Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30604033›Full record

ArticleJournal of gambling studies2019

Wagering Advertisements and Inducements: Exposure and Perceived Influence on Betting Behaviour.

Nerilee Hing, Alex M T Russell, Anna Thomas, Rebecca Jenkinson

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of gambling studies, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 27 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
27citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

27 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Nerilee HingExperimental Gambling Research Laboratory, School of Health, Medical and Applied Sciences, CQUniversity, Bundaberg, QLD, Australia. n.hing@cqu.edu.au.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2150-9784
Alex M T RussellExperimental Gambling Research Laboratory, School of Health, Medical and Applied Sciences, CQUniversity, Sydney, NSW, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3685-7220
Anna ThomasRMIT University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5197-1793
Rebecca JenkinsonAustralian Gambling Research Centre, Australian Institute of Family Studies, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9948-9448

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A proliferation of wagering advertising has raised concerns about its effects, especially on vulnerable gamblers. This study examined exposure to wagering advertisements and inducements, and their reported influence on the size, frequency and riskiness of bets placed-amongst regular bettors and by gambler risk group. An Ecological Momentary Assessment design minimised recall bias. After completing a baseline survey, 722 regular bettors completed up to 15 surveys administered on 5 days per week over three non-consecutive weeks. Data were analysed for the 316 race bettors and 279 sports bettors completing at least one survey. The results indicate that regular bettors have almost daily exposure to wagering advertising, including for inducements. The most frequently seen and influential advertisement types were direct messages (emails, texts and/or phone calls from wagering operators, which, in Australia, bettors are automatically opted-into when opening a betting account) and advertisements on betting websites or apps. Participants reported the most influential inducements to be: stake-back offers, multi-bet offers, match your stake or deposit offers, better odds/winnings inducements, happy hours, rewards programs, and cash out early offers. The findings indicate that wagering advertisements, including for inducements, are likely to be having powerful effects on regular bettors. On each day that respondents saw these advertisements (most days for most advertisement types), substantial minorities reported increased size and frequency of betting. Results did not vary by gambler risk group. Understanding which types of wagering advertising are associated with most gambling-related harm can inform advertising regulations, targeted public health interventions, and future research.

Indexed as

RewardRisk-TakingAdultAdvertisingAustraliaDirect-to-Consumer AdvertisingEcological Momentary AssessmentFemaleGamblingHumansMaleMotivationSportsYoung AdultAdvertisingBettingEcological momentary assessmentGambling harmInducementsMarketingProblem gamblingRacesSportsWagering

Identifiers

PMID30604033

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.