One of the ever present aspects in gambling at an amateur level is the much documented need of gamblers to search for any sign, no matter how subtle, to assist them in making their next play or bet.

A good example of this is a person playing roulette who notices another person in a black blouse standing next to them. Often, a moment like this will prompt certain gamblers to place their bet on black.

Blackjack players experiencing good luck who are then confronted by a less friendly dealer will take it as a sign to move onto another table. They believe their luck is about to change.

This is the world of the superstitious gambler, the act of blowing on a set of dice before rolling them; the carrying a toenail from a horned toad to bring luck when playing online bingo. The list of irrational beliefs associated with determining decisions in gambling is long and varied and crosses cultural boundaries and religious beliefs.

However, to understand the impulse to revert to irrational beliefs when making a decision in gambling, there are two useful hypothesis that seek to explain the acquisition of superstition practices and illusion of control that those superstitions bring, respectively.

The first is Skinner’s (1948) hypothesis which surmises that for conditioning to take place the most important factor is contingency. This can occur as a matter of expediency and even under accidental conditions. The result is a person gambling, whether blackjack, lotteries or online bingo, will identify a circumstance or list of circumstances during a winning phase of betting and establish those conditions as contingent to future gambling decisions.

The second hypothesis deals with the ongoing employment of a superstition or a set of superstitions as a means of belief that they offer control over a gambling situation. Experiments have been conducted that show gamblers exhibit more confidence of winning a bet if there is a history of wins in a given gambling situation. This is the basis for Langer’s (1975) hypothesis on illusion of control.

The Illusion of Control

Langer’s study of cognitive bias in gambling situations is one of the central contributions to understanding why certain gamblers believe random events are controllable. Previous observations to Langer’s study have shown that dice players often believed they could control the outcome of a throw by manipulating their throwing technique. Langer’s subsequent hypothesis was an attempt to explain that situations of luck or chance involved elements characteristic of situations that actually involved control or skill. In other words, a game of chance, such as online bingo, involves enough skill factors that a player can believe they can develop a strategy of actions designed to enhance their chances of winning despite the random basis of the game.

The previous observations of Henslin, Strickland and Lewicki seem to confirm this tendency amongst gamblers. Experiments by these social scientists seem to confirm that more money is wagered by gamblers based on their own techniques that appear to work than when someone else acted for them, despite the laws of probability stating each has the same chance of winning. The illusion of control is founded on this belief that probability can be manipulated by “game-play� techniques.

The kind of game required to create a situation where an individual gambler will develop strategies designed to flout probability through game-play techniques needs a set of elements based on possibility of choice; familiarity of response and stimulus, competition and active involvement.

For example, people who play online bingo will compete with other players by pitting their wits (active involvement) in recognizing the randomly selected numbers as matching those on their electronic bingo card (familiarity of response). As the game progresses each player races the others (competition) in reaching a stage in the game where they will be the first to achieve ‘bingo!’ (possibility of choice). That online bingo is based on randomly selected numbers as the determining factor in how the game progresses is an element that is conveniently overlooked by players engaging in ‘strategy’ based on techniques (superstition: the illusion of control).

Conclusion

Superstition provides the illusion of control many gamblers need to muster the courage to bet real money on a given game of chance where probability dictates chances of winning as being even.

The confidence shown by gamblers in winning in a game of chance when throwing a dice for themselves or when it is thrown for them often depends on previous results. Making a choice between the two techniques based on a belief that one will have a greater chance of producing a favourable result can be described as superstitious behaviour.

References

Barker, J. C. and Miller, M. (1968). Aversion therapy for compulsive gambling. The Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 146, 285-302.

Bleak, J. L., Frederick, C. M. (1998). Superstitious behavior in sport: Levels of effectiveness and determinants of use in three collegiate sports. Journal of Sport Behavior, 21, 1-15.

Budescu, D. V. and Bruderman, M. (1995). The relationship between the illusion of control and the desirability bias. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 8, 109-125.

Grenberg, D. and Rankin, M. (1982). Compulsive gamblers in treatment. British Journal of Psychiatry, 140, 364-366.
Henslin, J. M. (1967). Craps and magic. American Journal of Sociology, 73, 316-330.

Koehler, J. J., Gibbs, B. J. and Hogarth, R. M. (1994). Shattering the illusion of control: Multi-shot versus single-shot gambles. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 7, 183-191.

Langer, E. J. (1975). The illusion of control. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 32, 311-328.

Presson, P. K. and Besassi, V. A. (1996). Illusion of control: A meta-analytic review. Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 11, 493-510.

Skinner, B. F. (1948). “Superstition� in the pigeon. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 38, 168-172.

Strickland, L. H., Lewicki, R. J. and Katz, A. M. (1966). Temporal orientation and perceived control as determinants of risk-taking. Journal of Experimental and Social Psychology, 2, 143-151.

Rosa Bersabé and Rosario Martínez Arias Superstition in Gambling VOLUME 4. NUMBER 1. 2000. PSYCHOLOGY IN SPAIN

Written by John Witherspoon - Play bingo online at http://bingostreet.com/ and read celebrity gossip.

This entry was posted on Wednesday, July 18th, 2007 at 12:57 am and is filed under Online Bingo Education. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.