ArticleJournal of gambling studies2026
Who is Responsible for Online Gambling Harm? Personal Responsibility, Industry Accountability, and Support for Regulation.
Article in Journal of gambling studies, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Models of problem and responsible gambling have long emphasized personal responsibility, informed choice, and player agency as central to preventing gambling-related harm. Yet gambling harm occurs within broader commercial and regulatory systems, raising questions about how responsibility is distributed across players, operators, and regulators. In a study of 297 American adults, we examined responsibility attributions for online gambling-related harm and whether gambling history, problem gambling severity, and online gambling activity shape these attributions. Participants attributed the greatest responsibility to players, but also substantial responsibility to operators and regulators, suggesting that gambling-related harm is perceived as a shared responsibility rather than solely a player-level issue. Participants who gambled and those who did not gamble showed similar mean responsibility attributions, although responsibility judgments were more zero-sum among those who gambled: greater player responsibility was associated with lower operator and regulator responsibility. Among those who gambled, higher problem gambling severity predicted greater responsibility attributed to operators and regulators, whereas greater online gambling activity predicted greater responsibility attributed to operators. Neither predictor was associated with lower player responsibility. Finally, responsibility attributed to operators and regulators, but not players, predicted stronger support for stricter online gambling regulation. These findings suggest that greater gambling involvement and harm may heighten recognition of system-level responsibility without diminishing perceived player agency. They also point to a shared-responsibility model in which player agency remains important, but operator and regulator accountability are central to how the public understands and responds to online gambling harm.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42501281What 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.