Methodology
All gambling products do not have the same risk potential. Gambling products are characterized by situational parameters realized in observable scales that combined, result in more or less distinct risk potential.
The scales are standardized between 0 (of no importance) and 10 (of very great importance). All scales are symmetric.
The following ten dimensions (parameters) provided a useful framework to examine the risk potential of different gambling products:^{[1]}
1. Event frequency
Definition: Unit of time between stake, gambling result and next stake opportunity.
Scale
> 6 days |
> 24 hrs ≤ 6 days |
> 1 hr ≤ 24 hrs |
> 10 min ≤ 1 hr |
> 3 min ≤ 10 min |
> 1 min ≤ 3 min |
> 15 sec ≤ 1 min |
> 5 sec ≤ 15 sec |
≤ 5 sec |
0 |
1.25 |
2.5 |
3.75 |
5 |
6.25 |
7.5 |
8.75 |
10 |
2. Interval of payback
Definition: Period of time between gambling result and notification of payment or actual receipt of payment.
Scale
> 6 days |
> 24 hrs ≤ 6 days |
> 1 hr ≤ 24 hrs |
> 10 min ≤ 1 hr |
> 3 min ≤ 10 min |
> 1 min ≤ 3 min |
> 15 sec ≤ 1 min |
> 5 sec ≤ 15 sec |
≤ 5 sec |
0 |
1.25 |
2.5 |
3.75 |
5 |
6.25 |
7.5 |
8.75 |
10 |
3. Jackpot
Definition: An extraordinary top prize typically in the form of a large amount of money formed by the accumulation of previous bets.
Scale
non existent |
≥ 0 $ < 100 $ |
≥ 100 $ < 1.000 $ |
≥ 1.000 $ < 10.000 $ |
≥ 10.000 $ < 50.000 $ |
≥ 50.000 $ < 100.000 $ |
≥ 100.000 $ < 1 Mio. $ |
≥ 1 Mio. $ |
0 |
1.25 |
2.5 |
4 |
6 |
7.5 |
8.75 |
10 |
4. Continuity of playing
Definition: Period of time during which it is possible to gamble without interruption.
Scale
≤ 5 min of continuous gambling |
> 5 min ≤ 30 min of continuous gambling |
> 30 min ≤ 1 hour of continuous gambling |
> 1 hour ≤ 3 hrs of continuous gambling |
> 3 hrs of continuous gambling |
0 |
2.5 |
5 |
7.5 |
10 |
5. Chance of winning a profit
Definition: The probability of realizing a profit with each game.
Scale
0% |
> 0 % ≤ 0,1 % |
> 0,1 % ≤ 0,5 % |
> 0,5 % ≤ 1 % |
> 1 % ≤ 5 % |
> 5 % ≤ 10 % |
> 10 % ≤ 25 |
> 25% |
0 |
1,25 |
2.5 |
4 |
6 |
7.5 |
8,75 |
10 |
6. Availability
Definition: Possibility of accessing gambling opportunities.
Scale
Gambling opportunities within a radius of > 100 km |
Gambling opportunities within a radius from > 25 km to |
Gambling opportunities within a radius from > 10 km to |
Gambling opportunities within a radius from > 1 km to |
Gambling opportunities within a radius of ≤ 1 km |
Gambling opportunities at home / workplace |
0 |
2.5 |
4 |
6 |
7.5 |
10 |
7. Multiple playing-/stake opportunities
Definition: Opportunity to play several stakes at the same time (e.g. betting on several roulette numbers) or to take part in several gambling opportunities at the same time (e.g. playing different slot-machines at the same time or playing different online-poker-tables on different screens at the same time).
Scale
no multiple playing opportunity |
multiple playing opportunities or multiple stake opportunities |
multiple playing opportunities and multiple stake opportunities |
0 |
5 |
10 |
8. Variable stake amount
Definition: Extent to which gamblers can choose or modify their stake amounts while playing.
Scale
no variable (= fixed) |
variable stake, limited stake amount |
variable stake, unlimited stake amount |
0 |
5 |
10 |
9. Sensory product design
Definition: Auditory and visual effects.
Scale
non-existent |
auditory or visual effects exist |
auditory and visual effects exist |
0 |
5 |
10 |
10. Near wins
Definition: Results when a gambler supposes to almost win (to miss the profit narrowly; a near win).
Scale
non-existent |
un-intentionally created, occurring by chance |
intentionally created by supplier/ producer, |
0 |
5 |
10 |
Some dimensions are more important than others in increasing the risk potential of the gambling product. Therefore weights are assigned for each parameter regarding their risk potential. The weights are standardized between 0 (of no importance) and 10 (of very great importance).
The overall risk potential of a gambling product is obtained by multiplying the weight of each dimension by the score on that dimension and adding up the weighted scores of all ten dimensions. Thus the range ASTERIG^{©} is 0-620, where the maximum is obtained by multiplying the resulting individual points of each dimension (which always range from 0-10) by the weight of those dimensions (which could also range theoretically from 0-10, but which are fixed by the experts currently between 4-8). Based on the particular scales and on the general weights of dimensions, the result is a number of points with a maximum of 620 points = 62 (sum of the weights) x 10 (maximum scale), which can be normalized to a maximum score^{[2]} of maximum 10 by dividing by 62 (i.e., 620: 62)^{[3]}:
Risk potential criteria |
weights |
scales |
range of value^{[4] } |
Event frequency |
8 |
0 - 10 |
0 - 80 |
Interval of payback |
6 |
0 - 10 |
0 - 60 |
Jackpot |
5 |
0 - 10 |
0 - 50 |
Continuity of playing |
8 |
0 - 10 |
0 - 80 |
Chance of winning a profit |
6 |
0 - 10 |
0 - 60 |
Availability |
7 |
0 - 10 |
0 - 70 |
Multiple playing-/stake opportunities |
6 |
0 - 10 |
0 - 60 |
Variable stake amount |
6 |
0 - 10 |
0 - 60 |
Sensory product design |
4 |
0 - 10 |
0 - 40 |
Near wins |
6 |
0 - 10 |
0 - 60 |
Totals |
62 |
0 - 10 |
0 - 620 |
The different meanings of dimensions of the risk potential of each gambling product can be visualized by a scorecard.^{[5]}
If the total points are classified into five categories of equal amplitude, the results can be seen to map five categories of risk:
Result |
Score |
Risk category |
Risk potential |
1 - 124 |
> 0 - ≤ 2 |
A |
lowest |
125 - 248 |
> 2 - ≤ 4 |
B |
low |
249 – 372 |
> 4 - ≤ 6 |
C |
moderate |
373 - 496 |
> 6 - ≤ 8 |
D |
high |
497 - 620 |
> 8 - ≤ 10 |
E |
highest |
[1] Blanco, Carlos; Blaszczynski, Alex; Clement, Reiner; Derevensky, Jeffrey; Goudriaan, Anna E.; Hodgins, David C.; van Holst, Ruth J.; Ibanez, Angela; Martins, Silvia S.; Moersen, Chantal; Molinaro, Sabrina; Parke, Adrian ; Peren, Franz W.; Petry, Nancy M., and Wardle, Heather: Assessment Tool to Measure and evaluate the risk potential of gambling products - ASTERIG. In: The Journal of Gambling Business and Economics, Vol. 7, No 1 (2013).
[2] To use scores respectively a scorecard is recommended because one factor (the weights) of the two factors is fixed. The weights do not vary from case to case. A score from maximum 10 means that the risk potential of addiction would be reached in maximum in all dimensions.
[3] By dividing the total points – here at the maximum = 620 points – through 62 (= sum of the fix weights) the total scores are getting normalized into a range between 0-10.
[4] Weights multiply with the minimum/maximum values of the scales.
[5] Scorecards are suitable for quantitative assessments during analysis of potentials and risks, for the estimation of product- and performance-ideas and further problems. Scorecards are suited for the quantitative evaluation of potential and risk analyses to assess product and service ideas and many other factors.