Risky Gambling Patterns

Risky Gambling Patterns

One of the key benefits of this study is the distribution of players based on the amount spent on betting and the frequency of betting. There are 2% of extremely high spenders and 2% of extremely frequent players. Roughly 10-15% tend to spend a lot of money on gambling. A similar percentage tends to play very frequently. Most bettors appear at the low end of betting sums and betting frequency. That could draw a conclusion that Internet gambling does not seem to be riskier than traditional gambling. However, the online opportunities for sharing betting tickets could be seen as a growing risk for bettors to get engaged in problem gambling.

Authors of this review:

Nikita Goncharenko

Date of Publication:

25/09/2022

Academic Reference:

Gray, H., Jonsson, G., Laplante, D. and Shaffer, H. (2013). Expanding the Study of Internet Gambling Behavior: Trends Within the Icelandic Lottery and Sportsbetting Platform. Journal of gambling studies. 31.

Tags:sports gamblingdata analytics

Key Ideas

Gamblers who bet high amounts and gamblers who gamble highly frequently are two different at-risk groups of bettors that should be treated differently.

Active internet gamblers typically bet 3 to 7 days per month in Iceland. They also make less than 2.5 bets per gambling day. 96% of the bet amount is lost.

The online environment does not promote high-intensity betting.

The differences in betting could be explained by gambling types (casino vs sportsbook) or culture-specific norms or regulatory interventions from policymakers or gambling operators.

An example of a cultural norm is the fact that the lottery in Iceland is linked with charitable and philanthropic causes. [that means materialistic motivation could be expected to be lower for a regular bettor in Iceland.]

There seems to be an interesting picture: 2% of gamblers are extreme bettors (problem gamblers), roughly 10-15% can be considered, as high-risk gamblers, and roughly 80% of bettors gamble in a moderate fashion. A similar statistic is visible for the count of bets.

Internet gambling does not seem to be riskier than traditional forms of gambling, primarily offline. Based on the self-report method, previous studies could have contributed to the misbelief that internet gambling is riskier because of the biased vision (overestimation of usage/spend) and/or memory loss of selected participants.

Yet, the online environment allows online gamblers to easily facilitate social interaction by sharing their betting tickets. This could be seen as a new threat encouraging online players to extensive betting behavior.

Semi-professional and professional gamblers could be part of high-risk groups of gamblers. [NG: professional gambler - makes living by gambling, as the main professional occupation. By definition, it is a highly risky occupation.]

There is a piece of evidence from a variety of studies that confirm that there is a substantial number of accounts registered but never created any bets. [NG: moreover, these users do not even deposit money - Why do these players register in the first place? - research question for future studies]

Key opportunities to decrease the problem of gambling could include restrictions for advertisements, a decrease in licensing for gambling providers, and an increase in research on the topic of problem gambling.

There seems to be a link between “Live bets” (also known as “In-Game”) and problem gambling.

Citations

"Convenience, accessibility, and anonymity—... factors that might promote excessive gambling behavior" for Internet gamblers. (e.g., Griffiths 2003; Griffiths and Parke 2002; King and Barak 1999)

"A minority of users typically account for a majority of service usage ... highly intense subscribers: those who wagered the most money and those who made the most bets."

"Some industry analysts suggest that increasing the social nature of these services will decrease the rate of inactive accounts." (Peoples 2013)

Some "gamblers view sports betting as a way to fulfill the need to socialize with friends and other people." (Fang and Mowen 2009)

"Women tended to be drawn to the lottery products, while a greater per- centage of men engaged in English soccer sportsbetting" - in Iceland

External References

Griffiths, M. D., & Parke, J. (2002). The social impact of internet gambling. Social Science ComputerReview, 20(3), 312-320.

Griffiths, M. D. (2003). Internet gambling: Issues, concerns, and recommendations. CyberPsychology &Behavior, 6(6), 557-568.

King, S. A., & Barak, A. (1999). Compulsive internet gambling: A new form of an old clinical pathology.CyberPsychology & Behavior, 2(5), 441-456.

Peoples, G. (2013). Business matters: Spotify, Deezer inactive accounts are just part of doing business. billboard biz.

Fang, X., & Mowen, J. C. (2009). Examining the trait and functional motive antecedents of four gamblingactivities: Slot machines, skilled card games, sports betting, and promotional games. Journal ofConsumer Marketing, 26(2), 121-131.