Fair game? Producing and publishing gambling research

Abstract

This brief article reviews the findings of Fair Game (2014) and discusses their implications for journals publishing gambling research. Drawing parallels with critiques in tobacco and alcohol, it adds to the growing number of voices arguing for reform of the gambling field.

Keywords:

• ethics
• research
• funding
• gambling industry
• knowledge

Declaration of interests

Funding sources: The research leading to these results has received funding from the European Research Council under the European Union's Seventh Framework Programme (FP/2007–2013)/ERC Grant Agreement n. 263443. Between 2006 and 2009 I received £90,697.22 from ‘Research into Problem Gambling’, a collaborative research initiative between the Economic and Social Research Council (ESRC; lead organization) and the Responsibility in Gambling Trust (RiGT), now the Responsible Gambling Trust (RGT). All aspects of the grant were administered by the ESRC.

Constraints on publishing: Near the end of the project, I was asked by the RiGT to submit press releases for prior approval, a request that I declined. The ERC has not placed any restrictions on publishing other than that they be acknowledged as a source of support.

Competing interests: Between 2007 and 2009 I received ad hoc support from the National Lottery Commission for the Gambling Research Network, a group of early career and PhD researchers coming together in London two or three times a year. Money covered refreshments and no explicit restrictions or inducements were placed on the group by the NLC. I have paid to attend industry-sponsored events and attended free, industry-supported events. I have not received any other direct or indirect payments from the industry or any other groups substantially funded by gambling to conduct research or to speak at conferences or events. I have no other conflicts of interest to declare.

Notes

^1. The Transparency Project (http://www.thetransparencyproject.org/) is an example of an attempt by a group of researchers (lead by Howard Shaffer and Debi LaPlante of the Division on Addictions at the Cambridge Health Alliance, a teaching affiliate of Harvard Medical School) to share data contributed by an industry sponsor (bwin.party digital entertainment) with a wider audience. The fact that this attempt has not been universally well received is further evidence of the credibility gap in gambling research.

^2. The online ‘General Guidelines’ for authors submitting to IGS also indicate that ‘Authors must also incorporate a Disclosure Statement which will acknowledge any financial interest or benefit they have arising from the direct applications of their research. Disclosure statements should be included on the title page and also stated and described during the submission process. Full disclosure of any conflicts of interest is required at the time of submission.’ ‘Disclosure statement’ is hotlinked to ‘Disclosure of Conflicts of Interest’ a subsection of Taylor and Francis' author services (see http://journalauthors.tandf.co.uk/copyright/assignmentAndYourRights.asp#link3).

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Rebecca Cassidy

Rebecca Cassidy is an anthropologist and author of several books and articles on horseracing and gambling, including Sport of Kings: Kinship, Gender and Thoroughbred Breeding (Cambridge University Press, 2002) and Qualitative Research in Gambling: Exploring the Production and Consumption of Risk, edited with Claire Loussouarn and Andrea Pisac (Routledge, 2013). Her recent work focuses on the political economy of gambling research. In 2014, with Loussouarn and Pisac, she compiled Fair Game: Producing Gambling Research, a report based on interviews with 109 stakeholders in the field.