Associations of self-regulation strategy use with in-play betting intensity and associated harms: An ecological momentary assessment study

Abstract

Self-regulation strategies, such as limit setting, can be effective in reducing harms associated with gambling. However, limited research has examined their applicability to in-play sports betting. The current study therefore examined the utility of self-regulation strategies in reducing in-play betting intensity and associated harms. Adults engaging in-play betting (N = 77; Mage = 41.23 years, 71.43 % men) completed 14 days of ecological momentary assessment surveys in which they reported their in-play betting behaviours (number of bets placed, money spent), use of self-regulation strategies for in-play betting (setting monetary limits, setting time limits, stopping betting when no longer fun, taking frequent breaks), and in-play-betting-related harms. Multilevel models revealed that participants with a greater propensity to set monetary limits were overall less likely to experience financial, interpersonal, and health harms. In addition, participants were less likely to experience emotional/psychological harms following in-play betting occasions during which they set monetary limits (versus when they did not). In contrast, participants with a greater propensity to set time limits tended to spend more money on in-play bets, experienced more harms on average, and were overall more likely to experience financial and work/study harms. Results provide preliminary support for the utility of monetary limit setting, but not time limit setting, in reducing in-play-betting-related harms. Findings support the applicability of select self-regulation strategies originally proposed for more traditional forms of gambling to in-play sports betting, and highlight a need for further research investigating whether other responsible gambling strategies may be effective in reducing in-play-betting-related harms.