Journal of Gambling Studies

, Volume 8, Issue 2, pp 201–222 | Cite as

Predicting outcomes: Sports and stocks

  • Gordon Wood


Many gamblers and most fans, players, and coaches offer causal explanations for long runs of good or bad performance in sports and financial analysts are quick to offer explanations for the daily performance of the stock market. The records of professional basketball and baseball teams and the Dow Jones daily closing average for a ten year period were evaluated for trends (streaks). The records of teams were also evaluated to assess whether the record against opponents, the home court or home field advantage, and—for baseball teams—the record of the winning and losing pitcher (excluding the current game) predicted the outcome of individual games. Recent performance is, at best, a very weak predictor of current performance and the three best predictors for baseball (pitching, home field, and record against opponent) together accounted for only 1.7% of the variance in the outcomes of individual games. We overestimate our ability to predict. This overconfidence is likely to play a role in maintaining gambling behaviors.


Stock Market Good Predictor Gambling Behavior Current Performance Causal Explanation 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Abelson, R.P. (1985). A variance explanation paradox: When a little is a lot.Psychological Bulletin, 97, 129–133.Google Scholar
  2. Andreassen, P.B. (1987). On the social psychology of the stock market: Aggregate attributional effects and the regression of predictions.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53, 490–496.Google Scholar
  3. Baron, J., & Hershey, J.C. (1988). Outcome bias in decision evaluation.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 569–579.Google Scholar
  4. Corney, W.J., & Cummings, W.T. (1985). Gambling behavior and information processing biases.Journal of Gambling Behavior, 1, 111–118.Google Scholar
  5. Daily price record. (1980–1989, 40 volumes). New York: Standard & Poor's Corporation.Google Scholar
  6. Dawes, R.M. (1988).Rational choice in an uncertain world. New York: Harcourt, Brace, Jovanovich.Google Scholar
  7. Fama, E.F. (1965a). The behavior of stock market prices.Journal of Business, 38, 34–105.Google Scholar
  8. Fama, E.F. (1965b). Tomorrow on the New York Stock Exchange.Journal of Business, 38, 285–299.Google Scholar
  9. Frank, M.L., & Smith, C. (1989). Illusion of control and gambling in children.Journal of Gambling Behavior, 5, 127–136.Google Scholar
  10. Gebotys, R.J., & Claxton-Oldfield, S.P. (1989). Errors in the quantification of uncertainty: A product of heuristics or minimal probability knowledge base?Applied Cognitive Psychology, 3, 237–250.Google Scholar
  11. Gilovich, T. (1983). Biased evaluation and persistence in gambling.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 44, 1110–1126.Google Scholar
  12. Gilovich, T., Vallone, R., & Tversky, A. (1985). The hot hand in basketball: On the misperception of random sequences.Cognitive Psychology, 17, 295–314.Google Scholar
  13. Hood, D.C., (1988). Toward understanding stock market movements: A marriage of psychology and economics.Science and Public Policy Seminars, Federation of Behavioral, Psychological, and Cognitive Sciences.Google Scholar
  14. King, K.K. (1990). Neutralizing marginally deviant behavior: Bingo players and superstition.Journal of Gambling Studies, 6, 43–61.Google Scholar
  15. Kunda, Z. (1987). Motivated inference: Self-serving generation and evaluation of causal theories.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53, 636–647.Google Scholar
  16. Langer, E.J. (1975). The illusion of control.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 32, 311–328.Google Scholar
  17. Lerner, M.J. (1980).The belief in a just world: A fundamental delusion. New York: Plenum Press.Google Scholar
  18. Levy, R.A. (1968).The relative strength concept of common price forecasting. New York: Larchmont.Google Scholar
  19. Malkiel, B.G. (1990).A random walk down Wall Street. New York: W.W. Norton.Google Scholar
  20. Osborne, M.F.M. (1959). Brownian motion in the stock market.Operations Research, 7, 145–178.Google Scholar
  21. Osborne, M.F.M. (1962). Periodic structure in the Brownian motion of stock prices.Operations Research, 10, 345–379.Google Scholar
  22. Sachare, A., & Sloan, D., (Eds.). (1989).The sporting news 1989–90 official NBA guide. St. Louis, Mo.: The Sporting News.Google Scholar
  23. Schacter, S., Hood, D.C., Andreassen, P., & Gerin, W. (1986). Aggregate variables in psychology and economics: Dependence and the stock market. In B. Gilad & S. Kaish (Eds.),Handbook of behavioral economics (Vol. B, pp. 237–272). London: JAI Press Inc.Google Scholar
  24. Shaffer, H.J., & Gambino, B. (1989). The epistemology of “addictive disease”: Gambling as predicament.Journal of Gambling Behavior, 5, 211–229.Google Scholar
  25. Sloan, D., & Zesch, S. (Eds.). (1989).The sporting news official baseball guide. St. Louis, Mo.: The Sporting News.Google Scholar
  26. Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1971). The belief in the “law of small numbers.”Psychological Bulletin, 76, 105–110.Google Scholar
  27. Wagenaar, W.A. (1970). Subjective randomness and the capacity to generate information. In A.F. Sanders (Ed.),Attention and performance III, Acta Psychologica,33, 233–242.Google Scholar
  28. Wagenaar, W.A. (1988).Paradoxes of gambling behavior. London: Erlbaum.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Human Sciences Press, Inc. 1992

Authors and Affiliations

  • Gordon Wood
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of PsychologyMichigan State UniversityEast Lansing

Personalised recommendations