Understanding Online Voluntary Self-Exclusion in Gambling: An Empirical Study Using Account-Based Behavioral Tracking Data

Abstract

Online gambling has continued to grow alongside new ways to analyze data using behavioral tracking as a way to enhance consumer protection. A number of studies have analyzed consumers that have used voluntary self-exclusion (VSE) as a proxy measure for problem gambling. However, some scholars have argued that this is a poor proxy for problem gambling. Therefore, the present study examined this issue by analyzing customers (from the gambling operator Unibet) that have engaged in VSE. The participants comprised of costumers that chose to use the six-month VSE option (n = 7732), and customers that chose to close their Unibet account due to a specific self-reported gambling addiction (n = 141). Almost one-fifth of the customers that used six-month VSE only had gambling activity for less than 24 h (19.15%). Moreover, half of the customers had less than seven days of account registration prior to six-month VSE (50.39%). Customers who use VSE are too different to be treated as a homogenous group and therefore VSE is not a reliable proxy measure for problem gambling. The findings of this research are beneficial for operators, researchers, and policymakers because it provides insight into gambling behavior by analyzing real player behavior using tracking technologies, which is objective and unbiased.

Applying the DSM-5 Criteria for Gambling Disorder to Online Gambling Account-Based Tracking Data: An Empirical Study Utilizing Cluster Analysis

“…Griffiths and Auer (2016) highlighted that there are limitations in this latter approach because gamblers may not be using self-exclusion for problem gambling reasons. A recent study by Catania and Griffiths (2021) analysed 7732 gamblers who had used VSE. They reported almost one-fifth of the gamblers used the VSE option even though the players had less than 24 h of activity on their account.…”

Using artificial intelligence algorithms to predict self-reported problem gambling with account-based player data in an online casino setting

“…Their analysis also found that self-excluders made riskier bets than the control group. Catania and Griffiths (2021b) compared players who closed their account due to a specific self-reported gambling addiction with players who chose a six-month account closure option. Players who chose to close their account for six months had low gambling activity and had only registered recently (i.e., just over 50% of gamblers self-excluded within seven days of opening a gambling account, with one-fifth self-excluding within 24 h of opening an account).…”

Predicting self-exclusion among online gamblers: An empirical real-world study

“…Finally, the authors did not have access to players' self-reported reasons for self-exclusion. Previous research has shown that self-excluders are a heterogenous population (Catania & Griffiths, 2021b).…”

“…However, this assumption is controversial. Several studies have shown that problem gamblers may not self-exclude, while non-problem gamblers may self-exclude for reasons other than problem gambling (Griffiths & Auer 2016b;Catania & Griffiths, 2021b;Price-waterhouseCoopers & Responsible Gaming Council of Canada, 2017). On the other hand, there is also literature that has reported relationships between behavior patterns and selfreported/diagnosed problem gambling using survey and interview data (Bagby et al, 2007;McCormack et al, 2013;Sproston et al, 2000).…”