The Psychology of the Fruit Machine: The Role of Structural Characteristics (Revisited)

Abstract

Over the past three decades, a number of authors have examined the role of structural characteristics as they appear to be important in the acquisition, development and maintenance of gambling behaviour. Furthermore, it has been argued that fruit machine gambling features more gambling-inducing structural characteristics than all other forms of gambling. However, it is clear that previous overviews in this area are now out of date in a number of key areas. This paper therefore reviews the changes in structural characteristics of the fruit machine over the last decade. Important changes in the structural characteristics of fruit machines will be discussed focusing on the small changes to established structural characteristics (e.g., the near miss, sound effects, light effects, colour effects, event frequencies etc.) as well as a more speculative examination of new and contemporary characteristics such as the importance of “features” and the psychology of familiarity.

Throughout the last century, the gaming industry has used various inducements and ploys to entice people to gamble. It is likely that many of these have arisen spontaneously or fortuitously without in-depth psychological analysis. However, the effectiveness of these methods suggests there is much to be learned about the psychology of gambling from an analysis of structural characteristics (i.e., those characteristics that either induce gambling in the first place or are inducements to continue gambling irrespective of the individual's psychological, physiological or socio-economic status).

Over the past three decades, a number of authors have examined the role of structural characteristics in the acquisition, development and maintenance of gambling behaviour (e.g., Weinstein & Deitsch, 1974; Royal Commission on Gambling, 1978; Cornish, 1978; Abt, Smith, & Christiansen, 1985; Griffiths, 1993, 1995). Some of the analyses of structural characteristics have been in the form of general overviews (e.g., Weinstein & Deitsch, 1974; Cornish, 1978). However, others have been far more specific and have concentrated on the structural characteristics of individual gambling activities such as lotteries (Abt et al., 1985; Griffiths, 1997a), casino games (Royal Commission on Gambling, 1978; Abt et al., 1985), scratchcards (Griffiths, 1997b) and/or slot machines (Griffiths, 1993, 1995).

Structural characteristics appear to be an increasingly important factor in the maintenance of gambling behaviour. As both Cornish (1978) and Griffiths (1993) argue, the structural characteristics of a particular gambling activity are responsible for reinforcement of the activity, may satisfy gamblers' needs and may actually facilitate excessive gambling. Furthermore, they have also argued that by identifying particular structural characteristics it may be possible to see how (a) needs are identified, (b) information about gambling is presented (or perhaps misrepresented) and (c) cognitions are influenced and distorted.

Although many of the lists of structural characteristics provided by these authors are fairly comprehensive, it is clear that many of these have become outdated or obsolete, and that many forms of gambling have characteristics, which are unique to that particular activity (such as fruit machines or lotteries). Common structural characteristics include the types of pay out ratios, event frequencies, exercise of personal skills (real or imagined) and scope for beliefs about attractiveness of participation.

Slot machine gambling has been identified as one of the world's major gambling problems (Griffiths, 1995, 1999a). It has also been argued that slot machine gambling features more gambling-inducing structural characteristics than all other forms of gambling (Griffiths, 1995). However, it is clear that the comprehensive overviews provided by Griffiths of the fruit machine in the early 1990s (1993, 1995) are out of date in a number of key areas. This paper, therefore, reviews the changes in structural characteristics of the United Kingdom (UK) fruit machine over the last decade. As with previous overviews, it must be noted that some structural characteristics are inextricably linked with an individual gambler's psychological constitution and will be referred to accordingly.

Using Griffiths' (1993) original paper as a starting point, this paper systematically examines the changes that have taken place in the field of fruit machines. Most of the information reported in the paper comes from a variety of sources including gaming industry personnel, as well as both participant and non-participant observational fieldwork by the authors over a ten-year period. Important changes in the structural characteristics of fruit machines will be discussed. These include the development of “features” (and their relation to types of wins, bettor involvement, skill, and choice), feature ratio, the changing role of the near miss (including increased use of ‘features,’ ‘repeat chances’ and ‘credit teasing’), pay out interval/event frequency, familiarity characteristics (naming, appeal and persuasion), sound effects (music and verbal interaction), light effects, colour effects, win probability and other miscellaneous characteristics (e.g., multiplier potential, suspension of judgement).

Before looking at these characteristics, it must be noted that unlike North American slot machines, UK slot machines do not operate using random number generation (RNG). The slot machines in the UK use a “compensator” because operating on a random schedule such as the one offered by RNG was considered to be too volatile by some machine operators such as those in the brewery and retail trade. They argued that if slot machine payouts were truly random, some weeks they would make a loss despite making a profit in the long run. For this reason, they preferred machines to satisfy legally imposed payout ratios in the short term, ensuring that each week they made a profit rather than sporadic profits spread over the financial year. Therefore, software was designed to “compensate” or re-distribute revenue to players in accordance to the payout ratio over 10,000 gambles compared to typically over 100,000 gambles in machines using RNG. This information is consistent with the relevant UK Patent GB 2 165 386 A which states:

Fruit machines are usually designed to give overall a preselected payout, i.e., a preselected ratio of the coins (or tokens) paid out in winning games to the coins (or tokens) inserted into the machine and credited for the playing of games. With the aim of ensuring a relatively even distribution of payouts (e.g., to avoid long runs of winning games followed by long runs losing games) it is known to provide a compensator which monitors the payout ratio game by game and initiates action, as necessary to, to influence the random selection of wins and thereby attempt to hold the ratio at all times close to the preselected level. (GB Patent GB 2 165 386A [P1:L9-L24]).

Turner and Horbay (2004) also confirm this with their reference to U.S. Patent 6,666,765 (http://www.uspto.gov/patft/index.html) that discusses similarities and differences in randomness between US machines and UK machines:

Fruit machines generally use a form of “adaptive logic” wherein coin-in and coin-out is monitored over time and wherein odds/payouts of the fruit machine are proactively adjusted to achieve a target win percentage. Examples of adaptive logic fruit machines in Great Britain are GB 2 185 612 A and GB 2 087 618 A. Any advantage gained by a player following a hint is to the detriment of future outcomes on the fruit machine. In other words, what the fruit machine “gives” it later “takes away” by altering other parameters of the fruit machine. While adaptive logic fruit machines are permitted in certain foreign jurisdictions such as Great Britain, they are not allowed in the United States. In the United States, the casino game operated with a random number generator must, over all play of the casino game, provide a known player expected return (or house advantage) and the casino game cannot proactively monitor performance and correspondingly adjust play parameters (US Patent 6 666 765).

Therefore, while each spin in North America is an independent random event, spins in UK machines are manipulated by a “negative feedback control” principle (otherwise referred to as “compensation” or “adaptive logic”) designed to ensure that machines make a profit in return for offering entertainment while still obeying the payback percentage promised to the player.

The Development of the Play ‘Feature’

One the biggest changes in the format of the UK fruit machine over the last decade has been the rise of the play ‘feature’ with a gradual move away from money wins dependent on ‘reel order’ to money wins dependent on ‘features’. These are explained in more detail below.

Winning through ‘Reel Order’

Wins dependent upon ‘reel order’ simply refers to winning money through the order of symbols on the ‘win line’ (e.g., three melons in a row). These are typical of the slot machines found around the world in places like Las Vegas. Although there still are some UK fruit machines available which are entirely dependent on reel order for winning, they appear to be popular with non-regular fruit machine players or tourists where little or no expertise is needed to facilitate winning. For this reason, these types of machines are more common in tourist areas (e.g., seaside arcades) or in situations where they are primarily viewed as forms of leisure to pass the time more enjoyably (e.g., ferry crossings, fast food takeaway restaurants, motorway service stations etc.). Reel order machines can still produce habitual play although one arcade owner interviewed by the authors claimed that reel order machines are preferred by “fruit machine players with low intelligence” because “feature play machines are too complicated for them.” This is obviously the opinion of one member of the arcade industry and empirical evidence would be needed to confirm such a claim. Future research should also examine the implications of locus of control for reel order fruit machines. For instance, it could be hypothesized that individuals who attribute events to external factors prefer fruit machines with limited bettor involvement (i.e., reel order machines).

Winning through ‘Features’

Wins dependent upon the ‘features’ simply refers to winning money via the machine's play feature (rather than simple ‘reel order’). The ‘feature’ is basically a more complex extension of the specialist play features associated with earlier machines such as the ‘nudge,’ ‘gamble’ and ‘hold’ buttons (features which have traditionally been viewed as promoting “idiot skill”—see Griffiths, 1994, 1995). Features vary extensively by machine and manufacturer but typically include a core variety of different types. For instance;

• 1) The lapper—this is a feature where prizes are won by doing circuits (i.e., laps) on the game board.

• 2) The trail—this is a feature where prizes are won by progressing up the “trail” in the hope of winning the jackpot or top feature.

• 3) The hi–lo ladder—this is a feature where prizes are won by advancing up the prize ladders by successful gambles (i.e., gamblers having to guess whether the next number on the game board will be higher or lower). Top of such ladders usually represent jackpot wins or above.

• 4) The grid—this feature is another variation of the ‘hi–lo’ game where progresion is made by successful (higher or lower) gambles. The jackpot can be obtained by reaching the corners of the grid.

More recently, the trend is for fruit machines not to be limited to one kind of feature. Multiple features are now usually centered about a principle feature. The fruit machine in Fig. 1 shows a fruit machine that has a number of smaller features linked to a main principle feature. The ‘feature’ could be described as a game where cash prizes increase throughout the duration of the game. Exit from the feature is usually without a cash prize. For example, on The Simpsons fruit machine, the character Homer gets fired, and the player leaves the feature with no money; in Dracula, the character gets a stake-driven through their heart. The aim of most current games is to collect a ‘secondary feature’ or a cash prize before such an exit or, as many gamblers do, continue until the end to obtain the jackpot or the ultimate feature (see Fig. 1). The easiest way to conceptualize the ‘feature’ is to imagine a basic game board such as Monopoly, Cluedo, or Snakes and Ladders (which are, in fact, all types of UK fruit machines). Essentially, the player rolls the dice (usually 12-sided instead of 6-sided) and plays against the machine instead of another player.

Fig. 1

The “features” of the fruit machine [on display are 28 different feature and/or bonus games].

This particular structural characteristic has been developed from knowledge about structural characteristics relating bettor involvement and skill (which are discussed below). The level of skill needed, and the level of bettor involvement significantly increases the psychological involvement of the gambler. This feature alone appears to have a significant effect on habitual gambling although more empirical research is needed to ascertain whether this is indeed the case. There is little doubt that there has been a substantial improvement from the basic specialist play features associated with earlier machines such as the ‘nudge,’ ‘gamble’ and ‘hold’ buttons. It also appears to be the case that for the regular gambler at least, participating in the ‘feature’ of the machine is the primary aim of the gamble—although this also needs to be confirmed with empirical evidence. It is also worth noting that many of the following structural characteristics discussed in this paper are integrated and linked with the ‘feature’ element. In addition to increased skill and bettor involvement, it could be speculated that such a characteristic would be more exciting and fun than the limited features of previous models, and may, therefore, have more of an influence on maintenance of habitual play.

The Role of ‘Features’ in Bettor Involvement and Skill

It has been noted by a number of authors (Langer, 1975; Cornish, 1978; Griffiths, 1993) that the degree of personal participation (i.e., bettor involvement) and the exercise of skill are interrelated. Furthermore, in the 1980s, the UK gaming industry appeared to acknowledge that fruit machine players desired control and skill in playing. Traditionally, fruit machines were based wholly or predominantly on chance. This meant that machine operators had to make the players think they were affecting the outcome (even if they were not). These characteristics have been described by Griffiths (1995) as ‘pseudo-skill’ features. This, therefore, precluded the players' abilities from significantly affecting the final outcome of play and cost the machine owners very little.

The gradual introduction of specialist play features back in the 1970s and 1980s such as ‘nudge,’ ‘hold,’ and ‘gamble’ buttons, meant that the creation of perceived skill was achieved (i.e., structural characteristics which enabled a fruit machine to mimic skill determined situations). Early work by Griffiths (1990) argued that the introduction of specialist play features promoted the illusion of control through personal involvement, perception of skill, and familiarity with a particular machine. Over the last decade in the UK, there has been a huge increase in the number of specialist play features and options introduced into fruit machines (the earlier section regarding winnings as being dependent on ‘feature’ play is a case in point). Previously, the player would start the play button and watch the reels spin and wait for a match. The gambler had limited choices concerning the outcome of the game or play. However, as outlined in the next section, this has changed markedly.

The Role of Features in Bettor Involvement and Choice

The diagram below (Fig. 2) represents the range of playing options found in traditional reel order fruit machines and the more recent ‘feature’ play machines.

Fig. 2

The paths of playing options on fruit machines.

This increase in choice could affect how gambling-inducing the machine is by:

• increasing the level of bettor involvement.

• enhancing the players' perception of the skill involved.

• making the fruit machine more exciting and fun.

All of the above appear to manipulate the fruit machine gambler, and is done at no extra expense to the manufacturer or arcade owner. There have also been some other significant specialist play features which appear to exploit the illusion of control (i.e., the bonus, and secret functions). These are highlighted in more detail below.

The Bonus

This specialist play feature usually results from a either a certain reel order or appears to be randomly awarded. It is primarily used to increase the gambler's chance of a win or getting to play the ‘feature.’ There are usually different types of bonuses and these are usually very important to the game. The basic premise of the bonus is to make the fruit machine gambler think that they are “getting something for nothing.” Observational pilot work by the authors suggests that regular gamblers understand this is a gimmick but players still believe it to be important, because it is usually a gateway to playing the ‘feature.’ The bonus also increases bettor involvement and skill orientations and there are many different types of bonus. These include the ‘skill stop,’ the ‘shuffle,’ the ‘superhold,’ the ‘trail boost,’ the ‘feature hit,’ the ‘reel skill,’ the ‘win spin,’ the ‘selector,’ the ‘respin,’ and the ‘stopper.’

‘Secret’ Functions

Most new fruit machines have in-built secret functions that regular gamblers eventually learn about. The main aim of such a characteristic appears to be to increase the illusion of control (i.e., to make the fruit machine gambler think they have more control than they actually do). However, such “secrets” are an extremely innovative way to achieve such an aim and the illusion of control appears to have been taken to a different level. For example, in The Simpsons series of gaming machines, a verbal cue indicates that a secret play is on offer–Krusty the Clown saying “Here's a clue for ya Jack!.” Some of the most common “secret” functions are outlined below.

• a) The cancel button–One of the most common “secrets” is the use of the ‘cancel button.’ At certain times, the cancel button can be pressed down and will give hints or will slow down tasks that are skill-related. For example, sometimes when playing ‘hi–lo’ (i.e., gambling higher or lower on a number during a ‘feature’ play), the player will press the cancel button when it is lit up, and the machine will tell them which way to gamble (higher or lower). In these instances, the machine's instructions are always correct. It should also be noted that some fruit machines have a designated button for these kinds of cheats. This is usually marked with their logo (e.g., Barcrest have their logo of Mr. PoundCoin on the button). From this cue, a secondary function of a marketing nature might reinforce gamblers by giving the impression that their particular brand of fruit machines are generous and helpful, thus encouraging future play.

• b) The three holds rule–Another “secret” is the ‘three holds rule.’ This feature is linked specifically to reel order. When holding two winning symbols and waiting for the third to obtain a win, the third symbol will always be a match if they have already been held twice before. For example, if on the first credit, a player obtains two cherries and a melon on the win line, an opportunity to hold the reels may arise. Players will then hold the two cherries, and the third reel spins alone on the second credit. If the third reel is again different (e.g., a pear) but another chance to hold is given, the player will be guaranteed a winning match (i.e., a cherry) on the third credit spin.

• c) Guaranteed win after holds following a nudge–A third “secret” is the guaranteed win after holds following a nudge.¹ This sounds long-winded and complicated but is simple and engaging. If nudges are awarded and two matching symbols finish on the win line, followed by a hold option, this usually indicates a guaranteed win. Although the player might be tempted to hold the two matching symbols, they will obtain all three matching symbols if they let all three reels spin.

In all three of these instances, the payout ratio does not change, but all three “secret” functions appear to induce a high illusion of control. In addition, many of the heaviest fruit machine gamblers passionately believe that they can “beat” or “outsmart” the machine as they feel that by knowing such “cheats” that they have found the fruit machine's weakness. For many reasons (e.g., need for achievement, self-esteem, peer praise etc.), these forms of specialist play features appear to make the fruit machine all the more attractive to a minority of individuals. Furthermore, not only can gamblers get on fruit machine companies' mailing lists, but there are also several Internet websites that have large sections devoted entirely to giving fruit machine players tips about the machines they manufacture (e.g., www.jpm.co.uk, www.maygay.co.uk).

Skill and Structural Characteristics

One of the points consistently made by Griffiths (1993, 1994, 1995) is that ‘skill’ (or the perception of skill) appears to be a critical component in the maintenance of fruit machine playing. Griffiths argues that there is very little skill involved in playing fruit machines and his experimental research (Griffiths, 1994) shows that there is little or no difference between regular players and non-regular players in how long they stay on fruit machines in terms of time and money. While this may be true for many adolescents, it should be remembered that for most, gambling satisfies primarily social needs (Griffiths, 1995). (However, for some groups—such as women—gambling may be used primarily for other reasons such as escape from pressures associated with gender socialization). It can perhaps be speculated that adolescents are uniquely engaged in some kind of “leisure transition” where they are too young for more adult pursuits and consequently, play fruit machines with their friends in arcades. The motivations to gamble will, therefore, differ between the adolescent and the adult regular player for this reason. It could be argued that skill has always been required to select a “suitable” machine. Since the early 1990s, changes in fruit machine design and observational evidence collected by the authors suggests there does appear to be some genuine skills involved in operating fruit machines in addition to the many “idiot” skills outlined by Griffiths (1994). These are outlined below under the categories of selecting and operating fruit machines.

(1) Selecting a Fruit Machine

Frequent gamblers have more “insider knowledge” in working out which fruit machines are most likely to pay out. The skill comes in both the familiarity of how payout ratios work and knowing which machines have paid out. They also use a variety of intuitive skills that to the unskilled player mean little at all (‘boxing,’ the ‘snipe,’ the ‘empty chair’ and feeling for ‘hot’ machines). These are outlined below.

‘Boxing’

Regular fruit machine players often check whether the machine they are about to play is ‘boxing.’ If it is, regular gamblers will want to play on it. They do this by seeing whether an inserted coin bypasses the ‘tubes’ (used to pay winnings to the gambler) and goes straight down to the ‘box’ or ‘tray’ where the proprietors take their profit. If the tubes are full, the player knows that the machine has not paid out recently. Following this logic, most regular fruit machine players believe that this increases their chances of a win in the near future. Figure 3 illustrates how the ‘boxing’ sound is made. Machine A represents the machine which is ‘boxing’. This machine has full tubes (of money), which causes inserted coins to be redirected to the profit tray (i.e., the ‘box’). The drop that the coin makes to the bottom of this ‘box’ makes a noise and acts as the signal. However, Machine B makes no such noise as the tubes are not yet full and so the inserted coins go straight into the tubes. Machine A is therefore the ‘boxing’ machine that regular gamblers will play.

Fig. 3

Explanation of the “Boxing” machine. From the point of view of the regular fruit machine player, Machine A is more profitable since it makes the boxing noise as the coins bypass the tubes and fall down into the profit tray or “box.” This noise signals that the machine has taken in more money that it has paid out suggesting a favourable probability of a future payout.

When interviewed by the authors, both manufacturers and arcade owners have reported that they sometimes fill the tubes to “trick professional and regular gamblers.” Therefore, they hear their stake hitting the ‘box’ suggesting a full machine that has not paid out. They would, therefore, be “conned” into playing a machine that they would not normally play. Some machines have also had an artificial “boxing” sound installed for the same purpose. Neither measure has been met with much success as most regular gamblers are aware of the artificial sound mechanisms. Furthermore, arcades and casinos are usually too busy for owners to openly fill the tubes. Of course, this only refers to UK slot machines which do not operate using an RNG.

The ‘Snipe’

This practice involves waiting to play a machine that someone else has played and has put a substantial amount of money in without winning very much back. This can be done in two ways. Firstly, by simple observation. This is often not appreciated by other regular fruit machine gamblers as they know what that the spectator is waiting for the player to leave the machine. The exceptions are mainly adolescents, non-regular gamblers and friends (although friends are often expected to lend money to continue playing rather than ‘snipe’). Secondly, and probably the preferred method (based on the authors' observational pilot work), is to play something else which is cheaper (such as a videogame or a low stake fruit machine) until the other player leaves. Attention must be paid to particular auditory cues (e.g., cash hitting metal or plastic trays, or certain musical cues indicating money wins or jackpots) in order to ascertain if a significant win can be made. The skilful player can then move in to play the target fruit machine when the other player leaves.

The ‘Empty Chair’

Regular fruit machine players will often look to see if there is an empty chair in front of the fruit machine. If there is, this usually means someone has been playing the machine recently and then left either because they had no money left and/or they were bored. If they had won money and/or the jackpot and went to play another machine, they will usually take the chair with them, as most UK arcades have a limited numbers of chairs. There is no guarantee that someone simply won and left the arcade, but in all probability, an empty chair in front of the fruit machine is highly encouraging for the skilful fruit machine player.

Feeling for ‘Hot’ Machines

Some players also feel the ‘face’ of the fruit machine to see if it is ‘hot.’ This tells the player whether someone else has been playing the machine recently as the electronic mechanisms will still be warm. This may give the illusion of whether the machine is ready to pay out. This is not an ideal method as someone could have played this machine and then subsequently won. Nevertheless, it is often used with other indicators in order to form a general impression. For example, a hot machine that is ‘boxing’ with a chair in front of it might be a more profitable machine to play.

Visual Inspection of the ‘Tubes’

Finally, it is worth mentioning that some players visually inspect the fruit machine to see if the tubes are full by looking through the glass of the fruit machine. However, this is often difficult because of dim lighting and poor visual access. Therefore, although it is not a successful method for selection, many players (and adolescents in particular) can often be seen using this approach.

(2) Operating a Fruit Machine

The operation of fruit machines has become significantly more complicated and detailed over the last decade. This means that the level of skill and knowledge needed to operate them has subsequently increased. What was once referred to as “idiot skill” (Griffiths, 1994, 1995) has now developed into something where practice and co-ordination are significantly more important. Instead of simply ‘holding’ or ‘nudging’ winning symbols, players must now know how to:

• a) play ‘features’ and know what can be won;

• b) identify the ‘bonuses,’ ‘secrets’ and ‘gambles’ and how to play them;

• c) co-ordinate the play ‘features’ (many of which involve ‘skill stops’ where speed and hand–eye co-ordination are very important).

Skill is also important for another reason. There are now many aspects of feature plays that have time limits imposed. Therefore, the player must know what they have to do immediately as they have very little time to operate the feature. They will inevitably have to be experienced (i.e., skilled) and they will need fast hand–eye co-ordination and confidence to be successful.

With regards to the operation of the fruit machine, another important point needs to be made. If fruit machines have fixed payout ratios, then it could be argued that it should not matter what the gambler does as the machine will eventually pay out regardless of the player's gaming decisions. However, in some pilot work carried out by the authors, we attempted to lose on purpose (especially if the machine was boxing) to see if we would win anyway. We came to the conclusion that in the long run, it does not make much difference as straight wins (often from reel order wins such as three jackpot symbols in the win line) are often given in small amounts to keep the gambler playing. However, individuals often play with limited funds and are not able to risk playing long-term (which may involve hundreds of pounds). This is one of the main issues with this form of gambling. A machine might be expected to pay out, but the player might not know whether that means £20 now, £50 a little later or £150 tomorrow. For this reason, regular gamblers have to take skill seriously, as mistakes might mean that they have lost their chance to win in the short run.

In the short term, playing fruit machines does appear to require skill when playing the ‘features’ although the level of skill is debatable. However, more importantly, where skill seems most important in winning is in identifying which machine to play. This may be why some studies have failed to find differences in success rates between regular and non-regular gamblers (e.g., Griffiths, 1994; Fisher, 1993). Often the experimental condition will inhibit such strategic play, especially if they are restricted to playing a “designated machine” used by the researchers.

The Importance of “Feature” Ratio

Another speculation that could also be made is that the new multi-feature machines may be more habit-forming if they increase the play frequency of the in-built features. Gaming machines in the UK operate through legally imposed payout ratios although these are rarely indicated on the machine. However, manufacturers are free to decide such play frequencies of game features. For example, more habit-forming machines might be those that permit more chances to take part on the feature even though they might not win every time. The less habit-forming machines might be those that permit less feature plays where they ultimately win more. For instance, take the following hypothetical example:

• Machine A is a 5p stake machine which offers the gambler a feature play (on average) every 25 credits (£1.25). The average win on this feature might be £1.00.

• Machine B is a 5p stake machine which offers the gambler a feature play (on average) every 60 credits (£3.00). The average win on this feature might be £2.50.

Taking these properties into consideration, Machine B might seem more appealing since it offers bigger wins on average. However, our observations suggest this speculation is incorrect. In fact, Machine A may be more popular with players because it encourages greater player involvement. Although, Machine A's features might pay less winnings, it offers psychologically immersive features more often, increasing skill orientations, and bettor involvement. It may also be more exciting to the player. The payout ratios for these machines could be exactly the same (for example, 80%). However, Machine A might offer more chances to win lower amount of money and Machine B might offer less chances to more money.

Although ‘reel order’ is now less important in the psychology of gambling on fruit machines, ‘reel order’ is often used to begin playing on the feature. For example, if a gambler obtains three cherries in the pay line window, they might have the choice of collecting their (usually small) cash win or exchanging the win for a feature play. It is also worth mentioning that such a feature almost certainly increases the level of difficulty for new gamblers learning to play the fruit machine. This may act as a barrier to fruit machine gambling to some novices (especially as there are few—if any—rules displayed on fruit machines). However, the “difficulty” barrier may be overcome by the (sometimes) social nature of fruit machine playing, and the novices may learn new ‘skills’ from the ‘experienced’ players. To summarize, the change from reel order-dependent wins to feature-dependent wins, is important because it increases the level of skill-related gambling, bettor involvement, and arousal. All these factors may add to the habit-forming potential of the machine.

The Psychology of the Near Miss and the “Feature”

Another well reported structural characteristic in the maintenance of gambling behaviour is the ‘psychology of the near miss’ (Reid, 1986; Griffiths, 1991a, 1999b; Parke & Griffiths, 2004) which can act as an intermediate reinforcer. Near misses (i.e., failures that are close to being successful), are believed to encourage future play encouraging continued gambling, and that some commercial gambling activities (particularly fruit machines) are formulated to ensure a higher than chance frequency of near misses. At a behaviourist level, a near miss may have the same kind of conditioning effect on behaviour as a success. At a cognitive level, a near miss could produce some of the excitement of a win, i.e., cognitive conditioning through secondary reinforcement. Therefore, the player is not constantly losing but constantly nearly winning (Griffiths, 1991a, 1994).

Connected with the psychology of the near miss, Strickland and Grote (1967) draw attention to another design characteristic in fruit machines which has been experimentally shown to encourage repeated play. They note that the first reel on a fruit machine tends to have a larger proportion of winning symbols than the second reel, which has a larger proportion of winning symbols than the third reel. Since the reels stop in this order, the player is most likely to see a winning symbol early in the result sequence. At this point, it is worth noting that “symbol ratio proportions” now have virtually no impact on the maintenance of fruit machine gambling. The only group that this structural characteristic has the potential to affect is the non-regular gambler. However, they are unlikely to be significantly affected because they have so little exposure to fruit machines. To be effective, this ploy would only work for regular gamblers. However, informal interviews conducted by the authors suggest that they have little interest in such minutiae.

Parke and Griffiths (2004) argue that the most significant change in near misses appears to involve the types of near misses employed by gaming machine manufacturers. Our own observational pilot work suggests that for most regular fruit machine gamblers, a near miss on reel order does not have the same effect that it did five to ten years ago. This is because the newer generation of fruit machine gamblers are primarily interested in winning through ‘features’ rather than winning through reel order (as explained previously). The gaming industry appears to have adapted and strengthened the near miss by connecting it to the ‘feature’ play (rather than ‘reel order’).

One of the most common and effective near misses is the manipulation of the ‘trail.’ The ‘trail’ is the primary gateway to participating on the machine feature. In Fig. 4, it can be observed that the trail comprises of a series of seven steps that have to be completed to the get to the feature. Obtaining numbers that are attached to random reel symbols on the ‘win line’ or ‘win matrix’ provide these steps. For example, obtaining a bell with the number ‘2’ attached to it would take the gambler two places up the trail. The machine makes a decision whether or not to hold the trail (so that the player does not have to start from the beginning with each new credit or spin). Often, this is held right up until number ‘7’ so that the gambler is almost onto the play feature. Furthermore, it is not untypical for the trail to be held there for several credits while offering no numbers from the spinning reels. After this, the trail is no longer held and the player has to start from the beginning having experienced a near miss. The operation of this near miss is more common in lower stake machines because they have to adhere to their payout ratio, and therefore have to limit the frequency of features that they offer (Parke & Griffiths, 2004).

Fig. 4

The feature trail and the psychology of the near miss.

Like the traditional near miss, the player feels the excitement of “nearly” being taken to ‘feature’ participation, and almost certainly gets aroused at no extra expense to the machine's owner. Perhaps more importantly, it may cause frustration or cognitive regret that may perpetuate gambling. As Reid (1986) has pointed out, the near miss can be explained in terms of frustration theory (Amsel, 1958) or cognitive regret (Kahneman & Tversky, 1982). According to Amsel, failing to fulfil a goal (not winning on a fruit machine, for instance) produces frustration, which energises ongoing behaviour. Subsequent wins then reinforce high frequency behaviour. According to Kahneman and Tversky's theory, the frustration produced by ‘nearly winning’ would induce a form of cognitive regret. The elimination of regret can be achieved by playing again, and this in turn encourages future play.

Arguably, different types of ‘frustration inducements’ will increase within-session play but most probably reduces gambling behaviour between sessions. For example, when a machine gambler is sitting on an ‘11’ in a ‘hi/lo’ gambling game, and asked to gamble higher or lower out of numbers from ‘1’ to ‘12,’ most gamblers would choose a lower number without much thought. If the next spin happened to produce a ‘12’ (i.e., an unexpected and difficult loss, causing frustration) it might make players persevere during that session. However, most fruit machine players when returning will avoid that machine and will recall it as “the machine that cheats with the fixed gambles,” therefore representing a reduction in gambling on that machine in the long run.

Where the psychology of the near miss was previously limited to the reel order, there are now several aspects of the fruit machine's feature that manipulate the gambler through the ‘near miss.’ The more ‘features’ incorporated into the fruit machine, the more opportunities to use different types of ‘near miss.’ Another example can be demonstrated by looking at Fig. 4 again. On this machine, a player can often move their way up the ‘feature board’ without actually winning any money. They might even get themselves up to a point where they are just one ‘roll’ away from the jackpot or the ultimate feature. On this final roll having moved right up the board, they lose! There are numerous examples like this on almost all current fruit machines. The main point to re-iterate is that the psychology of the near miss appears to be being used now more than ever by gaming machine manufacturers and in different ways to that in which it was traditionally used. The near miss appears to perpetuate play, and is therefore a structural characteristic that has the potential to greatly influence the “addictiveness” of the machine.

The Psychology of the Near Miss and ‘Repeat Chances’

Another manipulation of the near miss by gaming machine manufacturers and outlined by Parke and Griffiths (2004) involves ‘repeat chances.’ Many fruit machines now offer a ‘repeat chance’ when the jackpot is obtained. For example, after winning (say) a £15 jackpot, ‘yes’ and ‘no’ will flash on the machine's screen and the player will hit the designated button and win another £15 if they hit ‘yes’ or nothing if they hit ‘no.’ This will continue until the player hits ‘no.’ Some machines can give as many as ten repeats (£150) but somewhere between one repeat (£15) and three repeats (£45) is most common. Obviously, such a feature will make playing the fruit machine more attractive. The limit for jackpots on fruit machines in arcades is currently £25 (although a whole new range of high jackpot machines will be introduced into UK casinos following the introduction of the recent Gambling Bill). The repeat chance is a way to get around this limit, since a jackpot plus two repeats is £45 and not £15. A “streak” is another possibility, where several high wins are paid in immediate succession. These are more common in the basic reel order machines since they do not offer features.

Here, a powerful mechanism is at work which has the potential to induce high rates of gambling. Most wins before the jackpot or ‘top feature’ are usually quite low (between £1 and £10). For this reason, the manufacturers know that players will often continue playing on a feature until they win the jackpot or top feature. This gives the operators a powerful advantage. They can allow players, several feature plays, and access to several medium sized wins knowing that players will refuse to collect them and will continue to try to win the jackpot or top feature. Here, the fruit machine will finish the feature before they get to the top. This is clearly an example of the near miss but is extremely powerful reinforcer of gambling behaviour because:

• 1) the player actually has access to several wins but decides not to take them in order to pursue the jackpot. This process itself appears to be reinforcing;

• 2) the play leading up to the jackpot is extremely arousing and involves intensive bettor involvement;

• 3) habitual fruit machine players will often continue until they reach the jackpot or top feature no matter what the cost.

These factors all give the impression that losing is the player's fault since they did not collect the winnings while they had the chance. In order to readjust to the payout ratio, fruit machines allow more feature plays when the gambler pursues the jackpot and loses, compared to the individual who collects medium-sized wins.

The Psychology of the Near Miss and “Credit Teasing”

Another manipulation of the near miss involves ‘credit teasing.’ Many fruit machine arcades do not have facilities to change £1 coins into 2, 5, 10, 20 or 50 pence denominations. Therefore, even though a fruit machine may be staked at 5p per play, the gambler often has to play in £1 increments as they have no change. A common characteristic for many fruit machines is to create an inviting situation on the last credit of play (e.g., on the twentieth credit after inserting £1 into a 5p stake machine). The fruit machine player is thus encouraged to insert more coins to find out how this inviting situation unwinds. In actuality, a “credit tease” is usually a near miss, although, it could come in the form of a ‘repeat chance’ or win streak. For example, if a gambler wins a jackpot on the last credit, the player will invariably put in another £1 coin to see if it offers a repeat chance. More often than not they fail to get the repeat, and the machine has successfully induced more gambling, and sometimes more chasing. This makes “credit teasing” a very successful structural characteristic. Another ploy that can facilitate players putting in more coins into the machines is to have 30 pence credits. Quite often players will put £3 into a machine that gives them ten credits of play (instead of putting just £1 in and having an unused ten pence left).

Pay Out Interval and Event Frequency

On fruit machines, pay out intervals are very short. In 1993, Griffiths argued that the high event frequency (i.e., the number of opportunities to gamble within a given time period), the result of the gamble (i.e., a win or loss), and the actual time until winnings are received, were all inextricably linked. He argued that this combination contributed to the potential “addictiveness” of fruit machine gambling and exploited psychological principles of learning (i.e., operant conditioning). Because of the high event frequency, the loss period is also very brief. As a consequence, little time is given over to financial considerations and, more importantly, winnings can be re-gambled almost immediately. With regards to this particular structural characteristic there have been few changes. The speed of the reels appears to have marginally increased making event frequency slightly quicker. There are, however, more recent developments (the ‘autoplay’ and ‘bank facility’) that impact on event frequencies and payouts. These are examined below.

Autoplay

It has been increasingly popular for fruit machines to have a built-in ‘auto-play’ or ‘psycho-play’ feature. In these instances, the machine plays for the gambler trying to make the optimum (i.e., best) choices. The most obvious result is an increase event frequency that may be more profitable to the machine owners and manufacturers. This is achieved by reducing the level of human interaction (i.e., compared to a machine, human choice inevitably slows down overall playing time). For the machine operator, the more plays, the greater the player turnover, and the greater the profit. The ‘auto-play’ only stops when the player needs to make a decision regarding features, holds, nudges or wins.

Bank Facility

There have also been some subtle changes in the way winnings are paid out. Over the last ten or so years, the provision of a built-in machine ‘bank’ has become a feature increasingly used by manufacturers. During play, cash winnings can be kept in the machine's ‘bank’ until the gambler decides to collect them by pressing of the ‘bank’ button. Usually, the accumulated winnings are digitally displayed on the face of the machine so that the gambler can keep track of the total of their winnings. The overall effect of such a feature may be very subtle. For instance, to the non-regular fruit machine player, immediate payout might be more effective as the reinforcement contingencies are strengthened. Consistent with behavioural theory, the quicker the reward, the stronger the reinforcement.

However, in contrast, immediate payout might not be preferred by the regular fruit machine gambler as they may prefer to have the option to use the ‘bank’ to keep the winnings until they are ready to ‘cash in.’ The first reason for doing this is to find out how full the ‘tubes’ are by testing whether the machine is boxing. Such an action gives the gambler the perception if the machine is ready to pay out in the near future. Secondly, many regular gamblers prefer keeping money in the bank for accounting purposes. They like to keep track of how much money they have put in the machine (or lost) in relation to how much they have in the bank (or won). Immediate payouts make this difficult to do.

The issue of the ‘bank’ is potentially complex. Immediate payouts on fruit machines are not necessarily the most habit-forming. In marketing terms, it may make more business sense for establishments that attract more non-regular gamblers (e.g., tourist seaside arcades) to house more immediate payout fruit machines and vice versa for those who attract regular fruit machine gamblers. It has not gone unnoticed by the authors that older fruit machines offer immediate payouts when compared to newer, high stake machines where the majority offer a banking facility. It is also clear that this issue has not been resolved as some newer machines are reverting back to immediate payouts. Manufacturers and operators may appreciate that the contingencies of reinforcement have a stronger effect than the utility of a ‘bank’ feature. However, it could be speculated that immediate payouts reduce cues or indicators (such as boxing) to fruit machine players.

The Psychology of Familiarity and Fruit Machines

Other recent innovations in fruit machine design tap into the psychology of familiarity. Three areas that appear to have relevance are familiarity and its relationship to naming, appeal, and persuasion. These are briefly examined in turn.

Naming

According to Costa (1988), the names of fruit machines are also important in impression formation. The original classification of fruit machine names outlined by Griffiths (1993) is now completely outdated as very few (if any) of the machines he named are still in operation and many of his original conclusions are totally invalid because the machines simply do not exist any more. It is almost certainly the case that the names of fruit machines themselves have little (if any) influence on gambling behaviour. However, when tied in with more recent research on the psychology of familiarity (Griffiths & Dunbar, 1997), the names of machines do seem to be critically important—particularly in terms of gambling acquisition. It is now quite often the case that fruit machines are named after a person, place, event, television show or film. Not only is this something that is familiar to the fruit machine player but may also be something that the potential players might like or affiliate themselves with. Table 1 highlights some examples of some very common UK fruit machines. These are different from a simple naming effect in that they may encompass the whole play of the machine, including features, sound effects, and lighting effects.

Table 1 Some Common Examples of UK Fruit Machines

Familiarity and Appeal

The affiliation or familiarity of a machine can be very play-inducing. Why would a gambler play on one machine more than another if both had exactly the same chances of winning? Some speculative reasons include:

• Celebrity association–if The Simpsons creator Matt Groening or the celebrity cartoon character Homer Simpson associate their names on this machine, a player might think it is a better machine than some of the others.

• Trust–with an international “quality” brand such as The Simpsons, a player might think that they are unlikely to lose a lot of money. They might also think the jackpots are likely to be generous.

• Experience–long time regular viewers of The Simpsons might think they know the TV programme inside out. They might think their knowledge will help them in the playing of the machine.

• Fun–it might simply be that the game play of The Simpsons is more exciting, and that the sound effects and features are novel, cute and/or more humorous than other machines.

The Simpsons is obviously just one of many examples of a fruit machine that could have been chosen to illustrate the psychology of familiarity. There are many cases similar to this one where it could be speculated that the fruit machine becomes so much more inducing because it represents something that is special to the gambler (e.g., a special attachment that may in extreme circumstances provide “electronic friendship”).

It is possible that familiarity is a very important aspect of why (for example) media-related fruit machines have been more prominent over the last few years. The media theme may induce a “psycho-structural interaction” (Griffiths, 1993) and may result in repeated use. Consequently, if the themes are increasingly “familiar,” an individual might be more likely to persevere with the complexities of a machine. Players may find it more enjoyable because they can easily interact with the recognizable images they experience. Therefore, the use of familiar themes may have a very persuasive effect, leading to an increase in the number of people using them, and the money they spend. Whilst there are many other aspects which influence an individual's decision to gamble, the possible persuasive nature of the themes should not be underestimated. Therefore, an examination of the factors that may influence an individual's decision to gamble on fruit machines is needed. These are overviewed in the next section.

Familiarity and Persuasion

McGuire (1969; cited in Condry & Scheibe, 1989) outlined the stages in the persuasive process (as applied to advertisements). This can be adapted to the playing of fruit machines. The framework constructed can be used to display the possible effectiveness of familiar themes in fruit machine gambling. The stages in the persuasive process have been identified as exposure, attention, comprehension, yielding, retention and decision to buy (Condry & Scheibe, 1989). Of the stages listed above, the “decision to buy” is reinterpreted here as the decision to gamble. The following adaptation of this framework illustrates the point.

Exposure

For an advertisement to be effective, the individual must first be exposed to it. The same can be said for fruit machines. Exposure of fruit machines can occur at two levels. At the macro level, UK fruit machines are endemic and can be found at a wide variety of outlets and are thus constantly exposed to the public. Secondly, at a micro level, machines within premises are placed so that they can easily be seen. For instance, in public houses, they are usually found near doorways or close to the bar.

Attention

Even though many people may be exposed to the machine, very few may pay attention to it. Therefore, to gain the attention of an individual, manufacturers may use diverse and/or familiar sights and sounds to achieve this (e.g., the use of a TV show's theme tune, bright flashing lights, picture of a celebrity). In general, the tunes are repeated often enough to catch a person's attention particularly when no-one is playing on the machine.

Comprehension

When the individual is fully attentive, the message has to be comprehended and understood. Therefore, as far as fruit machines are concerned, if a familiar theme is incorporated into the machine, the individual is more likely to comprehend that gambling may be socially acceptable because the images and sounds they see and hear are familiar and likeable.

Yielding

This is when the individual agrees with the message or claim made by the advertiser. When referring to fruit machine gambling, if a familiar TV show theme is included in the design of the machine, the person may be more likely to fully accept (i.e., agree) that gambling is socially acceptable because they “like” the images and sounds that are experienced.

Retention and Decision to Gamble

According to Condry and Scheibe (1989) these two final stages occur much later than when the individual is initially exposed to the advertisement. When in the shop, the person must recall the product that may have been advertised a long time previously, and decide whether to buy it. With regards to fruit machine gambling, it is possible that the players may be instantly attracted to the machine because they are aware of immediately familiar images and sounds, leading to a much quicker decision to gamble. This point can be better illustrated with the following example.

A person may enter a public house, have a drink, and then notice the familiar tune of The Simpsons TV show coming from a fruit machine not far from the bar. However, the person decides not to gamble, because they have never done so before. The following day, they visit another public house, which has two fruit machines adjacent to one another. Their “attention” is focused when they once again hear The Simpsons tune that they recognize. They “comprehend” that because this well-known and likeable signature tune is incorporated into the machine, it is acceptable to take a closer look. They may believe that the gambling process involves a theme based around aspects associated with The Simpsons TV show, and because they are attracted to, and “agree” with the “message,” they “yield” to the view that gambling on this particular fruit machine is socially acceptable. This leads to the “decision to gamble.”

This hypothesized example suggests that the decision to gamble may involve a number of stages and that familiarity appears to be the most important aspect. It would appear that familiarity not only promotes a skill orientation once a player has begun to gamble (Griffiths, 1994) but may also be an important factor in a player's (or non-player's) initial decision to gamble. This line of thinking requires further research as it is a potentially important factor in determining people's initial decision to gamble.

Sound Effects on the Fruit Machine

General Sound

A number of authors over the last 30 years (e.g., Hess & Diller, 1969; White, 1989; Griffiths, 1993) have argued that the sound effects of slot machines are gambling-inducers. Constant noise and sound gives the impression (a) of a noisy, fun and exciting environment, and (b) that winning is more common than losing (as you cannot hear the sound of losing! (Griffiths & Parke, 2003). However, these are very general effects that create an overall impression. To regular players (‘snipers’), the sound of a payout is obviously a distractor to playing an individual machine as this payout signals the perception that this machine is less likely to pay out again in the short term.

Sounds and music from fruit machines may act as reinforcers. Of particular relevance are the sound effects after losing (that could be termed “acoustic frustration”). Many machines make loud or antagonistic noises after a player has lost. Antagonistic sounds invoke frustration and disappointment. For example, on The Simpsons fruit machine, Mr. Smithers smugly informs Homer Simpson that “You're fired,” or Chief Wiggam says “You're going away for along time, Ha!” At present, we can only speculate about the consequences of such sound effects. In line with hypotheses supporting frustration theory and cognitive regret (Amsel, 1958; Kahneman & Tversky, 1982), this might make the fruit machine more inducing. However, it may be that antagonistic sound effects only perpetuate gambling in the short term or within session. In the long term or “between sessions,” regular fruit machine players might avoid machines that induce frustration, cognitive regret and aggression. Further research clearly needs to be carried out in this area.

Another sound effect that has been used on fruit machines is pulsating sound where the pitch of the sound increases and the sound becomes faster when a gambling decision needs to be made. This appears to increase the tension, and also tends to make players react more quickly towards the machine. This particular utilization of sound has been termed “perceived urgency” (Edworthy, Loxley, & Dennis, 1991). However, sound effects from fruit machines have dramatically changed and improved over the last decade. Basic pulsating (‘beeping’) sounds have been replaced by complex musical pieces (classical or pop), intricate sound effects, and verbal interaction (see below). The aim of these developments have not really changed over the years. Sound effects still appear to heighten emotional states. In addition, it might also be speculated that improved sound effects make the fruit machine more appealing on a general level.

Verbal Interaction

As mentioned above, the sound effects of fruit machines have advanced significantly over the past decade. In particular, verbal interaction in the form of commands and reinforcers are now central to many fruit machines. A number of factors might be involved in verbal interaction that could make fruit machines more play-inducing including the raising of self-esteem, the giving of hints and guidance, and even providing company and friendship. These are briefly expanded upon below:

Raising Self-Esteem

Several fruit machines make statements relating to self-esteem when a positive play was made on the fruit machine by the player. Here are some actual examples. For instance, on PsychoCashBeast it says “You're cool” (in a female seductive voice). On Top Tenner it says “You are genius,” and on Buccaneer it says “That's a swell idea.” On Viva Las Vegas, there are cheers from a crowd.

One of the most popular fruit machines on the market the moment is The Simpsons. This fruit machine has been so successful in the UK that there are at least three different variations of the machine currently in operation. One of the attractive features of the machine is that there is a substantial level of verbal interaction from characters themselves. For instance:

• When a player leaves the fruit machine, the character Apu says “Thank you come again”

• When a player starts playing the machine again, the character Krusty the Clown says “I knew you'd come crawling back!”

• When a player experiences any losses on the feature-play, the character Homer says his “D'oh” catchphrase

• When any player wins, the character Bart says “Wow Cool man”

• When a player wins the jackpot, The Simpsons theme song plays

All of these simple verbal and musical interactions would appear to be positive and which have the capacity for the player to feel better about themselves.

Giving Hints and Guidance

As mentioned earlier in the paper, verbal instructions are often given to players so that they play as efficiently as possible and learn the secret features and functions (“Hold reel three” or “Let 'em spin!”). This again may be reinforcing for the player.

Providing Company and Friendship

Although more speculative, it may even be possible that some fruit machine players are attracted to machines that “talk to them.” This plays on the friendship factor and taps into the previously forwarded notion of a videogame or fruit machine being an “electronic friend” (Selnow, 1984; Griffiths, 1995). Even if this is not a salient factor, fruit machines, which “talk,” certainly appear to be more psychologically interesting.

Music

Another speculative area worthy of further investigation is that of “background music” on the machine. It could be the case that such music facilitates, stimulates, maintains, and/or exacerbates gambling behaviour in some individuals. This will obviously depend on the musical preferences of the fruit machine players themselves. It is likely that ‘pop music’ will be the most effective—since it is “popular” by definition. Griffiths and Parke (2005) highlight that empirical research would be useful in the following areas as the music might:

• Increase confidence in fruit machine players

• Increase arousal in fruit machine players

• Relax the fruit machine player

• Help the fruit machine player disregard previous losses

• Induce a “romantic” affective state leading the player to believe that their chances of winning are better than they are.

Light and Colour Effects on the Fruit Machine

Griffiths' original (1993) review of structural characteristics outlined a comprehensive overview on the psychology of light and colour effects in relation to fruit machines. Little has changed here except the predictable development in light and colour quality (i.e., brighter flashy-lights, more impressive lighting and colour effects etc.). The psychology of colour in fruit machines is still being utilized although there is still little research into the differential effects of colour stimulation on gambling behaviour in ecologically valid settings. The limited empirical data suggest that people gamble more under red lighting (because it is more arousing) and that most UK gambling arcades utilize colours towards the red end of the colour spectrum in their lighting and décor (Stark, Saunders, & Wookey, 1982; Griffiths & Swift, 1992). On many new fruit machines (e.g., Cleudo, The Great Escape, Eastenders, Trivial Pursuit etc.), some structural features (e.g., the white letters of the feature board) will turn red when playing on the ‘feature’ indicating that the jackpot or ‘top feature’ will be won. All the player has to do is continue playing the feature until the end. (This is another example of a “secret” or “cheat” outlined in a previous section).

Win Probability and Long-Term Predictability

It has been pointed out by a number of authors that structural characteristics of win probability and payout ratios differ in most types of gambling (Royal Commission, 1951; Weinstein & Deitsch, 1974; Griffiths, 1993). It is these basic risk dimensions which may help determine whether a person gambles on a particular activity in the first place. Griffiths (1993) argued that on fruit machines, these structural characteristics do not appear to be especially important to the gambler. It appears that the ordinary ‘social gambler’ does not think about the actual probability of winning but relies on heuristic strategies for handling the available information. Probabilities of winning on fruit machines are comparable with other gambling activities (e.g., sports betting, casino gambling etc.) with most machines giving a 70–90% pay out (i.e., on average 70–90% of the original stake is paid back to the gambler). However, because of the higher event frequency than other gambling activities, money is lost much quicker.

Studies of adolescent fruit machine players indicate that winning money is only one of a variety of reasons for playing fruit machines. Other reasons for playing have included fun, boredom, social influences, atmosphere, escapism, and excitement (Griffiths, 1995). However, it could be argued that many of these “other reasons” depend on the fixed payout ratio for their saliency. It is clear that fun, boredom, escapism, and excitement are all reasons for playing, but “winning money” is viewed by many players as the underlying force that drives such factors. That is why gamblers prefer to play fruit machines where they think that they have a better chance of winning and avoid machines with a poor payout probability and/or payout ratio, no matter how “fun” or “exciting” they may be. Just because the gambling is fun and exciting, does not mean that the primary objective is not to make money. Counter-arguments might suggest that many motivations for gambling are subconscious. Even if this is the case, the main conscious objective is to make a profit.

Long-Term Predictability

Among the most popular and play-inducing fruit machines are those which players believe to be predictable in the long run and which closely follow certain payout patterns (i.e., what gamblers refer to as “long-term predictability”). In essence, this is a probability heuristic formulated by the players themselves. For instance, fruit machine players who know that the ‘tubes’ are full, expect £20–£40 in winnings through jackpots and top features. However, this could take £2 worth of credits or £50. To the fruit machine gambler, this is “predictable” although it is not predictable in the short run. Skilful players claim that they will come away with a profit a majority of the time as their losses are always smaller than the overall wins.

It is these “predictable” machines that most regular fruit machine gamblers like to play in general. These machines may also be the most play-inducing. However, after a payout, most regular gamblers who know what they are doing will avoid these machines. Essentially, this is simply an example of the variable-ratio schedule of reinforcement. The players on “predictable” machines know that they will win at some point but they will have no idea when, how much or how many credits (i.e., how much money) it will take. Traditional behavioural theory would also suggest that this is more habit-forming. At present, the true effect of long-term predictability on fruit machine addiction cannot be understood until this question has been answered empirically.

Other Miscellaneous Structural Characteristics

Suspension of Judgement

The suspension of judgement refers to a structural characteristic, which temporarily disrupts the gambler's financial value system and potentially stimulates further gambling (Griffiths, 1993). Old style UK fruit machines often utilized tokens (rather like the casinos' use of chips) to disguise the money's true value (i.e., decrease the psychological value of the money to be gambled). Tokens are put straight back into the machine without hesitation because they cannot be exchanged back into money by the machine's owner. Over the last decade there has been little development in this area, and in many fruit machine environments the use of tokens has been phased out altogether.

Multiplier Potential

As outlined by Griffiths (1993), multiplier potential is a structural characteristic, which refers to the range of odds and stakes that the form of gambling offers and can be viewed as a primary inducement to play. In essence, gamblers can choose the rate at which their wins and/or losses multiply. In the USA, this can be achieved on the same slot machine and are called ‘multipliers’ or ‘progressives,’ whereas traditionally in the UK the amount gambled per play was dependent upon the machine, i.e., each fruit machine had a particular gambling stake. New fruit machines in the UK are now starting to have multiplier stake systems incorporated (e.g., Red Arrow), although there is no evidence that multiplier systems have any effect on how inducing a fruit machine might be. Bettor involvement and choice may be increased but the effect is expected to be marginal. The observations relating to the clientele and function of different stake levels outlined by Griffiths (1991b, 1993) appear to have changed little although two pence play machines are becoming increasingly rare and higher stake (fifty pence) machines are being introduced gradually.

Conclusions

It is clear that structural characteristics of fruit machines are still as prevalent as they were a decade ago and still have the potential to induce excessive gambling regardless of the gambler's biological and/or psychological constitution. Further to this, some structural characteristics (as have been shown) are still capable of producing psychologically rewarding experiences even in financially losing situations (e.g., the psychology of the near miss on both reel order and feature plays). However, there is still no good evidence to suggest that the gaming industry has used the psychological literature to “exploit” gamblers. However, it could still be argued that the structural characteristics outlined in this paper are still deceptive and lead some players to believe they are close to winning.

The success of the machine's structural characteristics (where success is defined as an increase in gambling due to the structural characteristic) depends upon the psycho-structural interaction. As highlighted in Griffiths' (1993) review, the importance of a structural characteristic approach to gambling is the possibility to pinpoint more accurately where an individual's psychological constitution is influencing gambling behaviour. Such an approach also allows for psychologically context specific explanations of gambling behaviour rather than global explanations (such as “addictive personality”).

Further work is still needed to pinpoint which structural characteristics are more likely to affect “addictiveness” potential in particular forms of gambling. For instance, it may be that light, colour and sound effects are integral to increasing baseline levels of gambling among fruit machine players but not in other gambling forms, e.g., lotteries, horse racing etc. (Griffiths, 1993). It would also appear that the effects that structural characteristics might have on habitual play may depend on at least two factors—(1) the regularity of play and (2) personality.

With regards to the regularity of play, there are a number of instances where regular and non-regular gamblers may react differently to a particular structural characteristic. For example, the sounds of the coins hitting the metal payout tray. This might induce the non-regular gambler to play because they might hearing others winning and feel that they can win too, or they might feel that a machine is a good one and worth playing since people seem to be winning from it. In contrast, the regular gambler will understand that their chances of winning will be better if they play a machine that has not just paid out.

With regards to personality, there appear to be many instances where the structural characteristic might have a different effect depending upon particular individual personality characteristics. For instance:

• 1) the use of verbal compliments might be effective on the gambler with low self-esteem but not on the confident fruit machine player;

• 2) the same piece of music on a fruit machine might affect individuals differently depending upon personality;

• 3) the external locus of control, skill orientation, and bettor involvement may have differential influence on play depending upon the player. For instance, it could be argued (similar to the contention made by Griffiths [1995]), that fruit machine players with a high internal locus of control will enjoy playing fruit machines that require more involvement and skill from the player. A machine, which relies on bettor involvement to induce more play, will have little effect on an individual who has a high external locus of control and prefers games of chance. For instance, it could be hypothesized that individuals who attribute events to external factors prefer fruit machines with limited bettor involvement (i.e., reel order machines).

One of the most noticeable trends over the last decade has been the move away from the importance of multiplier potential, payout intervals and win probabilities as result of the fixed payout ratio. Put simply, fruit machine players care more about how much a machine has already paid out, and how much they expect it to pay out in the immediate future as a consequence. If this is the focus of their attention, then factors such as the multiplier potential and win probabilities will not matter. When a fruit machine is expected to pay out, the ratio of money lost to money won is all that matters, most importantly because the machine is fixed. For this reason, the structural characteristics of a fruit machine, that is pre-determined in terms of winning, are vastly different compared to one that is not.

Parts of this paper were deliberately speculative and would greatly be enhanced by both further empirical work in almost all of these areas and greater co-operation from the gaming industry themselves, as they could quite easily confirm or deny much of what has been written. Areas for further investigation include more in-depth research on the feature play, familiarity, and appeal, aural effects and ‘within session’ factors. For instance:

The Feature Play

For regular gamblers, participating in the ‘feature’ of the machine appears to be the primary aim of the gamble and many structural characteristics are integrated and linked with the ‘feature’ element. Observational work suggests this has a significant effect on habitual gambling although more empirical research is needed to ascertain whether this is indeed the case. In addition, further research needs to examine the feature ratio and the number of in-built features. It could be the case that regular players prefer machines that have a higher feature ratio (but smaller wins) to a machine with a lower feature ratio (but slightly bigger wins). Furthermore, the new multi-feature machines may be more habit-forming if they increase the play frequency of the in-built features and facilitate feelings of psychological ‘immersion.’

Familiarity and Appeal

It has been speculated that familiarity and affiliation promote a skill orientation once a player has begun to gamble (Griffiths, 1994) or, at the very least, are potentially important factors in determining a player's initial decision to gamble. Further research needs to examine the familiarity factors that influence players' decisions to play one machine over another. Areas for investigation include celebrity association, trust, experience, and fun. Related to this, further research could be carried out on electronic friendship. There appear too many cases where the fruit machine represents something that is special to the gambler (e.g., a special attachment that may in extreme circumstances provide “electronic friendship”). Regular players may be more attracted to machines that “talk” to them through the use of pre-determined verbal interactions.

Aural Effects

Other areas worthy of further investigation involve the use of sound and “background music” on the machine. Aural effects appear to heighten emotional states. Improved aural effects (music or verbal interaction) may make the fruit machine more appealing on a general level and/or may facilitate a psychological feeling of ‘immersion.’ It would also appear that musical effects have the potential to facilitate, stimulate, maintain, and/or exacerbate gambling behaviour in some individuals. This will obviously depend on the musical preferences of the fruit machine player. Furthermore, among fruit machine players, music may increase confidence, modulate arousal and relaxation, and/or help the fruit machine player disregard previous losses.

Within Session Factors

Although there is plenty of evidence to suggest that habitual fruit machine playing is maintained through intermittent schedules of behavioural reinforcement and high event frequencies, there are other ‘within session’ characteristics that would make interesting areas of investigation. For instance, the role of emotional states such as frustration. It may be that the potentially frustrating antagonistic sound effects perpetuate gambling within session but that between sessions players avoid these machines. Research may also give insight into whether immediate payouts reduce cues or indicators (such as boxing) to regular players.

It has been widely accepted that structural characteristics of the fruit machine influence the acquisition, development, and maintenance of gambling behaviour. However, it would appear that the role of structural characteristics has become even more significant within the past decade. Arguably, these more developed structural characteristics have an even greater potential to induce excessive gambling in some cases. Interactive feature plays, increased skill orientations and bettor involvement, and the manipulation of familiarity and sound effects, are now combined to produce sophisticated and psychologically immersive fruit machines.

The large number of people admitting to being drawn to such machines against their better ‘rational’ judgment raises an interesting paradox. Could it be that the subtle (yet powerful) attraction to the fruit machine could be explained by the operation of such structural characteristics? It has not been the aim of this paper to answer this question but to raise it. The information presented in this paper aims to begin the catch-up process of trying understand why people gamble on technology designed to take their money. New research in the areas outlined might be the only way forward in both treating problem fruit machine gambling and keeping pace with the industry.