WHAT DO GAMBLERS THINK OF RESPONSIBLE GAMBLING TOOLS? he promoon of responsible gambling (RG) and the prevenon of problem gambling have become major topics in the gambling studies field. This has led to the introducon of many RG and harm- minimisaon iniaves. As gambling products become more technologically sophiscated, the same technological innovaon is starng to be used to facilitate the development of harm-minimisaon tools to assist gamblers in maintaining self-control and make raonal and controlled gambling-related decisions. The Global Online Gambler Survey (Internaonal Gaming Research Unit, 2007) conducted for eCOGRA (eCommerce and Online Gaming Regulaon and Assurance) collected data from 10,865 parcipants, from 96 countries, who reported that they had gambled at Internet casino sites, Internet poker sites, or both within the three months prior to the study. In relaon to social responsibility, online gamblers were specifically asked about five parcular features (i.e., self-set spending limits, self-set me limits, self-exclusion, provision of regular financial statements, and self-assessment problem gambling tests). Although no single feature stood out as crically important, 51-75% of players (across all five social responsibility features) stated that they would consider some responsible gambling elements at least ‘quite useful’. The most popular opon was receiving regular financial statements (i.e., objecve feedback about all wins and losses) with 75% considering this opon to be at least quite useful and the least popular feature was self-set me limit with 51% reporng this as at least quite useful. Those players who were younger, female, gambled out of boredom, and reported losing more money, were significantly more likely to consider responsible gambling features to be useful.  Griffiths, Wood and Parke (2009) examined players' atudes Mark Griffiths Andrew Harris & Michael Auer 65 CGiMAGAZINE.COM SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY :: T Mark Griffiths