Does Framing the Hot Hand Belief Change Decision-Making Behavior in Volleyball?

Markus Raab,Clare Macmahon

doi:10.1080/02701367.2014.991437

Abstract

Purpose: Previous discussions of the hot hand belief, wherein athletes believe that they have a greater chance of scoring after 2 or 3 hits (successes) compared with 2 or 3 misses, have focused on whether this is the case within game statistics. Researchers have argued that the perception of the hot hand in random sequences is a bias of the cognitive system. Yet most have failed to explore the impact of framing on the stability of the belief and the behavior based on it. Method: The authors conducted 2 studies that manipulated the frame of a judgment task. In Study 1, framing was manipulated via instructions in a playmaker allocation paradigm in volleyball. In Study 2, the frame was manipulated by presenting videos for allocation decisions from either the actor or observer perspective. Results: Both manipulations changed the hot hand belief and sequential choices. We found in both studies that the belief in continuation of positive or negative streaks is nonlinear and allocations to the same player after 3 successive hits are reduced. Conclusions: The authors argue that neither the hot hand belief nor hot hand behavior is stable, but rather, both are sensitive to decision frames. The results can inform coaches on the importance of how to provide information to athletes.

Highlights

Previous discussions of the hot hand belief, wherein athletes believe that they have a greater chance of scoring after two or three hits compared to two or three misses, have focused on whether this is the case within game statistics
Hot hand belief was measured after each condition and framing effects on allocation decisions were described as mean allocation per condition as well as the length of allocations continuation to the hot hand player after sequences of one to four consecutive hits
When we analysed the sequential choice strategies rather than average behavior, we found that choices based on a 1-back strategy—such as win–stay, lose–shift— differed depending on participants’

Summary

Introduction

Previous discussions of the hot hand belief, wherein athletes believe that they have a greater chance of scoring after two or three hits (successes) compared to two or three misses, have focused on whether this is the case within game statistics. Results: Both manipulations changed the hot hand belief and sequential choices. We found in both studies that the belief in continuation of positive or negative streaks is non-linear and allocations to the same player after three successive hits are reduced. Even in cases of independence of sequentially observed outcomes, people tend to behave as if there is a greater chance of one outcome occurring after the other outcome has occurred three times, such as believing red will come up in roulette after black has come up three times—a belief known as the gambler’s fallacy (Ayton & Fischer, 2004). The majority of studies have shown that the sequences are independent, among them a study by Gilovich, Vallone, and Tversky (1985), a narrative review by Bar-Eli, Avugos, and Raab (2006), and a meta-analysis (Avugos, Köppen, Czienkowski, Raab, & Bar-Eli, 2012)

Methods

Results

Conclusion