Author: kp14237

Exploring online help-seeking searches using Google Trends data

Posted on by kp14237

By Dr Sebastian Whiteford, Swansea University, School of Psychology and Dr Scott Houghton, Northumbria University, Psychology Department 

This blog describes a research project made possible by a Strategic Award from the Hub’s Research Innovation Fund, which funds innovative and interdisciplinary research to understand and tackle gambling harms. 

Harnessing online sociotechnical methods to better identify and understand gambling related help-seeking has great potential to help people access advice and support sooner. Online search behaviour is, however, an understudied form of help-seeking for individuals experiencing gambling related harms. Google Trends offers a potentially rich, publicly accessible data source which can be used in conjunction with other data sources to investigate historical and ongoing/developing patterns of online help-seeking searches for gambling related harms across time and geographical regions.  

What we did. The primary aims of this project were to explore how individuals search for gambling related harm minimisation tools and treatment help and support opportunities online, and how this may have changed over time. We identified a series of key terms for general help-seeking and service specific searches, and examined their trends across the last decade. 

What we learned. The project has generated some unexpected avenues – particularly in terms of exploring the influence of policy changes on search behaviour. In particular, we saw significant changes in the underlying motivation for online searches using the term ‘GAMSTOP’ (a free online gambling self-exclusion tool) after March 2020, when all gambling operators in GB were required to be part of the GAMSTOP scheme as a condition of the licence granted to them by the Gambling Commission. A key aspect of this has been using “related queries” to understand how the underlying intention of a search term can change over time – in the case of GAMSTOP, shifting from a surge in searches to find out how to access the self-exclusion tool in March 2020 to searches to find ways to circumvent it. This has allowed us to, at least in part, deconstruct online search behaviour to better determine their relevance to gambling harm, for example delineating “poker” the game, from “poker face” the song.  

The project also enabled us to explore the limitations of using Google Trends data, notably changes to data access and data quality over the course of the project. We initially hoped to examine relatively high temporal resolution search data (e.g., hours within days), but the changes to the data provided make this approach infeasible for now. Instead, we pivoted to focus on larger units of time, and employing combination terms to enable us to use the data that is presently available as effectively as possible. Without daily data across the entire date range identified, the utility of Google Trends data alone is limited and means that – for future studies – we would require comparator datasets (e.g. gambling support helpline data) with sufficient observations and the required temporal granularity (across a similar date range) in order to analyse the Google Trends data. 

Next steps. These insights have paved the way for applications of this approach to explore the implications of historical and ongoing changes to policy and practice in the online search behaviour of gambling harms and support/treatment for those harms. In addition to disseminating the findings widely, we have also met with the Google Trends team to discuss our concerns and suggest improvements in how they sample and distribute their data, in ways that would enhance its value to gambling harms research and many other fields.  

 

Understanding the relationship between stigma and gambling-related harm

Posted on by kp14237

By Prof Zsolt Demetrovics PhD, Flinders University, Dr Andrea Czakó PhD, Centre of Excellence in Responsible Gaming, University of Gibraltar and Yanisha Soborun, Centre of Excellence in Responsible Gaming, University of Gibraltar 

This blog describes a research project made possible by a Strategic Award from the Hub’s Research Innovation Fund, which funds innovative and interdisciplinary research to understand and tackle gambling harms. 

This project investigated the stigma surrounding gambling, examining the cultural, societal, and psychological factors that contribute to it. Research on the social perception of gambling and gambling disorder, gambling-related stigma, and internalised negative beliefs related to gambling such as shame, anxiety, and guilt is very limited both in the UK and globally. Although previous studies have demonstrated that stigma negatively affects mental health and treatment-seeking in cases of substance abuse and other mental health disorders, few studies have explored gambling-related stigma and its consequences. Our project aimed to address this research gap and explore the public perceptions of gambling and how stigma contributes to gambling-related symptoms and harm in the UK and other cultural contexts.  

What we did: We investigated this subject both at a general population level as well as among people who engage in gambling activities, through two online surveys. Study 1 was a general population survey conducted in the UK (n=1,419 respondents) as well as in seven other countries (Kenya, n=2,838; Poland, n=905; Spain, n=755; Canada, n=733; Hungary, n=703; Australia, n=702; Italy, n=443). Study 2 was based on a UK sample of individuals who engaged in gambling in the last 12 months (n=1,174).  

What we learned: Our two studies show that there exists significant stigmatisation, as well as self-stigmatisation related to gambling and gambling disorder.  

Among the UK general population in Study 1, survey respondents perceived both individuals who gamble and those suffering from gambling disorder as having negative traits, including unreliability and a lack of discipline. A significant proportion of people were less willing to be friends with a person who regularly engages in gambling (21.5%) or suffers from gambling disorder (47.5%). Both intrinsic (e.g., personality traits, lack of willpower) and extrinsic factors (e.g., addictive nature of gambling games) were seen responsible for the development of gambling problems, but less importance was ascribed to genetic factors. While more than 90% of people recognised depression, bipolar disorder, and schizophrenia as mental illnesses, only a smaller proportion (57.1%) identified gambling disorder as a mental illness. Additional cross-national analysis in seven countries showed that there is significant gambling-related stigmatisation as well as self-stigmatisation present cross-culturally, although the occurrence of gambling behaviour and problem gambling as well as perceived factors behind the development of gambling disorder seem to vary significantly.  

In Study 2, 15.5% of people who gambled in the past year reported that they have experienced discrimination related to their gambling, often from family members or friends. The experiences of discrimination were associated with higher levels of anxiety, depression and stress, and higher levels of insomnia. Those who experienced discrimination had slightly higher levels of alcohol consumption than those who did not; however, no significant correlation was found. Feelings of guilt, shame, regret and a need to hide gambling behaviour from others were also frequently reported. As stigmatisation of gambling and gambling disorder can act as a barrier to seeking treatment, it may contribute to the worsening of symptoms and negatively impact treatment outcomes. Therefore, our results have important implications for research, diagnosis, therapy as well as prevention of gambling related harms. 

Next steps: Following the closure of the current research project, we plan to build on our findings by planning further studies such as collecting qualitative data through interviews. This approach will deepen our understanding of the experiences and challenges faced by the people who gamble, their significant others, treatment providers, and employees from social services, healthcare, and NGOs. Additionally, we will promote the initiation of new research projects utilising our questionnaire, including potential longitudinal studies that could track changes over time and provide further insights into gambling behaviours and their impacts. 

Furthermore, we have already begun expanding the present research to additional countries in order to broaden the scope of the study. The questionnaire has recently been translated to Russian, enabling us to gather more diverse data. Moving forward, we plan to continue this effort by incorporating even more countries, which will provide a more comprehensive understanding of the topic across different cultural contexts. 

About the project team: The project was led by Prof Zsolt Demetrovics PhD, Flinders University (previously Centre of Excellence in Responsible Gaming, University of Gibraltar), with Dr Andrea Czakó PhD, Yanisha Soborun (PhD Candidate), with co-investigators Ronald Kipkirui Ngetich (PhD Candidate), Pedro Romero (PhD Candidate) from the Centre of Excellence in Responsible Gaming, University of Gibraltar; Magda Losaberidze (PhD Candidate), ELTE Eotvos Lorand University; Prof. Ornella Corazza, PhD, University of Trento/University of Hertfordshire; Prof Mark Griffiths, PhD, Nottingham Trent University; Dr. Karol Lewczuk, Cardinal Stefan Wyszynski University; and Dr. Rosalind Baker-Frampton, Gordon Moody.  

A Hub workshop in Nairobi to develop a Pan-African gambling harms research network 30th April – 2nd May 2025

Posted on by kp14237

By Dr Emily Crick and Professor Agnes Nairn

Agnes Nairn, Hub Co-Director, and Emily Crick, Hub Research Development Associate joined representatives from the following institutions for a rich and stimulating 2 day workshop in Nairobi, Kenya. 

  • University of Namibia, Namibia – Dr Albert Shikongo 
  • Makerere University, Uganda – Dr Branco Sekalegga and Dr David Kakeeto 
  • Jaramogi Oginga Odinga University of Science and Technology, Kenya – Dr Gregory Jumah Nyongesa and Professor Pamela Raburu 
  • Unified Initiative for Drug Free Nigeria/Arizona State University, Nigeria – Daniel Ikenna Molobe 
  • University of Cape Town, University of South Africa, South Africa – Dr Caitlin Ferreira and Dr Jeandri Robertson 

All of these researchers have either been funded by the Hub or are working with Hub researchers and our mission was to work together on developing a Pan-African gambling harms research network.  In line with the complexity of gambling harms, the researchers’ disciplines and methodologies ranged from Performing Arts, Marketing, Education and Public Policy to Mathematical Modelling.  More details can be found about the funded projects here: Kenya, Uganda, Namibia, Nigeria. The South Africa project is a replication of Bristol projects on the volume of broad cast gambling messaging during cricket, rugby and football. 

The workshop was supported by the Perivoli Africa Research Centre (PARC) at the University of Bristol, a Research Development International Collaboration Award from the University of Bristol and the Bristol Hub for Gambling Harms Research. 

The network will be grounded firmly in the principles of the Africa Charter, an Africa-centred framework for advancing a transformative mode of research collaborations between the Global North and Africa and is a PARC Pathfinder Project – designed to put the charter principles into action. 

Over the course of two intense days together, involving a lot of flip charts and post-it notes, we co-created objectives for the network. 

 To support high quality Africa-centred gambling harms research collaborations  

  • between University of Bristol (and other global North institutions) and partners across the African continent  
  • between African partners 

To provide mutual support and capacity building in 

  • building a career in gambling harms research 
  • novel gambling harms research designs 
  • conducting multi-disciplinary research 
  • working with non-academic partners 
  • writing academic papers 
  • disseminating findings to lay audiences  
  • working with impact stakeholders including policy makers, regulators and community groups 
  • understanding how to use research to influence governments  

We explored the commonalities and divergences in how gambling is represented and understood across our countries and agreed that local, cultural understanding is paramount to help tailor local interventions to prevent gambling harms.  

Whilst each African project is very different, three strikingly common features emerged from our discussions.   

  1. Gambling harms are escalating extremely fast across the continent partly because online betting (particularly on sports) has become easily accessible by mobile phone 
  2. There is a severe paucity of research on gambling harms in Africa    
  3. There are also two very important policy issues/tensions: 
    • Gambling brings much needed economic contribution to regions and nations. So, policy makers can be reluctant to regulate too heavily.  
    • Gambling operators are global giants with enormous marketing, IT and legal budgets.  Regulators are national or even regional.  They are ill-equipped to protect citizens from harm. So, it is hard for willing policy makers to keep up with the activities of gambling operators – particularly in the light of lack of understand of scale and scope of gambling harms. 

The policy impact of gambling harms research will therefore be a very important part of our network. 

We also discussed that whilst the tensions experienced by policy and public health officials in the face of escalating gambling harms are common across the world, most of the research has been done in the global North: Australia, UK, USA, Europe. One of the challenges for the network will be to ensure that research conducted in the continent is genuinely Africa centred across all areas of the Africa Charter. As a funder, the Hub has an opportunity to put into practice Charter principles that apply to funders. 

The group also agreed to replicate the Kenyan study on gambling harms amongst students in Nigeria, Uganda, South Africa, Namibia and UK. We are following up our exciting discussions online over the next couple of months and a grant from the Bristol Collegiate Research Society means we can all meet again in Bristol to take forward the network and our new research project.  This coincides with the Colloquium on 16th October. 

The impact of gambling information diffusion on consumer behaviour and the design of a mitigation model to address harmful gambling in Namibia

Posted on by kp14237

By Dr Selma Iilonga, Dr Albert Shikongo, and Ms. Jacobina Mwiiyale, University of Namibia.

This blog describes a research project made possible by a Strategic Award from the Hub’s Research Innovation Fund. The Strategic Award is an annual competition that funds innovative and interdisciplinary research to understand and tackle gambling harms.

Namibia has seen exponential growth in gambling among the population, with regular high-profile media stories that celebrate large wins from sports betting. However, we know very little about how gambling impacts individuals and communities or how best to protect people from gambling harms. This groundbreaking interdisciplinary research project was the first empirical study on gambling in Namibia. Its main aim was to investigate how the dissemination of gambling information impacts consumer behaviour and to design a mitigating model to address harmful gambling. We conducted field work in Feb-May 2024 in betting/gambling houses in four regions of Namibia (Erongo, Khomas, Oshana, and Zambezi) and collected data from people who gambled using survey questionnaires (1,598 responses) and 60 semi-structured interviews. We also conducted covert observation in around 60 betting/gambling houses.

What we learned:

  • People who gamble in Namibia are more likely to be young and male: Our survey showed that young Namibians were most likely to be involved in gambling activities, with 19% of those aged 15-24 and 47% of people aged between 25 and 34 years actively gambling. More men (69%) than women (31%) were participating in gambling activities.
  • Word-of-mouth plays a key role in people’s exposure to gambling: The highest proportion of our survey participants (40%) were exposed to gambling through word of mouth. Other sources included gambling adverts (15%), billboards (14%) and WhatsApp or other forms of social media (13%).
  • Money is a strong motivator for gambling: Around half of our survey participants (48%) said they gambled to win money. Other reasons included for fun/entertainment (16%), for competition and skills (9%), to kill boredom (8%), social interaction (8%), stress relief (5%), having more money to spend (3%), and because they cannot stop (2%).

Based on the research, we recommended a range of strategies for mitigating gambling harms in Namibia, including the introduction of live counselling TV and local radio programmes providing gambling education, including testimonies from people who have experienced gambling harms; educational tailor-made gambling information literacy programs for all ages; and amendments to the current gambling act to regulate gambling advertisements.

The implementation of these strategies requires collaboration between stakeholders and change agents. We therefore hosted a workshop for policymakers and other stakeholders in July 2024 to discuss the research findings and recommendations. We were delighted that the workshop was attended by 70 expert participants including public health researchers, local council members, social workers, experts from the Ministry of Environment and Tourism, Gambling Division (the regulating body of gambling activities in Namibia) and Mr John Erastus, CEO of the Gambling Board of Namibia. Participants expressed strong support for the study to be rolled out across Namibia; and for improved consumer protection, including greater availability of gambling treatment centres, changes to gambling licensing, and better monitoring of gambling and betting outlets to prevent underage participation in gambling activities. Further information about the policy workshop is provided in this blog. You can also watch a YouTube video of Dr Iilonga’s presentation of the research at the Hub’s 2024 Colloquium.

About the project team: The project was conducted by the University of Namibia, led by Dr Selma Iilonga (Library and Information Services Unit), with Co-Investigators Dr Albert Shikongo (Department of Computing, Mathematical and Statistical Sciences) and Ms. Jacobina Mwiiyale, (Library and Information Services Unit).

Betting shops and crime in English cities and Police Force Areas

Posted on by kp14237

By Dr Oluwole Adeniyi and Professor Andy Newton (Nottingham Trent University), Dr Ferhat Tura and Professor John McAlaney (Bournemouth University)

This blog describes a research project made possible by a Strategic Award from the Hub’s Research Innovation Fund. The Strategic Award funds innovative and interdisciplinary research to understand and tackle gambling harms. 

This project investigated the relationship between betting shops and crime in seven cities in England (Birmingham, Bristol, Liverpool, Leeds, Newcastle, Nottingham and Sheffield) and two Police Force Areas (Dorset and Surrey). We conducted spatial and multilevel analysis on data obtained from the Gambling Commission’s register of licensed gambling premises, police-recorded crime data, UK Census, point of interest data from the Ordinance Survey and access to health assets and Hazards (AHAH) from Consumer Data Research Centre across three time points (2015, 2019 and 2022). This project builds on our previous study that found a relationship between betting shops and crime at a national level in England, by exploring whether similar relationships exist at sub-national geographies.

Key Finding #1: There is a relationship between betting shops and crime at the level of cities and Police Force Areas in England. Our cluster analysis (which organises items into groups, or clusters, based on how closely associated they are) provides evidence of co-location in the patterns of betting shops and overall crime across similar neighbourhoods in our seven cities, with strong evidence in Birmingham, Sheffield, Liverpool and Bristol compared to Nottingham and Newcastle.

Furthermore, we used a multilevel model (designed for data where units like neighbourhoods are grouped or clustered within larger units like cities and PFAs) to explore the relationship between betting shops and anti-social behaviour, burglary, bike theft, drugs, public disorder, shoplifting and theft from the person, while controlling for the resident populations and year. We found a significant positive relationship between betting shops and all the crime categories across the seven cities.

In the two PFAs, Dorset showed evidence of co-location of betting shops and overall crime, but Surrey did not. Like the cities, our multi-level models found a positive association between betting shops and all crime types in both PFAs.

It is important to note that our analysis does not show that having betting shops in cities or PFAs causes crime. Rather, our focus is on the co-location of crime with betting shops, and our analysis shows that betting shops are places around which crime occurs.

Key finding #2: The relationship between betting shops and crime is impacted by neighbourhood characteristics, but there are key differences between cities and PFAs. Delving into the data in more detail, we conducted multilevel modelling that controlled for a range of neighbourhood characteristics such as education deprivation, access to healthy assets and hazards, occupation, housing tenure and point of interest data (e.g. bus stops and food and drink places).

This showed that the relationship between betting shops and crime is impacted by neighbourhood characteristics, but there are differences across the cities and PFAs. For instance, the presence of betting shops increases the likelihood of at least one type of crime in Birmingham (ASB and shoplifting), Bristol (all crimes, anti-social behaviour, public disorder and burglary), Liverpool (ASB, public disorder, shoplifting and burglary), Newcastle (shoplifting) and Nottingham (all crime, ASB and shoplifting). On the contrary, there is no relationship between betting shops and crime in Leeds, whereas, in Sheffield, a negative relationship is observed between number of betting shops and bicycle theft. Across the cities and PFAs, the crimes with the greatest association with betting shops were ASB and shoplifting.

We also identified some key correlates of crime. Factors such as higher numbers of private and social renters, food and drink shops as well as bus stops in a neighbourhood further exacerbate the relationship between betting shops and crime. Based on other academic literature, these attributes suggest high residential mobility, low collective efficacy, high population density and high footfall associated with structural and concentrated disadvantages. The concentration of these risk factors of crime together with betting shops will further increase the level of disorganisation and riskiness, which serve as catalysts for crime occurrence.

Potential impacts
This study provides a nuanced picture of the relationship between betting shops and crime across different geographies in England. The results highlight that – irrespective of the similarities in the relationship between betting shops and the different crime types – there are clear differences with cities and PFAs. This emphasises the importance of local policies to tackle the negative impacts of provisioning of gambling activities; and the importance of local councils having sufficient powers to develop tailored approaches that work in their neighbourhoods and for their communities.

About the project team: The project was led by Dr Oluwole Adeniyi, Nottingham Trent University (Nottingham Business School) working with Dr Ferhat Tura, Bournemouth University (Department of Social Sciences and Social Work), Prof Andy Newton, Nottingham Trent University (Department of Criminology and Criminal Justice) and Prof John McAlaney, Bournemouth University (Department of Psychology).