Random Events Knowledge Test (REKT)

Abstract

The Random Events Knowledge Test (REKT), developed by Turner and Liu in 1999, is a specialized psychometric instrument designed to assess an individual’s understanding of random events and probability concepts, particularly those relevant to gambling behavior. It measures the presence of cognitive distortions such as the gambler’s fallacy and the illusion of control, which are key psychological predictors of risky or problematic gambling patterns. The REKT consists of 22 True/False items that gauge knowledge regarding lotteries, coin flips, slot machines, and basic statistical principles, often serving as a pre- and post-test measure in problem gambling prevention curricula.

Keywords

Random Events Knowledge Test, REKT, Gambler’s Fallacy, Probability Knowledge, Cognitive Distortions, Problem Gambling, Mathematical Reasoning.

Authors

Nigel E. Turner, E. Liu.

Purpose

The primary purpose of the REKT is to evaluate the level of mathematical reasoning and critical thinking skills applied to situations involving chance. The scale was initially developed as a component of educational curricula aimed at the prevention of problem gambling in adolescents and young adults. By identifying erroneous beliefs about the nature of chance—such as the belief that past outcomes influence future independent events—educators can target specific cognitive distortions through intervention programs.

Furthermore, the test serves as a diagnostic tool to differentiate between individuals who possess a sound understanding of probability and those who hold irrational beliefs that may predispose them to developing harmful gambling habits. High scores indicate accurate knowledge of randomness, while low scores suggest susceptibility to fallacies that normalize persistent gambling despite losses.

Construct

The REKT measures the construct of Knowledge of Random Events, which encompasses an individual’s grasp of basic statistical independence and the characteristics of random sequences. This construct is essentially the inverse of cognitive distortion related to chance. Key areas assessed include:

• Understanding the independence of random trials (e.g., coin flips, lottery draws).
• Recognizing the Gambler’s Fallacy (the belief that a streak of one outcome makes the opposite outcome more likely).
• Identifying the Illusion of Control (the false belief that personal actions, like choosing ‘random-looking’ numbers or staying at the same machine, can influence random outcomes).
• Basic knowledge of expected long-term averages (Law of Large Numbers).

Validity

While detailed psychometric data (e.g., factor structure reports) were not fully provided in the immediate source, the scale demonstrates strong face validity and content validity, as its items directly address well-documented cognitive errors associated with gambling behavior, such as the gambler’s fallacy and beliefs surrounding probability in lotteries and slot machines. Research utilizing the REKT, often cited in the context of problem gambling prevention curricula (Macdonald & Turner, 2008), confirms its utility in measuring the targeted knowledge deficit that precedes problematic behavior.

The items are drawn from common real-world gambling scenarios, suggesting ecological validity. The scale’s effectiveness is often reported in the context of intervention studies, where improved REKT scores post-intervention serve as a measure of change in critical thinking related to chance, indicating criterion validity against educational outcomes.

Reliability

Specific internal consistency coefficients (e.g., Cronbach’s alpha) for the REKT are typically reported within the broader literature concerning the effectiveness of the Life Skills, Mathematical Reasoning and Critical Thinking Curriculum (Macdonald & Turner, 2008). Given its use in academic research, the instrument is presumed to meet acceptable standards of internal reliability for a knowledge test of this nature, ensuring that the 22 items consistently measure the underlying construct of knowledge about random events.

Factor Analysis

The REKT is generally treated as a unidimensional measure of basic probability knowledge applied to gambling contexts, opposing the cluster of cognitive distortions that fuel irrational betting. While formal factor analysis reports were not included in the original source snippet, the design suggests the items load onto a single factor representing the overall understanding of statistical independence and randomness, distinct from specific personality traits or impulsivity measures.

Instrument

Test Type: Knowledge and Cognitive Distortion Assessment

Format: 22-item True/False self-report questionnaire.

Language Available: English (Primary).

Population Group: General population, specifically used in educational settings targeting risk populations.

Age Group: Adolescents and Adults (typically ages 14 and up, corresponding to educational curriculum targets).

Population Details: Used extensively in studies involving high school and university students for the prevention of problem gambling.

Test Methodology: Pencil-and-paper or digital administration. Scoring involves assigning points for statistically correct answers (T= true/ F= false), yielding a total knowledge score indicating the degree to which an individual understands or misunderstands the principles of chance.

Keywords

Cognitive Distortions, Probability, Gambling Beliefs, Critical Thinking, Turner and Liu, Mathematical Reasoning, Statistical Independence.

Authors

Author ORCID Identifier: Not specified in source.

Affiliation Email addresses: Not specified in source.

Correspondence Address: Not specified in source. Primary research affiliated with the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health (CAMH) in Toronto, Canada (based on Macdonad & Turner, 2008).

Permissions & Fee and Test Year

The REKT was first presented in 1999 (Turner & Liu). It is often published within larger educational curricula reports, such as the 2008 curriculum by Macdonald, Turner, and Somerset. Given its inclusion in publicly available academic reports detailing prevention programs, it is generally considered accessible for research and educational purposes, though formal permissions for commercial use should be sought from the primary authors or the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health (CAMH).

The instrument is publicly referenced and located on page 37 of the curriculum document, “Life Skills, Mathematical Reasoning and Critical Thinking: Curriculum for the Prevention of Problem Gambling.” The document is cited online via PubMed: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18095146.

Reference’s

• Turner, N.E. & Liu, E. (1999, Aug). The naïve human concept of random events. Paper presented at the 1999 conference of the American Psychological Association, Boston.
• Macdonald, J. & Turner, N.E. (2000, Oct) The prevention of problem gambling using education, modeling and drama. Paper presented at the conference of the National Council on Problem Gambling, Pennsylvanian, Oct.
• Macdonald, J. & Turner, N.E. (2001, April). The development and testing of an experimental approach to preventing problem gambling. Paper presented at the 2001b, conference of the Canadian Foundation on Compulsive Gambling.
• Macdonald, J. & Turner, N.E. (2002, Oct). The prevention of problem gambling using education, modeling and drama. Paper presented to the 14th National Conference on Problem Gambling. Philadelphia, PA.
• Turner, N., Littman-Sharp, N., Zengeneh, M. & Spence, W. (2002). Winners: Why do some develop gambling problems while others do not? Available at www.gamblingresearch.org
• Macdonald. John, Turner. Nigel, Somerset. Matthew. (2008). Life Skills, Mathematical Reasoning and Critical Thinking: Curriculum for the Prevention of Problem Gambling. Final Report to the Ontario Problem Gambling Research Centre. Centre for Addiction and Mental Health.

Items of the Random Events Knowledge Test (REKT)

IMPORTANT: The following scale items must be preserved in their original language and must not be changed in any way.

T F 1) Knowledge of math can help you to win at lotteries.

T F 2) Staying at the same slot machines improves your chances of winning.

T F 3) It is possible to get an A on a test by guessing.

T F 4) Betting the same numbers for every lottery draw will not help you win.

T F 5) If you lose several times in a row you are most likely to win if you keep playing

T F 6) If you win three times in a row while gambling‚ you are less likely to win again if you keep playing.

T F 7) If you buy a 649 lottery ticket every day‚ you would most likely win the jackpot within the next 40 years.

T F 8) If you have lost at several games in a row‚ your likelihood of winning or losing does not change.

T F 9) A random looking number (e.g.‚ 12 – 5 – 23 – 7 – 19 – 34) is more likely to win than a number that has a sequence in it (e.g.‚ 1- 2- 3- 4 – 5 – 6).

T F 10) The likelihood of winning does not increase if you bet on numbers that come up very often.

T F 11) If numbers are drawn randomly‚ repeated numbers often occur.

T F 12) If a student gets perfect on a test they are most likely to get a lower mark on the next test.

T F 13) If every 649 draw for the past year had 2 numbers between 31 and 39‚ it would probably indicate that the lottery numbers weren’t truly random.

T F 14) It would be foolish to bet on the number 18 if 18 had come up recently.

T F 15) If you flip a coin 5 times and you get heads 5 times in a row‚ you are most likely to get tails if you flip the coin again.

T F 16) If you flip a coin thousands of times‚ on average‚ you’ll get same number of heads and tails.

T F 17) Suppose you flip a coin and get 10 heads in a row. If you keep flipping the coin‚ you will eventually get exactly the same number of heads and tails.

T F 18) You have a better chance of becoming rich by gambling than by running a business.

T F 19) A longer test gives a more accurate measure of a student’s ability than a short test.

T F 20) Looking for a slot machine that has not paid out in a while will help you win.

T F 21) You cannot predict the winning numbers in a lottery by studying past winning numbers.

T F 22) In a lottery‚ all numbers have the same chance of winning.