Positive Thinking Among Slot Machine Gamblers: A Case of Maladaptive Coping?

  • Jonathan Parke
  • Mark D. Griffiths
  • Adrian Parke



Research has demonstrated that optimism and “positive illusions” can be used a coping mechanism among those facing adversity. Gamblers are a little studied group who also experience adversity and uncertainty. They often feel considerable levels of frustration, guilt, anger and a sense of feeling cheated after making significant losses. In order to deal with such feelings it is hypothesized that these individuals will search for positive consequences from their behaviour in order to offset this negative affect.


To (1) determine whether after gambling, gamblers compensate and reduce negative affect by identifying positive consequences from experiencing a loss, and (2) identify types of strategies which gamblers employ and consider how these should be classified.

Materials and Methods

Eighty-seven regular slot machine gamblers were interviewed in a variety of environments housing slot machines. Each participant was asked a series of questions in a semi-structured format, to explore possible styles of positive thinking.


Nine types of ‘positive thinking’ experienced by gamblers were identified. These included Comparative thinking, Prophylactic thinking, Biased frequency thinking, Responsibility avoidance, Chasing Validation, Prioritization, Resourcefulness, Thoughtfulness, and Fear Reduction. Gamblers who were positive thinkers experienced significantly less guilt than non-positive thinkers.


While reduction of negative affect may be perceived as positive in many other contexts, it is argued that it may counteract efforts to promote responsible gambling. Clinical implications and directions for future research are discussed.


Gambling Gamblers Slot machines Positive thinking Cognitive bias 


  1. Blaszczynski, A. P., & Silove, D. (1997). Pathological gambling: Forensic issues. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry, 30(3), 358–369.Google Scholar
  2. Campbell, F. (1976). Gambling: A positive view. In W. R. Eadington (Ed.), Gambling and society. Springfield, IL: Charles C. Thomas.Google Scholar
  3. Collins, R. L., Taylor, S. E., & Skokan, L. A. (1990). A better world or a shattered vision? Changes in perspectives following victimization. Social Cognition, 8, 263–285.Google Scholar
  4. Dickerson, M. C. (1974). The effect of betting shop experience on gambling behaviour. Ph.D. thesis. University of Birmingham.Google Scholar
  5. Festinger, L.A. (1957). A theory of cognitive dissonance. Evanston, IL: Row, Peterson.Google Scholar
  6. Fisher, S. (1991). The pull of the fruit machine: A sociological typology of young players. Sociological Review, 41, 446–474.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Goffman, E. (1969). Where the action is: Three essays. London: Penguin.Google Scholar
  8. Griffiths, M. D. (1995). Adolescent gambling. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  9. Griffiths, M. D. (1991). The psychobiology of the near miss in fruit machine gambling. Journal of Psychology, 125, 347–357.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Griffiths, M. D. (1993). Fruit machine gambling: The importance of structural characteristics. Journal of Gambling Studies, 9, 101–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Griffiths, M. D. (1994). The role of cognitive bias and skill in fruit machine gambling. British Journal of Psychology, 85, 351–369.Google Scholar
  12. Griffiths, M. D. (1999). The psychology of the near miss (revisited): A comment on Delfabbro and Winefield. British Journal of Psychology, 90, 441–445.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Griffiths, M. D. (2004). Betting your life on it: Problem gambling has clear health related consequences. British Medical Journal, 329, 1055–1056.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Helgeson, V. S., & Taylor, S. E. (1993). Social comparisons and adjustment among cardiac patients. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 23, 1171–1195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Henslin, J. M. (1967). Craps and magic. American Journal of Sociology, 73, 316–330.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Herman, R. D. (1976). Gamblers and gambling. Lexington, KY: Lexington Books.Google Scholar
  17. Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1982). The psychology of preferences. Scientific American, 136–142, January.Google Scholar
  18. Langer, E. J. (1975). The illusion of control. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 32, 311–328.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Langer, E. J., & Roth, J. (1975). The effect of sequence of outcome in a chance task on the illusion of control. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 32, 951–955.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Lesieur, H. R., & Custer, R. L. (1984). Pathological gambling: Roots, phases and treatment. Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Sciences, 474, 146–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Loftus, G. A., & Loftus, E. F. (1983). Mind at play: The psychology of video games. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  22. Maurer, C. D. (1994). Practical issues and the assessment of pathological gamblers in a private practice setting. I. Journal of Gambling Studies, 10(1), 5–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Parke, J., & Griffiths, M. D. (2002). Slot machine gamblers—Why are they so hard to study? Journal of Gambling Issues, 6, located at:
  24. Parke, J., & Griffiths, M. D. (2004). Gambling addiction and the evolution of the ‘near miss.’ Addiction Theory and Research, 12, 407–411.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Reid, R. L. (1986). The psychology of the near miss. Journal of Gambling Behavior, 2, 32–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Saunders, D. M., & Turner, D. E. (1987). Gambling and leisure: The case of racing. Journal of Leisure Studies, 6, 281–299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Simon, L., Greenberg, J., & Brehm, J. (1995). Trivialization: The forgotten mode of dissonance reduction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 68, 247–260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Steele, C. M. (1988). The psychology of self-affirmation: Sustaining the integrity of the self. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 2, 261–302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Strickland, L. H., Lewicki, R. J., & Katz, A. M. (1966). Temporal orientation and perceived control as determinants of risk-taking. Journal of Experimental and Social Psychology, 2, 143–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Taylor, S. E. (1983). Adjustment to threatening events: A theory of cognitive adaptation. American Psychologist, 38, 1161–1173.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Taylor, S. E. (1989). Positive illusions: Creative self-deception and the healthy mind. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  32. Taylor, S. E., & Brown, J. D. (1988). Illusion and well being: A social psychological perspective on health. Psychological Bulletin, 103, 193–210.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Taylor, S. E., Kemeny, M. E., Reed, G. M., & Aspinwall, L. G. (1991). Assault on the self: Positive illusion and adjustments to threatening events. In J. Strauss & G. R. Goethals (Eds.), The self: Interdisciplinary approaches (pp. 239–254). Berlin Heidelberg New York: Springer.Google Scholar
  34. Taylor, S. E., Lichtman, R. R., & Wood, J. V. (1984). Attributions, beliefs about control and adjustments to breast cancer. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 55, 378–393.Google Scholar
  35. Tesser, A. (1998). Toward a self-evaluation maintenance model of social behaviour. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 21, pp. 181–227). New York: Academic.Google Scholar
  36. Vitaro, F., Ferland, F., Jacques, C., & Ladouceur, R. (1998). Gambling, substance abuse and impulsivity during adolescence. Psychology of Addictive Behaviours, 12(3), 185–194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Wagenaar, W. A. (1988). Paradoxes in gambling behaviour. London: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  38. Wagener, J. J., & Taylor, S. E. (1986). What else could I have done? Patients’ responses to failed treatment decisions. Health Psychology, 5, 481–496.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Yeoman, T., & Griffiths, M. D. (1996). Adolescent machine gambling and crime. Journal of Adolescence, 19, 99–104.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Verlag 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jonathan Parke
    • 1
  • Mark D. Griffiths
    • 1
  • Adrian Parke
    • 1
  1. 1.International Gaming Research Unit, Psychology Division, Department of Social SciencesNottingham Trent UniversityNottinghamUK

Personalised recommendations