Archived News

Continued from home page…

• 13 February 2023: I am co-editing a special issue of the Journal of Gambling Issues on loot boxes entitled: Thinking Outside the Loot Box: Psychology, Regulation, and Beyond. Call for paper: https://doi.org/10.31219/osf.io/qa3ht.

• 18 January 2023: New working paper! Poor compliance with the ESRB’s, PEGI’s, and IARC’s loot box presence warning label, ‘In-Game Purchases (Includes Random Items),’ was demonstrated in two ways. Firstly, 60.6% of all games so labelled by either the ESRB or PEGI (or 25.7% using a more equitable methodology) were not labelled by the other. Such inconsistencies were most likely caused by one age rating organisation failing to accurately identify loot box presence. Secondly, 71.0% of popular games containing loot boxes on the Google Play Store (whose age rating system is regulated through IARC) did not display the label and were therefore non-compliant. At present, consumers and parents cannot rely on this self-regulatory measure to provide accurate information as to loot box presence, particularly in relation to mobile games. Link: https://osf.io/asbcg

• 17 January 2023: My registered report identifying that the Belgian ban on loot boxes has not been effective was published in Collabra: Psychology: https://doi.org/10.1525/collabra.57641.

• 13 December 2022: I have written a round-up of ALL (I think!) loot box-related regulatory and policy developments that happened in 2022 for GamesIndustry.biz: https://www.gamesindustry.biz/loot-box-state-of-play-2022-regulatory-and-policy-research-developments.

• 5 December 2022: The Game Awards (TGA) has named me a member of their Future Class 2022: https://archive.ph/tU75r.

• 22 November 2022: Listen to an Ethics and Video Games podcast where I talk about loot box regulation with Dr Shlomo Sher: https://youtu.be/3IWC2mXROkI.

• 14 November 2022: My paper finding that the Belgian ban on loot boxes has not been enforced has now been peer-reviewed and recommended by Peer Community in Registered Reports: https://rr.peercommunityin.org/articles/rec?id=264.

• 10 November 2022: Our paper on the (lack of) consumer protection features of crypto gambling websites has been published in the journal Psychology of Addictive Behaviors: https://doi.org/10.1037/adb0000885.

• 4 November 2022: Maira Andrade won the Poster Prize (Student-led Research) at the Society for the Study of Addiction Annual Conference 2022 for our co-authored paper on the (lack of) consumer protection features of crypto gambling websites.

• 20 September 2022: I wrote a guest post on GamesIndustry.biz setting out how I think the UK video game industry should self-regulate loot boxes: https://www.gamesindustry.biz/how-should-the-uk-video-game-industry-self-regulate-loot-boxes. I make three specific recommendations based on our prior experience with various regulatory attempts around the world.

• 17 September 2022: I conducted a secondary analysis of data on compliance with UK loot box industry self-regulation for the DCMS technical working group. In summary, we do not have enough data to conclude that UKIE members were more likely to comply with industry self-regulation than non-UKIE members. I again highlight the need to address the risks posed by foreign companies operating in the UK that do not necessarily engage with UK industry self-regulatory efforts. https://osf.io/kjng7/

• 7 August 2022: The Journal of Gambling Studies has published our study on the relationship between loot boxes and gambling in China and some survey results regarding probability disclosures and pity-timer mechanics: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10899-022-10148-0

• 28 July 2022: A preprint of the long-awaited stage 2 registered report for the Belgium study is now available: https://doi.org/10.31219/osf.io/hnd7w. Spoilers: the ban did NOT work.

• 26 July 2022: Our paper on framing loot box regulation as a public health issue has been published in Current Addiction Reports: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40429-022-00424-9.

• 23 July 2022: We responded to the Spanish Ministry of Consumer Affairs’ consultation on the draft law that intends to regulate video game loot boxes: https://doi.org/10.31219/osf.io/48yta.

• 6 July 2022: I am briefly visiting The Jagiellonian University in Kraków, Poland to attend the Digital Games Research Association 2022 International Conference (DiGRA 2022). I will lead a panel discussion on loot boxes; present two papers; and chair one hybrid session on player research. Thanks to the PROM Programme for funding.

• 26 June 2022: Very pleased to hear that two papers were accepted on the same day(!). One about taking a public health approach to loot box regulation in Current Addiction Reports, and another on our 2021 Chinese survey (N = 879) about loot boxes in the Journal of Gambling Studies.

• 17 June 2022: My paper ‘Drafting video game loot box regulation for dummies: a Chinese lesson’ has been published in Information & Communications Technology Law: https://doi.org/10.1080/13600834.2022.2088062. Drawing on Chinese law 🇨🇳 and 5 failed US loot box Bills 🇺🇸, I suggest how future “loot box laws” can be better drafted. 1️⃣ Why #LootBoxes shouldn’t be called “loot boxes” for legal purposes; 2️⃣ How to make better probability disclosures; and 3️⃣ Regulators need enforcement powers.

• 6 June 2022: My translation and comments on Chinese (quasi-)regulation of blind boxes (physical loot boxes) have been published in the Gaming Law Review: https://doi.org/10.1089/glr2.2022.0012. I note how gambling regulators around the world have not acted to enforce gambling law against collectible card packs, blind boxes, packs of randomised NFTs, and other gambling-like products, all of which do in fact legally constitute actual gambling due to the presence of secondary markets for their content. Gambling regulators ought to publically justify why they have not acted against such plain and obvious contraventions of gambling law.

• 30 May 2022: I am visiting the Meaningful Interactions Lab (Mintlab) of the Institute for Media Studies at the Faculty of Social Sciences at KU Leuven to empirically assess compliance with Belgian gambling law through fieldwork for my registered report: https://rr.peercommunityin.org/articles/rec?id=168. Thanks to Profs Bieke Zaman, Rozane De Cock and the FWO-funded Gam(e)(a)ble project for hosting. Thanks to the Academic Forum for the Study of Gambling (AFSG) for funding my project.

• 17 May 2022: Philip Newall and I argue (in the Journal of Gambling Issues) that loot box probability disclosures are not helpful enough and more can be done to reduce the potential harms of loot boxes. We recommend four ways to reduce the complexity of loot box reward structures: capping (i) the maximum number of loot boxes per game and (ii) the maximum number of potential rewards per loot box; (iii) equalizing winning probabilities across rewards; and (iv) implementing “exhaustible” loot boxes that provide the player with every potential reward after a predetermined amount of money has been spent, thereby effectively instituting a maximum spending limit. Postprint: https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/nuksd.

• 23 April 2022: Pieterjan Declerck and I critique the recent Dutch decision that loot boxes in the FIFA games do not contravene gambling law. In summary, we argue that (i) paid loot boxes should always be scrutinised on their own in the abstract as to whether they constitute a ‘game of chance’ (whether the overarching video game constitutes a ‘game of chance’ is irrelevant) and (ii) being preoccupied with the gameplay experience of the so-called ‘majority’ of players ignores the experience of the small minority of high-spending players who are most at risk of potential harms. Preprint: https://doi.org/10.31219/osf.io/pz24d.

• 19 April 2022: My opinion piece responding to Western academics referring to video gaming restrictions on under-18s in China as “draconian” has been accepted for publication in the Journal of Behavioral Addictions. I question, inter alia, whether the measure would have been referred to as “draconian” had it been adopted by a Western country. Should Western academics make this value judgement when a majority of Chinese parents might well support the measure if the matter is put to a vote? I also identify how the literature has been very supportive of Belgium’s ‘ban’ on paid #LootBoxes, an arguably similarly ‘draconian’ measure, and has recommended that other countries (e.g., the UK) should also adopt a ban. Seems rather hypocritical, no? See further: Xiao, L.Y. (forthcoming). Reserve Your Judgment on “Draconian” Chinese Video Gaming Restrictions on Children. Journal of Behavioral Addictions, _(_), __. Postprint: https://doi.org/10.31219/osf.io/4583f.

• 7 April 2022: My stage 1 registered report intending to assess the effectiveness of Belgium’s ban on loot boxes has been recommended by Dr Karhulahti based on reviews by Drs Chin, Macey, and Moshirnia in Peer Community in Registered Reports: https://rr.peercommunityin.org/articles/rec?id=168.

• 5 April 2022: My paper on how loot box law and regulation should be drafted, including how loot boxes should be defined, has been accepted by Information and Communications Technology Law. Preprint:  https://doi.org/10.31219/osf.io/b6x97.

• 28 March 2022: A policy paper arguing for doing more than requiring loot box probability disclosures has been accepted for publication in the Journal of Gambling Issues: Xiao & Newall, Probability disclosures are not enough: Reducing loot box reward complexity as a part of ethical video game design. Preprint: https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/nuksd.

• 28 March 2022: Pleased to learn that I will be awarded Associate Fellowship of the Higher Education Academy (AFHEA) by Advance HE. https://www.advance-he.ac.uk/fellowship/associate-fellowship.

• 25 March 2022: Very grateful to the Academic Forum for the Study of Gambling (AFSG) and Gambling Research Exchange Ontario (GREO) for awarding me a Postgraduate Research Support Grant. This was derived from ‘regulatory settlements applied for socially responsible purposes’ received by the UK Gambling Commission. I will use this grant to (i) assess video game companies’ compliance with the Belgian ‘ban’ on loot boxes and (ii) conduct a further survey on loot box purchasing and problem gambling in China. https://www.greo.ca/en/resources/AFSG_PostgraduateResearchSupport_Applications_Jan2022.pdf.

• 12 March 2022: Shanghai published compliance guidelines on blind boxes (盲盒) in January 2022, which are physical products with randomised content. Basically, analogue loot boxes. My thoughts on regulating this product and other gambling-like products as a preprint: https://doi.org/10.31219/osf.io/c6epr.

• 11 March 2022: Loot boxes in Electronic Arts’ FIFA games found NOT to contravene Dutch gambling law. Quick summary: https://www.scl.org/news/12540-loot-boxes-are-not-gambling-under-dutch-law

• 8 February 2022: Letter to the Editor published in Addiction identifying that UK paid loot box prevalence rate has increased from 2019 to 2021. https://doi.org/10.1111/add.15829.

• 5 January 2022: IT University of Copenhagen wrote a feature story about my Game Changers 2021 nomination and summarised my future research direction: English and Danish.

• 15 December 2021: Our research on loot box probability disclosure regulation in China was featured by Russian News Agency TASS, the largest Russian news agency: https://tass.ru/obschestvo/13207929.

• 7 December 2021: I was nominated as one of the Game Changers 2021 by GamesIndustry.Biz for my research into loot box regulation and policy advocacy: https://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2021-12-07-game-changers-2021-part-one.

• 1 December 2021: I started a PhD Fellowship at the IT University of Copenhagen in December 2021.

• 15 October 2021: Listen to a podcast about my most recent research on the effectiveness of UK loot box probability disclosure self-regulation when compared to Chinese loot box probability disclosure law recorded: https://critical-distance.com/2021/10/15/leon-xiao-keywords-in-play-episode-15/.