Main Takeaways
The gambler’s fallacy leads us to expect reversals after streaks, while self-attribution bias makes us over-credit wins and excuse losses, distorting our understanding of probabilities and skill.
Together, they feed the illusion of control, pushing traders toward gambling-like behavior that can spiral into overconfidence – and potentially, major losses.
Replace the illusion of control with real control by tracking your reasoning, building reflection into your process, and creating space between impulse and action.
Believing a bounce is “due” after a dip is like betting on rain today because it’s been sunny all week. Taking full credit for a lucky win is like claiming you control the weather because it didn’t rain on your picnic today.
These aren’t just harmless thought patterns – they shape how we interpret cause and effect and make sense of our own abilities. In the context of trading, they can subtly distort how we read market signals, assess risk, and react to wins or losses – laying the groundwork for behavior that feels strategic but is in fact closer to gambling.
In this edition of Thinking Through Ups and Downs, we’re digging into the gambler’s fallacy and self-attribution bias – a combo that can quietly nudge traders into treating markets like a game of chance. These patterns build on themselves, reinforcing behavior that feels rational in the moment but can spiral into overconfidence, risky decisions, and major losses. Let’s break down how they take root, how they show up in crypto, and how to spot the signs before you get swept up by the illusion of control and trapped in a losing streak.
Psychology Behind the Illusion of Control
Some gamblers believe slot machines eventually get “full” and are bound to pay out – but in reality, each spin is independent from one another, and a win is never guaranteed. The same goes for markets. No matter how many red candles you’ve seen, it doesn’t mean a green one is “due.”
This belief likely stems from the gambler’s fallacy – the idea that after a streak of losses, a win is expected. It’s rooted in our instinct to find patterns in randomness. In gambling, it’s thinking heads are more likely after a run of tails. In crypto, it’s expecting a bounce after a dip – when in reality, price movements are often influenced by new information, not some built-in balance.
While the gambler’s fallacy tricks us into seeing patterns when none exist, self-attribution bias distorts how we interpret those outcomes. It nudges us to take credit for wins (“I knew it would bounce!”) while blaming losses on bad luck or external forces (“That influencer wrecked it!”) This mindset may be comforting in the moment, but it short-circuits learning by leaving no room for honest reflection – inflating our ego and sense of skill, falsely interpreting lucky guesses as evidence of ability, which reinforces overconfidence and validates risky habits.
Together, these two biases can reinforce a dangerous illusion of control. When we think patterns are predictable and believe we’re the reason behind positive outcomes, it becomes easy to see ourselves as being “in tune” with the market. This false confidence encourages trading based on gut feelings, streaks, or hunches – not sound strategies – and sets the stage for painful, avoidable losses.
A Crypto Case Study
Imagine a trader who lands a few quick wins on meme coins. “I’ve got a knack for this,” they think. Riding the high, they start placing bigger bets, convinced the streak will continue. But then come the red candles – and within hours, their portfolio is down 90%. “It’s just temporary,” they insist. “It has to bounce, I’ve done this before.”
Here, the gambler’s fallacy whispers that a rebound is inevitable – even when the fundamentals suggest otherwise. Meanwhile, a self-attribution bias cushions the ego from the sting of losses. Rather than pausing to reassess, the trader doubles down, convinced that past wins prove their skill and current losses are just bad luck. The result? A string of increasingly risky decisions, deeper losses, and a growing disconnect from reality.
Eventually, frustration sets in. Instead of recognizing their own biases, the trader may shift the blame onto memecoins themselves – conveniently failing to factor in their inherently volatile nature. Disappointment can spiral into resentment, leading to sweeping conclusions like “all memecoins are scams.” Once bitten, twice shy – but in this case, the sting fuels a biased mindset rather than offering insights.
Shattering the Illusion of Control
To counter the illusion of control, it helps to shift focus from feeling in charge to staying grounded in process. A good starting point is to log your actual reasoning behind a trade – not just the numbers. Ask yourself: What’s my thesis? What’s this trade based on? Then, revisit it later to see if the outcome aligned with your logic, or if it was just lucky timing. This habit helps distinguish real insight from flukes.
But even solid reasoning can get hijacked by overconfidence – especially after a win. That’s where second-order journaling comes in. Don’t just note why you made the trade, but also why you believed your reason was valid. Did you critically test your assumptions, or just go with a gut feeling that sounded smart?
To make space for that reflection, build friction between idea and execution. Add a 20-minute cooldown before acting and run through a simple checklist – trend, volume, external catalysts. This disrupts impulse-driven trades and gives your rational side time to weigh in – and if you’re using Binance Futures, the opt-in Cooling-Off Period can help make that pause a habit.
Another smart tactic is to set a “confidence budget.” Limit yourself to a specific number of high-conviction bets per month. Once you hit that cap, it’s a signal to pause and review whether you’re operating from sound judgment or slipping into bias-fueled momentum.
Finally, after a winning streak, create a “win quarantine.” Step away for a few hours or even a day. It might feel counterintuitive, but it helps reset your mental state – breaking the illusion that you’ve somehow completely “figured out” the market, which insulates you from reckless follow-ups. A recent study shows that taking a break from technology may dramatically lower stress levels, which in turn boosts business efficacy. This means that stepping back isn’t slacking, it’s sharpening.
Together, these practices build awareness, inject discipline, and give you back what the gambler’s fallacy and self-attribution bias steal – clarity and rationality.
Final Thoughts
When the gambler’s fallacy and self-attribution bias take the wheel, trading starts to resemble gambling, not strategy. The former lures us into believing ups and downs are predictable while the latter tricks us into crediting ourselves for outcomes we barely had any insight into. Together, they build a compelling illusion of control.
However, charts don’t “even out” over time, and confidence doesn’t equate to mastery. Breaking free means learning to recognize when your mindset has shifted from analysis to anticipation. Instead, focus on process, not prediction, by tracking your reasoning, not just your wins. Don’t just reflect on what you got right – challenge why you thought you were right.
The most consistent traders don’t chase patterns or credit luck as skill. They pause, review, adapt. And that clarity – not perceived control – is what gives them the edge.
