Comparing football bettors' response to social media marketing differing in bet complexity and account type – An experimental study

Scott Houghton*, Mark Moss

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

Background and aims: The current study aimed to assess how sports bettors respond to advertised bets on social media and whether this differs dependent upon bet complexity and social media account type. Methods:
Employing a 3 × 2 repeated measures design, 145 regular football bettors were recruited to take part in an online study requiring them to rate bets advertised upon social media, providing indications of their likelihood to bet, confidence in the bet and how much they would stake on the bet. Advertised bets differed in terms of complexity (low, medium and high) and each bet was presented separately on both an operator account and an affiliate account. Results: Data analysis highlighted a significant interaction between bet complexity and account type, with bettors rating themselves as being more likely to bet and more confident in bets which were presented on an affiliate account for medium complexity bets but not for low or high complexity bets. Discussion and conclusions: This study provides initial evidence that affiliate marketing of sports betting increases bettor's confidence in certain types of bets. This heightens previously addressed concerns around affiliate marketing, given that affiliates are financially incentivised to attract custom toward gambling operators. Future research should explore risk factors for increased uptake of affiliate marketing, and the impact on gambling behaviour.
Original languageEnglish
Number of pages8
JournalJournal of Behavioral Addictions
Early online date26 Sep 2020
DOIs
Publication statusE-pub ahead of print - 26 Sep 2020

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Comparing football bettors' response to social media marketing differing in bet complexity and account type – An experimental study'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this