Psychographic and Demographic Profiles of State Lottery Ticket Purchasers

Abstract

Data from a national mail panel are used to develop psychographic and demographic profiles of heavier, lighter, and nonpurchasers of state lottery tickets. The research is limited to the sixteen states that offered a lottery at the time the study was completed. The resulting profiles indicate that each of the groups has identifiable characteristics. The findings tend to dispel some of the stereotyped characteristics of lottery players-that they are poor, uneducated, and unemployed.

The Inequality of Fair Play: Lottery Gambling and Social Stratification in Germany

“…Some studies analyse only macrolevel aggregate data and study the relationship between turnover per capita and the income levels of certain geographical areas (Clotfelter, 1979;Vasche, 1985;Mikesell, 1989;Jackson, 1994;Hansen, 1995). Other studies examine the tax incidence of lotteries by means of microlevel data, mostly by employing representative population survey data or data from surveys of lottery winners (Spiro, 1974;Brinner and Clotfelter, 1975;Suits, 1977a;Livernois, 1987;McConkey and Warren, 1987;Borg and Mason, 1988;Vaillancourt and Grignon, 1988;Clotfelter and Cook, 1991;Kitchen and Powells, 1991). Further studies combine micro-and macrolevel data, for example, Clotfelter and Cook (1987), Koza (1982), or Heavey (1978).…”

An exploratory study of gambling motivations and their impact on the purchase frequencies of various gambling products

“…For example, McDaniel and Zuckerman (2003) found gambling motivation and behavior related to demographics and personality (i.e., sensational seeking and impulsivity). McConkey and Warren (1987) discovered identifiable demographics profiles for buyers of state lottery tickets. Volberg (2003) postulated that gambling activities are gender and class-based.…”

Government-sponsored lotteries: Exploring purchase and nonpurchase motivations

“…t ϭ 6.43, p Ͻ .01 An alternative method commonly used to examine lottery purchase behavior is to assess differences in motivations across varying levels of playing intensity (cf. Burns et al, 1990;Clotfelter & Cook, 1989;Langenderfer, 1996;Miyazaki et al, 1996;McConkey & Warren, 1987). To perform this analysis, respondents were systematically divided into three groups: nonplayers, light players, and heavy players of the lottery.…”

“…Senate, 1985). This apparent conflict of interest, coupled with the widespread availability of lotteries, aggregate economic impact, and societal significance, compels researchers to seriously consider the implications surrounding lottery purchase and consumption.In general, prior academic lottery research has been of two types: (a) economic analyses of lotteries from primarily government finance perspectives (e.g., Borg & Mason, 1988;Mikesell, 1994;Scoggins, 1994), and (b) general evaluations of player characteristics and behaviors (e.g., Burns et al, 1990;Clotfelter & Cook, 1993;Cole & Hastie, 1978;Holtgraves & Skeel, 1992;McConkey & Warren, 1987). Although most of the latter studies provide information that is useful in determining who plays the lottery and sometimes how they play, a topic studied less often is why people do or do not play -that is, what are the underlying motivations of lottery purchase and nonpurchase behavior?…”