Responsible gambling codes of conduct: lack of harm minimisation intervention in the context of venue self-regulation

Abstract

Responsible Gambling Codes of Conduct (CoC) are used around the world to describe electronic gambling machine (EGM) operator commitments to reducing harm from gambling. In addition to the provision of passive product information and warnings, CoC describe how venues should assist EGM users displaying signs of problematic gambling. The focus in this paper is on venue adherence to the active strategies described in these documents relating to supporting ‘responsible gambling’ and discouraging harmful, intensive and extended gambling. The paper triangulates data from aspirational statements by EGM operators published in CoC documents; structured, unannounced observations by the research team in 11 EGM venues; and interviews and focus groups conducted with 40 gamblers and 20 professionals in Melbourne, Australia. Results showed only isolated evidence of supportive interactions between staff and gamblers to address gambling harm. The weight of evidence demonstrated that venues often fail to respond to signs of gambling problems and instead encourage continued gambling in contradiction of their CoC responsibilities. Signs of gambling problems are a normalised feature of EGM use in these venues. To genuinely address this public health and public policy challenge, improved consumer protection for gamblers may be achieved through legislation requiring venues to respond to signs of gambling problems. This may include a range of measures such as banning food and beverage service at machines and limiting withdrawals of cash by gamblers, as well as using behavioural tracking algorithms to identify problematic gambling patterns and binding universal pre-commitment systems to complement supportive interventions by venue staff.

Keywords:

• Electronic gambling machines
• self-regulation
• responsible gambling
• harm minimisation
• codes of conduct

Acknowledgements

The authors are grateful for the support of Dr Marissa Dickins who assisted recruitment and some data collection in the early stages of this research.

Disclosure statement

The authors report no conflicts of interest. The authors alone are responsible for the content and writing of this article.

Notes

1 A loss disguised as a win occurs when the machine provides reinforcement via visual and/or audio celebratory feedback when the amount won is less than the amount wagered (37).

2 Upstream measures are those that prevent problems from occurring. These measures typically address the whole population and are outside of the control of the individual.

3 Three professionals attended a focus group and an interview.

4 Name changed.

5 A book pay allows a gambler to cash out of the machine without collecting $1 coins paid at the machine. It involves requesting a venue staff member to authorise a paper docket, which can be exchanged at the cashier station for notes or a cheque.

6 EFTPOS is the acronym for ‘electronic funds transfer at point of sale’ that involves the use of a debit or credit card at a payment terminal that authorises a purchase or withdrawal of cash.

Additional information

Funding

This study was supported by Commonwealth Government of Australia.