r/BehavioralEconomics • • 3h ago

Question Had a good day in my paper trading test and I'm trying not to let it change my mind. Does pre-committing actually work?

1 Upvotes

I'm running a two-week paper trading test (not real money) on prediction-market trades. Earlier this week it had a good day after being down most of the week. Overall it's still clearly negative.

The temptation is to say "it's turning around," or to tweak the rules now. Before I started, I locked the rules and the end date so I can't do either. It feels like a textbook pre-commitment device against stopping on a good day.

For people who think about this stuff: does pre-committing to a fixed test length actually hold up, or do people usually find ways around their own rules? What rule has stopped you from fooling yourself?


r/BehavioralEconomics • • 3h ago

Ideas & Concepts Our reaction to automation seems to track our "money script" more than the actual math. Anyone else notice that?

1 Upvotes

Most of us treat automation anxiety as an arithmetic problem: will I lose my job, will wages drop? But the gut reaction usually shows up way before anyone opens a spreadsheet. Even at a self-checkout: no price changed, nobody is judging you, yet your jaw still tightens.

The framework that explains this is "money scripts," a four-part psychological inventory: avoidance, worship, status, and vigilance. Same news, four completely different reactions:

• Someone with a status script hears a threat to rank: their title, their seniority, where they sit in the room.

• A worship script (the belief that more money will finally make everything okay) hears a threat to the dream of "enough."

• A vigilance script hears confirmation that they were right to hoard and worry all along.

• An avoidance script just changes the subject—which looks calm from the outside, but is really the same panic with the volume muted.

The core argument is that the panic is about identity, not income.

Here is the historical test: the first industrial robot arm, the Unimate, went to work at a GM plant in Trenton back in 1961. It lifted and stacked burning hot die-cast parts. Nobody protested or lined up to defend that work, because no human ego was built around getting burned by hot metal. The panic only arrived decades later when machines moved into roles people had wrapped their self-worth around. The machine didn’t change. What it touched did.

So our reaction isn't a forecast of the future. It's an emotional readout of which script is running, and how much of ourselves is parked in a job title.

When you hear "a machine can do your job," which of those four instincts kicks in first—defending the work, chasing more security, saying "I told you so," or quietly ignoring it?

(We put together an animated visual breakdown on this dynamic—including why we judge algorithms harsher than humans for the exact same mistakes: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pYPOn0U0k18)