Griffiths

Question 1

Hypotheses

Answer 1

There will be no difference between regular and non-regular gamblers in skill
Regular gamblers will produce more irrational verbalisations than non-regular gamblers
Regular gamblers will be more skill-orientated on self-report measures

Question 2

Method

Answer 2

Field experiment

Question 3

Design

Answer 3

Independent measures

Question 4

Location

Answer 4

In an arcade, Exeter, Uk

Question 5

Independent variables

Answer 5

Regular or non-regular gambler

Thinking aloud group or not

Question 6

Dependent variables

Answer 6

Total plays during one session 
Total plays per minute 
Total wins during one session
Number of plays between each win
Number of minutes between each win
Total time played for one session
Total winnings at the end

Question 7

How many were assigned to the thinking aloud group

Answer 7

Half

Question 8

How were verbalisations measured?

Answer 8

They had a microphone and an observer watched them

Question 9

What does previous research into the thinking aloud method show?

Answer 9

That it had no impact on behaviour or cognition but slows participants down

Question 10

What specific instructions were given?

Answer 10

To verbalise every thought that passes through the mind
Don’t censor things that you think are irrelevant
Keep talking even if thoughts are not structured or in full sentences
Don’t justify thoughts

Question 11

Results

Answer 11

Only 2/7 of the DVs showed significant differences

Regular gamblers played 8 per minute as opposed to 6

Regular gamblers who thought aloud had significantly less gambles between each win than others

RG stayed on for as long as NRG in terms of gambles

No significant difference in the total winnings of those who thought aloud and didn’t

Question 12

How many categories were there for verbalisations

Answer 12

Content analysis produced 30 categories of utterance plus one assorted category

Question 13

Verbalisations results

Answer 13

RG made more categories in personifying the machine, predicted events after they happened, made flexible attributions, had ironwood responses
NRG made more utterances in categories of confusion and non-understanding
RG produced more irrational verbalisation

Question 14

Interview data

Answer 14

RG said they were above average skill or totally skilled

NRG said they were below average skill or totally unskilled

Question 15

Option to carry on

Answer 15

10/14 RG continued until they lost everything

2/10 NRG who broke even continued

Question 16

Conclusions

Answer 16

RG thought they were more skilful than NRG
There was no real difference in wins, only time on machine - RG took slightly longer to lose the same amount
RG had favourite machines
RG tended to ‘go blank’ more often, going onto auto pilot
These result could be used in cognitive behaviour modification to rehabilitate addicted gamblers

Question 17

Advantages of method

Answer 17

High ecological validity - local amusement arcade, typical fruit machine

Enriched data gathering and triangulation- observation of behaviours & recording of verbalisations and semi-structured interview

Question 18

Disadvantages of method

Answer 18

Validity of the thinking aloud technique is low as most are descriptive and do not show explanations for behaviour

Low inter-rater reliability- the descriptions of categories offered by Griffiths were only understood by him due to his experience and knowledge of gambling language

Question 19

Ethics issues

Answer 19

Girffiths was standing close to the fruit machine player, which may have encouraged longer period of gambling

Question 20

Sample disadvantages

Answer 20

Only represented students in a local university or college, not a full selection of society= not representative or generalisable

Regular gamblers had a severe gender imbalance of 29males to 1 female

Question 21

Advantages of sample

Answer 21

Gender imbalance represents the nature of fruit machine gambling which is mostly young males

Question 22

Quantitative data

Answer 22

Behavioural data

Categorisation of verbalisations

Question 23

Qualitative data

Answer 23

Analysis of verbalisations

Transcripts of the thinking aloud process

Question 24

Usefulness

Answer 24

Raises the profile of a forgotten addiction among teenagers which could lead to further addictions

Problem could be tested by allowing them to listen to the recordings. Could be used as part of a cognitive behaviour-modification programme

Question 25

Aim

Answer 25

To see if skill involved in fruit machine gambling is ‘actual’ or ‘perceived’

To examine the cognitive activities of regular and non-regular fruit machine gamblers using the thinking aloud method and interviews