Running Head: ASSIGNMENT # 3 1

ANNOTATED BIBLIOGRAPHY AND

PROPOSAL

Assignment # 3

Annotated Bibliography and Proposal

India Boudreau

English 115

North Island College

ASSIGNMENT # 3 ANNOTATED 2
BIBLIOGRAPHY AND PROPOSAL

Research Proposal on Online Gaming Addiction and Microtransactions

Topic: Targeting online game addicts with monetized games of chance and lottery microtransactions is
unethical.

Purpose: To demonstrate that the susceptibility of online gaming addicts to gambling addiction is due to
a myriad of factors, and that taking advantage of that psychological vulnerability to sell virtual gambling
tokens is unethical particularly in the case of underage players.

Description: The behavioral traits that indicate a predisposition to gaming addiction overlap
considerably with those of gambling addicts. Selling virtual “loot boxes” to addicts, where a person
exchanges real money for a digital token that offers them a chance to obtain a digital item or service, is
taking advantage of that psychological vulnerability. As many people who play games are underage, in
addition to being psychologically or emotionally vulnerable, this targeted sale of chance-based lottery
systems is exploitative and deliberately harmful.

Tentative Thesis: Due to the intentional exploitation of the vulnerable, the virtual gambling market
should be held to the same conditions as the actual gambling industry.

 What factors cause this dependency on games?

 Are players able to self-moderate?
 How is this new industry of gaming microtransactions comparable to traditional gambling
industries?
 What is the harm of this targeted marketing towards young people?
 How should this industry be regulated in future?
ASSIGNMENT # 3 ANNOTATED 3
BIBLIOGRAPHY AND PROPOSAL

Annotated Bibliography

Başol, G., & Kaya, A. B. (2018). Motives and Consequences of Online Game Addiction: A Scale
Development Study. Archives of Neuropsychiatry / Noropsikiatri Arsivi, 55(3), 225–232.
https://doi.org/10.5152/npa.2017.17017

Examines the reasons that online gaming addiction has become so prevalent, particularly among
young men dealing with adversity in both their personal lives and the changing global environment.

Chóliz, M., & Chóliz, M. (2016). The Challenge of Online Gambling: The Effect of Legalization on the
Increase in Online Gambling Addiction. Journal of Gambling Studies, 32(2), 749–756.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10899-015-9558-6

Argues the legalization and normalization of online gambling has broader repercussions than
legislators are aware. Examines how online gambling is currently handled and what could be done to
moderate the societal harm caused by gambling addiction.

Jeong, E. J., Kim, D. J., & Lee, D. M. (2017). Why Do Some People Become Addicted to Digital Games
More Easily? A Study of Digital Game Addiction from a Psychosocial Health Perspective.
International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 33(3), 199–214.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2016.1232908

An examination of the factors that lead to gaming addiction. Outlines the problems faced by
young people who turn to gaming to satisfy some emotional or material lack and the effects this trend
has on public health.

Summary

Zendle, D., & Cairns, P. (2018). Video game loot boxes are linked to problem gambling: Results of a large-
scale survey. PLoS ONE, 13(11), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0206767

The authors begin by defining the definition of a “loot box”, as opposed to a direct sale of a
digital item, as something that is “randomized” and therefore the money is not directly exchanged for
ASSIGNMENT # 3 ANNOTATED 4
BIBLIOGRAPHY AND PROPOSAL

the product but for the chance to obtain the product. The article emphasize that this is a widespread
phenomenon, noting hundreds of millions of players in different online games have spent an estimated
“$30 billion” on microtransactions and loot box sales.

Gambling addiction itself is here defined as “excessive and involuntary”, spending money
uncontrollably to the point of detriment to themselves and their “personal and vocational lives”. The
degree of the addiction was measured using the “Problem Gaming Severity Index (PGSI)”, a 9-article
instrument used to gauge the level of addiction based on factors such as “needing to borrow money” in
order to continue gambling or “needing to spend increasing amounts” to experience the same feelings
of enjoyment. The harm associated with gambling addiction is outlined as an increased risk of “domestic
abuse, involvement in illegal activities, suicidality” as well as the resultant financial and health risks
associated with this problematic behavior.

Similarities are drawn between traditional lottery systems and loot boxes in that money is
exchanged for the chance to receive prizes and that behavioral conditioning is intentionally used to
manipulate players into increased amounts of spending. Advocates for the games industry claim loot
boxes are differentiated from gambling systems because “losing” loot boxes always award an inferior
item instead of nothing, but this distinction is not enough according to Belgium and the Netherlands
where games that sell chance-based loot boxes are being banned.

The article summarizes their research with a large-scale analysis of over seven thousand players
who identify as having problematic in-game spending tendencies, the severity of their addiction, and the
qualitative amount spent on randomized loot boxes in comparison to the amount spent on direct sale
microtransactions.

Although the authors emphatically concluded there is a strong relationship between gambling
addiction severity and the amount spent on loot boxes, which was reported as vastly higher than that
spent on direct sale items, they also acknowledge the fundamental flaw in a conclusion drawn from
correlation alone. The authors also suggest that the inverse relation is true, not that loot box sales
encourage gambling addiction but that people who are already addicted to gambling may turn to loot
box sales instead. They also note that the PGSI relies heavily on players self-reporting and may be
considered biased. However, due to the magnitude of the study and the strong degree of association
between the two factors, the authors present a strong argument in favor of regulation.