On gambling research, social science and the consequences of commercial gambling

Abstract

Social, political, economic, geographic and cultural processes related to the significant growth of the gambling industries have, in recent years, been the subject of a growing body of research. This body of research has highlighted relationships between social class and gambling expenditure, as well as the design, marketing and location of gambling products and businesses. It has also demonstrated the regressive nature of much gambling revenue, illuminating the influence that large gambling businesses have had on government policy and on researchers, including research priorities, agendas, and outcomes. Recently, critics have contended that although such scholarship has produced important insights about the operations and effects of gambling businesses, it is ideologically motivated and lacks scientific rigour. This response explains some basic theoretical and disciplinary concepts that such critique misunderstands, and argues for the value of social, political economic, geographic and cultural perspectives to the broader, interdisciplinary field of gambling research.

Giving room to subjectivity in understanding and assessing problem gambling: A patient-centered approach focused on quality of life

“…Much work has focused on factors that contribute to the development of gambling behavior and gambling disorder. Some researches emphasized the role of environment, including socioeconomic and political aspects (Delfabbro & King, 2017); others, the individual vulnerability in a medical perspective (Livingstone et al, 2018). These different approaches have led to different social representations of gambling, problem gambling, and recovery (Reith & Dobbie, 2012).…”

How Luhmann’s systems theory can inform gambling studies

“…Delfabbro and King's (2017) individual-centred perspective sees that for exploitation of consumers to occur, a strategic and rational enterprise would be necessary. Livingstone et al (2018) argue instead that gambling is based on social structures and the a See Silvast & Virtanen (2014) for details on the role of objects in systems theory. economic logic of revenue maximisation, including market competition and spatial distribution of demand that produce social outcomes such as inequality.…”

“…Hence, gambling providers as organisations can act against the general interest without needing to strategically engage in such a direction (cf. Delfabbro & King, 2017;Livingstone et al, 2018). Following the systems theory, not only the logic of the economic system but previous decisions of the organisation system intervene in public interest policy-making.…”

“…This has not only been true of the dominant position of biopsychological views which approach problem gambling as a mental or behavioural disorder, but also of economic theories portraying the act of gambling as consumption (see Aasved, 2003;Marionneau, 2015). This individualist approach has affected how we view problem gamblers, and also how we consider gambling provision or even gambling research (cf., the recent debate on whether gambling is a capitalist conspiracy (e.g., Delfabbro & King, 2017;Livingstone et al, 2018)).…”

Gambling harm is everybody's business: A public health approach and call to action

“…While not the focus of this piece, it is recognised as a central issue for consideration in any work to tackle gambling-related harms and has been addressed in depth in several recent articles. 14 , 15 , 16…”