Individual Differences - Giffiths (1994)

1. To examine the factors and variables relating to cognition and the gambling process. The investigation aimed to examine whether the skills involved in fruit machine gambling are 'actual' or 'percieved' by comparing the success of regular and non-regular gamblers.
   1. 'Thinking aloud' was used to monitor cognitive activity during gambling. No independant variables were the behaviours and verbalisations of the gamblers.
2. Hypothesis
   1. 1) There would be no difference between the skill levels of regular and non-regular fruit machine gamblers.
   2. 2) Regular gamblers would produce more irrational verbalisationsthan non-regular gamblers.
   3. 3) Regular gamblers would report themselves as being more skill orientated than non-regular gamblers.
   4. 4) 'Thinking aloud' would take longer to complete the task than 'non-thinking aloud' participants.

1. 1) To enhance ecological validity, the experiment was conducted in a real amusement arcade.
2. 2) The 60 participants are split into regular gamblers and non-regular gamblers and then randomly divided into 'thinking aloud' and 'non-thinking aloud' groups.

   Annotations:

   • The verbalisations of those told to 'think aloud' were considered dependant variables.
3. 3) All gamblers were given £3.00 each, which is the equivilence of 30 (free) gambles. The participants objectives were to play atleast 60 gambles and to break even, earning back the £3 of their own money that they used.

   Annotations:

   • '30 gambles' meas 30 rounds on the fruit machine.

1. Type of data
   1. Qualitative
      1. The verbalisations of those thinking aloud.
         1. The transcriptions Griffiths collects provide detailed qualitative data of the 'thinking aloud' process'.

            Annotations:

            • The utterances and verbalisations were later put into quantitative data (the frequency in which a type of utterance was made).
      2. The semi-structered interview provided detailed qualitative information/insight towards possible heuristics used by the gamblers.
   2. Quantitative
      1. The qualitative data is turned into quantitative by identifying the frequency of use and ranking to provide statistical comparisions.
      2. The semi-structered interview provided quantitative information/insight towards possible heuristics used by the gamblers.
2. Analysis of verbalisations

   Annotations:

   • Conent Analysis - Technique for systematically describing written, spoken or visual communication.
   • Heuristics - Common-sense sets of rules that are used to solve problems.,
   1. RG - Irrational Verbalisations

      Annotations:

      • Personification of the machine ~'I think the machine likes me.'
      • Explaining away losses ~I lost there because i wasn't concentrating.;
      • Extensive swearing past general
   2. RG - Rational Verbalisations

      Annotations:

      • Reference to winning ~ 'I think i won forty pence i think.'
      • Reference to the number system. ~'I've got ''2''.'
      • General swearing/cursing ~'Damn' if losing/or having lost money.
   3. NRG - Rational Verbalisations

      Annotations:

      • Questions relating to cofusion or non-understanding. ~'What's going on here?'
      • Statements relating to confusion or non-understanding. ~'I don't understand this.'
      • Miscellaneous - Random ~'I think i'll get a bag of chips after this.'
      • General swearing/cursing ~'Damn' if losing/having lost money
   4. NRG - Irrational Verbalisations

      Annotations:

      • Very few uttered
   5. Non regular gamblers reported comments that 'their minds go blank' and that they were' 'frustrated'.
      1. Neither of these utterances were recorded with regular gamblers.

         Annotations:

         • Regular gamblers also stopped speaking more often.
   6. (Regular) Gamblers used the hindsight bias to predict events after they had happened - 'I had a feeling it wasn't going to pay very much after it had just given me a 'feature'.'

      Annotations:

      • Feature - the nudge button
      1. 'Reflex attributions' were used to blame an external influence, for example; '...two nudges, gotta be...you [the machine] changed them! You snatched the win!.'
      2. These findings support the idea that regular gamblers will produce more irrational verbaisations that may well result from cognitive bias and the use of heuristics.
3. Analysis of behaviour
   1. Two out of seven significant differences were found within the gambling behaviours.
      1. 1) Regular gamblers had a higher playing rate (8 gambles per minute) than non-regular gamblers played (which was 6 gambles per minute).
      2. 2) Regular gamblers who 'thought aloud' had a lower win rate and therefore made fewer gambles between each win than other groups.
   2. Two other findings (not significant) were:
      1. 1) Regular gamblers were seen to spend more time on the fruit machine by having more gambles using the same initial intakey
         1. 2) There were no significant differences in the amount of total winnings between those who thought alouds and those who did not.
   3. These findings support the first (null) hypothesis that there would be no difference in the skill level between the NRG and the RG. RG spent more time on the fruit machines, even thought this is not seen as a significant finding, it may suggest that some skill is involved in playing the machines. Griffith suggests that RG's know they will lose their money but by using an unfamiliar machine and having some level of skill they are able to maximise their playing time.
   4. Playing the machine can also be seen as it's own reward - Instead of gamblers gambling as a 'need' to do so, they could be gambling in the hope to gain more money.
   5. Support for the hypothesis that thinking aloud causes gamblers to take longer to gamble.
4. Analysis of skill variable
   1. A semi-constructed interview was conducted, post experiment, and the participants were asked if they believed that any skill was involved in playing a fruit machine. NRG considerd that performance was based mainly due to chance. RG said that it was down to equal chance and the skill of the gambler. When asked, RG's also that they had either above or equal skill to the average person where as NRG's would say they had either equal or below skill to the average person.
      1. 21/60 participants managed to break even/stay on for 60 gambles.

         Annotations:

         • 14 of these were RG and 7 were NRG.
         • This indicates that RG gamblers were indeed more skilled then NRG at the fruit machines and the NRG and RG would report themselves as being so.
         • The skill the RG reported they had had to do with their knowledge of the features on the machine. Using 'holds' and 'nudges' to turn little wins into bigger ones which also enables them to spend longer on the machine.
         • In reality, the machines are designed to be based purely on chance. The perception that the skills of knowing when to nudge or hold (variables) will have an impact on winning or losing (more variables) could be down to an 'Illusory Correlation' heuristic.
      2. 10 RG's stayed on until they lost everything and only 2 NRG did so.

1. (NRG) Non-regular Gamblers

   Annotations:

   • ~Have equal amount of genders.
   1. 15 male, 15 female
   2. Mean age of 25.3 years
   3. 15 of these were 'non-thinking aloud' participants
   4. 15 of these were 'thinking aloud' participants
2. (RG) Regular Gamblers

   Annotations:

   • ~Younger on average than non-regular gamblers ~Have to have gambled at least once a week on fruit machines. ~Some of were recruited by a gambling friend of Griffithes', ~More males than females.
   • Higher male participant percentage within the sample, making it hard
   1. 15 of these were 'thinking aloud' participants
   2. 15 of these were 'non-thinking aloud' participants'
   3. 29 male, 1 female
   4. Mean age of 21.6 years
3. Self-selected sample as they responded/volunteered to a post put up in Colleges and Universties in Plymouth.
4. Those thinking aloud had been asked to follow guidelines.

   Annotations:

   • 1) Say anything that enters your mind - Do not censor anything, even if it seems irrelevant to you.
   • 2) Keep talking as continuously as possible, even if your thoughts hold no specific structure.
   • 3) Speak clearly.
   • 4) Do not hesitate to use fragmented sentences is necessary, do not worry about speaking in complete sentences.
   • 5) Do not try to justify your thoughts.

1. Emperical

   Annotations:

   • Relied on observation and facts.
2. Ecological Validity

   Annotations:

   • It was set in an amusement aracade (natural setting) specifically to increase ecological validity.
   • However, problems with this may be 1) The RG may be more used to playing the machines in a pub opposed to an amusement arcade. 2) It is unlikely that when people gamble that they have a psychology doctor/professor recording their behaviour as they play the machine.
3. Snapshot

   Annotations:

   • Data was able to be collected quickly within the gambling sessions.
   • The data from this study could be used to start a longituinal study in another area related to this study (CBT for example).
4. Quantitative data

   Annotations:

   • Clear and concise information can be extracted from the statistics collected. Easy comparisons of which group was able to stay on for all 60 gambles or break even could be made.

1. Ethical Issues

   Annotations:

   • Psychological harm could have been an issue that might have arisen when the participants listened to their own playbacks of their 'thinking aloud;. They could have found it embarrassing, disturbing and could have damaged their self-esteem.
   • Other than this possible event, no other ethical issues were breached. Participants were allowed to withdraw without worry. The study was carried out following the British Psychology Societies guidlines.
2. Inter-observer reliability

   Annotations:

   • It was only Griffiths making the observations therefore there was no-one to compare his results with.
   • Giffths had aquired a gambler and a non gambler to help observe but neither could grasp the concept of Griffiths specifc coding scheme.
   • This inter-observer reliability of this study could be improved if Griffths had taught the two other possible observers how to use the coding scheme accurately.
3. Atypical sample

   Annotations:

   • The study is not representative. It was a self-selected sample meaning that the only people within the study were the type of people to put themselves forward in situations. They were most likely to extroverts opposed to an introvert.
   • The placement of the posters which allowed the self-selection to take place are also limited. They were put up in a University in Plymouth. Only one area of a small country including those who are either studying or teaching (or possible visiters but it's unlikely they'd stay).
4. Snapshot

   Annotations:

   • The information collected from this study is only relevant to it's specific time and the culture at that time in that area (within Plymouth). The amount of gamblers and their gender may have altered by now.
   • There was not time to see if there were other variables that effected how a NRG or RG played, their belief of their skill or ability to break even/complete all 60 gambles.
5. Thinking Aloud

   Annotations:

   • Thinking aloud whilst playing is not as simple as it may seem.
   • Participants may be conscious of what they are saying and sensor what they were saying (despite being asked not to).
   • Participants may say things they believe the researcher want them to say - The Screw You effect.

1. Differences between RG's and NRG's are related to how they deal cognitively with the idea of skill in relation to the fruit machine. RG thinking there is more skill involved than chance and NRG the opposite. Griffith believes that RG 'irrational gambling bias can be modified by allowing them to listen to their 'thinking aloud'.

1. Cognitive Behaviour Theory (CBT)

   Annotations:

   • CBT is a form of therapy in which you talk with a patient and try ti get them to change their way of thinking, be it on a specific subject or other.
   • This idea came about after one of the gamblers asked for their audio recordings to be played back to them and decided that they wanted to change their gambling ways.
   • Griffths proposed furthur study/research on the theory.

Annotations:

• Whether or not the participant was a Regular Gambler or a Non-regular Gambler.

1. Independant Variables

   Annotations:

   • The Independant Varibales within this study were not manipulated. The 'regular gamblers' had to meet specific criteria to be apart of this experiment.
   1. Regular Gambler (NRG)
   2. Non-regular Gambler (RG)
2. Dependant Variables
   1. The behaviours and verbalisations of the gamblers.