ArticleAddictive behaviors reports2019
Experiences of responsible gambling tools among non-problem gamblers: A survey of active customers of an online gambling platform.
Article in Addictive behaviors reports, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The Prevalence and Clinical and Sociodemographic Factors of Problem Online Gambling: A Systematic Review.Journal of gambling studies · 2021Pooled it
- Educational interventions for erroneous gambling beliefs among Norwegian online casino players: a large-scale real-world study of behavioural impact.Harm reduction journal · 2026Trial
- Mandatory verses voluntary self-tests for new online casino customers: effect on engagement, quality, gambling behavior and use of responsible gambling measures.Harm reduction journal · 2025Trial
- Motivational telephone intervention to risk gamblers by a state-owned gambling operator in Sweden.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2024Article
- Offering an auto-play feature likely increases total gambling activity at online slot-machines: preliminary evidence from an interrupted time series experiment at a real-life online casino.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2024Article
- Gamblers' Perception of the Playscan Risk Assessment: A Mixed-Methods Study.Journal of gambling studies · 2022Article
- Effects of a National Preventive Intervention Against Potential COVID-19-Related Gambling Problems in Online Gamblers: Self-Report Survey Study.JMIR formative research · 2022Article
- Responsible gambling through a motivational telephone intervention to high-risk gamblers - An evaluation of user satisfaction and subjective intervention effects.Frontiers in psychology · 2022Article
- Responsible Gambling Telephone Intervention to High-Risk Gamblers by a State-Owned Gambling Operator in Sweden: Study Protocol for a Study on Effectiveness, User Satisfaction, and Acceptability.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2020Article
- Use of Consumer Protection Tools on Internet Gambling Sites: Customer Perceptions, Motivators, and Barriers to Use.Journal of gambling studies · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionResponsible gambling (RG) tools, aiming at helping gamblers to avoid gambling-related harms, are common in online gambling platforms. Gambling industry, policy makers, and researchers have warned that RG tools can potentially disturb recreational gamblers, channeling them to less protective operators. No evidence exists to support these concerns, and they can hinder the development of effective RG tools. The current study aimed to investigate the recreational gamblers' experiences of RG tools.
methodsA total of 10,200 active customers of an online gambling service were invited to complete an online survey and rate their overall reactions, attitudes, disturbance and irritation towards RG tools, as well as their inclination to abandon a gambling service due to overexposure to RG tools.
resultsNon-problem gamblers had positive experiences of RG tools. Moderate-risk gamblers had more positive overall reaction and less irritation to previous experiences of RG tools compared to non-problem gamblers. Problem gamblers had least positive attitudes, most disturbance and most irritation towards RG pictures. Non-problem gamblers had lowest rates of having abandoned a service because of perceived overexposure to RG tools (5.2% compared to 25.9% of problem gamblers), with a significant between-group difference (OR [95% CI] = 7.17 [3.61-14.23],
conclusionsNon-problem gamblers were not particularly disturbed by RG tools and were not at risk of abandoning online gambling services because of overexposure to RG tools. The study found no grounds for limiting the design and implementation of RG tools due to fears of disturbing recreational gamblers.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.