FREE SHIPPING over $40
OVER 10000 FIVE-STAR REVIEWS
5% OFF ALL SUBSCRIPTIONS
100% HAPPINESS GUARANTEE
Analyze Diet
0
Journal of gambling studies1997; 13(2); 159-172; doi: 10.1023/a:1024903418798

An empirical study of the impact of complexity on participation in horserace betting.

Abstract: The aim of the research reported in this paper was to explore empirically whether levels of participation in horserace betting are affected by the complexity of the betting task. The study employed a systematic random sample of 1161 betting decisions made in UK offcourse betting offices during 1987. The research was conducted in a naturalistic setting where it was possible to grade complexity and to measure levels of participation. Complexity was defined in terms of both the number of alternatives in the decision-maker's choice set (number of horses in a race) and the complexity of the attributes set for each horserace (handicap vs. non-handicap races). Results indicated that bettors are not inhibited by alternative-based complexity, but may be inhibited to some extent by attribute-defined complexity.
Get Full Text
Publication Date: 1997-07-01 PubMed ID: 12913393DOI: 10.1023/a:1024903418798Google Scholar: Lookup
The Equine Research Bank provides access to a large database of publicly available scientific literature. Inclusion in the Research Bank does not imply endorsement of study methods or findings by Mad Barn.
LinkedInCopy
  • Journal Article

Summary

This research summary has been generated with artificial intelligence and may contain errors and omissions. Refer to the original study to confirm details provided. Submit correction.

The research article investigates if complexity in horse race betting impacts the participation of bettors. Focusing on factors such as the number of alternatives (like horses in a race) and attribute-related complexity (like handicap vs. non-handicap races), the study suggests while people don’t get discouraged by alternative-based complexity, attribute-defined complexity might hinder their participation to some extents.

Objective of the Research

  • This study mainly investigates how the complexity of horserace betting affects the participation of bettors.
  • It was aimed to offer empirical insights into how the intricacies involved in betting tasks influence the decision-making process of bettors.

Methods Used

  • The study employed a systematic random sample composed of 1161 betting decisions.
  • The bets were collected from UK offcourse betting offices over the year 1987.
  • The research was conducted in a natural environment to observe and grade complexity and to measure levels of participation.

Complexity Definition

  • In the context of this research, complexity was identified by the number of alternatives available in the decision process and the complexity level of attribute sets for each horserace.
  • The number of alternatives referred to the number of horses in the race, providing the bettors with options.
  • The attribute set complexity was distinguished by handicap versus non-handicap races, which present bettors with different conditions and requirements.

Research Findings

  • The study findings indicated that alternative-based complexity, such as the number of options (horses to bet on) in a race, did not discourage bettors.
  • However, bettors might be somewhat discouraged by attribute-defined complexity, such as the choice between handicap and non-handicap races. These results suggest that the characteristics of the race itself may play a bigger role in reducing bettors’ participation than the number of options they have to select from.

Cite This Article

APA
Johnson JE, Bruce AC. (1997). An empirical study of the impact of complexity on participation in horserace betting. J Gambl Stud, 13(2), 159-172. https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1024903418798

Publication

Journal of gambling studies
ISSN: 1050-5350
NlmUniqueID: 9425991
Country: United States
Language: English
Volume: 13
Issue: 2
Pages: 159-172

Researcher Affiliations

Johnson, J E
  • Centre for Risk Research, Social Sciences Faculty, University of Southampton, Southampton, SO17 1BJ, UK.
Bruce, A C

    References

    This article includes 5 references
    1. Griffiths M. Tolerance in gambling: an objective measure using the psychophysiological analysis of male fruit machine gamblers.. Addict Behav 1993 May-Jun;18(3):365-72.
      pubmed: 8342448doi: 10.1016/0306-4603(93)90038-bgoogle scholar: lookup
    2. Anderson G, Brown RI. Real and laboratory gambling, sensation-seeking and arousal.. Br J Psychol 1984 Aug;75 ( Pt 3):401-10.
      pubmed: 6487928doi: 10.1111/j.2044-8295.1984.tb01910.xgoogle scholar: lookup
    3. Onken J, Hastie R, Revelle W. Individual differences in the use of simplification strategies in a complex decision-making task.. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform 1985 Feb;11(1):14-27.
      pubmed: 3156956doi: 10.1037//0096-1523.11.1.14google scholar: lookup
    4. Brown RI. Arousal and sensation-seeking components in the general explanation of gambling and gambling addictions.. Int J Addict 1986 Sep-Oct;21(9-10):1001-16.
      pubmed: 3793306doi: 10.3109/10826088609077251google scholar: lookup
    5. Brehmer B. Dynamic decision making: human control of complex systems.. Acta Psychol (Amst) 1992 Dec;81(3):211-41.
      pubmed: 1462786doi: 10.1016/0001-6918(92)90019-agoogle scholar: lookup

    Citations

    This article has been cited 1 times.
    1. Armstrong T, Rockloff M, Greer N, Donaldson P. Rise of the Machines: A Critical Review on the Behavioural Effects of Automating Traditional Gambling Games. J Gambl Stud 2017 Sep;33(3):735-767.
      doi: 10.1007/s10899-016-9644-4pubmed: 27704237google scholar: lookup
    Subscribe to our newsletter
    Join 100,127 horse owners like you who receive our email updates on horse health and nutrition.