IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/osf/lawarx/cdr69.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Regulating Loot Boxes as Gambling? Perspectives from Psychology, Behavioural Economics and Ludology

Author

Listed:
  • Xiao, Leon Y.

Abstract

Loot boxes are virtual items in video games which represent a popular contemporary monetisation innovation that offers the purchasing player-consumer, who always pays a set amount of money for each attempt, the opportunity to obtain randomised virtual in-game rewards of uncertain in-game and real-world value. The popularisation of loot boxes has caused a shift in the business model of the video game industry to rely significantly on microtransactions, such as loot boxes, rather than title sales to monetise. Loot boxes have been subject to regulatory scrutiny because their randomised nature is akin to gambling. The regulation of loot boxes is a current and challenging international public policy and consumer protection issue. This paper reviews and applies the psychology and behavioural economics literature on loot boxes to establish the abusive nature and potential harms of loot boxes, which justify their regulation. Informed by game design and using examples from recent games, this paper extends the ludology literature on loot boxes to identify various different implementations of loot boxes and the differing nature of their respective potential harms. This paper argues that, currently, regulators and academics have not subjected each implementation of loot boxes to sufficient regulation and scrutiny. This paper reviews the effects of national loot box regulations and general video gaming regulations in European and Asian countries in order to recommend that loot boxes which involve real-world money should be regulated as gambling, and that a variety of ethical game design measures should be implemented to further ensure consumer protection.

Suggested Citation

  • Xiao, Leon Y., 2020. "Regulating Loot Boxes as Gambling? Perspectives from Psychology, Behavioural Economics and Ludology," LawArXiv cdr69, Center for Open Science.
    • Handle: RePEc:osf:lawarx:cdr69
    DOI: 10.31219/osf.io/cdr69
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://osf.io/download/5e94a741f1353503b9d585a2/
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.31219/osf.io/cdr69?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Cass R. Sunstein & Richard H. Thaler, 2003. "Libertarian paternalism is not an oxymoron," Conference Series ; [Proceedings], Federal Reserve Bank of Boston, vol. 48(Jun).
    2. David Zendle & Paul Cairns, 2019. "Loot boxes are again linked to problem gambling: Results of a replication study," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(3), pages 1-13, March.
    3. Richard H. Thaler & Cass R. Sunstein, 2023. "Libertarian paternalism," Chapters, in: Cass R. Sunstein & Lucia A. Reisch (ed.), Research Handbook on Nudges and Society, chapter 1, pages 10-16, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    4. Xiao, Leon Y. & Henderson, Laura L., 2019. "Towards an Ethical Game Design Solution to Loot Boxes: a Commentary on King and Delfabbro," LawArXiv r6z5a, Center for Open Science.
    5. McCaffrey, Matthew, 2019. "The macro problem of microtransactions: The self-regulatory challenges of video game loot boxes," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 62(4), pages 483-495.
    6. Aaron Drummond & James D. Sauer, 2018. "Video game loot boxes are psychologically akin to gambling," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 2(8), pages 530-532, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. D. Leahy, 2022. "Rocking the Boat: Loot Boxes in Online Digital Games, the Regulatory Challenge, and the EU’s Unfair Commercial Practices Directive," Journal of Consumer Policy, Springer, vol. 45(3), pages 561-592, September.
    2. Joseph E. Stiglitz, 2017. "The overselling of globalization," Business Economics, Palgrave Macmillan;National Association for Business Economics, vol. 52(3), pages 129-137, July.
    3. Ross Guest, 2010. "Policy Forum: Saving for Retirement: Policy Options to Increase Retirement Saving in Australia," Australian Economic Review, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research, vol. 43(3), pages 293-301, September.
    4. Asen Ivanov, 2021. "Optimal pension plan default policies when employees are biased," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 23(3), pages 583-596, June.
    5. Schnellenbach, Jan, 2012. "Nudges and norms: On the political economy of soft paternalism," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 28(2), pages 266-277.
    6. Ajla Cosic & Hana Cosic & Sebastian Ille, 2018. "Can nudges affect students' green behaviour? A field experiment," Journal of Behavioral Economics for Policy, Society for the Advancement of Behavioral Economics (SABE), vol. 2(1), pages 107-111, March.
    7. Till Grüne-Yanoff, 2012. "Old wine in new casks: libertarian paternalism still violates liberal principles," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 38(4), pages 635-645, April.
    8. Christopher Jeffords, 2014. "Preference-directed regulation when ethical environmental policy choices are formed with limited information," Empirical Economics, Springer, vol. 46(2), pages 573-606, March.
    9. Markus Haavio & Kaisa Kotakorpi, 2012. "Sin Licenses Revisited," CESifo Working Paper Series 4010, CESifo.
    10. Schnellenbach, Jan & Schubert, Christian, 2015. "Behavioral political economy: A survey," European Journal of Political Economy, Elsevier, vol. 40(PB), pages 395-417.
    11. Dohmen, Thomas & Falk, Armin & Huffman, David & Marklein, Felix & Sunde, Uwe, 2009. "Biased probability judgment: Evidence of incidence and relationship to economic outcomes from a representative sample," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 72(3), pages 903-915, December.
    12. Ashton, John K. & Hudson, Robert S., 2008. "Interest rate clustering in UK financial services markets," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 32(7), pages 1393-1403, July.
    13. Brown, Zachary & Johnstone, Nick & Haščič, Ivan & Vong, Laura & Barascud, Francis, 2013. "Testing the effect of defaults on the thermostat settings of OECD employees," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 39(C), pages 128-134.
    14. Joshua Henkel & Georg Schwesinger, 2020. "Establishing Sustainable Consumption - How Future Policies Can Channel Consumer Preferences," Bremen Papers on Economics & Innovation 2007, University of Bremen, Faculty of Business Studies and Economics.
    15. Marc A. Ragin & Benjamin L. Collier & Johannes G. Jaspersen, 2021. "The effect of information disclosure on demand for high‐load insurance," Journal of Risk & Insurance, The American Risk and Insurance Association, vol. 88(1), pages 161-193, March.
    16. Daniel Schatz & Rabih Bashroush, 0. "Economic valuation for information security investment: a systematic literature review," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 0, pages 1-24.
    17. Chakravarty, Sujoy & Mishra, Rajan, 2019. "Using social norms to reduce paper waste: Results from a field experiment in the Indian Information Technology sector," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 164(C), pages 1-1.
    18. Eiichi Tomiura & Banri Ito & Hiroshi Mukunoki & Ryuhei Wakasugi, 2016. "Individual Characteristics, Behavioral Biases, and Trade Policy Preferences: Evidence from a Survey in Japan," Review of International Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 24(5), pages 1081-1095, November.
    19. Cecilia Rossel & Denise Courtoisie & Magdalena Marsiglia, 2019. "How could conditional cash transfer programme conditionalities reinforce vulnerability? Non‐compliers and policy implementation gaps in Uruguay's Family Allowances," Development Policy Review, Overseas Development Institute, vol. 37(1), pages 3-18, January.
    20. Geiger, Martin & Luhan, Wolfgang J. & Scharler, Johann, 2016. "When do fiscal consolidations lead to consumption booms? Lessons from a laboratory experiment," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 1-20.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:osf:lawarx:cdr69. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: OSF (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://osf.io/preprints/lawarxiv/discover .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.