CASE STUDY

 • 

January 20, 2026

January 20, 2026

Lootboxes

Uncover how current industry protections often fail to safeguard young gamers as we reveal the critical gap between parental oversight, actual child spending, and the transparency of loot box mechanics in video games.

Digital, Data & Technology
Security & Online Safety

Challenge

PUBLIC, in collaboration with external researchers and the market research firm IPSOS, carried out research to understand the effectiveness of new industry-led protections in meeting the government objectives associated with Loot Boxes in video games.

The government’s objectives concerning loot boxes (features that produce randomised outcomes in video games) are as follows:

  1. Purchases of loot boxes should be unavailable to all children and young people unless and until they are enabled by a parent or guardian.
  2. All players should have access to, and be aware of, spending controls and transparent information to support safe and responsible gameplay.
  3. Better evidence and research, facilitated by improved access to data, should be developed to inform future policy making on loot boxes and video games more broadly.

To analyse the effectiveness of these protections, the research questions focused on the acknowledgement by parents and children of the risks and expenditures incurred; and, simultaneously, the acknowledgement of the technical controls imposed on them, information about their characteristics, and possibilities of making a refund.

Approach

As this was a significantly large project, four distinct work streams were carried out:

  1. Large-Scale Adult Survey (N=2,331)
  2. School-Based Student Survey (N=2,493)
  3. Remote Contextual Inquiry (N=20)
  4. Content Analysis of Loot Box Features and Compliance (N=20)

Each work stream served to analyse different research questions. While the first two streams were used to assess the acknowledgement of risk and expenditure by parents and children, the third and fourth streams were designed to answer the questions concerning the availability of technical controls, the transparency of information, and the real possibility of obtaining refunds following an unauthorised purchase by a minor. 

The content analysis, which was arguably the most novel of these research approaches, involved extracting audiovisual content from the gaming experience. This process served to evidence the existence (or lack thereof) of features associated with loot boxes that could fulfil the government's objectives.

Impact

We generated an extensive report detailing the findings of two significant and representative surveys. These surveys, conducted across two distinct samples, provided crucial information regarding:

  • Parental Purchasing and Controls: A large proportion of parents reported purchasing loot boxes (or associated products) for their children, yet significantly fewer reported establishing agreed spending limits or specific item types that their children were permitted to buy.
  • Discrepancy in Acknowledgement vs. Spend: The surveys demonstrated a substantial shortfall in the number of parents acknowledging their children purchasing loot boxes (or related items) in video games, compared with the proportion of children who reported having spent money on them. Even more worrying was the high weekly expenditure reported by the children themselves.

Similarly, the content analysis furnished evidence of non-compliance from certain parts of the gaming industry with the supposed protection policies. Several games analysed showed a lack of information displayed, as app stores failed to disclose the existence of randomised items and loot boxes in the games they were offering.

Reach out to the team

Photo by the author

Zixuan Fu

Senior Manager (Digital Governance)

Explore more insights

Stay in the loop!

Sign up to our monthly newsletter to get a snapshot of PUBLIC’s impact across the public sector, thought-leadership from our experts, and opportunities to get involved!