Joey Coco is a gambler and a practitioner of Santeria. When he plays roulette he

Question

Joey Coco is a gambler and a practitioner of Santeria. When he plays roulette he always plays his lucky number, 37. One day when placing a bet the dealer asked him if he said 38, and he responded that now he has to play both 37 and 38 because the dealer may have jinxed him. By using this miscommunication as a sign of what number will occur in a random drawing Joey has exhibited which logical fallacy that may challenge market efficiency?

The gambler’s fallacy

*Representativeness

Conservatism

Numerical symbology

The gambler’s fallacy

*Representativeness

Conservatism

Numerical symbology

Conservatism

Numerical symbology

The gambler’s fallacy

*Representativeness

Conservatism

Numerical symbology

The gambler’s fallacy

*Representativeness

Conservatism

Numerical symbology

Conservatism

Numerical symbology

Explanation / Answer

Gambler's fallacy is about thinking a result will not occur in the future because it has occurred many times in the past. This isnt the case here so it cant be the answer.

Conservatism is sticking to the same old number and not trying anything new which is not what Joey did, he gambled on a new number. So this cant be the answer.

Numerical symbology is about considering each number having different meaning. Although Joey said that the dealer jinxed him, he dint mean so, that was just an excuse to gamble on the extra number.

Representativeness is trying to find the outcome by the behaviour of the incomes. When dealer asked if Joey had told 38, Joey understood that dealer was confirming as 38 was the lucky number that day. So, based on dealer's behaviour, Joey went ahead and gambled on 38.

So representativeness is the answer.

Related Questions

Navigate

• Browse (All)
• Browse J
• Subjects

Integrity-first tutoring: explanations and feedback only — we do not complete graded work. Learn more.