Predictors of Return Rate Discrimination in Slot Machine Play

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to investigate the extent to which accurate estimates of payback percentages and volatility combined with prior learning, enabled players to successfully discriminate between multi-line/multi-credit slot machines that provided differing rates of reinforcement. The aim was to determine if the capacity to discriminate structural characteristics of gaming machines influenced player choices in selecting 'favourite' slot machines. Slot machine gambling history, gambling beliefs and knowledge, impulsivity, illusions of control, and problem solving style were assessed in a sample of 48 first year undergraduate psychology students. Participants were subsequently exposed to a choice paradigm where they could freely select to play either of two concurrently presented PC-simulated slot machines programmed to randomly differ in expected player return rates (payback percentage) and win frequency (volatility). Results suggest that prior learning and cognitions (particularly gambler's fallacy) but not payback, were major contributors to the ability of a player to discriminate volatility between slot machines. Participants displayed a general tendency to discriminate payback, but counter-intuitively placed more bets on the slot machine with lower payback percentage rates.

Transformation of Sports Betting into a Rapid and Continuous Gambling Activity: a Grounded Theoretical Investigation of Problem Sports Betting in Online Settings

“…Ultimately, research indicates that even an extra few seconds of respite between betting behaviours can be a sufficient opportunity to evaluate behaviour and reduce risk-taking and overall gambling expenditure (Corr and Thompson 2014). It is argued that the nature of continuous gambling activities, with minimal natural or enforced breaks in play, creates intense emotional and dissociative states, leading to impaired gambling decision-making and maladaptive responding (Coates and Blaszczynski 2013;Loba et al 2001). Fundamentally, a break in play is required to facilitate suppression of arousal and negative valence and to respond adaptively to negative outcomes (Newman and Lorenz 2003;Verbruggen et al 2012).…”

Understanding Within-Session Loss-Chasing: An Experimental Investigation of the Impact of Stake Size on Cognitive Control

“…However, structural characteristics of the gambling activity are also crucial determinants of arousal and reinforcement in the development of disordered gambling patterns (Blaszczynski 2013). Research has demonstrated that structural features, such as speed of game (Delfabbro et al 2005), schedule of reinforcement volatility (Coates and Blaszczynski 2013;Dixon et al 2006), maximum bet (Livingstone et al 2008), and near-misses Clark et al 2012), affect the gambler's willingness to continue gambling despite incurring significant losses (Blaszczynski 2013). It is possible that such structural characteristics can influence executive control in the individual in the short-term, including response inhibition and reflection impulsivity, and therefore potentially explain withinsession loss of cognitive control.…”

Effect of within-session breaks in play on responsible gambling behaviour during sustained monetary losses

“…Even at moderate levels of engagement EGMs can lead to gambling-related harm, such as excessive monetary and time expenditure (Afifi et al 2014;LaPlante et al 2011). Coates and Blaszczynski (2013) argued that rapid, continuous forms of gambling have elevated risk for harm because of the combination of a variable schedule of reinforcement and an absence of natural breaks-in-play. This combination of structural characteristics may lead to maladaptive responding to reinforcement i.e.…”