IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/has/discpr/1342.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Gambler's fallacy in the classroom?

Author

Listed:
  • Hubert Janos Kiss

    (Game Theory Research Group, Institute of Economics, Centre for Economic and Regional Studies, Hungarian Academy of Sciences)

  • Adrienn Selei

    (Regional Centre for Energy Policy Research)

Abstract

Does students' hand tremble after marking three consecutive identical answers in a multiple choice test? We design an experiment to study if the likelihood to change incorrectly to a different answer than the last one depends on the number of identical previous answers. We do not find a clear treatment effect, but observe that indeed the likelihood to change to an incorrect answer increases in the number of identical previous answers given by the student, even after controlling for how prepared (s)he was overall and how certain (s)he was that the answer to a given multiple choice question is correct. We claim that this behavior possibly is a reasonable reaction to previous exam experience.

Suggested Citation

  • Hubert Janos Kiss & Adrienn Selei, 2013. "Gambler's fallacy in the classroom?," CERS-IE WORKING PAPERS 1342, Institute of Economics, Centre for Economic and Regional Studies.
    • Handle: RePEc:has:discpr:1342
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://econ.core.hu/file/download/mtdp/MTDP1342.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Charles Ballard & Marianne Johnson, 2005. "Gender, Expectations, And Grades In Introductory Microeconomics At A Us University," Feminist Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 11(1), pages 95-122.
    2. Albert Burgos, 2004. "Guessing and gambling," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 4(4), pages 1-10.
    3. Stefano DellaVigna, 2009. "Psychology and Economics: Evidence from the Field," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 47(2), pages 315-372, June.
    4. repec:ebl:ecbull:v:4:y:2004:i:4:p:1-10 is not listed on IDEAS
    5. Espinosa Alejos, María Paz & Gardeazabal, Javier, 2007. "Optimal Correction for Guessing in Multiple-Choice Tests," DFAEII Working Papers 1988-088X, University of the Basque Country - Department of Foundations of Economic Analysis II.
    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. Marín, Carmen & Rosa-García, Alfonso, 2011. "Gender bias in risk aversion: evidence from multiple choice exams," MPRA Paper 39987, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. MARÍN MARTÍNEZ, Carmen & ROSA GARCÍA, Alfonso, 2014. "Is Gender Bias A Cost Of Failure Issue?," Regional and Sectoral Economic Studies, Euro-American Association of Economic Development, vol. 14(3), pages 19-30.
    3. Wettstein, Dominik J. & Boes, Stefan, 2022. "How value-based policy interventions influence price negotiations for new medicines: An experimental approach and initial evidence," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 126(2), pages 112-121.
    4. Andreas R. Kostøl & Andreas S. Myhre, 2021. "Labor Supply Responses to Learning the Tax and Benefit Schedule," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 111(11), pages 3733-3766, November.
    5. Paul De Grauwe, 2014. "Animal Spirits and Monetary Policy," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Exchange Rates and Global Financial Policies, chapter 18, pages 473-520, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    6. Andrzej Baniak & Peter Grajzl, 2017. "Optimal Liability when Consumers Mispredict Product Usage," American Law and Economics Review, American Law and Economics Association, vol. 19(1), pages 202-243.
    7. Tasoff, Joshua & Letzler, Robert, 2014. "Everyone believes in redemption: Nudges and overoptimism in costly task completion," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 107(PA), pages 107-122.
    8. Philippe Jehiel & Aviman Satpathy, 2024. "Learning to be Indifferent in Complex Decisions: A Coarse Payoff-Assessment Model," Papers 2412.09321, arXiv.org, revised Dec 2024.
    9. Chang, Chia-Lin & de Bruijn, Bert & Franses, Philip Hans & McAleer, Michael, 2013. "Analyzing fixed-event forecast revisions," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 29(4), pages 622-627.
    10. Justin Falk & Nadia Karamcheva, 2019. "The Effect of the Employer Match and Defaults on Federal Workers’ Savings Behavior in the Thrift Savings Plan: Working Paper 2019-06," Working Papers 55447, Congressional Budget Office.
    11. Tommaso Colussi & Ingo E. Isphording & Nico Pestel, 2021. "Minority Salience and Political Extremism," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 13(3), pages 237-271, July.
    12. Michel, Christian, 2017. "Market regulation of voluntary add-on contracts," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 239-268.
    13. Roy, Saktinil & Kemme, David M., 2012. "Causes of banking crises: Deregulation, credit booms and asset bubbles, then and now," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 24(C), pages 270-294.
    14. Jean-Michel Benkert, 2015. "Bilateral trade with loss-averse agents," ECON - Working Papers 188, Department of Economics - University of Zurich, revised Jul 2022.
    15. Damgaard, Mette Trier & Nielsen, Helena Skyt, 2018. "Nudging in education," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 64(C), pages 313-342.
    16. Johan Gustafsson, 2021. "Age-Targeted Income Taxation, Labor Supply, and Retirement," CESifo Working Paper Series 8988, CESifo.
    17. Bertrand, Jérémie & Burietz, Aurore, 2023. "(Loan) price and (loan officer) prejudice," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 210(C), pages 26-42.
    18. Piccoli, Luca & Tiezzi, Silvia, 2021. "Rational addiction and time-consistency: An empirical test," Journal of Health Economics, Elsevier, vol. 80(C).
    19. David Laibson, 1997. "Golden Eggs and Hyperbolic Discounting," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 112(2), pages 443-478.
    20. Pekkarinen, Tuomas, 2015. "Gender differences in behaviour under competitive pressure: Evidence on omission patterns in university entrance examinations," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 94-110.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    belief; experiment; gambler's fallacy; multiple choice;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C93 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Field Experiments
    • D03 - Microeconomics - - General - - - Behavioral Microeconomics: Underlying Principles
    • D84 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Expectations; Speculations

    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:has:discpr:1342. 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: Nora Horvath (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/iehashu.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.