Probability estimation in poker: A qualified success for unaided judgment

Poker players make strategic decisions on the basis of imperfect information, which are informed by their assessment of the probability they will hold the best set of cards among all players at the conclusion of the hand. Exact mental calculations of this probability are impossible—therefore, players must use judgment to estimate their chances. In three studies, 69 moderately experienced poker players estimated the probability of obtaining the best cards among all players, based on the limited information that is known in the early stages of a hand. Although several of the conditions typically associated with well‐calibrated judgment did not apply, players' judgments were generally accurate. The correlation between judged and true probabilities was r > .8 for over five‐sixths of the participants, and when judgments were averaged across players and within hands this correlation was .96. Players slightly overestimated their chance of obtaining the best cards, mainly where this probability was low to moderate (<.7). Probability estimates were slightly too strongly related to the strength of the two cards that a player holds (known only to themselves), and insufficiently influenced by the number of opponents. Seemingly, players show somewhat insufficient regard for the cards that other players could be holding and the potential for opponents to acquire a strong hand. The results show that even when judgment heuristics are used to good effect in a complex probability estimation task, predictable errors can still be observed at the margins of performance. Copyright © 2009 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

What's My Motivation? Video Games and Interpretative Performance

The interpretation of character motivations is a crucial part of the understanding of many narratives, including those found in video games. This interpretation can be complicated in video games by the player performing the role of a player‐character within the game narrative. Such performance finds the player making choices for the character and also interpreting the resulting character actions and their effect on the game's narrative. This can lead to interpretative difficulties for game narratives and their players: if a decision to act is made by the player, is it that the player's own imaginative reasons for acting warrant some narrative interpretations and exclude others? To answer this I argue that we need to investigate (a) the interactive ontology of video game narratives, (b) the notion of game playing as interpretative performance, and (c) the player‐character, an artifact through which performance is focused in narrative games. Doing so shows there to be at least two problems with the notion of the correct interpretation of narrative games. Neither of these problems entirely negates the normativity of game narratives, however, and so players are left with the problem of how they might decide which of the possible playings are warranted. I end by making some practical suggestions for the thoughtful and narratively interested game player.     

A Cognitive Model of Dynamic Cooperation With Varied Interdependency Information

We analyze the dynamics of repeated interaction of two players in the Prisoner's Dilemma (PD) under various levels of interdependency information and propose an instance‐based learning cognitive model (IBL‐PD) to explain how cooperation emerges over time. Six hypotheses are tested regarding how a player accounts for an opponent's outcomes: the selfish hypothesis suggests ignoring information about the opponent and utilizing only the player's own outcomes; the extreme fairness hypothesis weighs the player's own and the opponent's outcomes equally; the moderate fairness hypothesis weighs the opponent's outcomes less than the player's own outcomes to various extents; the linear increasing hypothesis increasingly weighs the opponent's outcomes at a constant rate with repeated interactions; the hyperbolic discounting hypothesis increasingly and nonlinearly weighs the opponent's outcomes over time; and the dynamic expectations hypothesis dynamically adjusts the weight a player gives to the opponent's outcomes, according to the gap between the expected and the actual outcomes in each interaction. When players lack explicit feedback about their opponent's choices and outcomes, results are consistent with the selfish hypothesis; however, when this information is made explicit, the best predictions result from the dynamic expectations hypothesis.     

The Effects of Final-Offer Arbitration on the Performance of Major League Baseball Players: A Test of Equity Theory

This study examined potential motivational processes of major league baseball players participating in final-offer arbitration. For baseball players, finaloffer arbitration entails both the player and the team management submitting a nonnegotiable salary figure to an impartial arbitrator. Based on the evidence proferred by the respective parties, the arbitrator adopts either the player's or team's salary figure as the player's compensation for the upcoming season. Using an equity theory perspective, we found support for the prediction that postarbitration player performance was linked to the arbitrator's decision and to the discrepancy between the player's salary request and the team's salary offer. The study's results were discussed in terms of general implications for equity-theory research.     

Justifying Optimistic Predictions With Minimally Diagnostic Information Under Conditions of Outcome Dependency

Participants in 2 studies received information varying in diagnosticity about another person whom they were motivated to view positively or negatively. In Study 1, participants' chances of winning a prize depended on whether another player won or lost an 11-trial game. Although estimates of this player's chances of winning were identical prior to the game, participants who wanted him to win were more optimistic than those who wanted him to lose after he was said to have won the first trial. Predictions following later trials also showed evidence of motivation, but only when participants had not made pregame predictions. Ratings after individual trials were also sensitive to whether the yoked player won or lost. In Study 2, participants received information that did or did not relate to the probable performance of their partner, opponent, or a control target in an upcoming creativity game. After receiving the information, participants rated their opponent more negatively than they did the control target, regardless of information diagnosticity, and despite the fact that participants acknowledged the difference in diagnosticity. Evidently, when seeking evidence for optimistic predictions, people may apply different standards to minimally diagnostic information depending on its favorability, despite understanding the information's low utility.     

The Russian Cards Problem

Suppose we have a stack of cards that is divided over some players. For certain distributions of cards it is possible to communicate your hand of cards to another player by public announcements, without yet another player learning any of your cards. A solution to this problem consists of some sequence of announcements and is called an exchange. It is called a direct exchange if it consists of (the minimum of) two announcements only. The announcements in an exchange have a special form: they are safe communications, an interesting new form of update. Certain unsafe communications turn out to be unsuccessful updates. A communication is a public announcement that is known to be true. Each communication may be about a set of alternative card deals only, and even about a set of alternatives to the communicating player's own hand only. We list the direct exchanges for a deal of seven cards where the two players holding three cards communicate their hands to each other. Our work may be applicable to the design of cryptographic protocols.     

A Description–Experience Gap in Social Interactions: Information about Interdependence and Its Effects on Cooperation

In social interactions, decision makers are often unaware of their interdependence with others, precluding the realization of shared long‐term benefits. In an experiment, pairs of participants played an Iterated Prisoner's Dilemma under various conditions involving differing levels of interdependence information. Each pair was assigned to one of four conditions: “No‐Info” players saw their own actions and outcomes, but were not told that they interacted with another person; “Min‐Info” players knew they interacted with another person but still without seeing the other's actions or outcomes; “Mid‐Info” players discovered the other's actions and outcomes as they were revealed over time; and “Max‐Info” players were also shown a complete payoff matrix mapping actions to outcomes from the outset and throughout the game. With higher levels of interdependence information, we found increased individual cooperation and mutual cooperation, driven by increased reciprocating cooperation (in response to a counterpart's cooperation). Furthermore, joint performance and satisfaction were higher for pairs with more information. We discuss how awareness of interdependence may encourage cooperative behavior in real‐world interactions. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Being in the Game: Effects of Avatar Choice and Point of View on Psychophysiological Responses During Play

The innovative features of multi-player computer games offer compelling opportunities for self-representation during interactions, and the ways in which these avatars are chosen and manipulated may change interactive experiences. This study investigated the effects of avatar choice (choice vs. no choice) and visual point of view (POV; first-person vs. third-person) on the physiological arousal and subjective evaluations of game experiences. A 2 (Avatar Choice, No Avatar Choice) × 2 (first-person POV, third-person POV) × 2 (female players, male players) mixed-design experiment was conducted (N = 22). The results demonstrated that being able to pick the character that will represent the player in the game leads to greater arousal, especially for males. Visual POVs alone did not affect the game player's arousal, but moderated the effect of avatar choice on the game player's heart rates. Avatar choice produced a more pronounced effect in the third-person POV (where the “camera” was located behind the avatar) in which avatar choice was visually more reinforced than in the first-person POV (where the “camera” was the eyes of the avatar). The results also revealed that the gender of the game player was a significant factor in game play experience. The results suggest theoretical implications of video game self-representation and effects on game player's psychophysiological responses.     

The Use of Role‐Player Prompts in Assessment Center Exercises

So far, a substantial amount of assessment center (AC) studies have aimed to improve the quality of the AC method by focusing on the assessors. However, systematic studies about the role‐player in AC exercises are nonexistent. This is surprising as the role‐player might serve as a key figure for consistently evoking job‐relevant behavior across candidates. Therefore, this study focused on the ‘role’ of role‐players in ACs. We examined the effects of instructing role‐players to use prompts among 233 candidates. Results suggest that role‐players are able to use prompts and that their negative impact on candidates' reactions is negligible. In addition, some AC dimensions (problem solving and interpersonal sensitivity) were better measured when role‐players used prompts. No effects on interrater reliability were found.     

Socially Constructed Technology

The concepts of omniscience and omnipotence are defined in 2 × 2 ordinal games, and implications for the optimal play of these games, when one player is omniscient or omnipotent and the other player is aware of his omniscience or omnipotence, are derived. Intuitively, omniscience allows a player to predict the strategy choice of an opponent in advance of play, and omnipotence allows a player, after initial strategy choices are made, to continue to move after the other player is forced to stop. Omniscience and its awareness by an opponent may hurt both players, but this problem can always be rectified if the other player is omniscient. This pathology can also be rectified if at least one of the two players is omnipotent, which can override the effects of omniscience. In some games, one player's omnipotence ‐ versus the other's ‐ helps him, whereas in other games the outcome induced does not depend on which player is omnipotent. Deducing whether a player is superior (omniscient or omnipotent) from the nature of his game playing alone raises several problems, however, suggesting the difficulty of devising tests for detecting superior ability in games.     

Players,Characters, and the Gamer's Dilemma

Is there any difference between playing video games in which the player's character commits murder and video games in which the player's character commits pedophilic acts? Morgan Luck's “Gamer's Dilemma” has established this question as a puzzle concerning notions of permissibility and harm. We propose that a fruitful alternative way to approach the question is through an account of aesthetic engagement. We develop an alternative to the dominant account of the relationship between players and the actions of their characters, and argue that the ethical difference between so‐called “virtual murder” and “virtual pedophilia” is to be understood in terms of the fiction‐making resources available to players. We propose that the relevant considerations for potential players to navigate concern (1) attempting to make certain characters intelligible, and (2) using aspects of oneself as resources for homomorphic representation.     

Investigating the illusion of control in mildly depressed and nondepressed individuals during video-poker play

Cognitive fallacies, such as the illusion of control, and psychological disorders, such as depression, may perpetuate gambling and thus contribute to problem gambling (e.g., R. Ladouceur, C. Sylvan, C. Boutin, & C. Doucet, 2002). Gender differences may exist across these variables (e.g., N. M. Petry, 2005). The authors investigated these possibilities by recruiting mildly depressed and nondepressed individuals to play jacks or better, 5-card draw, video poker. Across three poker sessions, participants were given (a) no choice of which cards to play, (b) information on the best cards to play but control over which cards were played, or (c) no information and complete control over which cards were played. The total amount of money gambled increased as control over the game decreased, but this result correlated with an increase in the rate of play. Depressed and nondepressed participants did not differ in how they gambled, but men gambled significantly more and sometimes made more mistakes during play than did women. These results question the role of the illusion of control and depression in perpetuating gambling. They also suggest that providing players information about which cards to play may indirectly promote gambling and provide insight as to why men are more prone to suffer from gambling problems than are women.     

There's no “I” in team: Effects of cooperative video games on cooperative behavior

The present research tests the idea that playing a team‐player video game in which players work together as teammates and assist each other in achieving a common goal increases cooperative behavior toward a new partner. In fact, relative to a single‐player mode, cooperatively playing a video game increased cooperation in a mixed‐motive decision dilemma task. Because the players were exposed to the same video game content in both experimental conditions, the effect on cooperative behavior can only be accounted for by the different way the game was played. Mediation analyses revealed that cooperative team play promoted feelings of cohesion, which activated trust (i.e., the expectation of reciprocal cooperation), which in turn increased cooperative behavior. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

The contagious impact of playing violent video games on aggression: Longitudinal evidence

Meta-analyses have shown that violent video game play increases aggression in the player. The present research suggests that violent video game play also affects individuals with whom the player is connected. A longitudinal study (N = 980) asked participants to report on their amount of violent video game play and level of aggression as well as how they perceive their friends and examined the association between the participant's aggression and their friends’ amount of violent video game play. As hypothesized, friends’ amount of violent video game play at Time 1 was associated with the participant's aggression at Time 2 even when controlling for the impact of the participant's aggression at Time 1. Mediation analyses showed that friends’ aggression at Time 1 accounted for the impact of friends’ amount of violent video game play at Time 1 on the participant's aggression at Time 2. These findings suggest that increased aggression in video game players has an impact on the player's social network.     

Decide like Lionel Messi! The impact of regulatory focus on divergent thinking in sports

According to Higgins, the regulatory focus theory states that in terms of motivational information processing, it makes a difference whether people have a promotion or prevention focus. A focus on aspirations is labeled as promotion focus, whereas a focus on responsibility is called prevention focus. In our study, the theory will be applied to the area of sport decision making. We showed that soccer players make different decisions in a sport‐specific divergent‐thinking task depending on their regulatory focus (promotion vs. prevention). Promotion‐framed athletes were able to produce more original, flexible, and adequate solutions than prevention‐framed athletes. Theoretical and practical implications for sport psychology are discussed.     

How Information Availability Interacts with Visual Attention during Judgment and Decision Tasks

Decisions in front of a supermarket shelf probably involve a mix of visually available information and associated memories—and interactions between those two. Several cognitive processes, such as decision making, search, and various judgments, are therefore likely to co‐occur, and each process will influence visual attention. We conducted two eye‐tracking experiments capturing parts of these features by having participants make either judgments or decisions concerning products that had been previously encoded. Half the time, participants made their choices with full information about the available products and half the time with crucial task‐relevant information removed. By comparing participants' use of visual attention during decisions and search‐based and memory‐based judgments, we can better understand how visual attention is differently employed between tasks and how it depends on the visual environment. We found that participants' visual attention during decisions is sensitive to evaluations already made during encoding and strongly characterized by preferential looking to the options later to be chosen. When the task environment is rich enough, participants engage in advanced integrative visual behavior and improve their decision quality. In contrast, visual attention during judgments made on the same products reflects a search‐like behavior when all information is available and a more focused type of visual behavior when information is removed. Our findings contribute not only to the literature on how visual attention is used during decision making but also to methodological questions concerning how to measure and identify task‐specific features of visual attention in ecologically valid ways. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Information and the complementarity game

Complementarity games are explorative games between two players. The deterministic rules of the game are known to both players. The first player freely chooses among a finite number of states of the game but tells nobody of this decision. The second player accesses the game only by primitive, symbolic input‐output interfaces. The task of the second player is to find out the unknown state by input‐output experiments. The logic resulting from this scenario resembles‐ quantum logic in many aspects. It is the empirical logic of choice for virtual realities.