Search arXivSearch

arXiv · 2310.04153

Fair coins tend to land on the same side they started: Evidence from 350,757 flips

Abstract

Many people have flipped coins but few have stopped to ponder the statistical and physical intricacies of the process. We collected $350{,}757$ coin flips to test the counterintuitive prediction from a physics model of human coin tossing developed by Diaconis, Holmes, and Montgomery (DHM; 2007). The model asserts that when people flip an ordinary coin, it tends to land on the same side it started -- DHM estimated the probability of a same-side outcome to be about 51\%. Our data lend strong support to this precise prediction: the coins landed on the same side more often than not, $\text{Pr}(\text{same side}) = 0.508$, 95\% credible interval (CI) [$0.506$, $0.509$], $\text{BF}_{\text{same-side bias}} = 2359$. Furthermore, the data revealed considerable between-people variation in the degree of this same-side bias. Our data also confirmed the generic prediction that when people flip an ordinary coin -- with the initial side-up randomly determined -- it is equally likely to land heads or tails: $\text{Pr}(\text{heads}) = 0.500$, 95\% CI [$0.498$, $0.502$], $\text{BF}_{\text{heads-tails bias}} = 0.182$. Furthermore, this lack of heads-tails bias does not appear to vary across coins. Additional analyses revealed that the within-people same-side bias decreased as more coins were flipped, an effect that is consistent with the possibility that practice makes people flip coins in a less wobbly fashion. Our data therefore provide strong evidence that when some (but not all) people flip a fair coin, it tends to land on the same side it started.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

František Bartoš, Alexandra Sarafoglou, Henrik R. Godmann, Amir Sahrani, David Klein Leunk, Pierre Y. Gui, David Voss, Kaleem Ullah, Malte J. Zoubek, Franziska Nippold, Frederik Aust, Felipe F. Vieira, Chris-Gabriel Islam, Anton J. Zoubek, Sara Shabani, Jonas Petter, Ingeborg B. Roos, Adam Finnemann, Aaron B. Lob, Madlen F. Hoffstadt, Jason Nak, Jill de Ron, Koen Derks, Karoline Huth, Sjoerd Terpstra, Thomas Bastelica, Magda Matetovici, Vincent L. Ott, Andreea S. Zetea, Katharina Karnbach, Michelle C. Donzallaz, Arne John, Roy M. Moore, Franziska Assion, Riet van Bork, Theresa E. Leidinger, Xiaochang Zhao, Adrian Karami Motaghi, Ting Pan, Hannah Armstrong, Tianqi Peng, Mara Bialas, Joyce Y. -C. Pang, Bohan Fu, Shujun Yang, Xiaoyi Lin, Dana Sleiffer, Miklos Bognar, Balazs Aczel, Eric-Jan Wagenmakers. 2025-04-17. Fair coins tend to land on the same side they started: Evidence from 350,757 flips. https://doi.org/10.1080/01621459.2025.2516210

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

Come for the vibe, stay for the math

This article describes our experiences in mathematical outreach over the past decade. We talk about specific activities, but also general principles that we've learned along the way.

math.HO

Graduate Mathematics in the Age of AI: Forming Mathematicians for Original, Independent, and Responsible Inquiry

Artificial intelligence can increasingly produce plausible, sophisticated mathematical material faster than a developing graduate student can understand or verify it. A sophisticated result or paper draft therefore becomes weaker evidence of the student's own mathematical development. This creates a formation gap between output and personal capacity, and a trust gap between a convincing argument and warranted acceptance. The formation gap can persist even when the student understands the output: understanding a supplied argument does not by itself establish the capacity to initiate and direct inquiry. These gaps are not the whole story. AI can also help students explore examples, compare approaches, enter unfamiliar areas, and undertake ambitious research. The task is to design an apprenticeship that realizes these possibilities while developing substantive mathematical command. The central purpose of a mathematics PhD is to form mathematicians capable of original, independent, and responsible inquiry, including inquiry conducted with AI. This document develops that objective through four connected capacities: competence, judgment, independence, and responsibility. It distinguishes a work's contribution to mathematics from the evidence it provides of a student's formation; explains how a known answer can initiate rather than end creative inquiry; and proposes changes in learning activities, assessment, doctoral originality, advising, and institutional support. Purposeful independent work and ambitious AI-assisted research are complementary parts of the model. Its recommendations include proportionate contribution statements, recognition of advising costs, and staged pilots evaluating both mathematical ability and effective human--AI collaboration. The aim is not to preserve an inherited sequence of training, but to improve mathematical formation as mathematical practice changes.

math.HO