IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/aea/jecper/v33y2019i3p144-62.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A Bridge from Monty Hall to the Hot Hand: The Principle of Restricted Choice

Author

Listed:
  • Joshua B. Miller
  • Adam Sanjurjo

Abstract

We show how classic conditional probability puzzles, such as the Monty Hall problem, are intimately related to the recently discovered hot hand selection bias. We explain the connection by way of the principle of restricted choice, an intuitive inferential rule from the card game bridge, which we show is naturally quantified as the updating factor in the odds form of Bayes's rule. We illustrate how, just as the experimental subject fails to use available information to update correctly when choosing a door in the Monty Hall problem, researchers may neglect analogous information when designing experiments, analyzing data, and interpreting results.

Suggested Citation

  • Joshua B. Miller & Adam Sanjurjo, 2019. "A Bridge from Monty Hall to the Hot Hand: The Principle of Restricted Choice," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 33(3), pages 144-162, Summer.
    • Handle: RePEc:aea:jecper:v:33:y:2019:i:3:p:144-62
    Note: DOI: 10.1257/jep.33.3.144
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.aeaweb.org/doi/10.1257/jep.33.3.144
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.aeaweb.org/doi/10.1257/jep.33.3.144.ds
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Matthew Rabin & Dimitri Vayanos, 2010. "The Gambler's and Hot-Hand Fallacies: Theory and Applications," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 77(2), pages 730-778.
    2. Brian D. Kluger & Steve B. Wyatt, 2004. "Are Judgment Errors Reflected in Market Prices and Allocations? Experimental Evidence Based on the Monty Hall Problem," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 59(3), pages 969-998, June.
    3. Friedman, Daniel, 1998. "Monty Hall's Three Doors: Construction and Deconstruction of a Choice Anomaly," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 88(4), pages 933-946, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Jonathan Libgober, 2021. "Identifying Wisdom (of the Crowd): A Regression Approach," Papers 2105.07097, arXiv.org, revised Apr 2023.
    2. Morgulev, Elia, 2023. "Streakiness is not a theory: On “momentums” (hot hands) and their underlying mechanisms," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    3. Sebastian Fehrler & Baiba Renerte & Irenaeus Wolff, 2020. "Beliefs about Others: A Striking Example of Information Neglect," TWI Research Paper Series 118, Thurgauer Wirtschaftsinstitut, Universität Konstanz.
    4. Duarte Gonçalves & Jonathan Libgober & Jack Willis, 2021. "Learning versus Unlearning: An Experiment on Retractions," NBER Working Papers 29512, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Miller, Joshua Benjamin & Sanjurjo, Adam, 2018. "A Bridge from Monty Hall to the Hot Hand: Restricted Choice, Selection Bias, and Empirical Practice," OSF Preprints dmgtp, Center for Open Science.
    2. Kim Kaivanto & Eike B. Kroll & Michael Zabinski, 2014. "Bias-Trigger Manipulation and Task-Form Understanding in Monty Hall," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 34(1), pages 89-98.
    3. Elena Asparouhova & Peter Bossaerts & Jon Eguia & William Zame, 2015. "Asset Pricing and Asymmetric Reasoning," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 123(1), pages 66-122.
    4. Joshua B. Miller & Adam Sanjurjo, 2019. "Surprised by the Hot Hand Fallacy? A Truth in the Law of Small Numbers," Papers 1902.01265, arXiv.org.
    5. Kaivanto, Kim, 2008. "Alternation Bias and the Parameterization of Cumulative Prospect Theory," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, pages 91-107.
    6. Kendall, Chad & Oprea, Ryan, 2018. "Are biased beliefs fit to survive? An experimental test of the market selection hypothesis," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 176(C), pages 342-371.
    7. Baratgin, Jean, 2009. "Updating our beliefs about inconsistency: The Monty-Hall case," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 57(1), pages 67-95, January.
    8. Siddiqi, Hammad, 2009. "Is the lure of choice reflected in market prices? Experimental evidence based on the 4-door Monty Hall problem," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 30(2), pages 203-215, April.
    9. Elena Asparouhova & Peter Bossaerts & Jon Eguia & William Zame, 2014. "Asset Prices and Asymmetric Reasoning," Bristol Economics Discussion Papers 14/640, School of Economics, University of Bristol, UK.
    10. Sebastian Fehrler & Baiba Renerte & Irenaeus Wolff, 2020. "Beliefs about Others: A Striking Example of Information Neglect," TWI Research Paper Series 118, Thurgauer Wirtschaftsinstitut, Universität Konstanz.
    11. Boris Maciejovsky & Matthias Sutter & David V. Budescu & Patrick Bernau, 2013. "Teams Make You Smarter: How Exposure to Teams Improves Individual Decisions in Probability and Reasoning Tasks," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 59(6), pages 1255-1270, June.
    12. Brain Kluger & Daniel Friedman, 2006. "Financial Engineering and Rationality: Experimental Evidence Based on the Monty Hall Problem," Labsi Experimental Economics Laboratory University of Siena 007, University of Siena.
    13. David M. Ritzwoller & Joseph P. Romano, 2019. "Uncertainty in the Hot Hand Fallacy: Detecting Streaky Alternatives to Random Bernoulli Sequences," Papers 1908.01406, arXiv.org, revised Apr 2021.
    14. Benjamin Enke & Florian Zimmermann, 2019. "Correlation Neglect in Belief Formation," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 86(1), pages 313-332.
    15. Stöckl, Thomas & Huber, Jürgen & Kirchler, Michael & Lindner, Florian, 2015. "Hot hand and gambler's fallacy in teams: Evidence from investment experiments," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 327-339.
    16. Patt, Anthony G. & Bowles, Hannah Riley & Cash, David W., 2006. "Mechanisms for Enhancing the Credibility of an Adviser: Prepayment and Aligned Incentives," Working Paper Series rwp06-010, Harvard University, John F. Kennedy School of Government.
    17. Miller, Joshua Benjamin & Sanjurjo, Adam, 2018. "How Experience Confirms the Gambler's Fallacy when Sample Size is Neglected," OSF Preprints m5xsk, Center for Open Science.
    18. Ignacio Palacios-Huerta, 2003. "Learning to Open Monty Hall's Doors," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 6(3), pages 235-251, November.
    19. Joshua B. Miller & Adam Sanjurjo, 2015. "Is it a Fallacy to Believe in the Hot Hand in the NBA Three-Point Contest?," Working Papers 548, IGIER (Innocenzo Gasparini Institute for Economic Research), Bocconi University.
    20. Erik Eyster & Matthew Rabin & Dimitri Vayanos, 2019. "Financial Markets Where Traders Neglect the Informational Content of Prices," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 74(1), pages 371-399, February.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • C90 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - General
    • D81 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Criteria for Decision-Making under Risk and Uncertainty
    • D83 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Search; Learning; Information and Knowledge; Communication; Belief; Unawareness

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:aea:jecper:v:33:y:2019:i:3:p:144-62. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Michael P. Albert (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aeaaaea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.