Abstract
Research examining gambling behavior via experiments, self-report, and/or observation presents many methodical challenges particularly in relation to objectivity. However, the use of player account-based gambling data provides purely objective data. Based on this real-world data, the primary aim of the present study was to examine gambling behavior in gambling venues with different numbers of gambling terminals (i.e., venues with one terminal; 2–5 terminals; 6–10 terminals; 11–16 terminals). Player account-based gambling data aggregated over a year (2015) amounting to 153,379 observations within 93,034 individual gamblers (males = 74%; mean age = 44.1, SD = 16.4 years) were analyzed. Gambling frequency was highest in venues with 2–5 terminals (54.5%) and lowest in venues with 11–16 terminals (1.6%). Approximately half of the sample (52.5%) gambled in only one venue category, with the majority (81.5%) preferring venues with 2–5 terminals present. Only 0.8% of the sample gambled in all four venue categories. Compared to venues with one terminal, venues with two or more terminals were associated with gamblers placing more bets, and spending more time and money per session. However, gamblers had higher losses (albeit small) in venues with one terminal compared to venues with 2–5 terminals. No differences in net outcome were found between venues with one terminal and those with 6–10 and 11–16 terminals. Overall, the present study demonstrates that in the natural gambling environment, gambling behavior is reinforced in venues with multiple terminals.
Highlights
The Gambling Environment and Gambling BehaviorThe “availability hypothesis” suggests that the greater the number of opportunities to gamble, the greater the amount of gambling (Orford, 2002)
While gambling in social venues such as casinos and pubs, wins are Gambling Terminals and Gambling Behavior often announced to others in the venue through accompanying stimuli or cues such as lights and sounds coming from slot machines, as well as gamblers’ reactions to wins and losses (Griffiths and Parke, 2003)
Our finding that approximately half of the sample (52.5%) gambled in only one venue category is consistent with evidence that a large proportion of gamblers have favorite venues and electronic gaming machine (EGM) with some leaving the venue if unable to play on their favorite EGM, while others wait and sometimes try other EGMs until they can play on their favorite (AIPC, 2006; Hing and Haw, 2010)
Summary
The Gambling Environment and Gambling BehaviorThe “availability hypothesis” suggests that the greater the number of opportunities to gamble, the greater the amount of gambling (Orford, 2002). On a simulated electronic gaming machine (EGM) task, individuals who received audio-visual feedback (such as winning bells and messages) from other gamblers (who were not present) placed more bets and lost more money in comparison to individuals who did not receive such audio-visual feedback (Rockloff and Dyer, 2007). In another laboratory-based study, roulette gamblers placed more chips and engaged in riskier betting behaviors when gambling with others compared to those who gambled alone (Cole et al, 2011). There is experimental evidence that gambling with others increases betting speed (Brevers et al, 2015) and is associated with higher losses (Molde et al, 2017)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
