Losses disguised as wins evoke the reward positivity event‐related potential in a simulated machine gambling task.

Electronic gambling machines include a suite of design characteristics that may contribute to gambling‐related harms and require more careful attention of regulators and policymakers. One strategy that has contributed to these concerns is the presentation of "losses disguised as wins" (LDWs), a type of salient losing outcome in which a gambling payout is less than the amount wagered (i.e., a net loss), but is nonetheless accompanied by the celebratory audio‐visual stimuli that typically accompany a genuine win. These events could thereby be mistaken for gains, or otherwise act as a reward signal, reinforcing persistent gambling, despite being a loss. This study aimed to determine whether LDWs evoke a reward positivity component in a task modeled on slot machine gambling. A prominent account of the reward positivity event‐related potential suggests that it is evoked during the positive appraisal of task‐related feedback, relative to neutral or negative events, or that it is evoked by neural systems that implement the computation of a positive reward prediction error. We recruited 32 individuals from university recruitment pools and asked them to engage in a simple gambling task designed to mimic key features of a slot machine design. The reward positivity was identified using temporospatial principal components analysis. Results indicated a more positive reward positivity following LDWs relative to clear losses, consistent with the theory that LDWs contribute to positive reinforcement of continued gambling, despite being net losses. This study reports the first evidence that "losses disguised as wins" (LDWs) elicit neural activity correlated with reward processing in the context of slot machine gambling. Our findings are consistent with the concern that these events may be mistaken for small gains, or act as positive reinforcers of persistent gambling, despite being losses. Our findings further highlight the need for closer regulatory attention on this structural characteristic of gambling product design. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]