Share 
State of Play’s TL;DR
- A new study suggests loot boxes are not just a gaming monetization feature.
- They may be closely tied to gambling harm.
Among Canadian adults who gamble regularly and play video games, those who bought loot boxes showed much higher rates of problem gambling than those who did not.
That finding is likely to draw attention beyond Canada because the debate over gambling-adjacent game mechanics is not limited to one market.
For US readers who follow online betting, casino regulation, and consumer-protection trends, the study adds fresh evidence to a familiar question: When does a digital purchase start to look a lot like gambling?
Study found higher rates of depression among loot box purchasers
The research, reported by PsyPost and published in “Addictive Behaviors,” examined 3,709 Canadian adults who gamble at least once a month and also play video games regularly. Researchers split the group into two segments: 1,922 participants who spent real money on loot boxes in the past year, and 1,787 gamers who gambled but did not buy randomized digital items.
The gap between those groups was notable. Over half of loot box purchasers met criteria for moderate-risk or problem gambling, compared with about one-fifth of non-purchasers.
According to the report, the link remained strong even after accounting for other gambling activities, including bingo, scratch tickets, sports betting, lotteries, casino games, and electronic gambling machines. The article says the association between loot box spending and gambling problems was stronger than the impact seen with sports betting or lotteries, though weaker than the association for electronic gambling machines.
The study also found that loot box purchasers reported higher rates of depression, generalized anxiety, panic disorders, substance abuse, excessive online shopping, and unhealthy video game use.
A ‘gray area’
Loot boxes sit in a “gray area” between gaming and gambling. This study frames them as a gambling-adjacent mechanic with measurable harm signals, especially among adults already participating in gambling. That matters because the findings do not simply compare gamers with non-gamers; they compare regular gamblers who buy loot boxes with regular gamblers who do not.
The report also points to possible regulatory responses. Some countries, including Belgium, have restricted randomized digital purchases under gambling frameworks, while other regions require disclosure of odds. Researchers suggested that traditional casino-style safeguards – such as age verification and mandatory spending limits – could help reduce harm.
For operators, publishers, and policymakers, the comparison to mainstream gambling products is hard to ignore. The article says the loot box association was stronger than the one observed for sports betting or lotteries, placing the issue squarely inside the wider debate over gambling risk and product design.
The study does not settle the legal status of loot boxes, and its limits matter. The report notes that the research was cross-sectional and based on self-reported data, which means it identifies an association rather than proving that loot box purchases cause problem gambling.
Based on reporting by Karina Petrova for PsyPost.
