July 17, 2011

Compulsive Gamblers Combine Impulsiveness with Irrationality

Compulsive gamblers seeking treatment were more impulsive and more likely to be superstitious than were non-gamblers. Steve Mirsky reports

SUBSCRIBE TO 60-Second Mind

Apple | Spotify | RSS

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

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.

Compulsive gambling is marked by poor impulse control. Where a non-gambler fears to tread, the compulsive gambler may rush in. Bet on the Mets to sweep a doubleheader against the Phillies with two kids brought up from AA pitching against Halliday and Lee? Seems like a great idea!

Now a study of British gamblers finds that the ones who were the most impulsive were also way more likely to reason incorrectly. For example, they put more stock in superstition, like rituals or carrying a lucky coin. Or they’ll believe more fervently that they got a slot machine that had simply gone cold, offering them no chance to win. Thereby discounting the actual laws of probability that govern their alleged luck.

The study looked at 30 compulsive gamblers who sought treatment at England’s National Problem Gambling Clinic. It was published in the journal Psychological Medicine. [Rosanna Michalczuk et al., "Impulsivity and Cognitive Distortions in Pathological Gamblers Attending the U.K. National Problem Gambling Clinic: a preliminary report"]

Thirty non-gamblers served as the control group. An interesting point to consider is that the gamblers in the study were aware enough to know that they had a problem in need of treatment. Other compulsive bettors may be even less rational.

—Steve Mirsky

[The above text is a transcript of this podcast.]

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American