IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/par/dipeco/2013-mk02.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Credenze: I Dadi Truccati Del Gioco D’Azzardo

Author

Listed:
  • D. T. Vergura

Abstract

Lo studio indaga le credenze manifestate dai giocatori d’azzardo con specifico riferimento al conteso italiano. È stata impiegata una tecnica di ricerca qualitativa. In particolare, sono stati realizzati tre focus group con giocatori abituali o occasionali di diverse tipologie di giochi. I risultati hanno confermato che il comportamento di gioco è influenzato da una molteplicità di distorsioni cognitive, già documentate dalla letteratura ma la cui manifestazione risente dell’humus culturale in sono immersi i giocatori: fallacia di Montecarlo, illusione di controllo, credenza nella fortuna, nella superstizione e nella provvidenza. Emerge, inoltre, una chiara distorsione cognitiva nella ragione per cui i giocatori tendono a rigiocare, in tutto o in parte, il denaro vinto. Essendo inaspettato, esso è percepito come un surplus rispetto a quello guadagnato con il proprio lavoro e, perciò, soggetto ad un maggiore grado di rischio. Si tratta di un aspetto mai evidenziato prima dalla letteratura sul tema.

Suggested Citation

  • D. T. Vergura, 2013. "Credenze: I Dadi Truccati Del Gioco D’Azzardo," Economics Department Working Papers 2013-MK02, Department of Economics, Parma University (Italy).
    • Handle: RePEc:par:dipeco:2013-mk02
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
    1. Check below whether another version of this item is available online.
    2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
    3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jonathan Guryan & Melissa S. Kearney, 2008. "Gambling at Lucky Stores: Empirical Evidence from State Lottery Sales," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 98(1), pages 458-473, March.
    2. Slovic, Paul & Finucane, Melissa & Peters, Ellen & MacGregor, Donald G., 2002. "Rational actors or rational fools: implications of the affect heuristic for behavioral economics," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 31(4), pages 329-342.
    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. Lucius Caviola & Nadira Faulmüller & Jim. A. C. Everett & Julian Savulescu & Guy Kahane, 2014. "The evaluability bias in charitable giving: Saving administration costs or saving lives?," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 9(4), pages 303-315, July.
    2. Filiz-Ozbay, Emel & Guryan, Jonathan & Hyndman, Kyle & Kearney, Melissa & Ozbay, Erkut Y., 2015. "Do lottery payments induce savings behavior? Evidence from the lab," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 126(C), pages 1-24.
    3. Jonathan Guryan & Melissa S. Kearney, 2010. "Is Lottery Gambling Addictive?," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 2(3), pages 90-110, August.
    4. Dan Ariely & Kristina Shampan'er, 2006. "How small is zero price? : the true value of free products," Working Papers 06-16, Federal Reserve Bank of Boston.
    5. Robin Maximilian Stetzka & Stefan Winter, 2023. "How rational is gambling?," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(4), pages 1432-1488, September.
    6. Tsoukias, Alexis, 2008. "From decision theory to decision aiding methodology," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 187(1), pages 138-161, May.
    7. Boshi, Shlomi & Lavie, Moshik & Weiss, Avi, 2016. "The demand for free goods: An experimental investigation," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 108-121.
    8. Rita Saleh & Angela Bearth & Michael Siegrist, 2019. "“Chemophobia” Today: Consumers’ Knowledge and Perceptions of Chemicals," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 39(12), pages 2668-2682, December.
    9. Manzini Paola & Mariotti Marco, 2004. "A Theory of Vague Expected Utility," The B.E. Journal of Theoretical Economics, De Gruyter, vol. 4(1), pages 1-17, December.
    10. Joshua B. Miller & Adam Sanjurjo, 2015. "Is it a Fallacy to Believe in the Hot Hand in the NBA Three-Point Contest?," Working Papers 548, IGIER (Innocenzo Gasparini Institute for Economic Research), Bocconi University.
    11. Kazeminia, Azadeh & Hultman, Magnus & Mostaghel, Rana, 2016. "Why pay more for sustainable services? The case of ecotourism," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(11), pages 4992-4997.
    12. Jorge E. Araña & Carmelo J. León, 2012. "Scale-perception bias in the valuation of environmental risks," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 44(20), pages 2607-2617, July.
    13. Diego Fernandez-Duque & Timothy Wifall, 2007. "Actor/observer asymmetry in risky decision making," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 2, pages 1-8, February.
    14. Kevin Fox Gotham & Richard Campanella & Katie Lauve‐Moon & Bradford Powers, 2018. "Hazard Experience, Geophysical Vulnerability, and Flood Risk Perceptions in a Postdisaster City, the Case of New Orleans," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 38(2), pages 345-356, February.
    15. repec:cup:judgdm:v:4:y:2009:i:4:p:297-306 is not listed on IDEAS
    16. Roman Kräussl & Ronald Bosman & Thomas van Galen, 2014. "Emotions-at-Risk: An Experimental Investigation into Emotions, Option Prices and Risk Perception," LSF Research Working Paper Series 14-11, Luxembourg School of Finance, University of Luxembourg.
    17. Miller, Joshua Benjamin & Sanjurjo, Adam, 2018. "A Bridge from Monty Hall to the Hot Hand: Restricted Choice, Selection Bias, and Empirical Practice," OSF Preprints dmgtp_v1, Center for Open Science.
    18. Yan Li, 2011. "Emotions and new venture judgment in China," Asia Pacific Journal of Management, Springer, vol. 28(2), pages 277-298, June.
    19. Simonson, Itamar, 2007. "Will I Like A "Medium" Pillow? Another Look At Constructed And Inherent Preferences," Research Papers 1977r1, Stanford University, Graduate School of Business.
    20. Hee Mok Park & Joseph Pancras, 2022. "Social and Spatiotemporal Impacts of Casino Jackpot Events," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 41(3), pages 575-592, May.
    21. Gurevich, Gregory & Kliger, Doron, 2013. "The Manipulation: Socio-economic decision making," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 39(C), pages 171-184.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    gioco d’azzardo; credenze; focus group;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • L83 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Services - - - Sports; Gambling; Restaurants; Recreation; Tourism
    • M31 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Marketing and Advertising - - - Marketing

    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:par:dipeco:2013-mk02. 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: Andrea Lasagni (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/feparit.html .

    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.