IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/feb/natura/00693.html

The representativeness heuristic and the choice of lottery tickets: A field experiment

Author

Listed:
  • Michal Krawczyk
  • Joanna Rachubik

Abstract

The representativeness heuristic (RH) has been proposed to be at the root of several types of biases in judgment. In this project, we ask whether the RH is relevant in two kinds of choices in the context of gambling. Specifically, in a field experiment with naturalistic stimuli and a potentially extremely high monetary pay-out, we give each of our subjects a choice between a lottery ticket with a random-looking number sequence and a ticket with a patterned sequence; we subsequently offer them a small cash bonus if they switch to the other ticket. In the second task, we investigate the gambler's fallacy, asking subjects what they believe the outcome of a fourth coin toss after a sequence of three identical outcomes will be. We find that most subjects prefer "random" sequences, and that approximately half believe in dependence between subsequent coin tosses. There is no correlation, though, between the initial choice of the lottery ticket and the prediction of the coin toss. Nonetheless, subjects who have a strong preference for certain number combinations (i.e., subjects who are willing to forgo the cash bonus and remain with their initial choice) also tend to predict a specific outcome (in particular a reversal, corresponding to the gambler's fallacy) in the coin task.

Suggested Citation

  • Michal Krawczyk & Joanna Rachubik, 2019. "The representativeness heuristic and the choice of lottery tickets: A field experiment," Natural Field Experiments 00693, The Field Experiments Website.
    • Handle: RePEc:feb:natura:00693
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://s3.amazonaws.com/fieldexperiments-papers2/papers/00693.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Sigrid Suetens & Claus B. Galbo-Jørgensen & Jean-Robert Tyran, 2016. "Predicting Lotto Numbers: A Natural Experiment on the Gambler's Fallacy and the Hot-Hand Fallacy," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 14(3), pages 584-607.
    2. James Sundali & Rachel Croson, 2006. "Biases in casino betting: The hot hand and the gambler's fallacy," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 1, pages 1-12, July.
    3. Tong V. Wang & Rogier J. D. Potter van Loon & Martijn J. van den Assem & Dennie van Dolder, 2016. "Number preferences in lotteries," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 11(3), pages 243-259, May.
    4. Lien, Jaimie W. & Yuan, Jia, 2015. "The cross-sectional “Gambler's Fallacy”: Set representativeness in lottery number choices," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 163-172.
    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. Bouteska, Ahmed, 2019. "The effect of investor sentiment on market reactions to financial earnings restatements: Lessons from the United States," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance, Elsevier, vol. 24(C).
    2. UNGAR Kevin, 2025. "Investigating Randomness And Fairness In The Romanian 6/49 Lottery," Revista Economica, Lucian Blaga University of Sibiu, Faculty of Economic Sciences, vol. 77(1), pages 13-24, May.
    3. Brian A. Polin & Eyal Ben Isaac & Itzhak Aharon, 2021. "Patterns in manually selected numbers in the Israeli lottery," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 16(4), pages 1039-1059, July.
    4. Wolff, Irenaeus, 2021. "The lottery player’s fallacy: Why labels predict strategic choices," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 184(C), pages 16-29.
    5. Tariq Mahadeen & Kostas Galanakis & Elpida Samara & Pavlos Kilintzis, 2021. "Heuristics and Evidences Decision (HeED) Making: a Case Study in a Systemic Model for Transforming Decision Making from Heuristics-Based to Evidenced-Based," Journal of the Knowledge Economy, Springer;Portland International Center for Management of Engineering and Technology (PICMET), vol. 12(4), pages 1668-1693, December.
    6. Michał Wiktor Krawczyk & Joanna Rachubik, 2019. "The limitations of the representativeness heuristic: further evidence from choices between lottery tickets," Working Papers 2019-11, Faculty of Economic Sciences, University of Warsaw.
    7. Oluwaseun A. Otekunrin & Adesola G. Folorunso & Kehinde O. Alawode, 2021. "Number preferences in selected Nigerian lottery games," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 16(4), pages 1060-1071, July.

    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. Michał Wiktor Krawczyk & Joanna Rachubik, 2019. "The representativeness heuristic and the choice of lottery tickets: A field experiment," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 14(1), pages 51-57, January.
    2. Oluwaseun A. Otekunrin & Adesola G. Folorunso & Kehinde O. Alawode, 2021. "Number preferences in selected Nigerian lottery games," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 16(4), pages 1060-1071, July.
    3. Qingxia Kong & Georg D. Granic & Nicolas S. Lambert & Chung Piaw Teo, 2020. "Judgment Error in Lottery Play: When the Hot Hand Meets the Gambler’s Fallacy," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(2), pages 844-862, February.
    4. Michał Wiktor Krawczyk & Joanna Rachubik, 2018. "Verifying the representativeness heuristic: A field experiment with real-life lottery tickets," Working Papers 2018-03, Faculty of Economic Sciences, University of Warsaw.
    5. Brian A. Polin & Eyal Ben Isaac & Itzhak Aharon, 2021. "Patterns in manually selected numbers in the Israeli lottery," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 16(4), pages 1039-1059, July.
    6. Brian Dillon & Travis J. Lybbert, 2024. "The gambler’s fallacy prevails in lottery play," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 69(1), pages 33-56, August.
    7. Robin Maximilian Stetzka & Stefan Winter, 2023. "How rational is gambling?," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 37(4), pages 1432-1488, September.
    8. Ala Avoyan & Robizon Khubulashvili & Giorgi Mekerishvili, 2020. "Call It a Day: History Dependent Stopping Behavior," CESifo Working Paper Series 8603, CESifo.
    9. Joshua B. Miller & Adam Sanjurjo, 2014. "A Cold Shower for the Hot Hand Fallacy," Working Papers 518, IGIER (Innocenzo Gasparini Institute for Economic Research), Bocconi University.
    10. Wolff, Irenaeus, 2021. "The lottery player’s fallacy: Why labels predict strategic choices," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 184(C), pages 16-29.
    11. Miller, Joshua B. & Sanjurjo, Adam, 2021. "Is it a fallacy to believe in the hot hand in the NBA three-point contest?," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 138(C).
    12. Miller, Joshua Benjamin & Sanjurjo, Adam, 2018. "Is it a Fallacy to Believe in the Hot Hand in the NBA Three-Point Contest?," OSF Preprints dmksp, Center for Open Science.
    13. Tong V. Wang & Rogier J. D. Potter van Loon & Martijn J. van den Assem & Dennie van Dolder, 2016. "Number preferences in lotteries," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 11(3), pages 243-259, May.
    14. Roger, Patrick & D’Hondt, Catherine & Plotkina, Daria & Hoffmann, Arvid, 2022. "Number 19: Another Victim of the COVID‐19 Pandemic?," LIDAM Reprints LFIN 2022012, Université catholique de Louvain, Louvain Finance (LFIN).
    15. Suetens, Sigrid & Tyran, Jean-Robert, 2012. "The gambler's fallacy and gender," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 83(1), pages 118-124.
    16. Judith Covey & Qiyuan Zhang, 2014. "The effect of dynamic proximity cues on counterfactual plausibility," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 9(6), pages 586-592, November.
    17. Greg Barron & Eldad Yechiam, 2009. "The coexistence of overestimation and underweighting of rare events and the contingent recency effect," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 4(6), pages 447-460, October.
    18. Giuseppe Coco & Daniele Simone & Laura Serlenga & Sabrina Molinaro, 2023. "Risk awareness and complexity in students’ gambling," Economia Politica: Journal of Analytical and Institutional Economics, Springer;Fondazione Edison, vol. 40(3), pages 971-994, October.
    19. Yanlong Sun & Hongbin Wang, 2010. "Gambler's fallacy, hot hand belief, and the time of patterns," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 5(2), pages 124-132, April.
    20. He, Kevin, 2022. "Mislearning from censored data: The gambler's fallacy and other correlational mistakes in optimal-stopping problems," Theoretical Economics, Econometric Society, vol. 17(3), July.

    More about this item

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:feb:natura:00693. 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: Franco Daniel Albino (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.fieldexperiments.com .

    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.