Interesting reading?

As DOND has been going since 2003, some serious studies have been conducted on its mechanics e.g. DOND paper. However all of these studies appear to look at the theory behind Deal Or No Deal as played in Holland and Australia, the first countries to run the show. The game is played very differently in other countries compared to the UK; looks like there is room for at least one more study (oh joy).

Two major differences are immediately apparent between the UK and Holland/Australia: the number of boxes (26), and the number of boxes opened between offers (the last five offers in Holland are after opening a single box in each case). The risk involved in letting three boxes be opened before the next decision point is greater than just opening one box - the courage required by a UK player to continue as the board approaches it conclusion may be much greater than elsewhere. [I often replace the word 'brave' with 'stupid' in determining a course of action.]

There are quite a few papers out there trying to extrapolate from DOND to the real world, particularly in the field of economics, and I find DOND fascinating not least because it takes me back to my years as a decision sciences consultant. But I think we may give DOND too much credance - the aim in business is to reduce risk in decison-making. Each business decision has to be as informed as possible - risk assessment attaches a value to each option (option evaluation) and then the lowest cost is usually selected.

The audience, the other contestants, the days spent watching other players and the player's ego, all have an impact in making the DOND player take risks that they would be unlikely/unable to take in real life. Makes for good telly though.