Hostname: page-component-7b9c58cd5d-sk4tg Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-03-15T08:45:45.396Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Learning to Open Monty Hall's Doors

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 March 2025

Ignacio Palacios-Huerta
Ignacio Palacios-Huerta*
Affiliation:
Department of Economics, Brown University, Box B, 64 Waterman Street, Providence, RI 02912, USA
*
email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The analysis in this paper searches for individual and group determinants of learning behavior in Monty Hall's Three Door problem examined in Friedman (1998, American Economic Review. 88, 933-946). The results show that the size of monetary incentives, individuals’ initial abilities, and social interactions with others are all important determinants of initial choices and subsequent learning in this problem: (i) More able students have a greater initial propensity to make the right choice than less able students, and their learning curves are initially steeper; (ii) Individual learning can also be enhanced through social interactions; (iii) Interestingly, less able students benefit more than more able students from social interactions in the sample. These findings support the argument that learning models that take into account individuals’ abilities and that allow for social interactions where agents can exchange information hold a great deal of promise for enhancing our understanding of actual learning environments, learning processes, and the formation of rationality.

Keywords

learningabilitysocial interactionsrationality

JEL classification

C91: Laboratory, Individual Behavior D83: Search • Learning • Information and Knowledge • Communication • Belief • Unawareness
Type
Research Article
Information
Experimental Economics , Volume 6 , Issue 3 , November 2003 , pp. 235 - 251
Copyright
Copyright © 2003 Economic Science Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Becker, G.S. and Murphy, K.M. (2000). Social Economics: Market Behavior in a Social Environment. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Camerer, C.F. (1995). “Individual Decision Making.” In Kagel, J.H. and Roth, A.E. (eds.), The Handbook of Experimental Economics. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, pp. 325–370.Google Scholar
Erev, I. and Roth, A.E. (1998). “Predicting How People Play Games: Reinforcement Learning in Experimental Games with Unique, Mixed Strategy Equilibria.” American Economic Review. 88, 848–881.Google Scholar
Friedman, D. (1998). “Monty Hall's Three Doors: Construction and Deconstruction of a Choice Anomaly.” American Economic Review. 88, 933–946.Google Scholar
Kerr, N.L., MacCoun, R.J., and Kramer, G.P. (1996). “When Are N Heads Better (or Worse) than One?: Biased Judgement in Individuals vs. Groups.” In Davis, J.H. and Witte, E. (eds.), Understanding Group Behavior: Consensual Action by Small Groups, vol. 1. Hillsdale, NJ: L. Erlbaum, pp. 105–136.Google Scholar
Manski, C.F. (1993). “Identification of Endogenous Social Effects: The Reflection Problem.” Review of Economic Studies. 60, 531–542.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Palacios-Huerta, I. (2002). “Learning to Open Monty Hall's Doors.” Department of Economics, Working Paper 2002-20, Brown University.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sacerdote, B. (2001). “Peer Effects with Random Assignment: Results for Dartmouth Roommates.” Quarterly Journal of Economics. 116, 681–704.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Topa, G. (2001). “Social Interactions, Local Spillovers and Unemployment.” Review of Economic Studies. 68, 261–295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
vos Savant, Marilyn. “Ask Marilyn.” Parade. Sept. 8, 1990; Dec. 2, 1990; Feb. 17, 1991.CrossRefGoogle Scholar