↓ Skip to main content

Unregulated Gambling in South African Townships: A Policy Conundrum?

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Gambling Studies, August 2012
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
49 Mendeley
Title
Unregulated Gambling in South African Townships: A Policy Conundrum?
Published in
Journal of Gambling Studies, August 2012
DOI 10.1007/s10899-012-9330-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Leanne Scott, Graham Barr

Abstract

This study was designed to explore the nature of informal or illegal gambling in South African townships, to investigate what motivates people to participate in this form of gambling and what they perceive are the associated benefits and dis-benefits. A series of focus group workshops was conducted with two groups of gamblers, all of whom had experience of some form of township gambling: one group currently lived in townships and the other had previously resided in townships. Gambling for the township residents was a far more frequent activity than for non-township residents and consumed substantially more of their time. The majority of the township residents classified themselves as unemployed, while of those who were unemployed, most people indicated that gambling was a major source of their income; some even described it as their only source of income. The most significant difference between what township and non-township residents expressed as wanting and getting from gambling was that the former indicated quite clearly and unanimously that what they sought and gained from gambling was money. Township residents were far more likely to indicate that they used gambling to balance their budgets than ex-township residents who gambled primarily at casinos. A lottery type game called "Fahfee" is the most widely spread and pervasive form of gambling and was unanimously portrayed as a necessary and beneficial form of support for the poor and unemployed. Lottery and Casino gambling were, in contrast, widely perceived by the township participants as being 'rigged' and unfair. Township Dice and cards were perceived as being 'fairer' and as allowing punters to be more in control than casino gambling. The downside of township gambling was reported to be high levels of violence, crime and insecurity surrounding, in particular, the game of Dice. There was widespread inability to calculate expected payoffs or odds, and an apparent belief that these were not particularly helpful skills for gamblers. In Fahfee, the reliance on dreams to guide choice of numbers appears to eradicate any interest in the odds, or of playing strategically. The findings of this study are preliminary but have serious policy implications for education and for gambling regulation in South Africa.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 49 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 49 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 7 14%
Researcher 7 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 10%
Student > Bachelor 4 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 6%
Other 6 12%
Unknown 17 35%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 10 20%
Medicine and Dentistry 6 12%
Psychology 4 8%
Business, Management and Accounting 3 6%
Sports and Recreations 3 6%
Other 7 14%
Unknown 16 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 15 October 2012.
All research outputs
#22,759,802
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Gambling Studies
#865
of 989 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#169,466
of 187,814 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Gambling Studies
#7
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 989 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.4. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 187,814 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.