1. Should we be concerned about Internet gambling for our youth? Jeffrey L. Derevensky, Ph.D. Professor, School/Applied Child Psychology Professor, Psychiatry International Centre for Youth Gambling Problems and High-Risk Behaviors McGill University www.youthgambling.com National Council on Problem Gambling Milwaukee, July, 2012

2. The new face of Internet gambling

3. Merging of social media sites

4. Why is Internet gambling potentially problematic for youth? Increased accessibility & availability Convenience Similarity with video-game technology Can gamble for small amounts of money Play in comfortable, non-intrusive environments often results in longer play Anonymity No travel barriers Psychologically youth perceive themselves as invincible and smarter than adults

5. Wagering via the Internet Poker/card games Casino games Sports wagering Reality shows Celebrity adoptions, arrests, etc. Any form of contest/Political race

6. Prevalence Findings of Internet Wagering Vary considerably Dependent upon method, sampling & date of data collection Dependent upon population studied Dependent upon the games studied

7. Is Internet gambling problematic (for youth)?

8. Some clinical evidence

9. Recent Internet Gambling Studies

10. Are Internet gamblers more likely to have problems? Wood & Williams (2007) - Sample of on-line adult gamblers Non-problem gamblers: 34% At-risk gamblers: 24% Moderate problem gamblers: 23% Severe problem gamblers: 20% 2/3 of those respondents gambling on the Internet are likely to have problems

11. Frequency of Play on Internet Gambling Sites Without Money in the Past 12 Months by Gambling Severity N = 2205 Internet Gambling Without Money 1 Yes (n = 1082) No (n = 1123) Gambling Groups*** Non Gamblern = 72633.966.1 Social Gamblern = 127856.643.4 At-Risk Gamblern = 12974.425.6 Probable Pathological Gambler n = 7280.619.4 Total49.150.9 1 Percentage. *** p<.001.

12. Frequency of Play on Internet Gambling Sites With Money in the Past 12 Months by Gambling Severity N = 2292 Internet Gambling With Money 1 Yes (n = 183) No (n = 2109) Gambling Groups*** Non Gamblern = 7450100 Social Gamblern = 13339.590.5 At-Risk Gamblern = 13921.678.4 Probable Pathological Gambler n = 7534.765.3 Total8.0*92.0 1 Percentage *13.1% males; 4.6% females are gambling on Internet

13. Canadian National Study (Meerkamper, 2010)

15. National Annenberg Survey of Youth (Romer, 2010) N=835 (2008) N=596 (2010) At least once per month Internet gambling among males 14-17 rose from 2.7% (2008) to 6.2% (2010) Internet gambling among males 18-22 rose from 4.4% (2008) to 16.0% (2010) Internet gambling among females 14-17 rose from 0.5% (2008) to 1.5% (2010) Internet gambling among females 18-22 rose from 0.0% (2008) to 4.4% (2010)

16. Past-Year Gambling Participation (On and Off the Internet) by Gender and Problem Gambling Severity among college students (McBride & Derevensky, in press) NOffline gamblingPractice sitesInternet gambling Gender*** Male30566.249.811.8 (90) Female16046.930.00.6 (90) Problem Gambling Severity Non gambler a 186-22.0 (90)***- Social gambler b 26299.255.3 (90)***11.8 (90)** Problem gambler c 1710082.4 (90)***35.3 (90)** Total46559.6 (90)43.0 (90)8.0 (90) 1 Percentage, participant numbers in parentheses. a DSM-IV score = 0, no gambling activity (on or off the Internet) in the past 12 months. b DSM-IV score (0 - 2). c DSM-IV score (≥ 3). ***p <.001 ** p <.01

17. NCAA Study (Derevensky & Paskus, 2010) Comparison between 2004 & 2008 Casino gambling via the Internet represented the largest increase Casino gambling via the Internet represented the largest increase Student athletes increased sports wagering via the Internet (10.9% in 2004 to 18.8% in 2008) Student athletes increased sports wagering via the Internet (10.9% in 2004 to 18.8% in 2008) “Internet (and mobile gambling) will become particularly problematic for this group [student athletes] and need to be carefully monitored” “Internet (and mobile gambling) will become particularly problematic for this group [student athletes] and need to be carefully monitored”

18. U.K Gambling study (Griffiths et al., 2009; 2011) 6% of gamblers in general (9% males; 3% females) were Internet gamblers 6% of gamblers in general (9% males; 3% females) were Internet gamblers Internet gamblers tended to be males (74% vs 26%) Internet gamblers tended to be males (74% vs 26%) 55% of Internet gamblers <age 34 55% of Internet gamblers <age 34 Highest percentage of Internet gamblers were between age 16-24; 25-34 Highest percentage of Internet gamblers were between age 16-24; 25-34 Pathological gamblers (Internet 5% vs 0.5% non-Internet gamblers) Pathological gamblers (Internet 5% vs 0.5% non-Internet gamblers) Large number of adolescents gambling via the Internet Large number of adolescents gambling via the Internet

19. Our current knowledge

20. Most have played on free sites Most have played on free sites Increasing use of social media sites Increasing use of social media sites Most Internet gamblers wager on multiple sites Most Internet gamblers wager on multiple sites Much of Internet gambling typically occurs in the evenings Much of Internet gambling typically occurs in the evenings Vast majority of Internet gamblers play for short periods (less than 2 hours each time Vast majority of Internet gamblers play for short periods (less than 2 hours each time Some reports suggest that they gamble $30-$60 per session Some reports suggest that they gamble $30-$60 per session

21. Often solitary activity but can also be used as way of socializing Often solitary activity but can also be used as way of socializing Particularly attractive to adolescents and young adults Particularly attractive to adolescents and young adults

22. What needs to be done?

23. Increased public awareness about the risks associated with Internet gambling Increased public awareness about the risks associated with Internet gambling Strict regulation based upon best practices Strict regulation based upon best practices Increased funding for treatment, prevention, & research Increased funding for treatment, prevention, & research

24. Standards for Internet Gambling Companies G50

25. Age verification Age verification Reality Checks Reality Checks Self Exclusion Self Exclusion Social responsibility/Player protection information Social responsibility/Player protection information Harm minimization strategies Harm minimization strategies Advertising and promotional material Advertising and promotional material Spending limits Spending limits Training and support Training and support Play-For-Fun or free/practice play Play-For-Fun or free/practice play