Every year, during Safer Gambling Week, the gambling industry ramps up efforts to promote safer gambling practices. But is this enough? While these campaigns claim to educate people about the risks, they are often overshadowed by the industry’s primary goal: keeping people gambling.
For all the advice to gamble responsibly, the real focus seems to be on ensuring customers keep returning, rather than protecting them from harm. The question is: do these campaigns really make a difference when the industry itself is constantly using behavioural tactics to draw people in?
The gambling industry uses clever strategies rooted in behavioural science, cognitive biases, and neuroscience to keep people engaged. One of the most powerful techniques is the use of reinforcement schedules. This is when rewards, such as wins in a game, are delivered at unpredictable times, much like how slot machines work. You never know when the next win will come, which keeps players hooked, as the brain releases dopamine (the chemical that makes us feel good) every time there’s a win or even a near-win 1, 2.
The industry also creates an illusion of control. This is where people are led to believe they can influence outcomes, whether through their choices in betting or by using certain strategies in games. In reality, most gambling activities are based on luck, but this illusion makes people feel more confident and keeps them playing 2.
Another subtle tactic is using ‘dark’ nudges, which encourage risky behaviour through personalised offers and complex betting options. Gambling companies use algorithms to deliver targeted ads on platforms like YouTube and Snapchat, making sure people see offers that look like great opportunities. In reality, these offers push gamblers into making decisions that are often against their best interests 3.
Despite running Safer Gambling Week campaigns, the gambling industry continues to use these techniques to retain players. While these awareness efforts are important, they don’t balance out the overwhelming marketing and product designs that keep people gambling.
Why We Need System-Level Changes Instead of Just Telling People to Gamble Responsibly
A lot of the solutions we see today focus on what are called i-frame solutions 5. These are individual-level interventions designed to help people regulate their own gambling behaviour. Things like setting personal limits or offering self-exclusion tools put all the responsibility on the individual to manage their gambling. While helpful in theory, these measures overlook the bigger picture: people are being asked to control themselves in environments specifically designed to make that hard to do.
Behavioural science tells us that when we’re surrounded by tempting offers and constant triggers, like targeted ads, personalised offers, and easy access to gambling apps, it’s incredibly difficult to make rational, responsible decisions. Cognitive biases like present bias (focusing on short-term rewards rather than long-term consequences) and optimism bias (believing that “next time” will be different) often lead people to continue gambling, even when they know it’s causing harm 4,3.
This is where s-frame solutions become vital. Rather than placing all the pressure on individuals, s-frame policies focus on changing the system itself. For example, limiting gambling ads during major sports events or regulating how complex betting options are presented would make it harder for companies to exploit people’s cognitive vulnerabilities. These systemic changes would reduce the influence of gambling marketing and make it easier for individuals to avoid harm.
At Magpie, we have long recognised the limits of i-frame interventions and have advocated for broader, system-level changes. Through our work, we focus on shifting the conversation away from blaming individuals for their gambling problems and instead addressing the environment that encourages gambling harm.
Magpie’s Efforts in Creating Meaningful Change
Magpie has consistently focused on creating campaigns that not only raise awareness but drive real change. Two of our recent campaigns — Chapter One and Gambling Understood, demonstrate our commitment to protecting vulnerable groups and challenging the system that places responsibility on individuals.
In the Chapter One Campaign, we used digital platforms like Snapchat, TikTok, and YouTube to reach young adults in Greater Manchester, a group particularly at risk of gambling harm. By using a carefully targeted digital strategy, we drove over 44,000 clicks to the campaign website and reached 2.3 million people. Our multi-platform approach and constant monitoring meant that we could tailor the campaign to what worked best, ensuring that we reached the most relevant audience.
Gambling Understood, a campaign across Yorkshire and the Humber, was built to challenge the widely held belief that gambling harm is an individual’s problem. We reframed the narrative, focusing on how gambling products and marketing tactics create environments that lead to harm. Through two phases, we educated the public about the risks of gambling products and then encouraged open conversations about gambling and its consequences. By breaking the stigma and showing that gambling harm affects more than just the individual, we reached over 2.9 million people, raising awareness and inspiring discussions.
Both of these campaigns show how Magpie goes beyond traditional awareness-raising efforts. By applying behavioural science, we focus on reaching vulnerable groups in the right ways and connecting them to the resources they need. But just as importantly, our campaigns challenge the system, whether by tackling the way gambling is marketed or by shifting how society views gambling harm. We aim to change not just individual behaviour, but the environment in which gambling decisions are made.
Magpie’s work in gambling harm prevention shows that we don’t just follow the crowd—we lead the way in using science-backed strategies to create campaigns that make a real difference. Our projects have demonstrated that raising awareness isn’t enough; what’s needed is a fundamental shift in how gambling is marketed, understood, and experienced. By focusing on system-oriented solutions, we are helping to protect people from gambling harm in a way that individual focused solutions alone cannot achieve.
As we continue our work, we remain dedicated to driving further systemic changes that reduce harm, challenge industry practices, and ensure that support reaches those who need it most.
References
- Clark, Luke, et al. “Pathological choice: the neuroscience of gambling and gambling addiction.” Journal of Neuroscience 33.45 (2013): 17617-17623.
- Anselme, Patrick, and Mike JF Robinson. “What motivates gambling behavior? Insight into dopamine’s role.” Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience 7 (2013): 182.
- Newall, Philip. “Gambling on the Dark Side of Nudges.” Behavioral Scientist, 27 June 2017, behavioralscientist.org/gambling-dark-side-nudges/.
- Fortier, Marie-Ève, et al. “Nudge theory and gambling: a scoping review.” Frontiers in Public Health 12 (2024): 1377183.
- Chater, Nick, and George Loewenstein. “The i-frame and the s-frame: How focusing on individual-level solutions has led behavioral public policy astray.” Behavioral and Brain Sciences 46 (2023): e147.