The role of money in the excitement of gambling.

Abstract

Many gamblers claim that gambling is intrinsically exciting, with money playing only a secondary role. To examine the effects of the expectancy of winning money, the authors randomly assigned 243 male college student gamblers to 1 of 6 experimental or 1 of 3 control conditions. Control participants either simply watched a videotaped horse race or they picked a horse, but without wagering; that horse later turned out to be either the winner of the race or the runner-up. Experimental participants wagered $1 on a horse for a chance of winning either USD 2, USD 7, or USD 15, with half winning and half losing their wagers. Wagering led to increased heart rates and subjective excitement as a function of the expected payoff and of winning as opposed to losing the wager. The study was replicated with 200 female college student gamblers with similar results. These findings support the notion that the excitement of gambling is tied to the expectancy of winning money.

Win or Lose: Negotiating meaning of time and money within three gambling settings

“…Previous research with college student gamblers has shown how previous wins may determine subsequent reckless behaviours (Cummins, Nadorff, & Kelly, 2009). Larger wins in experimental horse racing, or as this study demonstrates for online gambling, can reinforce this gambling patterns as it prolongs the gambling period (Wulfert, Franco, Williams, Roland, & Maxson, 2008). Nonetheless, considering the current study results, it would be more appropriate to argue that the gamblers' perceptions of risks versus benefits alone are not enough to identify potential risk for gambling problems.…”

The Appropriateness of Using Laboratories and Student Participants in Gambling Research

“…Several studies of physiological reactions have found significant increases in regular gamblers' heart rates when gambling (on cards or electronic gaming machines) in laboratory (Ladouceur et al, 2003;Leary & Dickerson, 1985;Wulfert et al, 2008) or natural settings (Coulombe et al, 1992;Griffiths, 1993;Meyer et al, 2000). However, in a direct comparison, Anderson and Brown (1984) found significant differences in heart rate between laboratory and casino gambling situations in a group of experienced blackjack gamblers, with a significantly lower mean increase in heart rate (7bpm as compared to 23bpm) measured in the laboratory situation.…”

The Effects of Realistic Reward and Risk on Simulated Gambling Behavior

“…This indicator of gambling experience has been used in previous research. 5,6 The second variable assessed was impulsiveness, measured with the 54-item yes/no Eysenck Impulsiveness Questionnaire. 11 This questionnaire is a widely used instrument with well-documented psychometric properties and adequate internal consistency demonstrated at α = .82.…”

“…For example, research participants typically show significantly higher heart rates in a gambling simulation when they play for a chance of winning real money versus worthless points 7 or when they place a small wager on the outcome of a horse race for a chance of winning money versus only watching the race without wagering and possibly winning money. 5 An interesting example of previous research that has demonstrated a relationship between the degree of arousal and excitement on the one hand and the expectancy of winning increasing amounts of money on the other hand comes from a parametric study by Wulfert et al 6 In a 2 × 4 design, the investigators randomly assigned male college students to one of eight groups (n = 27 per group) and instructed them to select the winner in an upcoming horse race. Of the eight groups, two were control groups who simply chose a horse but did not wager on the outcome.…”

“…1 Increases in physiological arousal, particularly in heart rate, have been demonstrated in many studies of gambling behavior both in the natural environment 2-4 as well as the laboratory. 5,6 Compared to research in real-world settings, laboratory studies usually allow for better experimental control of the variables under investigation. However, a significant shortcoming of laboratory analogs is that they typically fall short of mimicking real-world gambling because they may not adequately model the degree of reward and particularly not the degree of risk involved in actual gambling.…”