Gambling Studies, 23(2), 201–214. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10899-006-9035-3.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Beckert, J. (2016). Imagined futures. Fictional expectations and capitalist dynamics. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  6. Beckert, J., & Lutter, M. (2009). The inequality of fair play: Lottery gambling and social stratification in Germany. European Sociological Review, 25(4), 475–488. https://doi.org/10.1093/esr/jcn063.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Beckert, J., & Lutter, M. (2013). Why the poor play the lottery: Sociological approaches to explaining class-based lottery play. Sociology, 47(6), 1152–1170. https://doi.org/10.1177/0038038512457854.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Beyerlein, K., & Sallaz, J. J. (2017). Faith’s Wager: How religion deters gambling. Social Science Research, 62, 204–218. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssresearch.2016.07.007.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Binde, P. (2009). Gambling motivation and involvement. A review of social science research. Östersund: The Swedish National Institute of Public Health.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Binde, P. (2013). Why people gamble: A model with five motivational dimensions. International Gambling Studies, 13(1), 81–97.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Bloch, H. A. (1951). The sociology of gambling. American Journal of Sociology, 57(3), 215–221.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Browne, B. A., & Brown, D. J. (1994). Predictors of lottery gambling among American college students. The Journal of Social Psychology, 134(3), 339–347.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Burger, M. J., Hendriks, M., Pleeging, E., & van der Zwan, P. W. (2016). The silver linings of lottery play: Motivation and subjective well-being of British lottery participants. Applied Economics Letters. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504851.2016.1153783.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Cameron, C. A., & Trivedi, P. K. (1998). Regression analysis of count data. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  15. Campbell, C. (1987). The romantic ethic and the spirit of modern consumerism. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Casey, E. (2006). Domesticating gambling: Gender, caring and the UK national lottery. Leisure Studies, 25(1), 3–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/02614360500150695.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Chiu, J., & Storm, L. (2010). Personality, perceived luck and gambling attitudes as predictors of gambling involvement. Journal of Gambling Studies, 26(2), 205–227.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Clotfelter, C. T., & Cook, P. J. (1991). Selling hope. State lotteries in America. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Darke, P. R., & Freedman, J. L. (1997). The belief in good luck scale. Journal of Research in Personality, 31(4), 486–511.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Day, L., & Maltby, J. (2003). Belief in good luck and psychological well-being: The mediating role of optimism and irrational beliefs. The Journal of Psychology, 137(1), 99–110. https://doi.org/10.1080/00223980309600602.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Devereux, E. C. (1980). Gambling and the social structure: A sociological study of lotteries and horse racing in contemporary America. New York: Arno Press.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Downes, D. M., Davies, B. P., David, M. E., & Stone, P. (1976). Gambling, work and leisure. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul Ltd.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Felsher, J. R., Derevensky, J. L., & Gupta, R. (2003). Parental influences and social modelling of youth lottery participation. Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology, 13(5), 361–377. https://doi.org/10.1002/casp.738.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Firestone, J. M., Garza, R. T., & Harris, R. J. (2005). Protestant work ethic and worker productivity in a Mexican Brewery. International Sociology, 20, 27–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Fluke, S. M., Webster, R. J., & Saucier, D. A. (2014). Methodological and theoretical improvements in the study of superstitious beliefs and behaviour. British Journal of Psychology, 105(1), 102–126. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjop.12008.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Forrest, D., Simmons, R., & Chesters, N. (2002). Buying a dream: Alternative models of demand for lotto. Economic Inquiry, 40(3), 485–496. https://doi.org/10.1093/ei/40.3.485.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Frey, J. H. (1984). Gambling: A sociological review. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 474(1), 107–121.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Friehe, T., & Mechtel, M. (2015). Gambling to leapfrog in status? Review of Economics of the Household. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11150-015-9306-9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Garvía, R. (2007). Syndication, institutionalization, and lottery play. American Journal of Sociology, 113(3), 603–652.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Goffman, E. (1967). Interaction ritual. Essays on face-to-face behavior. New York: Anchor Books.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Greco, R., & Curci, A. (2016). Does the general strain theory explain gambling and substance use? Journal of Gambling Studies. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10899-016-9654-2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Guillén, M. F., Garvía, R., & Santana, A. (2012). Embedded play: Economic and social motivations for sharing lottery tickets. European Sociological Review, 28(3), 344–354. https://doi.org/10.1093/esr/jcq068.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Haisley, E., Mostafa, R., & Loewenstein, G. (2008). Subjective relative income and lottery ticket purchases. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 21, 283–295. https://doi.org/10.1002/bdm.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Hu, Y., Wang, B., Liu, L., Li, G., Huang, X., & Guo, D. (2017). Is lottery playing always harmful? Development of the lottery playing health scale. Social Behavior and Personality: An International Journal, 45(9), 1563–1571.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Humphreys, B. R., & Perez, L. (2013). Syndicated play in lottery games. The Journal of Socio-Economics, 45, 124–131. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socec.2013.05.010.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Kaiser, H. F. (1974). An index of factorial simplicity. Psychometrika, 39(1), 31–36. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02291575.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Kocher, M. G., Krawczyk, M., & van Winden, F. (2014). ‘Let me dream on!’ Anticipatory emotions and preference for timing in lotteries. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 98, 29–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jebo.2013.12.006.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Ladouceur, R., Dube, D., Giroux, I., Legendre, N., & Gaudet, C. (1995). Cognitive biases in gambling—American Roulette and 6/49-Lottery. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 10(2), 473–479.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Lutter, M. (2012). Tagträume und Konsum. Die imaginative Qualität von Gütern am Beispiel der Nachfrage für Lotterien. Soziale Welt, 63(3), 233–251.

    Google Scholar 

  40. McPherson, M., Smith-Lovin, L., & Cook, J. M. (2001). Birds of a feather: Homophily in social networks. Annual Review of Sociology, 27(1), 415–444.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Merton, R. K. (1938). Social structure and anomie. American Sociological Review, 3(5), 672–682.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Mirels, H. L., & Garrett, J. B. (1971). Protestant ethic as a personality variable. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 36, 40–44.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Olason, D. T., Hayer, T., Brosowski, T., & Meyer, G. (2015). Gambling in the mist of economic crisis: Results from three national prevalence studies from Iceland. Journal of Gambling Studies, 31(3), 759–774.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Papke, L. E., & Wooldridge, J. M. (1996). Econometric methods for fractional response variables with an application to 401(k) plan participation rates. Journal of Applied Econometrics, 11(6), 619–632. https://doi.org/10.2307/2285155.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Pravichai, S., & Ariyabuddhiphongs, V. (2014). Superstitious beliefs and problem gambling among Thai lottery gamblers: The mediation effects of number search and gambling intensity. Journal of Gambling Studies, 31(4), 1633–1649. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10899-014-9517-7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Richter, D., & Schupp, J. (2012). SOEP innovation sample (SOEP-IS)Description, structure and documentation. SOEPpaper 463. Berlin: DIW Berlin.

  47. Rogers, P. (1998). The cognitive psychology of lottery gambling. A theoretical review. Journal of Gambling Studies, 14(2), 111–134.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Rogers, P., & Webley, P. (2001). “It could be us!”: Cognitive and social psychological factors in UK national lottery play. Applied Psychology, 50(1), 181–199.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Rosecrance, J. (1986). Why regular gamblers don’t quit: A sociological perspective. Sociological Perspectives, 29(3), 357–378.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Sarti, S., & Triventi, M. (2017). The role of social and cognitive factors in individual gambling: An empirical study on college students. Social Science Research, 62, 219–237. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssresearch.2016.08.009.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Smith, A. (1904 [1776]). An inquiry into the nature and causes of the wealth of nations. London: Methuen & Co., Ltd. Retrieved February 9, 2017 from the World Wide Web: http://www.econlib.org/library/Smith/smWN.html.

  52. SOEP IS. (2014). SOEP-IS Release 2014, data 1998-2014. https://doi.org/10.5684/soep.is.2014.1.

  53. Welte, J. W., Barnes, G. M., Tidwell, M.-C. O., & Wieczorek, W. F. (2017). Predictors of problem gambling in the US. Journal of Gambling Studies, 33(2), 327–342.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mark Lutter.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have 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

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Lutter, M., Tisch, D. & Beckert, J. Social Explanations of Lottery Play: New Evidence Based on National Survey Data. J Gambl Stud 34, 1185–1203 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10899-018-9748-0

Download citation

Keywords

  • Lottery play
  • Sociology
  • Social networks
  • Strain theory
  • Imaginative values