Gambling : learning theory

• What is cue reactivity?

  Response to cues similar to nicotine effects
• What are the three main elements of cue reactivity?

  Desire, physiological signs, behavioral indicators
• What does subjective desire refer to in cue reactivity?

  Self-reported craving for a cigarette
• What are physiological signs of reactivity?

  Autonomic responses like heart rate and skin temperature
• What are objective behavioral indicators in cue reactivity?

  Number of draws taken on a cigarette
• How does indirect vicarious reinforcement contribute to gambling behavior?

  Positive portrayal of gambling in media encourages behavior
• What types of media portray gambling positively?

  Newspapers, magazines, TV adverts
• What are the components of cue reactivity and their significance?

  • Subjective desire: self-reported craving
  • Physiological signs: autonomic responses (heart rate, skin temperature)
  • Objective indicators: behavioral measures (draws on a cigarette)
• How does media influence gambling behavior through indirect vicarious reinforcement?

  • Positive portrayal of gambling
  • Encourages gambling behavior
  • Seen in newspapers, magazines, and adverts
• Direct negative reinforcement

  Gambling is also an escape for many, albeit a temporary one. 

  This is a negative reinforcement as it is offering a distraction from unpleasant emotions i.e. stress, work, anxiety in everyday life
• Partial and variable reinforcement 

  Skinner showed early on that a continuous reinforcement schedule (where you reward every desired response) is not actually the most effective method of reinforcement. 

  Instead, partial reinforcement schedules (where a behaviour is only rewarded some of the time) have actually been found to more consistently lead to the kind of persistent behaviour that is seen in gambling addiction.
• Partial and variable reinforcement 

  Variable reinforcement is a specific type of partial reinforcement schedule. In essence, because only some bets are rewarded there is an unpredictability about which gambles pay off which is enough to keep the person gambling even if rewards are few / difficult to obtain.

  The variable ratio schedule produces the most persistent learning
• What type of reinforcement is described as highly unpredictable?

  Variable reinforcement
• How does variable reinforcement affect behavior learning?

  It takes longer to learn but is more resistant to extinction
• Why do gamblers continue to gamble despite losses?

  They believe a win will eventually come
• What does the unpredictability of gambling lead to for gamblers?

  It keeps them engaged in gambling behavior
• What are the key characteristics of variable reinforcement in gambling?

  • Highly unpredictable
  • Takes longer for behavior to be learned
  • Once established, behavior is resistant to extinction
• Cue reactivity

  Where have you heard the term before?

  Smoking behaviour! Environmental/Emotional cues become engrained with our memories and understanding of certain circumstances associated with smoking, these then act as secondary reinforcers

  Exactly the same principle here, during the course of their gambling experiences, gamblers encounter many secondary reinforcers which can then independently trigger the desire to gamble
• Secondary reinforcers

  The presence of these cues can trigger the psychological arousal the gambler craves, even if they are not actively gambling in that moment. 

  This is particularly the case now that these cues saturate the media (internet and physical). They offer continuous low-level reminders of the pleasures of gambling and thus make relapse a fairly common occurrence for gambling addicts
• AO3

  (-) Only useful in explaining some gambling behaviour

  Learning theory is better at explaining some types of gambling than others. 

  Games that require skill i.e. poker are harder to explain in terms of conditioning because they in theory are predictable so the variable ratio schedule cannot account for the learning of behaviour. 

  As such learning theories lack explanatory power for all gambling behaviour
• What type of support is mentioned in the study material?

  Support from research evidence
• Who conducted the research on gamblers?

  Dickerson
• Where did Dickerson observe gamblers?

  Two gambling shops in Birmingham
• What was the behavior of high frequency gamblers before horse races?

  They placed bets in the last 2 minutes
• How did low frequency gamblers behave compared to high frequency gamblers?

  They tended to wait for the next race
• What conclusion did Dickerson draw about high frequency gamblers?

  They may delay betting for excitement
• AO3

  (-) Individual differences

  Griffiths & Delfabbro (2001) argue that conditioning processes do not occur in everyone in the same way. 

  Responses to identical stimuli can differ from one person to the next and motivations for gambling also differ (i.e. some people gamble to relax, some to be aroused). Some people stop gambling and never relapse, despite being subjected to the same cues as people who do. 

  These well-established observations of gambling behaviour are difficult to explain via learning theory without invoking some sort of cognitive or biological feature which the theory ignores.
• What psychological concept does Dickerson's conclusion support?

  The role of positive reinforcement
• What are the key findings of Dickerson's research on gambling behavior?

  • High frequency gamblers bet in last 2 minutes
  • Low frequency gamblers wait for next race
  • High frequency gamblers may delay for excitement
  • Evidence supports positive reinforcement in gambling