IA - Griffiths - 1994

Perception of skill - Measured by post-experiment semi-structured interview.      -Objective (behavioural)      1. Total number of plays in session      2. Total minutes of play in session      3. Total plays per minute in session      4. End stake – total winnings      5. Total number of wins in session      6. Win rate (time) – time between wins.      7. Win rate (plays) – number of plays between wins Procedure:In Arcade each participant given £3 to gamble on machine that gave 30 free gambles Objective: To stay on machine for 60 gambles To break even & win back the £3If they achieved 60 gambles they could choose to keep the ££ or carry on gambling All ppts assigned randomly to “non-think aloud” or “think aloud” group.Thinking aloud verbalization recorded via lapel microphone. - Ad. - Insight + understanding into what they think.- Dis. - Interference - thinking about thinking.          - Social desirability bias - try to make themselves look better.Controls:Thinking aloud (say what they’re thinking at the time)/ Not thinking aloudSo 4 groups altogether.All participants played same machine ‘Fruitskill’Randomly assigned to thinking aloud / non-thinking aloudAll recordings transcribed within 24 hours-Say everything that goes through your mind-Do not censor your thoughts-Keep talking continuously-Don’t have to speak in complete sentencesResults:14 regular gamblers managed to ‘break even’ (60 gambles) and 10 stayed on the machine until they lost all the money. 7 non regular gamblers broke even and 2 stayed on machine until they lost all the money. Also, see the tables of subjective and behavioural findings.Irrational behaviour - personification of machine - “machine likes me”Rational behaviour - general swearing/cursing - “damn”DV: BehaviouralFindings Non regular NTARegular NTANon regular TARegular TATotal47.856.355.765.6Total time8.48.511.59.9Play rate **6.57.55.38.4End Stake4.007.313.9Win6.18.08.36.0Win rate time2.01.01.71.8Win rate plays ** 12.57.58.0 14.6NTA = Non think aloud                  TA = Think aloudDV: Content analysis Examples of findings Non regular Regular Machine personification **1.147.54Explaining losses0.413.12Talk to machine0.902.64Swear at machine0.080.06Reference to skill1.475.34Verbal confusion **4.811.72        Conclusion:On the whole - RG use heuristics to keep gambling because they think they’re skilled + think they’ll win because of the skills they have.Regular gamblers are more skilful, e.g. knowing the reels and when to nudge.Skill related to knowledge of fruit machine - boost little wins.Regular gamblers believe they are more skilful than they are.Gamblers know they will ‘lose’ but they play with money not for it (staying on is the objective).Regular gamblers make more irrational verbalisations demonstrating cognitive bias. Explanation:When talking on the microphone, they may’ve felt as if they had to say anything, so they may’ve made some things up. Evaluation:Research Method - Quasi experiment - Ad. - Already occurring IV- no need to manipulate. Real setting. High mundane realism                                                                       - Dis. Lapel microphone. Demand characteristics - artificial behaviour.                                  Ecological Validity - Low - “Thinking aloud” technique may be questioned. It’s a very hard thing to do.                                  - High - Experiment conducted in local arcade.Generalisation - Can’t generalise to other ‘gambling’ - horse racing, dice, etc.Ethics - Ad. Consent given. Can’t generalise to other cultures/countries.Type of Data - Qualitative - Recording of verbalisations + semi-structured interviews.                                                Ad. - Rich data. Dis. - Harder to analyse.  Lack of qualitative self-reports.                        - Quantitative - Observation of behaviour.                         Ad. - Easy to analyse and compare. Dis. - Lack of rich data.Applications - Rehabilitate “gambling addicts”. One Change - Carry the study in another country.