UKGC: GSGB can be a ‘robust source of evidence’ for British gambling

UK flag
Image: Shutterstock

The UK Gambling Commission has published its first annual Gambling Survey for Great Britain report as the gambling regulator seeks to “establish a new baseline for understanding gambling behaviour in Britain”.

Of note, the GSGB report has stated that just under half of adults aged 18 and over have participated in any form of gambling in the past four weeks, but this figure drops to just above a quarter when those who only participated in lottery draws are excluded.

In addition, the report found that 41 per cent of adults who gambled in the past 12 months rated the last time they gambled positively, 21 per cent gave a negative score and 37 per cent gave a neutral score. Male participants were more likely to have higher Problem Gambling Severity Index scores, as well as those aged 18 to 34.

In response to the publication, the UKGC’s Executive Director of Research and Policy, Tim Miller, has described the GSGB report as “the next significant step forward in our journey on creating a robust source of evidence for gambling in Great Britain”.

GSGB structure

Produced by the National Centre for Social Research (NatCen) and the University of Glasgow, the first annual GSGB report data was collected over two waves between July 2023 and February 2024 using a push-to-web approach. 

Wave one data was released back in March this year, while wave two data was published earlier this month.

Responses from 9,804 people are featured within the report, but this figure will increase to around 20,000 by next year.

The UKGC has stated that the new GSGB approach aims to provide “greater insight into attitudes and gambling behaviours – presenting a fuller picture, illuminating participation rates, the type of gambling activities participated in, experiences and reasons for gambling, and the consequences that gambling can have on individuals and others close to them”.

However, the commission has emphasised that the GSGB report estimates “are not directly comparable with results from prior gambling or health surveys and such comparisons should not be used to assess trends over time” due to the changes in methodology.

The UKGC added that the GSGB data outlined is “the first year of a new baseline, against which future changes can be compared”.

Miller said: “One of our aims as a regulator is to ensure we gather the best possible evidence on gambling – and today’s publication is the next significant step forward in our journey on creating a robust source of evidence for gambling in Great Britain.

“Data in this report represents the first year of a new baseline, against which future changes can be compared and as such will prove invaluable in deepening further our understanding of gambling across the country.”

Gambling participation

The UKGC outlined figures from the GSGB report, stating that regarding participation, 48 per cent of respondents aged 18 and over participated in any form of gambling in the past four weeks.

However, this participation figure falls to 27 per cent when those who only participated in lottery draws were excluded.  

Participants were more likely to gamble online (37 per cent) than gamble in person (29 per cent), but “much of this difference was accounted for by people purchasing lottery tickets online”. Removing lottery draws, 18 per cent of participants gambled in person, while 15 per cent gambled online.  

The mean number of activities for those who had participated in gambling in the past four weeks was 2.2 activities, with the most common activities being the National Lottery at 31 per cent, buying tickets for other charity lotteries at 16 per cent and buying scratchcards at 13 per cent. 

Experiences of and reasons for gambling

Regarding experiences of gambling, respondents were asked to rate their feelings towards gambling with a score out of 10 – 10 meaning they loved it and zero meaning they hated it.

The UKGC reported that 41 per cent of adults who gambled in the past 12 months gave a positive score between six and 10, 37 per cent gave a neutral score of five and 21 per cent gave a negative score of between zero and four. 

Excluding lottery draws, 50 per cent gave a score between six and 10, 31 per cent gave a neutral score of five and 19 per cent gave a negative score between zero and four. 

As for why respondents gambled, the most common reason was ‘for the chance to win big money’ at 86 per cent, followed by ‘because it’s fun’ at 70 per cent, ‘to make money’ at 58 per cent and ‘because it’s exciting’ at 55 per cent.

Other answers included ‘because of the sense of achievement’ at 44 per cent, ‘because it is something that I do with others’ at 34 per cent, ‘as a hobby or pastime’ at 27 per cent, ‘to be sociable’ at 24 per cent, ‘to escape boredom or to fill my time’ at 23 per cent, ‘to relax’ at 22 per cent and ‘because I am worried about not winning’ at 20 per cent.

In addition, 19 per cent of respondents said they gambled ‘for the mental challenge or to learn’, 11 per cent ‘because it helps when I am feeling tense’, nine per cent ‘to compete with others’ and eight per cent ‘to impress other people’.

Respondents in the age group of 18 to 24 were the only age group to say they gambled ‘because it was fun’ (83 per cent) more than ‘for the chance to win big money’ (79 per cent).

Consequences from gambling

Looking at the consequences from gambling, the GSGB used the Problem Gambling Severity Index. The PGSI consists of nine items “which measure both behavioural symptoms of gambling disorder and certain adverse consequences from gambling”.

The nine PGSI items are:

  • bet more than you can really afford to lose
  • needing to gamble with larger amounts of money to get the same excitement
  • gone back to try to win back money you had lost
  • borrowed money or sold anything to get money to gamble
  • felt you might have a problem with gambling
  • felt gambling has caused you any health problems, including stress and anxiety
  • people have criticised your betting or told you that you have a gambling problem, whether or not you thought it was true
  • felt your gambling has caused financial problems for you or your household
  • felt guilty about the way you gamble or what happens when you gamble.

These nine questions are assessed on a four-point scale with corresponding scores between zero and three. The scale and respective scores are: ‘never’ – zero, ‘sometimes’ – one, ‘most of the time’ – two and ‘almost always’ – three.

A total score between zero and 27 is possible depending on the response for each of the nine questions. Scores are categorised into the following: PGSI score 0, PGSI score 1 to 2, PGSI score 3 to 7 and PGSI score 8 or higher.

Of all participants, 2.5 per cent had a PGSI score of 8 or more, 3.7 per cent had a PGSI score of 3 to 7, 8.3 per cent had a PGSI score of 1 to 2 and 85.6 per cent had a PGSI score of 0.

However, the UKGC has noted that “estimates of problem gambling rates should be used with caution as there is a risk the new methodology substantially overstates the true level of gambling and gambling harm in the population”.

The commission added that “given this is both a baseline statistic and further work is being carried out in line with Prof Sturgis recommendations, GSGB statistics should not be used to scale up the prevalence of problem gambling or the consequences of gambling to whole population”.

Among those who had gambled in the past 12 months, 4.1 per cent had a PGSI score of 8 or more, 6.1 per cent had a PGSI score of 3 to 7, 13.7 per cent had a PGSI score of 1 to 2 and 76.1 had a PGSI score of 0. The GSGB report noted that “rates were higher among those who had gambled on activities other than lottery draws alone”.

The report also stated that “for each PGSI group, that is scores 1 to 2, 3 to 7 and 8 or more, rates were higher among male than female participants, and typically were higher among those aged 18 to 34, declining with age”.

Of adults aged 18 and over who had gambled in the last 12 months, 16 per cent had gone back to win lost money, 9.9 per cent felt guilty about their gambling, 9.6 per cent bet more than they could afford and 6.7 per cent felt gambling had caused health problems.

In addition, 6.4 per cent gambled with large amounts of money to feel excitement, 6.4 per cent felt they might have a problem with gambling, 6.1 per cent had been criticised for their betting or told they had a gambling problem, 5.6 per cent felt their gambling had caused financial problems and 3.3 per cent borrowed money or sold anything for gambling.

The UKGC noted that its data showed who had bet on non-sports events in person were “over nine times more likely than the average for all past 12-month gamblers to have a PGSI score of 8 or more”. Those who had gambled on online slots were “more than six times more likely than average to have a PGSI score of 8 or more”.  

Of all adults who had gambled in the past year, the most reported severe consequence was relationship breakdown due to own gambling at 1.6 per cent, whilst the most frequently reported potential adverse consequences – happening at least occasionally – were reducing spending on everyday items at 6.6 per cent, lying to family at 6.4 per cent and feeling isolated at 5.5 per cent.

The survey also analysed the relationship between PGSI and the consequences from own gambling, showing that 41.3 per cent of those with a PSGI score of 8 or more “reported experiencing at least one of the severe consequences asked about”. 

Equivalent estimates were 7.9 per cent for those with a PGSI score of 3 to 7, 1.4 per cent for those with a PGSI score of 1 to 2 and 0.6 per cent for those with a PGSI score of 0. The UKGC says this demonstrates “how experience of severe consequences can be experienced by individuals with a range of PGSI scores”.

The GSGB report also asked participants if they had thought about taking their own life or had attempted to do so in the past 12 months. Those who answered yes were asked if this was related to their gambling.

The report stated: “Of the 11.4 per cent of participants who had thought about or attempted taking their own life, 4.9 per cent reported that this was related to their gambling either a little or a lot, with 1.1 per cent reporting that this was related to their gambling a lot.

“It is worth noting, in an area which is very difficult to research, that the 11.4 per cent of adults who had thought about or attempted taking their own life in the past 12 months represents an estimate higher than reported in other studies.”

The commission has also collected data on the consequences of someone else gambling for the first time, noting that 47.9 per cent of adults reported someone close to them gambled.

The most reported severe consequence of someone else gambling was relationship breakdown at 3.5 per cent, while the most frequently experienced consequences were experiencing embarrassment, guilt or shame, experiencing conflict or arguments and experiencing health problems, including stress and anxiety.

Independent review

In November last year, Professor Patrick Sturgis of the London School of Economics was commissioned by the UKGC to conduct an independent review of the push-to-web approach for GSGB.

Sturgis described the GSGB developments in his review published in February this year as being “exemplary in all respects”, and that the move to push-to-web will bring several “important benefits”.

He also provided seven recommendations for how the UKGC can address unresolved issues following his review of the GSGB methodology. This included:

  • Research to better understand the relationship between survey topic and the propensity of gamblers to respond to survey invitations.
  • Additional research to understand the role of socially desirable responding as the driver of the difference in gambling estimates between in-person and self-completion surveys.
  • Randomised experiment to evaluate the effect of the updated list of gambling activities on estimates of gambling prevalence and harm. 
  • Assess the extent of potential bias in the subset of questions administered to online respondents only.
  • Continue to monitor best practice developments in the area of within household selection of adults in push-to-web surveys.
  • Research on the prevalence of gambling and gambling harm in groups that are excluded from the GSGB because they are not included in the sampling frame.  
  • Seek opportunities to benchmark the estimates from the GSGB against a contemporaneous face-to-face interview survey in the future.

Following the publication of the first annual GSGB report, Sturgis stated: “The new design of the Gambling Survey for Great Britain will significantly enhance the evidence base on patterns and trends in gambling behaviour.

“With an annual sample size of 20,000 individual interviews across the nations and regions of Great Britain, the survey will provide researchers and policy makers with fine-grained and timely data across a broad range of key indicators.

“Using a push-to-web mixed mode design and random probability sampling from the Postcode Address File, the survey implements state-of-the-art methodology to a very high standard.”

The next quarterly GSGB wave data – Wave One 2024 – will be released on September 12, 2024, while the next annual release – 2024 Annual publication – will be in the summer of 2025.

To read the full GSGB 2023 Annual report, click here.