The experience of gambling in an illegal casino: The gambling spin process
| Author | Alon Baruch,Natti Ronel,Moshe Bensimon |
| DOI | 10.1177/1477370812455124 |
| Published date | 01 January 2013 |
| Date | 01 January 2013 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
2013
Article
European Journal of Criminology
10(1) 3 –21
The experience of gambling in
© The Author(s) 2013
Reprints and permission: sagepub.
an illegal casino: The gambling
co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/1477370812455124
euc.sagepub.com
spin process
Moshe Bensimon, Alon Baruch and
Natti Ronel
Bar-Ilan University, Israel
Abstract
The present study depicts the experience of gambling in an illegal casino through a qualitative,
phenomenological approach, in light of the criminal spin theory. Semi-structured interviews
were conducted with 10 gamblers and 4 staff members. Qualitative analysis of the data reveals
several major categories that describe the participants’ experiences: fears in the illegal casino;
learning through experience and with the assistance of a mentor; strengthening the sense of
potency; a tunnel vision perspective; the growing urge to gamble; losing control; harming the
family; and finding a way out of gambling. The findings indicate that the illegal casino created a
unique atmosphere for its attendees that fostered a gambling spin that coincides with the motives
of spin theory.
Keywords
Criminal spin, gambling, illegal casino, phenomenology
Introduction
Gambling is an ancient human activity found in most cultures and parts of the world
(Custer and Milt, 1985). Studies have shown that 70–90 percent of adults in Canada and
Australia gamble at some point during their lives (Ladouceur, 1991; Productivity
Commission, 1999). Although many people regard gambling as a form of entertainment,
some individuals develop a pattern of gambling characterized by lack of control, ‘chasing’
losses, lies and criminal acts, which is defined as ‘pathological gambling’ (for example,
Dannon et al., 2006; Lesieur, 1984) or ‘problem gambling’ (Clarke et al., 2006; Griffiths,
2006). According to Reith (2008), current research on gambling is moving away from an
Corresponding author:
Moshe Bensimon, Department of Criminology, Faculty of Social Sciences, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat Gan,
52900, Israel.
Email: bensimm@biu.ac.il
4
European Journal of Criminology 10(1)
individualistic focus on the distinction between pathological and non-pathological
gamblers, towards a focus on the problems caused by gambling to individuals and com-
munities that affect a greater number of people at different times in their lives. We there-
fore prefer to use the term problem gambling rather than pathological gambling. The
prevalence of problem gamblers in samples of several countries was found to be around
1 or 2 percent (Walker and Dickerson, 1996), whereas lifetime prevalence ranged from
0.1 to 5.1 percent (Petry and Armentano, 1999).
In contrast to the field of legal casinos, literature on gambling in illegal casinos is
limited (Arcuri et al., 1985; Israeli and Mehrez, 2000; Lesieur and Klein, 1987; Thompson
and Pinney, 1990). This might be owing to academic researchers’ difficulties in gaining
the cooperation of people engaged in such illegal activity. None of these studies uses a
qualitative phenomenological approach for investigating the experience of illegal casino
gamblers. The current study is designed to fill this gap. We aim to analyse the experience
of gambling in an illegal casino via the criminal spin theory (Ronel, 2009, 2011) as a
non-causal, phenomenological explanation for gambling.
Legal/illegal casino and problem gambling
The literature discusses different forms of gambling, including casino gambling (Raylu
and Oei, 2002). Some studies have noted that increasing crime rates in gaming venues
generate additional crime problems for police and society (Stitt et al., 2003; Thompson
et al., 1996). According to crime and place theories, casino zones provide ‘hot spots’ for
crimes (Weisburd et al., 2010).
Problems gambling (PG) is a progressive and chronic disorder expressed in a failure
to resist impulses to gamble, where this ‘maladaptive behaviour disrupts, or damages
personal, family, or vocational pursuits’ (American Psychiatric Association, 1994: 615).
Some researchers define it as a heterogeneous disorder with diverse subtypes that share
selected features (Moreyra et al., 2000). Several studies have found that the PG rate in
the USA is less than 5 percent (for example, Volberg, 1996). However, there is a claim
that it can be higher and may reach 16 percent (Stitt et al., 2000). In the UK, the estimated
percentage of adult problem gamblers is between 0.6 and 0.8 percent (or 275,000 and
370,000 people) (Reith, 2006).
The literature on illegal casinos as a main subject of research is quite limited.
Thompson and Pinney (1990) presented a historical analysis of the process of legalized
casino-type gambling in the Netherlands, relative to illegal and uncontrolled casino gam-
bling. Other studies found high percentages of adolescents engaged in such activity in
the USA (Arcuri et al., 1985; Lesieur and Klein, 1987). Another study presented a case
for legalized gaming in Israel by focusing on the difficulties of the current situation, in
which casino gaming is illegal (Israeli and Mehrez, 2000). However, the literature on
illegal casinos does not include a phenomenological enquiry into the experience of
gamblers and/or staff members.
Operating a casino is illegal in Israel. Nonetheless, many Israelis participate in illegal
gambling. This contributes to rising crime, including running illegal gambling institu-
tions, tax evasion, money laundering, theft, robbery and sex-oriented felonies. It is esti-
mated that the number of illegal casinos doubles every year and that the value of illegal
Bensimon et al.
5
gaming activity is US$300 million annually. However, it is difficult to estimate how
many people suffer from PG (Israeli and Mehrez, 2000).
Understanding problem gambling
Understanding phenomena in general, and gambling in particular, often calls for a causal
model that logically links past events and experiences to the present in order to create an
aetiological account. Several causal models attempt to identify the source of gambling in
social processes and/or in the past history of the gamblers. For example, social learning
theory suggests that family members as well as friends can often act as significant models
for gambling, thus reinforcing the learning of gambling activities (Gupta and Derevensky,
1997). Based on a longitudinal qualitative study, Reith and Dobbie (2011) argue that indi-
viduals ‘become’ gamblers out of complex social processes of observation, facilitation
and learning that occur through close social networks.
Numerous researchers have tried to identify core personality traits of PG. Gray’s
(1981) theory of introversion and extroversion claims that extroverts will demonstrate
stronger reactions to stimuli of reward than to stimuli of punishment. It may therefore be
predicted that problem gamblers are more extroverted than non-problem gamblers.
However, evidence on these traits in PG is inconclusive (see Raylu and Oei, 2002).
Another theory focuses on psychological mood states, such as anxiety and depression,
which have been linked to PG. Henry (1996) tested a theory that development of PG is
associated with unresolved trauma-related anxiety. Other psychology-based theories
provide some solid ground for further research. These include addiction-based (Jacobs,
1986) and cognitive-behavioural models (Harris, 1988). Sociological research views
social structures within a gambling environment as playing a role in the development and
maintenance of PG (for example, Ocean and Smith, 1993; Reith, 2007).
There is a growing body of phenomenological research into the experience of gam-
bling (Nixon and Solowoniuk, 2006; Nixon et al., 2005; Nixon et al., 2006; Parke and
Griffiths, 2012; Reith, 2002). The current study also belongs to this scene. Phenomenology
focuses on being-in-the-world, which involves the overall response of an individual to a
situation (Nixon and Solowoniuk, 2006), where individuals and their world mutually
construct one another (Polkinghorne, 1989). ‘Meaning’ is a reflective awareness of the
individual consciousness. It is therefore an essential concern of study (Bogdan and
Biklen, 1998). The aim of phenomenological studies is ‘to determine what an experience
means for the persons who have had the experience and are able to provide a comprehen-
sive description of it’ (Moustakas, 1994: 13). Existential phenomenological research into
gambling attempts to raise, describe and interpret the underlying meaning of the gambling
experience and the process of its formation. It is a study of the continuously constructed
consciousness of gamblers and their human surrounding.
According to Reith (2002), the gambling arena is characterized by its separateness
from everyday life. It is governed by a different set of rules, conventions, motivations and
identities. The fundamental perceptual categories of time, space and cause become dis-
torted in the gamblers’ minds. It is obvious that the reason for gambling is winning and
gaining money. However, it is the quest for thrills and excitement rather than winning or
losing money that attracts the gambler (Parke and Griffiths, 2012; Spanier, 1992). Money
6
European Journal of Criminology 10(1)
is associated with social factors such as recognition, status and peer approval rather than
with financial rewards...
To continue reading
Request your trial