A Clean Slate: Adapting the Realization Effect to Online Gambling and Its Effectiveness in People With Gambling Problems

IF 1.8 3区 心理学 Q3 PSYCHOLOGY, APPLIED
Ke Zhang, Alex Imas, Luke Clark
{"title":"A Clean Slate: Adapting the Realization Effect to Online Gambling and Its Effectiveness in People With Gambling Problems","authors":"Ke Zhang,&nbsp;Alex Imas,&nbsp;Luke Clark","doi":"10.1002/bdm.2406","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Betting more after losses (i.e., “loss-chasing”) is a central clinical feature of disordered gambling. According to prospect theory, increasing risk-seeking following losses could arise from a failure to “re-reference.” By contrast, successful re-referencing between successive decisions closes the mental account, and any losses are regarded as final or <i>realized</i>; gamblers should not chase realized losses. The present study sought to test this “realization effect” among gamblers using an ecologically valid online gambling task. We were further interested in whether the effectiveness of the loss realization varied as a function of problem gambling severity. Using online recruitment of past-year gamblers stratified on the Problem Gambling Severity Index, we tested a group without gambling problems (<i>n</i> = 227), a group with at-risk gambling (<i>n</i> = 239), and a group with gambling problems (<i>n</i> = 223). Over a sequence of nine bets, after the sixth bet, half of the participants underwent a simulated realization procedure that entailed cashing out from the gambling website and redepositing their remaining funds on another website. The feedback comparison group were shown their account balance after the sixth bet but did not withdraw or transfer their funds. In line with the realization effect, the group with non-problem gambling significantly reduced their bet after cashing out. The realization procedure did not significantly ameliorate loss-chasing in the groups with at-risk gambling or gambling problems. We conclude that the realization effect can be elicited in an online gambling context but that stronger interventions for realizing losses may be required for people experiencing gambling problems.</p>","PeriodicalId":48112,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Behavioral Decision Making","volume":"37 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/bdm.2406","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Behavioral Decision Making","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/bdm.2406","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, APPLIED","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Betting more after losses (i.e., “loss-chasing”) is a central clinical feature of disordered gambling. According to prospect theory, increasing risk-seeking following losses could arise from a failure to “re-reference.” By contrast, successful re-referencing between successive decisions closes the mental account, and any losses are regarded as final or realized; gamblers should not chase realized losses. The present study sought to test this “realization effect” among gamblers using an ecologically valid online gambling task. We were further interested in whether the effectiveness of the loss realization varied as a function of problem gambling severity. Using online recruitment of past-year gamblers stratified on the Problem Gambling Severity Index, we tested a group without gambling problems (n = 227), a group with at-risk gambling (n = 239), and a group with gambling problems (n = 223). Over a sequence of nine bets, after the sixth bet, half of the participants underwent a simulated realization procedure that entailed cashing out from the gambling website and redepositing their remaining funds on another website. The feedback comparison group were shown their account balance after the sixth bet but did not withdraw or transfer their funds. In line with the realization effect, the group with non-problem gambling significantly reduced their bet after cashing out. The realization procedure did not significantly ameliorate loss-chasing in the groups with at-risk gambling or gambling problems. We conclude that the realization effect can be elicited in an online gambling context but that stronger interventions for realizing losses may be required for people experiencing gambling problems.

Abstract Image

一片净土:将 "实现效应 "适用于网络赌博及其对有赌博问题的人的有效性
在输钱之后下更多的赌注(即 "追逐损失")是赌博失调的一个核心临床特征。根据前景理论,输钱后寻求更多风险可能是由于 "重新参照 "失败所致。与此相反,在连续决策之间成功地重新参照会关闭心理账户,任何损失都会被视为最终或已实现的损失;赌徒不应该追逐已实现的损失。本研究试图通过一项生态学上有效的在线赌博任务来检验赌徒的这种 "实现效应"。我们还想进一步了解,损失实现的效果是否会随着赌博问题的严重程度而变化。我们在网上招募了根据问题赌博严重程度指数分层的上一年赌徒,对无赌博问题组(n = 227)、有赌博风险组(n = 239)和有赌博问题组(n = 223)进行了测试。在一连九次下注中,第六次下注后,半数参与者进行了模拟变现程序,即从赌博网站提现,并将剩余资金转存到另一个网站。反馈对比组则在第六次下注后显示其账户余额,但不提取或转移资金。与 "意识到 "效应一致的是,无问题赌博组在提现后明显减少了赌注。在有赌博风险或赌博问题的组别中,变现程序并没有明显改善追逐损失的情况。我们的结论是,实现效应可以在网络赌博中产生,但对于有赌博问题的人来说,可能需要更有力的干预措施来实现损失。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
5.00%
发文量
40
期刊介绍: The Journal of Behavioral Decision Making is a multidisciplinary journal with a broad base of content and style. It publishes original empirical reports, critical review papers, theoretical analyses and methodological contributions. The Journal also features book, software and decision aiding technique reviews, abstracts of important articles published elsewhere and teaching suggestions. The objective of the Journal is to present and stimulate behavioral research on decision making and to provide a forum for the evaluation of complementary, contrasting and conflicting perspectives. These perspectives include psychology, management science, sociology, political science and economics. Studies of behavioral decision making in naturalistic and applied settings are encouraged.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信