The study protocol was reviewed and approved by the Human Subjects Ethical Review Committee at Southern Cross University.
Whilst focus groups typically have high face validity, group size may be small and the results may not be statistically generalizable [ 99 , ].
The results, however, still provide meaningful insights into how participants respond to messages presented to them, as well as feedback on message wording and content.
As any message used in actual marketing materials would need to be adapted for its particular market, focus groups are a useful method for exploring themes that a generic strategy could consider. The four player cohorts were identified based on a review of the literature and are groups that could be easily identified in player databases for message distribution.
In total, 39 participants attended the four focus groups:. Each of the authors independently generated potential messages for the cohorts. That list of potential messages was then reviewed by all authors for content and relevance within the literature framework and reduced to a useful subset through consensus.
Messages were selected to be similar to archetypal messages used by RG programs, but also with consideration of the evidence for their effectiveness found in the health messaging literature review. Messages were then reviewed for appropriate length before inclusion in the focus group moderator guide, which can be viewed as supplementary file Additional file 1.
Each message contained an action phrase connected to an RG tool to prompt respondents to consider their behavioral response. The Player Assessment Quiz is an online quiz that helps gamblers better understand their own gambling behavior within the scope of health habits.
The Limit Setting tool is a budgeting tool that allows players to set a weekly limit on the total amount they can transfer into their online gambling account. Table 1 below displays the messages presented to the respective groups. Participants were selected and screened by telephone using a database comprised of randomly selected households in Manitoba, Canada.
Table 2 below displays core sample characteristics reported during the screening process, including gender, age, gambling activity, and gambling frequency, which was measured as a simplified dichotomous variable for screening into the frequent gamblers group. During the recruitment and screening process, all participants completed an informed consent form.
Research suggests online focus groups may elicit more themes with sensitive topics than in-person focus groups [ ]. The iTracks platform conducts focus groups in a written format, similar to an online chat room.
The online focus group was conducted in a similar manner to an in-person focus group, with a moderator leading a discussion among a small group of participants.
The participants submitted typed answers to the group, and the moderator was able to communicate privately with individual participants. Through the private messaging system, the moderator was able to ask individual follow-up questions whilst continuing the discussion in the main focus group.
Focus groups were structured to elicit responses to the proposed messages, with an interest in collecting participant feedback on six pre-developed messages per group. The messages were presented in five cases, one at a time; each case focusing on a different RG tool as displayed in Table 1.
Participants were first asked for their initial response to the message, and then asked why they would or would not engage with the linked tool.
Next, the inquiry requested any proposed changes that participants would make to the message to make it more relevant to them. Where relevant, the moderator would send follow-up messages to individual participants to elicit further details on their response to the individual messages.
Finally, participants discussed the types of messages they found most effective, and offered up their own wording, themes, or specific phrases that would get them to engage with RG tools. The transcriptions of the focus groups were subjected to content analysis with a focused coding approach.
In focused coding, researchers identify themes and look for associated data fitting under categories of interest [ ]. Coding categories were established based on the literature review and focused on message tone, potential engagement, personalization options, numbers, and terminology e.
gaming, player vs. The message tone theme was used to assess participant interpretation of the tone of the message e. The potential engagement category was used to code how participants indicated they would or would not engage with the RG tool associated with the message.
The personalization options theme covered participant suggestions of how the messages could be individualized for different people or player types.
The numbers theme described inclusion of numbers from individual play behaviors, such as amount of time or money spent gambling. Finally, the terminology code was used to identify where participants identified qualities of the vocabulary used.
To establish inter-rater reliability, two researchers independently coded the data set The messages recommended for each specific group as a result of the analysis is presented in Table 3. Within all groups, there was no difference in message preference between genders.
Young Adults were particularly responsive to message tone, especially messages that were perceived as condescending. Young Adults also indicated a preference for messaging that provided tips to show how they can save money, by using the linked RG skills and tools. Some follow-up comments suggested that participants were interested in messages with tips that helped them become more successful gamblers i.
The idea of presenting negative realities was also suggested — the discussion turned to the potential harms of problem gambling and a proposal for warning messages similar to those on cigarette packs was presented as an option for messaging. Beyond this concern, the group was positive about the use of messages in general, suggesting that they be clever, upbeat, and humorous, with reminders to keep the game fun.
Some participants suggested that additional messages that show negative consequences of problem gambling would also be useful, as well as information on where to get help if a gambler thinks they are losing control. Older Adults identified the Play Summary as a useful tool, though many indicated they already set limits when they play.
In addition, the quiz to test gambling knowledge and the limit setting tools were selected as tools that the group would seek out if they received a message promoting the tool. Matching this preference, Skill Game Gamblers indicated that the Play Summary was a valuable tool for them, making them think about their own budget.
The quiz testing gambling knowledge was also considered useful, primarily for the purpose of confirming their own knowledge. Skill Game Gamblers also suggested that messages should include reminders of the ramifications of overspending, as well as that the odds are against winning and that in the long run, the house always wins.
As with the other groups, Frequent Gamblers emphasized the need for positive language in RG messaging, and to avoid any language that might be accusatory or might make someone feel guilty about their gambling behavior. Individual spend numbers were requested as a reminder of play behaviors, paralleling the request of Skill Game Gamblers.
Frequent Gamblers were the only group to not positively endorse the Play Summary tool, with most participants indicating they were already aware of their limits and spend, and thus felt they did not need the tool.
Also, distinct from other groups, Frequent Gamblers responded positively to the self-assessment tool, expressing curiosity about their classification. This research is the first study to empirically consider the content of RG messages in identifiable cohorts.
In this study, thematic differences were found between subgroups of players. This was observed in both message wording e. This is consistent with research suggesting that young people are more prone to erroneous beliefs about gambling, such as the idea that gambling can be controlled [ 78 , 79 , 80 ].
In contrast, Older Adults looked for more light-hearted messages, focused on keeping gambling fun. Older Adults were also attracted to limit-setting features that were not as popular among other groups. Older Adults, many of whom are on a fixed income, may benefit from tools that help them be mindful of how much money they spend on gambling [ , ].
The self-assessment test of gambling behaviors and limit setting tools were viewed more positively by Frequent Gamblers. Frequency of gambling has been identified as predictive of problem gambling [ ], and these messages prompt the recipient to assess their own level and style of gambling, and also suggest a tool that can be used to help them keep their gambling within affordable levels [ ].
Skill Game Gamblers preferred more direct communication, seeing themselves as able to incorporate information into their gambling, including about potential risks of gambling. Frequent Gamblers were interested in resources to assist them in keeping track of their expenditure — such as activity statements in the Play Summary tool.
This is consistent with Philander and Gainsbury [ ] who suggest that because those who play games with an element of skill are more likely to develop illusions of control about their skill [ ], messages for these gamblers should encourage gamblers to be mindful of the element of chance in games.
The Play Summary message also serves as a reminder to Skill Game Gamblers to be mindful of their sessions and expenditure. Recreational Skill Game Gamblers can exhibit impulsive personality traits and may demonstrate signs of chasing behaviors [ , , ], and this message may encourage them to use the Play Summary tool as a means of keeping themselves aware of expenditure resulting from such behavior.
Messages were found to be more likely to be persuasive if they promote positive attitudes towards the desired behavior.
Gamblers may be more likely to engage with RG resources if they believe that these resources are typically used by their peers, and those that they respect. Focus group participants consistently discussed the importance of messages not being patronizing or judgmental.
Educational- and awareness-based messaging is a tool that the gambling field has adopted from the wider public health field, with mixed success. Customizing RG messages and pairing RG tools based on age, gambling frequency, and type of gambling activities may enhance the effectiveness of messages and subsequent engagement with RG resources.
Literature supports the use of messages that encourage gamblers to consider their own gambling, rather than providing explicit directions or information; a finding reinforced by participants in this study. When individuals generate arguments and conclusions themselves, they are more convinced than by statements provided from external sources.
Whilst focus groups are highly useful for the in-depth exploration of topics, attitudes, and concerns, the findings may not be generalizable due to the limited sample. In addition, with only one group per segment type, the ability to draw conclusions from the data is limited, as data saturation may not have been reached.
Third-person bias may be at play, where messages that focus group participants think will be persuasive may be influenced by participants considering what is effective for other people, rather than themselves. The results are also limited in that they only considered four cohorts, each with some degree of overlap.
It is likely that gambling operators can segment their player databases in more sophisticated manners.
Further research should aim to analyze player databases of gamblers to identify at-risk gamblers using more complex segmentation, connected to a theoretical understanding of persuasive messages and experimental design. Such an approach could include qualitative research more specific to the given jurisdiction, followed by field experiments testing multiple message options.
Future work should also consider how to deliver messages, in terms of mode of delivery, frequency, and duration. Each of these factors is important to effective communication.
Last, it is important to note that gambler preferences are not the only consideration in the design of public health strategies. Although gamblers may prefer one RG tool to another, that does not mean that this is the tool from which they would most likely benefit [ ].
As such, one important role for RG messages and public health communication strategies is to effectively describe available resources to enhance understanding among relevant groups and evaluate related outcomes, even where there is not intrinsic interest in their use.
By focusing messages on a specific intended audience, messages can be developed to elicit greater individual responsiveness and compliance. Our research suggests that there are some commonalities in message components that are perceived to be most effective in encouraging uptake of preventative and harm-minimizing behaviors.
This includes promoting positive attitudes towards the desired behavior and reducing the perceived cost of compliance — that is, positive framing, and making behaviors easier and simpler to complete.
Increasing specificity of messages also enhances engagement, particularly if a sense of urgency is conveyed. Personalizing messages to target specific population subgroups and understanding the characteristics of those subgroups is advantageous and likely to enhance the presentation of health information.
Hing N, Nuske E, Gainsbury S, Russell AMT. Perceived stigma and self-stigma of problem gambling: perspectives of people with gambling problems.
Int Gambl Stud. Article Google Scholar. Kim HS, Wohl MJ, Salmon M, Santesso D. When do gamblers help themselves? Self-discontinuity increases self-directed change over time. Addict Behav. Article PubMed Google Scholar.
Suurvali H, Cordingley J, Hodgins DC, Cunningham J. Barriers to seeking help for gambling problems: a review of the empirical literature.
J Gambl Stud. Langham E, Rockloff M, Browne M, Best T. Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders DSM-5®. Google Scholar. Hodgins DC, Stea JN, Grant JE.
Gambling disorders. Gainsbury S, Parke J, Suhonen N. Consumer attitudes towards internet gambling: perceptions of responsible gambling policies, consumer protection, and regulation of online gambling sites.
Comput Human Behav. Gainsbury S, Russell A, Blaszczynski A, Hing N. Greater involvement and diversity of internet gambling as a risk factor for problem gambling.
Eur J Pub Health. Griffiths MD, Wood RT, Parke J. Social responsibility tools in online gambling: a survey of attitudes and behavior among internet gamblers.
Cyberpsychology Behav. Wood RT, Griffiths MD. Why Swedish people play online poker and factors that can increase or decrease trust in poker websites: a qualitative investigation.
J Gambl Issues. Forsström D, Jansson-Fröjmark M, Hesser H, Carlbring P. Experiences of Playscan: interviews with users of a responsible gambling tool. Internet Interv.
Wohl MJA, Davis CG, Hollingshead SJ. How much have you won or lost? Personalized behavioral feedback about gambling expenditures regulates play.
Cohen IM, McCormick AV, Davies G. University of the Fraser Valley. Gainsbury S. Responsible gambling strategies. In: Internet gambling: Current research findings and implications. New York: Springer; Chapter Google Scholar.
Nelson SE, LaPlante DA, Peller AJ, Schumann A, LaBrie RA, Shaffer HJ. Real limits in the virtual world: self-limiting behavior of internet gamblers.
Forsström D, Hesser H, Carlbring P. Usage of a responsible gambling tool: a descriptive analysis and latent class analysis of user behavior.
Bernhard BJ, Lucas AF, Dongsuk J. Responsible gaming device research report. Las Vegas: International gambling institute, University of Nevada; Nova Scotia player card research project. Stage III research report. Halifax: Nova Scotia Gaming Corporation; Lucar C, Wiebe J, Philander KS.
Monetary limits tools for internet gamblers: a review of their availability. Toronto: Implementation and Effectiveness Online; Gold J, Lim MS, Hellard ME, Hocking JS, Keogh L. Delivering sexual health promotion to young people in Australia via text messaging.
BMC Public Health. Article PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar. Haug S, Kowatsch T, Castro RP, Filler A, Schaub MP. Efficacy of a web- and text messaging-based intervention to reduce problem drinking in young people: study protocol of a cluster-randomised controlled trial.
Kerr DA, Pollard CM, Howat P, Delp EJ, Pickering M, Kerr KR, et al. Connecting health and technology CHAT : protocol of a randomized controlled trial to improve nutrition behaviours using mobile devices and tailored text messaging in young adults.
Argo JJ, Main KJ. Meta-analyses of the effectiveness of warning labels. J Public Policy Mark. Cox EP III, Wogalter MS, Stokes SL, Tipton Murff EJ. Do product warnings increase safe behavior? A meta-analysis. Wogalter MS. Purposes and scope of warnings. In: Handbook of warnings. Philadelphia: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; Rothman AJ, Kelly KM, Hertel AW, Salovey P.
Message frames and illness representations: implications for interventions to promote and sustain healthy behavior.
In: The self-regulation of health and illness behaviour. Rothman AJ, Salovey P. Shaping perceptions to motivate healthy behavior: the role of message framing.
Psychol Bull. Article CAS PubMed Google Scholar. Rothman AJ, Stark E, Salovey P. Using message framing to promote healthy behavior: a guide to best practices. In: Best practices in the behavioral management of chronic diseases. Los altos: Institute for Disease Management; Blaszczynski A, Ladouceur R, Shaffer HJ.
A science-based framework for responsible gambling: the Reno model. Blaszczynski A, Nower L. A pathways model of problem and pathological gambling.
Sharpe L. A reformulated cognitive—behavioral model of problem gambling: a biopsychosocial perspective. Clin Psychol Rev. Benhsain K, Taillefer A, Ladouceur R. Awareness of independence of events and erroneous perceptions while gambling.
Monaghan S. Review of pop-up messages on electronic gaming machines as a proposed responsible gambling strategy. Int J Ment Health Addict. Monaghan S, Blaszczynski A, Nower L. Do warning signs on electronic gaming machines influence irrational cognitions?
Psychol Rep. Steenbergh TA, Whelan JP, Meyers AW, May RK, Floyd K. Impact of warning and brief intervention messages on knowledge of gambling risk, irrational beliefs and behaviour.
Williams RJ, Connolly D. Does learning about the mathematics of gambling change gambling behavior? Psychol Addict Behav. Monaghan S, Blaszczynski A. Recall of electronic gaming machine signs: a static versus a dynamic mode of presentation.
Impact of mode of display and message content of responsible gambling signs for electronic gaming machines on regular gamblers. Tversky A, Kahneman D. Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Science Article CAS Google Scholar.
Leventhal H. Findings and theory in the study of fear communications. Adv Exp Soc Psychol. Broda A, LaPlante DA, Nelson SE, LaBrie RA, Bosworth LB, Shaffer HJ.
Virtual harm reduction efforts for internet gambling: effects of deposit limits on actual internet sports gambling behavior. Harm Reduct J. Strahan EJ, White K, Fong GT, Fabrigar LR, Zanna MP, Cameron R. Enhancing the effectiveness of tobacco package warning labels: a social psychological perspective.
Tob Control. Article CAS PubMed PubMed Central Google Scholar. Fukunaga R, Bogg T, Finn PR, Brown JW. Decisions during negatively-framed messages yield smaller risk-aversion-related brain activation in substance-dependent individuals.
Krawitz A, Fukunaga R, Brown JW. Anterior insula activity predicts the influence of positively framed messages on decision making. Cogn Affect Behav Neurosci. Rothman AJ, Bartels RD, Wlaschin J, Salovey P.
The strategic use of gain-and loss-framed messages to promote healthy behavior: how theory can inform practice. J Commun. Wansink B, Pope L. When do gain-framed health messages work better than fear appeals?
Nutr Rev. Glock S, Müller BC, Krolak-Schwerdt S. Implicit associations and compensatory health beliefs in smokers: exploring their role for behaviour and their change through warning labels. Br J Health Psychol. it's not really my place to say, it's not my money.
Then I thought I could help him, but I realise now that's not the case and I should have looked after myself first… I still sometimes have to remember to do that. I wish I had, just saying stuff out loud makes such a difference… I went to group meetings and the more I spoke about my story, the more open I was.
And the more I was getting asked questions and getting more involved. It was that that helped me in my recovery. Call an adviser and speak one to one for confidential advice, information and emotional support.
Chat online with an adviser one to one for confidential advice, information and emotional support. If you're worried about how gambling makes you or someone else feel, we can help. Suitable if you're gambling, or if you're here for someone else Get advice and content tailored to you Access free and confidential support.
Get started. Anonymity All answers provided are anonymous and will not be shared. Disclaimer This tool is provided as a guide only, and is not intended to be used for diagnostic purposes, or as a substitute for treatment. Getting help. We give tailored help that fits your situation.
How we help. Government harm reduction policy and legislative enforcement, alongside addressing influences in the broader system is critical. Australia led the race in reducing tobacco harm with significant investment to addressing system impacts including bans on tobacco sport sponsorship, tobacco advertising and counter display communications, alongside plain packaging requirements.
In turn, these actions significantly reduced capability of tobacco companies to recruit new smokers. There is growing concern about the relationship between betting companies and professional sports teams and the growing reliance on betting money.
Wagering companies have had a long relationship with professional sporting organisations, clubs, broadcasters and former stars. There is also momentum questioning whether gambling advertising needed at all.
Australia took a stance to reducing harm from tobacco by attacking tobacco advertising and sport funding relationships. Sporting organisations survived. No doubt this question will be asked again if the government takes a strong stance to reduce wagering normalisation.
No doubt sporting leagues will again survive. Dr Marie-Louise Fry is a Senior Lecturer in the Department of Marketing in Griffith Business School Her research interests brings practical and theoretical insight into understanding consumption behaviour across a variety of marketing arenas.
Marie-Louise is widely published in leading marketing and behaviour change journals, sits on the editorial board of two academic journals and is a frequent speaker at behaviour change and marketing conferences.
In November , the release of ChatGPT, a free-to-use chatbot based on GPT-3, brought powerful language models to the public.
It is possible for a introverts to progress in an extroverted career. This view is both dated and untrue. Processed meats are often publicised to be as bad as smoking? You are not doing the same harm as a cigarette when you reach for a charcuterie board, but it is definitely far from harmless. Privacy plan Copyright Complaints CRICOS Provider — E.
YouTube users will only see betting ads if they are logged in to an age- verified account, and BGC members will also post frequent responsible gambling messages The term safer gambling messaging here relates to communications campaigns and wider marketing activity that seek to address gambling-related harms through Guides, information and tools to stay safe when gambling. Information for parents and carers to keep young people and children safe from gambling
Daijind 
