J Gambl Stud. Author manuscript; available in PMC 2007 Feb 14.
Published in final edited form as:
doi: 10.1023/a:1021065116500
The website also provides information for students about gambling disorder, the warning signs of a gambling problem, where to get help, and how to promote campus awareness of the issue. The site also provides the first online intervention designed for college students, BetOnU. Problem Gambling and College Mostly online gambling, with some poker and March Madness mixed in. For most people, gambling is usually harmless entertainment. But for a growing number of young adults, gambling is becoming more than fun. For some college students, gambling for fun can turn into a serious problem and have a negative impact on their lives. CollegeGambling.org was developed by the National Center for Responsible Gaming (NCRG) as a tool to help current and prospective students, campus administrators, campus health professionals and parents address gambling.
NIHMSID: NIHMS11145
See other articles in PMC that cite the published article.
Abstract
The present research combined qualitative and quantitative approaches in examining gambling motives among college student gamblers. A comprehensive set of 16 gambling motives was identified by categorizing 762 open-ended reasons for gambling, provided by 184 college student gamblers. Results revealed that most college students gamble to win money, for fun, for social reasons, for excitement, or just to have something to do. Overall, the results suggest the need for an eclectic biopsychosocial approach with regard to etiology of college student gambling.
Keywords: gambling, college students, motives, motivation, reasons
Prevalence rates of problem and pathological gambling among college students are among the highest of any segment of the population (; ). However, little research has addressed why college students gamble. The majority of research examining motivations for gambling has focused specifically on adolescents and clinical or subclinical populations. The present research wasdesigned specifically to examine gambling motivation among college students with a long term goal of determining why gambling is so prevalent in this population.
Theories of gambling behavior have largely focused specifically on pathological, or problem, gamblers. Theories that do not also address non-problematic gambling are necessarily incomplete. Identification of motives for gambling among individuals who fall across the entire continuum is necessary to better understand what differentiates problem from non-problem gamblers. The etiology of gambling has been discussed and examined from a variety of perspectives, the majority of which are based on implicit or explicit assumptions about motivation. Cognitive approaches to gambling assume that individuals are motivated to gamble by the desire to win money or acquire wealth and that gambling disorders arise largely out of erroneous cognitions about one’s chances of winning (Ladouceur & Walker, 1998). Jacob’s general theory of addictions (1986) suggests that problem gambling arises from the combination of chronic hypotensive arousal, experienced as boredom and emptiness, and a negative self-concept and chronic low self-esteem. Similarly, McCormick (1987) described two sub-types of disordered gamblers, the chronically under stimulated gambler and the recurrently depressed gambler. Thus, gambling for some, is presumably motivated by the desire to experience stimulation or excitement, the desire to escape boredom, and/or the desire to escape or cope with depression, anxiety, and/or a negative self-concept. Others have suggested that gambling is a form of play done for fun and enjoyment (Klingemann, 1995). Psychodynamic theorists have argued that gambling, for some, may be unconsciously motivated by a masochistic desire to lose (Bergler, 1958), or as a means of addressing or recreating parental conflict (). Because most theories have focused on motivations for gambling among pathologic individuals, it is unclear the extent to which these motives generalize to non-pathologic individuals. Problematic and nonproblematic gamblers may have different motivations for gambling. For example, perhaps only problematic gamblers are motivated to escape boredom or to cope. Alternatively, individuals who gamble non-problematically may have similar motivations but at lower levels. Thus, perhaps motivational differences are primarily in degree versus type.
A number of studies have previously examined or reported specific motives for gambling. The majority of these, however, have utilized checklists or otherwise predefined lists of motives. Thus, participants were typically asked whether or to what extent they gambled for an apriori set of reasons. While checklists and Likert-type measures of gambling motivation are perfectly appropriate for examining specific motives, they carry no guarantee that the most relevant or important motives have been included. In addition, checklists may influence the accessibility of gambling motivations. For example, an individual when asked whether he/she gambles to support charitable causes may remember participating in raffles or playing bingo at church and endorse this item even if he/she does not typically gamble for this reason. The present research was designed to assess motivation for gambling among college students without imposing a predefined set of motives.
- For some college students, gambling for fun can turn into a serious problem and have a negative impact on their lives. CollegeGambling.org was developed by the National Center for Responsible Gaming (NCRG) as a tool to help current and prospective students, campus administrators, campus health professionals and parents address gambling.
- Online gambling among college students must be claimed within 14 days of registration. All wager-free spins are available on Starburst and have a £0.10 value each; expire 5 days online gambling among college students after credited. All winnings from the wager-free spins will be paid out in cash. Play Responsibly.
METHOD
Participants
Participants included 184 (123 men and 59 women, two students did not indicate sex) undergraduate college student gamblers, enrolled in introductory psychology classes at a large northwestern university in the U.S. The average age of participants was 19.4 years (SD=1.65). Ethnicity was 69.6% Caucasian, 21.2% Asian/Asian American, and 9.2% other. Participants were freshman (58.6%), sophomores (21.9%), juniors (14.8%), and seniors (4.7%). This sample was ethnically representative of the campus, which was approximately 69% Caucasian, 22% Asian/Asian American in the year 2000. Seventy-nine (45.6%) participants were non-problem gamblers (i.e., SOGS =0), 72 (41.6%) had minimal gambling problems (i.e., SOGS of 1 or 2), 16 (9.3%) were level II, subclinical gamblers (i.e., SOGS of 3 or 4), and 6 (3.5%) were probable pathological gamblers (i.e., SOGS of 5 or greater). Eleven participants did not complete the SOGS.
Procedure
Participants completed a survey in mass testing format. The questionnaire included demographic items, a measure of gambling motivation, and the South Oaks Gambling Screen, as well as additional items not relevant to the present research. All measures and procedures were reviewed and approved by the departmental human subjects committee.
Measures
Gambling Motives
Participants were asked to “think about what motivates you to gamble and briefly list the top five reasons in rank order (e.g., #1 =the most important reason, #2 =the second most important reason).”
The South Oaks Gambling Screen (SOGS; ) is a widely used self-administered screening instrument for pathological gambling. Scores on the SOGS can range from 0 to 20. Level II or subclinical “problem” gamblers have previously been identified by scores of 3 or 4 on the SOGS and those scoring 5 or higher have been identified as probable pathological, or level III gamblers (). The SOGS correlates highly with DSM-III-R and DSM-IV diagnosis of pathological gambling and has demonstrated validity and reliability among university students (; ; ). Sample items include “Do you feel you have a problem with gambling?” and “Have you ever felt guilty about the way you gamble or what happens when you gamble?” The SOGS also includes an item, which asks how frequently respondents engage in several types of gambling (e.g., “played cards for money,” “bet on sports,” and went “to a casino”).
RESULTS
Participants were asked to list in rank order their top five reasons for gambling. Participants varied in the number of reasons they actually listed (M=4.11, SD=1.13). Responses were qualitatively analyzed to categorize the 766 reasons given by participants. An initial qualitative analysis of responses yielded 16 distinct motives that captured the majority of reasons listed by respondents. The following motives were identified and are listed with representative examples from participants’ responses:
Money
Gambling to make or obtain money (e.g., “make money,” “win money,” and “get rich”).
Enjoyment/Fun
Gambling for enjoyment or just to have fun (e.g., “to have a good time,” “it’s enjoyable,” and “it’s fun”).
Excitement
Gambling for arousal, thrill, or excitement (e.g., “for the rush,” “excitement,” and “it’s exciting”).
Social
Gambling as a means of interacting with friends or family, or to meet new people (e.g., “social interaction,” “to be with friends,” and “to socialize”).
Occupy time/Boredom
Gambling to occupy time, to have something to do, or to alleviate boredom (e.g., “something to do,” “pass time,” and “bored”).
Winning
Gambling to experience winning (e.g., “victory,” “winning,” and “just to win”).
Competition
Gambling to compete with others (e.g., “to beat someone else,” “competition,” and “compete with friends”).
Conformity
Gambling because others are doing it, just to go along with the crowd, or because of peer pressure (e.g., “peer pressure,” “because friends are doing it,” and “friends decide to go gamble, so I just go along”).
Risk
Gambling in order to take risks or experience uncertainty (e.g., “feel like doing something risky,” “risk taking,” and “the risk of losing”).
Skill
Gambling to develop or practice one’s skills or to learn (e.g., “show skills,” “learn games,” and “practice strategies”).
Interest
Gambling because it is interesting or adds interest (e.g., “it’s interesting,” “friendly bets make a game/event more interesting,” and “makes playing cards interesting”).
Coping
Gambling in order to escape or to cope with problems, depression, or anxiety (e.g., “release from stress,” “avoid responsibility,” and “to shut the world out”).
Challenge
Gambling to experience a challenge (e.g., “it is challenging,” “I enjoy a challenge,” and “challenge”).
Drinking
Gambling motivated by alcohol (e.g., “free drinks,” “something to do when drinking,” and “drink liquor”).
Luck
Gambling to test one’s luck or because one feels lucky (e.g., “luck,” “test your luck,” and “feel lucky”).
Chasing
Gambling to win back previous losses (e.g., “to get my money back,” “to pay back what I lost,” and “chance of getting your money back”).
Motive Classification Reliability
Five coders were provided descriptions for each of the 16 motives and were instructed to classify each of the 766 responses as a single motive where possible but could select more than one category if a clear determination for a single category could not be made. For example, gambling “to take someone’s money” was perceived by coders as fitting both the money category and the competition category. In addition, coders were invited to propose additional categories to classify statements that fit none of the listed categories. Coders were also asked whether they thought any of the listed categories should be modified, combined, or removed. Inter-rater reliability across the five coders was .91. Final categorizations were made by assigning statements to motive categories endorsed by the majority of coders. Accordingly, 93% of all statements were categorized. Statements not fitting any of the categories, or statements in which coder agreement did not reach majority, were not categorized (7%). Statements not categorized included those that were not reasons for gambling (“only gamble if you can afford to lose”), were too general (e.g., “personal preference,” “just want to do it”) or motives which were relatively unique in this sample (e.g., sex, atmosphere, novelty, charity, proximity, etc.).
![Gambling among college students Gambling among college students](/uploads/1/2/5/2/125243890/366636188.jpg)
Motive Frequency
Table 1 presents the frequency of motives endorsed. In examining all reasons for gambling, money, enjoyment, social, excitement, and boredom motives constituted slightly more than 70% of respondents’ reasons for gambling. In examining only the “most important” reasons for gambling, approximately 84% endorsed money, enjoyment, social, or excitement motives. After applying Bonferroni corrections for multiple comparisons, there were no significant relationships between motives and SOGS scores.
Table 1
Motive Category | Proportion of All Motivations (N 3 712) | Primary Motivation (N 3 184) |
---|---|---|
Money | 22.1% | 42.7% |
Enjoyment/Fun | 18.4% | 23.0% |
Social reasons | 13.3% | 11.2% |
Excitement | 9.8% | 7.3% |
Occupy time/Boredom | 7.9% | 2.8% |
Winning | 4.5% | 3.9% |
Conformity | 3.8% | 0.0% |
Competition | 3.7% | 3.4% |
Risk taking | 3.2% | 2.2% |
Interest | 3.0% | 1.7% |
Skill | 2.7% | 1.1% |
Escape/Coping | 2.1% | 0.0% |
Chasing | 1.7% | 0.0% |
Luck | 1.5% | 0.6% |
Drinking | 1.5% | 0.0% |
Challenge | 0.8% | 0.0% |
DISCUSSION
The present research examined motivation for gambling among college student gamblers. Results revealed that most college students gamble to win money, for fun, for social reasons, for excitement, or just to have something to do. These motives, which were based on students’ own accounts of why they gamble, map very closely to motives that have been previously assessed in other populations using predetermined motivation categories. This suggests that motives for gambling are not necessarily unique to specific segments of the population. Among the motives typically assessed in previous studies, only coping/escape was not commonly reported. The scope of motives reported in this study supports the notion that comprehensive etiological approaches to gambling must be integrative and accommodate multiple perspectives (Brown, 1987).
Results were differentially supportive of extant motivational perspectives on gambling. Cognitively oriented theorists generally assume that gambling is motivated by the desire to win money or increase wealth (Ladouceur & Walker, 1998). Consistently, over 40% of this sample reported monetary gain as their primary motivation for gambling. Theories assuming that gambling is linked to arousal deficits or desire to experience stimulation (Jacobs, 1986; McCormick, 1987) were also supported with gambling for excitement and to escape boredom being among the most frequently cited motives for gambling. Consistent with hedonic explanations of gambling, a large proportion of the sample also reported gambling for fun or enjoyment (Klingemann, 1995). Less consistent with previous theoretical considerations of gambling was the large proportion of individuals listing social reasons for gambling. Social reasons for gambling have been acknowledged in previous theories (e.g., Sheeran, & Orbell, 1999), but are typically overshadowed by cognitive and arousal explanations. Gambling to escape or to chase losses was infrequently listed as reasons for gambling. In sum, our findings support the utility of a biopsychosocial approach to college student gambling (Griffiths & Delfabbro, 2001) that incorporates biological and arousal related motivations (e.g., excitement, boredom, and interest), cognitive and mood related psychological motivations (e.g., desire to win money, enjoyment, and coping) and social factors (e.g., gambling to socialize and conformity).
Reasons for gambling in this sample were relatively consistent with reasons that have been included in studies using checklists. While this is encouraging, additional research is necessary to evaluate the utility of motive checklists based on researchers interests versus motives generated by participants. We recommend that future researchers explicitly justify their choices for inclusion of specific reasons in checklist measures on the basis of theory and/or previous research assessing motivation by other means.
The present research corroborates and extends previous work examining gambling motivation, but it is important to acknowledge the limitations of this research. We employed a convenience sample of psychology students, and while we were specifically interested in college student gamblers, findings from this restricted sample may not generalize to other populations. Indeed, we expect that future research will reveal that gambling is part of “the college experience” for many students. Given the higher rates of problem gambling in college populations, understanding this phenomenon is an aim in itself. In addition, although participants were encouraged to answer honestly and reminded that their responses would be anonymous, they may not have accurately reported their behavior or motives for gambling. A limitation of all self-report examinations of gambling motivation is that they are unable to assess motives that respondents may not be aware of. For example, psychodynamic theories and perspectives that focus on reinforcement assume that individuals may not know why they gamble. Gambling motives that are outside of an individual’s conscious awareness are unlikely to be captured by self-report methodology. An additional limitation of this research is that low prevalence rates of pathological gambling precluded sufficient examination of motivational differences between non-problem and pathological gamblers. While we were primarily interested in gambling motives among college students generally, additional research utilizing large samples is necessary to more definitively examine this issue.
These results suggest numerous avenues for future research. The present findings serve as the basis for the construction of a gambling motives scale now in preparation. Each of the questions addressed in this research is worthy of additional attention. Potential motivational differences between problem and non-problem gamblers have important implications for prevention and treatment interventions aimed at college students, and other populations. Developing a solid understanding of the motivational factors involved in gambling is important for the development of prevention and treatment interventions for problem gambling among college students. This research represents an important step toward that objective.
Footnotes
This research was supported in part by the National Institute for Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism Grant T32 AA07455.
References
- Beaudoin CM, Cox BJ. Characteristics of problem gambling in a Canadian context: A preliminary study using a DSM-IV-based questionnaire. Canadian Journal of Psychiatry. 1999;44:483–487. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Bergler E. The Psychology of Gambling. New York: International University Press; 1958. [Google Scholar]
- Brown RI. Classical and operant paradigms in the management of gambling addictions. Behavioral Psychotherapy. 1987;15:111–122.[Google Scholar]
- Griffiths M, Delfabbro P. The Biopsychosocial Approach to Gambling: Contextual Factors in Research and Clinical Interventions. eGambling: The Electronic Journal of Gambling Issues 5 feature. 2001. [Retrieved April 26, 2002]. http://www.camh.net/egambling/issue5/feature/index.html.
- Jacobs DF. A general theory of addictions: A new theoretical model. Journal of Gambling Behavior. 1986;2:15–31.[Google Scholar]
- Klingemann HKH. Games, risk and prevention: The rehabilitation of “Homo Ludens. Journal of Drug and Alcohol Education. 1995;41:99–123.[Google Scholar]
- Ladouceur R, Dube D, Bujold A. Prevalence of pathological gambling and related problems among college students in the Quebec metropolitan area. Canadian Journal of Psychiatry. 1994;39:289–293. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Ladouceur R, Walker M. The cognitive approach to understanding and treating pathological gambling. In: Bellack AS, Hersen M, editors. Comprehensive Clinical Psychology. New York: Pergamon; 1998. pp. 588–601. [Google Scholar]
- Lesieur HR, Blume SB. The South Oaks Gambling Screen (SOGS): A new instrument for the identification of pathological gamblers. American Journal of Psychiatry. 1987;144:1184–1188. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Lesieur HR, Cross J, Frank M, Welch M, White CM, Rubenstein G, Moseley K, Mark M. Gambling and pathological gambling among university students. Addictive Behaviors. 1991;16:517–527. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- McCormick RA. Pathological gambling: A parsimonious need state model. Journal of Gambling Behavior. 1987;3:257–263.[Google Scholar]
- Rosenthal RJ, Rugle LJ. A psychodynamic approach to the treatment of pathological gambling: Part I. Achieving abstinence. Journal of Gambling Studies. 1994;10:21–42. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Shaffer HJ, Hall MN, Vander Bilt J. Estimating the prevalence of disordered gambling behavior in the United States and Canada: A research synthesis. American Journal of Public Health. 1999;89:1369–1376.[PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Sheeran P, Orbell S. Augmenting the theory of planned behavior: Roles for anticipated regret and descriptive norms. Journal of Applied Social Psychology. 1999;29:2107–2142.[Google Scholar]
According to the National Council for Responsible Gambling, over 75% of college students gamble each year. So most college students know how to gamble already, or they learn how really fast.
Of course, they define college gambling as any of the following activities:
- Casino games
- Lottery games
- Poker
- Sports betting
And, of course, all these activities DO constitute gambling if they involve risking money in the hopes of winning money.
Sites like the one above are concerned mostly with discouraging people from gambling at all. Some of them are more concerned with helping people with impulse control issues recognize problem gambling and get help for it.
There’s nothing wrong with that, either.
But for someone like me, the goal is to say, hey, if you’re going to gamble anyway, you might as well learn how to win—or at least get the maximum amount of entertainment for your gambling dollar.
And that’s the point of this post about how to gamble if you’re a college student.
If you ARE going to gamble anyway, how can you get the best odds as a college student?
You’ll find the answer to that question (and several others) below:
2 – How to Play Casino Games as a College Student
If you want to play casino games as a college student, you need to find a casino. Age requirements vary for casinos, too, but they’re generally the same as for the lottery. No matter what state you live in, you have to be at least 18 years old. In many states you have to be 21 years old.
Most states in the USA have at least one casino now. Only 7 states lack casinos. Even in the states where you can’t find legal casino gambling, you can drive to a nearby casino in an adjacent state. Just find out the legal gambling age at the casino you’re planning to visit before going there. It would be a shame to waste your time driving to a casino where you’re not allowed to play.
It’s also possible to find underground casinos—sometimes they’re even being run by other college students. I recommend avoiding such operation for multiple reasons. Their games might be rigged, or you might get into a situation where the police are involved. It’s better to avoid such situations at your age.
If you’re going to visit a casino to play casino games, you should make sure you can afford the stakes, first. Most casinos have minimum bet sizes that vary from game to game. Some casinos might offer blackjack games where you can bet as little as $1 per hand, but other casinos might have betting limits that start at $25 per hand.
Most college students are on a budget. You might be one of those rich kids with a trust fund or something, but even so, the cost of going to college can be high. And everyone, even the wealthy, should be a good steward of their family’s money.
Spend some time learning about which casino games offer the best odds and which casino games offer the worst odds before you go. All casino games have a mathematical edge that favors the house. But some games have a higher edge than others.
In no case can you gain an edge against the casino by using betting systems where you change the size of your bets based on your previous wins or losses. The math behind that just doesn’t work out. If you don’t understand why read some of the other blog posts about gambling math on this site.
Or consider taking a college class in statistics and probability.
You can, however, get an edge at blackjack by counting cards. That’s practically a college tradition in at least one college—MIT. In fact, the most famous card counting team in the history of the technique is the MIT Blackjack Team.
In fact, if you are going to play a casino game, blackjack is the way to go. Even if you don’t learn how to count cards, if you master basic strategy, the house edge for blackjack is less than 1%. This means that every time you bet $10 on a hand, you only expect to lose 10 cents in the long run.
You can play blackjack for a long time on very little money.
And that’s the best way for anyone, including college students, to look at casino gambling—as entertainment that costs money.
You should never assume that you’ve figured out some magical way to get an edge over the casino with some cockamamie betting scheme. Just accept that the casino has an edge, and keep that edge as low as possible.
And get as much entertainment for your money as possible.
4 – How to Bet on Sports as a College Student
My brother-in-law used to run his own bookmaking operation out of his apartment when he was in college. There were 4 people living in the same apartment, and their operation became pretty large within a couple of semesters. In fact, they wound up making so much money from the gig that they had to shut it down. The money was flying around, and the partying got out of hand.
I don’t think your goal should be to follow my brother-in-law’s example. I think you should focus on your studies. That being said, if I’d known anything about the bookmaking biz when I was in college, I would have probably gotten into it enthusiastically.
Most college students, though, aren’t interested in running a bookmaking operation. They just want to bet on football games. This isn’t as easy to pull off as other gambling activities.
Most states don’t have legal sports gambling, so you’re probably limited to using a neighborhood bookmaker or an offshore site. Both of these options can be reasonably safe if you do your homework beforehand.
Finding a neighborhood bookmaker (a “bookie”) is usually as easy as hanging out at a local bar and chatting with some of the other people watching sports there. Just ask them if they have any action on the game they’re watching. If they do, you can mention that you’re new in town and don’t have a local bookie yet, and you’d appreciate a referral to theirs.
Finding a reputable online bookmaker is trickier, but it’s not impossible. You just want to avoid shady outfits. A lot of offshore bookmakers don’t accept action from players in the United States—for legal reasons. The companies that do take action from U.S. citizens are slightly more likely to be problematic for a college student.
The biggest challenge with shady offshore sportsbooks is cashing out your winnings. Spend some time visiting online forums and look for complaints about specific sportsbooks. Also, read some reviews of these sportsbooks before deciding where to play.
I’ve published multiple posts about how to bet on specific sports on this site. You should review those pages carefully so you know what you’re doing before you risk your money.
6 – Balancing Your Schoolwork with Your Gambling Hobby
I used to argue with one of my girlfriends about her priorities. I’ve since given up arguing with girlfriends.
But we did have some interesting discussions about priorities.
She used to claim that certain activities were priorities to her, but I pointed out that priorities, by definition, are actions that you take first—before taking other actions.
What does this mean for a college student with a gambling hobby?
It means that if you’re behind on your schoolwork, you shouldn’t be gambling. You shouldn’t be sitting in the movie theater watching a movie if you’re behind on a term paper.
You also shouldn’t be sitting at a poker table calling someone’s bluff in that situation.
As long as you’re keeping your schoolwork a priority, you’ll be fine.
College Football Gambling Sites
Gambling Among College StudentsI’m here to tell you that it can be just as devastating to your life as alcohol or drugs.If you think you have a problem, take steps toward solving it, and don’t delay.Best Online GamblingDon’t gamble with money you can’t afford to lose, and get help sooner rather than later if your gambling becomes a problem.If you’re a college student thinking about a gambling activity, which kind of gambling are you interested in and why?
Don’t gamble with money you can’t afford to lose, and get help sooner rather than later if your gambling becomes a problem.
If you’re a college student thinking about a gambling activity, which kind of gambling are you interested in and why?