Having a close friend with a gambling addiction increases personal risk, study finds

Having a close relationship with someone who suffers from a gambling problem increases the likelihood that an individual will develop similar issues over time. A new longitudinal analysis published in the Journal of Gambling Studies has found that while strong family bonds can shield adults from this risk, close friendships do not appear to offer the same protection. These findings suggest that the social transmission of gambling behaviors operates differently depending on the nature of the relationship.

For decades, researchers have recognized that addiction often ripples through social networks. This phenomenon is well-documented in the study of alcohol and substance use. Scientists refer to this as the transmission of problem behavior. The impact of a person’s addiction extends beyond themselves, affecting family members, partners, and friends. In Finland, where this research took place, estimates suggest that approximately 20 percent of adults identify as “affected others” of someone else’s gambling. These individuals often bear significant emotional, financial, and health-related burdens.

Past inquiries into gambling transmission have predominantly focused on intergenerational lines. Studies have frequently examined how parents influence their children or how peer pressure impacts adolescents. Far less is known about how these dynamics function among adults. It has remained unclear whether adult gambling is primarily an individual trait or a behavior continuously shaped by social interactions. The protective potential of different types of social connections has also been an open question.

Emmi Kauppila, a doctoral researcher at the Faculty of Social Sciences at Tampere University in Finland, led the new investigation. She collaborated with a team of scholars from the University of Helsinki, the University of Turku, and the University of Bath in the United Kingdom. The researchers sought to determine if exposure to problem gambling in adulthood predicts an increase in one’s own gambling severity. They also aimed to test whether having strong, supportive relationships could act as a buffer against this potential harm.

The team employed a longitudinal survey design to answer these questions. They recruited 1,530 adults residing in mainland Finland to participate in the study. The data collection spanned from April 2021 to September 2024. Participants completed surveys across eight separate waves, with each wave occurring at six-month intervals. This repeated-measures design allowed the scientists to track changes within specific individuals over time, rather than relying on a single snapshot of the population.

Free daily newsletter

The researchers assessed gambling severity using the Problem Gambling Severity Index. This is a standard screening tool where respondents rate their gambling behaviors and consequences on a scale from zero to 27. Higher scores indicate a greater risk of problem gambling. Participants also reported whether they had a family member or a close friend who had experienced gambling problems. To measure the quality of these relationships, the study used the Social and Emotional Loneliness Scale for Adults. This metric evaluated how connected and supported the participants felt by their families and friends.

To analyze the data, the team used a statistical technique known as hybrid multilevel regression modeling. This method is particularly useful for longitudinal data. It allows researchers to distinguish between differences among people and changes that happen to a specific person. The model could determine if a person’s gambling habits changed during the specific six-month periods when they reported exposure to a problem gambler.

The analysis revealed that exposure to problem gambling within a social circle predicted a rise in an individual’s own gambling issues. When a participant reported that a family member had a gambling problem, their own score on the severity index increased by a measurable margin. This “within-person” effect suggests that the change in the social environment directly influenced the individual’s behavior. A similar pattern was observed regarding friends. Individuals who had friends with gambling problems tended to have higher severity scores themselves.

However, a distinct difference emerged when the researchers examined the protective role of relationship quality. The data showed that positive family relationships moderated the risk. Participants who reported strong, supportive connections with their family members were less likely to see their gambling increase, even when a family member had a gambling problem. The emotional support and connectedness provided by the family unit appeared to act as a buffer. This suggests that a supportive family environment can mitigate the transmission of harmful behaviors.

The same protective effect was not found for friendships. Strong emotional bonds with friends did not reduce the risk of acquiring gambling problems from a peer. The analysis indicated that close friendships did not buffer the impact of exposure. In some cases, high-quality friendships with problem gamblers were associated with higher risks for the individual. The researchers propose several explanations for this discrepancy.

One possibility is that peer groups often normalize risky behaviors. If gambling is a shared activity among friends, it may be viewed as a standard form of social interaction. In such contexts, a close friendship might reinforce the behavior rather than discourage it. This mirrors findings in alcohol research, where “drinking buddies” may encourage consumption. The authors also suggest that individuals might select friends who share similar attitudes toward risk. Consequently, the social environment maintains the habit rather than disrupting it.

Another interpretation involves social withdrawal. People who are affected by a loved one’s gambling often experience shame or stigma. This can lead them to isolate themselves from broader social support networks. They might feel that friends would not understand their situation. This isolation can prevent friends from acting as a protective resource. In contrast, family members are often already embedded in the dynamic and may be better positioned to offer support or monitoring.

Richard Velleman, an emeritus professor at the University of Bath and co-author of the paper, highlighted the broader implications of these results. He stated, “It has long been known that alcohol-related problems run in families – this study demonstrates that this is also the case with gambling.” He noted the importance of recognizing the severity of the issue. Velleman added, “This is an important discovery, as many people don’t see gambling problems as equivalent to alcohol or drug problems, as gamblers don’t ‘ingest’ anything, yet gambling can equally lead to serious problems which cause serious harm to individuals and families.”

The findings support the idea that gambling harm is not solely an individual pathology. It is a systemic issue that clusters in social networks. Emmi Kauppila noted, “In this paper, we demonstrate that gambling-related problems cluster within families and close relationships in ways similar to alcohol- and other substance-related harms.” She emphasized that the mechanism of transmission involves “shared environments, stressors and social dynamics.”

This perspective suggests that prevention and treatment strategies need to evolve. Interventions that focus exclusively on the individual gambler may miss a vital component of the recovery process. The study advocates for family-oriented approaches. Therapies that include family members could help strengthen the protective bonds that buffer against transmission. By addressing the needs of “affected others,” clinicians may be able to break the cycle of harm.

There are limitations to the study that contextually frame the results. The research was conducted in Finland, a nation with a specific cultural relationship to gambling. Gambling is widely accepted in Finland and is integrated into the funding of the welfare state. This cultural normalization might influence how gambling behaviors are shared and perceived. The results might differ in countries with more restrictive gambling laws or different cultural attitudes.

Additionally, the study relied on participants to report the gambling problems of their family and friends. These reports reflect the participants’ perceptions and were not clinically verified diagnoses. It is possible that some participants overestimated or underestimated the severity of their loved ones’ problems. The data also did not specify which family member was the source of the exposure. The influence of a partner might differ from that of a parent or sibling. The sample size for specific family roles was too small to analyze separately.

Future research could benefit from a more granular approach. Identifying specific family roles would clarify the transmission dynamics. Verifying the gambling status of the social network members would also strengthen the evidence. Comparative studies in other countries would help determine if these patterns are universal or culture-specific.

Despite these caveats, the study provides robust evidence that adult gambling behavior is deeply intertwined with social relationships. It challenges the view of the solitary gambler. The people surrounding an individual play a role in either amplifying risk or providing protection. Recognizing the power of these social bonds may be key to developing more effective harm reduction strategies.

The study, “Problem Gambling Transmission. An Eight-wave Longitudinal Study on Problem Gambling Among Affected Others,” was authored by Emmi Kauppila, Sari Hautamäki, Iina Savolainen, Sari Castrén, Richard Velleman and Atte Oksanen.