Report
Consumers' views on informed choice in gambling
Findings from a research project to explore how consumers understand the meaning of “informed choice” in gambling.
Views on informed choice while gambling
This stage refers to how consumers stay informed while they are gambling. It relates to the play experience and play outcome parts of the Path to Play framework. The play experience covers both the experience of creating a bet as well as the session of play when multiple bets or games are played, or the time spent in physical gambling venues. The play outcomes relate to both how participants engage with their results once a game ends or a bet is settled, but also how consumers stay informed of their play in the long term.
Key themes
All participants wanted clear information about their net spend through periodic reminders. Beyond this, barriers and facilitators while gambling differed by product.
For sport bettors, interruptions and unfeasible betting options actively undermined informed choice. They preferred a simpler, distraction-free interface featuring key prompts during bet submission alongside periodic performance data like net spend and win/loss ratios.
Players of novel casino games sometimes ended up playing before understanding the game rules, which undermined informed choice. They preferred free trial runs and permanent, easy-to-see menus for looking up how games work.
Players of familiar casino games were affected by the fast, immersive nature of play. They preferred active, personalised interventions that caught their attention in play, flagging changes to their stake, their net spend, and time on the platform.
Land-based players relied on physical cues and staff. They wanted attentive but unobtrusive staff who could notice signs of distress and step in without making the play feel surveilled.
Type of information needed to stay informed
To stay informed during active gameplay, participants highlighted the need for real-time financial tracking and proactive safety interventions, such as pre-wager comprehension checks or in-game active guidance on game instructions and time spent.
A key theme across the research was the desire for consumers to be clearly and consistently informed of their true financial spend. While some participants noted that basic spend data is visible upon logging into certain platforms, or that they actively use existing features like monthly Profit and Loss (P&L) statements, others found this information difficult to locate. To facilitate genuine informed choice, participants emphasised the value of P&L tools that actively calculate total losses against winnings directly on-screen, providing a transparent, real-time reflection of net spend alongside a centrally displayed live balance.
Beyond live, in-game tracking, participants expressed a demand for structured, periodic financial summaries. The preferred frequency of these summaries varied: some favoured receiving an end-of-session breakdown detailing exact wins and losses, while others preferred monthly overviews that aggregate total spend and cumulative losses since the account's creation. For instance, one participant reflected on reviewing a seven-year transaction history, which revealed that despite staking approximately £75,000, his net losses were minimal. For this participant, access to long-term data provided valuable contextual clarity, allowing him to see the "bigger picture," mitigate the frustration of recent losses, and feel reassured regarding the fairness of the platform. Conversely, other participants argued that these summaries should function as immediate, active interventions. They suggested that fast-paced games should feature direct "reality checks" that explicitly state, for example, the exact duration of the session alongside the precise amount spent and won within that timeframe.
While participants desired clear information regarding their previous transactions, existing research indicates that the way these are designed can further improve or not improve informed choice. Gainsbury et al. (2025) evaluated Australia's mandatory monthly activity statements and found that while 57 percent of consumers opened them at least sometimes and generally viewed them as useful, behavioural account analysis showed no significant changes in betting frequency or deposit amounts, and reading statements did not improve consumers' objective recall accuracy of their net spend13. In contrast, BIT’s "How do activity statements impact gambling behaviour?" (opens in new tab) found that seeing any activity statement resulted in lower amounts bet, lower average stakes and improved recall of the amount bet, with 90 percent supporting implementation. This suggests that well-designed activity statements may be necessary, but, given the complex gambling environment in which they are presented, they may not be sufficient. Given the complex and fast-paced nature of gambling games, some participants wanted comprehension checks to inform them of their true spending and behaviour before wagering. Participants who predominantly engaged in sport betting suggested that informed choice could be strengthened by introducing mandatory confirmation warnings before consumers are permitted to place high-risk or mathematically improbable wagers, such as ten-leg accumulator bets. Those playing casino games highlighted the need for explicit safeguards against changes in stake sizes. One participant recounted an instance where a game’s default stake unexpectedly shifted from 20p to £2, noting that a simple, automated friction point, such as a prompt asking, "Are you sure?", would effectively prevent accidental overspending and ensure that every wager represents a deliberate, conscious choice.
Informed choice was seen as a continuous state that requires not only upfront information, but also continuous support while playing games. When engaging with unfamiliar or complex products, such as novel slot games or live casino offerings, participants expressed a need for structural support to help them understand game mechanics during play. Suggested interventions included free practice rounds and permanent, side-screen displays that continuously explain how the game operates and how payouts are calculated.
In contrast, when playing familiar games where the core mechanics were already understood, consumers' preferences shifted away from heavy instructional text toward subtle, live environmental cues. Examples included clear, on-screen text at blackjack tables stating the dealer’s specific standing rules, which helps players easily gauge their immediate odds without disrupting the flow of play.
When playing novel games or familiar ones, participants felt that they could easily lose track of reality, sometimes for hours. To account for this, some desired prominent session timers and periodic pop-ups (for example, at the 45-minute mark) asking if they are happy to continue, functioning much like a Netflix "Are you still watching?" prompt. Rather than generic safety warnings, users prefer targeted pop-ups triggered by their actual gameplay patterns, such as interventions when a system detects rapid, heavy spending or someone aggressively chasing losses.
Barriers and facilitators to staying informed while gambling
The main barriers that interfered with participants' ability to make informed decisions while gambling stemmed from three interacting areas: gambling companies' practices (both complex website design and wider structural restrictions), consumers' own psychological states, context of play and behaviours during play, and the intersection between the operator and individual factors. To help address these barriers, participants suggested having a different approach for different types of gambling (sport betting, casino online games, in-venue games), and personalising the solutions to individual players’ behaviour.
Gambling designs and features
The design of the gambling platforms impacted participants’ ability to make informed choices in different ways, depending on the type of game they were playing. These findings are aligned with the previous literature, which document the systematic use of design features that can work against informed choice. Newall (2025) provides a taxonomy of deceptive features in online gambling, categorising them as sludge (detrimental frictions such as complex withdrawal processes, relevant at play outcome), dark patterns (deceptive UX such as high suggested default bet sizes, relevant at active search and play experience), and dark nudges (exploiting cognitive biases such as framing odds as RTP, relevant throughout)14. McGarrigle et al. (2025) found pervasive use of "sneaking" (hiding information), "obstruction" (creating friction around withdrawals and account closure), and "interface interference" (bad defaults and inaccessible language).15
Sports betting
Because sports bettors sometimes log on with a specific goal, some found the betting platforms cluttered or overwhelming. This was due to lists of smaller games and adverts, which actively distracted them from placing their intended bets. This group particularly disliked any pop-ups being displayed while actively building bets, or any prompts guiding them towards specific bets. This was because betting required attention under time pressure, as some may rush to put in bets just before games start. Any distractions at that stage were either ignored or impacted their ability to stay informed. On one hand, promotional pop-ups nudging users toward specific, high-risk outcomes, such as 40-to-1 odds on multi-goal accumulators, were thought to make them more likely to make poorly considered and impulsive decisions. On the other hand, well-intentioned safety interventions, such as notifications regarding time spent on the platform, could backfire in these high-pressure moments: rather than encouraging reflection, they could cause bettors to rush their calculations and make mistakes on their bet slips.
“With (a gambling operator), they kind of show you how many people have put a bet on a certain leg or a result or whatever. Um, that's really quite dangerous for me because there's times where I'm like panicking on making a decision and I just add the top three choices.“
Male, 35, In-person sports betting and in-person slot machines
Instead of being interrupted while building bets, some sports bettors preferred unskippable safety checks mirroring online banking security, pointing out exactly the bets they are agreeing to do, and flagging when their bets are highly unrealistic.
"There should be some kind of preconfirmation warning... say you got 10 legs on. That's way too much."
Male, 35, In-person sports betting and in-person slot machines
Online casino games
The key barriers to staying informed while playing online casino games, such as slot games and live-streamed casino games, stemmed from their immediate play, visual design, immersive nature and fast pace.
When playing novel games, the experience could be difficult to understand when clear pre-game instructions were not provided; one participant gave the example of the live dealer "Cash or Crash" game. As mentioned in the previous section, one participant described entering this game mid-session and losing money for 10 minutes because they did not understand the mechanics. While the dealer did eventually explain the rules when asked via the chat function, participants considered this a structural flaw. The group agreed that such games should offer practice tokens or free demos so that consumers can learn how to use novel games without losing money. This was something they had observed on some poker websites, where it allowed players to learn the rules without financial risk.
Alternative ways to support consumers staying informed about game rules while playing included having game mechanisms displayed permanently on the side of the screen or having help icons that explain terms in simplified language. Some proposed that gambling companies could integrate AI chatbots capable of proactively answering questions and surfacing buried information during sessions, acting as a smart, on-demand guide that teaches players how games work so they are not gambling "blindly."
When presented with images of slot games or other similar instant-win games, participants appreciated that they offered information about time and net pay. However, some remarked that bright lights and cartoon imagery focused their attention on those visual features rather than on the play information displayed elsewhere on the screen.
"[...] the bright lights and the cartoons things focus your mind on that rather than looking at the small print at the bottom."
Male, 50, Online sports betting
Having information about the net balance in inconsistent locations made it harder for some to engage with it. One participant highlighted that she was used to looking for information about her deposit amount at the bottom of the screen. However, the net pay was sometimes displayed at the top, and it was updated after the deposit figure. She preferred to look at the bottom centre of the screen, because this was the location she normally checked. This inconsistent and asynchronous design risked consumers either ignoring one piece of information or momentarily processing two conflicting financial figures on the same screen, increasing cognitive load and creating unnecessary friction when trying to quickly assess their true spend.
Play information was also sometimes hard to take in due to the speed of the games. Immersive games absorbed participants' attention, leading to a loss of awareness of not just money but also time. Some thought sites did very little to interrupt them, with one person noting they lost three and a half hours on the sofa without a single warning. There was little awareness of safety tools that could interrupt play, such as reality checks or deposit limits.
"I'll sink some hours into it not realising like oh my god it's been like two hours or something."
Male, 26, Online sports betting
The fast pace also created confusion about accuracy. One participant noted that multi-line micro-stakes, such as 20p bets, produced payout sums that felt wrong, but the game's speed prevented him from checking whether the amounts were correct.
To account for the immersive and fast-paced nature of such games, it was widely agreed that pop-ups or other mandatory and attention-grabbing features could be useful. Some suggested that on-screen elements could grow in size or change colour at intervals to better capture attention.
"At sort of 10 to 15 minute intervals, it can grow in size or change colour to draw someone's attention to it."
Male, 26, Online sports betting
Other suggested mechanisms included Netflix-like notifications to gently check if players are still engaged without triggering stigma, and periodic reminders of time and money spent. When asked whether such pop-ups might backfire or distract from the play experience, participants largely disagreed. Some considered them an act of care from gambling companies. Others highlighted that users are already accustomed to receiving countless digital notifications, and that dismissing them would not require much effort. The prevailing view was that even if some people instantly close pop-ups, the potential benefits outweigh the minor annoyance, because they might catch the attention of someone who genuinely needs a financial reality check at that moment.
“ I don't think it hurts having that at all. Like, you know, some people have it on their bank accounts where anytime they tap their card, they get a notification.”
Female, 42, Online and in-person slot machines
There was some dispute about how useful pop-ups would be if people grew accustomed to them. Some liked the repetitive nature of this information, thinking that repetition may help them actually remember it. Others thought they would simply learn to ignore it. Instead, they proposed targeted, unexpected interventions based on actual gameplay patterns rather than fixed intervals:
"Sometimes you can ignore those popups... you're thinking, 'Oh, yeah, here we go. I've placed four bets. I'm going to get me message now'. But actually, if it was something that said, 'Actually, we track how you play and we correlate that this isn't productive.' That would really speak to me."
Female, 52, Online sports betting
The importance of personalised information was also highlighted in the wider gambling literature. Auer and Griffiths (2016) found that personalised behavioural feedback significantly reduced expenditure among online gamblers16 , and the meta-analysis by Bjørseth et al. (2021) showed that personalised pop-ups (detailing specific behavioural data, such as reaching a preset limit had substantially larger effects than generic warnings17). Gainsbury et al. (2018) found that different consumer sub-groups responded to very different kinds of messages: young adults preferred "tips to be a better gambler," older adults preferred limit-setting prompts, and skill-game players wanted direct, personalised expenditure data18. This suggests that motivation to engage with information provided is not fixed but is shaped by whether the information feels relevant, personally useful, and respectful of the consumer's autonomy.
Land-based gambling
While engaging in land-based gambling, participants relied more on physical cues, human interaction, and the tangible nature of the environment itself, all of which could act as both barriers and facilitators to informed choice.
Some found that the simpler environment and the physical act of handing over money made the whole activity feel more grounded. One participant argued that online gambling is dangerous precisely because it strips away the natural human reactions to real-world financial loss that a physical setting preserves.
I know you've still got the same problems with people gambling too much in casinos, gambling too. I understand that, but it just seems more real.”
Male, 67, In-person sports betting and in-person casino games
However, participants acknowledged that this sense of tangibility did not necessarily protect against harm and negative impacts to consumers. The social dynamics of a physical venue could draw people into unplanned spending. One participant described how the flow of a casino visit could escalate gradually: playing on the blackjack table and then thinking "just do another quid," until slowly they had spent £100. For some, land-based gambling at events like horse racing was experienced more as a "fun day out," where the costs of gambling were factored into the overall price of the experience, which could reduce the sense that real financial risk was involved.
A distinct challenge in physical venues was the lack of proactive information provision. Participants noted that machines often lacked explicit instructions and that venue staff did not routinely explain how games operated, reflecting a false assumption that anyone who walked into a casino already knew what they were doing. The complexity of certain fruit machine mechanics compounded this, with participants describing unexpected financial losses from games they had not fully understood.
To stay informed during play, some preferred physical staff who could read signs of distress, such as visible frustration, and intervene when appropriate. One participant compared the ideal staff role to a bartender who stops serving a drunk patron, suggesting that venue staff should be trained to spot the signs of gambling distress and actively step in. However, participants were clear that they did not want staff to be overbearing. One described not wanting staff checking in 'every two minutes.' The desired balance was attentive but unobtrusive: staff who noticed when something was wrong without making the experience feel surveilled. Previous research suggests that delivering on this balance in practice is not straightforward, given competing commercial and welfare priorities and the difficulty of accurately identifying signs of harm (Riley et al., 2018; Riley et al., 2024)1920
Gambling company practices
Beyond specific game or venue design features that could impair information processing and informed choice, some participants noticed broader operator practices they believed could harm consumers, or expressed distrust regarding gambling companies' commitment to safeguarding users. Some highlighted online disputes where gambling companies refused payouts for subjective niche bets (such as "shots on target"), or arbitrarily voided large consumer winnings by claiming the game had crashed.
Casino players highlighted that games would sometimes switch from free promotional spins to using real money without clear notification, or that default stake amounts would suddenly increase without their active approval or without them noticing. This underlines the need for more visible notifications and appropriate friction points to help users understand what the real cost of their play is, and when it changes.
Sports bettors observed that platforms allowed them to place bets with "inactive" conditions, such as wagering on a player to receive a yellow card even when that player was not actually in the starting lineup. Allowing consumers to wager on unfeasible outcomes under standard odds was seen as misleading and was considered unfair. Participants framed this as a question of basic fairness: the product did not deliver what it appeared to promise. One participant suggested that if a player is not in the starting lineup, the platform either should not let the user place the bet at all or the odds should be reduced to signal the player's inactive status.
A further facilitator to aid informed choice would be to give consumers more informational context around the bets they are making. For example, a participant suggested that gambling companies could display recent football statistics directly on the site, allowing bettors to assess how fair the operator's odds for a given bet are.
Consumer variables
Participants' ability to stay informed while gambling also depended on their emotional state, personal habits, and social environment. External factors like drinking alcohol in a pub or feeling pressured by friends and time constraints before a match could easily override a careful betting strategy. Once active play began, consumers sometimes observed a loss of self-control. One participant compared building complex bets to a "runner's high," where they got caught in the excitement and impulsively kept adding more risk without feeling able to stop.
Mood was a further psychological barrier. Strong emotions like excitement or stress could limit how much safety information consumers were willing to read, sometimes driving them to gamble repeatedly just to relieve tension. The immediate results of games could also affect behaviour: losing streaks could lead to "chasing losses," while winning streaks could make players feel overly confident and cause them to ignore warnings.
These insights illustrate that vulnerability is not a fixed characteristic, and is aligned with research from other sectors. The FCA's guidance on vulnerable consumers (opens in new tab) (PDF) identifies 4 drivers of vulnerability (health, life events, resilience, and capability) and emphasises that vulnerability is fluid and situational, not a permanent label. Ofgem's work in the Consumer Vulnerability Strategy (opens in new tab) (PDF) similarly recognises that the market itself can create or exacerbate vulnerability through complex information and aggressive sales tactics. This has a direct parallel in gambling, where the immersive and emotionally charged nature of play can temporarily reduce anyone's capacity for informed decision-making, not just those with clinical gambling problems.
To account for these different states, participants proposed that informed choice interventions could happen outside of the gambling session. This could include sending messages informing players of their deposits, similar to what banks do when customers make payments. External interventions could also take the form of regular, blunt summaries detailing total P&L over a rolling period, such as a week, month, or year.
Consumers may also choose to gamble across multiple accounts, making tracking behaviour difficult and often inaccurate. To address this, some thought the government should establish a unified tracking mechanism to monitor and potentially limit the total amount an individual is gambling across all digital platforms and physical venues simultaneously. Others thought that banks, which have an overarching view of spending, could track total monthly expenditure across gambling sites and intervene if spending reaches concerning levels.
People's own cognitive biases could also prevent them from making informed decisions during games. One participant shared an example of friends playing roulette in a casino who, when a specific number came up, falsely assumed it would not appear again on the next spin. This is a well-documented cognitive distortion, the gambler's fallacy, which the desk review identified as a persistent barrier to rational decision-making (Blaszczynski et al., 2008; Monaghan and Blaszczynski, 2009)2122. It illustrates how, at times, people may not be equipped to make informed choices in the context of gambling, regardless of what information is provided, and how environmental cues and active interventions could act as important safeguards. For example, Cemiloglu (2023) tested "explainable persuasion," where consumers were shown short inoculation videos explaining how gambling platforms use persuasive design techniques. 23This generated significantly more counterarguments against promotional messaging and reduced intention to claim bonuses.
The report continues in the next section.
References
13 Gainsbury, S.M., Chandrakumar, D. and Heirene, R.M. (2025). Use and impact of government-mandated activity statements for online gambling in Australia.
14 Newall, P.W.S. (2025). Sludge, dark patterns and dark nudges: a taxonomy of online gambling platforms' deceptive design features. Addiction, 120(10), 1916–1923.
15 McGarrigle, J., Smith, J., Griffiths, J., Torrance, J., Quigley, M. and Dymond, S. (2025). Dark patterns in online gambling: A scoping review and classification of deceptive design practices. Journal of Behavioral Addictions, 2006-2025.
16 Auer, M.M. and Griffiths, M.D. (2016). Personalized behavioral feedback for online gamblers: a real world empirical study. Frontiers in Psychology, 7:1875.
17 Bjørseth, B., Simensen, J.O., Bjørnethun, A., Griffiths, M.D., Erevik, E.K., Leino, T. and Pallesen, S. (2021). The effects of responsible gambling pop-up messages on gambling behaviors and cognitions: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Frontiers in Psychiatry, 11:601800.
18 Gainsbury, S.M., Abarbanel, B.L.L., Philander, K.S. and Butler, J.V. (2018). Strategies to customize responsible gambling messages: a review and focus group study. BMC Public Health, 18(1):1381.
19 Riley, B. J., Orlowski, S., Smith, D., Baigent, M., Battersby, M., & Lawn, S. (2018). Understanding the business versus care paradox in gambling venues: A qualitative study of the perspectives from gamblers, venue staff and counsellors. Harm Reduction Journal, 15(1), 49.
20 Riley, B. J., Lawn, S., Crisp, B. R., & Battersby, M. (2024). Much ado about nothing? The role of land-based gambling venue employees in facilitating problem gambling harm reduction and help-seeking. Journal of Gambling Studies, 40(1), 387-408.
21 Blaszczynski, A., Ladouceur, R., Nower, L. and Shaffer, H.J. (2008). Informed choice and gambling: Principles for consumer protection. The Journal of Gambling Business and Economics, 2(1), 103-118.
22 Monaghan, S.M. and Blaszczynski, A. (2009). Electronic gaming machine warning messages: Information versus self-evaluation. The Journal of Psychology, 144(1), 83-96.
23 Cemiloglu, D. A. (2023). Explainable persuasion for persuasive interfaces: the case of online gambling (Doctoral dissertation, Bournemouth University).
Last updated: 15 September 2026
Show updates to this content
No changes to show.