A Contribution to the Psychology of Gambling1

In this brief report I shall make no attempt to deal in extenso with the complex phenomenon of gambling but I shall limit myself to the discussion of some clinical features of the so-called “gambling neurosis” (7) which in my opinion have been inadequately studied.

On the whole, the analytic literature on gambling, though not extensive—altogether approximately 20 papers, besides one or two popularly written books—offers a sufficient amount of clinical and nonclinical data pertaining to the psychodynamics and other aspects of the problem. From the early papers by von Hattingberg (11) and Simmel (10) to the more elaborate and recent contributions by Greenson, (8) Eissler, (4) Bergler, (1, 2) and Harris, (9) the gambling addiction has been subjected to analytic interpretation.

Freud's classic study on “Dostoievski and Parricide,” (6) of course, marks a high point in our literature on the psychology of gambling. The oedipal implications, irresistible character, need for self-punishment derived from a deep-seated sense of guilt, and similar aspects have been elucidated in Freud's paper which also emphasizes the close relation between gambling and masturbation. Freud writes: “The ‘vice’ of

masturbation is replaced by the mania of gambling. … The unsuccessful struggle to break the habit … is a repetition of the compulsion to masturbate.“

Bergler and Greenson, on the other hand, have stressed the pregenital components, Bergler emphasizing the patient's masochism, and Greenson, the multiple and complex aspects of the addiction, as evidenced by the imperative need for instinct gratification, the prevalence of strong oral demands, and the presence of magic, megalomanic, aggressive and other primitive modes of “archaic thinking.” The latter also briefly notes that “the neurotic gambler is a personality on the brink of depression.” It is this aspect that I shall consider more expl