The DOI matches its Crossref record; 30 of the 30 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The smart potential behind probability matching
Open accessAbstract
Probability matching is a classic choice anomaly that has been studied extensively. While many approaches assume that it is a cognitive shortcut driven by cognitive limitations, recent literature suggests that it is not a strategy per se, but rather another outcome of people's well-documented misperception of randomness. People search for patterns even in random sequences, which results in probability matching at the outcome level. Previous studies have supported this by the finding that distracting people with a secondary verbal working memory task presumably prevents the pattern search, resulting in more maximizing behavior that is considered more rational. The current paper demonstrates with two experiments that there is actually truth in both accounts. For some participants, probability matching indeed seems to be the result of a cognitive shortcut, a simple "win-stay, lose-shift" strategy, and in one experiment identified these as participants low in working memory capacity. For others, however, a potentially smart pattern search strategy underlies probability matching. These probability matchers (who still look irrational in the absence of patterns) actually have a higher chance of finding a pattern if one exists. Contrary to the almost uniformly negative perception of probability matching, we therefore conclude that there can be a potentially smart strategy behind probability matching.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
PINKER, S. (1999) · Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1111/j.1749-6632.1999.tb08538.x · Cited by 3,738
Working memory span tasks: A methodological review and user’s guide
Conway, A. R. A., Kane, M. J., Bunting, M. F., Hambrick, D. Z., Wilhelm, O., & Engle, R. W. (2005) · Psychonomic Bulletin & Review · doi:10.3758/bf03196772 · Cited by 2,882
An automated version of the operation span task
Unsworth, N., Heitz, R. P., Schrock, J. C., & Engle, R. W. (2005) · Behavior Research Methods · doi:10.3758/bf03192720 · Cited by 1,861
A strategy of win-stay, lose-shift that outperforms tit-for-tat in the Prisoner's Dilemma game
Nowak, M., & Sigmund, K. (1993) · Nature · doi:10.1038/364056a0 · Cited by 1,797
The Hot Hand in Basketball: On the Misperception of Random Sequences
Gilovich, T., Vallone, R., & Tversky, A. (1985) · Cognitive Psychology · doi:10.1016/0010-0285(85)90010-6 · Cited by 1,649
The hot hand fallacy and the gambler’s fallacy: Two faces of subjective randomness?
Ayton, P., & Fischer, I. (2004) · Memory & Cognition · doi:10.3758/bf03206327 · Cited by 482
Negative Consequences of Dichotomizing Continuous Predictor Variables
Irwin, J. R., & McClelland, G. H. (2003) · Journal of Marketing Research · doi:10.1509/jmkr.40.3.366.19237 · Cited by 425
An Economist’s Perspective on Probability Matching
Vulkan, N. (2000) · Journal of Economic Surveys · doi:10.1111/1467-6419.00106 · Cited by 413
Bar‐Hillel, M., & Wagenaar, W. A. (1991) · Advances in Applied Mathematics · doi:10.1016/0196-8858(91)90029-i · Cited by 408
Environments That Make Us Smart: Ecological Rationality
Todd, P. M., & Gigerenzer, G. (2007) · Current Directions in Psychological Science · doi:10.1111/j.1467-8721.2007.00497.x · Cited by 364
Cited by
Sorted by citations
How numeracy influences risk comprehension and medical decision making.
Reyna, V. F., Nelson, W. L., Han, P. K. J., & Dieckmann, N. F. (2009) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/a0017327 · Cited by 1,172
Bayesian just-so stories in psychology and neuroscience.
Bowers, J. S., & Davis, C. J. (2012) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/a0026450 · Cited by 436
Cokely, E. T., & Kelley, C. M. (2009) · Judgment and Decision Making · doi:10.1017/s193029750000067x · Cited by 427
Cognitive control over learning: Creating, clustering, and generalizing task-set structure.
Collins, A. G. E., & Frank, M. J. (2013) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/a0030852 · Cited by 426
A new intuitionism: Meaning, memory, and development in Fuzzy-Trace Theory
Reyna, V. F. (2012) · Judgment and Decision Making · doi:10.1017/s1930297500002291 · Cited by 333
Metadata
- Authors
- Gaissmaier, W., & Schooler, L. J.
- Affiliations
- Max Planck Institute for Human Development (DE)
- Corresponding author
- Gaissmaier, Wolfgang
- Venue
- Cognition
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2008-12
- Volume
- 109
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 416-422
- ISSN
- 0010-0277 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2091318897
- Cited by
- 223
- References
- 30
- Citations by year
- 2026: 9 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 17 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 12 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 16 · 2018: 10 · 2017: 13 · 2016: 13 · 2015: 15 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 29 · 2012: 17
- FWCI
- 5.53
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- nbn-resolving.de
- Locations
- Cognition (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- KOPS (University of Konstanz) (submittedVersion)
- Max Planck Institute for Plasma Physics (submittedVersion)
- Max Planck Digital Library (submittedVersion)
- MPG.PuRe (Max Planck Society) (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- Max-Planck-Institut für Bildungsforschung
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › General Decision Sciences › Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
- Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Experimental Behavioral Economics Studies
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neural and Behavioral Psychology Studies
- Keywords
- probability matching, pattern search, win-stay lose-shift strategy, working memory capacity, cognitive shortcuts, decision-making, rationality
- MeSH terms
- Choice Behavior, Cognition, Data Interpretation, Statistical, Female, Humans, Male, Memory, Memory, Short-Term, Mental Processes, Pattern Recognition, Visual, Photic Stimulation, Probability Learning, Visual Perception, Young Adult
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
