Table 2 Pearson correlation (r) results of linear regression models for each participant group (M, F, C), score category, and assessed decision-making tendency as independent variable.

From: How cognitive biases affect winning probability perception in beach volleyball experts

 

Optimism

Pessimism

Confirmation Bias

M

F

C

M

F

C

M

F

C

D-3

0.17*

0.32‡

0.30†

− 0.28‡

− 0.31‡

− 0.07

− 0.07

0.46‡

0.35‡

D-2

0.20†

0.12

0.43‡

− 0.24‡

− 0.10

− 0.10

− 0.09

0.27†

0.39‡

D0

0.16

0.08

0.22

− 0.17

− 0.05

0.10

0.01

0.10

0.23

D+2

0.06

0.23†

− 0.09

− 0.14*

− 0.09

− 0.16

0.05

0.18*

− 0.04

D+3

0.00

0.25‡

− 0.21†

− 0.01

− 0.13

− 0.00

0.10

0.19†

− 0.10

 

Sunk Cost Fallacy

LOT-R

M

F

C

M

F

C

D-3

− 0.03

0.15

− 0.00

0.25‡

0.33‡

0.26†

D-2

0.01

− 0.03

0.10

0.25‡

0.11

0.37‡

D0

0.02

− 0.05

0.13

0.19

0.07

0.09

D+2

0.14*

− 0.01

0.09

0.11

0.16*

0.04

D+3

0.09

− 0.01

0.07

0.01

0.19†

− 0.15*

  1. In bold, an asterisk (*, p < .05), dagger (†, p < .01), or double dagger (‡, p < .001) indicate significant Pearson correlations. For trailing scenarios (D-3 and D-2), a negative correlation indicates that higher values of the independent variable led to better estimates, as participants tended to overestimate the SWP. For leading scenarios (D+2 and D+3),a negative correlation suggests more estimation discrepancy or higher underestimation if the independent variable is higher, as participants in our survey predominantly underestimated the SWP.
Back to article page