IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0170057.html

Losses and External Outcomes Interact to Produce the Gambler’s Fallacy

Author

Listed:
  • Julia A Mossbridge
  • Christopher J R Roney
  • Satoru Suzuki

Abstract

When making serial predictions in a binary decision task, there is a clear tendency to assume that after a series of the same external outcome (e.g., heads in a coin flip), the next outcome will be the opposing one (e.g., tails), even when the outcomes are independent of one another. This so-called “gambler’s fallacy” has been replicated robustly. However, what drives gambler’s fallacy behavior is unclear. Here we demonstrate that a run of the same external outcome by itself does not lead to gambler’s fallacy behavior. However, when a run of external outcomes is accompanied by a concurrent run of failed guesses, gambler’s fallacy behavior is predominant. These results do not depend on how participants’ attention is directed. Thus, it appears that gambler’s fallacy behavior is driven by a combination of an external series of events and a concurrent series of failure experiences.

Suggested Citation

  • Julia A Mossbridge & Christopher J R Roney & Satoru Suzuki, 2017. "Losses and External Outcomes Interact to Produce the Gambler’s Fallacy," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(1), pages 1-18, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0170057
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0170057
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0170057
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0170057&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0170057?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gabriele Paolacci & Jesse Chandler & Panagiotis G. Ipeirotis, 2010. "Running experiments on Amazon Mechanical Turk," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 5(5), pages 411-419, August.
    2. Colin F. Camerer & George Loewenstein & Drazen Prelec, 2004. "Neuroeconomics: Why Economics Needs Brains," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 106(3), pages 555-579, October.
    3. Boynton, David M., 2003. "Superstitious responding and frequency matching in the positive bias and gambler's fallacy effects," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 91(2), pages 119-127, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Sweldens, Steven & Puntoni, Stefano & Paolacci, Gabriele & Vissers, Maarten, 2014. "The bias in the bias: Comparative optimism as a function of event social undesirability," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 124(2), pages 229-244.
    2. Enrico Rubaltelli & Lorella Lotto & Ilana Ritov & Rino Rumiati, 2015. "Moral investing: Psychological motivations and implications," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 10(1), pages 64-75, January.
    3. Hsu, Dan K. & Burmeister-Lamp, Katrin & Simmons, Sharon A. & Foo, Maw-Der & Hong, Michelle C. & Pipes, Jesse D., 2019. "“I know I can, but I don't fit”: Perceived fit, self-efficacy, and entrepreneurial intention," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 34(2), pages 311-326.
    4. Lutz, Christoph & Newlands, Gemma, 2018. "Consumer segmentation within the sharing economy: The case of Airbnb," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 187-196.
    5. Mariconda, Simone & Lurati, Francesco, 2015. "Does familiarity breed stability? The role of familiarity in moderating the effects of new information on reputation judgments," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 68(5), pages 957-964.
    6. Tarcia Camily Cavalcante Quezado & Nuno Fortes & William Quezado Figueiredo Cavalcante, 2022. "The Influence of Corporate Social Responsibility and Business Ethics on Brand Fidelity: The Importance of Brand Love and Brand Attitude," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(5), pages 1-20, March.
    7. Pam A. Mueller & Lawrence M. Solan & John M. Darley, 2012. "When Does Knowledge Become Intent? Perceiving the Minds of Wrongdoers," Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 9(4), pages 859-892, December.
    8. Robin Maximilian Stetzka & Stefan Winter, 2023. "How rational is gambling?," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(4), pages 1432-1488, September.
    9. Tobias Schlager & Ashley V. Whillans, 2022. "People underestimate the probability of contracting the coronavirus from friends," Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 9(1), pages 1-11, December.
    10. Hou, Chenxuan & Li, Tingting & Gu, Yanzhang, 2026. "Artificial intelligence versus human providers for personalized solutions? The influence of expected group size and perceived uniqueness on adoption intentions," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 88(C).
    11. Giorgia Ponsi & Maria Serena Panasiti & Salvatore Maria Aglioti & Marco Tullio Liuzza, 2017. "Right-wing authoritarianism and stereotype-driven expectations interact in shaping intergroup trust in one-shot vs multiple-round social interactions," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(12), pages 1-23, December.
    12. Charness, Gary & Gneezy, Uri & Kuhn, Michael A., 2013. "Experimental methods: Extra-laboratory experiments-extending the reach of experimental economics," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 93-100.
    13. Anthony M. Evans & Kyle D. Dillon & Gideon Goldin & Joachim I. Krueger, 2011. "Trust and self-control: The moderating role of the default," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 6(7), pages 697-705, October.
    14. Orazi, Davide C. & Pizzetti, Marta, 2015. "Revisiting fear appeals: A structural re-inquiry of the protection motivation model," International Journal of Research in Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 32(2), pages 223-225.
    15. Cantarella, Michele & Strozzi, Chiara, 2019. "Workers in the Crowd: The Labour Market Impact of the Online Platform Economy," IZA Discussion Papers 12327, IZA Network @ LISER.
    16. Gökçe Esenduran & James A. Hill & In Joon Noh, 2020. "Understanding the Choice of Online Resale Channel for Used Electronics," Production and Operations Management, Production and Operations Management Society, vol. 29(5), pages 1188-1211, May.
    17. Azzam, Tarek & Harman, Elena, 2016. "Crowdsourcing for quantifying transcripts: An exploratory study," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 63-73.
    18. He, Wei & Prentice, Catherine & Wang, Xuequn, 2024. "Symmetrical and asymmetrical approaches to brand loyalty– The case of intelligent voice assistants," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 183(C).
    19. Gonzalez-Cabello, Martin & Siddiq, Auyon & Corbett, Charles J. & Hu, Catherine, 2025. "Fairness in crowdwork: Making the human AI supply chain more humane," Business Horizons, Elsevier, vol. 68(5), pages 645-657.
    20. Egon Dejonckheere & Brock Bastian, 2021. "Perceiving Social Pressure not to Feel Negative is Linked to a More Negative Self-concept," Journal of Happiness Studies, Springer, vol. 22(2), pages 667-679, February.

    More about this item

    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:plo:pone00:0170057. 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: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    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.