Not all games are created equal: Adolescents who play and spend money on simulated gambling games show greater risk for gaming disorder.

Publisher: Elsevier Science Country of Publication: England NLM ID: 7603486 Publication Model: Print-Electronic Cited Medium: Internet ISSN: 1873-6327 (Electronic) Linking ISSN: 03064603 NLM ISO Abbreviation: Addict Behav Subsets: MEDLINE

Publication: Oxford : Elsevier Science
Original Publication: Oxford, Elmsford, N. Y., Pergamon Press.

Gambling*/epidemiology ; Behavior, Addictive*/epidemiology ; Video Games*; Adolescent ; Male ; Humans ; Female ; Australia/epidemiology ; Consumer Behavior

Research reports positive associations between gaming disorder (GD) in adolescents and loot box purchasing but has not examined this relationship for other types of simulated gambling. This study examined whether greater engagement and expenditure in three types of simulated gambling were associated with meeting the criteria for GD in adolescents. A sample of Australians aged 12-17 years (N = 826) was recruited through an online panel aggregator. It included 646 gamers (57.7% male) with 89 being classified as having past-year GD, as defined and measured by the Internet Gaming Disorder Scale. Independent variables comprised past-month engagement in three simulated gambling activities (games with 'mini' gambling components, social casino games, and loot boxes), loot box purchasing, other microtransactions, impulsiveness, and demographics. Logistic regressions first examined whether engagement in each of the three simulated gambling activities was individually associated with GD, then with all three in the same model, and then controlling for demographic variables and impulsivity. Logistic regressions also examined whether microtransactions and purchasing loot boxes were individually associated with GD, then with both in the same model, and then controlling for demographic variables and impulsivity. Adolescents who had engaged in each simulated gambling activity in the past month were more likely to report meeting the criteria for GD. These relationships remained significant when controlling for common demographics and impulsiveness. Past-month engagement in social casino games increased the odds of GD 2.5 times (95% CI: 1.54; 4.02), 2.4 times for games with 'mini' gambling components (95% CI: 1.42; 3.90) and 2.0 times for engaging in loot boxes (95% CI: 1.22; 3.21), but only social casino games remained significant when controlling for engagement in all three activities. The likelihood of meeting the criteria for GD increased 3.8 times with expenditure on microtransactions (95% CI: 2.32; 6.27) and 4.6 times for buying loot boxes, and each remained significant when both were included in the model. Compared to digital games without simulated gambling elements, simulated gambling appears to attract adolescents who report GD. Implications of the results are discussed in detail.
Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.
(Copyright © 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Keywords: Gambling-style games; Games with gambling components; Internet gaming disorder; Loot boxes; Problematic gaming; Social casino games

Date Created: 20221024 Date Completed: 20221130 Latest Revision: 20230217

20240105

10.1016/j.addbeh.2022.107525

36274342