|
Search over 100 encyclopedias and dictionaries: |
Research categories | Follow us on Twitter |
Research categories
View all topics in the newsView all reference sources at Encyclopedia.com |
|||
Gambling
GamblingGambling may be defined as a form of activity in which the parties involved, who are known as bettors or players, voluntarily engage to make the transfer of money or something else of value among themselves contingent upon the outcome of some future and uncertain event. While the origins of gambling are lost to recorded history, it appears probable that games of chance developed out of various magical and religious practices employed by man to cope with problems of uncertainty and fate. In contemporary societies gambling appears most frequently in recreational contexts and in association with various sports and games. Among the major classes of games, gambling is especially common in those in which chance plays a prominent role, but it also appears in connection with games of skill or strategy and with games of physical prowess. In nonrecreational contexts gambling occurs in the form of wagers on the outcome of future events about which the bettors have strong convictions, as in the case of election outcomes. Elements closely parallel to gambling appear in conjunction with economic activities, especially those in which risk and uncertainty are prominent. In effect, speculators on the commodity markets bet against each other about the rise or fall of commodity prices. In its various aspects gambling is at once a major recreational institution, a minor vice, a large-scale industry, a powerful source of crime and political corruption, a perennial social problem, a fascinating psychological puzzle, and an intriguing pastime. Like prostitution, it is ancient, widespread, and widely disapproved. It flourishes, in spite of ethical taboo and legal sanction, as an institutionalized deviant pattern and as a form of crime in which the victims are willing accomplices. Social science perspectives on gambling . Because of gambling’s complex and paradoxical nature, it is not surprising that the responses to it by social scientists and others have been extraordinarily diverse. Philosophers and theologians have struggled with the ethical and teleological implications of gambling, viewing it at times as a profane and frivolous stepchild of religion, to which it bears certain disquieting similarities. Mathematicians have exploited gambling to the hilt in the development of probability theory, some of them becoming gamesters in the process. Economists have turned to gambling to clarify the distinction between the functional and dysfunctional aspects of speculation and, more recently, for some sophisticated reformulations of utility theory. In the “theory of games” they have found in gambling a model for analyzing strategies in competitive situations involving risk and uncertainty. Experimental psychologists have employed gambling situations in studies of probability learning and probability preferences, of levels of aspiration, and of intermittent reinforcement and conflict-drive motivation. Social psychologists have utilized gambling games to study social competition, aggression, and coalition formation. Psychoanalysts and clinical psychologists have concerned themselves with the unconscious motivations and personality structures of gamblers and with the problems of addiction. Sociologists have been interested in the incidence of gambling, its organization in relation to the underworld and the police, its functions for individuals and society, and its control. Finally, ethnographers and social historians have provided some fascinating descriptions of the cultural patterning of gambling in various times and places. In these many different approaches that have touched on the subject, the interest in gambling has often been peripheral to some other, central interest, with the result that the coverage is piecemeal and fragmentary. While there are scattered bits of useful knowledge and theory, systematic treatises on gambling are sadly lacking. Moreover, many of the treatments that do exist are speculative, impressionistic, and moralistic, and many are also without adequate data. The psychology of gamblingFrom a psychological viewpoint, gambling is at once an instrumental activity, directed toward a consciously recognized economic end, and an expressive activity, enjoyed as an end in itself. Interpretations of gambling motivations have varied widely, depending upon which of these facets has commanded the central focus of attention. Gambling as instrumental behaviorIn making their betting decisions, economically oriented gamblers must take two principal factors into account: the odds and the probabilities. In gambling terminology “odds” designates the ratio between the amount staked and the amount the player stands to win if successful. “Probabilities” refers to expectations regarding the outcome of the event bet upon, expressed as a ratio of favorable to unfavorable outcomes or as the percentage of favorable outcomes out of all possible outcomes. The actuarial value of a gambling risk depends upon the relationship between the odds and the probabilities. In gambling situations generally, there is a tendency for these two ratios to approach an inverted balance: as the probabilities of a favorable outcome become smaller, the odds become longer. For example, in horse racing, long shots fetch better prices than favorites. That this tendency exists at all may be taken as evidence for the operation of an element of economic rationality among gamblers. It is clear, however, that no general theory of gambling behavior can be constructed from the conventional notions of economic rationality alone. In every gambling situation either the odds and probabilities are exactly balanced or they are not. Assume, first, that they are balanced, as in the case of tossing coins for even money. In the gambling world such risks are known as fair risks because neither side has any clear advantage. While it might appear that the rational gambler would have no particular reason to avoid such risks, there is also no apparent reason for him to accept them. Indeed, according to orthodox economic theory, the prudent gambler would presumably assign some element of disutility or cost to risk assumption and to the activity of gambling itself, regarding it as a form of “work.” Moreover, if he assigns some function of diminishing utility to successive increments of money income, as economic theory assumes, the utility of each unit of money he might win in a fair-risk situation would be less than that of the money he might lose. Hence, the economically rational gambler would presumably avoid such risks as in this sense “not fair.” In all other gambling situations the odds and probabilities are not in balance. In situations of this sort, since all gambling transactions are between persons, it follows that whereas one player has backed a good risk, his opponent has by definition accepted a poor one. It is evident, therefore, that at least half of all gamblers have lost their rational economic bearings. In fact, in the gambling world the majority of good risks are monopolized by the professional gamblers who operate the various games and devices, always with a comfortable margin of safety. From the lay player’s point of view there are no “good risks” at all in any professionally operated gambling house. Yet the market behavior of such gamblers makes it clear that there is always an easy market for poor gambling risks, especially those in which the odds are intriguingly long but offset by disastrously short probabilities. The “utility of money.” Economists and psychologists alike have advanced many arguments and theories designed to show how such apparently nonrational behavior may yet be motivationally intelligible. One line of argument has called for a reappraisal of traditional assumptions about the diminishing utility of money. Thus, Vickrey (1945) reasoned that the behavior of lottery players clearly implies that in this situation the utility of money is an increasing rather than a decreasing function of income. Following this same theme, Friedman and Savage (1948) demonstrated that for the gambler even a small probability of a large reward may have more utility than either a much larger prob ability of small loss or the certainty, if the risk be rejected, of staying at the same income level. Along similar lines, Mosteller and Nogee (1951) recorded the actual market behavior of experimental subjects in a situation that permitted varying amounts to be won, with varying probabilities of success or failure. Observing that the subjects do not automatically accept the bets with the highest actuarial values, they attempted to construct a series of curves showing the actual utility for their subjects of varying amounts of money (see also Coombs & Komorita 1958). The “utility of gambling.” A second line of analysis has challenged the assumption that the activity of gambling should be reckoned on the cost, or disutility, side of the calculus. In effect, the gambler may justify his losses as a fair payment for the pleasure he has obtained from the activity itself. Royden, Suppes, and Walsh (1959) have proposed a carefully reasoned model for the experimental measurement of the “utility of gambling” itself, which they argue must be kept independent of notions about the “utility of money.” This line of analysis, however, is not much help in explaining why gamblers find pleasure in this activity, while nongamblers presumably do not. Subjective probabilitiesA third line of analysis, focusing on the cognitive aspects of gambling orientations, raises the question whether gambling behavior is a function of simple ignorance or error or whether the “subjective probabilities” upon which the gambler premises his behavior are systemati cally distorted or biased by various motivational factors. Ignorance or error. Studies of probability learning provide evidence that there is ample scope for error in appraising the probabilities in complex gambling situations. Komorita (1959) has shown that experimental subjects are least accurate in estimating probabilities when the number of events or possible outcomes is large and when the probabilities for unit events depart from .50. Brim and Koenig (1959) found, in a sample of 143 college students, that none knew the correct way to combine the probabilities of independent events. And Cohen and Hansel (1958) found that even highly intelligent subjects tended to interpret multiplicative probabilities as if they were additive. Professional gamblers are less prone to such errors and employ their extra knowledge to design gambling situations in which the true probabilities are subtly concealed. Faulty reasoning may also serve to distort subjective probability estimates, as, for example, in the widespread belief among gamblers in the “maturity-of-chances” doctrine (Jarvik 1951). Since Dame Fortune must keep her books in balance, reason such gamblers, at roulette, for example, after any unduly long run of black the probabilities of red appearing on the next few plays are greatly increased. In fact, of course, the probabilities on unit events are not affected by preceding sequences. Ironically, perhaps, while the ability to estimate true probabilities generally increases with maturity (Cohen 1957), more sophisticated reasoning errors, such as the maturity-of-chances theory, do not occur among young children and become increasingly common with advancing age (Ross & Levy 1958). Distorted estimates of the true probabilities also result from erroneous information—a principle much utilized by shrewd professionals. Thus, race tracks abound with false tips and spurious “inside information,” much of which is deliberately circulated by touts to mislead the fans and thus to skew the betting odds in some desired direction. Motivated bias. While there is ample scope for simple ignorance or error in gambling situations, there is also abundant evidence that such errors are not random or merely cognitive but reflect consistent patterns of motivated bias. Very simply, the “errors” are almost invariably such as to distort the subjective probabilities in the gambler’s favor. It has been observed again and again that gamblers consistently overestimate their own skill or luck, and it has been demonstrated experimentally that subjects consistently overestimate low probabilities (cf. Preston & Baratta 1948; Nogee & Lieberman 1960). A variety of possible explanations of this phenomenon have been advanced. Atkinson (1957) demonstrated experimentally that the tendency to overestimate chances to win is especially likely to be associated with a high need for achievement. Another recent study of probability learning has shown that positive events are learned more rapidly and extinguished more slowly than negative events (Crandall et al. 1958). This might help to explain the tendency among gamblers to think they are ahead—to remember the exciting winning play and forget the losses that preceded it. But, of course, most gamblers do know in a cognitive sense that they might lose and that they have lost in the past. Leon Festinger and his associates would regard this as an example of dissonant information that must somehow be suppressed if the gambler wishes to continue, which of course he does; indeed, this circumstance may cause the actor to develop some extra attraction to the activity, harnessing various secondary drives to it to justify his behavior and compensate for the dissonant information (Lawrence & Festinger 1962). In terms of learning theory more generally, gambling represents an ideal-typical situation of “intermittent reinforcement,” or partial reward, and the evidence is overwhelming that activities reinforced in this way are peculiarly resistant to extinction. One plausible explanation of this is advanced in the conflict–drive theory developed by J. M. Whiting and his associates. Basically, this theory argues that when the same activity is sometimes rewarded and at other times nonrewarded or punished, conflict between the contradictory expectations of reward and punishment has the effect of adding drive strength to the originally reinforced action (Sears et al. 1953). Very simply, if the gambler always won or always lost, he would presumably lose interest; however, the conflict between fear and hope helps keep him going. Gambling as expressive behaviorIn considering the purely psychological rewards of gambling, we are clearly getting away from a concern with cognitive orientations and the interpretation of gambling as an instrumental activity directed toward an economic goal and are moving toward interpretations of gambling as an end in itself. It has been shown that even mathematically sophisticated subjects, possessing full information regarding the odds and the probabilities, opt for poor risks most of the time (Scodel et al. 1959). Curiously, it is also clear that there are some kinds of people who would not even bet on a sure thing. Moreover, there are evidently important differences among gamblers themselves: between those who prefer games of pure chance and those who prefer games involving skill or strategy; between system players and long-shot players; or between petty gamblers and addicts, for example. Such differentials as these yield to analysis only in terms of the differential noneconomic needs and motives of different classes of people. Games as expressive models. Games typically occur in times, places, and contexts that are removed from the workaday utilitarian sectors of social structure and hence from the constraints and disciplines that the reality principle imposes on task-oriented activities. Thus, they tend to become intimately involved with the expressive and social-emotional sectors and to be concerned with problems of tension release and integration. Indeed, because they operate in what Kurt Lewin called a “plane of unreality,” games are well suited to function as expressive models, onto which a variety of psychological conflicts and problems can be harmlessly projected. As Menninger noted with respect to games of strategy, they may enable us “to express aggression without reality consequences; one can hurt people without really hurting them; we can even kill them without really killing them” (1942, p. 172). In a similar vein, Phillips (1960) has interpreted certain children’s games as exercises in the mastery of anxiety, in which psychological problems can be worked through in a miniature and relatively safe context. Observing that games are not free and spontaneous expressive activities of individuals but are embedded in culture, Roberts and Sutton-Smith (1962) hypothesize that games will have special relevance for psychological problems that are endemic and widespread in the cultures or subgroups in which they are played. While games provide a buffered learning experience for children, game involvement typically diminishes with maturity as individuals become integrated into the mainstream of their culture. Games among adults are thus presumed to represent unresolved areas of conflict, and addicted players are presumed to be persons in a high state of unresolved inner conflict. We may go on to inquire, for what kinds of needs or conflicts, for what kinds of persons, in what kinds of groups or societies, are gambling games appropriate expressive models? A number of theories have been proposed, each with at least some evidence in its support. Teleological motivations in gambling. Since games of chance apparently originated out of religious and magical practices of divination, it has frequently been proposed that gambling may still perform an important teleological function in helping people orient themselves to the problems and conflicts invoked by the intrusions of chance, risk, and uncertainty in a world presumed to be causally and morally ordered. In principle, chance is meaningless and unintelligible, both causally and ethically. Yet, because of its capacity to violate legitimate expectations in important ways, many people feel that it must mean something: why do these things happen? why do they happen to me? For people who find these problems salient, gambling may assume a cosmic significance as a device for probing after the ground of things and of one’s personal relationships to fate (am I lucky today?). In one of the earliest psychological studies of gambling, France (1902) argued that in an environment of uncertaint a belief in luck is functional in encouraging a necessary element of risk assumption but that too much reliance on luck would obviate action and lead to a lack of effort. Relevant empirical evidence is provided in a recent crosscultural study (Roberts et al. 1959) which demonstrates that games of chance are especially likely to be found in preliterate societies in which the deities are regarded as benevolent and nonaggressive and readily subject to compulsion by humans. In contemporary, rationally oriented societies, gambling appeals particularly to superstitous persons, and it is one of the few areas in which permissive attitudes toward superstition are tolerated. Economic conflicts and gambling. Because of gambling’s quasi-instrumental, economic character, it is also peculiarly suitable for the working out of conflicts engendered by the discipline, frustrations, and constraints of the capitalist economic system. Since its rewards are distributed on the basis of chance, gambling would appear to make a mockery of the legitimate economy, with its stress on rationality, discipline, and hard work and its assumed correlations of effort, merit, and reward. Evidence that conflicts in this area are relevant to gambling motivation is provided in another cross-cultural study, which demonstrated that games of chance are most frequently found in preliterate societies in which child-training practices place special stress on responsibility training and arouse high anxiety about achievement performance (Roberts & Sutton-Smith 1962). The authors of this latter study have also demonstrated that in the United States games of chance tend to be preferred by women and low-status economic groups—categories especially involved with positions of frustrating drudgery and with routine responsibilities (Sutton-Smith et al. 1963). A similar hypothesis is tested by Tec (1964) in her study of gambling in Sweden, in which she demonstrated that habitual gambling is especially common in groups that find conventional channels of social advancement blocked (see also Devereux 1949; Caillois 1958). Competition and aggression. Where gambling occurs in conjunction with games of strategy, as in poker (see Riddle 1925), motivations of personal competition and aggression may also play a prominent role. In a classic analysis of this theme, W. I. Thomas (1901) viewed gambling as a form of sublimated combat and suggested that such games may help to keep this vital “instinct” alive in our civilized, bureaucratic world. Among preliterate societies it has been shown that games of strategy tend to occur most frequently in the relatively complex societies with developed systems of stratification, in which social competition becomes problematic and a source of conflict (Roberts et al. 1959). In the contemporary United States a preference for games of strategy and also games of physical prowess is more common among higher-status persons (Sutton-Smith et al. 1963). Anxiety and guilt in gambling. Finally, there are theories that have focused upon thrill-seeking motivations in gambling behavior and their relationship to anxiety. There is broad consensus among students of habitual gamblers that, for all their apparent external calm, gamblers are in fact highly anxious persons. The psychological literature on levels of aspiration provides abundant evidence that persons known to be high in anxiety are particularly prone to set goals for themselves that are grossly unrealistic on the basis of past performance, being either much too high or much too low (cf. Lewin et al. 1944). It has also been demonstrated that unrealistic aspirations are more likely to be set in gaming situations, perhaps because of their miniature and fictitious character, than in real life situations (Frank 1935). Addressing himself to such findings, Atkinson (1957) argues that unrealistic aspirations in fact serve the function of minimizing anxiety about failure, for if one did not really expect to succeed, failure has very little sting. In his studies of probability preferences, he was able to demonstrate that persons high in “need achievement” and presumably high in success drives typically prefer risks at intermediate probability levels, in which success or failure are equally probable and, hence, which generate a maximum of tension and anxiety. Subjects low in “need achievement” and presumably more concerned with fear of failure typically preferred risks at extreme probability levels (either sure things or long shots), in which the success-failure tension is greatly reduced. Persons with high success need would presumably prefer games of skill or strategy, while persons with high fear of failure would prefer games of pure chance, in which failure is peculiarly noninvidious [seeAchievement Motivation]. Why do people who are high in anxiety and in fear of failure elect to gamble at all? Edmund Bergler, the only psychoanalyst who has dealt extensively with the problem of addicted gamblers, has argued that such gamblers are genuine neurot ics, driven by unconscious aggression and latent rebellion “against logic, cleverness, moderation, morals and renunciation. That latent rebellion, based on the inwardly never-relinquished ‘pleasure principle,’ scoffs ironically at all the rules of education. Heavy inner retaliation is the result …rebel lion activates a deep unconscious feeling of guilt” (1943, pp. 385-386). This guilt, Bergler argues, becomes in turn a source of anxiety and creates a need for self-punishment. These unconscious feelings are then neatly displaced into the segregated, miniature, and toylike setting of gambling, where they may be more or less harmlessly worked out. The gambler persuades himself that the real source of his guilt and anxiety is the tension of the game itself, and he achieves the needed self-punishment by keeping going until he loses. Thus, unconsciously, the neurotic gambler wants to lose, and he needs to lose in order to keep his psychological books in balance (see also Bergler 1957; Olmsted 1962). Because gambling provides such a neat, readymade, institutionalized, and culturally sanctioned mechanism for the handling of neurotic problems of this sort, the neurotic gambler does not feel neurotic and rarely appears voluntarily for treatment. Hence, to date there has been very little empirical research on gambling addiction, and academic psychologists have largely ignored the problem. There is, however, at least some empirical evidence that gambling may also serve somewhat parallel conflict-resolving functions for nonaddicted petty gamblers, along the lines indicated earlier in this article. The sociology of gamblingFrom a sociological point of view gambling is of interest primarily as an institutionalized deviant pattern. Although it is widely disapproved of, gambling is nevertheless also widely practiced, and it has given rise to an extensive sub rosa organization that is elaborately articulated with the underworld, on the one hand, and with the legitimate world of its clientele, on the other. Attitudes toward gamblingThe disapproval of gambling is ancient and extremely widespread, although varying greatly in intensity, content, and rationale. At different times and places gambling has been treated as a capital offense or merely as a misdemeanor. Legal restrictions have ranged from total prohibition to selective permissiveness, in which certain types of gambling activities have been permitted or even encouraged while others were forbidden or in which the rules against gaming were lifted during stated holidays or holy days. The laws have often made a distinction between games of pure chance and games of skill or between professional gamblers and their clients. Similarly, the grounds for the disapproval of gambling have varied widely, ranging from views that hold that gambling is fundamentally wrong in. principle to views that hold that gambling is wrong only if it produces manifestly evil consequences. Essentially the same conclusions, moreover, have been derived at times from theological and ethical arguments and at other times from rationalistic, scientific, and pragmatic grounds. In Western society attitudes toward gambling have varied significantly among different religious groups. While the Bible is silent on the subject of gambling, there are numerous references to the use of lots for serious purposes, as when Moses was instructed to allocate the lands of Canaan among the Israelites by lot (Numbers 26.55). Since chance events were considered “acts of God,” the use of the lot, with appropriate ritual and respect, was regarded as justified for discerning the divine will in serious matters. However, the use of the lot for frivolous purposes, as in gaming, was regarded as a sacrilege and profanation. While formal opposition to gambling has persisted among Jewish moralists, prevailing attitudes have softened considerably, and they now view gaming as essentially a useless waste of time. Moreover, since the Middle Ages gambling has been widespread within the Jewish community. Roman Catholics have also come to take a liberal attitude toward gambling, holding that there is nothing wrong in principle with gambling, providing only that certain conditions be met: that the game be honest, that the stakes be moderate and within the means of the players, and that the money staked be one’s own, for example. Gambling and the Protestant ethic. In Western society fundamental opposition to gambling, as a matter of basic ethical principle, is centered squarely in Protestantism and in the cultures where these denominations prevail. These are also, as Weber (1904–1905) observed, the same cultures in which modern bourgeois capitalism has achieved its greatest development. This fact suggests the hypothesis that gambling is somehow peculiarly antithetical, in principle at least, to the core of values embraced in this dominant economic system and in its supporting Protestant ethic. On the surface, at any rate, the antithesis would seem to be clear enough. Among the core values of bourgeois capitalism are its special emphasis on rationality, disciplined work habits, prudence, thrift, methodical adherence to routine, and the assumed correlation of effort, ethical merit, and reward. The values symbolically erribodied in gam bling are diametrically opposed to these core virtues. Since its rewards are based on chance, gambling is explicitly and spitefully nonethical and makes a mockery of the required correlation of merit and reward. Thus, it tends to undermine disciplined work habits, prudence, and thrift; and in place of the needed rational-empirical orientations, it tends to foster superstitious beliefs and magical practices. If the values fostered by gambling were to become general in the population, the whole system of ethical sentiments that functions to sustain this dominant economic system would simply wither away. So argue the Protestant moralists. In fact, of course, even in the dominant economic system the alternative values of initiative, daring, boldness, shrewdness, aggressive competitiveness, and willingness to assume risks also play a prominent role, and sheer luck is not always irrelevant. Because these values do not fit so neatly with those of the ethically sanctioned core, they have been the focus of considerable cultural ambivalence and guilt. The American public is uncomfortably aware, for example, of certain disquieting similarities between gambling and transactions on the stock markets; but open discussion of these similarities is strongly tabooed, and standard economic texts make a frantic effort to focus on the differences. In effect, gambling becomes a whipping boy to serve the precarious distinction between forms of speculation that are functionally useful and hence “legitimate” and those that are functionless or dysfunctional. Thus, when speculation gets out of hand, the obviously dysfunctional consequences for the economy are blamed, not on legitimate businessmen and still less on the stock market system, but on “gamblers,” who have somehow invaded the market and should be driven from it. More generally, it is quite possible that the disapproval of gambling, in addition to reinforcing certain functionally appropriate values and attitudes, functions as a mechanism through which society seeks to allay its fears and misgivings about the ethical integrity of the dominant system—a fact that may account for the persistence and intensity of this disapproval in Protestant societies (Devereux 1949, chapter 18). Functions of gambling for societyThe fact that gambling persists in spite of the powerful legal and ethical taboos against it maybe taken as evidence that it serves important psychological functions for the gamblers; the preceding discussion of the Psychology of gambling has called attention to at least some of these. But what about functions or dys functions of gambling for society? This, of course, is an empirical question that cannot be answered on the basis of a priori principle. The fact that the disapproval of gambling is functional for society does not in itself establish that the practice of gambling is therefore dysfunctional, for the questions of scale, contexts, and side effects must also be considered. Most observers would probably agree that the addicted gambler, like the alcoholic, is a waste for society. Moreover, it is probably true, as the moralists have argued, that if gambling became a major preoccupation for the whole population and if the attitudes and practices of gambling were to permeate the sphere of the dominant economic system, the consequences for society would be seriously dysfunctional. However, there is no evidence that petty gambling is in any way damaging to character or that petty gamblers differ in significant ways from nongamblers (Tec 1964). On the contrary, petty gambling may function as a kind of institutionalized “solution” for many of the specific psychological problems generated by the conflicts, strains, and ambivalences embedded in the economic system. It may serve to revitalize certain relevant patterns of motivation that are given little scope in routine economic pursuits, such as motives relating to themes of daring, combat, faith, and willingness to take chances. It has also been argued that the existence of institutionalized petty gambling is functional for society in providing a channel into which potentially disruptive speculative tendencies may be safely deflected from the legitimate market place. To these should be added the positive (and perhaps somewhat perverse) value-reinforcing and scapegoating societal function of the disapproval of gambling, for which institutionalized gambling provides a convenient target. The legalization issueIf recreational petty gambling is harmless enough and may even perform useful functions for personality and society, the question naturally arises, should gambling be legalized? In fact, several forms of gambling have already been legalized during the present century. Gambling casinos flourish in many European countries and in Latin America; many nations, including even the Soviet Union and China, have adopted state lotteries; and legalized football betting pools have captured enormous followings in England and Sweden. Gambling and law in the United StatesIn the United States pari-mutuel betting at racetracks has been legalized in approximately half the states. Several states allow the playing of bingo for charitable purposes; two states (New Hampshire and New York) operate a lottery, and only one state (Nevada) permits all forms of gambling. Although there is unmistakable evidence that moral resistance to legalized gambling is weakening rapidly in the United States, until November 1966, with the above exceptions, proposals to legalize any other form of gambling in the United States had been soundly defeated. Although legal sanctions may have some dampening effect on the amount of gambling that occurs, they have never been able to stop gambling altogether. Sample polls in the United States have indicated over and over again that a majority of American adults do in fact gamble at least occasionally, in spite of moral taboos and legal restrictions. In 1951 the Kefauver committee estimated the volume of illegal betting in the United States at $20,000 million per year (Kefauver 1951), but that estimate is almost certainly too low. In 1963 an officially recorded $2,700 million was wagered legally on horse races alone, through the pari-mutuel machines, and experts are generally agreed that at least ten times as much was wagered illegally with bookmakers. Scarne (1961, p. 1) places the probable total volume of betting, for all types of gambling in the United States, at closer to $500,000 million a year. While this estimate is probably too large, there is ample evidence that the volume of illegal betting in the United States is sufficient to support a major industry. Indeed, since the legalization of the liquor industry in 1933, gam bling has become the major source of support of the organized underworld in the United States. The antigambling laws are unenforced and un enforceable in the United States for two principal reasons. First, the enormous financial resources controlled by the professional gamblers have enabled them to buy protection from excessive police or political harassment. Indeed, gambling has become one of the principal sources of political corruption and graft in America, especially at municipal levels (Devereux 1949; Kefauver 1951). Second, the general public, although sufficiently ambivalent to insist that antigambling statutes remain on the books, does not really want the gambling laws enforced and hence provides grossly insufficient support to reform-administration and routine enforcement efforts. As noted above, gambling is a peculiar form of crime, which is carried on with the willing consent of its victims; even when the victims have been clearly duped or cheated, they are usually loath to complain to the police, because of feelings of embarrassment and shame. Arguments for legalization. The proponents of legalization argue that gambling—at least regulated petty gambling—is probably harmless, possibly beneficial, and in any case ineradicable. Antigambling statutes can never be effectively enforced. By keeping them on the books, we throw the entire operation into the hands of the underworld, create thereby an enormous source of revenue and power for organized crime, and keep alive a major source of political graft and corruption in America. Moreover, we place an unnecessary burden of guilt and hypocrisy upon the lay public, which must patronize these illegal and frequently dishonest establishments to indulge their gambling propensities. Partial legalization, as it currently exists in the United States, is doubly unsatisfactory, the argument continues, for it is discriminatory, hypocritical, and sabotages the moral convictions needed for effective law enforcement. Legalization will effectively end this sort of hypocrisy, get gambling into the open where it can be suitably regulated and controlled, dry up a major source of underworld income and power, eliminate the occasion and resource for police graft and political corruption, and make available to the state a highly lucrative source of additional revenue, achieved through the most painless known form of taxation. These arguments were ably stated some thirty years ago by a leading American sociologist, E. W. Burgess (1935), and have been repeated ever since. Until now they have not prevailed, even though recent public opinion polls show unmistakable trends in this direction. Arguments against legalization. The opposition to legalization stems from several sources and draws on a variety of arguments. The core of resistance in the United States is still firmly rooted in the residual Puritan culture, which regards gambling as inherently sinful and placates its restive conscience by keeping the official facade of culture officially against it. Whatever the merits of the moralists’ theological or ethical grounds, their arguments tend to be sociologically naive; in the empirical world one drink does not necessarily make an alcoholic or one lottery ticket an addicted gambler. While conceding that a generalized gambling mania might have disastrous consequences for society, it is an empirical question whether legalization would have this consequence. However, the moralists undoubtedly score a strong empirical point in their argument that selective legalization weakens the public will to enforce the statutes which remain. Arguments from other sources have attempted to grapple more directly with empirical conse quences. Would legalization in fact rid gambling of gangster influence? No, answers Virgil Peterson (1945), who was for many years chairman of the Chicago Crime Commission, citing the continued influence of the underworld in the liquor business even after the repeal of prohibition laws, and the unsavory history of graft and corruption which accompanied the later days of legalized lotteries in nineteenth-century America. In rebuttal proponents point out that most European state lotteries have operated successfully for years without major scandal. But perhaps the United States is different. Would legalization set off a wholesale gambling mania, create a population of gambling addicts, and sabotage work disciplines and the ethical attitudes which maintain them? Undoubtedly the incidence of gambling would increase, perhaps quite substantially, if the taboos were lifted and the facilities made more visible, guilt-free, and accessible, but nobody knows for sure how much it would increase. So far, the legalization of football pools and off-track betting shops in England has not produced any runaway mania. But again, perhaps the United States is different. There is at least some evidence that by the 1820s American lotteries had reached such craze proportions that they had seriously disruptive consequences for some communities (Spofford 1892) and some evidence that during the racing season at local tracks many local businesses suffer, absenteeism increases, installment payments fall off, and petty crimes increase (New Jersey State Chamber of Commerce 1939). Regarding the possible long-run effects of wholesale legalization upon the ethical attitudes and beliefs which underpin the system of bourgeois capitalism, there is no relevant empirical evidence. Opponents of legalization point to Latin America, where permissive attitudes to gambling and generally more fatalistic value systems prevail and where bourgeois capitalism has been slow to develop. Who can say whether gambling is cause or consequence in this relationship? Recalling the functions attributed above to the disapproval of gambling, could the United States afford an attitude of moral indifference? The solution, of course, does not have to be of an either-or nature. Although few are willing to admit it and still fewer to recommend it, since it violates all the principles of logic and common sense, the United States has again and again shown by its behavior that it still covertly prefers the present type of compromise solution, in which a formal facade of disapprobation and legal taboo is combined with halfhearted enforcement and widespread practice. Through this arrangement it does achieve at least some measure of regulation and constraint, keeps the public conscience appeased, and yet provides generous opportunities for those who would gamble to do so (for a carefully reasoned defense of this arrangement, see Dos Passos 1904). But these gains, if they be that, are not achieved without serious cost; and in any event, in this age of increasing secularization it is highly probable that the proponents of further legalization will have won their battle in the United States before another edition of this encyclopedia appears. Edward C. Devereux, Jr. [See alsoGame Theory; Leisure; Social Control; Speculation, Hedging, and Arbitrage; Utility.] BIBLIOGRAPHYAtkinson, John W. (1957) 1958 Motivational Determinants of Risk-taking Behavior. Pages 322-339 in John W. Atkinson (editor), Motives in Fantasy, Action, and Society: A Method of Assessment and Study. Princeton, N.J.: Van Nostrand. → First published in Volume 64 of the Psychological Review. Bergler, Edmund 1943 The Gambler: The Misunder stood Neurotic. Journal of Criminal Psychopathology 4:379–393. Bergler, Edmund 1957 The Psychology of Gambling. New York: Hill & Wang. Block, Herbert A. 1962 The Gambling Business: An American Paradox. Crime & Delinquency 8:355–364. Brim, O. G. Jr.; and Koenig, F. W. 1959 Two Aspects of Subjective Probability Among College Students. Journal of Communication 9:19–26. Burgess, Ernest W. 1935 The Next Step in the War on Crime—Legalize Gambling: A Report to Governor Harry M. Homer. Chicago: Adair. Caillois, Roger (1958) 1961 Man, Play and Games. New York: Free Press. → First published as Les jeux et les hommes. Cohen, John 1957 Subjective Probability. Scientific American 197:128-138. Cohen, John; and Hansel, C. E. M. 1956 Risk and Gambling: The Study of Subjective Probability. New York: Philosophical Library. Cohen, John; and Hansel, C E. M. 1958 The Nature of Decisions in Gambling. Acta psychologica 13:357–370. Coombs, C H.; and Komorita, S. S. 1958 Measuring Utility of Money Through Decisions. American Journal of Psychology 71:383–389. Crandall, V. J.; Solomon, D.; and Kellaway, R. 1958 The Value of Anticipated Events as a Determinant of Probability Learning and Motivation. Journal of Genetic Psychology 58:3–10. Devereux, Edward C. 1949 Gambling and the Social Structure: A Sociological Study of Lotteries and Horse Racing in Contemporary America. Ph.D. dissertation, Harvard Univ. Dos Passos, John R. 1904 Gambling and Cognate Vices. Yale Law Journal 14:9—17. France, Clemens J. 1902 The Gaming Impulse. American Journal of Psychology 13:364–407. Frank, J. D. 1935 Some Psychological Determinants of Level of Aspiration. American Journal of Psychology 47:285–293. Friedman, Milton; and Savage, L. J. 1948 The Utility Analysis of Choices Involving Risk. Journal of Political Economy 56:279–304. Galdston, Iago 1951 Psychodynamics of the Triad, Alcoholism, Gambling and Superstition. Mental Hygiene 35:589–598. Greenson, Ralph R. 1947 On Gambling. American Imago 4:61–77. Jarvik, Murray E. 1951 Probability Learning and a Negative Recency Effect in the Serial Anticipation of Alternative Symbols. Journal of Experimental Psychol ogy 41:291–297. Kefauver, Estes 1951 Crime in America. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday. Komorita, S. S. 1959 Factors Which Influence Subjective Probability. Journal of Experimental Psychology 58:386–389. Lawrence, Douglas H.; and Festinger, Leon 1962 Deterrents and Reinforcement: The Psychology of Insufficient Reward. Stanford Univ. Press. Lewin, Kurt et al. 1944 Level of Aspiration. Volume 1, pages 333-378 in Joseph McV. Hunt (editor), Personality and the Behavior Disorders. New York: Ron ald Press. Menninger, Karl 1942 Love Against Hate. New York: Harcourt. → A paperback edition was published in 1959. Mosteller, Frederick; and Nogee, Philip 1951 An Experimental Measurement of Utility. Journal of Polit ical Economy 59:371–404. New Jersey State Chamber of Commerce, Research Department 1939 The Economic Effects of Parimutuel Horse Racing, as Measured by the Experiences of Other States. Orange, N.J.: The Department. Nogee, Philip; and Lieberman, Bernhardt 1960 The Auction Value of Certain Risky Situations. Journal of Psychology 49:167–179. Olmsted, Charlotte 1962 Heads I Win—Tails You Lose. New York: Macmillan. Peterson, Virgil W. (1945) 1949 Gambling—Should It Be Legalized? Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology 40:259–329. → First published by the Chicago Crime Commission. Phillips, R. H. 1960 The Nature and Function of Children’s Formal Games. Psychoanalytical Quarterly 29:200–207. Preston, Malcolm G.; and baratta, philip 1948 An Experimental Study of the Auction Value of an Uncertain Outcome. American Journal of Psychology 61:183–193. Riddle, E. M. 1925 Aggressive Behavior in a Small Group. Archives of Psychology No. 78. Roberts, John M.; Arth, Malcolm S.; and Bush, Robert R. 1959 Games in Culture. American Anthropologist New Series 61:597–605. Roberts, John M.; and Sutton-Smith, Brian 1962 Child Training and Game Involvement. Ethnology 1:166–185. Ross, B. M.; and Levy, N. 1958 Patterned Predictions of Chance Events by Children and Adults. Psychological Reports 4:87–124. Royden, Halsey L.; Suppes, Patrick; and Walsh, Karol 1959 A Model for the Experimental Measurement of the Utility of Gambling. Behavioral Science 4:11–18. Scarne, John 1961 Scarne’s Complete Guide to Gambling. New York: Simon & Schuster. Scodel, A.; Ratoosh, P.; and Minas, J. S. 1959 Some Personality Correlates of Decision Making Under Conditions of Risk. Behavioral Science 4:19–28. Sears, R. R. et al. 1953 Some Child Rearing Antecedents of Aggression and Dependency in Young Children. Genetic Psychology Monographs 47:135–236. Spofford, A. R. 1892 Lotteries in American History. American Historical Association, Annual Report [1892]:173–195. Sutton-Smith, B.; Roberts, J. M.; and Kozelka, R. M. 1963 Game Involvement in Adults. Journal of Social Psychology 60:15–30. Tec, Nechama 1964 Gambling in Sweden. Totowa, N.J.: Bedminster. Thomas, W. I. 1901 The Gaming Instinct. American Journal of Sociology 6:750–763. Thorner, Isidor 1956 Ascetic Protestantism, Gambling, and the One-price System. American Journal of Economics and Sociology 15:161–172. Vickrey, William 1945 Measuring Marginal Utility by Reactions to Risk. Econometrica 13:319–333. Weber, Max (1904–1905) 1930 The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism. Translated by Talcott Parsons, with a foreword by R. H. Tawney. London: Allen & Unwin; New York: Scribner. → First published in German. The 1930 edition has been reprinted frequently. See especially pages 35–92. |
|
|
Cite this article
"Gambling." International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences. 1968. Encyclopedia.com. 29 May. 2012 <http://www.encyclopedia.com>. "Gambling." International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences. 1968. Encyclopedia.com. (May 29, 2012). http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G2-3045000447.html "Gambling." International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences. 1968. Retrieved May 29, 2012 from Encyclopedia.com: http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G2-3045000447.html |
|
Video Game
Video GameBackgroundVideo games are played at the arcade, at home on a television or personal computer, and as a handheld portable game. They are packaged in large consoles, game paks that can only be played on the same manufacturer's hardware (i.e. Nintendo, Sega Genesis, and Sony Playstation), and as CD-ROMs. Made up of a program that instructs the computer to display specific visual and audio effects, video games utilize cutting-edge technology in order to provide fast paced entertainment. Recent statistics show that 70% of all children in the United States have home video game systems. Over four billion dollars is spent on arcade video games annually. HistoryA precursor to the video game, pinball machines were introduced during the 1930s and remained popular through the 1970s. In 1971, a video arcade game was produced called Computer Space. Invented by Nolan Bushnell and Ted Dabney, Computer Space was the first real coin-operated video game, but for various reasons, it never became popular. It did however, lay the groundwork for the next video game that Bushnell and Dabney introduced: the phenomenally successful arcade game Pong. Modeled after the game of ping pong, it was an electronic game in which players tried to hit a flashing dot passed their opponent's video paddle. With the success of Pong, Bushnell and Dabney started the Atari Company, and in 1975, they introduced a home version of Pong. In 1976, Warner Communication purchased Atari for $28 million and expanded its home line of video game cartridges. At the same time Bushnell and Dabney were developing Pong, Ralph Baer, who was working for Sanders Associates, was designing a home video game system called The Odyssey. Developed in 1969, Baer's system was finally manufactured and distributed by Magnavox in 1972. The Odyssey was a package of 12 different plug-in games that were housed on circuit cards. Each game came with plastic overlays that, when placed over the television screen, simulated the appropriate background. For example, a plastic overlay of a hockey rink was included with the hockey game. The Odyssey also offered an electronic shooting gallery with four additional games and an electronic rifle. Eighty-five thousand systems were sold. Rapid advances in electronics technology during the 1970s led to the development of more complicated games, such as Space Invaders and Pac-Man. Introduced in 1983 as a joint venture between the Namco Company of Japan and Midway of the United States, Pac-Man has sold hundreds of thousands of games and remains one of the most popular video games. When personal computers became available, computer games were created. Many of these games were adaptations of arcade or home video game systems, however unique games were also developed. The computer game industry grew swiftly during the 1980s powered by various companies, especially the Nintendo Corporation. In the late 1980s, the CD-ROM was introduced. These disks could hold more information on them, and allowed the development of more sophisticated, interactive games. In 1995, digital video disks (DVDs) were first produced for home computers. Since they have a storage capacity over twenty times greater than CD-ROMs, they promise to revolutionize computer games. DesignDesign is the key aspect of making all video games. It is typically done by a team of skilled computer programmers, writers, artists, and other game designers. During this phase of development, they generate the game's specifications, which includes game type, objective, and graphics. While creating a video game is rarely a step by step process, there are a variety of tasks that must be accomplished during the development phase. In the beginning, the type and objective of the game is determined. In general, games fall within six categories, or genres, including fighting, shooting, strategy, simulations, adventure, and run, jump and avoid (RJA). Fighting games require the players to battle with each other or the computer. Presently, they are the most popular and encompass such titles as Mortal Kombat and Street Fighter. Shooting games involve battles in which the player tries to destroy enemy tanks, ships, or planes. Strategy games include such classics as chess, bridge or checkers. Simulations are games, which reproduce real life situations such as flying or driving. Adventure games are computerized versions of role-playing fantasy games. The RJA games are those like the Super Mario games in which a character tries to reach a goal while being impeded by various obstacles. The action of the game is dependent upon its intended venue. An arcade game must have immediate action. A home version usually includes various skill levels in order to keep the player interested over a longer period of time. A handheld version of a video game is simplified to be played in miniature. Raw MaterialsAlthough the most important raw material in creating a video game is imagination, a number of supplies are necessary to bring that imagination to life. Once the story has been created, characters and background are drawn on storyboards, then transferred to electronic format directly by an artist or via digitization. Lifelike action is captured on film and sound is recorded on digital audio tape (DAT). Once design is complete, a variety of raw materials are used to produce video games. This includes the materials that go into making the storage medium, the accessories, and the packaging. The most common storage mediums are floppy disks and CDs. These are made with hard plastics such as polycarbonates. CDs have a thin layer of aluminum or silver coating. Additionally, they are coated with a protective, clear acrylic coating. Floppy disks are made with a thin plastic that is coated with a magnetic material. Plastics are also used to make the accessory pieces that some computer games require. In each of the plastics used, a variety of fillers and colorants are incorporated to modify its characteristics. Typically, computer games are packaged in highly decorated cardboard boxes. The Manufacturing |
|
|
Cite this article
"Video Game." How Products Are Made. 2000. Encyclopedia.com. 29 May. 2012 <http://www.encyclopedia.com>. "Video Game." How Products Are Made. 2000. Encyclopedia.com. (May 29, 2012). http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G2-2896900106.html "Video Game." How Products Are Made. 2000. Retrieved May 29, 2012 from Encyclopedia.com: http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G2-2896900106.html |
|
Gambling
GAMBLINGGAMBLING. Men and women throughout history and around the world have gambled. In the early colonial days, taverns were the main meeting place—and a place to put down a bet. In addition, gamblers and those who just placed an occasional bet had gambling halls, gaming rooms, saloons, even outdoor games to wager on. Indians, judges, Mexicans, physicians, Chinese, clergymen, African Americans, salesclerks, cowboys, and professional gamblers bet their money and sometimes their possessions on games of chance. Gambling venues included logging camps, elegant steamboats, railroad cars, boxing rings, and more. Gambling was (and is)a form of entertainment. In the early days of the nation, people worked hard and often did not live near towns, thus when they did go to town they wanted to be entertained. Gambling gave an air of fairly harmless excitement and the payoff (or loss)was immediate. Indians and Early GamblingThe Assiniboin Indians of North Dakota had a favorite dice game. Their two-sided dice had one side granting points when it came up; the other side did not. The dice were made of pieces of broken dishes or claws from a crow, with one side painted red, the other black. Buttons or other trinkets were also used as dice. Point values for each item were agreed upon before the game began. To make the game last longer and to have more at stake, the Assiniboins often played double or nothing. They would have one round with a set object as the prize. After round one, more objects—even wives—were added to the pot as the rounds continued. Sometimes games went on two and three days and nights, breaking only for meals. The dice games continued until one of the players had lost everything. Wives were property and had no say if they were lost to another man. They just moved. But there were some men who would not bet their wives, and fatal fights sometimes ensued. The Zuni, Papago, and Hopi Indians liked to bet on foot races. Other tribes used hand games, the equivalent of, "Button, button, who's got the button." In this hand game, a button, or other small object, was placed in a person's hand. That person then began passing the button around the circle—or at least pretended to. Whoever was, "It" had to try to discern who had the button at any given time. If he was wrong, he lost the bet. Most betting included drumming and chants that grew more enthusiastic with each round. In the 1830s Choctaw Indians played a serious game called, "ball play" that was similar to lacrosse and involved two teams, each consisting of ten players. Sticks about two feet long with a cup fashioned on one end were used to catch and throw a ball in this competition. George Catlin, the renowned Western artist, watched such a game with close to 700 young warriors as players. Women were in charge of the betting for this particular game. At stake were mostly household items, including dogs, horses, and guns. Spectators numbered in the thousands. On the Upper Missouri River, the Mandan Indians' favorite game was, "the game of the arrow." Each young warrior who wanted to play had to pay an entry fee of a valued possession, such as a pair of moccasins or a robe. The object was to shoot arrows as fast as possible, seeing how many arrows could be launched before the first one hit the ground. In the game that Catlin observed, one of the warriors got eight arrows off and won all the prizes ("entry fees"). Gambling on SteamboatsInitially steamboats were used only to haul freight. In January of 1812, Robert Fulton introduced his boat, the New Orleans, as the first steamboat to carry passengers. By 1860, western rivers had 735 passenger steamboats plying their waters; these boats carried gamblers, who often took on the air of gentlemen, wearing knee-length black coats, ruffled white shirts, vests, and fancy rings. Referred to as "dandies," these professional gamblers were frequently con men who fleeced their victims in less than honest wins. The belief was that 99 percent of riverboat gamblers cheated and worked with an accomplice. The gambler and his partner(s)would board the boats at different points, thus covering up their collusion. A team consisted of two, three, or up to six men. Some would play cards, while the others would give them signals. Tips were specific puffs of cigar smoke, holding a cane in a certain manner, wearing a hat at various angles, or anything that would not be obvious to the other players. With their lavish frescoed walls, crystal chandeliers, and flowery carpets, the riverboats were expensive to run. The Great Republic was sold at auction in 1871 because fuel for the round trip from St. Louis to New Orleans cost $5,000. Gambling WomenWomen also gambled. Alice Tubbs, known as Poker Alice, was born Alice Ivers in Sudbury, England, in 1851; she moved to Virginia with her family in her late teens. She married a mining engineer in Colorado; his early death left her a young widow who soon became acquainted with gambling. Poker Alice learned her craft well in Colorado, practiced it in Oklahoma, and eventually found herself working as a faro dealer in South Dakota. She was apparently the only woman faro dealer that ever lived and worked in the Black Hills, primarily in Sturgis and Deadwood. Photos of Tubbs, who never played cards with strangers, always show her with a big cigar in her mouth. In the 1880s, Tubbs sometimes made $1,000 in just one evening of cards. Also a blackjack dealer and a madam, Poker Alice marched in the 1927 parade in Deadwood, South Dakota, when the town hosted President Calvin Coolidge. She died in 1930, having outlived three husbands. Lotteries and ViolenceIronically, even though many churches frowned upon other forms of gambling, lotteries were and are accepted by nearly everyone. Many church buildings, schools, and even roads and bridges were built by proceeds from lotteries. Perhaps because the tickets did not have to be sold in the smoky saloons but could be sold by anyone, anywhere, lotteries were looked upon as a good way to raise money and were not truly considered "gambling." Some states banned them; others embraced them. States then and now, passed lottery bills, then fought over how much of the proceeds the state would receive and how they would be used. James Monroe Pattee, a New Hampshire writing instructor, was the king of lottery sales. He migrated to California for a time then settled in Omaha, Nebraska. He created lotteries for worthy causes such as hospitals and libraries. In 1873 Nebraska outlawed lotteries and Pattee moved to Wyoming. In that state a lottery could be legally offered by buying a three-month license for $100. During his first year in Wyoming, Pattee bought a license every three months for a total of $400. He sold about $7 million worth of tickets in that year. Despite the small population of Wyoming, he was successful because he advertised in the New York Herald newspaper, thus getting out-of-state business. Violence was often gambling's companion; perhaps the most famous murder was that of Wild Bill Hickok in Deadwood, Dakota Territory. Although Hickok had a strict policy of never sitting with his back to the door when he was playing cards, on 2 August 1866, for the first time, he sat with his back to the door in Saloon #10 and was shot in the back by Jack McCall. Hickok's poker hand—a pair of aces and a pair of eights—was from then on known as a "Deadman's Hand." The saloon is still operating. Gambling on the ReservationLarge scale casino gambling on Indian reservations was allowed in 1987 when the Supreme Court ruled in Calfornia vs. Cabazon Band of Mission Indians that states could regulate commercial gambling on Indian reservations. Congress subsequently passed the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (IGRA)in 1988. Proceeds of gaming operations were to be used for economic development and welfare of tribal members. Three levels, called classes, of gambling were defined. Class I: traditional tribal and social games with nominal prizes; this class is regulated solely by the tribe. Class II: in states where such games are legal and not prohibited by federal law, bingo, lotto, punch cards, and games played among individuals (not against the house)may be allowed or licensed by the tribe. Class III: casinos, which are the most highly regulated and must be legal in the state where the reservation is located; casinos are subject to state-tribal agreements. Such compacts delineate state-tribal regulatory authority; they also cover cooperative areas of criminal justice and payments to each state for enforcement and oversight. From passage of IGRA in 1988 through the end of 1996, revenues from gambling on the reservations increased from $212 million to $6.7 billion. Of the 554 federally recognized tribes, the Bureau of Indian Affairs reports only 146 tribes with Class III gaming facilities. More than two-thirds of Indian tribes do not offer gambling; some tribes have voted not to offer gaming on their lands. The Prairie Island Indian Community is one of eleven reservations in Minnesota and one of the smallest in that state. Prairie Island uses the revenue from its gambling operations to pay for some of its basic services and to improve the lives of tribal members. The largest Indian gambling facility in the United States, Foxwoods Casino (run by the Mashantucket Pequots)near Ledyard, Connecticut, employs about 13,000; the entire tribe has only about 500 members. Alcohol consumption is not a given in reservation casinos; it is up to each tribe to decide if it will allow liquor to be sold on the reservation. In South Dakota, the Pine Ridge Indian Reservation is a dry reservation yet it owns and operates Prairie Wind Casino. It still draws visitors—and their dollars—to the reservation. BIBLIOGRAPHYMoulton, Candy Vyvey. The Writer's Guide to Everyday Life in the Wild West From 1840–1900. Cincinnati, Ohio: Writers Digest Books, 1999. Sasuly, Richard. Bookies and Bettors: Two Hundred Years of Gambling. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1982. MacFarlan, Allan, and Paulette MacFarlan. Handbook of American Indian Games. New York: Dover, 1985. Eadington, William. Indian Gaming and the Law. Reno: University of Nevada Press, 1998. PeggySanders See alsoLotteries . |
|
|
Cite this article
"Gambling." Dictionary of American History. 2003. Encyclopedia.com. 29 May. 2012 <http://www.encyclopedia.com>. "Gambling." Dictionary of American History. 2003. Encyclopedia.com. (May 29, 2012). http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G2-3401801653.html "Gambling." Dictionary of American History. 2003. Retrieved May 29, 2012 from Encyclopedia.com: http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G2-3401801653.html |
|
Gambling
GamblingGAMBLING AMONG CHILDREN AND TEENS Gambling and games of chance have been popular throughout history. The globalization of gambling has passed through a number of cycles. More so than in the past, gambling is viewed as a socially acceptable form of entertainment. While gambling activities can take many forms and vary across cultures and jurisdictions, most individuals gamble for enjoyment, for entertainment, to socialize, and to try their luck without experiencing many negative repercussions. PATHOLOGICAL GAMBLINGGambling can be viewed on a continuum, ranging from non-gambling to social gambling to pathological gambling. While most adults gamble without experiencing many adverse consequences, a small proportion of adults (0.4–3%) experience significant gambling-related problems, with an even larger proportion of adolescents (4–6%) reporting major gambling-related problems. The essential characteristic associated with pathological gambling is that it is a persistent and recurrent maladaptive gambling behavior that negatively disrupts personal, familial, social, economic, and vocational pursuits. Given the widespread proliferation and expansion of government-regulated and sponsored forms of gambling, gambling is quickly becoming a prominent social policy issue. Pathological gambling, conceptualized as an impulse-control disorder, results in an individual’s inability to stop his or her gambling in spite of multiple negative consequences. While a greater number of males experience pathological gambling compared to females (estimates are that a ratio of 3:1 exists), pathological gamblers frequently experience a preoccupation with gambling, the need to substantially increase the amount and frequency of their wagers, have great difficulty stopping or reducing their gambling, and become extremely irritable when trying to limit their gambling. These individuals often gamble to escape problems or relieve stress, return to gambling in order to recoup losses, frequently lie to family members, peers, and friends in order to conceal their gambling losses, and commit illegal behaviors (both within and outside the home) to finance their gambling. Pathological gamblers jeopardize familial, peer, and vocational relationships in order to continue gambling and help relieve financial difficulties resulting from their gambling behavior. There is considerable discussion as to whether some forms of gambling may be more problematic than others. Some research suggests that machine gambling (e.g., slot machines, video poker machines, video lottery terminals) and Internet gambling may be more problematic to some individuals because of their relatively low cost and the frequency and speed of playing while simultaneously allowing the player to go into a disassociative state. Other research suggests that there are definite differential patterns of playing and preferences for different forms of gambling depending upon one’s age, accessibility of venues, gender, and ethnic and cultural background. An emerging body of literature suggests that certain familial factors (high rates of family gambling problems, substance abuse problems, spouse or partners with a gambling problem), biological factors (including brain chemistry and functioning, physiological indicators of arousal and the need for stimulation, genetic considerations), attentional problems, and a wide variety of physical health problems (including cardiovascular and gastrointestinal problems and chronic pain) are associated with pathological gambling disorders. Personality disorders related to impulsivity, sensation seeking, a high degree of risk-taking, antisocial personality disorders, oppositional defiant disorders, compulsivity, psychoticism, and neuroticism, and cognitive distortions (erroneous beliefs including an illusion that one can control the outcome of random events, a lack of recognition of the notion of independence of events, the belief in a system to “beat the odds”) have similarly been linked to pathological gambling. From a psychological perspective, pathological gamblers have been reported to exhibit high anxiety, depression and depressive symptomatology, suicidal ideation and suicide attempts, and a wide range of personality and mental health disorders. There is also a growing body of evidence to suggest that pathological gamblers have a variety of comorbid alcohol and substance abuse problems. While there is no personality profile of a pathological gambler per se, there are indications that an individual’s psychological and mental state make certain individuals more susceptible to both gambling and the development of a gambling problem. In spite of the large number of adverse behavioral traits associated with gambling, it is not unusual for individuals to fail to recognize their problems. They tend not to acknowledge their gambling problem and fail to seek help. Their perceived solution often rests on the “big win.” GAMBLING AMONG CHILDREN AND TEENSAlthough problem gambling has been primarily thought of as an adult behavior, considerable research indicates that it remains a very popular activity among both children and adolescents. Whether one is gambling for money on personal games of skill, cards, dice, sporting events, or lottery tickets, a high percentage of children and adolescents worldwide have been found to engage in different forms of gambling. Studies conducted since the 1990s suggest that gambling activities remain particularly attractive to today’s youth and that its popularity is on the rise among both children and adolescents. Prevalence studies conducted in the United States, Canada, New Zealand, Europe, and Australia all confirm the rising prevalence rates of youth involvement in both legal and illegal forms of gambling. While approximately 80 percent of high school students report having gambled for money during the past year, 4 to 6 percent of adolescents exhibit serious gambling problems, with another 10 to 14 percent of adolescents remaining at-risk for developing a serious gambling problem. Adolescent pathological gamblers, like their adult counterparts and independent of the negative consequences resulting from their excessive gambling, continue to chase their losses, exhibit a preoccupation with gambling, and have an impaired ability to stop gambling in spite of repeated attempts and their desire to do so. The growing body of research with adolescents suggests that gambling and problem gambling is more popular among males than females, adolescent prevalence rates of problem gamblers are higher than those reported by adults, and there is a rapid movement from social gambler to problem gambler. Adolescent problem gamblers report initiating gambling at an early age (approximately ten years of age) as compared with peers who report gambling but have few gambling-related problems. These adolescents are greater risk takers in general and on gambling tasks in particular, exhibit lower self-esteem, exhibit higher depressive symptomatology, remain at heightened risk for suicide ideation and suicide attempts, have poor general coping skills, and report a significant number of major traumatic life events (e.g., parental loss, divorce). Individuals with gambling problems are also more likely to report school- or work-related problems. Personality traits reveal adolescent pathological gamblers are more excitable, extroverted, and anxious, tend to have difficulty conforming to societal norms, experience difficulties with self-discipline, exhibit more anxiety, exhibit higher levels of impulsivity, and remain at increased risk for the development of multiple addictions. NEW FORMS OF GAMBLINGNew forms of gambling continue to be developed. With more and more governments sanctioning and regulating a multitude of different forms of gambling, its accessibility has never been easier. Problem gambling is not associated with single-trial learning. Very few individuals become addicted to the lure of gambling after their first initiation. Pathological gambling remains a progressive disorder with certain identifiable risk factors developing over time accompanied by periods of euphoria and depression. The gambling environment today is significantly different from that of past generations. Because of its widespread acceptability, its popularity, and the enormous revenues generated from gambling, the growth of the gaming industry continues. Gambling is viewed as significantly less harmful than other potentially addictive behaviors including substance abuse, alcohol abuse, and cigarette smoking. New forms of gambling and games will continue to emerge. Efforts at developing effective empirically sound practices concerning prevention and treatment programs have yet to be realized. Given the widespread accessibility, social acceptance and new technologies bringing gambling into the home, there remains speculation that the prevalence of pathological gambling will likely increase. BIBLIOGRAPHYAbbott, Max, Rachel Volberg, Maria Bellringer, and Gerta Reith. 2004. A Review of Research on Aspects of Problem Gambling. Final Report. London: Responsibility for Gambling Trust. American Psychiatric Association. 1992. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. 4th ed. Washington, DC: Author. Derevensky, Jeffrey, and Rina Gupta. 2004. Adolescents with Gambling Problems: A Review of Our Current Knowledge. e-Gambling: The Electronic Journal of Gambling Issues 10:119–140. Jacobs, Durand. 2004. Youth Gambling in North America: Long-Term Trends and Future Prospects. In Gambling Problems in Youth: Theoretical and Applied Perspectives, eds. Jeffrey Derevensky and Rina Gupta. New York: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers. Jeffrey L. Derevensky |
|
|
Cite this article
"Gambling." International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences. 2008. Encyclopedia.com. 29 May. 2012 <http://www.encyclopedia.com>. "Gambling." International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences. 2008. Encyclopedia.com. (May 29, 2012). http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G2-3045300888.html "Gambling." International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences. 2008. Retrieved May 29, 2012 from Encyclopedia.com: http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G2-3045300888.html |
|
Gambling
GAMBLINGGAMBLING. From the early medieval period, various forms of gambling were popular at every level of society, although the types of games played, as well as the freedom to indulge in them, was dependent on an individual's position in the social hierarchy, and subject to sustained criticism from both church and state. Blood sports such as bearbaiting and cockfighting were popular among the peasantry, and regular contests, accompanied by heavy betting, drinking, and general revelry, were a traditional part of community life. At the other end of the social spectrum, horse racing was a pastime confined to the upper classes. The ownership and racing of horses operated within a system of royal patronage, with successive monarchs—most notably, Charles II of England (ruled 1660–1685), "the father of the British turf"—organizing races and entering horses to compete in their name. Betting was a strictly private affair conducted among the aristocracy, who regarded participation in the sport as their exclusive right. Lotteries began during the fifteenth century, and, although popular, were governed by politically expedient legislation that made participation irregular and often arbitrarily illegal. The most widespread form of gambling, however, was dice playing, which endured as the standard game of the entire medieval period. The most ancient and simple form of gambling, it was pursued assiduously by all sections of society—including the clergy—despite being subject to innumerable bans and prohibitions. The Saxons, Danes, and Romans all introduced their own varieties of games and their own styles of playing, although most games tended to fall into one of two types: either based on moving counters around boards (such as the Spanish alquerque, a game similar to checkers), or guessing games based on dice throws (such as hazard). Playing cards were introduced into Europe from the East toward the end of the thirteenth century, where they grew, over the next three hundred years, from an elite pastime into a leisure activity popular with every social class. Their route of entry is uncertain: some have suggested that Marco Polo brought them back from his travels in Cathay, while others believe they were introduced by Gypsies or returning Crusaders. Whatever the case, the first mentions of cards in Europe come from Italy in 1299, from Spain in 1371, from the Low Countries (modern Belgium, Luxembourg, and Netherlands) in 1379, and from Germany in 1380. By 1465, they were sufficiently well established in Britain to be subject to an import ban. These early cards were crafted by hand on copper and ivory as well as card and wood, usually by professional painters who found patronage in aristocratic households. The first woodcuts on paper were, in fact, playing cards. (The term Kartenmahler or Kartenmacher, 'painter' or 'maker of cards', appears in German in 1402.) At first, their expense put cards out of reach of all but the wealthiest in society, with the result that widespread playing was initially restricted to the upper classes. Gambling was fashionable among this group, with high-stakes "betting orgies" frequently lasting for days and serving as a marker of status and prestige as much as a straightforward leisure pursuit. Cards and games were symbolic systems that represented the cultural climate and social order that surrounded them. Medieval card games such as brelan, pair, gleek, and primero were based on the principals of "melds" and "murnivals"—pairing and joining cards in ranks—reflecting the hierarchical social organization, represented as the "great chain of being" in the Middle Ages. The development of the printing press in the fifteenth century was crucial to the history of cards, transforming them from the playthings of the aristocracy into mass-produced commodities enjoyed by all ranks of society. The presses also gave cards the name they still have today. The medieval Latin charta, 'sheet of paper', was taken as shorthand for the playing cards, which were, for a time, the presses' main industry. The word survives as the standard term for cards throughout Europe, variously as cart, carte, Karte, karta, and kartya. Despite its widespread popularity, attempts were continually made by both church and state to limit or outlaw gambling. Although ostensibly designed to curb the excesses of the general population, most legislation targeted the poor and was uneven in its application. Initially, prohibitions imposed by the Catholic Church were pragmatic and aimed at steering the population away from sedentary activities that were seen to encourage idleness and toward more organized exertions, such as sports. Ultimately, the aim was to create a fit workforce that could be easily rallied into an indigenous army, a definite advantage in the violent climate of the Middle Ages. As such, various edicts attempted to regulate gambling according to social position. From the time of the Crusades, dicing by any soldier below the rank of knight was forbidden. Cardplaying on workdays had been banned since 1397, and was further outlawed when a statute of Henry VIII (ruled 1509–1547) confined all gambling among the working population to Christmas, the assumption being that, as they would be celebrating anyway, its disruptive effects would be minimal. After the Reformation, attempts to outlaw gambling were dramatically increased by the Protestant bourgeoisie, who objected to it on the ideological grounds that it undermined the work ethic and squandered time and money. Criticism continued throughout the Enlightenment, when the emphasis shifted to the disorderly effects of gambling within rational society—again, aimed primarily at the poor. Across the continent, legislation during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries attempted to remove gambling from the mass of the population, primarily by fiscal means: imposing taxes on cards and dice, charging hefty entrance fees for horse races, and increasing the price of lottery tickets. At the same time, many European countries introduced laws limiting public gambling to licensed premises, while restricting the granting of licenses to members of the nobility and upper classes. The result of such legislation was the stratification of public betting and the effective outlawing of gambling for the majority of the population, with the poor restricted to playing in illegal, unlicensed taverns, and the upper classes free to indulge in a wide variety of games with impunity. See also Class, Status, and Order ; Games and Play ; Lottery ; Printing and Publishing ; Roma (Gypsies) ; Sports . BIBLIOGRAPHYAshton, John. The History of Gambling in England. Montclair, N.J., 1969. Originally published in 1898. Cotton, Charles. The Compleat Gamester. London, 1674. Kavanagh, Thomas. Enlightenment and the Shadows of Chance: The Novel and the Culture of Gambling in Eighteenth-Century France. Baltimore and London, 1993. Reith, Gerda. The Age of Chance: Gambling in Western Culture. London and New York, 1999. Gerda Reith |
|
|
Cite this article
REITH, GERDA. "Gambling." Europe, 1450 to 1789: Encyclopedia of the Early Modern World. 2004. Encyclopedia.com. 29 May. 2012 <http://www.encyclopedia.com>. REITH, GERDA. "Gambling." Europe, 1450 to 1789: Encyclopedia of the Early Modern World. 2004. Encyclopedia.com. (May 29, 2012). http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G2-3404900435.html REITH, GERDA. "Gambling." Europe, 1450 to 1789: Encyclopedia of the Early Modern World. 2004. Retrieved May 29, 2012 from Encyclopedia.com: http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G2-3404900435.html |
|
Game Controllers
Game ControllersGame controllers are intricate hardware devices that allow game players to send instructions to a computer, which can range in size from a desktop computer to a handheld proprietary game machine. The wide variety of game controllers includes such devices as game pads, joysticks, paddles, steering wheels, fishing rods, aircraft yokes, light guns, and rifles. History of ControllersWhen Atari game consoles became popular in the 1970s, the standard game controller had a single button in the corner of the four-inch square base, which held a three-inch joystick. Players could maneuver the screen cursor by moving the joystick with one hand, and pressing the button with the thumb of the other hand. The only feedback was an occasional "blip" or "doink" noise from primitive speakers, and relatively slow, jerky movements on the screen. Joystick design evolved to include a taller, ergonomically shaped handle with a trigger mechanism and a miniature stick at the end, called a top hat. With this device, players could squeeze such triggers with their forefingers and maneuver the top hat using one of their thumbs. These controllers often featured additional buttons on both the stick and the base that performed specific actions dictated by the game's software. Games were made more realistic with livelier sound effects from more powerful speakers. While the one-handed joystick was sufficient for early games, it proved awkward for other sophisticated software. Soon two-handled yokes, simulating a pilot's cockpit, were introduced. Car racing games were made more realistic with the introduction of steering wheel controllers, some of which included brake and gas pedals. Gun fighting games spawned the introduction of light guns and rifles. Even fishing games were enhanced with the introduction of rod-like sticks with buttons to help the player simulate casting and fishing. Controllers for proprietary games, such as Nintendo's "Game Boy," Sega's "Dreamcast," and Sony's "PlayStation," became special two-handed devices, each with two one-inch joysticks and many multifunction action buttons. How They WorkAlthough modern game controllers sport many different features, they operate in essentially the same way as joysticks do. As the stick or indicator is moved from side to side, the position of the handle is converted into a number, known as the "x" coordinate. Likewise, as the stick is moved forward and back, the handle's position is measured with a "y" coordinate. Using these xy coordinates, the computer can precisely track the stick's direction as it moves. If the stick has a rotational capability, the r-axis is tracked as well. To calculate the distance the stick is moved, the controller's positioning sensor uses a capacitor and potentiometer . As electrical current flows through the potentiometer, the current is temporarily collected by the capacitor, which discharges it only when a certain charge is reached, say five volts. When the stick is in the resting position, not pushed from the center, the capacitor collects and discharges the current rapidly. As the joystick is pushed farther from the center, the capacitor collects and discharges current more slowly. By measuring the number of milliseconds required for the capacitor to charge and discharge, the game adapter card tracks the stick's exact distance from center. In newer joysticks, the capacitor and potentiometer have been replaced with an optical gray-scale position sensor, which measures the amount of light emitted by an LED (light emitting diode) to track the stick's position. When a button is pushed (to simulate jumping a barrel or hitting a ball), a contact switch sends an electrical signal to the computer's game adapter card and the game software uses the signal to start the intended action. When the button is released, another signal ends the action. Some controllers, such as those for Sony's "PlayStation 2" and Microsoft's "Xbox," measure the amount of pressure used to push a button. When a button is pushed lightly, the button's curved contact barely touches the conductive strip mounted on the controller's circuit board. But when a button is pressed forcefully, more of the button's contact touches the conductive strip. Therefore, the level of conductivity is greater, signaling to the computer that this is a more intense action than that indicated with a lighter touch. Force Feedback ControllersIntroduced by several manufacturers in 1997, force feedback controllers allow players to experience tactile stimulation to enhance their gaming experience. In the handgrip of each controller is a built-in electric motor with an unbalanced weight attached to its shaft. When power is supplied to the motor, it spins the unbalanced weight. Ordinarily, such an imbalance would cause the motor to wobble, but since the motor is securely attached to the controller, the wobble is translated into a vibration that shakes the entire handgrip and is felt by the game player. The force and duration of the wobble in dictated by a waveform , which is a graph or formula that tells the software when and how to turn on and off the motor. For example, if the game player drives a car that runs into a wall, the wobble will be sudden and will continue for perhaps a second or two. On the other hand, if the game player is a firing machine gun, the resulting wobble will rapidly accelerate and decelerate many times a second for as long as the button, the "machine gun trigger," on the controller is pressed. Likewise, if the game player is driving a tank over rough terrain, the controller will experience a series of wobbles that correspond to the ground's bumps and dips. As microprocessors have become smaller and cheaper, they have been integrated into game controllers, greatly expanding their capabilities. For example, each Microsoft Sidewinder Force Feedback Pro Joystick has a 25-megahertz microprocessor in the base to interpret software commands that dictate the feedback motion. When the command is received, the microprocessor accesses a read-only memory (ROM) chip, which permanently stores 32 movement effects and unleashes the correct movement on demand. Each movement corresponds to a certain waveform. If the software should dictate a waveform that is not already loaded on the ROM chip, the data can be downloaded to a two-kilobyte random access memory (RAM) chip for the microprocessor to use. see also Games; Input Devices. Ann McIver McHoes BibliographyWhite, Ron. How Computers Work, 6th ed. Indianapolis, IN: Que, 2002. Internet ResourcesXbox Website. Microsoft Corporation. <http://www.xbox.com> |
|
|
Cite this article
McHoes, Ann McIver. "Game Controllers." Computer Sciences. 2002. Encyclopedia.com. 29 May. 2012 <http://www.encyclopedia.com>. McHoes, Ann McIver. "Game Controllers." Computer Sciences. 2002. Encyclopedia.com. (May 29, 2012). http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G2-3401200216.html McHoes, Ann McIver. "Game Controllers." Computer Sciences. 2002. Retrieved May 29, 2012 from Encyclopedia.com: http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G2-3401200216.html |
|
Gambling
291. Gambling
|
|
|
Cite this article
"Gambling." Allusions--Cultural, Literary, Biblical, and Historical: A Thematic Dictionary. 1986. Encyclopedia.com. 29 May. 2012 <http://www.encyclopedia.com>. "Gambling." Allusions--Cultural, Literary, Biblical, and Historical: A Thematic Dictionary. 1986. Encyclopedia.com. (May 29, 2012). http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G2-2505500300.html "Gambling." Allusions--Cultural, Literary, Biblical, and Historical: A Thematic Dictionary. 1986. Retrieved May 29, 2012 from Encyclopedia.com: http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G2-2505500300.html |
|
gambling
gambling in Ireland has uncertain origins, though by the 17th century it was considered a common vice. Regular lotteries were held at least from the 1680s. Following the revolution of 1688 reforms were attempted. Amongst several parliamentary measures was one of 1708 which made it an offence to play cards or dice for cash. Interestingly it did not apply to the residence of the lord lieutenant. An act of 1740, citing gambling as a distraction from labour, made horse racing for small prizes a criminal offence, and lotteries, already deemed nuisances and liable to suppression, completely illegal. Yet lotteries continued to flourish. By the early 19th century the Irish were still portrayed as compulsive gamblers, though religious opposition and economic uncertainty in the following decades did prompt some decline. After partition both Irish states used gambling as a means of raising revenue. In Northern Ireland betting was heavily taxed. In the Irish Free State the existing lottery of the Irish Hospitals Sweepstake was given government backing from 1930. From 1926 off‐course betting on horses and greyhounds was legalized and taxed. Later levies were imposed on on‐course betting to support the racing industries. A national lottery, the Lotto, now provides funds for various projects in the Republic. Gambling remains extremely popular throughout Ireland. In the Republic alone IR£223 million was gambled on horse racing alone in 1985.
Neal Garnham |
|
|
Cite this article
"gambling." The Oxford Companion to Irish History. 2007. Encyclopedia.com. 29 May. 2012 <http://www.encyclopedia.com>. "gambling." The Oxford Companion to Irish History. 2007. Encyclopedia.com. (May 29, 2012). http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1O245-gambling.html "gambling." The Oxford Companion to Irish History. 2007. Retrieved May 29, 2012 from Encyclopedia.com: http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1O245-gambling.html |
|
Gambling
175. GamblingSee also 73. CHANCE ; 176. GAMES
|
|
|
Cite this article
"Gambling." -Ologies and -Isms. 1986. Encyclopedia.com. 29 May. 2012 <http://www.encyclopedia.com>. "Gambling." -Ologies and -Isms. 1986. Encyclopedia.com. (May 29, 2012). http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G2-2505200186.html "Gambling." -Ologies and -Isms. 1986. Retrieved May 29, 2012 from Encyclopedia.com: http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1G2-2505200186.html |
|
gambling
gambling. See BETTING AND GAMBLING.
|
|
|
Cite this article
E. A. LIVINGSTONE. "gambling." The Concise Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church. 2000. Encyclopedia.com. 29 May. 2012 <http://www.encyclopedia.com>. E. A. LIVINGSTONE. "gambling." The Concise Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church. 2000. Encyclopedia.com. (May 29, 2012). http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1O95-gambling.html E. A. LIVINGSTONE. "gambling." The Concise Oxford Dictionary of the Christian Church. 2000. Retrieved May 29, 2012 from Encyclopedia.com: http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1O95-gambling.html |
|