1 JACKPOT PITFALLS IN EGM PLAYING: DETERMINISTIC OR PROGRESSIVE? En Li, Matthew Rockloff, Phillip Donaldson, Matthew Browne, and Erika Langham Experimental Gambling Research Laboratory, Central Queensland University, Australia Acknowledgement: This study was commissioned by Gambling Research Australia - a partnership between the Commonwealth, State and Territory Governments. NAGS, November 2013
Purpose 2 Previous research: little on the influence of the structural features of EGM jackpots on gambling behaviour (Rockloff & Hing, 2012). This study: two common features of EGM jackpots (i.e., progressive and deterministic), their potential effects on game attractiveness and gaming behaviour, and how jackpot size may moderate such effects.
Progressive versus Non-progressive Jackpots 3 Progressive: incrementally grow in value as players make additional bets. Non-progressive: do not grow in value. Rolled over effect (Rogers, 1998): gamblers are encouraged to bet more to increase the accumulated amount of the jackpots, a seemingly recoverable investment. Goal distance effect (Kivetz, Urminsky & Zheng, 2006): gamblers may perceive increased distance to the goal as the jackpot value grows after each additional bet, and therefore decrease players motivation to pursue the jackpot reward.
Deterministic versus Non-deterministic Jackpots 4 Deterministic: have a guaranteed payout after a fixed number of bets, which is determined at random. Non-deterministic: have a potential payout assessed at random with every bet. A key difference: the likelihood of winning a deterministic jackpots increases as players continue to bet, whereas there is no guaranteed winning outcome over time for non-deterministic jackpots (Rockloff & Hing, 2012). Deterministic jackpots may lead to heightened betting motivation at EGM playing as players have increasing odds of winning with every bet placed.
5 Jackpot Size Regular players understand that small jackpots payout more frequently than large jackpots. Prospect Theory (Kahneman & Tversky, 1979) predicts that EGM players should be more motivated to place bets with small-probability large jackpots, however, because people are generally more risk-seeking with respect to low-probability events framed as gains (Rockloff & Hing, 2012). The motivating influence of large, low probability prizes is also supported by evidence from US lottery sales, where larger population states have higher per-capita purchases of lottery tickets (Cook & Clotfelter, 1993).
6 Study Participants 123 participants (M=51, F=72) completed the experiment following recruitment from newspaper-flyer advertisements in Bundaberg, Queensland Australia.
7 The Simulated EGM Programmed with a fixed sequence of 5 wins and infinite losses thereafter. Produced the typical musical sounds associated with play.
8 Procedures Participants were given $20 upon arrival. After completing brief demographic questions and the Lie-Bet Scale (Johnson et al., 1988), participants were asked whether they would like to wager their $20 compensation on the EGM. The $20 cash compensation was retrieved from the participants and loaded to the EGM for their subsequent play. Stratified random assignment based on participants gender, age, and Lie-Bet score was utilised to allocate participants to play the EGM in the different conditions. Each participant had a finger sensor measuring skin conductance attached to the middle finger of his or her non-dominant hand (Biograph Infinity System).
9 Design A 2 (progressive vs. non-progressive) 2 (deterministic vs. nondeterministic) 2 (small jackpot vs. large jackpot) factorial design with an additional no-jackpot control condition.
10 Exemplary instruction The deterministic, progressive, $25K jackpot condition players were told: The $25,000 prize amount will be shown on the top of the screen once you begin. You ll notice that the jackpot prize grows with every bet you make. The ticket-jackpot will payout after a certain number of bets have been placed. The number of bets that must be made before the jackpot is triggered has been determined in advance and at random.
11 Data Analysis Dependent variables: the behavioural outcomes of average bet size, subjective enjoyment of playing the EGM, physiological arousal (change in skin conductance). ANCOVA model: using progressive feature, deterministic feature, and jackpot size as the primary predictive variables in a crossed design. Covariates: Gender, age, and Problem Gambling Severity Index (PGSI, Ferrris & Wynne, 2001).
Effect of progressive, deterministic, and jackpot size on bet size (p <.05) 12
13 No effect of jackpot features, interactions or covariates on enjoyment/excitement Importantly, participants experienced similar level of enjoyment or excitement in those conditions where they placed larger (vs. smaller) bets. enjoyment / excitement =
14 Implications Large jackpot size can encourage risky gambling behaviour, especially when the jackpot structure is deterministic and non-progressive; or progressive and non-deterministic. These riskier EGM products, as compared to the less risky products, might not increase the pleasure and excitement among players. Policy makers may consider pre-warning the EGM players of the potential harms of such jackpots, or promote the less risky products to a larger degree.
Thank you! 15