Main Article Content

David Suk
Ki C Han
Sukhun Lee
Hyun Mo Sung


Despite the very unfavorable odds and low payout ratios, many people play lottery games all over the world, and the number of participants is growing.  While surveys and empirical tests have been performed to characterize the demographics of lottery players, there is still no consensus on who they are.  The present study aims to provide an in-depth and clearer profile of said participants.  The analysis is based on New Jersey lottery sales from 2001 to 2010.  Our findings indicate that the typical lottery consumer in the state of NJ would be (1) male or female with a greater participation by females, (2) in his/her 20s to late-30s, or senior citizens in their 70s, (3) a minority, (4) a high school graduate with no further educational degree, (5) from a below-average income family, (6) and a home renter instead of a home owner.  As for lottery game preferences, African-Americans and Hispanics have a strong preference for both the Instant Match and Mega Millions.  Lastly, it appears that the economic climate has little effect on the socio-demographic factors influencing lottery purchasing behavior.

Article Details

Author Biography

David Suk, Rider University

Associate Professor of Finance


Ariyabuddhiphongs, V. (2006). A test of the social cognitive model of lottery gambling in Thailand. International Gambling Studies, 6, 77-93.

Ariyabuddhiphongs, V. (2011). Lottery gambling: A review. Journal of Gambling Studies, 27, 15-33.

Barnes, G., Welte, J., Tidwell, M. & Hoffman, J. (2011). Gambling on the lottery: Sociodemographic correlates across the lifespan. Journal of Gambling Studies, 27, 575-586.

Blalock, G., Just, D. & Simon, D. (2007). Hitting the jackpot or hitting the skids: Entertainment, poverty and the demand for state lotteries. The American Journal of Economics and Sociology, 66(3), July, 545-570.

Burns, A., Gillett, P., Rubinstein, M. & Gentry, J. (1990). An exploratory study of lottery playing, gambling addiction and links to compulsive consumption. Advances in Consumer Research, 17, 298-305.

Clotfelter, C. & Cook, P. (1990). On the economics of state lotteries. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 4 (4), 105-119.

Felsher, J., Derevensky, J. & Gupta, R. (2004). Lottery playing amongst youth: Implications for prevention and social policy. Journal of Gambling Studies, 20, 127-153.

Forrest, D. & Gulley, O. (2009). Participation and level of play in the UK national lottery and correlation with spending on other modes of gambling. International Gambling Studies, 9, 165-178.

Forrest, D. & McHale, I. (2012). Gambling and problem gambling among young adolescents in Great Britain. Journal of Gambling Studies, 28, 607-622.

Guryan, J. & Kearney, M. (2008). Gambling at lucky stores: Empirical evidence from state lottery sales. American Economic Review, 98 (1), 458-73.

Hing, N. & Breen, H. (2001). Profiling lady luck: An empirical study of gambling and problem gambling amongst female club members. Journal of Gambling Studies, 17, 47-69.

Horváth, C. & Paap, R. (2012). The effect of recessions on gambling expenditures. Journal of Gambling Studies, 28, 703-717.

Jackson, R. (1994). Demand for lottery products in Massachusetts. The Journal of Consumer Affairs, 28 (2), (Winter), 313-325.

Kaizeler, M. & Faustino, H. (2012). Lottery sales and per-capita GDP: An inverted U relationship. Lisbon, Portugal: Technical University of Lisbon, School of Economics and Management, Working Paper No. WP41/2008/DE/SOCIUS.

Kaplan, H. R. (1987). Lottery winners: The myth and reality. Journal of Gambling Behavior, 3, 168-178.

Kumar, A. (2009). Who gambles in the stock market? Journal of Finance, 64, 1889-1933.

Ladouceur, R. & Mireault, C. (1988). Gambling behavior among high school students in the Quebec Area. Journal of Gambling Studies, 4, 3-12.

Lang, B. & Omori, M. (2009). Can demographic variables predict lottery and pari-mutuel losses? An empirical investigation. Journal of Gambling Studies, 25, 171-83.

Mikesell, J. L. (1994). State lottery sales and economic activity. National Tax Journal, 47(1), (March), 165-171.

Miyazaki, A., Langenderfer, J. & Sprott, D. (1999). Government-sponsored lotteries: Exploring purchase and nonpurchase motivations. Psychology & Marketing, 16, 1-20.

National Gambling Impact Study Commission. (1999). Final Report. Washington, DC: National Gambling Impact Commission.

Oster, E. (2004). Are all lotteries regressive? Evidence from the Powerball. National Tax Journal, 57(2), 179-87.

Pickernell, D., Brown, K., Worthington, A. & Crawford, M. (2004). Gambling as a base for hypothecated taxation: The UK’s national lottery and electronic gaming machines in Queensland Australia. Public Money and Management, 24(3), 167-174.

Price, D. & Novak, E. (1999). The tax incidence of three Texas lottery games: Regressivity, race, and education. National Tax Journal, 52(4), 741-751.

Rogers, P. & Webley, P. (2001). It could be us!: Cognitive and social psychological factors in UK national lottery play. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 50, 181-199.

Shinogle, J., Norris, D., Park, D., Volberg, R., Haynes, D. & Stokan, E. (2011). Gambling prevalence in Maryland: A baseline analysis. Maryland Institute for Policy Analysis and Research, Working Paper.

US Census Bureau. (2012). Statistical Abstract of the United States.


Welte, J., Barnes, G., Wieczorek, W., Tidwell, M-C. & Parker, J. (2002). Gambling participants in the U.S. – results from a national survey. Journal of Gambling Studies, 18, 313-337.

Wisman, J. D. (2006). State lotteries: Using state power to fleece the poor. Journal of Economic Issues, XL, 4, 955-966.

Wood, R. & Griffiths, M. (2004). Adolescent lottery and scratchcard players: Do their attitudes influence their gambling behaviour? Journal of Adolescence, 27, 467-475.