*Article* **The Prevalence of E-Gambling and of Problem E-Gambling in Poland**

**Bernadeta Lelonek-Kuleta \*, Rafał P. Bartczuk, Michał Wiechetek, Joanna Chwaszcz and Iwona Niewiadomska**

Institute of Psychology, The John Paul II Catholic University of Lublin, 20-950 Lublin, Poland; bartczuk@kul.lublin.pl (R.P.B.); wiechetek@kul.lublin.pl (M.W.); chwaszcz@kul.lublin.pl (J.C.); pfrau@kul.lublin.pl (I.N.)

**\*** Correspondence: bernadetalelonek@kul.lublin.pl; Tel.: +48-81-4453441

Received: 22 November 2019; Accepted: 6 January 2020; Published: 8 January 2020

**Abstract:** This study estimated the levels of involvement in e-gambling and problem e-gambling in Poland and identified selected sociodemographic variables associated with e-gambling activities. The study was conducted using a representative sample of the adult inhabitants of Poland (*n* = 2000). The survey contained questions measuring three aspects of gambling (involvement in e-gambling, types of e-gambling activity, and problematic e-gambling). Results suggested that 4.1% of respondents were involved in e-gambling and 26.8% of them could be classified as problem gamblers. The most popular e-gambling games were lotteries and sports betting. Gender, age, size of city of residence, level of education, and income were identified as significant predictors of involvement in e-gambling. The results indicated that men, younger people, and people who earnt less were more often involved in e-gambling. Having children, playing online scratch cards, and online sport betting—but not online lotteries—turned out to be typical for problem online gamblers. The prevalence of problem gambling among Polish e-gamblers suggests that extended research in this area is needed.

**Keywords:** e-gambling; e-gambling prevalence; forms of e-gambling; problem e-gambling

### **1. Introduction**

The involvement of societies in gambling is a subject that has interested researchers for many years [1,2]. Gambling, as an entertainment form permitted for adults, involves a game in which there is a valuable stake, the result of which partially depends on chance, and it interests the representatives of social sciences mostly due to the potential damages that the activity can cause if specific circumstances arise. In 2013, in the 5th edition of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5), pathological gambling was included in the group of non-substance related disorders (in section: Substance-Related and Addictive Disorders), which made the scientific world admit that pathological gambling and substance addiction have common development mechanisms and analogous symptoms [3]. The World Health Organisation included gambling disorder in the section "Disorders" due to substance use or addictive behaviours in the 11th edition of the International Classification of Diseases (ICD) classification. It is noteworthy that WHO distinguishes two categories of this disorder, including: 6C50.0 gambling disorder, predominantly offline, and 6C50.1 gambling disorder, predominantly online [4]. The development of addiction is most often described in four stages, common for substance and behavioural addictions. Taking the example of exercise addiction, they are as follows: recreational exercise, at-risk exercise, problematic exercise, and exercise addiction [5]. The traditional description of the gambling disorder has included four phases: the reaction to winning, losing, desperation, and hopelessness [6]. The next distinguished phases are accompanied by an increasing intensity of problems resulting from involvement in a given activity, progressive concentration and loss of control. According to researchers, the social consequences of gambling abuse include decreased

productivity, social welfare costs resulting from absence from work [7], loss of jobs, early retirement, and even an increase in mortality resulting from suicidal tendencies occurring at advanced stages of gambling addiction [8,9]. Social detriments are also considered in the context of elevated distress and social isolation resulting from gambling [10].

Despite the long tradition of research on the involvement in gambling and problem gambling, a new phenomenon that has very quickly caused concern among the specialists emerged in the recent decades—online gambling [11]. Studies on online gambling have led many researchers to conclude that it has higher addictive potential than any other type of gambling [12–16]. Although results that do not confirm the higher addictive potential of online gambling do exist, most studies confirm this phenomenon [17,18]. Its high addictive potential is further confirmed by the higher rate of gambling addiction among online gamblers than among those who gamble in the traditional form [16,19,20]; this increase may even be three to five times higher [21]. The studies conducted by Effertz et al. on a representative group of 15,023 Germans showed that replacing 10% of offline gambling with online gambling increased the risk of becoming a problem gambler by 8.8–12.6% [22].

As for the increase in problem gambling among online players, the results of international studies conducted by McCormack among 1119 gamblers showed that 14% met the Problem Gambling Severity Index (PGSI) criteria for problem gambling, 29% met the criteria for moderate risk gambling, 32.7% met the criteria for problem gambling at a low level, and 24.3% did not show symptoms indicating problems resulting from gambling [23].

Why online gambling is more addictive remains uncertain; does it result from its higher accessibility, or, perhaps, from the nature of the Internet as a medium via which players gamble? [17,18]. Some studies have reported a lower percentage of addicted gamblers among "pure" online gamblers in comparison with "pure" offline gamblers [18]. Studies have, however, determined certain factors increasing the addictive potential of online gaming, including the games' structure, which consists of, among other things, directness, accessibility, and ease of betting, all of which are particularly dangerous for young gamblers [24]. These factors are said by other gamblers, to have addictive potential. For example, Griffiths et al. also indicated factors related to the games' structure—the directness of reinforcement, the speed of their course, and the frequency of game appearance—but also situational factors, such as accessibility and availability—which other researchers have also confirmed [25–29].

Online gambling seems to be more attractive for various reasons. It offers gamblers additional profits from gambling compared to offline gambling. First and foremost, gamblers can play whenever and wherever they choose (at home or work), which is associated with a high level of comfort and low access costs: players do not need to travel to certain locations, dedicate their time, and so forth [12]. Gamblers also save time because they can play several games simultaneously, which accelerates the course of online games [30,31]. The basic benefit of online gambling is anonymity, which seems to be particularly desirable for certain types of users [32,33].

Recent studies on involvement in online gambling have mainly focused on identifying the risk factors of problem gambling. The studies conducted by Effertz et al. on a representative group of Germans indicated that the risk of problem gambling decreases with higher levels of education and increases in the case of men; people who are unemployed, single, and divorced (respectively); and among migrants [22]. Effertz et al. also noticed that the risk of problem online gambling is the highest among heavy Internet users. Scientists have also drawn attention to the correlation between the type of game and problem gambling. For example, McCormack et al. observed that the risk of problem online gambling was significantly higher among people who gamble regularly and play online betting games, online slot machines, and online roulette, compared to gamblers who do not play regularly. In addition, persons who regularly played two or more types of online games were also at considerably greater risk of developing problem gambling than those who played one game only [23]. Other studies [34] have also highlighted the correlation between the number of the gambling accounts a gamer has, increased involvement in gambling, and increased intensity of problem gaming [35]. In the McCormack studies, people who regularly played only online poker were at lower risk of problem gambling than people

who did not play poker regularly, but played other games as well, which is in line with the results of other studies [36]. Although the results suggest that there is a correlation between multi-gambling and problem gambling, researchers have emphasised the shortage of studies in the area [23].

There are few studies on gender differences in online gambling involvement. For example, studies conducted in Ireland have shown that women prefer online games that are more acceptable socially, such as lotteries or scratch cards [37]. Scratch cards are also the game type that women tend to become addicted to, which has also been highlighted by other researchers [32]. Women, on average, play for a shorter period of time (an average of two years for women and seven years for men), and spend less time gambling online than men (1 h per session, compared to 3 h for men).

Legal regulations are another aspect that has also been regarded as significant in recent studies on online gambling, particularly concerning the involvement of citizens in gambling. In his 2016 study, which included 1277 pathological gamblers undergoing addiction treatment, Chóliz discovered significant changes that occurred between 2012 (when online gambling was legalised in Spain) and the turn of 2014/2015. First and foremost, the number of people entering treatment due to pathological gambling in the studied facilities quadrupled. Also, most importantly, patients indicated online gambling as the source of their problems ten times more often than in 2012 (from 2.53% in 2012 to 24.21% in 2014/2015). For a comparison, the number of people indicating slot machines as the main source of their problems decreased (from 80.26% to 65.71%). These results seem particularly important in the context of the tendency to legalise online gambling and liberalise access to it, which has been observed by the specialists [38,39]. Moreover, researchers have also noted that using legal websites for online gambling causes less gambling-related damage [40], and a higher percentage of problem gambling occurs in populations in which legal regulations for online gambling are less restrictive [41].

The gambling market in Poland is regulated by the Act of 19 November 2009 on online gambling, which has so far been amended several times. In light of the Act of 15 December 2016 amending the Act on gambling, online gambling—with the exclusion of pari-mutuel betting and promotional lotteries—is subject to state monopoly [42]. Online games subject to state monopoly are organised by Totalizator Sportowy—a company owned by the State Treasury (Warsaw, Poland). The first online gambling games were introduced by Totalizator Sportowy in December 2018 and included a number of lotteries and games offered by the only legal online casino in Poland—slot machines, roulette, and card games for money. Legal online betting games are currently offered by nine private operators. Until 2017, when Poland tightened its restrictions on the betting market, introducing the possibility of blocking illegal domains, 90% of the industry belonged to the grey market [43].

Due to the relatively recent regulation of online gambling in Poland, there have thus far been no studies on the matter. It is worth noting that the longer tradition of research in Poland on addiction to slot machines resulted in the regulation of the market for these games [44]. The first study to estimate the involvement of Polish people in online gambling, and problem involvement in the activity and its determinants, was therefore, undertaken.

#### **2. Materials and Methods**

#### *2.1. Participants*

This study was conducted on a nationwide sample of 2000 adult Poles. The sample was representative and randomly selected on the basis of PESEL (Personal Identification Number). The distribution of gender, age, education, the size of place of residence, the region, and the number of people in the household were controlled. The Polish population was layered according to 9 geographical macro-regions, and then, in each of them, the localities were layered into 7 layers, according to size; the municipalities with probabilities proportional to the number of residents older than 18 years of age were randomly selected. Within the framework of each selected municipality, 6 interviews with randomly selected respondents were carried out. The respondents in municipalities were at first selected by means of drawing households proportionally to the number of household members

according to the PESEL census records. Upon visiting a selected household, the interviewers selected the respondents using the Kish grid and then conducted computer-assisted personal interviews with them. If conducting the interview with the person from the list was not possible, the interviewer would look for a person of the same age and gender in the same town. The study was carried out by the GfK Polonia, the Polish branch of a well-known international public opinion research institute (GfK SE, Nuremberg, Germany), which also ensured the anonymity and uniformity of testing.

#### *2.2. Measures*

#### 2.2.1. E-Gambling

The questionnaire consisted of questions regarding use of online gambling games, frequency, frequency of online gambling, time duration of a single session, and money spent on online gambling. In the first question, the respondent was asked to select the online games on which they have bet money at least once within the last 12 months. The list included 11 categories: online lottery (i.e., receipt lottery), online scratch cards, slot machines and other gambling machines on the Internet, online card games for money, other online casino games (i.e., roulette, dice), Totalizator Sportowy number games via the Internet, other online number games (i.e., bingo), online arcade games for money, online sports betting (including "fantasy sports"), online betting on e-sport or online virtual sports, and online betting on financial markets (i.e., stock exchange, FOREX, binary options). A memory-activating filtering statement was posed: "I am certain that I have not made online cash bets within the last 12 months." The question regarding e-gambling frequency was: How often, within the last 12 months, have you gambled online? (1 = everyday; 2 = several times a week, but not every day; 3 = once a week; 4 = several times a month but more rarely than once a week; 5 = once a month; 6 = several times a year, but more rarely than once a month). The question regarding the time duration of a single session was: How much time did one session of the game usually take? (1 = less than 15 min; 2 = from 15 to 30 min; 3 = from 31 min to an hour; 4 = from over an hour to 2 h; 5 = from over 2 h to 3 h; 6 = more than 3 h). The question regarding spending was open: "How much money exactly have you spent on online gambling within the last 4 months?"

#### 2.2.2. Problem E-Gambling

The Brief Biosocial Gambling Screen (BBGS), adapted to Polish by Niewiadomska et al., was adjusted to the assessment of problem e-gambling [45,46]. It contains three questions about gambling and has been shown to have good screening properties for the criteria of problem gambling compliant with DSM-5 [47]. Each of the questions could be answered with either "Yes" or "No." The risk of problem gambling cut-off at endorsing one symptom is the best indicator of gambling disorder, taking into account that sensitivity and negative predictive value are most important for identifying individuals who potentially need treatment [45,47]. The psychometric properties of the Polish adaptation of BBGS were tested on a representative sample of high school students of the Lublin province. The criterion was fulfilment of at least 5 DSM-IV criteria of pathological hazard, measured by self-report. Sensitivity was 0.82, and specificity was 0.96 [46]. Because not distinguishing by a measure of problem gambling between forms of gambling (online versus offline) is a potentially confounding issue [48], we adjusted the BBGS for the purposes of the current study by rewording the questions in the BBGS to refer to online gambling. The final versions of the questions used in this study were as follows: Within the last 12 months, have you felt powerless, irritated, or anxious when you were trying to quit or limit online gambling? Within the last 12 months, have you tried to keep the fact that you are gambling online from your family and friends? Have you had financial trouble resulting from online gaming, because of which you had to ask your family, friends, or social services for financial support within the last 12 months?
