Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39809302›Full record

Trial reportAddiction (Abingdon, England)2025

The effect of a brief intervention video on gambling advertising resistance: Results of a randomized, on-line experimental study.

Jamie Torrance, Alex M T Russell, Conor Heath, Philip Newall

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Addiction (Abingdon, England), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
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.

Jamie TorranceSchool of Psychology, Swansea University, Swansea, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5001-4126
Alex M T RussellSchool of Health, Medical and Applied Sciences, Experimental Gambling Research Laboratory, CQ University, Bundaberg, Australia.
Conor HeathFaculty of Computing, Engineering and the Built Environment, Birmingham City University, Birmingham, UK.
Philip NewallSchool of Psychological Science, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1660-9254

Funding

Academic Forum for the Study of Gambling (AFSG)Gambling Research Exchange Ontario
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND

aimsGambling advertising is nowadays prevalent in multiple jurisdictions and can take multiple forms, such as TV adverts and social media promotions. However, few independently designed interventions for gambling advertising have been empirically tested. We aimed to measure the effectiveness of an inoculative intervention video for gambling advertising, which was developed based on previous interventions for alcohol and tobacco, and which used input from academics and experts by experience.

designBetween-participants randomised online experiment.

settingUK.

participantsUK-based gamblers aged 18-29 years (n = 1200) were recruited via Prolific.

interventionParticipants either saw a novel inoculative intervention video (7.2 mins) aimed at increasing resistance against gambling advertising strategies (n = 595) or a neutral control video (7.2 mins) on healthy eating (n = 605). MEASUREMENTS: Participants completed pre- and post-test measures of gambling advertising scepticism and persuasion knowledge immediately before and after video exposure. They also answered the Problem Gambling Severity Index (PGSI) and reported their past-month engagement with gambling promotional offers. A random subset of participants (n = 797) recompleted these measures at one-month follow-up.

findingsThe intervention group's post-test scores were statistically significantly higher than control for scepticism [estimated marginal means (EMM) = 40.32 vs. EMM = 34.72; P < 0.001, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 4.90-6.29, ηp2 = 0.17] and persuasion knowledge (EMM = 20.77 vs. EMM = 16.71; P < 0.001, 95%CI = 3.61-4.50, ηp2 = 0.21). One-month follow-up scores also remained statistically significantly higher in the intervention group compared with control for both scepticism (EMM = 38.26 vs. EMM = 34.73; P < 0.001, 95%CI = 2.70-4.36, ηp2 = 0.08) and persuasion knowledge (EMM = 18.63 vs. EMM = 17.21; P < 0.001, 95%CI = 0.88-1.95, ηp2 = 0.03). Within the intervention group, 21% of participants had stopped engaging with gambling promotional offers at one-month follow-up, reflective of a statistically significant reduction compared with control (EMM = 0.48 vs. EMM = 0.87; P < 0.001, 95%CI = -0.53 to -0.26, ηp2 = 0.04). Overall, the control group showed no statistically significant changes in any of their scores throughout the study period.

conclusionsAn inoculative intervention video appears to increase young gamblers' resistance to gambling advertising and reduce their self-reported engagement with promotional offers.

Indexed as

AdvertisingGamblingAdolescentAdultFemaleHumansMalePersuasive CommunicationUnited KingdomYoung Adultcounter‐advertisinggambling advertisinggambling marketinginterventionpersuasionscepticism

Identifiers

PMID39809302
PMCPMC11986288

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.