Sep 5, 2025 | PROBLEM GAMBLING
Prediction markets, platforms where people trade on the outcomes of future events, are experiencing a significant surge in popularity and are moving toward mainstream adoption. How exactly do these markets work, are they legal, do they constitute gambling and should they be regulated to ensure there are protections in place for those who might become addicted?
What are prediction markets?
A prediction market or betting market is an exchange-traded market where individuals can bet on the outcome of a variety of events with an unknown future. These events can involve elections, financial markets (such as whether or not the S&P 500 index will close above a specific level by year end), sports (such as whether a specific football team will win the Super Bowl) or even pop culture (such as whether a specific film will win the Academy Award for best picture). They just have to involve “yes or no” questions that will be resolved by a specific date.
Prediction markets run on a type of financial instrument known as an event contract. An event contract has a nominal value — often $1 — and traders can buy “yes” or “no” positions on it for some fraction of that value. When the event happens, the contract pays out to whoever was right.
For example, an event contract could involve whether Candidate A or Candidate B will win an election. If a trader buys a “yes” position on a Candidate A for 25 cents, and Candidate A ultimately does win the election, the trader would earn $1. But if the trader were wrong and Candidate B won, they’d get nothing and would lose their 25 cents.
From a larger perspective, prediction markets are based on the principle that aggregating the predictions of many individuals can lead to more accurate forecasts than relying on a single expert, opinion or poll.
Do prediction markets constitute gambling?
While there are various legal arguments opining on whether prediction markets constitute gambling or not, the perspective of the National Council on Problem Gambling (NCPG) is that it doesn’t make a significant difference. “From a problem gambling standpoint, anyone can develop an addiction to this activity, just as they can develop an addiction in legalized gambling markets,” says Cole Wogoman, director of government relations and league partnerships with NCPG.
The need for problem gambling safeguards
“Putting aside whether futures legally constitute gambling, from a problem gambling standpoint, betting on futures is functionally gambling,” says Cole. “The line between purchasing futures and gambling has particularly blurred with markets offered related to sporting events. NCPG is concerned about a form of gambling taking place outside of the responsible gambling tools framework and problem gambling safeguards required by gambling regulators.”
The legality of prediction markets
The legal status of prediction markets is complex and subject to ongoing debate. Historically, regulators have generally taken a firm stance against unlicensed online betting platforms. The central question is whether prediction markets, especially those involving sports outcomes, fall under the exclusive jurisdiction of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) or are also subject to state gambling laws. If prediction markets are not regulated, there will be no protections for consumers.
“Our position is that the CFTC needs to regulate prediction markets so they’re on a par with other legalized forms of gambling and offering the related protections that state and tribal regulators provide,” says Cole. Otherwise, Cole says, the CFTC should not allow these markets.
The issue is particularly concerning to tribes and gambling regulators. “If prediction market activity is allowed without any regulation, it renders the efforts of those who have worked to provide protections for legalized gambling essentially meaningless if people can avoid all the laws already in place,” says Cole. Prediction markets also do not pay any gambling taxes like legalized gambling markets, and therefore do not contribute to funding used to prevent and treat gambling addiction.
Stay tuned as we track continuing developments with regard to prediction markets and NCPG’s efforts to ensure there is appropriate oversight of these potentially dangerous transactions.
Sep 4, 2025 | RESEARCH
Read the Original Article on The Basis HERE.
By Matthew Tom, Ph.D.
Drug use disorders, pathological gambling, compulsive shopping, and other similar mental health problems were once thought of as separate and disconnected phenomena. According to the Syndrome Model of Addiction, advanced by Dr. Howard Shaffer and colleagues, risk factors for addiction – whether chemical and behavioral – include common themes and life circumstances. Researchers are continuing to look for these “primary causes” and mechanisms that can cut across different expressions of addiction. This week, as part of our Special Series in Honor of Dr. Howard Shaffer, The WAGER reviews a study by Sophie G. Coelho and colleagues that examined the perceived causes of several different expressions of addiction.
What was the research question?
From the perspective of people with lived experience, are the perceived causes of addiction similar across different forms of addiction?
What did the researchers do?
The researchers used data from the Quinte Longitudinal Study of Gambling and Problem Gambling. This prospective survey solicited people 18 years or older living within 70 miles of Belleville, Ontario, Canada, from 2006 to 2011. The 4,122 participants were a 74%/26% mix of people recruited randomly and a group overly selected for higher levels of gambling. A total of 1,473 participants reported problematic substance abuse, gambling, or other behavior. The researchers asked participants which behaviors led to “significant negative consequences” (e.g., financial difficulties, relationship issues). For each mentioned behavior, the researchers asked, “What was the main cause of [your problem with the substance/behavior]?” Participants’ responses were open-ended text, and the researchers used content analysis to classify responses. They classified participants’ types of addiction into three categories (substance use versus gambling versus other behavioral addictions), and then counted how many participants in each class gave each main cause. They used a chi-square test to determine if there was a difference in the three classes’ distributions of main causes.
What did they find?
Out of 25 main causes the researchers gleaned from the participants’ responses, 10 were common to all three classes. The most common cause was coping (see Figure), either with other mental health issues like depression, physical ailments such as nausea, or other life stressors such as family problems. Other main causes common to the three classes of addiction include enhancement (e.g., gambling for excitement), poor self-control, and the addictive properties of the substances or activities themselves. Main causes that were unique to certain classes included [chemical] withdrawal (specific to substance use disorders), money and trying to “win” (specific to gambling), and hunger (specific to eating, as another behavioral addiction). The researchers did find differences in the distributions of main causes. For example, participants were more likely to mention inherently addictive properties as a main cause of their addiction when discussing substance use disorders (e.g., “Tobacco is highly addictive”), while enhancement and excitement were more common in gambling and in other behavioral addictions.
Figure. Six of the eight most common main causes of addictive behavior and the categories of addictive behavior they led to. The two of the eight not shown are “Unclear” and “Unsure of cause.” Click image to enlarge.
Why do these findings matter?
Understanding the etiology of addiction is important, even if certain causes are more common for particular addictions than they are for others. For instance, researchers and clinicians can explore whether combining treatment seekers into support groups by main causes, rather than by current problems, might yield better treatment outcomes faster. To illustrate, people who all started engaging in addictive behaviors as a way of coping with depression and loneliness might be able to empathize with each other, even if some have problems with alcohol while others have problems with gambling. Treatment providers might find ways to think beyond the common practice of promoting services for one specific type of addiction, and find themselves able to serve much wider client bases than they originally envisioned.
Every study has limitations. What are the limitations of this study?
The participant pool resided completely within a single province in Canada, so the results might not be generalizable to other populations. The researchers grouped the different types of addiction into three broad classes, combining drugs with very different properties into one class, the many different forms of gambling into another, and a wide range of behavioral addictions into a third. Grouping participants or types of addiction this way might have kept the researchers from pinpointing specific main causes unique to specific substances, gambling games, or behaviors.
Aug 13, 2025 | RESEARCH
Read the Original Article on The Basis HERE.
By John Slabczynski
Gambling policy in the U.S. is driven by a combination of federal, state, and municipal regulations. This patchwork approach allows for the spread of relatively unregulated gambling opportunities, particularly online. These unregulated online operators often present unique risks to consumers, such as deposit insecurity—as evident during ‘Black Friday’, the 2011 federal shutdown of major online poker sites. As the U.S. moves towards a safer and more regulated market, it is important to understand how such regulation influences the consumer experience. This week, The WAGER reviews a study by Kahlil Philander and Bradley Wimmer that explored how online poker players value government regulation.
What was the research question?
How much are online poker players willing to pay for government-regulated online poker?
What did the researchers do?
The researchers recruited 783 U.S. and Canadian online poker players (21 years and older) from poker-related websites and on social media. The participants completed a discrete choice experiment (DCE)1. Each participant was presented with two hypothetical online poker sites that varied on five features (see Figure), and were asked to choose the operator they preferred. Participants completed this task eight times, with a different combination of opposing operator features each time. They also indicated their attitudes and beliefs towards government regulation. The researchers estimated the dollar value participants were willing to pay for government-regulated poker gambling and whether this differed based on a player’s preferred stake size.
What did they find?
On average, online poker players were willing to pay an additional $1.83/hour to play on government-regulated sites, though this varied based on factors like a player’s preferred stake size. For example, at micro-stakes,2 participants were willing to pay an average of $0.88 compared to $5.35 at middle-stakes. Furthermore, attitudes appear to be an important factor in a consumer’s price point insofar as those who held negative attitudes towards government regulation were less willing to pay more for government regulation, and at times even willing to pay more to play on an unregulated site. For example, those who played at either micro-stakes or small-stakes and believed that government regulation would lead to increased taxation showed an aversion to sites that offer such regulation.
Figure. Displays the five features involved in the DCE. The left-most column lists the specific features and the middle-left column describes each feature. The columns on the right show examples of two hypothetical online poker sites with opposing features (Option A and Option B). During the experiment, participants selected the operator who appealed more to them based on their differing features. Click image to enlarge.
Why do these findings matter?
The findings from this study suggest that government-regulated poker sites are generally more appealing to online poker players compared to sites without such regulation, and so regulation might be important for the future health of the poker industry. However, it is also important to note that this study was conducted before recent changes to U.S. federal gambling regulations. For example, bettors can no longer deduct all of their gambling losses from their taxes. With fears of taxation a primary detractor to the value of government regulation, it is unclear how this legislation might affect the perceived value of government regulated gambling going forward.
Every study has limitations. What are the limitations in this study?
This study focused on online poker players and thus may not be generalizable to the wider population of people who gamble. Notably, previous studies suggest that poker players may differ from other gambling populations on a number of factors. This study was also unable to acquire a representative sample (i.e., higher stakes bettors comprising an outsized proportion of the sample) that might have biased the results.
________________
1. The researchers conducted two prior qualitative studies to inform the development of the final DCE.
2. For micro-stakes games, the big blind can be as high as $0.50. Small-stakes big blinds are between $0.50 and $2.00 and middle-stakes big blinds are between $2.00 and $10.00.
Jun 18, 2025 | PROFESSIONALS
The International Gambling Counselor Certification Board (IGCCB) changed its name to the International Problem Gambling and Gaming Certification Organization (IPGGC) in December 2024 to better reflect its expanded mission and scope. This rebranding acknowledges the growing convergence between gambling and gaming behaviors and the need for specialized training and certification in both areas.
The organization, established in 1984, initially focused solely on gambling-related certifications. However, with the recognition of gaming disorder by the World Health Organization and the increasing prevalence of gaming-related issues, the IPGGC now offers certifications that encompass both gambling and gaming disorders. These include the International Certified Gambling Counselor (ICGC) credentials and the International Gaming Disorder Certificate (IGDC), among others.
By updating its name, the IPGGC aims to provide clearer guidance to professionals and the public, ensuring that those affected by gambling and gaming disorders receive support from certified experts trained in current best practices across both domains.
Jun 18, 2025 | ABOUT MNAPG
Problem Gambling Awareness Month (PGAM) is a national campaign that takes place every March to increase public awareness of problem gambling and the availability of prevention, treatment and recovery services. It’s organized by the National Council on Problem Gambling (NCPG) in collaboration with state affiliates, healthcare providers and community organizations.
MNAPG communicated these important messages through a series of articles, emails and ads. We’re pleased to report that our 2025 PGAM efforts were the most extensive in our history, reaching more people than ever before. Some metrics highlighting this effort include:
- Total traffic to the MNAPG website was up 68% this past March compared to March 2024.
- There were approximately 75,000 MNAPG website views in March.
- In partnership with the Star Tribune, a four-email campaign resulted in more than 180,000 opens and more than 24,000 clicks.
- A native article in the Star Tribune (a form of advertising that’s designed to blend seamlessly with the content of a website or publication) had 1.3 million impressions (the number of times a piece of content is displayed to a user) and 3,201 clicks.
- A display ad on the Star Tribune website had nearly 3 million impressions and was clicked nearly 4,500 times.
- PGAM-related ads placed on Google Ads had 68,000 impressions and nearly 1,000 clicks.
- An email and ad placed in The Phoenix Spirit produced approximately 15,000 website visits.
- A public service announcement had 20 million impressions and was viewed 8.9 million times.
- MNAPG was featured on MPR News with Angela Davis on March 17.
Beyond these analytics, the important message is that we’re reaching more and more people, and educating them about gambling addiction.
