Warning labels have little impact on gamblers

David Strow

Monday, June 19, 2000 | 11:27 a.m.

Presenting warning messages and odds of winning to gamblers may do little to change their gambling habits, two new studies suggest.

But one group of researchers believes warning messages still have the potential to help curtail problem gambling.

"Brief messages result in a knowledge gain and an understanding of what they're doing (when they gamble)," said James Whelan, a professor of psychology at the University of Memphis. "At least at first impact, people become educated."

The University of Memphis study, together with a study conducted by Harvard Medical School's Division on Addictions, was presented at the 11th International Conference on Gambling & Risk-Taking last week in Las Vegas. The conference was hosted by the University of Nevada, Reno.

Both studies were triggered by a recommendation by the National Gambling Impact Study Commission that warning signs, hotline numbers and true odds of winning be posted in prominent places wherever gaming occurs.

The Harvard study, conducted by economist Richard McGowan, examined whether lottery ticket buyers were influenced by posting the true odds of winning on each ticket.

Four states were examined -- Minnesota, Wisconsin, Arizona and New Mexico. Minnesota and Arizona each print the true odds of winning on tickets, while Wisconsin and New Mexico do not. The study assumed adjacent states would be similar enough in other fashions to allow a good comparison.

The result -- no statistical differences between the states examined.

"It looks like the warning label didn't have any effect on sales," McGowan said. This is consistent, he said, with the minimal effect warning labels apparently have had on sales of alcohol and cigarettes since they were required by law.

Though it did provide a glimpse of how gambling behavior was influenced, McGowan said he didn't know what impact posting a similar message on slot machines would have.

"If they put the odds of your winning on a slot machine, that would be interesting to see how gamblers react," McGowan said. "What it would do to casino (win), I don't know.

"I don't think it would (have much impact). The reason most people play is that they want to be entertained. I don't see what difference it would make."

The University of Memphis study took a more direct approach, studying the effect warning messages would have on roulette players.

The 101 students that participated in the study were first surveyed with the "Gamblers' Belief Questionnaire," a survey designed to measure a person's irrational gambling-related beliefs. Examples would be a player who believes he will eventually win money if he plays long enough, and that "chasing" losses with larger bets will eventually result in a player winning back his stake.

The students were then given $125 in "funds," then allowed to play roulette on a computer. Though the students weren't playing with real money, they were told they would receive a raffle ticket for every $5 in funds that remained after the session. The students could play as long as they liked.

Prior to the experiment, the participants were broken into three groups. One group would play without any warning messages of any kind. The second group, prior to playing, received a 20-second message that warned gambling could have serious consequences, and stated "the longer you play, the more money you are likely to lose." It also stated that roulette players averaged a return of about $94 for each $100 wagered.

A third group received the most intense pre-briefing of all, watching a 10-minute video that outlined the risks and odds involved with gambling. The video also attempted to debunk many common misperceptions about gambling. Finally, the players were compelled to set a loss limit before they started playing.

In the end, there was no statistical difference in the wagering behavior of the three groups. Members of each group played an average of 15 to 16 minutes, played 27 to 30 spins, bet roughly 4 percent of their stake per spin, and lost roughly the same amount of money.

The researchers, however, are not yet convinced that gambling behavior wouldn't change in a casino after players view warning and odds messages.

They noted the students played in a controlled fashion, rather than in the erratic manner of problem gamblers. A second possible factor was the lab setting, as opposed to a real-world casino setting.

"Whether (warning messages) would produce an effect when administered to individuals who gamble in problematic or risky ways is not clear," the study said. "Consequently, further investigation of the impact of these strategies with such populations is warranted."

One result of the study that suggests the messages may help came in the change in the gambling beliefs of the players. Only 9 percent of the control group could identify the correct odds and risks involved with roulette, compared to 71 percent of those exposed to the 20-second message and 75 percent of those that watched the 10-minute message.

As significant was the change in the participants' scores on the test of irrational gambling beliefs. After playing roulette, the control group's scores changed by 10 points -- suggesting that irrational beliefs increase after gambling. Those that received the short warning message had essentially unchanged scores, while scores in the 10-minute warning group improved more than 7 points -- suggesting that they had adopted more rational beliefs toward the true nature of gambling.

"There's strong support for the informational value of warning messages," said Timothy Steenbergh, a psychology graduate student at the University of Memphis who helped author the study. "Whether that has effects (on player behavior) remains to be seen."

Another possibility, he said, is that the educational impact of such messages would be lost over time as players became used to them.

The next step is to conduct a similar study in a real-world casino setting, though no casino has agreed to participate yet.

"We're not trying to make (gambling) go away," Whelan said. "We hope our group can convince (the gaming industry) that we're on the same side, and that there's a good chance we could get their cooperation."

Even if such studies prove that warning messages have an impact on just a miniscule portion of problem gamblers, Whelan and Steenbergh both believe that's enough justification for moving forward with warning messages in gaming settings.

"If we can even get a small proportion of individuals to change their behavior just a bit, it would have a great impact (on the costs of treating problem gambling)," Steenbergh said.