This box is not visible in the printed version.
This short report explores the reasons people give for taking part in gambling and how they relate to different gambling activities.
Published: 30 January 2025
Last updated: 30 January 2025
This version was printed or saved on: 21 May 2025
Online version: https://www.gamblingcommission.gov.uk/report/investigating-the-relationship-between-reasons-for-gambling-and-different
The key findings for this report are:
This short report explores the reasons people give for taking part in gambling and how they relate to different gambling activities. It shows how the reasons given for gambling can be grouped into 5 broad themes: enhancement, challenge, coping and escapism, social, and money, and that different themes are associated with different gambling activities.
Participants were provided with a list of 18 types of gambling legally available in Great Britain and asked which of these activities they had taken part in in the past 12 months. They were also asked about any private betting or gambling they may have done in the same period. Participants who answered yes to taking part in one or more gambling activity are described in this report as participating in gambling in the past 12 months.
Participants who had participated in any gambling activity in the past 12 months were then asked if they had taken part in the same gambling activity or activities within the past 4 weeks. Participants who answered yes to one or more gambling activity are described in this report as participating in gambling in the past 4 weeks.
The list of gambling activities presented to participants was refined and tested during the development stages of the Gambling Survey for Great Britain (GSGB). The aim was to update the list used in previous surveys to better represent forms of commercial gambling currently available in Great Britain, and to better capture engagement in different online gambling formats. Appendix A shows the list of gambling activities asked about for the past 4 weeks and the past 12 months.
The Reasons for Gambling Questionnaire (RGQ) is a 15-item self-report measure of gambling motivations. Originally developed for the British Gambling Prevalence Survey (BGPS) 2010 (opens in new tab), the RGQ is a validated measure (opens in new tab) of reasons for gambling designed to be used in men and women from aged 16 and older.
In July 2024, the Gambling Commission published the first annual report from the Gambling Survey for Great Britain (GSGB) based on data collected in 2023. Further details about the survey methodology including its strengths and limitations are provided in the GSGB Technical report. The annual report presented figures relating to the reasons people gave for participating in gambling, showing how they varied by age and sex. This latest report provides additional insight into the reasons people give for taking part in gambling and explores how those reasons relate to different gambling activities. A better understanding of the association between motivation and activities is critical in understanding both general gambling behaviour as well as its consequences.
Previous research has identified some associations between motivations for gambling and type of gambling activity. Canale et al (opens in new tab) used data from the 2010 British Gambling Prevalence Survey (BGPS) to show participants who gambled both online and in person in the past year gave different reasons for gambling than participants who only gambled in person, with the former group more likely to cite reasons relating to recreation, enhancement and money. Later research by Sundqvist et al (opens in new tab) (2016) found that social reasons for gambling were more strongly associated with casino games and sports betting, whilst coping reasons more strongly linked to Electronic Gaming Machines. The first of these studies focused only on broad groupings and the second used a more limited range of gambling activities than exists in the GSGB data. The large size of the GSGB data allows these associations to be investigated in more detail, specifically with respect to differences in the motivation behind online and in person variants of the same activity.
The Gambling Survey for Great Britain (GSGB) used the Reasons for Gambling Questionnaire (RGQ) developed for the British Gambling Prevalence Survey (BGPS) 2010 to investigate the reasons people gave for participating in gambling activities. The RGQ built upon the work of Stewart and Zack (2008) (opens in new tab), who developed a self-reported tool to measure motivations for gambling among those who gambled. The RGQ was designed to capture a full range of reasons for participation amongst the general population, and designed to measure reasons for gambling in general, rather than motivations for engagement in specific activities.
The RGQ contains a series of 15 questions on the reasons people give for taking part in gambling. People who had gambled in the past 12 months were asked to state how often each proposed reason was the reason they had taken part in the activities they had listed, with the option of selecting ‘always, ‘often’, ‘sometimes’, or ‘never’.
Table 1 shows the reasons given for participating in gambling, showing both overall endorsement (the proportion who said that was the reason ‘always’, ‘often’, or ‘sometimes’) and strong endorsement (the proportion who said ‘always’). Figures are presented for people who had spent money on any gambling activity in the past 12 months and those who had done so in the past 4 weeks, with the distributions of both being very similar.
Table 1: Distribution of reasons for gambling questions for those who gambled in the past 12 months and past 4 weeks
| Reasons for gambling: I take part in these activities… | Gambled in past 12 months: responding 'sometimes', 'often' or 'always' (percentage) | Gambled in the past 4 weeks: responding 'sometimes', 'often' or 'always' (percentage) | Gambled in past 12 months: responding 'always' (percentage) | Gambled in the past 4 weeks: responding 'always' (percentage) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| For the chance of winning big money | 86% | 90% | 36% | 39% | Because it's fun | 70% | 72% | 14% | 15% | As a hobby or pastime | 27% | 30% | 4% | 4% | To escape boredom or to fill my time | 23% | 25% | 2% | 2% | Because I'm worried about not winning if I don't play | 20% | 23% | 3% | 3% | To compete with others (for example bookmaker, other gamblers) | 9% | 10% | 1% | 1% | Because it's exciting | 55% | 58% | 7% | 7% | For the mental challenge or to learn about the game or activity | 19% | 21% | 1% | 1% | Because of the sense of achievement when I win | 44% | 47% | 6% | 7% | To impress other people | 8% | 8% | 1% | 1% | To be sociable | 24% | 23% | 2% | 2% | Because it helps when I'm feeling tense | 11% | 13% | 1% | 1% | To make money | 58% | 63% | 20% | 22% | To relax | 22% | 24% | 2% | 2% | Because it's something that I do with my friends or family | 35% | 35% | 4% | 4% | Unweighted bases (number) | 5780 | 4562 | 5780 | 4562 |
Notes on table
Base: Productive individuals who had gambled in the past 12 months.
Unweighted bases (number): Only includes participants who provided a response to the reason for gambling statement.
Unweighted bases (number): Bases for "For the chance of winning big money" are shown. Other bases vary but are of a similar magnitude.
The most endorsed items were to win big money, for fun, and to make money. The least endorsed reasons were to impress others, to compete with others, and to help when feeling tense. This is broadly in line with the patterns seen in the BGPS 2010.
A breakdown of the reasons given by age and sex for those who had gambled in the past 12 months is given in Table C.3 in the GSGB Year 1 Annual Report.
The Reasons for Gambling Questionnaire (RGQ) was designed to identify the reasons people give for gambling across 5 broad domains, these were: gambling for social reasons, enhancement reasons, monetary reasons, recreational reasons, and coping reasons.
To understand if these themes were also evident with the Gambling Survey for Great Britain (GSGB), a Principal Component Analysis (PCA) was run using the data collected by the RGQ from those who had gambled in the past 12 months. The PCA revealed 5 themes or ‘components’1 that were largely consistent with the 5 themes listed above.
Table 2 shows how each question from the RGQ loads onto each of the 5 components. Loadings can range between -1 and 1. A positive value means the question has a positive association with that component (hence someone who said ‘always’ to that specific reason is likely to have a high value for that component), whilst a negative value means the reverse (it should be noted that this specific PCA did not return any negative loadings).
The closer a loading is to 1, the stronger the association between that question and the component. Table 2 excludes loadings lower than 0.3, as these have a weaker impact on the component; excluding them allows the patterns between questions and components to be seen more clearly. The questions with the highest loadings will dominate the component, although it is possible (as in the case of mental challenge) for a question to be associated with more than one component.
The table shows loadings for principal component analysis with varimax factor rotation. Loadings can range between -1 and 1 and indicate how strongly each question loads onto each component.
| Reasons for gambling: I take part in these activities… | Component 1: Enhancement | Component 2: Coping and/or escape | Component 3: Challenge | Component 4: Social | Component 5: Money |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Because it's fun | 0.76 | <0.3 | <0.3 | <0.3 | <0.3 |
| Because it's exciting | 0.75 | <0.3 | <0.3 | <0.3 | <0.3 |
| Because of the sense of achievement when I win | 0.65 | <0.3 | 0.32 | <0.3 | <0.3 |
| As a hobby or pastime | 0.52 | 0.58 | <0.3 | <0.3 | <0.3 |
| For the mental challenge or to learn about the game or activity | 0.50 | 0.35 | 0.48 | <0.3 | <0.3 |
| To relax | 0.35 | 0.70 | <0.3 | <0.3 | <0.3 |
| To escape boredom or to fill my time | <0.3 | 0.77 | <0.3 | <0.3 | <0.3 |
| Because it helps when I'm feeling tense | <0.3 | 0.74 | <0.3 | <0.3 | <0.3 |
| To compete with others (for example bookmaker, other gamblers) | <0.3 | <0.3 | 0.72 | <0.3 | <0.3 |
| To impress other people | <0.3 | <0.3 | 0.66 | 0.35 | <0.3 |
| Because I'm worried about not winning if I don't play | <0.3 | <0.3 | 0.53 | <0.3 | 0.42 |
| To be sociable | <0.3 | <0.3 | <0.3 | 0.81 | <0.3 |
| Because it's something that I do with my friends or family | <0.3 | <0.3 | <0.3 | 0.79 | <0.3 |
| For the chance of winning big money | <0.3 | <0.3 | <0.3 | <0.3 | 0.83 |
| To make money | <0.3 | <0.3 | <0.3 | <0.3 | 0.80 |
Notes on table
Base: productive individuals who gambled in the past 12 months and provided a response to the reason for gambling statement.
The table shows loadings for principal component analysis with varimax factor rotation. Loadings can range between -1 and 1 and indicate how strongly each question loads onto each component.
The loadings show us how the responses given by GSGB participants to the RGQ naturally group together into 5 themes that describe the reasons people give for gambling.
Two of the themes – gambling for social reasons (component 4) and gambling for monetary gain (component 5) – are straightforward to interpret. Social reasons include gambling to be sociable or because it is something the participant does with their friends and family. Monetary reasons include gambling, at least sometimes, for the chance of winning big money and gambling to make money.
The remaining 3 themes, as in 2010, needed further examination and are discussed below:
Component 1 is dominated by reasons relating to fun and excitement. These 2 questions had the highest factor loadings. Gambling because it gives a sense of achievement is also important. The theme also includes gambling as a hobby or pastime and gambling for the mental challenge. Both Wardle et al and Stewart and Zack identified a subscale in the RGQ that they named ‘enhancement’ that was defined as ‘internal, positive reinforcement’ as it was seen as gambling for fun, excitement, and to increase positive emotions. Component 1 is comparable to this theme has therefore been named ‘enhancement’ for consistency.
Component 2 has the highest loadings for three questions relating to filling in time: alleviating boredom, relieving tension, and relaxing. This has close similarities to the ‘coping’ motives identified by Stewart and Zack, which they defined as being related to ‘internal, negative reinforcement’ (that is, gambling to reduce or avoid negative emotions). Boredom and being tense can both be viewed as negative emotions. This theme also includes gambling as a hobby or pastime and includes a weak loading for gambling as a mental challenge, although it should be noted that gambling as a mental challenge has stronger associations with other components and makes only a minor contribution here. As this component has strong parallels with the coping motives identified in the literature, and centres on escapism it has been named ‘coping or escapism’.
Component 3 is defined by reasons relating to gambling as a challenge or competition, namely, to compete with others, impress others, and the mental challenge. This theme also includes concerns about missing out. This component has been named ‘challenge’ as a result.
These 5 factors are broadly consistent with BGPS 2010. The social and money components are equivalent in both surveys and the enhancement component is broadly similar. The remaining 2 have some key differences:
15 principal components were identified; 4 were retained because they had eigenvalues greater than 1, a fifth, concerning reasons related to money, was also retained due to its conceptual usefulness. The 5 factors explained 66 percent of the variance in the responses given to the RGQ, similar to that in 2010 BGPS.
The 5 factors were entered into a series of regression models to identify how each of the 5 themes were associated with each of the 21 gambling activities undertaken in the past 4 weeks. Whilst the questions about reasons for taking part were not asked in respect to specific activities, it is reasonable to assume that the respondent is answering in relation to the activities they have more recently taken part in, hence the 4-week activity data has been used for this analysis.
However, it should be noted that many participants had taken part in more than one activity. Excluding National Lottery draws, around half the respondents who had spent money on gambling in the past 4 weeks had participated in more than one activity. A quarter had participated in 3 or more. This means the findings will be interpreted as ‘common reasons given for participation in gambling by individuals who have taken part in activity X’, with the caveat that they may also have participated in other activities alongside. It is possible that the relationships are weaker with activities that are likely to be participated in alongside other activities, as this would dilute the associations between reasons and activity.
The regressions1 were run with the 4-week frequency for a specific gambling activity as the outcome and the principal component scores as predictor variables representing the five motivation themes. Models were run using stepwise regression. This means any motivation themes that had a non-significant relationship with the activity (defined as having a p-value greater than 0.05) were removed from the model. The themes that remained in the model are therefore the ones which have a significant association with that specific activity. The direction and strength of this relationship is evidenced by the size and direction of the coefficient, a positive coefficient meant someone with those motivations for gambling was also more likely to do that specific activity, whereas a negative coefficient means someone who gave those motivations was less likely to have also done that specific activity. Although it should be noted that these are not causal associations – giving a specific reason does not result in participating in a specific activity, or vice versa.
Different groups of activities and their associated themes are presented in the following tables.
| Motivations for participating in The National Lottery draws and other charity lotteries (Regression coefficients) | National Lottery draw tickets - online | National Lottery draw tickets - in person | Other charity lotteries - online | Other charity lotteries – in person |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Enhancement | 0.05 | 0.09 | Not significant | 0.03 |
| Coping and/or escape | 0.07 | 0.14 | 0.09 | 0.11 |
| Challenge | 0.05 | 0.11 | 0.11 | 0.11 |
| Social | −0.05 | 0.05 | Not significant | 0.03 |
| Money | 0.36 | 0.17 | 0.03 | Not significant |
Notes on table: Only coefficients with significant p-values are shown in the table. Cells with "not significant" indicate reasons for gambling were not significant in the stepwise model. Positive coefficients mean that people with these reasons for gambling were more likely to take part in the activity. Negative coefficients mean that people with these motivations were less likely to take part in the activity.
All motivation types were associated with taking part in the National Lottery draws, either in person or online, with money being the strongest reason for both. Interestingly, those who gambled for social reasons were less likely to purchase National Lottery tickets online, whereas the opposite was true for those who purchased National Lottery tickets in person.
Those who gambled for monetary reasons were not likely to purchase other charity lottery tickets in person. There was only a weak positive association between gambling for money reasons and the purchase of other charity lottery tickets online.
| Motivations for participating in The National Lottery draws and other charity lotteries (Regression coefficients) | National Lottery Scratchcards | Other Scratchcards | National Lottery online instant wins | Other online instant wins |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Enhancement | 0.13 | 0.04 | 0.04 | 0.04 |
| Coping and/or escape | 0.13 | 0.14 | 0.10 | 0.18 |
| Challenge | 0.08 | 0.16 | 0.12 | 0.14 |
| Social | −0.07 | 0.10 | Not significant | Not significant |
| Money | 0.12 | 0.06 | 0.13 | 0.05 |
Notes on table: Only coefficients with significant p-values are shown in the table. Cells with "not significant" indicate reasons for gambling were not significant in the stepwise model. Positive coefficients mean that people with these reasons for gambling were more likely to take part in the activity. Negative coefficients mean that people with these motivations were less likely to take part in the activity.
All motivation types were associated with the purchase of National Lottery or other scratchcards. The strongest associations observed for enhancement and coping and or escapism were National Lottery scratchcards, whilst challenge had the strongest association for other scratchcards. The association of monetary reasons was stronger for National Lottery scratchcards than other scratchcards, possibly reflecting the size of potential winnings.
For online instant wins, both National Lottery and others, there was a different pattern. First, social reasons were not significantly associated with engagement in either type of online instant wins, suggesting social reasons for gambling are unrelated to participating in any form of online instant win. For National Lottery online instant wins, the strongest association was with gambling for monetary reasons whereas for other forms of online instant wins, it was gambling to cope or escape.
| Motivations for betting on sports and racing and betting on the outcomes of other events (Regression coefficients) | Betting on sports and or racing online | Betting on sports and or racing in person | Betting on the outcomes of other events online | Betting on the outcomes of other events in person |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Enhancement | 0.38 | Not significant | 0.04 | 0.03 |
| Coping and/or escape | 0.27 | 0.12 | 0.09 | 0.05 |
| Challenge | 0.08 | 0.16 | 0.13 | 0.10 |
| Social | −0.07 | Not significant | Not significant | Not significant |
| Money | 0.12 | 0.07 | 0.07 | Not significant |
Notes on table: Only coefficients with significant p-values are shown in the table. Cells with "not significant" indicate reasons for gambling were not significant in the stepwise model. Positive coefficients mean that people with these reasons for gambling were more likely to take part in the activity. Negative coefficients mean that people with these motivations were less likely to take part in the activity.
Associations between reasons for gambling and betting activities, either online or in person, were varied. Betting on sports and or racing online was most strongly associated with gambling for enhancement. However, gambling for enhancement was not significantly associated with betting on sports and or racing in person and was negatively associated with betting on the outcomes of other events, meaning that people who gambled for these reasons were less likely to bet on other events.
Gambling to cope and or escape was strongly associated with betting on sports and or racing online and was associated with gambling on other events, albeit with a weaker association. For those betting on sports and or racing in person, gambling for the challenge was the most strongly associated reason for gambling.
Notably, there was either no relationship between gambling for social reasons and participation in each of the betting types, and in the case of betting on sports and or racing online, there was a negative association, meaning that people who gambled for social reasons were less likely to bet on sports and or racing online.
With the exception of betting on the outcomes of other events in person, gambling for money was positively associated with each betting type, but it was not the strongest association observed.
| Motivations for participating in bingo (regression coefficients) | Bingo online | Bingo in person |
|---|---|---|
| Enhancement | 0.07 | Not significant |
| Coping and/or escape | 0.23 | Not significant |
| Challenge | 0.06 | Not significant |
| Social | Not significant | 0.15 |
| Money | Not significant | Not significant |
Notes on table: Only coefficients with significant p-values are shown in the table. Cells with "not significant" indicate reasons for gambling were not significant in the stepwise model. Positive coefficients mean that people with these reasons for gambling were more likely to take part in the activity. Negative coefficients mean that people with these motivations were less likely to take part in the activity.
There were distinct differences between the reasons for participating in gambling given by people who participated in bingo online in the past 4 weeks and those who participated in person.
Social motivations for participating in gambling were the only significant reasons among those who participated in bingo in person, no other reasons were significant. This suggests that people who gamble for reasons other than social reasons were less likely to play bingo in person.
For online bingo, the strongest association was gambling to cope and or escape. Those who gamble for these reasons were significantly more likely to play bingo online. This was followed by enhancement and the challenge, although these associations were far weaker.
Monetary motivations were not significant in either model, suggesting that those whose main motivation is winning money do not participate in either form of bingo.
| Motivations for participating in casino games (regression coefficients) | Casino games online | Casino games at a casino (in person) | Casino games at a machine/terminal |
|---|---|---|---|
| Enhancement | Not significant | Not significant | Not significant |
| Coping and/or escape | 0.29 | 0.11 | 0.14 |
| Challenge | 0.15 | 0.18 | 0.15 |
| Social | Not significant | 0.07 | Not significant |
| Money | Not significant | Not significant | 0.13 |
Notes on table: Only coefficients with significant p-values are shown in the table. Cells with "not significant" indicate reasons for gambling were not significant in the stepwise model. Positive coefficients mean that people with these reasons for gambling were more likely to take part in the activity. Negative coefficients mean that people with these motivations were less likely to take part in the activity.
As with bingo, the motivations for gambling that were associated with participating in casino games in the past 4 weeks varied according to the form of casino game participation.
Coping and or escapism was the motivation that had the strongest significant association with participating in casino games online in the past 4 weeks. This was also significantly associated with participating in casino games in person (at a casino) and casino games at a machine, but that association was weaker.
Individuals who had given social reasons as a motivation for taking part in gambling were more likely to have also gambled on casino games in person (at a casino) in the past 4 weeks, but there was no association between social reasons and participating in casino games online or at a machine.
Correspondingly, those who gambled for monetary reasons were also more likely to have participated in casino games at a machine, but there was no association between monetary reasons and online or in person casino games (at a casino).
Casino games, in all modes of participation, were associated with people giving challenge and coping and or escapism as motivations for their gambling participation. However, the association between coping and or escapism and participation was stronger for online casino games than casino games in person (at a casino) or at a machine.
Enhancement was not significant in any casino game type, suggesting that gambling for enhancement reasons is not associated with casino gambling, the other motivations had stronger associations.
| Motivations for participating in fruit and slots (regression coefficients) | Fruit and or slot machines online | Fruit and or slot machines in person |
|---|---|---|
| Enhancement | Not significant | Not significant |
| Coping and/or escape | 0.40 | 0.14 |
| Challenge | 0.09 | 0.07 |
| Social | −0.14 | Not significant |
| Money | 0.12 | 0.11 |
Notes on table: Only coefficients with significant p-values are shown in the table. Cells with "not significant" indicate reasons for gambling were not significant in the stepwise model. Positive coefficients mean that people with these reasons for gambling were more likely to take part in the activity. Negative coefficients mean that people with these motivations were less likely to take part in the activity.
As with bingo and casino, there were differences in the reasons for gambling between those who played fruit and or slot games online and those who played them in person. The main difference is the strength of the association between gambling to cope and or escape and playing fruit and or slot machines online. Those who gambled for reasons relating to coping and or escapism were far more likely to play fruit and or slot machines online. Whilst there was also an association between coping and or escapism and playing fruit and or slot machines in person, the association was not as strong.
Individuals who give social reasons for gambling are significantly less likely to have participated in online fruit and slot machines in the past 4 weeks. This implies people who gamble for social reasons or to spend time with friends and family are also less likely to engage with fruit and slot machines online. Social reasons are not significantly related to fruit and slot machines in person, implying this motivation is unrelated to participating in fruit and slot machines in person.
Enhancement was not significant in either model, suggesting this motivation for gambling is unrelated to participating in any form of fruit or slot machines.
For both, gambling for monetary reasons was positively associated with engagement but this was not the strongest association observed.
| Motivations for participating in the football pools and private betting (regression coefficients) | Football pools | Private betting |
|---|---|---|
| Enhancement | 1.22 | 1.13 |
| Coping and/or escape | 1.14 | Not significant |
| Challenge | 1.18 | Not significant |
| Social | Not significant | 1.43 |
| Money | 1.45 | Not significant |
Notes on table: Only coefficients with significant p-values are shown in the table. Cells with "not significant" indicate reasons for gambling were not significant in the stepwise model. Positive coefficients mean that people with these reasons for gambling were more likely to take part in the activity. Negative coefficients mean that people with these motivations were less likely to take part in the activity.
People who gambled for enhancement reasons were significantly more likely to engage in private betting or football pools. Perhaps unsurprisingly, those who gambled for social reasons were significantly more likely to engage in private betting also.
Aside from social reasons, the football pools was positively associated with all other reasons for gambling, with the strongest motivation being gambling for monetary reasons.
1All but 2 models used linear regression, with the frequency of taking part in that activity coded as: every day = 6, a few times a week = 5, about once a week = 4, about once a fortnight = 3, about once in the past 4 weeks = 2, not in the past 4 weeks = 1. The exceptions are football pools and private betting, these questions were asked as yes or no outcomes and use logistic regressions with the outcomes coded as 1 = yes, 0 = no. Coefficients are reported for linear regression models, odds ratios are reported for logistic regression models.
Despite the caveat that the reasons for gambling were not asked in relation to specific activities, there are some clear patterns between the reasons people have given for taking part in any gambling activity in the past 12 months, and the types of gambling activities they have taken part in during the past 4 weeks.
Some common themes are apparent.
Coping and/or escapism motives are more likely to be given by people who participated in activities online. This was seen for bingo, casino, fruit and or slots, and betting on sports or racing. This suggests people who participate in these forms of gambling were also more likely to give reasons for gambling that aimed to reduce or avoid negative emotions. These types of gambling activities may act as a form of escapism.
Enhancement motives – gambling for fun and excitement – were mainly seen for private betting, football pools, betting on sports online, bingo online, and National Lottery draws and scratchcards. These motives were not seen for online casino games or fruit and slots, where escapism and coping motives were much more prominent.
In person activities were more likely to have social motives. Bingo in person and casino games in person both had social motives, it was particularly strong for bingo. However, this was not the case for placing bets (either sports bets or betting on other outcomes) where social motives were unrelated. This is likely because sports betting in person includes placing bets at a bookmakers, as well as attending race meets. If it was possible to separate out the latter there could potentially be an association with social reasons. Similarly, placing bets on the outcome of events in person would be done at a bookmakers.
Social motives were missing from, or were negatively associated with, all of the online forms of gambling activities.
Machine-based activities (casino and fruit and or slots) did not behave like other in person gaming activities as they were not related to social motives.
Money was not the key driver for most activities. The exceptions tended to be activities relating to the National Lottery; tickets, scratchcards, or online instant wins; products that have potentially large winnings.
The following table shows the list of gambling activities and indicates whether they were asked about for the past 12 months and the past 4 weeks.
| Activity | Asked if participated in past 12 months | Asked if participated in past 4 weeks |
|---|---|---|
| Tickets for National Lottery draws | Yes | No |
| Tickets for National Lottery draws bought online | No | Yes |
| Tickets for National Lottery draws bought in person | No | Yes |
| Tickets for other charity lottery draws | Yes | No |
| Tickets for other charity lottery draws bought online | No | Yes |
| Tickets for other charity lottery draws bought in person | No | Yes |
| National Lottery scratchcards | Yes | Yes |
| Other scratchcards | Yes | Yes |
| National Lottery online instant win games | Yes | Yes |
| Other online instant win games | Yes | Yes |
| Betting on sports and racing online or via an app | Yes | Yes |
| Betting on sports and racing in person | Yes | Yes |
| Betting on the outcome of events online or via an app | Yes | Yes |
| Betting on the outcome of events in person | Yes | Yes |
| Bingo online or via an app | Yes | Yes |
| Bingo played at a venue, for example bingo hall or social club | Yes | Yes |
| Casino games played online or via an app | Yes | Yes |
| Casino games played at a casino | Yes | Yes |
| Casino games played on a machine or terminal in a venue, such as a casino, bookmakers, club, or pub | Yes | Yes |
| Fruit and slots games played online or via an app | Yes | Yes |
| Fruit and slots games played in person (on a machine) | Yes | Yes |
| Football pools | Yes | Yes |
| Private betting | Yes | Yes |
Tipping S and Wardle H. (2025) Investigating the relationship between reasons for gambling and different gambling activities, Gambling Commission: Birmingham.
In the last 5 years, Heather Wardle (HW) discloses grant funding for gambling-related research by the Economic and Social Research Council, National Institute for Health Research, Wellcome Trust, the Commission (including their regulatory settlement fund), Office of Health Disparities and Improvements; Public Health England; Greater London Authority; Greater Manchester Combined Authority; Blackburn with Darwen Local Authority and the Department of Digital Culture Media and Sport.
HW declares consulting fees from the Institute of Public Health, Ireland and the National Institute for Economic and Social Research.
HW declares payment for delivery of seminars from McGill University, the University of Birmingham, John Hopkins University and from the British Broadcasting Corporation.
HW has been paid as an expert witness by Lambeth and Middlesborough Borough Councils.
HW declares travel costs paid by Gambling Regulators European Forum, the Turkish Green Crescent Society, Alberta Gambling Research Institute; the REITOX Academy (administered through the Austrian National Public Health Institute) and the University of Helsinki.
HW served as Deputy Chair of the Advisory Board for Safer Gambling between 2015 and 2020, remunerated by the Commission; is a Member of the WHO panel on gambling (ongoing) and provided unpaid advice on research to GamCare for their Safer Gambling Standard (until mid-2021).
HW runs a research consultancy for public and third sector bodies only. She has not, and does not, provide consultancy services to gambling industry actors.
In researching the gambling industry and their practices, HW declares occasional attendance at events where gambling industry actors are present (including industry-sponsored conferences).
As part of her work on the Gambling Survey for Great Britain (GSGB), HW is required by the Commission (the funder) to participate in events disseminating research findings to their stakeholders, which includes the industry. Her attendance at events where industry is present is independently funded and does not involve collaborations or partnerships with industry.
In the last 5 years, Sarah Tipping (ST) declares funding for gambling projects from the National Institute of Health Research and the Gambling Commission.