gambling addiction cognitive explanation

Initiation of gambling

A persons decision to start gambling that depends on their expectations of future costs and benefits. If a person expects the benefits to outweigh the costs, they are more likely to start gambling

What does the cognitive explanation focus on

The way we think

Expectancy theory

Where peoples thinking aligns with the expectations of what will happen when they gamble

Future costs of gambling

Financial losses, anxiety

Future benefits of gambling

Financial gains, enjoyment, control

Maintenance of gambling

When someone who is gambling continues despite costs now outweighing the benefits, we need to explain what is maintaining their behaviour. Expectations are not rational or logical because their thoughts are biased and disorted

3 ways that thoughts can become biased or distorted leading to maintenance of gambling

Irrational thoughts

Cognitive biases

Illusion of control

What are addicted gamblers guided by

Irraitonal thoughts about how luck, probability and chance operate

Gamblers fallacy

The mistaken belief that if something happens more often than usual based on the previous outcomes (e.g. heads tossed in a row) it will happen less in the future)

How is a gamblers cognitive bias biased

It is biased towards positive outcomes e.g. near miss bias

Near miss bias

Feeling of winning as they nearly won they dont see it as a loss they still feel like they have won because they got a buzz making them carry on gambling as they nearly won

Example of near miss

If a gamble has bet all of their earnings on a horse that comes 2nd or 3rd in a race… instead of feeling like they have lost, they feel they almost won

Illusion of control

Gambler believing they can influence the gambling outcome

Example of illusion of control

Gambler doing superstitious behaviour (touching a piece of clothing or bringing tokens) can alter their odds of wining or gambler thinking they have special knowledge that makes them experts

Michalckuk et al (2011) study

30 addicted gamblers who attended the uk national problem gambling clinic. Compared with non gambling P’s. The addicted gamblers showed more and stronger gambling related cognitive distortions of all types. For example ‘now were motoring, we’ll be here all night’ ; ‘these cards after not my friends’ ; ‘I’m going for red its my lucky colour’ ; ‘now I’ve won there’s no stopping me’ ; ‘at last my happy time is here’

What part of michalczuk et al (2011) is illusion of control

‘I’m going for red, its my lucky colour’

What part of michalczuk et al (2011) is expectancy theory

‘Now I’ve won there’s no stopping me’

Relapse of gambling

Relapse due to memories of their big wins (and overestimating the benefits) and not remembering their big or small losses (and underestimate costs).

What does relapse of gambling make an addict vulnerable to

Distorted cost through cost benefit analysis

Griffith (1994) research aim

To compare the thought processes of regular gamblers (RG) to non-regular gamblers (NRG)

Griffiths (1994) research method

30 RG and 30 NRG were instructed to use the ‘thinking out loud’ method as they gambled. These verbalisations were recorded and placed as rational or irrational

Griffiths (1994) research results

Rags made 6 times more irrational verbalisatons and were prone to the illusion of control (‘this machine likes me’). RGs thought they were more skilled at fruit slot machines

Griffiths research (1994) conclusion

Cognitive factors play a significant role in maintaining gambling behaviour

Strength of Griffiths research (1994)

Cognitive approach has practical applications because there ae effective treatments based on the cognitive approach. Treatments can directly challenge gamblers cognitive biases and irrational thoughts with more rational ways of thinking about gambling. This means that the theory is a valid explanation as the treatments based upon the assumptions of the cognitive approach work.

Weakness of Griffiths (1994) research

Expectancy theory cannot fully explain the link between cognitions and gambling. There are many people who have distorted thoughts about gambling- but very few ever take up gambling and become addicted.

What percentage of gamblers have difficulty regulating their behaviour

1-3%

How can the learning approach explain initiation

Someone may see others around them gambling and be tempted to try it themselves. E.g. a child seeing a parent (role model) having fun at the casino or winning money on football bets (vicarious reinforcement) they maybe feel motivated to copy the behaviour (imitation) when in similar situation themselves

How can the learning approach explain maintenance

How can the learning approach explain relapse

What is the difference between positive and negative reinforcement

How might the reinforcement explain the different stages of gambling addiction

Positive reinforcement

Behaviour is followed by a pleasant experience. The consequence could be literal (food or money) or abstract (a smile or compliment)

Negative reinforcement

Behaviour is followed by the removal of an unpleasant experience. E.g. removing pain encourages you to repeat this action to remove pain

Partial reinforcement

Some instances are rewarded

Variable reinforcement

Partial reinforcement but only to a small proportion of gamblers

Maintenance of gambling by positive reinforcement

Gambling provides an exciting buzz, as well as the occasional opportunity to win money. Both rewards encourage gambling to be repeated. Some gamblers experience their ‘big win’ soon after getting into gambling - or even near misses

Maintenance of gambling through negative reinforcement

Gambling can take someone away from undesirable situations too. Gambling acts as an escape from reality, and is a temporary relief from everyday anxiety. This desire to move away from negative experiences will encourage more gambling

Maintenance of gambling through partial reinforcement

Some features of gambling are designed to give partial reinforcement. For example slot machines are programmed to pay out to some bets, so the gamblers behaviour is sometimes reinforced

Maintanence of gamble through variable reinforcement

Unpredictability reinforces the behaviour because the gambler cannot be sure they will be rewarded next, so will continue until they win. Think of fruit machines - they will eventually have a winner, but will it be the next round, or after 10 more rounds?

Relapse

Once a gambler has quit they may still have some conditioned cues from gambling

Examples of cues which can cause relapse of gambling

Adverts for gambling. The appealing look for scratch cards, the expensive allure of the casino or the busy look of a gambling website-these cause arousal and the ex gambler craves gambling again. This is cue reactivity theory

How easy is it to avoid conditioned cues for gambling

Almost impossible to avoid due to social media so very high chance of relapse