赌徒谬论在彩票游戏中盛行

IF 1.3 2区 经济学 Q3 BUSINESS, FINANCE Journal of Risk and Uncertainty Pub Date : 2024-08-07 DOI:10.1007/s11166-024-09434-6
Brian Dillon, Travis J. Lybbert
{"title":"赌徒谬论在彩票游戏中盛行","authors":"Brian Dillon, Travis J. Lybbert","doi":"10.1007/s11166-024-09434-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>We use natural experiments in Haiti and Denmark to test recent theoretical predictions about how agents react to random events. Using player-level administrative data, we find that the average lottery player avoids numbers that recently won (the gambler’s fallacy). A small subset of players in each country exhibit the hot hand fallacy, and bet recent winners. We find no evidence of ‘streak switching,’ in which beliefs switch from the gambler’s fallacy to the hot hand fallacy as winning streaks grow. Follow-up survey data in Haiti indicate that almost all lottery players believe that some numbers are more likely to win than others, and that recent winning history is an important factor in subjective beliefs about numbers’ win probabilities.</p>","PeriodicalId":48066,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Risk and Uncertainty","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The gambler’s fallacy prevails in lottery play\",\"authors\":\"Brian Dillon, Travis J. Lybbert\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s11166-024-09434-6\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>We use natural experiments in Haiti and Denmark to test recent theoretical predictions about how agents react to random events. Using player-level administrative data, we find that the average lottery player avoids numbers that recently won (the gambler’s fallacy). A small subset of players in each country exhibit the hot hand fallacy, and bet recent winners. We find no evidence of ‘streak switching,’ in which beliefs switch from the gambler’s fallacy to the hot hand fallacy as winning streaks grow. Follow-up survey data in Haiti indicate that almost all lottery players believe that some numbers are more likely to win than others, and that recent winning history is an important factor in subjective beliefs about numbers’ win probabilities.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48066,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Risk and Uncertainty\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-08-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Risk and Uncertainty\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11166-024-09434-6\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"BUSINESS, FINANCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Risk and Uncertainty","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11166-024-09434-6","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"BUSINESS, FINANCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

我们利用在海地和丹麦进行的自然实验来检验最近关于代理人如何对随机事件做出反应的理论预测。通过使用彩民管理数据,我们发现普通彩民会避开最近中奖的号码(赌徒谬误)。每个国家都有一小部分彩民表现出热手谬误,投注最近中奖的号码。我们没有发现 "连胜转换 "的证据,即随着连胜次数的增加,人们的信念会从赌徒谬误转换到热门谬误。海地的后续调查数据表明,几乎所有彩民都认为某些号码比其他号码更有可能中奖,而近期的中奖历史是影响彩民对号码中奖概率的主观看法的一个重要因素。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
The gambler’s fallacy prevails in lottery play

We use natural experiments in Haiti and Denmark to test recent theoretical predictions about how agents react to random events. Using player-level administrative data, we find that the average lottery player avoids numbers that recently won (the gambler’s fallacy). A small subset of players in each country exhibit the hot hand fallacy, and bet recent winners. We find no evidence of ‘streak switching,’ in which beliefs switch from the gambler’s fallacy to the hot hand fallacy as winning streaks grow. Follow-up survey data in Haiti indicate that almost all lottery players believe that some numbers are more likely to win than others, and that recent winning history is an important factor in subjective beliefs about numbers’ win probabilities.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
6.30
自引率
10.60%
发文量
29
期刊介绍: The Journal of Risk and Uncertainty (JRU) welcomes original empirical, experimental, and theoretical manuscripts dealing with the analysis of risk-bearing behavior and decision making under uncertainty. The topics covered in the journal include, but are not limited to, decision theory and the economics of uncertainty, experimental investigations of behavior under uncertainty, empirical studies of real world risk-taking behavior, behavioral models of choice under uncertainty, and risk and public policy. Review papers are welcome. The JRU does not publish finance or behavioral finance research, game theory, note length work, or papers that treat Likert-type scales as having cardinal significance. An important aim of the JRU is to encourage interdisciplinary communication and interaction between researchers in the area of risk and uncertainty. Authors are expected to provide introductory discussions which set forth the nature of their research and the interpretation and implications of their findings in a manner accessible to knowledgeable researchers in other disciplines. Officially cited as: J Risk Uncertain
期刊最新文献
Subjective beliefs, health, and health behaviors Randomization advice and ambiguity aversion The gambler’s fallacy prevails in lottery play Are economic preferences shaped by the family context? The relation of birth order and siblings’ gender composition to economic preferences Reference-dependent discounting
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1