Explaining Excess Entry in Winner-Take-All Markets

We report experimental data from standard market entry games and winner-take-all games. At odds with traditional decision-making models with risk aversion, the winner-take-all condition results in substantially more entry than the expected-payoff-equivalent market entry game. We explore three candid...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Management science 2023-02, Vol.69 (2), p.1050-1069
Hauptverfasser: Laferrière, Vincent, Staubli, David, Thöni, Christian
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 1069
container_issue 2
container_start_page 1050
container_title Management science
container_volume 69
creator Laferrière, Vincent
Staubli, David
Thöni, Christian
description We report experimental data from standard market entry games and winner-take-all games. At odds with traditional decision-making models with risk aversion, the winner-take-all condition results in substantially more entry than the expected-payoff-equivalent market entry game. We explore three candidate explanations for excess entry: blind spot, illusion of control, and joy of winning, none of which receive empirical support. We provide a novel theoretical explanation for excess entry based on cumulative prospect theory and test it empirically. Our results suggest that excess entry into highly competitive environments is not caused by a genuine preference for competing, but is instead driven by probability weighting. Market entrants overweight the small probabilities associated with the high payoff outcomes in winner-take-all markets, while they underweight probable failures. This paper was accepted by Yan Chen, behavioral economics and decision analysis. Funding: This work was supported by the Schweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen Forschung [Grants 100018_182185 and 26022621] and the Dr. h.c. Emil Zaugg-Fonds [Grant B11162135]. Supplemental Material: The data files and e-companion are available at https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2022.4397 .
doi_str_mv 10.1287/mnsc.2022.4397
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2778060547</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2778060547</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c260t-eb661d1932b50598c89a1f415a7e2ab33a603b3c116f10cc0cb9b4deac3a775e3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkM9LwzAcxYMoOKdXzwXPqd8kTdIcx6g_YOJl4jGkWSrZunQmHWz_vS0VPHp6l897Dz4I3RPICS3l4z4km1OgNC-YkhdoRjgVmHMgl2gGQDkmCtQ1uklpCwCylGKGaHU6tMYHH76y6mRdSlkV-njOfMg-fQgu4rXZObxo2-zNxJ3r0y26akyb3N1vztHHU7VevuDV-_PrcrHClgrosauFIBuiGK05cFXaUhnSFIQb6aipGTMCWM0sIaIhYC3YWtXFxhnLjJTcsTl6mHYPsfs-utTrbXeMYbjUVMoSBPBCDlQ-UTZ2KUXX6EP0exPPmoAevejRix696NHLUMimgrNd8OkPLzmUVHJFBgRPiA9NF_fpv8kfrMxuFA</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2778060547</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Explaining Excess Entry in Winner-Take-All Markets</title><source>INFORMS PubsOnLine</source><creator>Laferrière, Vincent ; Staubli, David ; Thöni, Christian</creator><creatorcontrib>Laferrière, Vincent ; Staubli, David ; Thöni, Christian</creatorcontrib><description>We report experimental data from standard market entry games and winner-take-all games. At odds with traditional decision-making models with risk aversion, the winner-take-all condition results in substantially more entry than the expected-payoff-equivalent market entry game. We explore three candidate explanations for excess entry: blind spot, illusion of control, and joy of winning, none of which receive empirical support. We provide a novel theoretical explanation for excess entry based on cumulative prospect theory and test it empirically. Our results suggest that excess entry into highly competitive environments is not caused by a genuine preference for competing, but is instead driven by probability weighting. Market entrants overweight the small probabilities associated with the high payoff outcomes in winner-take-all markets, while they underweight probable failures. This paper was accepted by Yan Chen, behavioral economics and decision analysis. Funding: This work was supported by the Schweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen Forschung [Grants 100018_182185 and 26022621] and the Dr. h.c. Emil Zaugg-Fonds [Grant B11162135]. Supplemental Material: The data files and e-companion are available at https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2022.4397 .</description><identifier>ISSN: 0025-1909</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1526-5501</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1287/mnsc.2022.4397</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Linthicum: INFORMS</publisher><subject>Candidates ; Competition ; cumulative prospect theory ; Decision making ; Decision making models ; excess entry ; experiment ; Games ; Market entry ; market entry game ; Markets ; Obesity ; Probability ; probability weighting ; Prospect theory ; Risk ; Risk aversion ; Underweight ; Weighting ; winner-take-all market</subject><ispartof>Management science, 2023-02, Vol.69 (2), p.1050-1069</ispartof><rights>Copyright Institute for Operations Research and the Management Sciences Feb 2023</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c260t-eb661d1932b50598c89a1f415a7e2ab33a603b3c116f10cc0cb9b4deac3a775e3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c260t-eb661d1932b50598c89a1f415a7e2ab33a603b3c116f10cc0cb9b4deac3a775e3</cites><orcidid>0000-0003-1190-8471 ; 0000-0002-0580-4708</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://pubsonline.informs.org/doi/full/10.1287/mnsc.2022.4397$$EHTML$$P50$$Ginforms$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,778,782,3681,27911,27912,62601</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Laferrière, Vincent</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Staubli, David</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Thöni, Christian</creatorcontrib><title>Explaining Excess Entry in Winner-Take-All Markets</title><title>Management science</title><description>We report experimental data from standard market entry games and winner-take-all games. At odds with traditional decision-making models with risk aversion, the winner-take-all condition results in substantially more entry than the expected-payoff-equivalent market entry game. We explore three candidate explanations for excess entry: blind spot, illusion of control, and joy of winning, none of which receive empirical support. We provide a novel theoretical explanation for excess entry based on cumulative prospect theory and test it empirically. Our results suggest that excess entry into highly competitive environments is not caused by a genuine preference for competing, but is instead driven by probability weighting. Market entrants overweight the small probabilities associated with the high payoff outcomes in winner-take-all markets, while they underweight probable failures. This paper was accepted by Yan Chen, behavioral economics and decision analysis. Funding: This work was supported by the Schweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen Forschung [Grants 100018_182185 and 26022621] and the Dr. h.c. Emil Zaugg-Fonds [Grant B11162135]. Supplemental Material: The data files and e-companion are available at https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2022.4397 .</description><subject>Candidates</subject><subject>Competition</subject><subject>cumulative prospect theory</subject><subject>Decision making</subject><subject>Decision making models</subject><subject>excess entry</subject><subject>experiment</subject><subject>Games</subject><subject>Market entry</subject><subject>market entry game</subject><subject>Markets</subject><subject>Obesity</subject><subject>Probability</subject><subject>probability weighting</subject><subject>Prospect theory</subject><subject>Risk</subject><subject>Risk aversion</subject><subject>Underweight</subject><subject>Weighting</subject><subject>winner-take-all market</subject><issn>0025-1909</issn><issn>1526-5501</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2023</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNqFkM9LwzAcxYMoOKdXzwXPqd8kTdIcx6g_YOJl4jGkWSrZunQmHWz_vS0VPHp6l897Dz4I3RPICS3l4z4km1OgNC-YkhdoRjgVmHMgl2gGQDkmCtQ1uklpCwCylGKGaHU6tMYHH76y6mRdSlkV-njOfMg-fQgu4rXZObxo2-zNxJ3r0y26akyb3N1vztHHU7VevuDV-_PrcrHClgrosauFIBuiGK05cFXaUhnSFIQb6aipGTMCWM0sIaIhYC3YWtXFxhnLjJTcsTl6mHYPsfs-utTrbXeMYbjUVMoSBPBCDlQ-UTZ2KUXX6EP0exPPmoAevejRix696NHLUMimgrNd8OkPLzmUVHJFBgRPiA9NF_fpv8kfrMxuFA</recordid><startdate>20230201</startdate><enddate>20230201</enddate><creator>Laferrière, Vincent</creator><creator>Staubli, David</creator><creator>Thöni, Christian</creator><general>INFORMS</general><general>Institute for Operations Research and the Management Sciences</general><scope>OQ6</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>8BJ</scope><scope>FQK</scope><scope>JBE</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1190-8471</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0580-4708</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20230201</creationdate><title>Explaining Excess Entry in Winner-Take-All Markets</title><author>Laferrière, Vincent ; Staubli, David ; Thöni, Christian</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c260t-eb661d1932b50598c89a1f415a7e2ab33a603b3c116f10cc0cb9b4deac3a775e3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2023</creationdate><topic>Candidates</topic><topic>Competition</topic><topic>cumulative prospect theory</topic><topic>Decision making</topic><topic>Decision making models</topic><topic>excess entry</topic><topic>experiment</topic><topic>Games</topic><topic>Market entry</topic><topic>market entry game</topic><topic>Markets</topic><topic>Obesity</topic><topic>Probability</topic><topic>probability weighting</topic><topic>Prospect theory</topic><topic>Risk</topic><topic>Risk aversion</topic><topic>Underweight</topic><topic>Weighting</topic><topic>winner-take-all market</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Laferrière, Vincent</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Staubli, David</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Thöni, Christian</creatorcontrib><collection>ECONIS</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><jtitle>Management science</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Laferrière, Vincent</au><au>Staubli, David</au><au>Thöni, Christian</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Explaining Excess Entry in Winner-Take-All Markets</atitle><jtitle>Management science</jtitle><date>2023-02-01</date><risdate>2023</risdate><volume>69</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>1050</spage><epage>1069</epage><pages>1050-1069</pages><issn>0025-1909</issn><eissn>1526-5501</eissn><abstract>We report experimental data from standard market entry games and winner-take-all games. At odds with traditional decision-making models with risk aversion, the winner-take-all condition results in substantially more entry than the expected-payoff-equivalent market entry game. We explore three candidate explanations for excess entry: blind spot, illusion of control, and joy of winning, none of which receive empirical support. We provide a novel theoretical explanation for excess entry based on cumulative prospect theory and test it empirically. Our results suggest that excess entry into highly competitive environments is not caused by a genuine preference for competing, but is instead driven by probability weighting. Market entrants overweight the small probabilities associated with the high payoff outcomes in winner-take-all markets, while they underweight probable failures. This paper was accepted by Yan Chen, behavioral economics and decision analysis. Funding: This work was supported by the Schweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen Forschung [Grants 100018_182185 and 26022621] and the Dr. h.c. Emil Zaugg-Fonds [Grant B11162135]. Supplemental Material: The data files and e-companion are available at https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2022.4397 .</abstract><cop>Linthicum</cop><pub>INFORMS</pub><doi>10.1287/mnsc.2022.4397</doi><tpages>20</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1190-8471</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0580-4708</orcidid></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0025-1909
ispartof Management science, 2023-02, Vol.69 (2), p.1050-1069
issn 0025-1909
1526-5501
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_journals_2778060547
source INFORMS PubsOnLine
subjects Candidates
Competition
cumulative prospect theory
Decision making
Decision making models
excess entry
experiment
Games
Market entry
market entry game
Markets
Obesity
Probability
probability weighting
Prospect theory
Risk
Risk aversion
Underweight
Weighting
winner-take-all market
title Explaining Excess Entry in Winner-Take-All Markets
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-15T12%3A13%3A15IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Explaining%20Excess%20Entry%20in%20Winner-Take-All%20Markets&rft.jtitle=Management%20science&rft.au=Laferri%C3%A8re,%20Vincent&rft.date=2023-02-01&rft.volume=69&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=1050&rft.epage=1069&rft.pages=1050-1069&rft.issn=0025-1909&rft.eissn=1526-5501&rft_id=info:doi/10.1287/mnsc.2022.4397&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2778060547%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2778060547&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true