KSA investigates behavioural tactics in online gambling

The Dutch gambling regulator, Kansspelautoriteit (KSA), has announced a new investigation into the behavioural influence techniques used by online gambling operators in the Netherlands. The authority is assessing whether certain strategies applied in the industry comply with existing duty of care standards or whether stricter rules should be introduced to protect vulnerable players.

The regulator’s move follows earlier research conducted by the Behavioural Insights agency, which highlighted both positive and negative practices within the country’s regulated online gambling market. While some operators have incorporated player-friendly measures that promote safer gambling habits, other tactics identified by researchers may pose risks to individuals susceptible to addiction.

The issue of behavioural influence in gambling has become an increasingly significant subject in Europe, as regulators weigh commercial freedoms of licensed operators against the obligation to safeguard public health and consumer well-being.

Background of the investigation

The regulated Dutch online gambling market officially launched in October 2021, following the introduction of the Remote Gambling Act (Wet Kansspelen op afstand). The law granted the KSA responsibility for licensing operators, overseeing compliance, and protecting consumers against potential gambling-related harm.

Since the market’s launch, KSA has introduced a number of guidelines on advertising, game design, and responsible gambling tools. However, the regulator has consistently signaled that ongoing monitoring is necessary, particularly as operators develop increasingly sophisticated techniques to retain players and maximize revenue.

The new investigation will focus specifically on behavioural influence tactics—methods designed to steer, encourage, or nudge players towards certain types of gambling behaviour. While some of these techniques may be benign or even beneficial, others could cross ethical or legal boundaries.

Positive and negative findings from initial research

The Behavioural Insights agency’s study provided the KSA with an initial overview of how operators are applying behavioural psychology in practice.

On the positive side, some operators were found to implement features that encourage breaks, limit excessive play, or incorporate feedback loops from players to improve safety. For example, pause functions and reminders can give players the chance to reflect on their gambling behaviour, potentially reducing the risk of compulsive play.

On the negative side, however, researchers found that certain operators allow new players to stake high amounts immediately upon registration. This practice, the study suggested, may be particularly risky for inexperienced individuals, as it creates opportunities for substantial losses before players have had time to understand the risks.

In its public statement, the KSA noted that the specific details of the study have not yet been fully released. Nevertheless, the findings have provided sufficient grounds for the regulator to carry out its own follow-up investigation to determine whether any behaviours constitute breaches of duty of care obligations.

KSA’s perspective on behavioural influence

Michel Groothuizen, Chairman of the KSA, explained the regulator’s stance in a formal statement. He remarked:

“At the KSA, we understand that online providers, like other commercial companies, monitor what users do on their platforms and how they can influence that to their advantage.”

This acknowledgment underscores a fundamental tension in the sector: while it is legitimate for commercial enterprises to optimize their platforms for user engagement, gambling operators must simultaneously uphold a duty of care to prevent harm.

Groothuizen emphasized that the recent research has given the authority “a better understanding of how they do this and can also provide more guidance on negative influence and things we no longer want to see.”

Duty of care in Dutch gambling regulation

The concept of duty of care is central to Dutch gambling regulation. Under the Remote Gambling Act, licensed operators are required to take measures to prevent gambling addiction and protect vulnerable groups. These measures include monitoring player behaviour, offering self-exclusion options, and intervening when signs of problematic play are identified.

The KSA has previously issued guidance documents to clarify what constitutes acceptable compliance. For example, in 2022 and 2023, the authority published guidelines concerning advertising practices and game features that could be considered risky.

Earlier in 2023, the regulator banned the ‘autoplay’ function, a feature allowing continuous play without player interaction. The KSA argued that autoplay encourages excessive gambling and removes natural breaks, which are essential for reflection and control.

The upcoming investigation could therefore lead to additional guidance or even stricter obligations for operators.

The potential risks of behavioural influence

Behavioural influence techniques are not inherently harmful. Many industries—from retail to social media—use design and psychology to shape consumer engagement. However, gambling presents unique risks because of its addictive potential.

The main concerns include:

• Encouragement of high initial spending: Allowing players to make large deposits or bets at the start may overwhelm newcomers.
• Reinforcement loops: Design features that highlight near-misses or small wins may encourage continued play despite losses.
• Time distortion: Removing natural pauses or creating environments where time feels compressed can lead to longer gambling sessions.
• Personalized incentives: Using player data to target bonuses or promotions could create pressure on vulnerable individuals.

For individuals with a predisposition to gambling addiction, these tactics can accelerate harmful behaviour. For regulators, the challenge lies in distinguishing acceptable commercial strategies from those that unduly exploit psychological vulnerabilities.

Industry implications

If the KSA concludes that certain practices breach duty of care, the regulator could impose stricter requirements on operators. Potential measures might include:

• Mandatory limits on initial bet sizes for new players.
• Restrictions on design features deemed manipulative or misleading.
• Expanded requirements for responsible gambling tools, such as time-outs or spending caps.
• Greater transparency obligations around how operators use player data.

The Dutch market is already one of the most tightly regulated in Europe, and further restrictions would place additional compliance obligations on licensees. However, regulators argue that such measures are necessary to sustain long-term public trust and the legitimacy of the licensed sector.

Wider European context

The Netherlands is not alone in addressing behavioural influence in gambling. Other European jurisdictions, including the United Kingdom, Sweden, and Germany, have also scrutinized how design features and operator strategies affect player behaviour.

In the UK, for example, the Gambling Commission has introduced measures restricting features such as autoplay and speed of play. Sweden has imposed temporary deposit limits during periods of heightened risk, such as the COVID-19 pandemic. Germany has capped monthly deposit amounts across licensed operators.

The Dutch approach appears to be evolving in a similar direction, with a focus on data-driven insights and evidence-based policymaking.

Balancing regulation and commercial viability

One of the ongoing debates in gambling regulation concerns the balance between consumer protection and maintaining a viable regulated market. Operators often warn that excessive restrictions may drive players to unlicensed or offshore platforms, where protections are weaker.

The KSA, however, has consistently maintained that consumer safety is the primary priority. By targeting specific high-risk practices, rather than imposing blanket prohibitions, the regulator aims to achieve a proportionate response.

Next steps in the KSA investigation

The KSA has not yet published a timeline for the completion of its investigation, nor has it specified what new rules might emerge. However, the authority has made clear that it will use the findings both to educate operators and to issue further guidance where necessary.

The regulator’s statement also suggests that industry self-regulation alone may not be sufficient, and that binding obligations could be introduced if harmful practices persist.

Ultimately, the investigation will test how far the KSA is willing to go in regulating behavioural influence in gambling, and how operators will adapt to evolving expectations.

Conclusion

The KSA’s decision to investigate behavioural influence tactics in the Dutch online gambling market reflects the regulator’s growing focus on safeguarding vulnerable players and ensuring that commercial practices do not undermine consumer protection. While the initial research identified both responsible and questionable techniques, the authority’s follow-up inquiry highlights a clear intention to draw firmer boundaries around acceptable behaviour.

For licensed operators, this development serves as a reminder that duty of care is not merely a formal obligation but a cornerstone of long-term market sustainability. By adopting transparent and player-focused practices, companies can not only comply with evolving regulations but also strengthen public trust in the regulated sector.

Ultimately, the outcome of the investigation may shape the future regulatory landscape in the Netherlands, setting new benchmarks for responsible gambling standards across Europe. The balance between commercial viability and consumer protection remains delicate, yet the KSA’s proactive stance demonstrates that protecting players will remain the guiding principle of Dutch gambling policy.

FAQs

What is the KSA?
The Kansspelautoriteit (KSA) is the Dutch gambling authority responsible for licensing, regulation, and enforcement in the Netherlands’ gambling market.

Why is the KSA investigating behavioural influence?
The regulator is concerned that some operators use tactics that may encourage risky gambling behaviour, potentially harming vulnerable players.

What is meant by duty of care?
Duty of care refers to the legal and regulatory obligation of licensed operators to protect players from gambling-related harm and addiction.

What did the initial research show?
The Behavioural Insights agency’s study found both positive practices, such as pause functions, and negative practices, such as allowing high initial bets.

Will new rules be introduced?
The KSA has not confirmed new rules yet, but stricter duty of care obligations could follow depending on the outcome of the investigation.

What measures has the KSA already taken?
In 2023, the regulator banned autoplay features and updated duty of care guidance to encourage safer gambling practices.

How could this affect operators?
Operators may face tighter restrictions on game design, player incentives, and use of behavioural data if the investigation leads to new regulations.

Is behavioural influence always harmful?
Not necessarily. Some techniques, such as reminders or pause functions, can promote responsible gambling, while others may exploit vulnerabilities.

How does this compare to other countries?
Similar measures have been taken in the UK, Sweden, and Germany, where regulators have limited features like autoplay and high deposits.

When will the investigation conclude?
The KSA has not provided a timeline, but findings are expected to guide further regulatory actions and industry guidance in the near future.