Theory and Decision

, Volume 68, Issue 4, pp 445–462

The hot hand belief and the gambler’s fallacy in investment decisions under risk

Article

Abstract

We conduct experiments to analyze investment behavior in decisions under risk. Subjects can bet on the outcomes of a series of coin tosses themselves, rely on randomized ‘experts’, or choose a risk-free alternative. We observe that subjects who rely on the randomized experts pick those who were successful in the past, showing behavior consistent with the hot hand belief. Obviously the term ‘expert’ suffices to attract some subjects. For those who decide on their own, we find behavior consistent with the gambler’s fallacy, as the frequency of betting on heads (tails) decreases after streaks of heads (tails).

Keywords

Hot hand belief Gambler’s fallacy Experimental economics Decision making under risk 

JEL Classification

C91 D81 G10 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Ayton P., Fischer I. (2004) The hot hand fallacy and the gambler’s fallacy: two faces of subjective randomness?. Memory and Cognition 32: 1369–1378Google Scholar
  2. Bachelier L. (1900) Théorie de la Spéculation. Gauthier Villars, ParisGoogle Scholar
  3. Bar-Eli M., Avugos S., Raab M. (2006) Twenty years of “hot hand” research: review and critique. Psychology of Sport and Exercise 7: 525–553CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Carhart M.M. (1997) On persistence in mutual fund performance. The Journal of Finance 52: 57–82CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Caruso, E. M., & Epley, N. (2004). Hot hands and cool machines: perceived intentionality in the predictions of streaks. Poster session presented at the 5th Annual Meeting of the Society for Personality and Social Psychology, Austin, TX, USA.Google Scholar
  6. Croson R., Sundali J. (2005) The Gambler’s fallacy and the Hot hand: empirical data from casinos. The Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 30(3): 195–209CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Dohmen, T. J., Falk, A., Huffman, D., Schupp, J., Sunde, U., & Wagner, G. G. (2006). Individual risk attitudes: New evidence from a large, representative, experimentally-validated survey. CEPR Discussion Paper No. 5517.Google Scholar
  8. Estes W.K. (1964) Probability learning. In: Melton A.W.(eds) Categories of human learning. Academic Press, New York, LondonGoogle Scholar
  9. Fama E.F. (1970) Efficient capital markets: A review of theory and empirical work. The Journal of Finance 45: 383–417CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Fama E.F. (1991) Efficient capital markets II. The Journal of Finance 66: 1575–1616CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Fischbacher U. (2007) z-Tree: Zurich toolbox for ready-made economic experiments. Experimental Economics 10: 171–178CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Jensen M.C. (1968) The performance of mutual funds in the period 1945–1964. The Journal of Finance 23: 389–416CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Jörgensen, C. B. (2006). Field evidence on the law of small numbers. Working Paper.Google Scholar
  14. Kahneman D., Tversky A. (1979) Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica 47: 263–291CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Malkiel B.G. (2005) Reflections on the efficient market hypothesis: 30 years later. The Financial Review 40: 1–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Nickerson R.S. (2004) Cognition and chance: The psychology of probabilistic reasoning. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Inc, Mahwah, NJGoogle Scholar
  17. Odean T. (1998) Are investors reluctant to realize their losses?. The Journal of Finance 53: 1775–1798CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Rabin M. (2002) Inference by believers in the law of small numbers. The Quarterly Journal of Economics 117: 775–816CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Rapoport A., Budescu D. (1997) Randomization in individual choice behavior. Psychology: Review 104: 603–617CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Rieskamp J. (2006) Positive and negative regency effects in retirement saving decisions. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied 12: 233–250CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Shapira Z., Venezia I. (2001) Patterns of behavior of professionally managed and independent investors. Journal of Banking & Finance 25: 1573–1587CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Sirri E.R., Tufano P. (1998) Costly search and mutual fund flows. The Journal of Finance 53: 1589–1622CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Sundali J., Croson R. (2006) Biases in casino betting: The hot hand and the Gambler’s fallacy. Judgment and Decision Making 1: 1–12Google Scholar
  24. Tversky A., Kahneman D. (1971) Belief in the Law of Small Numbers. Psychological Bulletin 76: 105–110CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC. 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jürgen Huber
    • 1
  • Michael Kirchler
    • 1
  • Thomas Stöckl
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Banking and FinanceUniversity of InnsbruckInnsbruckAustria

Personalised recommendations