Dr Mark Griffiths

Mark D. Griffiths — my life in behavioural addictions, gambling studies, and public-facing science

I’m Professor Mark D. Griffiths. Over the last few decades, my work has centred on one big theme: why some everyday behaviours become addictive—and what we can do, practically and ethically, to reduce harm. My research spans behavioural addictions such as gambling disorder, gaming addiction, internet-related problems, and other “excessive” behaviours, but gambling has remained one of my most consistent focal points.

I’ve always believed that research shouldn’t live only in academic journals. If the subject is gambling, it touches real lives—finances, relationships, mental health, and the way people cope. So I’ve tried to build a career that balances three things: rigorous research, useful communication, and real-world impact.

Where I started, and how I became a gambling researcher

Early education and the “why” behind my interests

I earned my first degree in psychology at University of Bradford in 1987, graduating with First Class Honours. I was fascinated by how motivation works—why people repeat behaviours even when those behaviours stop being enjoyable or start causing harm.

I then completed my PhD at University of Exeter in 1990. The topic that shaped my trajectory was fruit-machine (slot machine) addiction. It wasn’t a fashionable topic at the time, but it was an urgent one: I could see how gambling products and environments could be engineered for intense engagement—and how some individuals were far more vulnerable to those effects than others.

My first academic roles

I began teaching while working toward my doctorate and gained early teaching experience before moving into full-time academia. After completing my PhD, I took a lectureship at University of Plymouth (1990–1995).

In 1995, I joined Nottingham Trent University. That move became the anchor for much of my later work, including building and leading research programmes that connect behavioural science with gambling policy, industry practice, and harm minimisation. According to my university profile, I was awarded a professorship in 2002 and later a Distinguished Professorship in 2017.

What I actually study: behavioural addiction as a framework

A consistent thread: addictions share common components

One of my most-cited ideas is what people call the “components model of addiction”—a biopsychosocial framework arguing that addictions share core features such as salience, mood modification, tolerance, withdrawal, conflict, and relapse. I wasn’t trying to reduce addiction to a slogan; I was trying to clarify the criteria we use when we label something an addiction, especially for behaviours that do not involve ingesting a substance.

The reason this matters in gambling research is simple: if we define addiction carelessly, we either (a) over-pathologise normal behaviour, or (b) under-recognise harmful patterns that need support. Getting definitions right influences prevalence estimates, treatment pathways, and public messaging.

Why gambling sits at the centre of my work

Gambling is a uniquely revealing behaviour for psychologists because it combines:

• reinforcement schedules (wins are intermittent and unpredictable),
• product design (speed, near-misses, sound, visuals),
• cognitive distortions (illusion of control, chasing losses),
• and environmental access (availability, marketing, ease of payment).

Over the years, my research expanded from “who gets addicted” to include “what features of products and environments increase risk,” and “which protective tools genuinely help.”

Building a research identity that stays applied

At International Gaming Research Unit, the emphasis has been strongly applied: the design and evaluation of gambling products, staff training around social responsibility, and evaluating harm minimisation measures.

I’ve also worked extensively with mixed methods—quantitative and qualitative approaches—because gambling harm is not only a number. It’s also lived experience: pressure, secrecy, shame, family stress, financial collapse, and the way gambling can become a coping tool.

Teaching, awards, and the public role of a gambling scholar

Teaching and mentorship

Teaching has been a major part of my academic identity. My profile notes I teach across abnormal, social, and health psychology with a strong emphasis on behavioural addictions and cyberpsychology, and that I’ve supervised or completed a large number of PhDs in this broader area.

In 2006, I received the British Psychological Society’s Excellence in Teaching of Psychology Award—its highest teaching honour. I mention that not as a trophy line, but because teaching is part of harm reduction: the next generation of psychologists will influence how we understand and respond to behavioural addictions.

Recognition and professional roles

Over time, I’ve received multiple awards and have been invited to give keynote talks widely—partly because behavioural addictions have become central to modern life and policy debates. My university profile lists numerous honours and extensive public dissemination.

Working with policymakers and the industry—carefully

Gambling research can become polarised: some people treat the industry as inherently predatory; others treat harm as solely individual responsibility. I’ve tried to sit in the evidence space: assess risk factors, evaluate tools, and support genuine improvements.

My NTU profile describes consultancy and advisory work with government bodies (including the Gambling Commission) and a wide range of gaming companies internationally, focusing on social responsibility, harm minimisation, and player protection. The principle I’ve tried to keep is that involvement should not dilute scientific independence. If research becomes public health theatre, it’s useless.

Media work and public education

I’ve also spent a lot of time communicating research beyond academia—writing and commenting in media—because gambling harm is influenced by public understanding. My NTU profile describes extensive media involvement and journalism. Public communication can be messy, but the alternative is leaving the conversation to marketing narratives, outrage cycles, or misinformation.

How I define impact: what I hope my work contributes

When I think about what I’ve tried to contribute, it’s not just “more papers.” It’s a set of practical outcomes:

1. Clearer concepts
   Helping the field distinguish “high engagement” from “harmful compulsion,” using definitional clarity (including the components model).
2. Better measurement
   Encouraging research designs that capture harm, not just participation—especially as online products accelerate intensity.
3. Product and policy relevance
   Pushing research to evaluate whether interventions actually work—pop-ups, time-outs, limit setting, self-exclusion, staff training, and safer design.
4. Public-facing honesty
   Being frank about what we know, what we suspect, and what remains uncertain.

If I have a personal philosophy, it’s this: gambling harm is preventable, but prevention requires humility—about how strong the evidence is, how incentives operate, and how complex human behaviour can be.

All workplaces and roles

Research themes

Closing note (in my voice)

If you strip my career down to a single intention, it’s this: make the psychology of gambling understandable enough to be useful—for clinicians, policymakers, families, and players themselves. Research can’t remove risk completely. But it can stop us pretending that harm is mysterious, inevitable, or purely personal failure. It isn’t. It’s measurable, it’s preventable, and—when we’re serious about evidence—it’s reducible.