Not always as advertised: Different effects from viewing safer gambling (harm prevention) adverts on gambling urges

IF 3.7 2区 医学 Q1 PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL Addictive behaviors Pub Date : 2024-09-08 DOI:10.1016/j.addbeh.2024.108161
Philip Newall , Leonardo Weiss-Cohen , Jamie Torrance , Yakov Bart
{"title":"Not always as advertised: Different effects from viewing safer gambling (harm prevention) adverts on gambling urges","authors":"Philip Newall ,&nbsp;Leonardo Weiss-Cohen ,&nbsp;Jamie Torrance ,&nbsp;Yakov Bart","doi":"10.1016/j.addbeh.2024.108161","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Public concern around gambling advertising in the UK has been met not by government action but by industry self-regulations, such as a forthcoming voluntary ban on front-of-shirt gambling sponsorship in Premier League soccer. “Safer gambling” (harm prevention) adverts are one recent example, and are TV commercials which inform viewers about gambling-related harm. The present work is the first independent evaluation of safer gambling adverts by both gambling operators and a charity called GambleAware. In an online experiment, we observed the change in participants’ (<em>N</em> = 2,741) Gambling Urge Scale (GUS) scores after viewing either: a conventional financial inducement gambling advert, a gambling operator’s safer gambling advert, an advert from the GambleAware “bet regret” campaign, an advert from the GambleAware “stigma reduction” campaign, or a control advert that was not about gambling. Relative to a neutral control advert, GUS scores increased after viewing a financial inducement or an operator’s safer gambling advert. In comparison to the neutral control condition, GUS score changes were similar after viewing a bet regret advert, but showed a significant decrease after viewing a stigma reduction advert. Those at higher risk of harm reported larger decreases in GUS after watching a bet regret or stigma reduction advert. Overall, this study introduced a novel experimental paradigm for evaluating safer gambling adverts, uncovered a potential downside from gambling operators’ safer gambling adverts, and revealed variation in the potential effectiveness of charity-delivered safer gambling adverts.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":7155,"journal":{"name":"Addictive behaviors","volume":"160 ","pages":"Article 108161"},"PeriodicalIF":3.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0306460324002107/pdfft?md5=86aba2f61037e0a2f2e3a0ff72c3797c&pid=1-s2.0-S0306460324002107-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Addictive behaviors","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0306460324002107","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, CLINICAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Public concern around gambling advertising in the UK has been met not by government action but by industry self-regulations, such as a forthcoming voluntary ban on front-of-shirt gambling sponsorship in Premier League soccer. “Safer gambling” (harm prevention) adverts are one recent example, and are TV commercials which inform viewers about gambling-related harm. The present work is the first independent evaluation of safer gambling adverts by both gambling operators and a charity called GambleAware. In an online experiment, we observed the change in participants’ (N = 2,741) Gambling Urge Scale (GUS) scores after viewing either: a conventional financial inducement gambling advert, a gambling operator’s safer gambling advert, an advert from the GambleAware “bet regret” campaign, an advert from the GambleAware “stigma reduction” campaign, or a control advert that was not about gambling. Relative to a neutral control advert, GUS scores increased after viewing a financial inducement or an operator’s safer gambling advert. In comparison to the neutral control condition, GUS score changes were similar after viewing a bet regret advert, but showed a significant decrease after viewing a stigma reduction advert. Those at higher risk of harm reported larger decreases in GUS after watching a bet regret or stigma reduction advert. Overall, this study introduced a novel experimental paradigm for evaluating safer gambling adverts, uncovered a potential downside from gambling operators’ safer gambling adverts, and revealed variation in the potential effectiveness of charity-delivered safer gambling adverts.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
并不总是像广告宣传的那样:观看更安全的赌博(预防伤害)广告对赌博冲动的不同影响
在英国,公众对赌博广告的关注并没有得到政府行动的回应,而是得到了行业自律的回应,例如,英超足球联赛即将自愿禁止球衣前的赌博赞助。"更安全的赌博"(预防伤害)广告是最近的一个例子,这些电视广告向观众宣传与赌博有关的伤害。本研究是赌博运营商和一个名为 "提高赌博意识"(GambleAware)的慈善机构对 "加强赌博安全 "广告的首次独立评估。在一项在线实验中,我们观察了参与者(2,741 人)在观看以下任一广告后赌博冲动量表(GUS)得分的变化:传统的经济诱导赌博广告、赌博运营商的更安全赌博广告、GambleAware "打赌后悔 "活动的广告、GambleAware "减少耻辱 "活动的广告或与赌博无关的对照广告。与中性对照广告相比,在观看经济诱导广告或经营者的更安全赌博广告后,GUS 分数有所上升。与中性对照组相比,观看 "后悔下注 "广告后的 GUS 分数变化相似,但观看 "减少污名化 "广告后 GUS 分数显著下降。伤害风险较高的人群在观看投注后悔或减少污名化广告后,其 GUS 下降幅度更大。总之,本研究引入了一种新的实验范式来评估更安全的赌博广告,发现了赌博经营者的更安全赌博广告的潜在弊端,并揭示了慈善机构发布的更安全赌博广告的潜在效果差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Addictive behaviors
Addictive behaviors 医学-药物滥用
CiteScore
8.40
自引率
4.50%
发文量
283
审稿时长
46 days
期刊介绍: Addictive Behaviors is an international peer-reviewed journal publishing high quality human research on addictive behaviors and disorders since 1975. The journal accepts submissions of full-length papers and short communications on substance-related addictions such as the abuse of alcohol, drugs and nicotine, and behavioral addictions involving gambling and technology. We primarily publish behavioral and psychosocial research but our articles span the fields of psychology, sociology, psychiatry, epidemiology, social policy, medicine, pharmacology and neuroscience. While theoretical orientations are diverse, the emphasis of the journal is primarily empirical. That is, sound experimental design combined with valid, reliable assessment and evaluation procedures are a requisite for acceptance. However, innovative and empirically oriented case studies that might encourage new lines of inquiry are accepted as well. Studies that clearly contribute to current knowledge of etiology, prevention, social policy or treatment are given priority. Scholarly commentaries on topical issues, systematic reviews, and mini reviews are encouraged. We especially welcome multimedia papers that incorporate video or audio components to better display methodology or findings. Studies can also be submitted to Addictive Behaviors? companion title, the open access journal Addictive Behaviors Reports, which has a particular interest in ''non-traditional'', innovative and empirically-oriented research such as negative/null data papers, replication studies, case reports on novel treatments, and cross-cultural research.
期刊最新文献
Cannabis use regimens in trauma-exposed individuals: Associations with cannabis use quantity and frequency The effect of rumination on problematic mobile phone use among female freshmen: A moderated mediation model Editorial Board Role of social-cognitive factors in the relationship between e-cigarette use and subsequent cigarette smoking among U.S. youth: A causal mediation analysis E-cigarette access and age verification among adolescents, young adults, and adults
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1