Video slot machines are associated with both accelerated transition into problematic forms of gambling, as well as psychosocial harm above and beyond other forms of gambling. A growing body of evidence is uncovering how key design features of multiline slot machines produce an inflated experience of reward, despite the fact that these features offer no overall financial benefit to the player. A pernicious example of this are ‘losses disguised as wins’ (LDWs), which occur when simultaneous bets placed on multiple lines result in a winning combination that returns an amount greater than zero, but less the total wager. These events are usually accompanied by the same celebratory sounds and animations that accompany true wins. We argue that LDWs may leverage neuropsychological phenomena that underlie reinforcement learning and contribute to extended or repetitive use and gambling‐related harm. While other characteristics of slot machine gambling have been examined by cognitive neuroscientists, this feature has not yet received attention. Neuroscientific methods can be used to assess the impact of LDWs on the human reward system, to assess the claim that these events are a reinforcing and contributing factor in the development of harmful play. Positive findings would provide further persuasive evidence in support of strategies to minimise gambling harm through the regulation of machine design.
This study investigated whether there was community support for prominent gambling harm reduction policies, as well as perceived responsibility for electronic gambling machine (EGM) related harm in an Australian sample (n = 906). Using a randomised experimental design, we also explored whether these outcomes were influenced by three alternative explanations for EGM-related harm: a brain-based account of gambling addiction, an account that highlighted the intentional design of the gambling environment focused on the “losses disguised as wins” (LDWs), and a media release advocating against further government intervention in the gambling sector. We observed clear majority support for most policies presented, including mandatory pre-commitment, self-exclusion, and a $1 limit on EGM bets. A substantial majority of participants agreed that individuals, governments, and industry should be held responsible for EGM-related harm. Participants presented with the explanation of LDWs attributed greater responsibility for gambling-related harm to industry and government, less agreement that electronic gambling machines are fair, and more agreement that EGMs are likely to mislead or deceive consumers. There was some limited evidence of greater support for policy intervention in this group, including a blanket ban of EGMs, clinical treatment funded by gambling taxes, mass media campaigns, and mandatory pre-commitment for EGMs. We found no evidence that a brain-based account of gambling addiction substantially undermined support for policy intervention. We predicted that the information about LDWs and the brain-based account of EGM related harm would soften attributions of personal responsibility for gambling harm. Our results did not support either of these predictions.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.