On 25 July 2024, the Gambling Commission launched the new Gambling Survey for Great Britain (the GSGB). Going forwards, the GSGB will be used by the Gambling Commission to measure gambling participation and harm in Great Britain, with reports on the same published annually. Here we examine the consequences of the GSGB being introduced and consider how it has been perceived by the gambling industry.

What is the GSGB?

The GSGB collects the official statistics on gambling behaviour in Great Britain. The Gambling Commission will collect data from 20,000 respondents each year to understand patterns of gambling behaviour across England, Wales and Scotland. To some extent, the statistics revealed by the GSGB will be used to inform policy-making decisions, meaning the introduction of the GSGB will have very significant practical implications for those operating in the gambling industry. 

What has changed?

Before the GSGB, the Gambling Commission collected statistics via a dedicated gambling chapter in the Health Survey for England (the HSE) which was conducted by the NHS. The GSGB will replace the HSE as the source of official statistics on gambling in Great Britain. As the GSGB is an entirely new survey it introduces a completely different methodology to data collection. The significant differences between the GSGB and the HSE include:

• Medium: the GSGB is conducted online and via post, whereas the HSE was conducted through home visits.
• Framing: the GSGB specifically looks at gambling, whereas the HSE was a generic health survey with a single chapter that addressed gambling.
• Participants: the GSGB will collect data from 20,000 people whereas the HSE had lower participation volumes (6,000 in 2021).
• Territory: the HSE was only offered to people in England whereas the GSGB will be offered to people in England, Wales and Scotland.

Outcomes of the GSGB

The official statistics for 2023 have been reported on following the first GSGB, using data collected from 9,804 respondents. The responses revealed[1]:

1. 48% of participants had gambled in the past four weeks (by comparison, the 2021 HSE found 50% of adults who had gambled in the past twelve months[2]); and
2. 14.4% of participants had a Problem Gambling Severity Index (PGSI) score of 1 or more (indicating they were at risk or problem gamblers). This figure in the 2021 HSE was 2.8%[3].

How has the GSGB been received?

The GSGB has attracted significant criticism from some industry commentators, with many perceiving that the GSGB exaggerates gambling participation and gambling harm. There are several factors which have led to this conclusion, the most important of which are:

1. Methodology: whilst the GSGB covers a wider data set, spanning a larger territory, many have claimed that the methodology introduces selection bias and so it is not representative of the population. As it is specifically focussed on gambling, rather than a generic health survey, participants are more likely to be gamblers and, therefore, participation and harm rates are likely to be inflated. For example, the GSGB claims that 11.4 per cent of respondents experienced suicide ideation, which is more than twice as high as the rate amongst the general public. Further, many have claimed that people are less likely to disclose gambling via face-to-face meetings and therefore the figures revealed by the GSGB are likely to be higher than those of the HSE in terms of both gambling participation and harm.
2. Response priming: the GSGB sets out a number of questions focusing on gambling related harms and adverse consequences. These questions are sequenced to fall after questions related to gambling participation. Some commentators argue that this is likely to introduce response priming, whereby respondents are more likely to attribute the negative outcomes (such as relationship breakdown and suicide ideation) to gambling based upon the order in which the questions have been asked. 

What’s next?

It is notable that the Gambling Commission’s launch of the GSGB includes accompanying guidance notes which state the GSGB should “not be used to provide direct comparisons with results from prior gambling or health surveys” and that it “may overstate some gambling behaviours”[4]. These limitations in themselves have sparked criticism of the Gambling Commission, with some arguing that the inaccuracies of the GSGB could drive the wrong policy decisions if the statistics are misused and, if the GSGB does contain such inaccuracies, the data and findings should not have been published in the first place. Given that there has previously been significant concern over misuse of gambling statistics within the gambling industry, it is unsurprising that the perceived weaknesses of the GSGB have been widely criticised. 

The GSGB has arrived at a time when Great Britain is experiencing an overhaul of gambling regulation following the publication of the Gambling White Paper in April 2023. Many are keen to ensure that the GSGB’s findings do not drive more onerous gambling regulation, designed to combat gambling issues which some perceive as a mirage created by the GSGB’s inaccurate data. For now, it is likely that the statistics reported on and the methodologies used in the GSGB will be subject to further testing by both the Gambling Commission (seeking add weight to the findings) and industry commentators (seeking to highlight problems with the GSGB). Both parties will be keen to report any further findings when they have completed their tests, so it is likely that industry commentary on the GSGB will continue over the coming months.

[1] Statistics on gambling participation - Annual report Year 1 (2023)

[2] HSE 2021

[3] As above.

[4] Guidance on using statistics from the Gambling Survey for Great Britain