Development and Validation of the RAFFLE: A Measure of Reasons and Facilitators for Loot Box Engagement

Exploring the relationships between psychological variables and loot box engagement, part 2: exploratory analyses of complex relationships

In a pre-registered survey linked to this paper (Exploring the relationships between psychological variables and loot box engagement, part 1: pre-registered hypotheses), we confirmed bivariate associations between engagement with loot boxes (purchasable randomized rewards in video games) and measures of problem gambling, problem video gaming, impulsivity, gambling cognitions, experiences of game-related 'flow', psychological distress and reduced wellbeing. However, these variables have complex relationships, so to gain further insights, we analysed the dataset (1495 gamers who purchase loot boxes and 1223 purchasers of non-randomized content) in a series of Bayesian mixed-effects multiple regressions with a zero-inflation component. The results challenge some well-established results in the literature, including associations between loot box engagement and problematic gambling measures, instead suggesting that this relationship might be underpinned by shared variance with problem video gaming and gambling-related cognitions. An entirely novel discovery revealed a complex interaction between experiences of flow and loot box engagement. Distress and wellbeing are both (somewhat contradictorily) predictive of participants engaging with loot boxes, but neither correlate with increasing loot box risky engagement/spend (among those who engage). Our findings unravel some of the nuances underpinning loot box engagement, yet remain consistent with narratives that policy action on loot boxes will have benefits for harm minimization.

Exploring the relationships between psychological variables and loot box engagement, part 1: pre-registered hypotheses

Loot boxes are purchasable randomized rewards in video games that share structural and psychological similarities with gambling. Systematic review evidence has established reproducible associations between loot box purchasing and both problem gambling and problem video gaming, perhaps driven by a range of overlapping psychological processes (e.g. impulsivity, gambling-related cognitions, etc.) It has also been argued that loot box engagement may have negative influences on player financial and psychological wellbeing. We conducted a pre-registered survey of 1495 loot box purchasing gamers (LB cohort) and 1223 gamers who purchase other, non-randomized game content (nLB cohort). Our survey confirms 15 of our 23 pre-registered hypotheses against our primary outcome (risky loot box engagement), establishing associations with problem gambling, problem gaming, impulsivity, gambling cognitions, experiences of game-related 'flow' and specific 'distraction and compulsion' motivations for purchase. Results with hypotheses concerning potential harms established that risky loot box engagement was negatively correlated with wellbeing and positively correlated with distress. Overall, results indicate that any risks from loot boxes are liable to disproportionately affect various 'at risk' cohorts (e.g. those experiencing problem gambling or video gaming), thereby reiterating calls for policy action on loot boxes.

Measuring loot box consumption and negative consequences: psychometric investigation of a Swedish version of the Risky Loot Box Index

•

Loot Box use and purchases have potentially addictive qualities.

•

An instrument, the Risky Loot Box Index, was psychometrically evaluated in a Swedish populations.

•

A revised scale consisting of a two factor seven item scale was the best fit.

•

The revised scale measures overconsumption in relation time spent on loot boxes and purchases of loot boxes.

•

The instrument can be used to measure the potentially addictive qualities of loot box use.

•

This is important since loot box use, and purchases has been linked to problem gambling.

Loot boxes are products in videogames that is earned by playing a video game or by buying them. Loot boxes has similar mechanisms as a lottery and there is an ongoing debate if loot boxes are gambling. However, to understand the potential harm of loot boxes valid instruments are needed. An English study psychometrically evaluated an instrument focused on risky loot box use called the Risky Loot Box Index. The study evaluated 12 item scale and based on a factor analysis it was reduced to a five-item scale. The aim of our study is to evaluate a Swedish version of the 12-item instrument from a psychometric perspective. Two samples recruited via an online survey were used. The first sample was recruited from the gambling site Unibet. A mail with an invitation to participate was sent to esports bettors and sport bettors at the gambling site. The second sample was recruited from a Facebook forum focused on e-sports. An invitation was posted on the forum to partake in the study. A total of 195 of respondents (96% men and 4% women) with a mean age of 33.76 (SD = 12.34) answered the Unibet survey and 169 respondents (96% men and 4% women and non-binary) with a mean age of 23.89 (SD = 5.52) answered the Facebook survey. An exploratory factor analysis yielded a two-factor seven item solution. The factors were overconsumption regarding time spent on loot boxes and the other factor was focused on overconsumption of loot boxes in terms of spending money. The confirmatory factor analysis conducted in the Facebook sample validated the result from the exploratory factor analysis. The conclusion of the study is that the Swedish version of the Risky Loot Index has good psychometric properties and can used to measure risky loot box consumption.