Almost winning is just as exciting for problem gamblers

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

This article was published in Scientific American’s former blog network and reflects the views of the author, not necessarily those of Scientific American


Oh, so close. Just one more try.

It's hard to understand what keeps problem gamblers betting after a long losing streak. But a new study published May 5 in The Journal of Neuroscience suggests their brains' reward centers, part of the dopamine system (so-called because the neurons release the neurotransmitter dopamine), react the same way to a "near miss" as they would to a win.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


Researchers from the University of Cambridge, U.K., used functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) to scan the brains of 20 gamblers with varying degrees of gambling intensities while they played a computerized slot machine. The brain reward centers were active in problem gamblers even when the slot machine icons almost lined up but didn't. So the near miss delivered the dopamine, if not the dollars. 

"These findings are exciting because they suggest that near-misses may elicit a dopamine response in the more severe gamblers, despite the fact that no actual reward is delivered," said study co-author Luke Clark in a prepared statement. "If these bursts of dopamine are driving addictive behavior, this may help to explain why problem gamblers find it so difficult to quit."

Studies have linked the dopamine system with other forms of addiction, including drug abuse. "The results highlight some of the links between problem gambling and drug addiction, and have implications for both psychological and drug treatment for problem gamblers," Clark said.

Photo: iStockphoto/bonniej

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe