Is gambling a pastime or addiction - Essay Example

?Topic: Is gambling a pastime or addiction? Gambling has economic connotations; it generally refers to putting at risk money or goods on the chances of getting extra funds or goods through some game, competition or an event. The gambling function differs on many scales, including the betting the amount to be put at risk for betting, the approaching result and the foretelling possibility of the game. Prediction cannot be made for all betting risks like lotteries, some slot machines and bingo but for certain other things like sports betting and horse racing, a prediction can be attempted, depending on the predictor’s expertise and insight. In the UK, there are a number of offline commercial gambling kinds available such as lotto, bingo, card games, sports-related betting, non-sports betting, scratch cards, roulette, slot machines, and football pools and spread betting (Griffiths, 2009). In the UK, the terms “problem gambling” and “pathological gambling” have been employed in a number of studies to explain gambling that affects the person and family life of the gambler. The general term “Prevalence” is used for process addictions, which is the epidemiological term for the number of people addicted to a specific problem. In the field of process addictions, only problem gambling has so far produced prevalence estimates (Griffiths, 2009). Various societies have distinct societal concepts of social problems, as in Canada beliefs and values vary on when gambling is to be seen as a problem and the causes behind it. It is not easy to define process addictions, for instance, when gambling is a harmless pastime and when is it addictive (Firth, 2010). The American Psychiatric Association (APA) identified gambling as actually a pathological disorder in the 1980. Even Freud (1929/1950) had researched problem gambling but remained inadvertent about its prediction. According to APA, gambling is a rising psychological disorder, featured by emotional addiction, lack of control and attached negative repercussions in the gamblers’ academic, social, or vocational life. Other popular names for pathological gambling are compulsive gambling and addictive gambling (Jean, 2000). In addictive gambling, the person shows a recurrent and continued disorder of dysfunctional behaviours by remaining busy in gambling. The person wants to put at the risk greater sum of money to attain increased stimulation. Continuous striving is seen to curb, check and/or stop gambling. Feeling of restlessness or irritating behaviour is observed when striving to check or curb the habit of gambling. For an addictive gambler, gambling becomes an escape-route from mood shifts. An addictive gambler reverts back to equalise the loss. Such a person attempts not to disclose the level of engagement with gambling. Wrong means are sought to arrange funds for gambling. Gambling when it becomes an addiction causes the loss of one’s aim in life pertaining to the relationship, scholarship or career. Dependence on others for maintaining status increases with the prevalence of gambling, as a gambler needs financial support due to shortage of funds. The only criterion segregating addictive behaviour is the presence of bipolar disorder. The debate over whether gambling is an addiction or pass time, (Kusyszyn, 1980) has been hyped out of proportion. For instance, many years back, a popular suggest columnist used to publish an article by a doctor explaining that gambling “could not possibly” be addictive (Jean, 2000). Viewing the perspective of this physician, functions like gambling, stealing and outward expression of sexual behaviours do not engage substance intake and that’s why they are not addictions. Instead, the physician debated, they are generally representations of manic depressiveness although mania is an external recognition for the presence of gambling disorders. Had it been true, then most of the gambling patients would have been managed with lithium, which is not so (Jean, 2000). Those who support gambling as mere pass time and question the basis of calling it as an addictive disorder do so as they associate addictive disorders with particular abused substances. Rather, they found gambling as a disorder of impulse check (Jean, 2000). Theoretically, gambling behaviour has been explained as practiced to get sudden money (Snyder, 1975); for game (Herman, 1976: Kusyszn, 1990; Smith & Abt, 1984); as a sign of psychodynamic issue (Freud, 1928); and creating excitement and stimulation (Boyd, 1976) among various other perspectives (Ferris, 2012). Cognitive behavioural cure method is the reasoning based method of curing gambling habit, which is connected to particular surroundings or caused by particular stimulations. Only those who observe sense in gambling, state this on the assumption that it provides entertainment and profit can be made through it. No single theoretical explanation can fit a gambling habit, as they might be present in different extents in a person (Ferris, 2012). What is Gambling? The critical thing to know about gambling, as stated by Wildman (1997, P. 1), is that it is “a conscious, deliberate effort to stake valuables, usually but not always currency, on how some event happens to turn out.” Gambling also includes “quasi-gambling” functions like share trading and property earnings that can be employed to get leverage by putting it at risk through gambling, therefore, a survey needs to ask questions on whether the respondents use such money for gambling. To know whether an individual is just passing time or is addicted to gambling, it is necessary to know how randomly he or she is into gambling. The amount of money on the risk is also helpful in making a raw estimate over the actuality of gambling. It is generally stated that if there is no excitement or sensation in doing an activity, it can not be gambling (Ferris, 2012). Buying of lottery tickets or raffle tickets for charity is not taken to be gambling although there remains some promise or eagerness to see the results of the draw although not a big amount is involved in the buying. It takes two things, excitement and degree of participation to derive whether an individual has become a gambler or not, as the extent of assumed “gambling” trend has framed the definitions of “problem” gambling to be employed and approximated. All reasoning in the name of problem gambling can be considered by granting that gambling is a significant behavioural feature of people. Some people see gambling as a source of excitement and stimulation, as the biological perspective on Problem Gambling (PG) indicates that it could be because of genetic susceptibilities for gambling, for PG specifically (Ferris, 2012). Talking about cognitive beliefs creating a mental frame impressing upon the possibility of winning, these are superstitions based on positive hopes, behaviours and a secure faith that victory is certain (King, 1990; Toneatto, Blitz-Miller, Calderwood, Dragonetti, & Tsanos, 1997), for instance some gamblers are of the view that passionate continuing the game will boost their chances of victory, while some others hold the opposite view. Actually the gambling behaviour is greatly affected by superstitions (Czerny et al., 2008). Cognitive Dissonance Cognitive dissonance can also throw light on the perception of the gambler and the cognitive defence. The connection between the outcomes of a gambling function and a gambler’s cognitive applications may produce imagined regularity or dissonance. A feeling of discomfort develops if a person’s activities are not relevant with the maintained personality of that person. Perceiving his actions, the person strives to reduce the repelling feeling by vindicating his or her attitude or by changing his or her behaviour by delaying the condition that could aggravate dissonance. Can a gambler vindicate the incessant gambling behaviour when undergoing recurrent losses? The very mechanism of the gambling institution offers various outlets to players to get free from cognitive dissonance, letting the problem gambling attitude remain intact. Various elements including biological/genetic, psychological, social and environmental impacts should also be discussed in the context of developing better insight on PG attitude. As Lamberton and Oei (Cited in Czerny et al., 2008) remark, “affective, cognitive, and behavioral variables may play different roles at different stages of problem gambling and may interact with each other in different ways during the causal sequence”. Scholars generally search for the easiest reasoning on specific behaviour, which is a half-hearted attempt as uncomprehending behaviours occur from the involvement of many determinants. Online Gambling Types Remote gambling is done via the internet, interactive TV or mobile phone; online casinos offer roulette and playing through slot machines where in payment is made by using credit cards, debit cards, or various electronic mediums to gamble (Griffiths, 2009). Coming to the prevalence of gambling, data interpretation over problem gambling is relatively authentic to other process addictions. Prevalence rates vary depending on geographical locations studied, age groups, and time of study, applicability for “lifetime” or “point” (current) participation and on definitions of specific terms (Firth, 2010). Gambling cannot be a pass time. It is wrongly put in the same section as fire setting, hair pulling and bombastic nature. Instead, it needs to be counted in the type of such behaviours as exhibited via alcohol abuse and cocaine use, irrespective of the fact that the dynamics of gambling include remaining busy, manhandling of the situation around, tolerance, receding back and other considerations that make it common like a classic addiction (Firth, 2010). Why Gambling is taken Lightly as Pass Time Support to the notion of gambling as a pass time is more prominent rather than finding and correlating it with addictive behaviour. This pseudo-difference between chemical consumption and behaviours is not straightway articulated by chemical intake as a condition because addiction is at loggerheads with the latest definitions of the notion of addiction. For instance, L’Abate’s (1994)) definition that has been greatly helpful in impressing the World Health Organization, defines addiction as participative essential use of a substance over time amidst bearing social insult and/or negative health outcomes; a major engrossment by getting enough supply; and repose after use. Peele (1990)), a regular critic of a number of considerations of addiction, the cure and its presence, defines addiction as remaining busy with one individual or function as the only possibly preferable enforcer (Jean, 2000). Jean (2000) finds no actual difference between disorders typed in the DSM-IV as substance abuse disorders and a number of others typed as disorders of impulse check. Gambling, in easy terms, is one of the various non-pharmacological addictions. Others include workaholics, Internet addiction and non-stop viewing of rock videos. Innumerable others could be counted. The DSM-IV (1994, p. 618) finds the first sign of Pathological Gambling as given: “Gambler is busy with gambling by re-experiencing gone-by gambling experiences, handicapping, or considering the next attempt, or planning means of getting money for gambling” , as cited by Jean (2000). The above instance of reliving the past experiences means that pathological gamblers, like drug addicts, are in quest of reliving a feeling in advance. Instead of remaining busy in past memories, gamblers are busy with future promises. That is the degree of what distinguishes pathological gambling from drug addictions. Gamblers are addicted to imagination and “what if.” They are normally more involved in planning the future great win than experiencing a past success (Jean, 2000). Non-pharmacological Addiction Problem in comprehending the notion of non-pharmacological addiction has been outlined particularly among biologically focussed researchers, who show keen interest in an easy perspective of biological processes. J. Johnson and McCown (1993)) have remarked that there was too much stress laid on the feeling once that each substance of abuse needed only one particular neurotransmitter. For example, LSD attaches to serotonergic receptors and as a result has its uses because it is relatively more effective in mimicking natural neurotransmitters. As there was no particular gambling receptor, the behaviour was not tagged with the label “addictive” (Jean, 2000). Talking about psychological issues related to this feeling, there was a robust but very incorrect thinking that drugs that did not develop gross symptoms of physical withdrawal were not addictive, in any but a petty “psychological state” (White, 1998)). Actually, the huge difference was created between drugs that were “genuinely physically addictive” to the drugs that were only “psychologically addictive,” basically because they had robust rewarding merits. The relative neat bill of health affording cocaine in the 1970s shows how harmful such understanding was to public health. Since that deficient in understanding time, there has been sufficient proof that the body may be addicted to behaviours because of its own neurochemical and neurohormonal processes (Jean, 2000). The progress on the technological front is seen as the cause of gambling tendency, changing from very much a social notion to one that is rooted in one’s nature, Griffiths explains, “Many argue that gambling is a social activity, however, to reiterate what was argued earlier—technology is essentially turning gambling from a social pastime to an asocial one” (cited in Czerny et al., 2008). The increased trend of Internet gambling has enabled people to gamble in the privacy and comfort of distancing from people around when gambling. Technology has changed the meanings of gambling, necessitating the change in the path of research in future on gambling and interaction among them (Czerny et al., 2008). According to Harrigan and Dixon (2009) resembling slot machine games provide various reward percentages. They checked the various variations of the resembling slot games and practiced Gambler’s Ruin simulations of 2,000 new participants playing with a $100 currency note and took chances on either the 85 or 98% variation of the ditto game till exposed. Each simulation indicated routine participant’s experience, which did not vary greatly between variations. Nevertheless, the reward percentage impacted participants in the top ends of the distributions in the 98% variation having suddenly increased overall reward points. Most significantly, the number of simulated participants of slot machine games who had the highest peak balance exceeding $1,000 multiplied ten times. The outcomes were analysed for the Pathways Model of Problem and Pathological Gambling. There could be the possibility that certain machines looking “fairest” to the gambler, in reality may create the biggest risk for carrying forward the place-related gambling problems. Kushner et al. (2008) have discussed the simulated gambling environment in the context of provoking gambling, as based on their laboratory based research, which indicates that gambling-related cues stimulate gambling, the reasoning behind that they have been trained to do so after continuous connections with real gambling. This outcome is very critical especially in relation to the opinion by Tavares et al. (2003)) that procedures connected to related learning may carry critical possibility of advancing the intelligence and cure of pathological gambling. It can be inclined therefore that the neutral stimuli is incessantly clubbed by gambling behaviour to derive ‘‘conditioned’’ answers in relation to gambling attitude. It is advocated therefore that (a) that gambling cues can become a mean of a nearer reason for the desire to gamble; and, (b) by eliminating the answer, it can be derived that the cues heighten the possibility of successful treatment to the process gambling. Cockrill et al. (2008) analysed the notion of servicescape, initially developed by Booms and Bitner and its outcome on consumer attitude in various retailing contexts. Servicescape is “the environment in which the service is assembled and in which seller and consumer interact, combined with tangible commodities that facilitate performance or communication of the service” Blooms and Bitner (cited in Cockrill et al., 2008). The impact of surrounding, design and functionality on consumer attitudes in the UK playing corners, representing the huge UK gambling industry, provides a benchmark on the service experience. Gambling creates huge economic growth opportunities, critical for the UK but it is not given due attention in the scholarly research. Research by Cockrill et al. (2008) indicates that inside environment of the betting shops is inductive. The surrounding elements create an impact on the customers. Knowledge about staff is significant as it helps them in knowing the customers who are betting. Standardisation of the betting shops helped in easy traversing of the actual customers. Critical insight was gained from this research that even if the ambience was not up to customers’ mark, it did not reduce the time spent in that surrounding, the betting locations and the environment. All elements of ambience not performing well could not deter customers from betting, thus causing a leading impression on their behaviour. This particular betting consumers’ behaviour does not match with the other industry areas, the reason being that gambling is an addictive and propelling behaviour (Cockrill et al., 2008). Hirschman (1992) discusses various genetic, social and personality theories on compulsive addiction, which offers critical leads on the understanding of this notion. These theories are mutually inclusive with sufficient statistical proof of the application of these theories. It increases the possibility, as an outcome, of the role played by genetic, social and personality factors that promote addiction but the limitation of these theories can be observed when some consumers in the high-risk group become addicts while others get escaped. For instance, a consumer may be genetically more prone to exhibit addictive interests by giving sudden responses to drinking or consuming drugs although brought up in such ethnic environment where alcohol or narcotics are consumed hugely and some personality characteristics are prevalent that are connected to addiction in some way. Even then the consumers don’t exhibit any such addictive trend or any other kind of impulsive behaviour (see, e.g., Peele 1985); while on the contrary other consumers may inhibit some or all of the similar type of features and become addicts. The answer to this conflicting behaviour could be found in other area of theorisation with respect to addictive-compulsive behavior via learning theory. Conclusion After discussing the views of various scholars on the topic, there remains no ambiguity over the claim that gambling in the current context of technological advancement, promoting various online gambling opportunities and considering the individuals’ behaviour in general, gambling has no more remained a social pass time; it has become a process addiction. The alarming rise of gambling trends among teenagers and people of other age group has increased the responsibility of parents, guardians and all stakeholders of society to see that control measures are taken at various school, home, office and other platforms to curb the gambling tendency among people of all age groups, particularly students. References: Cockrill, Antje., Goode, Mark., Emberson, Daniel .,2008. Servicescape matters – or does it? The special case of betting shops. Marketing Intelligence & Planning, vol. 26, no. 2, pp.189 – 206. Available from: Emerald Database [Accessed 22 March 2012]. Czerny, Ewa., Koenig, Stephanie and Turner, Nigel E., 2008. Exploring the mind of the gambler: psychological aspects of gambling and problem gambling, in The Pursuit of Winning, pp. 65-82. Available from: Springer Link [Accessed 23 March 2012]. Ferris, Jackie., 2012. How do you define gambling? Problem Gambling.ca. Available from: http://www.problemgambling.ca/EN/ResourcesForProfessionals/Pages/Howdoyoudefinegambling.aspx [Accessed 22 March 2012]. Firth, John., 2010. An introduction to process addictions. Problem Gambling Institute of Ontario. Available from: http://www.problemgambling.ca/EN/Documents/AnIntroductiontoProcessAddictions.pdf [Accessed 22 March 2012]. Griffiths, Mark., 2009. Problem Gambling in Europe. Great Britain. Available from: Springer Link [Accessed 23 March 2012]. Harrigan, Kevin A. & Dixon, Mike., 2009. Government sanctioned “Tight” and “Loose” slot machines: how having multiple versions of the same slot machine game may impact problem gambling. Journal of Gambling Studies, pp. 159-174. [Abstract] Available from: Springer Link [Accessed 22 March 2012]. Hirschman, Elizabeth C., 1992. The Consciousness of addiction: toward a general theory of compulsive consumption. Journal of Consumer Research, vol. 19, no. 2, pp. 155-179. Available from: JSTOR [Accessed 23 March 2012]. Jean, 2000. Chapter 1: An Introduction to Gambling and Gambling Disorders. Available from: http://media.wiley.com/product_data/excerpt/93/04711896/0471189693.pdf [Accessed 23 March 2012]. Kushner, Matt., Thurus, Paul., Sletten, Sandra., Frye, Brenda and others. 2008. Urge to gamble in a simulated gambling environment. Journal of Gambling Studies, 24, pp. 219-227. Available from: EBSCOhost database [Accessed 23 March 2012]. Read More