首页> 外文期刊>Economic inquiry >MARCH MADNESS? UNDERREACTION TO HOT AND COLD HANDS IN NCAA BASKETBALL
【24h】

MARCH MADNESS? UNDERREACTION TO HOT AND COLD HANDS IN NCAA BASKETBALL

机译:疯狂三月?对NCAA篮球的冷热手反应不足

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

The hot hand bias is the widely documented bias toward overestimation of positive serial correlation in sequential events. We test for the hot hand bias in a novel real-world context, the seeding of National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) basketball tournament teams. That is, we examine whether teams that perform relatively well heading into March Madness are seeded too high, and/or teams with poor recent performance are seeded too low. The seeds are determined by a 10-member committee that only has implicit incentives, but these incentives are still substantial as the committee's decisions are highly scrutinized by the media, fans, and other stakeholders. We find that, contra the hot hand bias, the committee underreacts to signals of momentum heading into the NCAA tournament. Various results indicate this behavior can be attributed to both: (1) inattention to relatively detailed information indicating momentum; and (2) under-appreciation of the predictive value of this information. Betting markets incorporate this information efficiently, but neglect some additional information that is predictive of winning NCAA tournament games but not of beating the spread. We note that the NCAA tournament has been highly popular and lucrative partly due to the madness (high frequency of wins by lower-seeded teams), which the bias we document contributes to, making the persistence of bias less surprising. (JEL D83, L83)
机译:热手偏见是广泛记录的偏向于高估连续事件中正序列相关性的偏见。我们在新颖的现实环境中测试热手偏见,这是美国大学田径协会(NCAA)篮球比赛队的种子。也就是说,我们检查进入“疯狂三月”的团队表现相对较好的种子是否过高,和/或近期表现较差的团队的种子过低。种子由一个只有10名成员的委员会决定,该委员会只有隐性的激励措施,但是由于委员会的决策受到了媒体,粉丝和其他利益相关者的严格审查,这些激励措施仍然很重要。我们发现,与热手偏见相反,委员会对进入NCAA锦标赛的动量信号反应不足。各种结果表明,这种行为可归因于以下两个方面:(1)对表示动量的相对详细的信息不注意; (2)对该信息的预测价值认识不足。博彩市场有效地吸收了此信息,但忽略了一些其他信息,这些信息可以预测赢得NCAA锦标赛,但无法击败点差。我们注意到NCAA锦标赛非常受欢迎且利润丰厚,部分原因是疯狂(低种子球队赢得比赛的频率很高),这种偏见是我们造成的原因,这种偏执的持续性也就不足为奇了。 (JEL D83,L83)

著录项

  • 来源
    《Economic inquiry》 |2018年第3期|1724-1747|共24页
  • 作者

    Stone Daniel F.; Arkes Jeremy;

  • 作者单位

    Bowdoin Coll, Dept Econ, Brunswick, ME 04011 USA;

    Naval Postgrad Sch, Grad Sch Business & Publ Policy, Monterey, CA 93943 USA;

  • 收录信息
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号