Collegiate Crossing: Discovering a Better Understanding of College Student Betting
Most college students today have reached the age where they can legally bet on sports if they reside in a state that permits sports betting. Dr. Katherine Spilde of San Diego State University’s Sycuan Institute on Tribal Gaming explains how research and polling will enable targeted sports betting interventions when necessary.
As the legal sports betting industry continues to rapidly expand across the United States, the research on its social and economic impacts is trailing behind. What is clear is that the majority of stakeholders in this growing industry (including its detractors) are concerned about whether increased access to sports betting opportunities, especially online, is related to an increase in disordered gambling. As a college Professor who teaches tribal casino operations management, I spend my days in conversation with students who participate in all forms of betting on sports, whether fantasy teams, college or professional games or their own play.
Many of these students do not know (or care) that sports wagering is not yet legal in California, where I teach. The sports betting apps they use often mimic legal gambling sites by offering responsible gaming information (along with 1-800 helplines) and other “tools” that signal integrity and fairness. Some scholars have noted that for sports bettors in general, and college students in particular, legalization of sports betting is simply a “technicality” since individual players do not report that they bet more often or more money on legal sites than illegal ones. While I direct all students to the AGA, RGEM and ICRG’s excellent resources, this generalized education approach is likely not meeting the diverse needs of college students who might be seeking responsible gaming resources, industry information or even treatment options for themselves or others.
In an effort to address this gap, my colleague and I dug more deeply into college student betting behaviors to understand student motivations for betting. By segmenting student betting behavior, we want our work to offer guidance for those who are interested in creating more targeted sports betting interventions for college students based on who bets, why they bet and how they bet.
In the absence of a comprehensive understanding of differing profiles of sports bettors, our well-intentioned universities, policymakers, and support professionals run the risk of implementing interventions that are misaligned with student needs, resulting in wasted resources or even unintentional harm. A blanket message detailing “the dangers of sports betting,” for example, may resonate poorly with individuals primarily motivated by sociability and moderate excitement. Meanwhile, students driven by financial stress might be overlooked if outreach efforts fail to address the economic anxieties that underlie their betting behavior. Our findings will be published soon and can contribute to the good work being done by others who are committed to the industry, the players and the employees in this diverse ecosystem.
Our research, led by Professor Brandon Mastromartino, dug deeper to identify and understand the diverse motivations prompting college students to bet on sports, ranging from making money to social bonding. Findings revealed and reinforced the reality that college students are not a monolithic group when it comes to sports betting. The segmentation approach we employed offers meaningful insight into how different student subgroups interact with the sports betting environment, with implications for theory development, implementation of appropriate harm reduction strategies, and targeted responsible gaming messaging.
Importantly, the research highlights a critical theoretical insight: demographic variables alone, such as gender, race, or student status (athlete vs. non-athlete, domestic vs. international), do not significantly predict motivational segment membership for college students. While demographic characteristics are often included in gambling research and risk profiling, our findings suggest that they may not adequately capture the complexity of sports betting motivations. Instead, our results emphasize the value of psychological and behavioral segmentation approaches. For example, student bettors were segmented by the types of needs being fulfilled (e.g., social, entertainment, emotional relief) and the nature of the motivational regulation driving the behavior (e.g., intrinsic interest vs. peer pressure or boredom). Our dual-theory approach may be particularly useful for researchers seeking to distinguish between low-risk and high-risk bettors in a population that is not easily segmented by traditional demographic lines.
In our sample of 482 students, we identified an important baseline segment called Low Engagement Bettors who report occasional sports wagers tied to a major event like the Super Bowl. Their immediate social circles do not promote or normalize betting activity and they reported low financial investment and lack of strong motivational reinforcement. From a harm minimization perspective, this segment may be at the lowest risk for gambling-related problems. While not a specific target for RG messaging, a deeper understanding of this group may serve as a reference point for describing what non-problematic or low-involvement betting looks like in the college setting.
In contrast, we identified a segment of Highly Motivated Generalists who engage in more complex and risk-oriented forms of betting (e.g., parlays, player props) and view betting not only as entertainment but as a domain where strategic thinking and expertise can yield social and financial returns. These students may be embedded in peer networks where betting is not only normalized but celebrated and encouraged. Their high levels of behavioral engagement, financial investment, and frequency of betting suggest a profile that could be at elevated risk for developing problematic gambling behaviors. Targeted messaging focused on self-regulation, skill vs. chance misconceptions, and limits setting may be most effective with this group. Peer-led interventions or social norm correction campaigns may be especially impactful with this segment as these approaches can challenge the perceived prevalence and acceptability of gambling behaviors within their peer networks.
Other segments include Social Entertainment Seekers (students who engage in sports betting primarily for recreational and social reasons) and Boredom Relief Bettors (those who wager to fill idle time, alleviate boredom, or break routine). As our research expands, our understanding of–and outreach to–each segment can be refined.
We hope that this study is the first of many to examine theoretical questions such as how the type or nature of motivation, rather than simply its strength or intensity, plays a critical role in predicting gambling behavior. In addition, we encourage others to extend our inquiry on the importance of peer influence and social context for college gambling. We found that these variables, possibly even more than demographic factors, play a pivotal role in gambling behavior in the college student population.
Dr. Katherine Spilde is a Professor at San Diego State University and Endowed Chair of the Sycuan Institute on Tribal Gaming. She serves on the Board of Directors for the International Center for Responsible Gaming.
