Setting a hard (versus soft) monetary limit decreases expenditure: an assessment using player account data

ABSTRACT

Considerable debate has focused on whether pre-commitment to a money and/or time limit and adherence to that limit should be mandatory or voluntary. A unique feature of Ontario Lottery and Gaming’s player management system (My PlaySmart) provides a middle ground by allowing players to select whether they are permitted to continue playing once their limit is reached (the soft lock option) or whether continued play is not permitted (the hard lock option). We assessed the relative responsible gambling utility of these two options using player account data by comparing play data before and after enrollment. Players who chose the hard lock option decreased their average coin-in, loss per visit, and minutes played per visit. In contrast, soft lock enrollees significantly reduced their coin in (but not to the same extent as those who chose the hard lock option) and increased their visits from pre-enrollment to post-enrollment. The play data for hard and soft lock enrollees was also benchmarked against play of non-enrollees. Results suggest that the soft lock option is relatively ineffective at limiting play, thus adding important knowledge to the ongoing debate about pre-commitment schemes that aim to advance responsible gambling to minimize gambling-related harms.

KEYWORDS:

• Pre-commitment
• voluntary
• mandatory
• limit
• responsible gambling

Acknowledgements

The dataset used in the current research was provided by the Ontario Lottery and Gaming (OLG); however, the author(s) take full responsibility for the results and conclusions drawn from the dataset and acknowledge that they do not necessarily represent the views of the OLG. We would like to thank OLG for providing us with the player account data.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Data availability statement

No data set was declared by the authors in relation to this manuscript.

Ethics approval

This research was granted formal ethics approval from an institutional Human Research Ethics Committee. HREC institution: Carleton University; Protocol number: 1104907.

Constraints on publishing

Role of any external organization, including but not limited to funding bodies or individual/s other than the authors, in approving or reviewing the methodology, content, or final reporting of this manuscript (e.g. input into research questions, design and/or methodology, construction of questions/scope/survey, measures, analysis, interpretation of data, reporting of results, reviewing and commenting on drafts, requirements to have manuscripts approved before submission for publication) There are no constraints on publishing this paper. As noted below, however, OLG has not granted us permission to share the player-account data used in this research.

Preregistration statement

No preregistration was declared by the authors in relation to this manuscript.

Correction Statement

This article has been republished with minor changes. These changes do not impact the academic content of the article.

Notes

1. Most who were excluded from analyses only had player data for the day they enrolled, indicating that they were not regular players. For instance, among those who enrolled in the hard lock program, 381 (60.7%) had no player data prior to or after the enrollment date, and a further 86 (13.7%) had only one additional visit prior to or after their enrollment date.

2. Because visits for the non-enrollees covered the full year, whereas pre-enrollment and post-enrollment visits for enrollees each covered 180 days, we divided non-enrollees’ visits by 2. None of the non-enrollees visited more than 251 times in the year.

3. At the request of the editorial team and an anonymous reviewer, we re-analyzed the data using fixed effects multi-level modeling. The results were the same as those reported herein (i.e. the p-values were identical).

4. percentages vary as a function of whether a mean or median is calculated. Median percent change is higher than mean percent change.

Additional information

Funding

Direct and indirect support for this manuscript (e.g., direct or indirect funding; in-kind assistance including for recruitment, access to data, etc.) This research was funded by an International Center for Responsible Gaming Large Grant to Wohl, Davis, and Tabri

Notes on contributors

Michael J. A. Wohl

Michael J. A. Wohl (Professor of Psychology) examines factors that lead to excessive play and means to increase responsible gambling. Recently, attention has been paid to the promotion of positive play and the influence loyalty program membership can have on gambling behavior. He has published over 170 peer-reviewed papers.

Christopher G. Davis

Chris Davis (Professor of Psychology) examines the psychological processes through which people adjust to life-changing circumstances. He also conducts research on psychological factors that cause and exacerbate gambling and substance use problems. A third line of research investigates the psychological consequences of secret-keeping.

Nassim Tabri

Nassim Tabri (Associate Professor of Psychology) examines the etiology and maintenance of disordered gambling and other addictive behaviours. His recent research focuses on how the pursuit of financial success via gambling may proliferate and maintain disordered gambling. He has published 48 peer-reviewed papers.