Legal Aspects of Responsible Gaming Pre-commitment and Personal Feedback Initiatives

AuerMichael,; LittlerAlan,; GriffithsMark, D

doi:10.1089/glre.2015.1966

Cited by 13 publications

(30 citation statements)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This leads to the conclusion that there is little overlap between problem gambling and self-excluding. importance of early risk detection via behavioral tracking systems [1]. VSE also plays an important role in this context.…”

Section: "Self-exclusion" As a Predictor Of Problem Gamblingmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Should Voluntary "Self-Exclusion" by Gamblers be used as a Proxy Measure for Problem Gambling?

Griffiths¹,

Auer²

2016

MOJAMT

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Self-exclusion practices typically refer to the possibility for gamblers to voluntarily ban themselves from playing all (a selection of) games over a predetermined period. The period of exclusion can typically be chosen by the gambler although some operators have non-negotiable self-exclusion periods. Selfexclusion in both online sites and offline venues has become an important responsible gambling practice that is widely used by socially responsible operators. Auer, Littler and Griffiths. [1] briefly overviewed self-exclusion practices in both online and land-based environments. They argued that empirical research on the effectiveness of VSE in online gambling is rare. Hayer and Mayer [2] investigated a sample of 256 online gamblers who selfexcluded. who were then surveyed six & twelve months later. They found that VSE can have favourable psycho-social effects for the gambler. For instance, players showed a marked decrease in the willingness to gamble online shortly after they self-excluded. Haefeli et al. [3] tried to predict future self-exclusion by analyzing written player correspondence with a gaming company from 150 self-excluders (compared to 150 controls). They were able to correctly predict 76.6% of future self-exclusions based on written communications. Important indicators extracted from customer emails were increasing amount of interaction with customer services over a six-month period prior to self-exclusion, doubts about the results of games, and issues concerning account administration and financial transactions. Self-excluders were also different from controls with respect to the tonality of the email (i.e., they used threats and were more abusive in written communications). Based in previous empirical research, Gainsbury [4] claimed that VSE programs are under-utilized by problem gamblers. In general, it is known that individuals do not seek help for problem gambling until they reach serious crisis [5].Why do Players "Self-Exclude" and who are they?Reasons for players to self-exclude are manifold. In a study by Hayer and Meyer, [2] players frequently reported excluding as a preventive measure and annoyance with the operator as reasons for VSE. Furthermore, about one-fifth of self-excluders reported to be problem. gamblers (21.2%). Using the DSM-IV criteria for pathological gambling [6], Lischer [7] reported that in a study of three Swiss Casinos, 29% of self-excluders were pathological gamblers, 33% were problem gamblers, and 38% were recreational gamblers. Given that many voluntary self-excluders do not exclude themselves for gambling-related problems, Lischer [7] concluded that self-exclusion is not a good indicator of gambling-related problems. In line with these results Dragecevic and colleagues [8] compared self-excluders with other online players and reported no differences in the (i) mean number of gambling hours per month or (ii) minutes per gambling session. Similar to Hayer and Meyer [2], who report self-exclusion to be rather spontaneous, Dragicevic and colleagues [8] reported that 2...

show abstract

Section: "Self-exclusion" As a Predictor Of Problem Gamblingmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Auer, Littler and Griffiths. [1] briefly overviewed self-exclusion practices in both online and land-based environments. They argued that empirical research on the effectiveness of VSE in online gambling is rare.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Should Voluntary "Self-Exclusion" by Gamblers be used as a Proxy Measure for Problem Gambling?

Griffiths¹,

Auer²

2016

MOJAMT

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This simulation-based AI has shown that irrational gambling-related cognitions and misunderstandings linked to randomness and probabilities represent some of the key components contributing to the initiation and maintenance of problematic gambling in general, and in electronic gambling in particular [3,4]. Furthermore, it has been shown that problematic gambling behavior can be curtailed pursuant to cognitive-behavioral therapy and similar cognitive interventions gathered through simulation-based AI.…”

Section: 2mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As a consequence, some organizations and gaming operators are beginning to offer players information about common gambling myths and erroneous beliefs. Furthermore, players can now access general advice on healthy and responsible gambling [3,4].…”

Section: 2mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Take the example of the simulation-based AI conducted by Wohl et al He has developed an animation-based educational video regarding the function of slot machines, their results depicted that the animation was indeed effective in promoting responsible gaming as demonstrated by those viewing the video staying within their pre-set limits. The aforementioned survey also demonstrated that animated educational information on slot machines (EGMs) can be an effective to enhance user adherence to pre-set limits [3,4].…”

Section: 2mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Artificial Intelligence: Are You Sure? Beware of What You Wish!

Santos¹

2018

Simulation and Gaming

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Looming in the purview of gaming leisure industry is the utmost importance of artificial intelligence (AI). Its burgeoning preponderance can be straightforwardly depicted by the following conundrum: imagine you walk through into a dazzling casino in Macau aiming to play "Baccarat." As soon as you sit down in order to initiate your gambling journey, you actually realize that the casino table dealer has been replaced by a cuttingedge robot fully equipped to enhance even further casino's house advantage (that in the realm of "Baccarat" is very narrow). What would be your immediate thought? Should you proceed with your gambling endeavors? Should you refrain yourself from initiating your gambling endeavors? Or has your self-confidence just been boosted by this unexpected challenge? Nonetheless, if you scratch deep enough, underpinning these nonrhetorical questions is a rather twisted question: what if the casino patron or high roller (player) decides himself to foster his gambling skills through AI aiming to curb or even override casino's "house advantage?" In any event, should not we take AI on the scope of gaming leisure industry very seriously in order to avoid disrepute or moral hazard of casino gaming leisure industry as a whole in light of its corporate social responsibility? This chapter will provide an overview about the current prominence of AI or simulation-based AI in gaming leisure industry, mainly for research purposes in the context of problem gambling and of forecasting online casino patron's churn behavior. Finally, this chapter will carve out the foundations of candent challenges gaming leisure industry will face in the forthcoming future about the "moral hazard" deeply enshrined in the breadth of AI, especially if robots are due to replace humans as casino table dealers in the realm of table games.

show abstract

Predictors of Gamblers Beliefs About Responsible Gambling Measures

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

All authors declare that they have no conflict of interest. However, it should be noted that the first author (Jonny Engebø) works as a senior adviser with The Norwegian Gaming Authority where one of his major tasks is related to regulation and responsible gambling. He is also a PhD candidate with the University of Bergen. In addition, Engebø is a board member of GREF (Gaming Regulators European Forum and he is also co-chair of a GREF working group in responsible gambling. Further he is a member of the executive committee of EASG (The European Association for the Study of Gambling). Ethical approval:All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. The study was approved by the Regional Committee for Medical and Health Research Ethics, Western Norway (2013/120).

show abstract

Legal Aspects of Responsible Gaming Pre-commitment and Personal Feedback Initiatives

Cited by 13 publications

References 17 publications

Should Voluntary "Self-Exclusion" by Gamblers be used as a Proxy Measure for Problem Gambling?

Should Voluntary "Self-Exclusion" by Gamblers be used as a Proxy Measure for Problem Gambling?

Artificial Intelligence: Are You Sure? Beware of What You Wish!

Predictors of Gamblers Beliefs About Responsible Gambling Measures

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About