Second Session at the Virtual Poker Table: A Contemporary Study of Actual Online Poker Activity.

Technological advancements and worldwide television exposure led to a poker boom in the early 2000s, and poker (both live and online) has retained some of that popularity today. The present study examined online poker playing trends based on actual electronic betting records data for 2489 subscribers to a major global internet gambling operator from 2015 to 2017. We found that overall financial involvement (median total overall spend: €439.7) and time commitment (median number of sessions: 43) during the two-year study period were relatively moderate. We identified the top 1% by total overall spend as a subgroup of highly involved players with disproportionately higher financial involvement (median total overall spend: €272,581.4) and time commitment (median number of sessions: 1149). Our results were similar to those reported in LaPlante et al.'s (Comput Hum Behav 25(3):711-717, 2009. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2008.12.027 ) study of online poker betting records, suggesting that players' levels of involvement are similar to those from ten years ago despite numerous changes to the online poker environment. We also analyzed records of deposits and withdrawals, and we observed similar indicators of moderate gambling behavior within the overall sample (median two-year total amount deposited: €176.4). In contrast to popular beliefs about internet gambling, in our sample, most online poker play was arguably moderate. However, a small percentage of highly involved players play poker at extreme levels and require closer scrutiny.

Open Science Practices in Gambling Research Publications (2016-2019): A Scoping Review.

The replication crisis has stimulated researchers around the world to adopt open science research practices intended to reduce publication bias and improve research quality. Open science practices include study pre-registration, open data, open access, and avoiding methods that can lead to publication bias and low replication rates. Although gambling studies uses similar research methods as behavioral research fields that have struggled with replication, we know little about the uptake of open science research practices in gambling-focused research. We conducted a scoping review of 500 recent (1/1/2016-12/1/2019) studies focused on gambling and problem gambling to examine the use of open science and transparent research practices. Our results showed that a small percentage of studies used most practices: whereas 54.6% (95% CI: [50.2, 58.9]) of studies used at least one of nine open science practices, each practice's prevalence was: 1.6% for pre-registration (95% CI: [0.8, 3.1]), 3.2% for open data (95% CI: [2.0, 5.1]), 0% for open notebook, 35.2% for open access (95% CI: [31.1, 39.5]), 7.8% for open materials (95% CI: [5.8, 10.5]), 1.4% for open code (95% CI: [0.7, 2.9]), and 15.0% for preprint posting (95% CI: [12.1, 18.4]). In all, 6.4% (95% CI: [4.6, 8.9]) of the studies included a power analysis and 2.4% (95% CI: [1.4, 4.2]) were replication studies. Exploratory analyses showed that studies that used any open science practice, and open access in particular, had higher citation counts. We suggest several practical ways to enhance the uptake of open science principles and practices both within gambling studies and in science more generally.