Vulnerability

Donati MA, Chiesi F, Primi C (2017). Gambling-Related Distortions and Problem Gambling in Adolescents. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 2243.

Adolescent-specific (n=306 male teens) model showing illusion of control and gambler’s fallacy mediate the path from probabilistic-reasoning failures to problem gambling — the evidence base for teaching these distortions to youth.

American Psychiatric Association (2013). Gambling Disorder, in DSM-5. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th edition.

DSM-5 lists nine criteria for Gambling Disorder. Chasing losses (“often returns another day to get even”) and preoccupation are among the criteria with strongest predictive validity for escalation to disordered gambling.

Steinberg L (2008). A Social Neuroscience Perspective on Adolescent Risk-Taking. Developmental Review, 28(1), 78–106.

Foundational paper: risk-taking peaks in adolescence because the dopaminergic reward system matures earlier than the prefrontal cognitive-control system. Establishes the neurobiological vulnerability window that gambling platforms exploit.

Chambers RA, Potenza MN (2003). Neurodevelopment, Impulsivity, and Adolescent Gambling. Journal of Gambling Studies, 19(1), 53–84.

Definitive review showing problem-gambling prevalence in adolescence and young adulthood is two- to four-fold higher than in adulthood. Proposes the neural-circuitry model that links adolescent impulsivity to gambling vulnerability.

National Council on Problem Gambling (2024). NGAGE 3.0 — National Survey on Gambling Attitudes and Gambling Experiences.

Betting weekly or more is identified as one of the strongest predictors of problem gambling. Parlay participation among US sports bettors nearly doubled from 17% (2018) to 30% (2024).

Fairleigh Dickinson University Poll (Sept 2024). Online Sports Betting Among Young Men.

Nationally representative poll: 26% of men under 30 bet on sports online in the past year; 10% met problem-gambling criteria — more than triple the 3% national rate.

NCAA (Jan 2025). Sports Wagering Trends Among Student-Athletes — 5th National Study (n>20,000).

22% of NCAA male athletes bet on sports in the past year; education programs show a measurable shift in behavior; harassment from bettors is widespread at Division I.

Zendle D, Meyer R, Over H (2019). Adolescents and loot boxes: links with problem gambling and motivations for purchase. Royal Society Open Science, 6(6), 190049.

Found a moderate-to-large association between loot box spending and problem gambling in 16–18-year-olds (η²=0.120), stronger than the same association in adults. The strongest adolescent-specific evidence that loot box exposure links to gambling harm.

Schüll ND (2012). Addiction by Design: Machine Gambling in Las Vegas. Princeton University Press.

Foundational ethnography on how electronic gambling machines are engineered to maximize “time on device.” Origin of the modern dark-pattern conversation as applied to gambling and gaming products.

Hing N, Russell AMT, King DL, Rockloff M, Browne M, Greer N, Newall P, Sproston K, Chamberlain SR (2022). Adolescent betting on esports using cash and skins: Links to gambling and problem gambling. PLOS ONE.

Found 6.2% of adolescents under 18 engaged in esports skin betting (2.5x higher than cash esports betting), and skin bettors were ~3x more likely to meet problem gambling criteria. Best evidence for skin-betting markets as a youth-specific exposure.