IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/osf/osfxxx/g5wd9_v1.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

What are the odds? Poor compliance with UK loot box probability disclosure industry self-regulation

Author

Listed:
  • Xiao, Leon Y.

    (IT University of Copenhagen)

  • Henderson, Laura L.
  • Newall, Philip

    (University of Warwick)

Abstract

Loot boxes are purchased in video games to obtain randomised rewards of varying value and are thus psychologically akin to gambling. Disclosing the probabilities of obtaining loot box rewards may reduce overspending, in a similar vein to related disclosure approaches in gambling. Presently, this consumer protection measure has been adopted as law only in the People’s Republic of China (PRC). In other countries, the videogaming industry has generally adopted this measure as self-regulation. However, self-regulation conflicts with commercial interests and might not maximally promote public welfare. The loot box prevalence rate amongst the 100 highest-grossing UK iPhone games was 77% in mid-2021. The compliance rate with probability disclosure industry self-regulation was only 64.0%, significantly lower than that of PRC legal regulation (95.6%). In addition, UK games generally made insufficiently prominent and difficult-to-access disclosures both in-game and on the game’s official website. Significantly fewer UK games disclosed probabilities on their official websites (21.3%) when compared to 72.5% of PRC games. Only one of 75 UK games (1.3%) adopted the most prominent disclosure format of automatically displaying the probabilities on the in-game purchase page. Policymakers should demand more accountable forms of industry self-regulation or impose direct legal regulation to ensure consumer protection.

Suggested Citation

  • Xiao, Leon Y. & Henderson, Laura L. & Newall, Philip, 2021. "What are the odds? Poor compliance with UK loot box probability disclosure industry self-regulation," OSF Preprints g5wd9_v1, Center for Open Science.
    • Handle: RePEc:osf:osfxxx:g5wd9_v1
    DOI: 10.31219/osf.io/g5wd9_v1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://osf.io/download/6155991d17d22700c98696de/
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.31219/osf.io/g5wd9_v1?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Pierre Dubois & Paulo Albuquerque & Olivier Allais & Céline Bonnet & Patrice Bertail & Pierre Combris & Saadi Lahlou & Natalie Rigal & Bernard Ruffieux & Pierre Chandon, 2021. "Effects of front-of-pack labels on the nutritional quality of supermarket food purchases: evidence from a large-scale randomized controlled trial," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 49(1), pages 119-138, January.
    2. Shaun Stephen Garea & Aaron Drummond & James D. Sauer & Lauren C. Hall & Matthew Neil Williams, 2021. "Meta-analysis of the relationship between problem gambling, excessive gaming and loot box spending," International Gambling Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(3), pages 460-479, September.
    3. 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., 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.
    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. Mattinen, Topias & Macey, Joseph & Hamari, Juho, 2023. "A Ruse by Any Other Name: Comparing Loot Boxes and Collectible Card Games Using Magic Arena," OSF Preprints s9xqt_v1, Center for Open Science.
    4. 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.
    5. 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).
    6. Stephanie von Hinke, 2022. "Education, Dietary Intakes and Exercise," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 84(1), pages 214-240, February.
    7. Jingwen Liu & Peng Zou & Yu Ma, 2022. "The Effect of Air Pollution on Food Preferences," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 50(2), pages 410-423, March.
    8. Thomas Chambon & Ulysse Soulat & Jeanne Lallement & Jean-Loup Guillaume, 2023. "The effect of visual information complexity on urban mobility intention and behavior," Post-Print hal-04089291, HAL.
    9. Andrews, J. Craig & Netemeyer, Richard & Burton, Scot & Kees, Jeremy, 2021. "What consumers actually know: The role of objective nutrition knowledge in processing stop sign and traffic light front-of-pack nutrition labels," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 128(C), pages 140-155.
    10. Xiao, Leon Y. & Lund, Mie, 2025. "Assessing compliance with UK loot box industry self-regulation on the Apple App Store: a longitudinal study on the implementation process," OSF Preprints xmwgy, Center for Open Science.
    11. Ulysse Soulat & Jeanne Lallement, 2023. "Can quantified-self change urban mobility behaviour? The importance of information presentation [Le quantified-self peut-il changer les comportements de mobilité urbaine ? De l'importance de la pré," Post-Print hal-04367651, HAL.
    12. Jacob Suher & Courtney Szocs & Koert Ittersum, 2021. "When imperfect is preferred: the differential effect of aesthetic imperfections on choice of processed and unprocessed foods," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 49(5), pages 903-924, September.
    13. 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.
    14. Panzone, Luca A. & Tocco, Barbara & Brečić, Ružica & Gorton, Matthew, 2024. "Healthy foods, healthy sales? Cross-category effects of a loyalty program promoting sales of fruit and vegetables," Journal of Retailing, Elsevier, vol. 100(1), pages 85-103.
    15. 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.
    16. Lan Luo & Koen Pauwels, 2023. "Practice Prize Report: The 2020 and 2022 ISMS Gary Lilien Practice Prize Competition," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 42(1), pages 6-10, January.
    17. Jorge Alé-Chilet & Sarah Moshary, 2022. "Beyond Consumer Switching: Supply Responses to Food Packaging and Advertising Regulations," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 41(2), pages 243-270, March.
    18. Xiao, Leon Y. & Lund, Mie, 2025. "Assessing compliance with UK loot box industry self-regulation on the Apple App Store: a longitudinal study on the implementation process," OSF Preprints xmwgy_v1, Center for Open Science.
    19. 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.
    20. Xiao, Leon Y. & Deery, Callum & Petrovskaya, Elena & Park, Solip & Newall, Philip, 2025. "Widespread illegal video game advertising in the UK and South Korea: Many adverts not disclosing loot box presence found using Meta’s ad repository," OSF Preprints jqng5_v1, Center for Open Science.

    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:osf:osfxxx:g5wd9_v1. 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: OSF (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://osf.io/preprints/ .

    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.