Gamblification: A definition

Abstract

In recent years, gambling has become increasingly prominent in everyday life; the term ‘gamblification’ first emerged in the late 2000s and was used to describe the colonisation of sports and sporting cultures by the gambling industry. Since that time, gamblification has been used to describe a range of phenomena in increasingly diffuse contexts; it has been variously used as a proxy for the convergence of gaming and gambling, to describe specific monetisation practices, or as a means of motivating consumer behaviours. Conceptual clarity has been further muddied by the positioning of gamblification as a form of gamification. This work provides a definition of gamblification, which draws upon and consolidates existing uses of the term while also providing a lens through which the differing aspects of gamblification can be understood and appraised. By doing so, this work will establish a clear conceptual framework, which can structure in-depth discussions of this multi-dimensional phenomenon.

What is sludge? Comparing Sunstein's definition to others'

“…'Bad nudges' (Mrkva et al, 2021) and 'nudges for bad' (Soman et al, 2019) are corresponding terms that I have also seen. 'Dark nudges' is a term which I first applied in reference to other harmful aspects of gambling environments (Newall, 2019), and which has since then also been used in the video gaming and alcohol fields (Pennay et al, 2020;Petticrew et al, 2020;Xiao et al, 2021;Hadi Mogavi et al, 2022;Macey & Hamari, 2022). However, sludge is clearly the more recognised term, which I now use myself in gambling research to refer both to instances of deliberately ineffective disclosures fitting within Sunstein's definition (Newall et al, 2022), and to broader features of online gambling platform design (Newall & Rockloff, 2021), which are more similar to The Behavioural Insight Team's (2021) anchoring finding.…”

Not all games are created equal: Adolescents who play and spend money on simulated gambling games show greater risk for gaming disorder

“…Researchers have proposed that the 'gamblification' of online games via the insertion of gambling mechanics and revenue-generating schemes (Brock & Johnson, 2021;Macey & Hamari, 2022;Zanescu et al, 2020) may make gaming more problematic for some players (Armstrong et al, 2018;. This gamblification is evident in simulated gambling games that have embedded gambling elements, and directly replicate gambling activities or have analogous structural characteristics (Hing et al, 2022).…”

Understanding the mechanics and consumer risks associated with play-to-earn (P2E) gaming

“…Some monetization features have also been likened to a form of ‘gamblification’ of gaming. Discussed in detail by Macey and Hamari (2022) , this term refers to contexts in which gambling context becomes increasingly present in activities. This process can either occur at an affective level (e.g., gambling is more normalized or the term is used) or more structurally when realistic or partially realistic (e.g., chance games for prizes) are made available in gaming activities.…”

“…This process can either occur at an affective level (e.g., gambling is more normalized or the term is used) or more structurally when realistic or partially realistic (e.g., chance games for prizes) are made available in gaming activities. A particularly well publicized example of this are loot boxes ( Garea, Drummond, Sauer, Hall, & Williams, 2021 ; King & Delfabbro, 2020 ; King, Delfabbro, Gainsbury et al., 2019 ) which are features (e.g., treasure chests or card packs) that can be purchased or earned and which deliver outcomes based on chance-based algorithms ( Drummond & Sauer, 2018 ; Drummond, Sauer, & Hall, 2019 ; Griffiths, 2018 ; Macey & Hamari, 2022 ). Loot boxes have attracted regulatory attention because they appear to share some features with gambling: the purchase of a stake in an outcome governed by chance ( Derevensky & Griffiths, 2019 ; Zendle & Cairns, 2018 ).…”