Abstract
Many research findings in the gambling studies field rely on self-report data. A very small body of empirical research also suggests that when using self-report, players report their gambling losses inaccurately. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the differences between objective and subjective gambling spent data by comparing gambler’s actual behavioral tracking data with their self-report data over a 1-month period. A total of 17,742 Norwegian online gamblers were asked to participate in an online survey. Of those surveyed, 1335 gamblers answered questions relating to gambling expenditure that could be compared with their actual gambling behavior. The study found that the estimated loss self-reported by gamblers was correlated with the actual objective loss and that players with higher losses tended to have more difficulty estimating their gambling expenditure (i.e., players who spent more money gambling also appeared to have more trouble estimating their expenses accurately). Overall, the findings demonstrate that caution is warranted when using self-report data relating to amount of money spent gambling in any studies that are totally reliant on self-report data.
Highlights
Many research findings in the gambling studies field—including research into online gambling—rely on self-report data
The study found that the estimated loss self-reported by gamblers was correlated with the actual objective loss and that players with higher losses tended to have more difficulty estimating their gambling expenditure
The median gross gaming revenue (GGR) which is the difference between the amount of money bet minus the amount of money won was larger among those that reported their subjective gambling spend compared to the total sample (1027 [Norwegian Krone] NOK. vs. 702 NOK)
Summary
Many research findings in the gambling studies field—including research into online gambling—rely on self-report data. The basis for their conclusion was the comparison of average self-reported past year losses with industry wide data of the same time period. Blaszczynski et al (1997) studied the interpretation of seemingly straightforward survey items such as ‘‘how much do you spend gambling?’’ They found that only two-thirds or less of their participants calculated the figure to be the difference between the initial amount risked and the residual amount of money at the conclusion of the session This led to the conclusion that more attention should be given to providing clear instructions in surveys. The relative validity of each question format was subsequently established by the correspondence of reported gambling expenditures with actual Ontario gambling revenue, as well as with amounts obtained by prospective diaries. They found that slight variations in question wording resulted in significant variation in reported expenditure amounts
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
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 call
