An analysis of how a player’s psychological profile affects the perception of the "near-win" mechanic and its behavioral consequences. Based on materials from Pepper Partners and a Chinese study by Xia et al. (2018).
This approach allows us to explore how optimists and pessimists respond differently to the same scenarios — and what it means for engagement and retention in online gaming.
This approach allows us to explore how optimists and pessimists respond differently to the same scenarios — and what it means for engagement and retention in online gaming.
Study Overview
The test involved 27 pronounced optimists and 25 pessimists. Players placed bets in a test slot game with four possible outcomes:
🔴 Absolute win — bet x5, all 4 reels match.
🔴 Win — bet returned, 3 identical symbols in a row.
🔴 Near-win — 3 identical symbols, but not in sequence; bet is not returned.
🔴 Loss — all symbols are different.
Players could keep their bet fixed or increase it by 10x. Each participant wore a neuro-headset that monitored brain activity.
Key Findings
🔵 Optimists increased their bet after a near-win in 31% of cases.
🔵 Pessimists — only in 23% of cases, but they were more likely to raise their bet after an actual win.
🔵 Optimists' brains perceived a regular win almost the same way as an absolute win. Pessimists' reaction to a win was closer to their reaction to a near-win.
🔵 EEG analysis showed that for pessimists, there is a direct link between brain activity during a near-win and the decision to take a risk — while for optimists, no such link was found.
Why It Matters for iGaming
🔴 The same mechanic works differently: for optimists, a near-win is a trigger to take risks; for pessimists, it’s a win.
🔴 Behavioral response to scenarios can help identify psychological profiles.
🔴 This data can be gathered without EEG — simply by tracking bet changes after specific outcomes.
Implications for Operators
🔵 Personalizing scenarios based on player behavior can improve retention.
🔵 For vulnerable groups, the frequency of near-wins can be reduced.
🔵 Using such data increases both platform responsibility and efficiency.
The test involved 27 pronounced optimists and 25 pessimists. Players placed bets in a test slot game with four possible outcomes:
🔴 Absolute win — bet x5, all 4 reels match.
🔴 Win — bet returned, 3 identical symbols in a row.
🔴 Near-win — 3 identical symbols, but not in sequence; bet is not returned.
🔴 Loss — all symbols are different.
Players could keep their bet fixed or increase it by 10x. Each participant wore a neuro-headset that monitored brain activity.
Key Findings
🔵 Optimists increased their bet after a near-win in 31% of cases.
🔵 Pessimists — only in 23% of cases, but they were more likely to raise their bet after an actual win.
🔵 Optimists' brains perceived a regular win almost the same way as an absolute win. Pessimists' reaction to a win was closer to their reaction to a near-win.
🔵 EEG analysis showed that for pessimists, there is a direct link between brain activity during a near-win and the decision to take a risk — while for optimists, no such link was found.
Why It Matters for iGaming
🔴 The same mechanic works differently: for optimists, a near-win is a trigger to take risks; for pessimists, it’s a win.
🔴 Behavioral response to scenarios can help identify psychological profiles.
🔴 This data can be gathered without EEG — simply by tracking bet changes after specific outcomes.
Implications for Operators
🔵 Personalizing scenarios based on player behavior can improve retention.
🔵 For vulnerable groups, the frequency of near-wins can be reduced.
🔵 Using such data increases both platform responsibility and efficiency.