This article is available in: PDF HTML

Built-in bad luck: Evidence of near-miss outcomes by design in scratch cards

Madison Stange, Dan G. Brown, Kevin Harrigan, Michael Dixon


Scratch cards are a pervasive form of gambling in the Canadian marketplace. Despite their widespread appeal, we are only beginning to understand the influence of their structural characteristics on the player. The most widely studied of these characteristics is the near-miss, a game outcome in which the player gets two of the three needed symbols to win a jackpot prize. Although other authors have noted the existence of these outcomes in scratch cards, no systematic investigation has been undertaken to understand their occurrence in these games. We present the results of an analysis to determine the frequency of these outcomes using two samples (sample A, n = 41; sample B, n = 61) of a popular scratch card game available in Ontario, Canada. Our results suggest that certain scratch card games may be designed to include more pairs of jackpot symbols (i.e., more near-miss outcomes) than any other symbol pair. In the game that we analyzed, the top prize symbol occurred more often than any other symbol and appeared to be manipulated to appear in clusters of two, creating many near-miss outcomes to the jackpot prize. This work has strong implications for the study of gambling behaviour, responsible gambling strategies, as well as for the scientific investigation of scratch card games.

 Les cartes à gratter sont une forme très répandue de jeux sur le marché canadien. Malgré leur grand attrait, nous commençons à comprendre l’influence de leurs caractéristiques structurelles sur le joueur. La caractéristique la plus étudiée parmi elles est un résultat s'approchant du résultat gagnant; le joueur obtient deux des trois symboles nécessaires pour gagner un gros lot. Bien que d’autres auteurs aient noté l’existence de ce genre de résultats dans des cartes à gratter, aucune enquête systématique n’a été entreprise pour comprendre leur occurrence dans ces jeux. Nous présentons les résultats d’une analyse pour déterminer la fréquence de ces résultats en utilisant deux échantillons (échantillon A, n = 41; échantillon B, n = 61) d’un jeu de cartes à gratter populaire, vendu en Ontario, au Canada. Selon nos résultats, certains jeux de cartes à gratter peuvent être conçus pour inclure plus de paires de symboles pour le gros lot (c’est-à-dire des résultats plus proches) que n’importe quelle autre paire de symboles. Dans le jeu que nous avons analysé, le symbole du prix le plus élevé était présent plus souvent que tout autre symbole et semblait être manipulé pour apparaître en grappes de deux, créant de nombreux résultats proches du résultat gagnant. Ce travail a de fortes répercussions pour l’étude du comportement du jeu, du jeu et des stratégies responsables, de même que pour l’étude scientifique des jeux de cartes à gratter.

Full Text:



Ariyabuddhiphongs, V. (2011). Lottery gambling: A review. Journal of Gambling Studies, 27, 15–33. doi:10.1007/s10899-010-9194-0

Brown, R. I. F. (1986). Arousal and sensation-seeking components in the general explanation of gambling and gambling addictions. International Journal of the Addictions, 21(9–10), 1001–1016. doi:10.3109/10826088609077251

Clark, L., Crooks, B., Clarke, R., Aitken, M. R., & Dunn, B. D. (2012). Physiological responses to near-miss outcomes and personal control during simulated gambling. Journal of Gambling Studies, 28, 123–137. doi:10.1007/s10899-011-9247-z

Clark, L., Lawrence, A. J., Astley-Jones, F., & Gray, N. (2009). Gambling near-misses enhance motivation to gamble and recruit win-related brain circuitry. Neuron, 61, 481–490. doi:10.1016/j.neuron.2008.12.031. Retrieved from:

Clark, L., Liu, R., McKavanagh, R., Garrett, A., Dunn, B. D., & Aitken, M. R. (2013). Learning and affect following near-miss outcomes in simulated gambling. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 26, 442–450. doi:10.1023/A:1026384011003

Côté, D., Caron, A., Aubert, J., Desrochers, V., & Ladouceur, R. (2003). Near wins prolong gambling on a video lottery terminal. Journal of Gambling Studies, 19, 433–438.

Dixon, M. J., Harrigan, K. A., Jarick, M., MacLaren, V., Fugelsang, J. A., & Sheepy, E. (2011). Psychophysiological arousal signatures of near-misses in slot machine play. International Gambling Studies, 11, 393–407. doi:10.1080/14459795.2011.603134. Retrieved from:

Dixon, M. J., MacLaren, V., Jarick, M., Fugelsang, J. A., & Harrigan, K. A. (2013). The frustrating effects of just missing the jackpot: Slot machine near-misses trigger large skin conductance responses, but no post-reinforcement pauses. Journal of Gambling Studies, 29, 661–674. doi:10.1007/s10899-012-9333-x

Dubhashi, D. P., & Panconesi, A. (2009). Concentration of measure for the analysis of randomized algorithms. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

Griffiths, M. (1995). Adolescent gambling. London, UK: Routledge.

Griffiths, M. (1997). The national lottery and scratchcards: A psychological perspective. Psychologist Bulletin of the British Psychological Society, 10, 23–26. Retrieved from:

Griffiths, M. (2002). Are lottery scratch cards a “hard” form of gambling? Journal of Gambling Issues, 7. doi:10.4309/jgi.2002.7.8. Retrieved from:

Harrigan, K. A. (2007). Slot machine structural characteristics: Distorted player views of payback percentages. Journal of Gambling Issues, 20, 215–234. doi: 10.4309/jgi.2007.20.7. Retrieved from:

Harrigan, K. A. (2009). Slot machines: Pursuing responsible gaming practices for virtual reels and near misses. International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction, 7, 68–83. doi:10.1007/s11469-007-9139-8. Retrieved from:

Kassinove, J. I., & Schare, M. L. (2001). Effects of the “near miss” and the “big win” on persistence at slot machine gambling. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 15, 155. doi:10.1037//0893-164X.15.2.155

Ontario Lottery and Gaming Corporation (2015a). Player’s guide fact sheet, Cash For Life, INSTANT Lottery Game No. 1167. Retrieved from:

Ontario Lottery and Gaming Corporation (2015b). Player’s Guide Fact Sheet, Cash For Life, INSTANT Lottery Game No. 1171. Retrieved from:

Ontario Lottery and Gaming Corporation (2016). 2014–15 Annual report. Sault Ste. Marie, ON: OLG. Retrieved from:

Reid, R. L. (1986). The psychology of the near miss. Journal of Gambling Behavior, 2, 32–39. Retrieved from:

Rogers, P. (1998). The cognitive psychology of lottery gambling: A theoretical review. Journal of Gambling Studies, 14, 111–134. doi:10.1023/A:1023042708217

Short, M. M., Penney, A. M., Mazmanian, D., & Jamieson, J. (2015). Lottery ticket and instant win ticket gambling: Exploring the distinctions. Journal of Gambling Issues, 30, 6–21. doi:10.4309/jgi.2015.30.4

Stange, M., Grau, M., Osazuwa, S., Graydon, C., & Dixon, M. J. (2017). Reinforcing small wins and frustrating near-misses: Further investigation into scratch card gambling. Journal of Gambling Studies, 33, 47–63. doi:10.1007/s10899-016-9611-0

Stange, M., Graydon, C., & Dixon, M. J. (2016). “I was that close”: Investigating gamblers’ reactions to losses, wins, and near-misses on scratch cards. Journal of Gambling Studies, 32, 187–203. doi:10.1007/s10899-015-9538-x

Stange, M., Graydon, C., & Dixon, M. J. (in press). Increased urge to gamble following near-miss outcomes may drive purchasing behaviour in scratch card gambling. Journal of Gambling Studies. doi:10.1007/s10899-016-9662-2

Turner, N., & Horbay, R. (2004). How do slot machines and other electronic gambling machines really work? Journal of Gambling Issues, 11. Retrieved from:

Wadhwa, M., & Kim, J. C. (2015). Can a near win kindle motivation? The impact of nearly winning on motivation for unrelated rewards. Psychological Science, 26, 701–708. doi:10.1177/0956797614568681

Copyright © 2017 | Centre for Addiction and Mental Health
Editor-in-chief: Sherry Stewart, Ph.D.
Managing Editor: Vivien Rekkas, Ph.D. (contact)