|
|
|
Introduction
|
|
Risky Behaviour Risk-Enhancing Phenomena in Gambling
Risk-Enhancing Phenomena in Gambling Eric K. H. Chan and Dr. G. Ron Frisch Introduction Researchers have long been interested in the relationships between group exposure (people playing in group versus individual situation), the familiarization effect (acquisition of knowledge of the game with repeated play) and risk-enhancing behaviour in gambling (increase in one's betting risk). Blascovich, Veach, and Ginsburg (1973) studied gambling behaviour based on the theory of the "risky shift". It was based on the assumption that groups tend to choose riskier alternatives than individuals do. They suggested using casino blackjack as a method for studying risk-taking behaviour. The overall results from Blascovich et al.'s (1973) study supported the familiarization effect in which the money people waged increased as more hands were played. The amount bet was also found to be significantly higher in groups. Higher betting effect was also found following winning hands. They concluded that the risky shift in gambling did happen. We investigated the differences with respect to group exposure and the familiarization effect. It was hypothesized that people playing in groups would exhibit more risky behaviour than those playing alone. It was also predicted that there would be an increase in risk-taking behaviour as more hands were played. In addition, we assessed the players' betting patterns following the outcome of each (winning and losing) hand. Method The sample was composed of fifty-nine (30 males and 29 females) undergraduate psychology students from the University of Windsor. Participants were randomly distributed into five groups. In the first group, males played alone; in the second group, females played alone; in the third group, males played individually in a group; in the fourth group, females played individually in a group; and in the final group, males and females played individually in a group. The 59 participants played in a pseudo casino (a felt blackjack blanket, a dealer's shoe with eight decks of cards, and gaming chips). Initially, a brief lesson on the game of blackjack was presented to each of the participants. Three sets of eight hands of blackjack were administered to all participants. Each of the participants was to play in only one of the five groups, but was to play for the full three sets. Results and Discussion Similar to previous findings, the results indicated that risk-taking behaviour increases as one becomes more familiar with the gambling activity (Blascovich et al., 1973; Ladouceur, Tourigny, & Mayrand, 1986). Participants in all five conditions (mixed, male group, male individual, female group, and female individual) bet more in the third set than the first or second set. Players placed higher bets as they progressed. Although players in our study realized that the outcome of the game was uncontrollable, they kept betting more as they progressed through the experiment. It has been suggested that when people win, they perceive the "illusion of control" (Langer, 1975) to a greater extent, and eventually bet irrationally to satisfy their beliefs (Dixon, Hayes, & Ebbs, 1998). The increase in risk-taking behaviour in our study could also be explained by arousal theory. Langewisch and Frisch (1998) argued that continuity of gambling might arouse players, and the arousal might lead people to keep gambling, thus creating a never-ending cycle. In line with previous findings (Ladouceur et al., 1986), players playing in groups did not exhibit more risky behaviour than those playing alone. Aside from the belief that people playing in groups take more risk to earn social status (Blascovich et al., 1973, cited in Ladouceur et al., 1986), it could be that individualism is valued in North American culture. Hence, individual players also exhibit risk-taking behaviour. Despite the fact that males show more confidence while gambling (Bruce & Johnson, 1994; Toneatto, Blitz-Miller, Calderwood, Dragonetti, & Tsanos, 1997), and are more likely to engage in illusion of control (Hong & Chiu, 1988), no gender difference was found in the present study. It is suggested that the chance of both men and women losing control in gambling activities, as well as becoming problem gamblers, are the same (Hraba & Lee, 1996). The results from the present study could also be explained by cultural factors. Traditionally people act according to the expected cultural norms in terms of gender stereotypes in which males exhibit more risk-taking behaviour than females (DiBerardinis, Ramage, & Levitt, 1984). In addition, Hong and Chiu (1988) concluded that gender differences are due to gender role expectation differences, which are culturally defined. The unexpected findings in our study revealed that the traditional gender stereotypes in risk-taking behaviour are being minimized, perhaps a reflection of more gender equality. In support of the previous findings (Blascovich et al., 1973), analysis of the outcome effect revealed that participants bet significantly more following a winning hand, and less following a losing hand, regardless of gender or group exposure. The results of our study reflect the existence of individual cognitive distortions in which players feel lucky after winning hands, thus making it difficult for them to quit ("luck as trait", Toneatto et al., 1997). In addition, winning hands evoke illusory control (Ladouceur, Gaboury, Dumont, & Rochette, 1988), leading players to bet more after winning hands. References Blascovich, J., Veach, T. L., & Ginsburg, G. P. (1973). Blackjack and the risky shift. Sociometry, 36, 42-55. Bruce, A. C., & Johnson, J. E. V. (1994). Male and female betting behaviour: New perspectives. Journal of Gambling Studies, 10, 183-198. DiBerardinis, J., Ramage, K., & Levitt, S. (1984). Risky shift and gender of the advocate: Information theory versus normative theory. Group and Organization Studies, 9, 189-200. Dixon, M. R., Hayes, L. J., & Ebbs, R. E. (1998). Engaging in "illusory control" during repeated risk-taking. Psychological Reports, 83, 959-962. Hong, Y., & Chiu, C. (1988). Sex, locus of control, and illusion of control in Hong Kong as correlates of gambling involvement. Journal of Social Psychology, 128, 667-673. Hraba, J., & Lee, G. (1996). Gender, gambling and problem gambling. Journal of Gambling Studies, 12, 83-101. Ladouceur, R., Gaboury, A., Dumont, M., & Rochette, P. (1988). Gambling: Relationship between the frequency of wins and irrational thinking. Journal of Psychology, 122, 409-414. Ladouceur, R., Tourigny, M., & Mayrand, M. (1986). Familiarity, group exposure, and risk-taking behaviour in gambling. Journal of Psychology, 120, 45-49. Langer, E. J. (1975). The illusion of control. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 32, 311-328. Langewisch, M. W. J., & Frisch, G. R. (1998). Gambling behaviour and pathology in relation to impulsivity, sensation seeking, and risky behaviour in male college students. Journal of Gambling Studies, 14, 245-262. Toneatto, T., Blitz-Miller, T., Calderwood, K., Dragonetti, R., & Tsanos, A. (1997). Cognitive distortions in heavy gambling. Journal of Gambling Studies, 13, 253-266.
Introduction |Problem Gambling |Research |Members |Links |University of Windsor © 2000, Problem Gambling Research Group This site was developed by Richard J. Govoni. Please send any questions or comments about this site to Richard J. Govoni |