| Title |
Reports of Wins and Risk Taking: An Investigation of the Mediating Effect of the Illusion of Control
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Gambling Studies, June 2010
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10899-010-9204-2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Frédéric Martinez, Valérie Le Floch, Bernard Gaffié, Gaëlle Villejoubert |
| Abstract |
Two experiments examined the relationships between the knowledge that another person has won in a gamble, the illusion of control and risk taking. Participants played a computer-simulated French roulette game individually. Before playing, some participants learnt that another person won a large amount of money. Results from a first experiment (n = 24) validated a causal model where the knowledge of another person's win increased the illusion of control, measured with betting times, expectancy and self-reports on scales, which in turn encourages risk taking. In the second experiment (n = 36), some participants were told the previous player acknowledged the win to be fortuitous. The suppression of the belief that the previous winner had himself exerted control over the outcome resulted in lower rates of risk-taking behaviors. This suggests that it was not the knowledge of another person's win in itself that increased risk taking, but rather, the belief that the other person had some control over the gamble's outcome. Theoretical implications for the study of social mechanisms involved in gambling behavior are discussed. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 80 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 1% |
| United States | 1 | 1% |
| France | 1 | 1% |
| Belgium | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 76 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 13 | 16% |
| Researcher | 12 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 8 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 6% |
| Other | 16 | 20% |
| Unknown | 18 | 23% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 34 | 43% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 7 | 9% |
| Social Sciences | 7 | 9% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 5 | 6% |
| Neuroscience | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 3 | 4% |
| Unknown | 22 | 28% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 12. 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 03 March 2016.
All research outputs
#2,864,003
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Gambling Studies
#151
of 989 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#10,698
of 104,693 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Gambling Studies
#4
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 88th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
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 has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its peers.
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 104,693 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 10 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 6 of them.