IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/intgms/v9y2009i3p245-262.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The relationship between explicit and implicit learning processes and probable pathological gambling

Author

Listed:
  • Nigel Turner
  • Keith D. Horton
  • Barry Fritz

Abstract

This paper reports the findings of a study of explicit and implicit learning and gambling with non-problem ( n = 107), sub-clinical problem gamblers ( n = 13), and probable pathological gamblers ( n = 46). Two probability learning tasks modeled after gambling games and an artificial grammar task were used to explore how people learn patterns. In each of the two probability learning tasks, the outcome of the game was biased during the first part (learning phase) of the task. The results showed that many of the participants in the experimental conditions learned the bias and gradually unlearned the bias during the extinction phase of the study. Probable pathological gamblers showed less retention of the bias during two probability tasks and repeated the same errors during the artificial grammar task suggesting that they emphasize explicit learning strategies rather than implicit learning strategies. The results are consistent with the idea that pathological gamblers are more likely to utilize explicit rules than implicit rules.

Suggested Citation

  • Nigel Turner & Keith D. Horton & Barry Fritz, 2009. "The relationship between explicit and implicit learning processes and probable pathological gambling," International Gambling Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 9(3), pages 245-262, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:intgms:v:9:y:2009:i:3:p:245-262
    DOI: 10.1080/14459790903286584
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/14459790903286584
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/14459790903286584?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:taf:intgms:v:9:y:2009:i:3:p:245-262. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RIGS20 .

    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.