MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2056543311 · doi:10.4309/jgi.2005.13.8

The psychology of music in gambling environments: An observational research note

2005· article· en· W2056543311 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mark D. Griffiths, Jonathan Parke

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Gambling Issues · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroscience and Music Perception
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAmusementPopularityPsychologyOptimal distinctiveness theoryActive listeningContext (archaeology)AestheticsObservational studyCognitive psychologyApplied psychologySocial psychologyArtCommunicationHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Effects of the listening context on responses to music largely have been neglected despite the prevalence of music in our everyday lives. Furthermore, there has been no research on the role of music in gambling environments (e.g., casinos, amusement arcades) despite gambling's increased popularity as a leisure pursuit. An exploratory observational study in gambling arcades was carried out to investigate (i) how music is used as background music in amusement arcades, and (ii) how slot machines utilize music in their design. Results indicated that arcades often have music that caters for their customer demographics and that this may influence gambling behaviour. Furthermore, music from the slot machine itself appears to produce important impression formations about the machine (i.e., quality of the machine, familiarity, distinctiveness, and the sound of winning). It is suggested that music (whether it is in the gambling environment or in the activity itself) has the potential to be important in the acquisition, development, and maintenance of gambling behaviour. Some preliminary ideas and hypotheses to be tested are offered.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.638
GPT teacher head0.532
Teacher spread0.106 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations45
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Gambling IssuesSame topicNeuroscience and Music PerceptionFrench-language works237,207