IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v19y2022i22p15384-d979184.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Do Gamers Play for Money? A Moderated Mediation of Gaming Motives, Relative Deprivation, and Upward Mobility

Author

Listed:
  • Anthony King

    (Department of Psychology, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, Las Vegas, NV 89154, USA)

  • Gloria Wong-Padoongpatt

    (Department of Psychology, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, Las Vegas, NV 89154, USA)

Abstract

Past research indicates strong monetary motives for gambling often elevate an individual’s risk of experiencing symptoms of gambling disorder, with personal relative deprivation (PRD) and upward mobility (UM) identified as key factors in this relationship. Nevertheless, few studies have examined how financial motives, PRD, and UM might interact for people playing modern video games—many of which offer financial incentives to encourage participation. Due to the overlap between gambling and (video) gaming, evidence suggests disordered gambling and disordered gaming might also share similarities. Therefore, the present study explored whether PRD influences associations between playing video games for financial motives, symptoms of Internet gaming disorder (IGD), and UM in two samples: 797 college students (Study 1) and 179 adult gamers over 25 years old (Study 2). Results from Study 1 revealed more PRD predicted more IGD symptoms, with higher financial gaming motives mediating the relationship. In Study 2, PRD also predicted IGD severity, but only coping motives appeared to mediate the positive association between PRD and IGD severity. In both samples, perceived UM inversely moderated the effect of PRD on one’s financial or coping gaming motives. These findings suggest financial motives for video games might lead to more problematic forms of participation for younger adults and negative perceptions of PRD and UM might interact, similar to gambling, to elevate a gamer’s vulnerability for IGD.

Suggested Citation

  • Anthony King & Gloria Wong-Padoongpatt, 2022. "Do Gamers Play for Money? A Moderated Mediation of Gaming Motives, Relative Deprivation, and Upward Mobility," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(22), pages 1-21, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:22:p:15384-:d:979184
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/22/15384/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/19/22/15384/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Richard J. Rosenthal, 2020. "Inclusion of pathological gambling in DSM-III, its classification as a disorder of impulse control, and the role of Robert Custer," International Gambling Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(1), pages 151-170, January.
    2. Benjamin J. I. Schellenberg & Daniel S. McGrath & Kristianne Dechant, 2016. "The Gambling Motives Questionnaire financial: factor structure, measurement invariance, and relationships with gambling behaviour," International Gambling Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 16(1), pages 1-16, April.
    3. McCaffrey, Matthew, 2019. "The macro problem of microtransactions: The self-regulatory challenges of video game loot boxes," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 62(4), pages 483-495.
    4. Aaron Drummond & James D. Sauer, 2018. "Video game loot boxes are psychologically akin to gambling," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 2(8), pages 530-532, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Xiao, Leon Y., 2020. "Regulating Loot Boxes as Gambling? Perspectives from Psychology, Behavioural Economics and Ludology," LawArXiv cdr69, Center for Open Science.
    2. D. Leahy, 2022. "Rocking the Boat: Loot Boxes in Online Digital Games, the Regulatory Challenge, and the EU’s Unfair Commercial Practices Directive," Journal of Consumer Policy, Springer, vol. 45(3), pages 561-592, September.
    3. McCaffrey, Matthew, 2019. "The macro problem of microtransactions: The self-regulatory challenges of video game loot boxes," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 62(4), pages 483-495.
    4. von Meduna, Marc & Steinmetz, Fred & Ante, Lennart & Reynolds, Jennifer & Fiedler, Ingo, 2020. "Loot boxes are gambling-like elements in video games with harmful potential: Results from a large-scale population survey," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 63(C).
    5. Ken Chan, 0000. "The collective voice of businesses: How companies can effectively use trade associations in corporate political activity," Proceedings of Economics and Finance Conferences 14115871, International Institute of Social and Economic Sciences.
    6. Ningyuan Chen & Adam N. Elmachtoub & Michael L. Hamilton & Xiao Lei, 2021. "Loot Box Pricing and Design," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(8), pages 4809-4825, August.
    7. Sharon Lawn & Candice Oster & Ben Riley & David Smith & Michael Baigent & Mubarak Rahamathulla, 2020. "A Literature Review and Gap Analysis of Emerging Technologies and New Trends in Gambling," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(3), pages 1-20, January.
    8. Imam Salehudin & Frank Alpert, 2024. "Perceived aggressive monetization: why some mobile gamers won’t spend any money on in-app purchases," Electronic Commerce Research, Springer, vol. 24(3), pages 1997-2019, September.
    9. David Zendle & Paul Cairns, 2019. "Loot boxes are again linked to problem gambling: Results of a replication study," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(3), pages 1-13, March.
    10. Suzanne Lischer & Emilien Jeannot & Lukas Brülisauer & Niels Weber & Yasser Khazaal & Samuel Bendahan & Olivier Simon, 2022. "Response to the Regulation of Video Games under the Youth Media Protection Act: A Public Health Perspective," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(15), pages 1-11, July.
    11. Hui Zhou & Eva P. W. Hung & Li Xie & Zhen Yuan & Anise M. S. Wu, 2022. "The Application of the Intolerance of Uncertainty Model to Gambling Urge and Involvement," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(22), pages 1-11, November.
    12. Kostić Zorana & Tomić Nenad, 2022. "Implementation of the Game as a Service Research Model: Microperspective," Economic Themes, Sciendo, vol. 60(1), pages 57-75, March.
    13. Paul Delfabbro & Daniel L. King, 2021. "Contentious Issues and Future Directions in Adolescent Gambling Research," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 18(21), pages 1-11, October.
    14. Xiao, Leon Y., 2024. "Illegal loot box advertising on social media: an empirical study using the Meta and TikTok ad transparency repositories," OSF Preprints s92j3, Center for Open Science.
    15. E. Mitchell Church, 2024. "The one to watch: Heuristic Determinants of Viewership among Influential Twitch Streamers," Electronic Commerce Research, Springer, vol. 24(3), pages 1795-1820, September.
    16. Zhaoxia Deng & Zhijie Chen, 2024. "Balancing Creative Expression and Societal Well-being: A Comprehensive Regulatory Framework for the Chinese Video Game Industry," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 15(3), pages 10384-10411, September.
    17. Juan R Barrada & Juan F Navas & Cristian M Ruiz de Lara & Joël Billieux & Gaëtan Devos & José C Perales, 2019. "Reconsidering the roots, structure, and implications of gambling motives: An integrative approach," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(2), pages 1-22, February.
    18. Cameron, Lachlan & Ride, Jemimah, 2023. "The role of mental health in online gambling decisions: A discrete choice experiment," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 326(C).

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:19:y:2022:i:22:p:15384-:d:979184. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.