Abstract
Two studies were conducted to examine the relation between the gambler’s fallacy (GF) and attentional processes associated with inhibition of return (IOR). In Study 1, participants completed rapid aiming movements to equally probable targets presented to the left and right. They also completed a gambling protocol in which they bet on the illumination of either target. Consistent with the IOR phenomenon, participants were slower to initiate their movements on trial N + 1 when the target was the same as trial N. Participants with more pronounced IOR were more likely to switch betting behavior after a win than participants with a smaller index. This betting behavior was also related to a GF index measured by a questionnaire. In Study 2, participants performed both the aiming task and the betting task with a partner. Each participant performed two trials before ceding to the partner. Thus we were able to examine IOR and betting behavior as a function of the participant’s own previous trial and their partner’s previous trial. The IOR effect was robust both within and between-participants. Participants were more likely to maintain their bet following an unsuccessful outcome regardless of whether it was their own outcome or their partner’s outcome. This type of betting behavior is consistent with the GF. Individual IOR scores were a reliable predictor of betting behavior and the questionnaire was also successful in predicting behavior. In addition, the within-person IOR indices covaried with the GF index derived from the questionnaire. In summary, there appears to be a relation between IOR and the GF. We suggest that early humans developed specialized attentional systems to deal with non-random environmental contingencies, and that the automatic processes associated with these systems are sometimes maladaptive in artificial environments in which the same contingencies do not hold.
Highlights
Over 50 years ago Heider (1958) suggested that one of the most important prevailing characteristics of human nature is a strong motivation to exert individual control over a personal environment
Study 1 was conducted to determine whether the behaviors associated with the expression of the gambler’s fallacy (GF) are consistent with those observed with the inhibition of return (IOR) phenomenon
This between-person IOR effect is consistent with the idea that the mirror neuron system is important in a number of areas that involve interpersonal interaction
Summary
Over 50 years ago Heider (1958) suggested that one of the most important prevailing characteristics of human nature is a strong motivation to exert individual control over a personal environment In most cases, this ambition of control is considered a positive human trait and is even cited as desirable in the fostering of mental health (e.g., Taylor and Brown, 1988). Not all elements of life are subject to personal control One example of this occurs when random events govern outcome, as is the case in games of chance. A search of the literature has yet to uncover any empirical data to support this observation, the effect is considered to be quite robust, suggesting an innate desire to maintain a degree of control over a random outcome This desire to exert control over external events is not limited to movements.
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary 
Published Version (
Free)
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
