Related Experiment Video
Updated: Feb 20, 2026

Measuring the Subjective Value of Risky and Ambiguous Options using Experimental Economics and Functional MRI Methods
Published on: September 19, 2012
A re-examination of "bias" in human randomness perception
Paul A Warren1, Umberto Gostoli1, George D Farmer1
1Division of Neuroscience and Experimental Psychology, School of Biological Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine, and Health, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, University of Manchester.
Abstract:
Human randomness perception is commonly described as biased. This is because when generating random sequences humans tend to systematically under- and overrepresent certain subsequences relative to the number expected from an unbiased random process. In a purely theoretical analysis we have previously suggested that common misperceptions of randomness may actually reflect genuine aspects of the statistical environment, once cognitive constraints are taken into account which impact on how that environment is actually experienced (Hahn & Warren, Psychological Review, 2009). In the present study we undertake an empirical test of this account, comparing human-generated against unbiased process-generated binary sequences in two experiments. We suggest that comparing human and theoretically unbiased sequences using metrics reflecting the constraints imposed on human experience provides a more meaningful picture of lay people's ability to perceive randomness. Finally, we propose a simple generative model of human random sequence generation inspired by the Hahn and Warren account. Taken together our results question the notion of bias in human randomness perception. (PsycINFO Database Record
Related Concept Videos
Bias
In statistics, a sampling bias is created when a sample is collected from a population, and some members of the population are not as likely to be chosen as others (remember, each member...
First Impression
Confirmation Biases
Halo Effect
Correspondence Bias
Motivational Bias

