The behavioral economics behind problematic sports betting

Americans have wagered more than $600 billion on sports since the Supreme Court paved the way for states to legalize sports betting back in 2018.

And something like 2.5 million adults have a problem with gambling.

For more on the psychology behind sports betting, “Marketplace Morning Report” host Kimberly Adams spoke with Joshua Grubbs. He's an associate professor at the University of New Mexico and an investigator at the Center on Alcohol, Substance use, and Addictions.

The following is an edited transcript of their interview.

Kimberly Adams: Since sports betting has become legal in 39 states plus Washington D.C., how has it changed how likely people are to suffer from problem gambling?

Joshua Grubbs: This change in access to gambling, this legalization of sports gambling, has fundamentally changed both the number of people that are showing up and who they are. One of the things that we know about gambling is that accessibility predicts engagement. If you can get to it easily, you're more likely to do it. What's unique, though, about sports gambling is that it's appealing, in particular, to younger men — and by younger, I don't mean necessarily college age. I mean all the way through the 30s. These people are developing problems earlier in life, and often experiencing a lot of harms due to it.

Adams: What does problematic sports betting look like? What are some of the typical behaviors?

Grubbs: There are some hallmark symptoms and behaviors. One of the big things is this experience of chasing losses, which is the term that we use for trying to win back money that you've already lost. The other big hallmark is if you're hiding how much you're gambling from people in your life. That is typically a sign that you're aware that something is objectively not in a good place. And then the final one is: Is it taking over your mind, your thoughts, your daily life? Is this the thing that you're primarily thinking about? Is it supplanting other things in your life? Those are the big ones that we look for.

Adams: The consequences of problem gambling feel almost institutionalized. You have the stereotype, in the past, of you owe too much gambling debt and somebody scary comes after you. But in this case, it's a credit card company or a bank company or one of these more official channels.

Grubbs: Things are different now. The likelihood of a loan shark breaking your knees has gone down quite a bit, right? The issues that we see are ruined credit, lost financial resources — but those are devastating in their own way. Working with someone that has taken out a second mortgage on their house and then blown it all on gambling, someone that has drained their own and their spouse's retirement accounts, spending kids' college funds on gambling — these all lead to massive consequences. And in extreme cases, we're talking about criminal charges for embezzlement or misuse of funds that leads to actual legal trouble. And I've seen all of those, both in research and in my clinical work in this space.

Adams: What about when it comes to policy? I understand you were actually just speaking with a member of Congress about this. What do you want to see from lawmakers in terms of regulation?

Grubbs: I do think we need unified standards across the country in the form of federal oversight. I think that we need better limits on advertising. And then the final thing that I think we really need is federally-supported research funding. Right now, there is no federal research funding for gambling-related harms prevention or treatment, and we actually need that federal funding to be able to understand how to help people better.