Two for the GOES: Exploring Gambling Outcome Expectancies Scores Across Mixed and Offline-Only Gamblers in Relation to Problem Gambling Risk Status
- PMID: 37369871
- PMCID: PMC11272669
- DOI: 10.1007/s10899-023-10234-x
Two for the GOES: Exploring Gambling Outcome Expectancies Scores Across Mixed and Offline-Only Gamblers in Relation to Problem Gambling Risk Status
Abstract
As online gambling becomes more prevalent, understanding the motives of online gamblers has become a key focus for research and practice. The aim of this study was to understand differences in gambling-related outcome expectancies between mixed (both online and offline) gamblers and offline-only gamblers, by incorporating gambling harm risk categories from the problem gambling severity index (PGSI). This study comprised a secondary data analysis of the 2015 Northern Territory Gambling Prevalence and Wellbeing Survey. A sample of 1207 individuals in the Northern Territory who had reported gambling at least once in the previous 12 months were used in the analyses. General linear and structural equation modelling were used to ascertain differences in gambling outcome expectancies, in relation to gambling modality (i.e., mixed, offline-only) and PGSI scores. Mixed gamblers tended to score higher on all outcome expectancies than their offline-only counterparts. Outcome expectancy scores were higher in individuals in higher-risk PGSI categories. The escape outcome expectancy was dependent on both modality and risk category. Invariance testing of a low and problem gambling risk subsample revealed differential relationships for both the escape and excitement outcome expectancies for mixed and offline-only gamblers. The results provide an important contribution to the existing literature regarding motivation and outcome expectancies in relation to gambling modality and problem gambling severity. The findings highlight the importance of considering both gambling outcome expectancies and modality when considering problem gambling.
Keywords: Gambling; Gambling-related harm; Motivation; Online gambling; Outcome expectancies.
© 2023. The Author(s).
Conflict of interest statement
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Figures


Similar articles
-
The Activation of Reward Versus Relief Gambling Outcome Expectancies in Regular Gamblers: Relations to Gambling Motives.J Gambl Stud. 2015 Dec;31(4):1515-30. doi: 10.1007/s10899-014-9474-1. J Gambl Stud. 2015. PMID: 24916965
-
[Psychopathology in online pathological gamblers: a preliminary study].Encephale. 2012 Apr;38(2):156-63. doi: 10.1016/j.encep.2011.01.009. Epub 2011 Mar 24. Encephale. 2012. PMID: 22516274 French.
-
Gambling Motives and Offshore Gambling: A Finnish Population Study.J Gambl Stud. 2024 Jun;40(2):825-840. doi: 10.1007/s10899-023-10253-8. Epub 2023 Sep 28. J Gambl Stud. 2024. PMID: 37768466 Free PMC article.
-
[Internet gambling: what are the risks?].Encephale. 2012 Feb;38(1):42-9. doi: 10.1016/j.encep.2011.01.014. Epub 2011 Apr 8. Encephale. 2012. PMID: 22381723 Review. French.
-
Online Gambling: A Systematic Review of Risk and Protective Factors in the Adult Population.J Gambl Stud. 2024 Jun;40(2):673-699. doi: 10.1007/s10899-023-10258-3. Epub 2023 Nov 14. J Gambl Stud. 2024. PMID: 37964161 Free PMC article.
Cited by
-
Excite, or Take Flight? Exploring the Relationship between Difficulties with Emotion Regulation, Outcome Expectancies, and Problem Gambling.J Gambl Stud. 2025 Mar;41(1):233-245. doi: 10.1007/s10899-024-10340-4. Epub 2024 Jul 25. J Gambl Stud. 2025. PMID: 39052190 Free PMC article.
-
How Does Problem Gambling Impact the Relationship Between Gambling Attitudes and Frequency?J Gambl Stud. 2025 Sep;41(3):1163-1174. doi: 10.1007/s10899-025-10379-x. Epub 2025 Mar 6. J Gambl Stud. 2025. PMID: 40048066 Free PMC article.
References
-
- Australian Communications and Media Authority. (2022). The role of affiliate services in promoting illegal online gambling in Australia: Desktop research. https://www.acma.gov.au/sites/default/files/2022-02/
-
- Australian Government Productivity Commission. (2010). Gambling. Australian Government Productivity Commission. https://www.pc.gov.au/inquiries/completed/gambling-2010/report
-
- Binde, P. (2011). What are the most harmful forms of gambling? Analyzing problem gambling prevalence surveys. CEFOS Working Papers 12. CEFOS.
-
- Binde, P. (2013). Why people gamble: A model with five motivational dimensions. International Gambling Studies,13(1), 81–97. 10.1080/14459795.2012.71215010.1080/14459795.2012.712150 - DOI
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical
Research Materials