Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Gambling Responsibly: Who Does It and To What End?

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Journal of Gambling Studies Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Numerous responsible gambling (RG) strategies are promoted to assist consumers to “gamble responsibly”. However, consumer adoption of RG strategies, how this varies by gambler risk group, and whether usage is associated with non-problematic gambling are largely unknown. This study aimed to (1) determine how use of RG-related strategies differs amongst regular gamblers by gambler risk group; and (2) identify RG-related strategies whose usage predicts non-problem/low risk gambling. Regular Australian gamblers on high-risk products (N = 860), recruited through gambling venues and an online wagering operator, were surveyed about their use of RG strategies promoted on the website of their jurisdiction’s main RG agency. Knowledge of RG strategies was reasonably high amongst all gambler risk groups, but lower-risk groups were more likely to use RG strategies. A logistic regression correctly predicted 82.1 % of lower-risk gamblers and 77.2 % of higher-risk gamblers. Predictors of lower-risk gambling included: greater confidence in their understanding of RG; endorsement of lower gambling expenditure and frequency limits; fewer erroneous gambling beliefs; being less likely to gamble to win money, challenge their skills/beat the odds, or forget about worries and stresses; and being more likely to gamble for pleasure/entertainment. Lower-risk gamblers were more likely to set a money limit in advance of gambling and to balance their gambling with other activities. These findings contribute to understanding which strategies are favoured by different risk groups, and which are associated with safer levels of gambling. They can guide consumer information aimed at enhancing RG consumption and future research on RG consumption.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abbott, M., Bellringer, M., Garrett, N., & Mundy-McPherson, S. (2014a). New Zealand 2012 National Gambling Study: Gambling harm and problem gambling. Report No. 2. Wellington: Ministry of Health.

  • Abbott, M., Bellringer, M., Garrett, N., & Mundy-McPherson, S. (2014b). New Zealand 2012 National Gambling Study: Overview and gambling participation. Report No. 1. Wellington: Ministry of Health.

  • Agostinelli, G., Brown, J. M., & Miller, W. R. (1995). Effects of normative feedback on consumption among heavy drinking college students. Journal of Drug Education, 25(1), 31–40.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (5th ed.). Arlington: American Psychiatric Publishing.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Baranowski, T., Cullen, K. W., Nicklas, T., Thompson, D., & Baranowski, J. (2003). Are current health behavioral change models helpful in guiding prevention of weight gain efforts? Obesity Research, 11(suppl), 23S–43S.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Bernhard, B. J. P., Lucas, A. F. P., Jang, D. P., & Kim, J. P. (2008). Responsible gaming device research report. UNLV Gaming Research & Review Journal, 12(1/2), A1–A56.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bettinghaus, E. P. (1986). Health promotion and the knowledge-attitude-behavior continuum. Preventive Medicine, 15(5), 475–491.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cunningham, J. A., Hodgins, D. C., Toneatto, T., & Murphy, M. (2012). A randomized controlled trial of a personalized feedback intervention for problem gamblers. PLoS One, 7(2), e31586.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Cunningham, J. A., Hodgins, D. C., Toneatto, T., Rai, A., & Cordingley, J. (2009). Pilot study of a personalized feedback intervention for problem gamblers. Behavior Therapy, 40(3), 219–224.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Currie, S. R., Hodgins, D. C., Casey, D. M., el-Guebaly, N., Smith, G. J., Williams, R. J., et al. (2012). Examining the predictive validity of low-risk gambling limits with longitudinal data. Addiction, 107(2), 400–406.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Currie, S. R., Hodgins, D. C., Wang, J., El-Guebaly, N., & Wynne, H. (2008a). In pursuit of empirically based responsible gambling limits. International Gambling Studies, 8(2), 207–227.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Currie, S. R., Hodgins, D. C., Wang, J., El-Guebaly, N., Wynne, H., & Chen, S. (2006). Risk of harm among gamblers in the general population as a function of level of participation in gambling activities. Addiction, 101(4), 570–580.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Currie, S. R., Hodgins, D. C., Wang, J., el-Guebaly, N., Wynne, H., & Miller, N. V. (2008b). Replication of low-risk gambling limits using Canadian provincial gambling prevalence data. Journal of Gambling Studies, 24(3), 321–335.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Currie, S. R., Miller, N., Hodgins, D. C., & Wang, J. (2009). Defining a threshold of harm from gambling for population health surveillance research. International Gambling Studies, 9(1), 19–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Delfabbro, P. H. (2012). Australasian gambling review (5th ed.). Adelaide: Independent Gambling Authority.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dzik, B. (2006). Between consumption and investment: A new approach to the study of the motivation to gamble. Journal of Gambling Issues, 17. Retrieved from http://jgi.camh.net/doi/full/10.4309/jgi.2006.17.4.

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Gainsbury, S. M., Russell, A., Hing, N., Wood, R., Lubman, D. I., & Blaszczynski, A. (2014). The prevalence and determinants of problem gambling in Australia: Assessing the impact of interactive gambling and new technologies. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 28(3), 769–779.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Hagen, B., Nixon, G., & Solowoniuk, J. (2005). Stacking the odds: A phenomenological study of non-problem gambling in later life. Canadian Journal on Aging, 24(04), 433–442.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hancock, L., Schellinck, T., & Schrans, T. (2008). Gambling and corporate social responsibility (CSR): Re-defining industry and state roles on duty of care, host responsibility and risk management. Policy and Society, 27(1), 55–68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hare, S. (2009). A study of gambling in Victoria: Problem gambling from a public health perspective. Melbourne: Victorian Government Department of Justice.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hing, N. (2002). The emergence of problem gambling as a corporate social issue in Australia. International Gambling Studies, 2, 101–122.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hing, N. (2009). Changing fortunes: Past, present & future perspectives on the management of problem gambling by New South Wales clubs. Saarbrucken: VDM Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hing, N., Cherney, L., Gainsbury, S., Lubman, D., Wood, R., & Blaszczynski, A. (2015). Maintaining and losing control during Internet gambling: A qualitative study of gamblers’ experiences. New Media and Society, 17(7), 1075–1095.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ladouceur, R., Blaszczynski, A., & Lalande, D. (2012). Pre-commitment in gambling: A review of the empirical evidence. International Gambling Studies, 12(2), 215–230.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ladouceur, R., & Sévigny, S. (2009). Electronic gambling machines: Influence of a clock, a cash display, and a precommitment on gambling time. Journal of Gambling Issues, 23, 31–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Langham, E., Thorne, H., Browne, M., Donaldson, P., Rose, J., & Rockloff, M. (2016). Understanding gambling related harm: A proposed definition, conceptual framework, and taxonomy of harms. BMC Public Health, 16(1), 1.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewis, M. A., & Neighbors, C. (2006). Social norms approaches using descriptive drinking norms education: A review of the research on personalized normative feedback. Journal of American College Health, 54(4), 213–218.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Livingstone, C., & Woolley, R. (2007). Risky business: A few provocations on the regulation of electronic gaming machines. International Gambling Studies, 7(3), 361–376.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lostutter, T. W., Lewis, M. A., Cronce, J. M., Neighbors, C., & Larimer, M. E. (2014). The use of protective behaviors in relation to gambling among college students. Journal of Gambling Studies, 30(1), 27–46.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  • Lubman, D., Rodda, S., Hing, N., Cheetham, A., Cartmill, T., Nuske, E., et al. (2015). Gambler self-help strategies: A comprehensive assessment of self-help strategies and actions used by gamblers. Melbourne: Gambling Research Australia.

    Google Scholar 

  • McDonnell-Phillips. (2006). Analysis of gambler precommitment behaviour. Melbourne: Gambling Research Australia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moore, S. M., Thomas, A. C., Kyrios, M., & Bates, G. (2012). The self-regulation of gambling. Journal of Gambling Studies, 28(3), 405–420.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Nower, L., & Blaszczynski, A. (2010). Gambling motivations, money-limiting strategies, and precommitment preferences of problem versus non-problem gamblers. Journal of Gambling Studies, 26(3), 361–372.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Parke, A., Harris, A., Parke, J., Rigbye, J., & Blaszczysnki, A. (2014). Facilitating player control in gambling. Journal of Gambling Business and Economics, 8(3), 36–51.

    Google Scholar 

  • Productivity Commission. (2010). Gambling, Report no. 50, Canberra, ACT: Productivity Commission.

  • Queensland Government Statistician’s Office. (2015). Australian gambling statistics (31st ed.). Brisbane: QGSO.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reith, G. (2003). Gambling: Who wins? who loses?. Amherst, NY: Prometheus Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reith, G. (2007). Gambling and the contradictions of consumption: A genealogy of the “pathological” subject. American Behavioral Scientist, 51(1), 33–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reith, G. (2008). Editorial: Reflections on responsibility. Journal of Gambling Issues, 22, 149–155.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Responsible Gambling Council. (2010). Insight 2010: Informed decision making. Retrieved from: http://www.responsiblegambling.org/rg-news-research/rgc-centre/insight-projects/docs/default-source/research-reports/informed-decision-making.

  • Samson, T., Rossen, F., & Hoque, E. (2012). The New Zealand gaming and betting survey: Chinese and Indian people’s experience. International Journal of Migration, Health and Social Care, 8(2), 98–106.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schottler Consulting. (2010). Factors that influence gambler adherence to pre-commitment decisions. Melbourne: Gambling Research Australia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thomas, A. C., Moore, S. M., Kyrios, M., Bates, G., Meredyth, D., & Jessop, G. (2010). Problem gambling vulnerability: The interaction between access, individual cognitions and group beliefs/preferences. Melbourne: Department of Justice.

    Google Scholar 

  • Turner, N. E., Wiebe, J., Falkowski-Ham, A., Kelly, J., & Skinner, W. (2005). Public awareness of responsible gambling and gambling behaviours in Ontario. International Gambling Studies, 5(1), 95–112.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • VRGF. (2015). Who we are. Retrieved on 13-11-15 from http://www.responsiblegambling.vic.gov.au/about-us/who-we-are.

  • Wardle, H., Moody, A., Spence, S., Orford, J., Volberg, R., Jotangia, D., et al. (2011). British gambling prevalence study 2010. London: UK Gambling Commission and National Centre for Social Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams, R. J., Volberg, R. A., & Stevens, R. M. (2012a). The population prevalence of problem gambling: Methodological influences, standardized rates, jurisdictional differences, and worldwide trends. Guelph, ON: Ontario Problem Gambling Research Centre.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams, R. J., West, B. L., & Simpson, R. I. (2012b). 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., & Griffiths, M. D. (2015). Understanding positive play: An exploration of playing experiences and responsible gambling practices. Journal of Gambling Studies, 31(4), 1715–1734.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

The Victorian Responsible Gambling Foundation funded this study (no grant number assigned) and approved this manuscript for publication.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Human, Health and Social Sciences, Central Queensland University, Locked Bag 3333, Bundaberg, QLD, 4670, Australia

    Nerilee Hing

  2. ORC International, Sydney, NSW, Australia

    Kerry Sproston

  3. ORC International, Melbourne, VIC, Australia

    Katherine Tran

  4. Centre for Gambling Education and Research, Southern Cross University, Lismore, Australia

    Alex M. T. Russell

Authors
  1. Nerilee Hing
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Kerry Sproston
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Katherine Tran
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Alex M. T. Russell
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nerilee Hing.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

All authors declare no conflict of interest in relation to this manuscript. They have all received research funds from beneficiaries of gambling including governments and industry.

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

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Hing, N., Sproston, K., Tran, K. et al. Gambling Responsibly: Who Does It and To What End?. J Gambl Stud 33, 149–165 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10899-016-9615-9

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10899-016-9615-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation