Controversial Topics:
Basic Needs Theory
and Gambling
Gordon Walker
AGRI Conference – April 5, 2014
Circumstantial Evidence:
Basic Needs Theory
and Gambling
Gordon Walker
AGRI Conference – April 5, 2014
• Psychological Needs Research
• Four general (and often overlapping) approaches:
1. Inventory – e.g., Murray’s (1938) comprehensive
list included, among others needs:
• achievement, affiliation, aggression, autonomy,
deference, dominance, harm avoidance,
nurturance, order, play, sex, and understanding.
• Similarly, in leisure studies, Driver’s REP framework
includes 39 domains and multiple sub-domains.
2. Stratify – e.g., Maslow’s (1968) hierarchy:
Self-Actualization
Ego & Esteem
Belongingness &
Love
Safety & Security
Physiological
3. Demarcate – e.g., to support their proposition that
belongingness was a basic or fundamental
human need, Baumeister and Leary (1995)
developed the following criteria:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
A basic need:
directs cognitive processing
motivates toward satiation or satisfaction
has affective consequences (e.g., increased
happiness)
impacts a broad variety of behaviours
operates across a wide variety of settings
is universal
is medically, psychologically, and/or behaviourally
harmful if not satisfied
4. Delimit – e.g., Deci and Ryan (1991; Ryan & Deci,
2000; 2002) held there were three fundamental
or basic needs.
• These needs comprise their basic needs theory
(BNT), which in turn is a sub-component of their
broader, self-determination theory (SDT).
• More specifically:
BNT – Three Types of Basic Needs
1. Need for autonomy - which involves freedom to
(typically through personal choice), and selfendorsement of, one’s activities.
2. Need for competence - which involves effective
functioning and, in turn, the desire to seek out
and conquer ever bigger challenges.
BNT – Three Types of Basic Needs
3. Need for interpersonal relatedness - which
involves people feeling that:
• they are loved by and connected to others
• those others understand them
• they are meaningfully involved with the broader
social world
• (Because this one is comparable to Baumeister &
Leary’s need to belonging, I often remind my
students to remember their “ABC’s”).
BNT – Need Variation Across Domains
• BNT-based research has also discovered that need
satisfaction can vary across domains. E.g.,
• An experience-sampling method study (Ryan,
Bernstein, & Brown, 2010) found that American
workers’ ABC needs were satisfied less during
paid work than non-work activities.
• And Ryan et al. added that this effect may
have been underestimated because they did
not differentiate among the different kinds of
non-work (e.g., leisure, household chores, etc.).
BNT – Need Compensation
• Correspondingly, Blanchard, Vallerand, and
Provencher (2000) contended that,
• if a basic need was not satisfied in one domain (e.g.,
work), there could be an attempt to remedy this
deficiency in another domain (e.g., sports).
• (Noteworthy here is that Allport argued that leisure
could serve as a form of “need compensation”
for oppressive work in 1924.)
BNT – Need Frustration
• Although Ryan and Deci (2000) did recognize that
needs could not only be satisfied or dissatisfied
but also even thwarted,
• only relatively recently has theoretical refinement
and empirical research taken place,
• with Vansteenkiste and Ryan (2013) linking need
frustration with smoking, alcohol abuse, and
binge eating.
BNT – Need Substitution
• Vansteenkiste and Ryan (2013) outlined various
“maladaptive mechanisms to cope with need
frustration”, including:
• Need substitution – attaching high importance to
extrinsic goals, such as popularity, attractiveness,
and materialism/wealth. (p. 270)
BNT – Need Substitution
• Vansteenkiste and Ryan (2013) added that
attainment of extrinsic goals is associated with
ill-being, whereas attainment of intrinsic goals
is related to well-being. (p. 270)
• With the following figure illustrating more fully the
relationship between needs and motivations:
Needs
Motivations
SelfDetermined
Intrinsic
Autonomy
Integrated
Identified
Belongingness
E
X
T
R
I
Introjected
N
S
External
Competence
I
C
Amotivation
Non-SelfDetermined
SDT Model (Deci & Ryan)
Needs
Motivations
SelfDetermined
Intrinsic
Autonomy
Integrated
Identified
Belongingness
E
X
T
R
I
Introjected
N
S
External
Competence
I
C
Amotivation
Non-SelfDetermined
SDT Model (Deci & Ryan)
Needs
Motivations
SelfDetermined
Intrinsic
Autonomy
Integrated
Identified
Belongingness
E
X
T
R
I
Introjected
N
S
External
Competence
I
C
Amotivation
Non-SelfDetermined
SDT Model (Deci & Ryan)
• BNT and Gambling Motivations
• Based on unpublished data collected as part of an
AGRI-funded study of Edmontonians’ gambling
behaviour, my preliminary results indicate that:
• the more participants’ need for belongingness was
satisfied, the more they reported intending to casino
gamble in the next six months because doing so was
interesting.
• the less participants’ need for belongingness was satisfied,
the more they reported intending to casino gamble in
the next six months to get rich.
• BNT and Gambling Motivations
• And, when re-contacted for the study’s second wave:
• the less participants’ need for belongingness was satisfied,
the more frequently they reported actually casino
gambling during the intervening six months to get
rich.
• the less participants’ need for belongingness was satisfied,
the more frequently they reported actually casino
gambling during the intervening six months to make
money quickly and easily.
NOT BNT – Need Escape
• Baumeister (1990) held that one of the reasons for
the rise in “escapist” activities (e.g., mountain
climbing, but also alcohol use and abuse), was:
• to avoid thinking bad thoughts about oneself (i.e.,
low self-esteem—with Sheldon et al., 2001,
noting that this self-concept could be a broader
manifestation of the need for competence).
• Thus, rather than trying to compensate for need
dissatisfaction or frustration, why not just
escape these need shortcomings entirely?
• Needs and Gambling Research
• A PsycINFO search identified using terms such as
“needs” and “gambling” resulted in a very small
number of pertinent studies, including:
• Neighbors et al. (2007) proposed that engaging in
risky behaviours—such as gambling—could be a
more or less maladaptive strategy for satisfying
the needs for autonomy, competence, and
interpersonal relatedness. (p. 101)
• Needs and Gambling Research
• Based on further unpublished data from the earlier
AGRI-funded study of Edmontonians’ gambling
behaviour, my preliminary results indicate that:
• the less participants’ need for belongingness was satisfied,
the more frequently they reported intending to play
casino slot machines (SM) in the next six months.
• the less participants’ need for competence was satisfied,
the more frequently they reported intending to play
casino video lottery terminals (VLTs) in the next six
months.
• Needs and Gambling Research
• And, when re-contacted for the study’s second wave:
• the less participants’ need for competence was satisfied,
the more frequently they reported actually playing
casino SMs during the intervening six months.
• the less participants’ need for belongingness was satisfied,
the more frequently they reported actually played
casino VLTs during the intervening six months. (Albeit
at p < .10 in this case.)
• Needs and Gambling Research
• McCormick (1987) speculated that a dysfunctional
“strong and enduring need state” could be briefly
dulled by escape into “the high stimulus
environment of the casino or track”. (p. 260).
• And non-BNT studies have found, for example, that
gambling on electronic gaming machines (EGMs)
was an escape from negative reflection (Rockloff
et al., 2011; see also Weatherly et al., 2010;
Thomas et al., 2009; Wood & Griffiths, 2007).
• Needs and Gambling Research
• Similarly, Hodgins (2012) reported that gambling
“to escape/distraction”, along with “to win
money”, were among the “most important and
robust variables best predicting problem
gambling from the QLS and LLLP studies”.
• (See also Martin et al., 2011, and Nower &
Blaszczynski, 2010.)
• BNT and Gambling - Summary
• If a person’s ABC needs are not being sufficiently
satisfied and/or are being frustrated, then at
least three possible need-based responses:
• Need Compensation – offset deficiency in another
domain (e.g., leisure for work), or possibly subdomain (e.g., EGMs for non-gambling leisure).
• Need Substitution – de-emphasize intrinsic goals and
instead emphasize extrinsic goals (e.g., money).
• Need Escape – Engage in escape-supportive activities
• BNT and Gambling – Future Research
• Thanks to a recently approved AGRI grant, this month
the University of Alberta Population Research Lab
will begin pre-testing a survey that examines:
– basic need satisfaction and need frustration in the leisure
and non-leisure domains (and, in terms of the former, both
the EGM sub-domain and the non-EGM sub-domain).
– need compensation and need escape
– subjective well-being (i.e., positive affect, negative affect,
and life satisfaction)
– leisure and gambling prevalence
– problem gambling (CPGI)
• BNT and Gambling – Future Research
• After any necessary survey modifications are made,
data will then be collected three times, four months
apart, to allow testing of causal relationships.
• Data will be collected in the Edmonton metropolitan
area, using English-language computer assisted
telephone interviewing.
• BNT and Gambling – Future Research
• Depending on the results of this upcoming study, future
research could also replicate and extend this line of
inquiry by, for example, examining:
• other maladaptive need mechanisms identified by
Vansteenkiste and Ryan (2013).
• specific cultural groups (e.g., Chinese-Canadians), as
some research suggests Asians may not only
emphasize belongingness more, but also construe
autonomy and competence differently.
Questions?