A direct and conceptual replication of post-loss speeding when gambling

Post-reinforcement pauses during slot machine gambling are moderated by immersion

The post-reinforcement pause (PRP) is an operant effect in which response latencies increase on trials following the receipt and consumption of reward. Human studies demonstrate analogous effects in electronic gambling machines that utilise random ratio reinforcement schedules. We sought to identify moderators of the human PRP effect, hypothesising that the magnitude of gamblers' PRPs is moderated by the type of reinforcing outcome (genuine wins vs. losses-disguised-as-wins [LDWs] vs. free-spin bonus features) and individuals' level of gambling immersion, a cognitive state linked to problem gambling. Experienced slot machine users (N = 53) played a real slot machine for 20 min. The dependent variable was defined as the time delay in the initiation of each bet ("Spin Initiation Latency"; SIL). Using 80% of trials, a linear model was fit regressing SIL on the independent variables (outcome type, immersion, and outcome-by-immersion interaction), and a larger group of covariates (participant ID, trial number, winnings, etc.) selected using double-robust LASSO-regularised regression. The previously unseen 20% of cases were used to validate the model. Positively reinforcing outcome types (wins, LDWs, bonus spins) showed significantly larger SILs than losses, indicating a PRP effect. Immersion did not predict response latencies, but win-by-immersion and LDW-by-immersion interactions indicated that pauses were greater among more immersed participants. The small number of free-spin bonus features showed similar trends that were not statistically significant. These results indicate that gamblers immersed in play remained sensitive to in-game reinforcement (contrary to a prevailing account), and provide guidance for researchers bridging laboratory research and real-world behaviour.

Post-loss speeding or post-win slowing? An empirical note on the interpretation of decision-making time as a function of previous outcome

Differences in response time following previous losses relative to previous wins are robust observations in behavioural science, often attributed to an increased (or decreased) degree of cognitive control exerted after negative feedback, hence, post-loss slowing (or post-loss speeding). This presumes that the locus of this effect resides in the specific modulation of decision time following negative outcomes. Across two experiments, I demonstrate how the use of absolute rather than relative processing speeds, and the sensitivity of processing speeds in response to specific experimental manipulations (Experiment 1: win rate, Experiment 2: feedback), provide clarity as to the relative weighting of post-win and post-loss states in determining these behavioural effects. Both experiments show that the speeding or slowing of decision-time is largely due to the flexibility generated by post-win cognitive states. Given that post-loss speeding may actually represent post-win slowing, conclusions regarding the modulation of decision-making time as a function of previous outcomes need to be more carefully considered.

Am I Winning or Losing? Probing the Appraisal of Partial Wins via Response Vigor

Attempts to obtain rewards are not always successful. Despite investing much time, effort, or money, sometimes individuals may not obtain any reward. Other times they may obtain some reward, but the obtained reward may be smaller than their initial investment, such as partial wins in gambling. It remains unclear how such ambiguous outcomes are appraised. To address this question, we systematically varied the payoffs for different outcomes in a computerized scratch card task across three experiments. To test outcome appraisal, we used response vigor as a novel proxy. In the scratch card task, participants turned three cards one by one. Depending on the turned cards, they either received an amount that was higher than the wager (win), an amount lower than the wager (partial win), or nothing (loss). Overall, participants responded to partial wins more slowly than losses, but more quickly than wins. Partial wins were therefore appraised to be better than losses, but worse than wins. Importantly, further analyses showed that outcome appraisal was not based on the net win or loss amount. Instead, participants primarily used the configuration of turned cards as a cue for the relative rank of an outcome within a specific game. Outcome appraisals thus utilize simple heuristic rules, rely on salient information (such as outcome-related cues in gambling), and are specific to a local context. Together, these factors may contribute to the misperception of partial wins as real wins in gambling. Future work may examine how outcome appraisal may be modulated by the salience of certain information, and investigate the appraisal process in contexts beyond gambling.

Deliberately making miskates: Behavioural consistency under win maximization and loss maximization conditions

We argue that the feedback traditionally used to indicate negative outcomes causes future detrimental performance because of the default goal of win maximization. In gaming paradigms where participants intentionally performed as well (win maximization) and as poorly (loss maximization) as possible, we showed a double dissociation where actions following wins were more consistent during win maximization, but actions following losses were more consistent during loss maximization. This broader distinction between goal-congruent and goal-incongruent feedback suggests that individuals are able to flexibly redefine their definition of 'success', and provide a reconsideration of the way we think about 'losing'.

Behavioural expressions of loss-chasing in gambling: A systematic scoping review

BANERJEE Nilosmita., CHEN Zhang., CLARK Luke., NOËL Xavier. Behavioural expressions of loss-chasing in gambling: A systematic scoping review NEUROSCI BIOBEHAV REV 152(1) XXX-XXX, 2023. - Loss-chasing, the tendency to continue and/or intensify gambling following losses, is a key clinical symptom in gambling disorder and a central feature endorsed by at-risk problem gamblers. Despite its centrality, loss-chasing has been often operationalised across distinct behavioural expressions. The current systematic scoping review aimed to map the heterogeneous operationalisations of loss-chasing in the literature. The reviewed studies defined loss-chasing either between-sessions (n = 39) or within-sessions (n = 38), as a long-recognised distinction. For both categories, further behavioural expressions could be distinguished. Between-session loss-chasing was captured by endorsing an item 'returning another day/time to recoup losses', or behaviourally as the interval between successive sessions, or as increasing stakes in the next session. Within-session loss-chasing was defined as continuing and/or intensifying gambling either by increased risk-taking, stake size, or speed of play. Additionally, much heterogeneity was observed in the gambling contexts examined, the exact definition of loss, and the potential delineation of win-chasing. Open questions and future directions are discussed. Overall, this paper serves as a first step towards more conceptual clarity of loss-chasing.

Modeling urgency in the lab: Exploring the associations between self-reported urgency and behavioral responses to negative outcomes in laboratory gambling

Impulsivity is a multifaceted construct that relates to different behaviors in everyday life and has been associated with many psychopathological disorders and behavioral problems, such as problematic gambling behavior. One questionnaire to measure these several facets on a trait level is the UPPS-P Impulsive Behavior Scale. Specifically, the UPPS-P investigates five distinct facets: (a) negative urgency, (b) lack of premeditation, (c) lack of perseverance, (d) sensation seeking, and (e) positive urgency. Negative urgency at a trait level in particular seems to be associated with the development of psychopathological disorders. To date, there are no established state measures of negative urgency. However, it was recently proposed that speeding after losses might be a suitable measure. Thus, in this study, we explored the possible relationship between a state measure of negative urgency modeled through a behavioral gambling task and a trait measure of negative urgency through the UPPS-P questionnaire. We used correlational and network analyses in an aggregated database of eight samples (total N = 1216) to explore the potential relationships between post-loss speeding on the behavioral gambling task and UPPS-P scores (by combining trait vs. item-based analyses). We found that the degree of speeding after losses (post-loss speeding) did not correlate with the trait measure of impulsivity in general and negative urgency specifically, either at the latent trait level or on an item-based level. This null finding indicates that our state measure of post-loss speeding and negative urgency on a trait level does not seem to capture the same underlying constructs. Implications for personality research are discussed.

Winning and losing in online gambling: Effects on within-session chasing

The tendency to continue or intensify gambling after losing (loss-chasing) is widely regarded as a defining feature of gambling disorder. However, loss-chasing in real gambling contexts is multifaceted, and some aspects are better understood than others. Gamblers may chase losses between multiple sessions or within a single session. Furthermore, within a session, loss-chasing can be expressed in the decision of (1) when to stop, (2) how much stake to bet, and (3) the speed of play after winning and losing. Using a large player-tracking data set (>2500 players, >10 million rounds) collected from the online commercial game Mystery Arena, we examined these three behavioral expressions of within-session loss-chasing. While the first two aspects (when to stop and how much stake to bet) have been examined previously, the current research is the first large-scale study to examine the effects of wins and losses on the speed of play in real gambling. The players were additionally assigned different involvement levels by the operator based on their gambling behavior on the operator’s own platform, which further allowed us to examine group differences in loss-chasing. We found that after winning, both the high- and low-involvement groups were less likely to stop, and increased the stake amount, thus showing win-chasing instead of loss-chasing in these two facets. After losing, both groups played more quickly though, which may reflect an urge to continue gambling (as an expression of loss-chasing). Wins and losses had a smaller influence on the speed of play for the high-involvement players, suggesting that they might have reduced sensitivity to wins and/or losses. Future work can further examine chasing in different gambling products and in people with gambling problems to assess the generalizability of these findings.

Assessing behavioural profiles following neutral, positive and negative feedback

Previous data suggest zero-value, neutral outcomes (draw) are subjectively assigned negative rather than positive valence. The combined observations of faster rather than slower reaction times, subsequent actions defined by shift rather than stay behaviour, reduced flexibility, and, larger rather than smaller deviations from optimal performance following draws all align with the consequences of explicitly negative outcomes such as losses. We further tested the relationships between neutral, positive and negative outcomes by manipulating value salience and observing their behavioural profiles. Despite speeded reaction times and a non-significant bias towards shift behaviour similar to losses when draws were assigned the value of 0 (Experiment 1), the degree of shift behaviour approached an approximation of optimal performance when the draw value was explicitly positive (+1). This was in contrast to when the draw value was explicitly negative (-1), which led to a significant increase in the degree of shift behaviour (Experiment 2). Similar modifications were absent when the same value manipulations were applied to win or lose trials (Experiment 3). Rather than viewing draws as neutral and valence-free outcomes, the processing cascade generated by draws produces a complex behavioural profile containing elements found in response to both explicitly positive and explicitly negative results.

Post-error Slowing Reflects the Joint Impact of Adaptive and Maladaptive Processes During Decision Making

Errors and their consequences are typically studied by investigating changes in decision speed and accuracy in trials that follow an error, commonly referred to as “post-error adjustments”. Many studies have reported that subjects slow down following an error, a phenomenon called “post-error slowing” (PES). However, the functional significance of PES is still a matter of debate as it is not always adaptive. That is, it is not always associated with a gain in performance and can even occur with a decline in accuracy. Here, we hypothesized that the nature of PES is influenced by one’s speed-accuracy tradeoff policy, which determines the overall level of choice accuracy in the task at hand. To test this hypothesis, we had subjects performing a task in two distinct contexts (separate days), which either promoted speed (hasty context) or cautiousness (cautious context), allowing us to consider post-error adjustments according to whether subjects performed choices with a low or high accuracy level, respectively. Accordingly, our data indicate that post-error adjustments varied according to the context in which subjects performed the task, with PES being solely significant in the hasty context (low accuracy). In addition, we only observed a gain in performance after errors in a specific trial type, suggesting that post-error adjustments depend on a complex combination of processes that affect the speed of ensuing actions as well as the degree to which such PES comes with a gain in performance.