Losing sight of Luck: Automatic approach tendencies toward gambling cues in Canadian moderate- to high-risk gamblers - A replication study.

Evidence for approach bias tendencies to underly automatic behavioural impulses towards seeking out gambling activities in the presence of appetitive salient cues was first shown by Boffo et al. (2018) in a Dutch sample. Relative to non-problem gamblers, moderate-to-high-risk gamblers demonstrated stronger approach tendencies towards gambling-related stimuli compared with neutral ones. Moreover, gambling approach bias was associated with past-month gambling behaviour and predictive of gambling activity persistence over time. The current study aimed to replicate these findings within a Canadian sample evaluating the concurrent and longitudinal correlates of gambling approach bias. The study was conducted online, available throughout Canada. Twenty-seven non-treatment-seeking moderate-to-high-risk gamblers and 26 non-problem gamblers community-recruited via multiple channels (i.e., internet and newspaper advertisements, land-based flyers, and university recruitment portals). Participants completed two online assessment sessions 6-months apart. Each session included (1) self-report measures of gambling behaviour (frequency, duration, and expenditure), (2) self-report assessment of problem gambling severity (PGSI), and (3) a gambling approach-avoidance task, utilising culturally relevant stimuli tailored to individual gambling habits. However, our study failed to replicate Boffo et al. (2018) findings in a Canadian sample. Relative to non-problem gamblers, moderate-to-high-risk gamblers did not exhibit greater approach bias tendencies towards gambling-related stimuli compared to neutral stimuli. Moreover, gambling approach bias was not predictive of prospective gambling behaviour (frequency, duration, or expenditure) or severity of gambling problems. Reported results do not provide evidence for approach tendencies contributing to problematic gambling behaviour in a Canadian sample of moderate-to-high-risk gamblers compared to non-problematic gambler controls. Further replications on the topic are needed. Future research should evaluate approach tendencies within the gambling context, considering the potential impact of task reliability to assess approach bias in light of individual gambling modality preferences.