To screen, or not to screen: An experimental comparison of two methods for correlating video game loot box expenditure and problem gambling severity

Abstract

Loot boxes are gambling-like products found in video games that players can buy with real-world money to obtain random rewards. A positive correlation between loot box spending and problem gambling severity has been well-replicated. Some researchers recently argued that this observed positive correlation may be due to participants incorrectly interpreting problem gambling questions as applying to their loot box expenditure. We experimentally tested this alternative explanation for the observed positive correlation (N = 2,027), by manipulating whether all participants were given the problem gambling scale (the ‘non-screening’ approach; n = 1,005), or by ‘screening’ participants (n = 1,022) by only giving those reporting recent gambling expenditure the problem gambling scale. Results showed positive correlations across both experimental conditions, with the association being slightly stronger in the non-screening group. In addition, a predicted positive correlation emerged between past-year gambling participation and loot box expenditure in the screening group. These experimental results confirm that the association between loot box spending and problem gambling severity is likely not due to participants misinterpreting problem gambling questions as being relevant to their loot box spending. These results also provide support for the usage of gambling participation screening questions in further research on this topic.

Loot boxes, gambling-related risk factors, and mental health in Mainland China: A large-scale survey

“…By considering gamblers and non-gamblers separately, the present study shows that the inclusion of non-gambling participants affects the strength of the correlation. Future studies should consider screening participants for gambling participation before giving them the PGSI to obtain more accurate results [76] .…”