Introduction
Scratch cards (also referred to as “instant tickets” or “instant win” games) are a ubiquitous form of gambling in our society. Many different types of scratch-card games exist, but in general, the goal of these games is to uncover matching symbols by removing an opaque film covering. Players typically remove this covering by “scratching” it off with the aid of a small coin. Depending on what is matched or uncovered, a certain prize may be attained. In Canada, scratch cards range in price from $1.00 to $30.00, with the majority of cards being in the $3.00 to $10.00 range (
M = $5.81; calculated from OLG
2016). The payback percentages of scratch-card games in Ontario range from 59.97 to 70.39% (
M = 65.73%; calculated from OLG
2016).
Researchers have long focused on the use of these products by youth, with lottery products being a highly sought-after type of gambling for this demographic (Griffiths
2000; Felsher et al.
2004; Donati et al.
2013; Wood and Griffiths
1998). A recently published study of Canadian youth aged 13–19 found that scratch cards were the most common type of regulated gambling behaviour engaged in by these teenagers, with 13.8% of the sample endorsing participation (Elton-Marshall et al.
2016). In light of these findings, researchers have begun to examine in more detail the types of individuals who play these games and the experiences associated with this form of gambling.
In a large Canadian survey study (Short et al.
2015) the amount of scratch-card gambling that participants engaged in was negatively correlated with level of education; no other demographic variables (e.g., age, sex, marital status) were meaningfully correlated with frequency of scratch-card play. Another study found that Ontario baby boomers who played scratch cards reported participating in more forms of gambling than those in the cohort who did not report playing these games (Papoff and Norris
2009). These authors also found that at-risk/problem gambling prevalence was significantly higher among respondents who purchased scratch cards compared to those who did not. Similarly, a large, 5-year longitudinal study of gambling behaviour in Canada found that instant-win-ticket gambling (which includes scratch cards) was predictive of problem gambling over time (Williams et al.
2015). Although population estimates for pathological scratch card gambling are low (DeFuentes-Merillas et al.
2003), case study reports of pathological scratch card gamblers do exist (Raposo-Lima et al.
2015), demonstrating that for a small portion of gamblers, these games may be associated with problematic use. Although studies examining player characteristics are informative, examining specific structural aspects of the games themselves may also help to elucidate how these games affect the people who play them. Such knowledge, in turn may provide insight into why these games are so popular with the general population.
While typically seen as an innocuous type of gambling, scratch cards nevertheless bear many similarities to more addictive forms of gambling. Specifically, these games share many structural characteristics with slot machines. These include intermittent payout intervals, rapid event frequency, the opportunity for continual play, and near-miss outcomes (Griffiths
1995a,
b,
1997; Wood and Griffiths
1998). Multiple authors have commented on these resemblances, referring to these games as slot machines in a paper form (Griffiths
1995b,
1997; Ariyabuddhiphongs
2011), and consequently a potentially “hard” (as opposed to a “softer”, more innocuous) form of gambling (Griffiths
2002). Of the many surface similarities between slot machines and scratch cards, arguably the most striking are near-misses. Since near-misses have been most rigorously investigated in the context of slot machine play, we turn first to this literature to inform our predictions.
Slot machines have been associated with high levels of problem gambling (Dowling et al.
2005) for quite some time, and across a wide range of countries (Fisher and Griffiths
1995). Tellingly, the Ontario Problem Gambling Helpline receives more calls identifying slot machine gambling as a concern compared to any other gambling type (Counter and Davey
2006). As previously mentioned, near-misses are a ubiquitous feature of many slot machine games. Reid (
1986) defined a near-miss as an outcome that comes close to a win but falls short. A classic near-miss in a slot machine game consists of two of the required jackpot symbols landing on the payline, with the third landing just below or above. In a scratch card game, a near-miss consists of players getting two of the three symbols required to win a jackpot prize, but missing the third. These outcomes create the appearance of coming close to a jackpot, but are nonetheless a losing outcome, in that there is no monetary gain for the player. The effects of near-miss outcomes on gamblers have been particularly well documented in slot machine research, with a wealth of studies describing the effects of these outcomes in human participants (Clark et al.
2013; Dixon et al.
2013; Habib and Dixon
2010), rats (Winstanley et al.
2011) and pigeons (Scarf et al.
2011)
Many studies of human gamblers report that slot machine near-misses increase players’ physiological arousal, as measured by skin conductance (or electrodermal activity) and heart rate (Clark et al.
2012,
2013; Dixon et al.
2011,
2013). Increased arousal for near-miss outcomes may be problematic, as heightened physiological arousal has been identified as a key reinforcer of gambling behaviour (Brown
1986). As such, if arousal is reinforcing, and near-misses trigger an increase in arousal, then it could be that players are being reinforced for losing. Heightened arousal that accompanies a lack of goal attainment can result in a paradoxically frustrating, yet highly motivating subjective experience. In line with this notion, some authors have postulated that heightened arousal indicates enhanced motivation (Bradley and Lang
2007).
Consistent with the notion that near-misses increase motivation, near-miss outcomes in slot machines have been shown to prolong the amount of time spent gambling (Côté et al.
2003; Kassinove and Schare
2001). Neuroimaging studies allow insight into the mechanisms behind these behavioural effects. Near-miss outcomes in a simulated slot machine task have been found to activate the ventral striatum, an area associated with reward processing (Clark et al.
2009), despite their objective status as a losing outcome. On this same task, participants rated near-miss outcomes as unpleasant, yet still motivating when they had personal control over their wager. These results highlight the paradoxically motivating yet aversive nature of near-miss outcomes, and the behavioural consequences that they have for the gambler (i.e. increased money and time spent gambling). Indeed, research on approach motivation suggests that motivated behaviour can occur in response to negative stimuli (Harmon-Jones et al.
2013). Thus near-misses may activate the “wanting” as opposed to the hedonic “liking” facet of the reward system (Berridge
2007).
Research regarding near-misses in slot machines has prompted us to investigate the effects of near-miss outcomes in scratch cards. We found that players showed heightened physiological arousal as they uncovered the symbols that led to small wins and near-miss outcomes. We showed such effects using both skin conductance (Stange et al.
2016b) and heart rate changes (Stange et al.
2016a). Additionally, in these studies near-miss outcomes were consistently rated as the most frustrating and emotionally negative outcome, whereas wins were rated as the most positive and least frustrating. Importantly, scratch card near-misses also appeared to increase the urge to continue gambling. When student scratch-card gamblers were polled immediately following each outcome, urge to continue gambling was as elevated following near-miss outcomes as it was for small wins of $5.00 (Stange et al.
2016a). These results suggest that scratch card near-misses, even though they are monetary losses, may be capable of encouraging further gambling behaviour much like their slot machine equivalents.
Although we have shown increases in arousal, frustration, negative affect, and subjective urge following scratch card near-misses, it remains unknown whether or not experiencing these outcomes would actually prolong gambling behaviour, as in slot machines. In this study our two overarching goals were to: (1) replicate our previous finding that near-miss outcomes trigger increases in the urge to gamble, and (2) assess whether near-misses and their associated heightened urge would prompt participants to actually purchase more scratch cards. We had participants play two custom-made scratch cards. On the first card (Card 1), all participants experienced a loss, a small win and another loss. On the second card (Card 2), one group of participants experienced three consecutive losing games, while the other group experienced two losses, followed by a near miss. Participants were asked to give ratings of their urge to gamble after each outcome. Following game play, participants were given an opportunity to use their winnings (from Card 1) to purchase additional cards. We predicted that participants would experience increases in the urge to gamble following both winning and near-miss outcomes (a replication of our previous findings). We also predicted that participants who experienced a near-miss outcome would be more likely than participants who experienced only losses to use their winnings to purchase additional cards. Finally, we predicted that this purchasing behaviour would be attributable to increases in the urge to continue gambling following the near-miss outcome, as compared to regular losing outcomes.
Discussion
We ran an experiment to determine whether near-misses would trigger increases in gambling urge, and whether this increased desire to continue gambling would translate into participants using their winnings to purchase additional scratch cards. Near-misses dramatically increased the urge to gamble—a finding that replicates our previous study on scratch card players (Stange et al.
2016a). Figure
2a shows that the random assignment of players into the two groups was effective—there were no differences between the urge ratings of the groups prior to the key manipulation (the introduction of the near-miss for one of the groups). Figure
2b shows that the groups continued to show similar urge trajectories for the two losses on Card 2. The groups only diverged following the third game when the key manipulation was delivered (a near-miss for half of the participants, and another loss for the other half of the participants). Those who experienced a loss in their third game showed a decline in their urge to gamble, whereas those who experienced a near miss showed a clear spike in gambling urge. In sum, the finding that scratch card near-misses trigger increases in the urge to gamble is a robust one that replicates across studies using different procedures (e.g., the within-subjects design in Stange et al.
2016a, and the between-subjects design employed in the present study).
The effects of near-misses on urge in various gambling forms is at first glance counterintuitive, as they are clearly a monetary loss, yet still enhance the motivation to play. Classic interpretations of near-miss effects derived from investigations of slot-machine play focus on the arousing yet frustrating properties of these outcomes. Slot machine near-misses are consistently reported as being unpleasant outcomes (Clark et al.
2009) that increase physiological arousal (Dixon et al.
2011) and frustration (Dixon et al.
2013). Despite such negative affect, they have been found to prolong slot-machine play (Côté et al.
2003; Kassinove and Schare
2001). Thus a theorized chain of events is as follows: when a player experiences a near-miss, frustration ensues due to having
just missed the jackpot prize. This is coupled with an increase in physiological arousal and negative subjective evaluations. Due to this state of heightened frustration and physiological arousal, players are eager to move on to their next available game as quickly as possible leading to increases in the urge to continue gambling. This urge then translates, for at least some players, into prolonged or additional gambling behaviour.
In this and previous studies we provide converging evidence for this chain of events in scratch-card play. Near-miss outcomes in scratch cards are associated with increased physiological and subjective arousal, and heightened subjective negative emotion and frustration (Stange et al.
2016a,
b). Yet, regardless of their objective monetary status, near-misses have distinct motivational consequences for the player. In the current study they served to increase the urge to gamble compared to those who were exposed to a standard losing outcome.
Our second prediction was that the spikes in urge caused by the near-miss would trigger the purchase of additional scratch cards. Within the group exposed to the near-miss, those who purchased more cards appeared to be those who experienced this spike in urge. The purchasers showed far higher urge ratings following the near-miss than the non-purchasers. Furthermore, there was a positive point-biserial correlation between participants’ ratings of their urge to gamble following near-misses and their purchasing behaviour. This lends support to the idea that near-misses trigger increases in the urge to gamble, which can in turn prompt some players to buy more cards.
An unexpected finding concerned those in the loss group. Despite three successive losses in Card 2, eight participants still purchased at least one more card. In the loss group, urge to gamble was significantly lower than in the near-miss group, and (unlike in the near-miss group) there were no differences in the urge ratings between purchasers and non-purchasers. Additionally, urge ratings following losses were uncorrelated with purchasing behaviour. Thus despite not showing an increase in urge to continue gambling, a small subset of people in the loss group
still chose to purchase additional cards. This puzzling finding hints at the importance of considering other individual differences among players and how these may relate to purchasing behaviours. Some candidate variables that may be informative include impulsivity (MacLaren et al.
2012) and the closely related concept of delay discounting (Dixon et al.
2003; Callan et al.
2011) in which deficits are strongly related to gambling behaviour. Research examining differences in delay discounting have shown that participants who chose to purchase scratch cards from an experimenter in an unrelated experimental context discounted delayed rewards at a steeper rate than those who did not purchase scratch cards (Callan et al.
2011). The inability of some individuals to delay larger, later rewards and instead engage in less-rewarding behaviour in the short term may explain some differences in purchasing behaviour within the current study. Individual differences like delay discounting could also potentially account for why some participants with low urges to gamble nonetheless purchased an extra card (i.e. the purchasers in the loss group), and might also explain why some participants with high urge to gamble following a near-miss might have been able to refrain from making a purchase (they may have been able to discount the slim
possibility of earning money immediately, for the surety of having an extra $5.00 to spend that evening).
Although not the manipulation of primary interest, the data for Card 1 clearly shows that small wins in scratch card play trigger increases in the urge to gamble—a finding that replicates previous results from our laboratory. For both groups urge was relatively low following the first loss, then rose dramatically following the small win, and dropped once again following another loss. When considering the effects of small wins, it is important to note that the most common outcome in scratch card play is a loss, but if a prize is won, the most common prize amount in virtually all scratch card games is in fact not a true win, but rather what in gambling parlance is called a “push”. This outcome is a type of “win” in which the player gains an amount equal to that of their original bet. It is not unreasonable to assume that the majority of these push outcomes may be simply “cashed in” for another card by the player, as they are of equivalent value. Therefore, future research would benefit from designs that directly compare the effects of pushes and true wins.
Limitations
While we tried to accurately approximate real gambling behaviour, it should be reiterated that participants were not gambling with their own money and thus could not truly lose within the constraints of the experimental design. Although our participants all had experience playing scratch cards, it’s possible that different results would be obtained with a community-based sample of more experienced scratch card players, or more experienced gamblers in general. Future studies should attempt to clarify the roles of experience, frequency of play, and gambling status on near-miss effects. Another limitation of the current study is the relatively small jackpot prize that participants could win, in contrast to real scratch card jackpots (which range from tens of thousands to millions of dollars). However, we believe this factor would only serve to attenuate responses to the different outcome types. In this light, the robust effect of near-misses on urge that we obtained may be viewed as a conservative estimate of the effects that may occur in real scratch card games.