Prevention Messages for EGMs: Effects on Behaviours and Cognitions

NCT ID: NCT06341504

Last Updated: 2025-04-01

Basic Information

• Recruitment Status: RECRUITING
• Clinical Phase: NA
• Total Enrollment: 80 participants
• Study Classification: INTERVENTIONAL
• Study Start Date: 2024-02-27
• Study Completion Date: 2026-02-28

Brief Summary

The goals of this randomized controlled trial are to test the manifold effects of prevention pop-up messages on participants' behaviours, cognitions and affects. This study is conducted among regular EGMs' players (defined as having played EGMs at least once every two weeks for the past 12 months) who are not classified as probable pathological gamblers by the PGSI.

After answering a series of short questionnaires by phone, participants are asked to schedule a gambling session which is done in a laboratory on the university's campus. This laboratory replicates a typical bar, and is equipped with real EGMs. Participants are recruited under the false pretense of giving their opinion on the realism of the bar replica, and on the overall feeling of the gambling session in it. They are told that: (a) they are free to gamble as much and for as long as they like; (b) they are allowed to take breaks; (c) gambling is to be done with their own money; (d) the only compensation for participation are the potential winnings made while gambling; (e) net winnings across their whole session are paid, but losses are real. There is only one participant at a time in the laboratory for the gambling session.

After having stopped by their own volition (some exceptions apply, see "Detailed Description" for further details), participants are debriefed on the real goals of this study and reimbursed any incurred losses while gambling. They are then be asked to answer another series of questionnaires.

Detailed Description

EGMs and online gambling are the reputedly most damaging gambling type from a public health perspective. Pop-up messages are often used as a responsible gambling (RG) measure to prevent harm for these screen-based types of gambling. Despite some evidence of effectiveness in the literature for these messages, limitations persists, among which low ecological validity is of particular concern.

Indeed, gambling studies set in a controlled environment, usually a laboratory setting, often require participants to engage in a gambling task while wagering some form of virtual credits or money provided upfront by the researchers as a compensation for participation. Their behaviour is then assumed alike what would happen in a real gambling setting, even though gamblers are not risking their own money. Surprisingly, this assumption has not been subject to much scientific scrutiny. Moreover, some studies provide data which seems to contradict this assumption.

This study address this limitation by heightening the realism factor. This study starts with an intake interview by phone to evaluate eligibility, PGSI category, sociodemographic characteristics, gambling behaviours on EGMs (past 12 months), general level of fun while playing EGMs (past 12 months) and perceived self-control while playing EGMs. Participants are then asked to schedule a gambling session which is done in a laboratory on the university's campus. This laboratory replicates a typical bar, and is equipped with real EGMs. Participants are recruited under the false pretense of giving their opinion on the realism of the bar replica, and on the overall feeling of the gambling session in it. They are told that:

• They are free to gamble as much and for as long as they like.
• They are allowed to take breaks.
• Gambling is to be done with their own money.
• The only compensation for participation are the potential winnings made while gambling.
• Net winnings across their whole session are paid , but losses are real.

There is only one participant at a time in the laboratory for the gambling session. While in the bar replica, the participant is joined by a research assistant who plays the role of barmaid/barman. The assistant is there for general realism purposes, operating the cash register (Square terminal), and ensuring the general safety of the session. The bar replica has three EGMs, but only one can be played on and used to show the prevention pop-up messages. The other two EGMs are turned on for ambiance purposes, but have their money collector disabled to prevent participants playing on them or switching between EGMs mid-session. Limiting play to only one EGM also eases the recording of gambling behaviours and proper showing of the prevention messages. Participants are told the two "unusable" EGMs are awaiting to be serviced because of their money collector malfunction.

A second research assistant is located in an adjacent room. They are responsible for (a) recording all gambling behaviours using a computer connected to the EGM; and (b) operating the pop-up messages presentation schedule. A spy camera (disguised as a smoke detector) with a live-feed is used to observe gambling related behaviours that can't be recorded by the EGM's computer (e.g. taking a break).

The gambling session ends when the participant cashes out and unambiguously tell the research assistant they want to end their session. The participant is then brought to an office for a series of questionnaires which are, in order:

• Perception of realism of the bar replica and the gambling session in it.
• Debriefing about the true goals of the study and validation of consent to participate in the study. At this point, participants will be able to guess in which group they were assigned.
• Prevention pop-up messages recall (free and cued recall).
• Cognitive and emotional response to prevention pop-up messages.
• Evaluation of protocol credibility (i.e. if participant really believed they were gambling their own money and were really risking their own money).

Note that while the participant is told they can gamble for as long as they like, in reality there is a 2 hours time limit to the gambling session duration. This time limit is hidden from the participant. The gambling session starts with the first time money is inserted in the EGM by the participant (the "clock" is set at 0 hours) and ends with either the participant ending it of their own volition or upon reaching the time limit (2 hours). Breaks during gambling session are permitted (e.g. for going to the bathroom, for buying snacks from the barman/barmaid, etc.) and don't stop the "clock".

If the participant has not yet ended their gambling session on their own volition upon reaching the 2 hours time limit, they will be asked to take a small break to answer some questions. The existence of a time limit will be communicated to them during the debriefing. In the eventuality of a participant refusing to stop playing or wanting to rapidly quit the laboratory (e.g. because they are angry about losing money), the debriefing will be done earlier, before the questionnaire about their perception of realism of the bar replica and the gambling session in it. While not optimal, early debriefing is nevertheless considered acceptable in order to force the end of the gambling session or to prevent a participant from hastily quitting the study without receiving all the information to make an informed decision about their participation. There will be no more gambling done after debriefing.

Upon debriefing the participant will be reimbursed all money lost (if any).

The mains objectives are to test to what extent do RG pop-up messages affect:

1. Participants' gambling behavior (e.g. money betted, gambling session length, gambling intensity, etc.).

2. Participants' cognitions (e.g. thoughts elicited by messages, perceived effectiveness of message, etc.).

3. Participants' emotions (e.g. enjoyment of gambling, emotional response to messages, etc.).

Secondary objectives are to test:

1. to what extent are the main effects moderated by participants' characteristics (e.g., gender, age, education, PGSI category, etc.).

2. the feasibility of studies conducted in a laboratory setting with the use of real money (or using deception to make the participants believe they are gambling their own money). This objective is answered with four sub-questions:

• Was it possible to recruit enough participants for the study considering they were confronted with the prospect of loosing their own money by participating in the study and were not guaranteed any compensation other than what they could win on the EGMs?
• Did the laboratory "bar" replicated well the overall "vibe" of a typical gambling venue with EGMs?
• Did the participants found their gambling session in the bar replica as realistic as a real one?
• Did the participants believed they were gambling their own money during the study (i.e. to what extent did the deception worked)?

Conditions

Gambling

Study Design

• Allocation Method: RANDOMIZED
• Intervention Model: PARALLEL
• Primary Study Purpose: PREVENTION
• Blinding Strategy: SINGLE

Study Groups

Prevention pop-up messages

Same as active comparator with the addition of prevention pop-up messages delivered during the gambling session on a fixed presentation schedule.

Due to hardware limitations on the EGMs' part, the prevention messages presented only alter what is shown on the play screen (they fill it completely, hiding the game), but can't pause the game per se. The EGMs' buttons, sound, and music are still operational while the message is shown. While disrupting play flow, this still lets the participant place bets (albeit without seeing what is going on).

Group Type: EXPERIMENTAL

Prevention pop-up messages

Intervention Type: BEHAVIORAL

Messages are shown full screen on the EGM's play screen on a fixed presentation schedule. Clock of the gambling session starts the first time the participant puts money in the EGM. From this event, messages are shown at those timepoints: [1] +10 minutes; [2] +40 minutes; [3] +70 minutes; [4] +100 minutes. Messages block the screen for 15 seconds before automatically closing. Up to 4 different messages are presented during the gambling session. Order is determined by sortition without replacement.

Messages have a warning heading "Caution!". Content is, from top to bottom: (a) time spent gambling from beginning; (b) warning that gambling could lead to serious monetary loss; (c) 1 of 4 self-appraisal phrases about current gambling behaviour; (d) advice to the participant that a break could help choose what is best for them; (e) countdown before the message closes itself; (f) Health department logo is shown in the lower right corner as a more "neutral" endorsement of the messages.

Mandatory time limit

Intervention Type: BEHAVIORAL

Activated either when (a) the previous time limit is up; or (b) the player bank meter reaches $0. When the previous time limit is up, a pop-up takes up the upper third of the play screen and requires the player to set a new time limit using one of five choice buttons (four firsts buttons: 15, 30, 45 or 60 minutes; fifth button: cash out, which prints a receipt and ends the gambling session). As the EGM cannot track who is playing, there are no limits on consecutive gambling sessions. When the player's bank meter reaches $0, the the pop-up described above appears as soon as new money is inserted in the EGM, no matter if the previous time limit is up or not.

Responsible gambling information

Intervention Type: BEHAVIORAL

Located in a submenu accessed through a button on the main touch screen. This open a window which contains basic information on randomness and responsible gambling advice. The information is presented in small white font on a black background.

Electronic gambling machine (model IGT GL20)

Intervention Type: DEVICE

EGM model currently in use in Quebec, Canada, the location where this study is conducted. The EGMs used in this study are fully functional and unaltered except for the presentation of prevention pop-up messages in the experimental arm of this study. These machines are equipped with basics responsible gambling features, the two main ones described in this section (i.e. "Mandatory time limit"; "Responsible gambling information"). Wins/losses sequence is fully randomized and not determined beforehand.

Square terminal

Intervention Type: DEVICE

This terminal allows for buying non-alcoholic beverages (soft drinks or coffee) and chips during the experimentation. This is done to enhance the realism of the bar setting. It also allows for real cash withdrawal from bank account during gambling session. Quebec's code of conduct for EGMs commercialization prohibits retailers from having an ATM near their EGMs, and prohibits them from lending money to consumers or withdrawing cash for them to gamble. However, this rule is not always followed in practice. For this study, participants will be allowed to withdraw from their bank account, at the bar counter, if they ask for it. However, this will not be offered to them upfront.

Regular gambling session control

Gambling session on EGMs in a room replicating a bar (subdued light, music, bar paraphernalia, fake liquor on display, research assistant acting as barman and selling non-alcoholic soft drinks and chips).

Participants are invited to participate under the false pretense of giving their opinion on the realism of the bar replica and overall feeling of the gambling session in it. They are told that: (a) they are free to gamble as much and for as long as they like; (b) they are allowed to take breaks; (c) gambling is to be done with their own money; (d) the only compensation for participation are winnings that could be made while gambling; (e) net winnings across their whole session are paid up to $500, but losses are real. Lost money is given back after debriefing (see Study Detailed Description).

Group Type: ACTIVE_COMPARATOR

Mandatory time limit

Intervention Type: BEHAVIORAL

Activated either when (a) the previous time limit is up; or (b) the player bank meter reaches $0. When the previous time limit is up, a pop-up takes up the upper third of the play screen and requires the player to set a new time limit using one of five choice buttons (four firsts buttons: 15, 30, 45 or 60 minutes; fifth button: cash out, which prints a receipt and ends the gambling session). As the EGM cannot track who is playing, there are no limits on consecutive gambling sessions. When the player's bank meter reaches $0, the the pop-up described above appears as soon as new money is inserted in the EGM, no matter if the previous time limit is up or not.

Responsible gambling information

Intervention Type: BEHAVIORAL

Located in a submenu accessed through a button on the main touch screen. This open a window which contains basic information on randomness and responsible gambling advice. The information is presented in small white font on a black background.

Electronic gambling machine (model IGT GL20)

Intervention Type: DEVICE

EGM model currently in use in Quebec, Canada, the location where this study is conducted. The EGMs used in this study are fully functional and unaltered except for the presentation of prevention pop-up messages in the experimental arm of this study. These machines are equipped with basics responsible gambling features, the two main ones described in this section (i.e. "Mandatory time limit"; "Responsible gambling information"). Wins/losses sequence is fully randomized and not determined beforehand.

Square terminal

Intervention Type: DEVICE

This terminal allows for buying non-alcoholic beverages (soft drinks or coffee) and chips during the experimentation. This is done to enhance the realism of the bar setting. It also allows for real cash withdrawal from bank account during gambling session. Quebec's code of conduct for EGMs commercialization prohibits retailers from having an ATM near their EGMs, and prohibits them from lending money to consumers or withdrawing cash for them to gamble. However, this rule is not always followed in practice. For this study, participants will be allowed to withdraw from their bank account, at the bar counter, if they ask for it. However, this will not be offered to them upfront.

Interventions

Prevention pop-up messages

Messages are shown full screen on the EGM's play screen on a fixed presentation schedule. Clock of the gambling session starts the first time the participant puts money in the EGM. From this event, messages are shown at those timepoints: [1] +10 minutes; [2] +40 minutes; [3] +70 minutes; [4] +100 minutes. Messages block the screen for 15 seconds before automatically closing. Up to 4 different messages are presented during the gambling session. Order is determined by sortition without replacement.

Messages have a warning heading "Caution!". Content is, from top to bottom: (a) time spent gambling from beginning; (b) warning that gambling could lead to serious monetary loss; (c) 1 of 4 self-appraisal phrases about current gambling behaviour; (d) advice to the participant that a break could help choose what is best for them; (e) countdown before the message closes itself; (f) Health department logo is shown in the lower right corner as a more "neutral" endorsement of the messages.

Intervention Type: BEHAVIORAL

Mandatory time limit

Activated either when (a) the previous time limit is up; or (b) the player bank meter reaches $0. When the previous time limit is up, a pop-up takes up the upper third of the play screen and requires the player to set a new time limit using one of five choice buttons (four firsts buttons: 15, 30, 45 or 60 minutes; fifth button: cash out, which prints a receipt and ends the gambling session). As the EGM cannot track who is playing, there are no limits on consecutive gambling sessions. When the player's bank meter reaches $0, the the pop-up described above appears as soon as new money is inserted in the EGM, no matter if the previous time limit is up or not.

Intervention Type: BEHAVIORAL

Responsible gambling information

Located in a submenu accessed through a button on the main touch screen. This open a window which contains basic information on randomness and responsible gambling advice. The information is presented in small white font on a black background.

Intervention Type: BEHAVIORAL

Electronic gambling machine (model IGT GL20)

EGM model currently in use in Quebec, Canada, the location where this study is conducted. The EGMs used in this study are fully functional and unaltered except for the presentation of prevention pop-up messages in the experimental arm of this study. These machines are equipped with basics responsible gambling features, the two main ones described in this section (i.e. "Mandatory time limit"; "Responsible gambling information"). Wins/losses sequence is fully randomized and not determined beforehand.

Intervention Type: DEVICE

Square terminal

This terminal allows for buying non-alcoholic beverages (soft drinks or coffee) and chips during the experimentation. This is done to enhance the realism of the bar setting. It also allows for real cash withdrawal from bank account during gambling session. Quebec's code of conduct for EGMs commercialization prohibits retailers from having an ATM near their EGMs, and prohibits them from lending money to consumers or withdrawing cash for them to gamble. However, this rule is not always followed in practice. For this study, participants will be allowed to withdraw from their bank account, at the bar counter, if they ask for it. However, this will not be offered to them upfront.

Intervention Type: DEVICE

Other Intervention Names

EGM

Eligibility Criteria

Inclusion Criteria

• At least 18 years old (legal age to gamble in Quebec, Canada, where the study is conducted)
• Functional literacy in french (study is conducted in french and requires reading and understanding simple texts)
• Having played EGMs and least once every two weeks for the past 12 months

Exclusion Criteria

• Classified as a probable pathological gambler (score ≥ 8 on the PGSI)
• Currently receiving treatment for problem gambling
• Currently under self-exclusion from gambling venues

• Minimum Eligible Age: 18 Years
• Eligible Sex: ALL
• Accepts Healthy Volunteers: Yes

Sponsors

Fonds de recherche du Québec - Société et culture

UNKNOWN

Sponsor Role: collaborator

Fonds pour la prévention et le traitement du jeu

UNKNOWN

Sponsor Role: collaborator

Benjamin Galipeau

OTHER

Sponsor Role: lead

Responsible Party

Benjamin Galipeau

Ph.D. candidate

Responsibility Role: SPONSOR_INVESTIGATOR

Principal Investigators

Benjamin Galipeau

Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

Laval University

Locations

Centre québécois d'excellence pour la prévention et le traitement du jeu

Québec, , Canada

Site Status: RECRUITING

Countries

Canada

Central Contacts

CQEPTJ

Role: CONTACT

recrutementJEUX@psy.ulaval.ca

1 866 677-5389

Benjamin Galipeau

Role: CONTACT

benjamin.galipeau.1@ulaval.ca

Facility Contacts

Benjamin Galipeau

Role: primary

benjamin.galipeau.1@ulaval.ca

Christian Jacques, M.Ps.

Role: backup

christian.jacques@psy.ulaval.ca

References

Dillard JP, Shen L. On the nature of reactance and its role in persuasive health communication. Communication monographs. 2005; 72(2): 144-168.

Reference Type: BACKGROUND

Ferris J, Wynne H. The Canadian Problem Gambling Index: Final Report. 2001. https://www.greo.ca/Modules/EvidenceCentre/files/Ferris%20et%20al(2001)The_Canadian_Problem_Gambling_Index.pdf

Reference Type: BACKGROUND

Delfabbro P, King DL, Browne M, Dowling NA. Do EGMs have a Stronger Association with Problem Gambling than Racing and Casino Table Games? Evidence from a Decade of Australian Prevalence Studies. J Gambl Stud. 2020 Jun;36(2):499-511. doi: 10.1007/s10899-020-09950-5.

Reference Type: BACKGROUND

PMID: 32306234 (View on PubMed)

Bjorseth B, Simensen JO, Bjornethun A, Griffiths MD, Erevik EK, Leino T, Pallesen S. The Effects of Responsible Gambling Pop-Up Messages on Gambling Behaviors and Cognitions: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Front Psychiatry. 2021 Jan 25;11:601800. doi: 10.3389/fpsyt.2020.601800. eCollection 2020.

Reference Type: BACKGROUND

PMID: 33569015 (View on PubMed)

Ginley MK, Whelan JP, Pfund RA, Peter SC, Meyers AW. Warning messages for electronic gambling machines: evidence for regulatory policies. Addiction Research & Theory. 2017; 25(6): 495-504. doi: 10.1080/16066359.2017.1321740

Reference Type: BACKGROUND

Livingstone C, Rintoul A, Francis L. What is the evidence for harm minimisation measures in gambling venues? Evidence Base: A Journal of Evidence Reviews in Key Policy Areas. 2014; (2), 1-24. https://search.informit.org/doi/10.3316/informit.

Reference Type: BACKGROUND

Williams RJ, West BL, Simpson RI. Prevention of problem gambling: A comprehensive review of the evidence and identified best practices. 2012. https://opus.uleth.ca/bitstream/handle/10133/3121/2012-PREVENTION-OPGRC.pdf?sequence=3&isAllowed=y

Reference Type: BACKGROUND

MacLaren VV. Video Lottery is the Most Harmful Form of Gambling in Canada. J Gambl Stud. 2016 Jun;32(2):459-85. doi: 10.1007/s10899-015-9560-z.

Reference Type: BACKGROUND

PMID: 26233645 (View on PubMed)

Papineau E, Lacroix G, Sevigny S, Biron JF, Corneau-Tremblay N, Lemétayer F. Assessing the differential impacts of online, mixed, and offline gambling. International Gambling Studies. 2018; 18(1): 69-91. doi: 10.1080/14459795.2017.1378362

Reference Type: BACKGROUND

Billieux J, Van der Linden M, Khazaal Y, Zullino D, Clark L. Trait gambling cognitions predict near-miss experiences and persistence in laboratory slot machine gambling. Br J Psychol. 2012 Aug;103(3):412-27. doi: 10.1111/j.2044-8295.2011.02083.x. Epub 2011 Oct 24.

Reference Type: BACKGROUND

PMID: 22804705 (View on PubMed)

Blaszczynski A, Cowley E, Anthony C, Hinsley K. Breaks in Play: Do They Achieve Intended Aims? J Gambl Stud. 2016 Jun;32(2):789-800. doi: 10.1007/s10899-015-9565-7.

Reference Type: BACKGROUND

PMID: 26275785 (View on PubMed)

Floyd K, Whelan JP, Meyers AW. Use of warning messages to modify gambling beliefs and behavior in a laboratory investigation. Psychol Addict Behav. 2006 Mar;20(1):69-74. doi: 10.1037/0893-164X.20.1.69.

Reference Type: BACKGROUND

PMID: 16536667 (View on PubMed)

Harris A, Parke A. The Interaction of Gambling Outcome and Gambling Harm-Minimisation Strategies for Electronic Gambling: the Efficacy of Computer Generated Self-Appraisal Messaging. International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction. 2016; 14(4): 597-617. doi: 10.1007/s11469-015-9581-y

Reference Type: BACKGROUND

Cloutier M, Ladouceur R, Sevigny S. Responsible gambling tools: pop-up messages and pauses on video lottery terminals. J Psychol. 2006 Sep;140(5):434-8. doi: 10.3200/JRLP.140.5.434-438.

Reference Type: BACKGROUND

PMID: 17066750 (View on PubMed)

Kim HS, Wohl MJ, Stewart MJ, Sztainert T, Gainsbury SM. Limit your time, gamble responsibly: Setting a time limit (via pop-up message) on an electronic gaming machine reduces time on device. International Gambling Studies. 2014; 14(2): 266-278. doi: 10.1080/14459795.2014.910244

Reference Type: BACKGROUND

Ladouceur R, Sévigny S. Interactive messages on video lottery terminals and persistence in gambling. Gambling Research. 2003; 15(1): 44-49.

Reference Type: BACKGROUND

Brandt AE, Sztykiel H, Pietras CJ. Laboratory simulated gambling: risk varies across participant-stake procedure. J Gen Psychol. 2013 Apr-Jun;140(2):130-43. doi: 10.1080/00221309.2013.776509.

Reference Type: BACKGROUND

PMID: 24837532 (View on PubMed)

Anderson G, Brown RI. Real and laboratory gambling, sensation-seeking and arousal. Br J Psychol. 1984 Aug;75 ( Pt 3):401-10. doi: 10.1111/j.2044-8295.1984.tb01910.x.

Reference Type: BACKGROUND

PMID: 6487928 (View on PubMed)

Ladouceur R, Gaboury A, Bujold A, Lachance N, Tremblay S. Ecological validity of laboratory studies of videopoker gaming. J Gambl Stud. 1991 Jun;7(2):109-16. doi: 10.1007/BF01014526.

Reference Type: BACKGROUND

PMID: 24242983 (View on PubMed)

Weatherly JN, Brandt AE. Participants' sensitivity to percentage payback and credit value when playing a slot-machine simulation. Behavior and Social Issues. 2004; 13(1): 33-51.doi: 10.5210/bsi.v13i1.34

Reference Type: BACKGROUND

Weatherly JN, McDougall CL, Gillis AA. A bird in hand: discouraging gambling on a slot machine simulation. J Psychol. 2006 Jul;140(4):347-61. doi: 10.3200/JRLP.140.4.347-361.

Reference Type: BACKGROUND

PMID: 16967741 (View on PubMed)

Weatherly JN, Meier E. Studying gambling experimentally: The value of money. Analysis of Gambling Behavior. 2007; 1(2): article 5. https://repository.stcloudstate.edu/agb/vol1/iss2/5

Reference Type: BACKGROUND

Other Identifiers

263472

Identifier Type: OTHER_GRANT

Identifier Source: secondary_id

ALVMsg2023

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: org_study_id