Buying video game loot boxes linked to higher rates of problem gambling

Buying virtual loot boxes in video games is linked to elevated rates of problem gambling and personal harm among adults who already participate in traditional betting. The research indicates that spending money on these randomized digital prizes carries behavioral risks comparable to casino table games and stronger than sports betting. The findings were published in the journal Addictive Behaviors.

Loot boxes are virtual chests or crates found in many popular video games. Players spend real-world money to open them, hoping to receive rare digital rewards like character outfits, weapon designs, or special abilities. The contents of these digital packages are entirely randomized. A player might spend a few dollars and win a highly coveted prize, but they are far more likely to receive common, low-value items.

The psychological mechanics of opening a loot box closely mirror those found on a traditional casino floor. Much like slot machines, loot boxes rely on unpredictable outcomes to keep participants engaged. Players never know how many times they need to pay before they win something rare. Video games wrap this experience in flashing lights, celebratory sounds, and animations that tease a near-miss when a rare item almost appears.

Because of these similarities, experts have debated whether video games are training young people to gamble. Past research has established that teenagers and young adults who engage with loot boxes are more likely to eventually try traditional betting. However, researchers knew very little about how monetized game mechanics affect older adults who already have established gambling habits.

Psychologist Hyoun S. Kim and a team of researchers from academic institutions across Canada wanted to understand this specific dynamic. They set out to identify the characteristics of adults who mix traditional betting with video game purchases. They also wanted to see if buying digital items worsened traditional gambling problems. To find out, the team analyzed data from a large study of Canadian adults.

Free daily newsletter

The researchers identified a group of 3,709 participants who gamble at least once a month and also play video games on a regular basis. They divided these individuals into two distinct groups. The first group consisted of 1,922 people who spent real money on loot boxes during the past year. The second group contained 1,787 gamers who gambled but never paid for randomized digital items.

Participants completed surveys detailing their demographic background. They also answered questions about their psychological well-being, indicating whether they experienced symptoms of various mental health conditions and behavioral addictions. The research team then measured each individual’s problem gambling severity. This metric tracks unhealthy behaviors like chasing losses, borrowing money to place bets, or feeling guilty about playing games of chance.

In addition to behavioral symptoms, the team assessed real-world gambling harms. These harms represent the tangible negative consequences of an out-of-control betting habit. Participants reported whether their behavior had caused financial emergencies, strained their interpersonal relationships, or created trouble at their workplace.

The data revealed notable demographic differences between the two groups of gamers. Those who purchased loot boxes tended to be younger and were more likely to be single. They were also more likely to hold a college degree, maintain full-time employment, and earn an upper-middle-class income.

Mental health struggles and addictive behaviors were substantially higher among the loot box buyers. They reported higher rates of depression, generalized anxiety, and panic disorders. The purchasers also showed a greater tendency to engage in compulsive behaviors. They reported higher instances of substance abuse, excessive online shopping, and playing video games to an unhealthy degree.

When assessing gambling habits, the differences between the groups were highly pronounced. Over half of the loot box purchasers met the criteria for moderate-risk or problem gambling. In contrast, only about one-fifth of the non-purchasing group met those same risk criteria. Spending real money on digital items was consistently linked to a higher severity of betting problems.

To ensure the virtual boxes were actually linked to these issues, the researchers controlled for the participants’ other betting activities. They factored in how much time and money the individuals spent on bingo, scratch tickets, sports betting, and casino games. Even after adjusting for these other habits, loot box purchases remained strongly associated with elevated gambling severity and personal harm.

The impact of buying loot boxes was actually stronger than the impact of playing lotteries or betting on sports. Only playing electronic gambling machines showed a stronger association with problem gambling than buying virtual crates.

The researchers ran the data through several different mathematical checks to ensure their results were stable. They factored in the age of the participants to verify that the younger demographic of the purchasing group was not distorting the data. They also removed participants who claimed they won more money than they lost, just in case those individuals were not answering honestly. The association between loot box spending and gambling problems remained steady across every test.

These results lend weight to arguments that monetized video game features function as a form of gambling. In many countries, the legal definition of gambling requires a player to risk money on a game of chance to win a prize. Because video games always provide some sort of digital item inside a loot box, even if the item is unwanted, developers can argue there is no actual risk of losing.

Because of this specific detail, most consumer protection laws do not apply to video game marketplaces. Some countries, such as Belgium, have restricted randomized digital purchases under their existing gambling frameworks. Other regions simply require game publishers to display the mathematical odds of winning a rare item. The researchers suggest that applying traditional casino regulations, such as age verification and mandatory spending limits, could help mitigate the harms experienced by vulnerable players.

The study does have a few limitations. The data was collected at a single point in time, meaning the researchers cannot determine a direct chain of events. It is impossible to know whether buying loot boxes caused a worsening of the participants’ casino habits. It is equally possible that people with severe betting problems are simply more drawn to unpredictable rewards in their video games.

The methodology also relied entirely on self-reported behavior. Participants had to rely on their memories to estimate how much money they spent on digital items and casino games over the past year. People often struggle to remember their exact financial habits, which can lead to imprecise estimates in scientific data. Future studies could use digital tracking tools to record exactly how often and how much players are spending in real time.

Finally, mental health conditions were tracked through survey questions rather than formal clinical interviews. An individual might identify with the daily symptoms of anxiety without meeting the strict medical criteria for a psychiatric disorder. Future investigations could benefit from using medical professionals to diagnose these conditions. Expanding this research to cover teenagers could also help experts understand how these digital spending habits shape adolescent development before they reach the legal age to enter a casino.

The study, “Lootbox purchases are associated with problem gambling severity and harms beyond traditional gambling activities,” was authored by Hyoun S. Kim, Youssef Allami, Darren R. Christensen, David C. Hodgins, Daniel S. McGrath, Fiona Nicoll, Carrie A. Shaw, Rhys Stevens, and Robert J. Williams.