Time out: Prediction of self-exclusion from daily fantasy sports.

Abstract

Objective: Responsible gambling (RG) tools that include play management software, self-limit features, and self-exclusion are relatively common offerings on major online gambling platforms. However, how online gaming and daily fantasy sports (DFS) players use such tools is less clear. The goals of this article were to understand how players use self-exclusion at a major DFS platform and to identify DFS activity-related predictors of self-exclusion. Method: During November 2015, DraftKings, a major DFS provider, rolled out a self-exclusion feature that allows players to self-exclude from the platform for a specified amount of time, up to 5 years. We used player records from DraftKings, examining play patterns and self-exclusion across 3+ years of data. Results: We found that less than 0.5% of subscribers in our sample self-excluded during the study period and almost one third of those who self-excluded did so more than once. In general, self-excluders engaged with a greater variety of contests and sports and entered contests with higher entry fees than those who did not self-exclude. Repeat self-excluders selected shorter initial self-exclusion terms and also engaged with a greater variety of game types and sports than one-time self-excluders. However, self-excluders did not engage in riskier contests or experience higher percent losses. Conclusion: Our findings have implications for our understanding of RG feature use among DFS subscribers and markers of risk for experiencing problems with DFS and gambling more generally. Public Health Significance StatementThis study found that while self-exclusion from a daily fantasy sports (DFS) platform was a rare behavior, those who self-excluded displayed distinguishable patterns of activity prior to self-exclusion. These findings contribute to a body of literature identifying potential risk factors for experiencing problems with DFS play and gambling.

Second Session at the Virtual Poker Table: A Contemporary Study of Actual Online Poker Activity

“…Although this is not a limitation of the study within its scope per se, we should note that this data did not come with a screener (e.g., the Brief Biosocial Gambling Screen; see Tom et al, 2014 ) or an indicator or proxy for (e.g., voluntary self-exclusion; see Nelson et al, 2022 ) suffering from problems in controlling one’s play. While there is some overlap, there is a difference between excessive poker play and problematic (i.e., harmful) poker play.…”

Cryptocurrency Trading, Day Trading, and Gambling Behavior: Examining the Moderating Effects of Financially Focused Self-Concept and Gambling Motives

“…Second, tools should be developed to allow people to self-regulate their cryptocurrency and day trading behavior, for example, by putting a voluntary limit (e.g., see an example in online gambling in Nelson et al, 2008 anda review in Delfabbro &King, 2021) on the amount of money that they can deposit into their account daily, weekly, or monthly, as well as the amount of time available for trading each day. In more extreme cases, implementing voluntary self-exclusion features (see Nelson et al, 2022) could also be an option on cryptocurrency and investment websites, which has had success in helping those with gambling-related problems (Caillon et al, 2019). Third, cryptocurrency and investing websites should consider implementing self-directed screens for psychometric measures such as the PGSI, FFS, and GMQ, and then provide tailored feedback about responses, similar to the Positive Play Scale's (Wood et al, 2017) integration into a major sports betting operator's safer gambling tools in 2023 (FG News, 2023).…”