ABSTRACT
This paper discusses the relationship between investigative credibility and the sources of funding associated with gambling research. Some researchers argue against accepting funding from gambling industry sources; similarly, they decline to participate in activities directly or indirectly sponsored by gambling industry sources. In contrast, these anti-industry investigators evidence less resistance toward accepting funds from sources other than industry, for example, governments, because they believe that they have greater independence, reliability, and validity, and less undue influence and/or interference. We organize this article, around six primary issues: (1) researchers making a priori judgments that restrict positions towards industry associated research; (2) the potential negative impacts of holding such a position; (3) a description of the different sources of funding available to support gambling-related research; (4) an examination of the extant empirical support associated with the sources of funding and whether such support evidences bias; (5) a description of six cases illustrating how refusing to participate in any project funded by the industry can adversely influence the advancement of science and, at times, be itself unethical; and finally, (6) we suggest some remedies to advance solutions to this problem by stimulating the participation of reluctant researchers to work towards a greater harmony, keeping in mind that the pivotal goal of our work is to increase our knowledge in different area of science and to harness it to public goods.
