Working Papers

Seria wydawnicza WNE WORKING PAPERS prowadzona jest przez WNE UW od 2008 r. i jak dotąd opublikowano w niej ponad 400 prac.

Seria WNE Working Papers służy szybkiemu upowszechnianiu wyników badań prowadzonych na Wydziale Nauk Ekonomicznych UW. Publikowane tu teksty mają charakter wersji roboczych (pre-printów): mogą być uzupełniane lub poprawiane w miarę postępu prac nad tekstem i procesu wydawniczego. Prezentujemy aktualną wersję udostępnioną przez autorów, opatrzoną datą oraz identyfikatorami DOI/ISSN – co ułatwia jej cytowanie i śledzenie kolejnych iteracji. Każdy dokument zachowuje pełne prawa autorskie swoich twórców, a w przypadku późniejszych zmian, autorzy mogą w dowolnym momencie zamieścić zaktualizowany plik lub wskazać miejsce ostatecznego wydania.

Do serii WORKING PAPERS przyjmowane są artykuły pracowników naukowych WNE UW oraz publikacje z konferencji organizowanych na WNE UW. Artykuły powinny dotyczyć ekonomii, mieć charakter oryginalnych prac badawczych, nie być wcześniej publikowane. Przyjmowane są wyłącznie teksty w języku angielskim.

Prace prosimy przesyłać e-mailem na adres: ZH~[u%i]2ybo-I0Y|\@r_/Mvm8n]#[R4qG_pQNnjHb{`'Hbe2jho.lv&[

Prosimy przesyłać dwa pliki:

(1) główny tekst bez podania tytułu artykułu oraz autorów (plik DOC/DOCX) oraz

(2) stronę tytułową zawierającą: tytuł opracowania, autorów oraz ich afiliację (plik DOC/DOCX). 

Przed przesłaniem tekstu prosimy zapoznać się z szczegółowymi wymogami edycyjnymi.

Redaktorem wydawniczym serii Working Papers jest dr Maciej Bukowski.

Ilość wyników 4

WP(24/2021)372. Stability of the Representativeness Heuristic: Further Evidence from Choices Between Lottery Tickets

Autorzy: Krawczyk Michał, Rachubik Joanna
The representativeness heuristic (RH) proposes that people expect even a small sample to have similar characteristics to its parent population. One domain in which it appears to operate is the preference for combinations of numbers on lottery tickets…

WP372. Stability of the Representativeness Heuristic: Further Evidence from Choices Between Lottery Tickets

The representativeness heuristic (RH) proposes that people expect even a small sample to have similar characteristics to its parent population. One domain in which it appears to operate is the preference for combinations of numbers on lottery tickets: most players seem to avoid very characteristic, “unrepresentative” combinations, e.g., only containing very low numbers. Likewise, many players may avoid betting on a recently drawn combination because it would seem particularly improbable to be drawn again. We confirm both of these tendencies in a lab experiment and corroborate their external validity in two field experiments. However, we only find a weak link between these two choices: the same people do not necessarily exhibit the two biases. In this sense, there is little consistent manifestation of the RH across different tasks at the individual level. Nevertheless, there are some links related to rationality across the two choices – people who are willing to forgo a monetary payment to get the preferred ticket in one task are also willing to do it in the other. We find such preferences to be related to the misperception of probabilities and providing intuitive, incorrect answers in the Cognitive Reflection Test.


Krawczyk Michał, Rachubik Joanna
Decision making under risk Lottery choice Perception of randomness Number preferences in lotteries Representativeness heuristic

WP(29/2020)335. Lottery "strategies": monetizing players' behavioral biases

Autorzy: Kachurka Raman, Krawczyk Michał
The popularity of lotteries around the world is puzzling. In this paper, we study one factor, which might contribute to this phenomenon, namely lottery "strategies" that could allegedly improve players' odds. In an online survey of lott…

WP335. Lottery "strategies": monetizing players' behavioral biases

The popularity of lotteries around the world is puzzling. In this paper, we study one factor, which might contribute to this phenomenon, namely lottery "strategies" that could allegedly improve players' odds. In an online survey of lottery players we find that such strategies are popular and their use is related to more frequent lottery play and a number of personality traits and beliefs about gambling. Systematically searching for websites and books, we amass the largest dataset of lottery strategies in existence. We subsequently analyze their descriptions, categorize them, and investigate how they exploit their target audience's behavioral biases, including the illusion of control, authority bias, magical thinking, the illusion of correlation, gambler's fallacy, hot hand fallacy, representativeness heuristic, availability heuristic, and regret aversion. We find that the strategies maintain gamblers' (false) beliefs about the possibility of controlling lottery results. This exploratory work contributes to a deeper understanding of (problem) gambling and lays the foundation for the design of experiments testing how the specific features of different strategies may interact with beliefs and trigger (excessive) lottery play.


Kachurka Raman, Krawczyk Michał
decision making under risk lottery strategy illusion of control

WP(3/2020)309. What do lab experiments tell us about the real world? The case of lotteries with extreme payoffs

Autorzy: Kachurka Roman, Krawczyk Michał, Rachubik Joanna
In this study, we conduct a laboratory experiment in which the subjects make choices between real-world lottery tickets typically purchased by lottery customers. In this way, we are able to reliably offer extremely high potential payoffs, something r…

WP309. What do lab experiments tell us about the real world? The case of lotteries with extreme payoffs

In this study, we conduct a laboratory experiment in which the subjects make choices between real-world lottery tickets typically purchased by lottery customers. In this way, we are able to reliably offer extremely high potential payoffs, something rarely possible in economic experiments. In a between-subject design, we separately manipulate a number of features that distinguish the situation faced by the customers in the field and by subjects in typical laboratory experiments. We also have the unique opportunity to compare our data to actual sales data provided by the operator of the lottery. Overall, we find the distributions to be highly similar (meaning high external validity of the laboratory experiment). The only manipulation that makes a major difference is that when the probabilities of winning specific amounts are explicitly provided (which is not the case in the field), choices shift towards options with lower payoff variance. We also find that standard laboratory measures of risk posture fail to explain our subjects' behavior in the main task.


Kachurka Roman, Krawczyk Michał, Rachubik Joanna
Decision making under risk External validity Longshot bias Perception of randomness Number preferences in lotteries

WP(11/2019)296. The limitations of the representativeness heuristic: further evidence from choices between lottery tickets

Autorzy: Krawczyk Michał, Rachubik Joanna
The representativeness heuristic (RH) proposes that people expect even a small sample to have similar characteristics to the parent population. One domain in which it appears to operate is the preference for combinations of numbers on lottery tickets…

WP296. The limitations of the representativeness heuristic: further evidence from choices between lottery tickets

The representativeness heuristic (RH) proposes that people expect even a small sample to have similar characteristics to the parent population. One domain in which it appears to operate is the preference for combinations of numbers on lottery tickets: most players seem to avoid very characteristic, "unrepresentative" combinations, e.g. only containing very low numbers. Likewise, most players may avoid betting on a combination that was drawn recently, because it would seem particularly improbable to be drawn again. We confirm both of these tendencies in two field experiments, building upon Krawczyk and Rachubik (2019, KR19). However, we find no link between these two choices: it is not the same people that show the two biases. In this sense, the RH does not organize the data well. Nevertheless, there are some links related to rationality across the two choices – people who are willing to forgo a monetary payment in order to get the preferred ticket in one task are also willing to do it in the other. We find such preference to be related with misperception of probabilities and providing intuitive, incorrect answers in the Cognitive Reflection Test.


Krawczyk Michał, Rachubik Joanna
Decision making under risk Gambler’s fallacy Lottery choice Perception of randomness Number preferences in lotteries Representativeness heuristic
  • 1