74, p < .0001). Fourth, we examined the 50,300 bets which had already won three NVP-BEZ235 concentration times and checked the result of the bets followed them. We found that 33,871 bets won. The probability of winning went up again to 0.67. In contrast, the bets not having a run of lucky predecessors showed a probability of winning of 0.45. The probability of winning in these two situations was significantly different (Z = 90.63, p < .0001). Fifth, we used the same procedure and took all the 33,871 bets which had already won four times. We checked the result of bets followed these bets. There

were 24,390 bets that won. The probability of winning went up again to 0.72. In contrast, the bets without a run of previous wins showed a probability of winning of only 0.45. The probability of winning in these two situations was significantly different (Z = 91.96, p < .0001).

Sixth, we used the same method to check the 24,390 bets which had already won five times in a row. There were 18,190 bets that won, giving a probability of winning of 0.75. After other bets, the probability of winning was 0.46. The probability of winning in these two cases was significantly different (Z = 86.78, p < .0001). Seventh, we examined the 18,190 bets that had won six times in a row. Following such a lucky streak, the probability of winning was 0.76. However, for the bets that had not won on the immediately selleck preceding occasion, the probability of winning was only 0.47. These two probabilities of winning were significantly different (Z = 77.50, p < .0001). The hot hand also occurred for bets in other currencies (Fig. 1). Regressions (Table 2) show that, after each successive winning bet, the probability of winning increased by 0.05 (t(5) = 8.90, p < .001) for GBP, by 0.06 for EUR (t(5) = 8.00, p < .001), and by 0.05 for USD (t(5) = 8.90, p < .001). We used the same approach to analyze the gamblers’ fallacy. The first step was same as in the analysis of the hot hand. We counted all the bets in GBP; there were 178,947 bets won and 192,359 bets lost. The probability of winning was 0.48 (Fig. 2, top

panel). In the second step, Farnesyltransferase we identified the 192,359 bets that lost and examined results of the bets immediately after them. Of these, 90,764 won and 101,595 lost. The probability of winning was 0.47. After the 178,947 bets that won, the probability of winning was 0.49. The difference between these two probabilities were significant (Z = 12.01, p < 0.001). In the third step, we took the 101,595 bets that lost and examined the bets following them. We found that 40,856 bets won and 60,739 bets lost. The probability of winning after having lost twice was 0.40. In contrast, for the bets that did not lose on both of the previous rounds, the probability of winning was 0.51. The difference between these probabilities was significant (Z = 58.63, p < 0.001). In the fourth step, we repeated the same procedure.