People overshoot when choosing resource pools

This paper studies a pool-choice dilemma, in which two or more resource-seekers decide independently whether to seek resources from a larger pool or a smaller pool. This dilemma mimics many real-life problems, such as firms or vendors deciding whether to enter a market with more potential buyers or one with fewer potential buyers. Across ten studies (five are incentive-compatible), we document a systematic overshooting bias, whereby the resource-seekers in the pool-choice dilemma are more likely to choose the large pool than normatively warranted, thereby sacrificing their own earnings. This research is a major extension of the prior work by Hsee et al. (2021) who found an opposite, undershooting effect in a similar dilemma. The current work offers a new look at the dilemma, with a more comprehensive theory that not only explains the overshooting effect found in this research, but also identifies its moderators and reconciles the opposite findings between this and the prior work. Contrary to what the prior work found, we predict and find that people in the dilemma generally overshoot rather than undershoot, unless they are explicitly prompted to predict the choice of their counterparts or the dilemma is framed in such a way that naturally prompts the players to consider the choice of their counterparts. This research carries theoretical implications for strategic thinking, and practical implications for resource competition.