Abstract
In their review of Internet gambling studies, Auer and Griffiths (Soc Sci Comput Rev 20(3):312–320, 2013) question the validity of using bet size as an indicator of gambling intensity. Instead, Auer and Griffiths suggest using “theoretical loss” as a preferable measure of gambling intensity. This comment identifies problems with their argument and suggests a convergent rather than an exclusionary approach to Internet gambling measures and analysis.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
Unfortunately, the term “gambling intensity” has never been clearly defined in the paper of Auer and Griffith (2013). In the present comment we do our best to follow our understanding of the concept as it has been presented in the original paper.
The term Theoretical Loss (also, known as “theo”) is commonly used by casino staff to refer to a calculation of a gambler’s “monetary value” (http://vegasmavens.com/tag/theoretical-loss/). It is operationally defined as a product of house advantage and total amount wagered by the given gambler. This is the same definition Auer and Griffiths use in their paper.
We use “bet size,” “total wagered” and “total stakes” interchangeably through the paper. This is because we cite different authors who use these terms to describe the same concept: total amount of money a single gambler placed in stakes for gambling for the given period of time.
Some researchers indeed calculated the total amount wagered for a combination of different casino–type games (e.g., LaBrie et al. 2008). Investigators do this frequently by necessity because of the lack of information about the specific game(s) played.
References
Afifi, T. O., LaPlante, D. A., & Shaffer, H. J. (in press). Types of gambling, gambling involvement, and gambling-related problems. International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction.
American Psychiatric Association. (2000). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders: DSM-IV-TR (4th ed., text revision ed.). Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association.
Auer, M., & Griffiths, M. D. (2012). Theoretical loss and gambling intensity: A simulation study. Gaming Law Review and Economics, 16, 269–273.
Auer, M., & Griffiths, M. D. (2013). An empirical investigation of theoretical loss and gambling intensity. Journal of Gambling Studies. doi:10.1007/s10899-013-9376-7.
Billings, D., Davidson, A., Schaeffer, J., & Szafron, D. (2002). The challenge of poker. Artificial Intelligence, 134(1–2), 201–240. doi:10.1016/S0004-3702(01)00130-8.
Braverman, J., LaBrie, R. A., & Shaffer, H. J. (2011). A taxometric analysis of actual internet sports gambling behavior. Psychological Assessment, 23(1), 234–244. doi:10.1037/a0021404.
Braverman, J., LaPlante, D. A., Nelson, S. E., & Shaffer, H. J. (2013). Using cross-game behavioral markers for early identification of high-risk Internet gamblers. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 27(3), 868–877.
Braverman, J., & Shaffer, H. J. (2012). How do gamblers start gambling: Identifying behavioural markers for high-risk Internet gambling. European Journal of Public Health, 22(2), 273–278.
Cronbach, L. J., & Meehl, P. E. (1955). Construct validity in psychological tests. Psychological Bulletin, 52(4), 281–302.
Dragicevic, S., Tsogas, G., & Kudic, A. (2011). Analysis of casino online gambling data in relation to behavioural risk markers for high-risk gambling and player protection. International Gambling Studies, 11(3), 377–391.
Gainsbury, S., Sadeque, S., Mizerski, D., & Blaszczynski, A. (2012). Wagering in Australia: A retrospective behavioural analysis of betting patterns based on player account data. Journal of Gambling Business and Economics, 6(2), 50–68.
Galfond, P. (2007, 2007/03/29/). G-Bucks. Bluff Magazine.
Ganzfried, S., & Sandholm, T. (2008, 2008/05/12). Computing an approximate jam/fold equilibrium for 3-player no-limit Texas Hold’em tournaments.
Gebauer, L., LaBrie, R. A., & Shaffer, H. J. (2010). Optimizing DSM IV classification accuracy: A brief bio-social screen for detecting current gambling disorders among gamblers in the general household population. Canadian Journal of Psychiatry, 55(2), 82–90.
Gray, H. M., LaPlante, D. A., & Shaffer, H. J. (2012). Behavioral characteristics of Internet gamblers who trigger corporate responsible gambling interventions. Psychology of Addictive Behaviors. doi:10.1037/a0028545. Online First.
Griffiths, M. D., & Parke, J. (2002). The social impact of Internet gambling. Social Science Computer Review, 20(3), 312–320.
Humphreys, B. R., Lee, Y. S., & Soebbing, B. P. (2011). Modelling consumers’ participation in gambling markets and frequency of gambling. Journal of Gambling Business and Economics, 5, 1.
King, S. A., & Barak, A. (1999). Compulsive Internet gambling: A new form of an old clinical pathology. Cyberpsychology & Behavior, 2(5), 441–456.
LaBrie, R. A., Kaplan, S. A., LaPlante, D. A., Nelson, S. E., & Shaffer, H. J. (2008). Inside the virtual casino: A prospective longitudinal study of Internet casino gambling. European Journal of Public Health, 18(4), 410–416.
LaPlante, D. A., Afifi, T. O., & Shaffer, H. J. (2013). Games and gambling involvement among casino patrons. Journal of Gambling Studies, 29(2), 191–203.
LaPlante, D. A., Kleschinsky, J. H., LaBrie, R. A., Nelson, S. E., & Shaffer, H. J. (2009). Sitting at the virtual poker table: A prospective epidemiological study of actual Internet poker gambling behavior. Computers in Human Behavior, 25(3), 711–717.
LaPlante, D. A., Schumann, A., LaBrie, R. A., & Shaffer, H. J. (2008). Population trends in Internet sports gambling. Computers in Human Behavior, 24(5), 2399–2414.
Moshman, C. (2007). Sit ‘n go strategy: Expert advice for beating one table poker tournaments. Henderson, NV: Two Plus Two Publishing.
Nelson, S. E., LaPlante, D. A., Peller, A. J., Schumann, A., LaBrie, R. A., & Shaffer, H. J. (2008). Real limits in the virtual world: Self-limiting behavior of Internet gamblers. Journal of Gambling Studies, 24(4), 463–477. doi:10.1007/s10899-008-9106-8.
Peller, A. J., LaPlante, D. A., & Shaffer, H. J. (2008). Parameters for safer gambling behavior: Examining the empirical research. Journal of Gambling Studies, 24(4), 519–534. doi:10.1007/s10899-008-9097-5.
Shaffer, H. J., & Martin, R. (2011). Disordered gambling: Etiology, trajectory, and clinical considerations. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology, 7(April), 483–510. doi:10.1146/annurev-clinpsy-040510-143928.
Sklansky, D. (1987). The theory of poker: A professional poker player teaches you how to think like one. Henderson, NV: Two Plus Two Publishing.
Trochim, W. M. (2000). The research methods knowledge base (2nd ed.). Cincinnati, OH: Atonic Dog Publishing.
Acknowledgments
bwin.party provided primary support for the preparation of this manuscript. The Division on Addiction also receives support from the National Institute on Alcohol and Alcohol Abuse, National Institute of Mental Health, National Institute on Drug Abuse, The Massachusetts Council on Compulsive Gambling, the Century Council, Saint Francis House, ABMRF/Foundation of Alcohol Research and others. The authors extend thanks to Debi A. LaPlante, Sarah E. Nelson, and Heather M. Gray for their support and thoughtful comments on previous drafts of the paper. None of the supporters or any of the authors has personal interests in bwin.party or its associated companies that would suggest a conflict of interest.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Braverman, J., Tom, M. & Shaffer, H.J. Tilting at Windmills: A Comment on Auer and Griffiths. J Gambl Stud 31, 359–366 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10899-013-9428-z
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10899-013-9428-z