This article is available in: PDF HTML

Internet Gambling: A Critical Review of Behavioural Tracking Research

Bernardo T. Chagas, Jorge F. S. Gomes

Abstract


This paper reviews and analyzes studies that are focused on Internet gambling with the use of behavioural tracking and big data to identify gambling behaviour. The behaviour of gamblers has been extensively studied and much has been published on the subject. The vast majority of research has relied on self-reported gambling behaviour or case study research. With the advent of the Internet, however, it has become possible for researchers to remotely study the real behaviour of gamblers. The goal has been to empirically describe playing behaviour in several conditions and contexts. Existing research, conducted since the 2000s, focuses on several forms of gambling such as sports betting, casino, poker, and lottery, but there is still only a concise body of research on gambling behaviour with the use of Internet gambling tracking data. Most studies are based on the same databases, meaning that a few companies and websites were the basis for most of the research produced so far. It is important to explore new sources of information, methodologies, and approaches to enrich discussion and contribute to a better understanding of this field. The empirical analysis of gambling behaviour with the use of tracking data was found to greatly contribute to the understanding of player behaviour, despite existing limitations and problems. Considering that Internet gambling behavioural tracking is still a fairly recent phenomenon, much can still be done to further develop this field of research.

Cet article examine et analyse les études axées sur le jeu en ligne qui recourent au suivi comportemental et aux mégadonnées pour cerner le comportement lié au jeu. Or, on a souvent étudié le comportement des joueurs et on a beaucoup publié sur le sujet, mais jusqu’à présent, la majeure partie de la recherche repose sur le comportement autodéclaré ou la recherche fondée sur les études de cas. Avec l’avènement d’Internet, il est dorénavant possible pour les chercheurs d’étudier à distance le comportement réel des joueurs. L’objectif a donc consisté à décrire de manière empirique le comportement lié au jeu dans plusieurs conditions et contextes. La recherche existante, menée depuis les années 2000, se concentre sur plusieurs formes de jeux de hasard tels que les paris sportifs, le casino, le poker et la loterie. Mais à ce jour, il n’existe qu’un corpus de recherches très concis sur le comportement lié au jeu qui utilise des données de suivi sur le jeu par Internet. La plupart des études sont fondées sur les mêmes bases de données, car seulement quelques entreprises et sites Web ont servi de base à la plupart des recherches produites jusqu’à maintenant. Il est donc important d’explorer de nouvelles sources d’information, méthodologies et approches pour pouvoir enrichir les discussions et améliorer la compréhension de ce domaine. L’analyse empirique du comportement lié au jeu à l’aide de données de suivi a ainsi largement contribué à la compréhension du comportement du joueur en dépit des limites et problèmes existants. Si l’on tient compte du fait que le suivi comportemental du jeu sur Internet est un phénomène encore assez récent, il reste beaucoup à faire pour exploiter davantage ce domaine de recherche.


Full Text:

PDF HTML

References


Adami, N., Benini, S., Boschetti, A., & Canini, L. (2013). Markers of unsustainable gambling for early detection of at-risk online gamblers. International Gambling Studies, 13, 188–204.

Auer, M., & Griffiths, M. D. (2013). Voluntary limit setting and player choice in most intense online gamblers: An empirical study of gambling behaviour. Journal of Gambling Studies, 29, 647–660.

Auer, M., & Griffiths, M. D. (2014a). An empirical investigation of theoretical loss and gambling intensity. Journal of Gambling Studies, 30, 879–887.

Auer, M., & Griffiths, M. D. (2014b). Personalised feedback in the promotion of responsible gambling: A brief overview. Responsible Gambling Review,1, 27–36.

Auer, M., & Griffiths, M. D. (2015a). Testing normative and self-appraisal feedback in an online slot-machine pop-up in a real-world setting. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 339.

Auer, M., & Griffiths, M. D. (2015b). Theoretical loss and gambling intensity (revisited): A response to Braverman et al. (2013). Journal of Gambling Studies, 31, 921–931.

Auer, M., & Griffiths, M. D. (2015c). The use of personalized behavioral feedback for online gamblers: An empirical study. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 1406. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01406

Auer, M., & Griffiths, M. D. (2016a). Personalized behavioral feedback for online gamblers: A real world empirical study. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, 1875.

Auer, M., & Griffiths, M. D. (2016b). Self-reported losses versus actual losses in online gambling: An empirical study. Journal of Gambling Studies. Advance online publication. doi:10.1007/s10899-016-9648-0

Auer, M., Malischnig, D., & Griffiths, M. D. (2014). Is ‘‘pop-up’’ messaging in online slot machine gambling effective as a responsible gambling strategy? Journal of Gambling Issues, 29, 1–10.

Auer, M., Schneeberger, A., & Griffiths, M. D. (2012). Theoretical loss and gambling intensity: A simulation study. Gaming Law Review and Economics, 16, 269–273.

Braverman, J., LaBrie, R. A., & Shaffer, H. J. (2011). A taxometric analysis of actual Internet sports gambling behavior. Psychological Assessment, 23, 234–244.

Braverman, J., LaPlante, D. A., Nelson, S. E., & Shaffer, H. J. (2013). Using cross-game behavioral markers for early identification of high-risk Internet gamblers. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 27, 868–877.

Braverman, J., & Shaffer, H. J. (2010). How do gamblers start gambling: Identifying behavioural markers for high-risk internet gambling. European Journal of Public Health, 22, 273–278.

Braverman, J., Tom, M., & Shaffer, H. J. (2013). Tilting at windmills: A comment on Auer and Griffiths. Journal of Gambling Studies, 31, 359–366.

Braverman, J., Tom, M. A., & Shaffer, H. J. (2014). Accuracy of self-reported versus actual online gambling wins and losses. Psychological Assessment, 26, 865–877.

Broda, A., LaPlante, D. A., Nelson, S. E., LaBrie, R. A., Bosworth, L., & Shaffer, H. J. (2008). Virtual harm reduction efforts of Internet gambling: Effects of deposit limits on actual Internet sports gambling behavior. Harm Reduction Journal, 5, 1–27.

Brosowski, T., Meyer, G., & Hayer, T. (2012). Analyses of multiple types of online gambling within one provider: An extended evaluation framework of actual online gambling behaviour. International Gambling Studies, 12, 405–419.

Dragicevic, S., Percy, C., Kudic, A., & Parke, J. (2015). A descriptive analysis of demographic and behavioral data from Internet gamblers and those who self-exclude from online gambling platforms. Journal of Gambling Studies, 31, 105–132.

Dragicevic, S., Tsogas, S. B., & Kudic, A. (2011). Analysis of casino online gambling data in relation to behavioural risk markers for high-risk gambling and player protection. International Gambling Studies, 11, 377–391.

European Commission. (2011). Green paper on on-line gambling in the Internal Market. Retrieved from http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52011DC0128&from=EN

Fiedler, I. (2011). The gambling habits of online poker players. The Journal of Gambling Business and Economics, 6, 1–24.

Fiedler, I. (2013). Gamblers’ habits: Empirical evidence on the behavior of regulars, newcomers and dropouts. Journal of Gambling Studies, 29, 289–309.

Gainsbury, S. (2011). Player account-based gambling: Potentials for behaviour-based research methodologies. International Gambling Studies, 11, 153–171.

Gainsbury, S., Hing, N., Delfabbro, P. H., & King, D. L. (2014). A taxonomy of gambling and casino games via social media and online technologies. International Gambling Studies, 14, 196–213.

Gainsbury, S., & Russell, A. (2015). Betting patterns for sports and races: A longitudinal analysis of online wagering in Australia. Journal of Gambling Studies, 31, 17–32.

Gainsbury, S., Sadeque, S., Mizerski, R., & Blaszczynski, A. (2012). Wagering in Australia: A retrospective behavioural analysis of betting patterns based on player account data. Journal of Gambling Business & Economics, 6, 50–68.

Gray, H. M., Jónsson, G. K., LaPlante, D. A., & Shaffer, H. J. (2015). Expanding the study of internet gambling behavior: Trends within the Icelandic lottery and sportsbetting platform. Journal of Gambling Studies, 31, 483–499.

Gray, H. M., LaPlante, D. A., & Shaffer, H. J. (2012). Behavioral characteristics of Internet gamblers who trigger corporate responsible gambling interventions. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 26, 527–535.

Griffiths, M. D. (1996). Gambling on the internet: A brief note. Journal of Gambling Studies, 12, 471–473.

Griffiths, M. D. (1999). Gambling Technologies: Prospects for Problem Gambling. Journal of Gambling Studies, 15, 265-283.

Griffiths, M. D. (2009). Social responsibility in gambling: The implications of real-time behavioural tracking. Casino and Gaming International, 5, 99–104.

Griffiths, M. D. (2010). The use of online methodologies in data collection for gambling and gaming addictions. International Journal of Mental Health Addiction, 8, 8–20.

Griffiths, M. D. (2011). Empirical Internet gambling research (1996–2008): Some further comments. Addiction Research and Theory, 19, 85–86.

Griffiths, M. D. (2012). Internet gambling, player protection and social responsibility. In R. Williams, R. Wood, & J. Parke (Eds.), Routledge handbook of internet gambling (pp. 227–249). London, United Kingdom: Routledge.

Griffiths, M. D. (2013). Behavioral Tracking in Gambling: New Empirical Data and the Development of a New Social Responsibility Tool [Powerpoint slides]. Retrieved from http://www.responsiblegambling.org/docs/discovery-2013/behavioural-tracking-in-gambling-new-empirical-data-and-a-new-social-responsibility-tool.pdf?sfvrsn=4

Griffiths, M. D. (2014). The use of behavioural tracking methodologies in the study of online gambling. SAGE Research Methods Cases. http://methods.sagepub.com/case/behavioural-tracking-methodologies-in-the-study-of-online-gambling

Griffiths, M. D., & Auer, M. (2011). Approaches to understanding online versus offline gaming impacts. Casino and Gaming International, 7, 45–48.

Griffiths, M. D., Parke, A., Wood, R., & Parke, J. (2006). Internet gambling: An overview of psychosocial impacts. UNLV Gaming Research & Review Journal, 10, 27–39.

Griffiths, M. D., & Parke, J. (2002). The Social Impact of Internet Gambling. Social Science Computer Review, 20, 312-320.

Griffiths, M. D., & Parke, J. (2010). Adolescent gambling on the internet: A review. International Journal of Adolescent Medicine and Health, 22, 58-75.

Griffiths, M. D., & Whitty, M. W. (2010). Online behavioural tracking in Internet gambling research: Ethical and methodological issues. International Journal of Internet Research Ethics, 3, 104–117.

Haefeli, J., Lischer, S., & Schwarz, J. (2011). Early detection items and responsible gambling features for online gambling. International Gambling Studies, 11, 273–288.

Hayer, T., & Meyer, G. (2011). Internet self-exclusion: Characteristics of self-excluded gamblers and preliminary evidence for its effectiveness. International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction, 9, 296–307.

LaBrie, R. A., Kaplan, S., LaPlante, D. A., Nelson, S. E., & Shaffer, H. J. (2008). Inside the virtual casino: A prospective longitudinal study of actual Internet casino gambling. European Journal of Public Health, 18, 410–416.

LaBrie, R. A., LaPlante, D.A., Nelson, S. E., Schumann, A., & Shaffer, H. J. (2007). Assessing the playing field: A prospective longitudinal study of Internet sports gambling behavior. Journal of Gambling Studies, 23, 347–362.

LaBrie, R. A., & Shaffer, H. J. (2011). Identifying behavioral markers of disordered Internet sports gambling. Addiction Research, & Theory, 19, 56–65.

LaPlante D. A., Kleschinsky J. H., LaBrie R. A., Nelson S. E., & Shaffer H. J. (2009). Sitting at the virtual poker table: A prospective epidemiological study of actual Internet poker gambling behavior. Computers in Human Behavior, 25, 711–717.

LaPlante, D. A., Schumann, A., LaBrie, R. A., Nelson, S. E., & Shaffer, H. J. (2008). Population trends in Internet sports gambling. Computers in Human Behavior, 24, 2399–2414.

Ma, X., Kim, S. H., & Kim, S. S. (2014). Online gambling behavior: The impacts of cumulative outcomes, recent outcomes, and prior use. Information Systems Research, 25, 511–527.

Nelson, S. E., LaPlante, D. A., Peller, A. J., Schumann, A., LaBrie, R. A., & Shaffer, H. J. (2008). Real limits in the virtual world: Self-limiting behavior of Internet gamblers. Journal of Gambling Studies, 24, 463–477.

Peller A. J., LaPlante D. A., & Shaffer H. J. (2008). Parameters for safer gambling behavior: Examining the empirical research. Journal of Gambling Studies, 24, 519–534.

Shaffer, H. J., Peller, A. J., LaPlante, D. A., Nelson, S. E., & LaBrie, R. A. (2010). Toward a paradigm shift in Internet gambling research: From opinion and self-report to actual behavior. Addiction Research and Theory, 18, 270–283.

Shaffer, H. J., Peller, A. J., LaPlante, D. A., Nelson, S. E., & LaBrie, R. A. (2011). Research using actual behavior encourages and confirms accurate self-report: A response to Griffiths’ (2010) further comments. Addiction Research and Theory, 19, 87–88.

Stevens, R. (2006). Internet Gambling Bibliography: Update and Analysis. UNLV Gaming Research & Review Journal, 10, 95-100.

Tom, M. A., & Shaffer, H. J. (2016). Devil in the details: A critical review of ‘‘Theoretical Loss.” Journal of Gambling Studies, 32, 865–875.

Xu, J., & Harvey, N. (2014). Carry on winning: The gamblers’ fallacy creates hot hand effects in online gambling. Cognition, 131, 173–180.

Xuan, Z., & Shaffer, H. J. (2009). How do gamblers end gambling: Longitudinal analysis of Internet gambling behaviors prior to account closure due to gambling related problems. Journal of Gambling Studies, 25, 239–252.




DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.4309/jgi.v0i36.3987

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