Category: Innovation, Transition, Change

By Edoardo Tozzi

My PhD research delves into the world of gambling advertising – specifically, how it entices adolescents and young adults. But tackling this topic wasn’t a straightforward path. A major challenge emerged when I needed a reliable way to measure the impact these ads have on my target audience. That’s when I stumbled across a peculiar piece of research… the kind that would be right at home with the Ig Nobel Prizes.

The Ig Nobel Prize is a satirical award that is given annually to ten unusual or (apparently) trivial achievements in scientific research that “first make people laugh, and then make people think”. This peculiar award was first established by the Annals of Improbable Research (AIR), a scientific humor magazine founded in 1991 by Marc Abrahams, and the award ceremony used to take place at Harvard University’s Sanders Theatre until Covid – now it’s online. Some notable examples? In 2006, Bart Knols and colleagues received the Ig Nobel Prize for their study on the attraction of mosquitoes to human feet. The researchers found that female Anopheles gambiae mosquitoes, which are known to transmit malaria, were attracted to both human feet and –  Limburger cheese. Not surprisingly, the research has implications for understanding the behavior of mosquitoes and for developing new methods of mosquito control – as you may or may not know, mosquitoes are the deadliest animals in the world.  In 2000, Andre Geim, a Russian-born Dutch–British physicist, won the Ig Nobel prize for… levitating a live frog with magnets. A few years later, the Chinese government took inspiration to build the lunar gravity research facility while Geim won the Nobel prize for his work on graphene.

One of most notable winners of this prestigious award, though, is a study that took place at the Koorana Saltwater Crocodile Farm in Queensland, Australia. Imagine stepping into the world of gambling research, where the thrill of the game meets the cold-blooded gaze of a crocodile. This is not a scene from a bizarre movie, but the setting of real research conducted by Matthew J. Rockloff and Nancy Greer, aptly titled ‘Never Smile at a Crocodile: Betting on Electronic Gaming Machines is Intensified by Reptile-Induced Arousal’. The experiment involved 103 participants randomly assigned to gamble on a simulated Electronic Gaming Machine (EGM) before or after handling a 1-meter saltwater crocodile. The primary aim was to investigate how this emotional arousal influenced various aspects of gambling behavior, such as bet size, speed of betting, final payouts, and the number of trials played, with a particular focus on how these effects varied among at-risk gamblers and based on the gamblers’ affective state.

The findings revealed that at-risk gamblers who reported fewer negative emotions placed higher average bets after interacting with the crocodile compared to those in the control condition. This suggests that high arousal can exacerbate gambling behaviors in individuals at risk of gambling problems, but only when the arousal is not interpreted as a negative emotion. In contrast, at-risk gamblers with a high level of self-reported negative emotions demonstrated more conservative gambling behaviors under the same conditions. The study builds on existing research by offering a novel approach to understanding the complex relationship between emotion, physiological arousal, and gambling. Methodologically, the study involved measuring participants’ gambling behavior on an EGM simulated on a laptop, with the EGM’s outcomes predetermined to ensure consistent conditions. The results underscore the significant role of arousal in gambling behavior, particularly among at-risk individuals. The study demonstrates that arousal, when not perceived as negative, can lead to more aggressive gambling, likely due to a misattribution of the source of arousal to the gambling experience itself. This finding is crucial for developing strategies to mitigate gambling harm, as it highlights the need to understand the underlying emotional and physiological drivers of gambling behavior.

How has this affected my own PhD research you may wonder.  Well, in the study just discussed, galvanic skin response (GSR) was employed to evaluate arousal differences stemming from exposure to a crocodile scenario versus a control situation. GSR, an index of the skin’s electrical conductance, fluctuates with its moisture levels, reflecting sweat gland activity governed by the sympathetic nervous system. This component of the autonomic nervous system orchestrates the body’s fight-or-flight response, making GSR a reliable indicator of emotional arousal. As I set out to investigate how gambling ads affect young people, I investigated this measure further.

Indeed, I found that GSR’s application extends into consumer neuroscience, or neuromarketing, to gauge consumer arousal in response to stimuli, such as advertisements. While GSR sheds light on physiological arousal, it falls short in differentiating between similar arousal levels triggered by distinct emotions, like fear and excitement. Moreover, it does not tell us much in terms of cognitive processes. The latter limitation led to the integration of GSR with electroencephalography (EEG) in my research, “Mind games: deciphering the youth’s neurophysiological responses to (e)sports gambling ads on social media.” EEG tracks brain wave pattern changes across various frequencies, correlating to different brain states and processes, including attention, emotional valence, memory, and semantic processing. This combination of techniques aims to provide objective, unbiased insights into consumer preferences, focusing on how (e)sports gambling advertisements on social media trigger cognitive and affective processes. Overall, I hope that my research will open a window into the mind of adolescents and young adults, providing some potentially novel insights to fight what initiates gambling harm.  And maybe, just maybe, I too will win the (Ig) Nobel prize.

By Dr Jamie Wheaton and Ben Ford

The prevention of gambling harms requires many different approaches, and the co-operation of many different stakeholders, including (but not limited to) researchers, charities, treatment providers and policymakers. Gambling harms can be classified in different ways, but our framework uses a previous classification of gambling harms as resource harms (for example, loss of money or assets), relationship harms, and health harms. Harms which do not fall into these categories could also be categorised as ‘non-specific harms’.

While there are many frameworks that detail how to prevent or reduce gambling harms, or how harms can be measured, there are no frameworks that can help to promote collaboration between these stakeholders and map where approaches to prevent gambling harms can be most effective.

The Hub has developed a framework, recently published in PLOS ONE, that  can help to encourage collaboration between stakeholders, map existing research, initiatives or interventions, and allow stakeholders to identify where these are most needed.

The Framework

The framework emerged from research that explored public health approaches to the prevention or reduction of harms from gambling, tobacco, products high in fat, salt and sugar, and alcohol.

The framework is derived from four key factors which we will briefly explore in turn:

• goals that lead to the prevention or reduction of harms;
• the overarching groups of strategies that can achieve these goals;
• the types of gambling harms that can be prevented or reduced through the achievement of these goals; and
• the levels of society at which strategies can be targeted.

The research indicated three goals that – when achieved – can lead to the prevention or reduction of harms. These goals were identified as the ‘prevention’ of harms from occurring in the first instance; the ‘regulation’ of the industry or its products; and ‘support’ for those experiencing gambling harms, including those harmed by another person’s gambling.

Additionally, we found that these goals could be achieved through three broad groups of strategies. These were defined as ‘education and awareness’ strategies that introduce an understanding or awareness of gambling harms; ‘screening, measurement and intervention’ strategies that seek to identify and measure the scale of gambling harms as well as provide interventions to reduce the harms; and an understanding of how the ‘environments and products’ can lead to gambling harms.

These strategies and goals can also overlap, meaning individual initiatives or interventions that consist of one or more strategy type, can be targeted towards one or more of the goals. We contend that strategies mapped against this framework will prevent or reduce gambling harms.

These strategies for reducing harm can be targeted at different levels of society. They can be targeted towards societies as a whole, specific groups or communities, families and friends of those experiencing harms, and the individual themselves. These aspects when combined create a framework which can foster collaboration between stakeholders, allowing them to map previous research or initiatives to a particular area of interest, and to identify gaps where future research or initiatives are most needed.

How the framework can be used

To illustrate how this framework could be used, we give some potential examples on how it could help to inform future approaches to prevent or reduce gambling harm.

At the societal level, previous research tells us that the framing of messaging around ‘responsible gambling’ or ‘safer gambling’ is unlikely to alter gambling behaviours. Research also tells us that changing the environment – for example, altering the design of gambling-related products – is more likely to reduce harm at a societal level. Recent developments in the sector provide evidence of collaboration in these areas, such as the reduction of maximum stakes for online slots games, the introduction of a slower speed of play, or the promise of centrally-developed messaging on gambling harms made in the White Paper.

Stakeholders may be interested in exploring how to prevent or reduce gambling harms for certain groups. For example, existing research tells us that those with the least economic resources are more likely to experience gambling harms, while gambling harms also disproportionately impact minority ethnic groups. The framework can help them identify strategies such as:

• developing ‘education and awareness’ programmes aimed at specific groups in order to improve their awareness of the risks of engaging with certain gambling products,
• developing ‘screening, measurement and intervention’ schemes to provide support for those experiencing harms and to track the prevalence of gambling harms at community level. Such strategies would help achieve the goals of ‘prevention’ and ‘support’.
• enacting regulation relating to ‘environment and product’, whether through the regulation of marketing in the local area, or managing the positioning, and number of, land-based gambling outlets in specific areas.

Stakeholders such as local treatment providers, local authorities, and charities could use the framework to collaborate and to map previous or similar strategies which have been developed for other groups. They could also use the framework to develop and deploy strategies to prevent harms amongst the specific groups, and then to evaluate the progress of such strategies.

At the level of family and friends, possible strategies may be to raise awareness that gambling harms can affect not only the person who gambles but also their relationships. The framework could therefore help those interested in this area by:

• exploring how awareness around the harms and stigma possibly experienced by family and friends could be raised (through ‘education and awareness’ strategies),
• ensuring that those who are being harmed by – or are concerned about – a loved one’s gambling behaviour has access to sufficient support.

The mapping of these strategies represents an overlap of the goals of ‘support’ and ‘prevention’, developing awareness and reducing the stigma around gambling harms that may be experienced by family and friends, as well as providing the support to those who need it. Additionally, stakeholders such as researchers, treatment providers and charities may use the framework to target such approaches over local or more national levels.

Finally, the framework highlights how strategies can be targeted towards the individual. As highlighted above, focusing specifically on the individual when trying to reduce gambling harms can be stigmatising and can also detract from the harmful nature of products. Strategies developed within the framework could therefore explore:

• how centrally-developed messaging is received at the individual level in a way which is not stigmatising (education and awareness),
• how treatment is more accessible (screening, measurement and intervention),
• how an individual’s behaviour is impacted by modifications of the gambling environment (environment and product), such as marketing or specific products.

These are some broad examples of how the framework could be used, and many other approaches could be mapped against and developed within the framework. In summary, the framework has the ability to bring together numerous stakeholders to explore how best to prevent or reduce gambling harms for a wide range of people. Developing initiatives can be mapped against previous research or approaches, to allow stakeholders to best target future initiatives where they most prevent or reduce harms in the future.

By Sharon Collard, Personal Finance Research Centre and Bristol Hub for Gambling Harms Research
Please note: This blog discusses harmful gambling and its impacts.  

In July 2023, a team from the Personal Finance Research Centre, FinTech West and the lived experience-led charity Gambling Harm UK delivered a workshop to consider how FinTech can help reduce harm from gambling. This was a great example of ‘grounded innovation’ in action: bringing FinTechs together with people who have lived experience of gambling harms to focus on real-life issues and how to solve them.  

It highlighted useful products and services that FinTech firms already offer as well as opportunities for further innovation. Most of all, it showed the invaluable contribution that experts-by-experience like Gambling Harm UK bring to the table.  

We are grateful to Higher Education Innovation Funding for funding the workshop.  

Helping FinTechs understand the harms caused by gambling problems 

A key part of the workshop was Chris Gilham, Julie Martin and John Gilham from Gambling Harm UK sharing their own personal experiences, which illustrated the complex and messy nature of gambling problems and their serious long-term impacts.  

Chris told us about having been diagnosed with Adult ADHD just over eighteen months ago at almost 40 years of age, and how he has battled with his mental health since his mid-teens and using alcohol to cope. Then when he was 30 years old, having had no previous interest in gambling, he saw an advert and that day, he decided to try it. He explained that whilst gambling initially made him feel calmer, it wasn’t long before he was suffering from gambling harm. After almost five years of harm he finally found recovery following a two-day gambling binge, when he was planning to win and leave money to his family before ending his own life. Julie described the severe financial toll that her ex-husband’s gambling had on her and her children, meaning she had to work four jobs just to pay off loans he had taken out in her name, as well as the verbal, mental and sometimes physical abuse that she experienced. John (Chris’s dad) told us about his experiences as the parent of someone with a gambling addiction, how his life and that of his wife and family had been turned upside down and his role now supporting Chris in his recovery journey, including helping Chris keep tight control of his money.  

These real-life experiences really resonated with workshop participants – even if they had no experience of gambling harms. Our rich discussion touched on many issues including the links between ADHD and impulse behaviours such as gambling; the fact that there is no single reason for gambling problems; and the normalisation of gambling-like behaviours in online games that are so popular among children and young people, through features like microtransactions and loot boxes that are played to get an edge. John reminded us that 55,000 young people aged 11-16 in Britain are categorised as ‘problem’ gamblers – a term which stigmatises those suffering from this illness – with a further 85,000 young people estimated to be at risk of harm from gambling. 

How FinTechs can help reduce harms from gambling 

There is no perfect solution to help someone control their gambling. Blocks, self-exclusion schemes and other features can all be circumvented if gambling has become the most important activity in someone’s life and dominates their thinking, feelings, and behaviour. Nonetheless, the workshop highlighted a whole range of things that FinTechs are already doing as well as challenges still to be solved, such as joint accounts that give more control and protection. It also illustrated the invaluable contribution that experts-by-experience like Gambling Harm UK can bring to the table in terms of product ideation, design, and testing.  

Data-driven early intervention: Starling Bank described how it had a specialist team that proactively contacted loan customers to offer help where their underwriting team identified potential harm from gambling (or where they were in other potentially vulnerable situations), including links to external sources of support. It accepted that the message won’t always land well with customers but in its experience, there was more positive than negative feedback from customers. Saying the right things, in the right way is key, which Chris, Julie and Julie all confirmed was so important, means testing the language and training staff. Indicators of potentially harmful gambling might include applying for large loans late at night and multiple gambling transactions across several sites in a very short space of time.  

Enhanced friction and control features: At a time when it is quicker and easier than ever to set up a new bank account or take out a sizable loan, there is significant potential to give customers more control over their spending from the get-go. This might be a bank account where you have to opt-in to be able to gamble rather than opting out; or a non-gambling banking app with enhanced transaction monitoring. Through its personal financial management features, Moneyhub enables its users to set up spending flags across multiple accounts, making it easier for people to see what they are spending on different expenditure categories (such as gambling) where they may want to exercise more control and set spend limits. As Chris attested from his personal experience, tools to help people set up, and stick to, a budget can be an invaluable part of someone’s recovery from gambling addiction, ideally with a human element as well.  

Joint accounts: As an affected other, Julie highlighted the problems that resulted from having a joint account with her then-husband. He took her earnings and their savings from the joint account to gamble leaving her in dire financial straits, but Julie was unable to close the account without his permission. While joint accounts nowadays offer both parties easier visibility of the account data, for example via banking apps, in practice there may not be equal access or control if one partner is the victim of coercive control or financial abuse. Other research has highlighted the potential for a safer joint account using Open Banking payment initiation, but while the technology exists to build such a product, it is not yet available.  

Help to rebuild finances in recovery: John wanted to see financial services do more to support people with gambling problems to achieve sustainable recovery, by helping them rebuild their finances and their credit rating. Partly this is about raising awareness among FinTechs and other financial firms that gambling addiction is an impulse control disorder; and that people in recovery may be returning to a life they need help to cope with. 

In practical terms, it is about helping people build their finances so they can rebuild their lives, for example offering lower interest rates to people who have shown they can stick to a loan repayment schedule; allowing people to pay back debt over longer periods without penalising them; providing money management features such as ‘account sweeping’ to help repay debt or to start saving.  

Make gambling harms a normal thing to talk about: making it normal for us to talk about gambling harms and their potentially devastating impacts makes a lot of sense, given that millions of people in the UK are affected – not just the person who gambles but those around them as well. And taking the conversation to FinTechs and other financial services firms has the potential to stimulate even greater innovation for good.  

“Thank you so much for speaking to us in Bristol today. You really brought home how important it is for financial service providers to engage and to think bigger and better about how we can prevent and reduce harm and aid recovery. And for me most importantly, some immediately actionable insights which we can do something to address now in our own lending practices. Every step in the right direction, however, small, is very valuable in making change.” James Berry CEO, Great Western Credit Union. 

“Thank you for organising such a fascinating yet poignant discussion. Matthew Barr, John Dyer and I left energised planning how we at Moneyhub can do more to support those affected by gambling harm and how financial institutions can position themselves as a first line of defence to protect those who are vulnerable.” Jonathan Bell, Sales Director (Decisioning), Moneyhub. 

---

If you have been affected by any of the issues in this blog, you can contact the National Gambling Helpline which provides confidential advice, information and support by telephone and webchat free of charge.  

To find out more about the work of Gambling Harm UK, please contact John Gilham, CEO: john@gamharm.co.uk 

This blog was originally posted on the Personal Finance Research Centre’s (PFRC) blog.