Executive Function
Tournament Choice Task
Also called: willingness to compete, competition entry, piece-rate versus tournament choice
Measure competition entry after participants try points per correct answer and a tournament against simulated opponents. Scores include entry, performance and rank confidence.
8-10 minTimed: desktop or laptop with a mouse or trackpad
Free to start: 10 free participants per account, then $0.99 per participant for academic research, or any yearly plan. Try it here first, with no account.
- Papers, 2021 to 2025
- 119
- Evidence grade
- C
- Registered clinical studies
- 3
Choose the rule for round 3
What it measures
Measures entry into competition after earning points per correct answer and in a tournament against simulated opponents. Reports entry, performance and estimated rank.
Constructs
- Competition entry
- Performance under incentives
- Relative confidence
Research uses
- Behavioral economics research
- Incentive design studies
- Within-study group comparisons
How the paradigm works
The Tournament Choice Task measures entry into competition after experience of two point rules. Participants solve generated addition problems, first for points per correct answer and then in a tournament against three simulated opponents. They choose the rule for a third work round and estimate their rank in the second round. This follows the sequence of performance and entry decisions studied by Niederle and Vesterlund (2007).
More about the paradigm
This version uses three 120-second work rounds, five two-digit numbers per sum and 10 points per correct answer. First place in a tournament earns 40 points per correct answer; others earn zero. A seed fixes opponent scores and resolves ties. Opponents score between 2 and 8 correct answers per minute, a design choice rather than participant data. Round 3 uses the same opponent scores as round 2. Rank and opponent results remain hidden until after the confidence question. One randomly selected round supplies final points. A 20-second practice and a rule check precede the work.
Scores
- Tournament Entryscore
- 1 for tournament, 0 for points per answer.
- Choice under these point rules
- Piece-Rate Correct Answerscount
- Correct sums in round 1.
- Performance before competition
- Tournament Correct Answerscount
- Correct sums in round 2.
- Performance under tournament points
- Chosen-Rule Correct Answerscount
- Correct sums in round 3.
- Performance under the chosen rule
- Performance Changecount
- Round 2 correct answers minus round 1.
- Positive means more correct answers in round 2
- Estimated Rankscore
- Estimated rank in round 2, from 1 to 4.
- Lower means a higher expected place
- Actual Rankscore
- Rank against the simulated scores, with seeded tie-breaking.
- 1 is first place
- Rank Confidence Biasscore
- Actual rank minus estimated rank.
- Positive means a higher estimated place than achieved
- Points Earnedpoints
- Points from the one randomly selected work round.
- Descriptive
- Median Answer Timems
- Median arithmetic answer time, excluding answers under 100 ms.
- Includes calculation and typing
- Anticipationscount
- Arithmetic answers under 100 ms.
- Inspect alongside the recorded answers
- Rounds Completedcount
- Completed work rounds, out of three.
- Three is complete
- Rule Check Correctscore
- 1 for a correct rule check, 0 otherwise.
- Review an incorrect answer
Use and evidence
119 papers from 2021 to 2025 name this task in their title or abstract, down 10% compared with 2016 to 2020. That ranks it 222 of 582 test families in our census. See the counts for every test.
Show the numbers
| Year | Papers |
|---|---|
| 2025 | 27 |
| 2024 | 15 |
| 2023 | 25 |
| 2022 | 26 |
| 2021 | 26 |
| 2020 | 17 |
| 2019 | 29 |
| 2018 | 28 |
| 2017 | 36 |
| 2016 | 22 |
| 2015 | 18 |
| 2014 | 16 |
| 2013 | 14 |
| 2012 | 9 |
| 2011 | 19 |
| 2010 | 6 |
| 2009 | 4 |
| 2008 | 13 |
| 2007 | 7 |
| 2006 | 6 |
| 2005 | 3 |
| 2004 | 7 |
| 2003 | 2 |
| 2002 | 2 |
| 2001 | 1 |
| 2000 | 0 |
Use grade C
100 to 299 papers from 2021 to 2025.
Evidence grade C
At least 2 test-retest papers, 30 reliability or validity papers or 3 registered clinical studies.
- Papers on test-retest reliability
- 0
- Papers on reliability or validity
- 9
- Registered clinical studies using it as an outcome
- 3
Measured on ConductCognition
Pooled across the studies that feed our platform norms, by device group. A figure needs 50 or more people.
No pooled figure yet.
Note on the counts: includes some papers on firms' and athletes' willingness to compete.
How the grades work
Use: A is 1,000 or more papers from 2021 to 2025, B 300 to 999, C 100 to 299, D 30 to 99 and E fewer than 30. Evidence: A means at least 25 papers report its test-retest reliability and at least 25 registered clinical studies use it as an outcome; B, at least 8 test-retest papers, and either 5 registered clinical studies or 150 reliability or validity papers; C, at least 2 test-retest papers, 30 reliability or validity papers or 3 registered clinical studies; D, little published measurement evidence found. The counts measure use. They include every paper that names the task in its title or abstract. Grades describe the published research on this task, not ConductCognition's version of it.
Source: ConductCognition test census 0.39.0, counted 10 November 2026 from OpenAlex and ClinicalTrials.gov.
Task design
The trial sequence as the test runs in ConductCognition.
- Work
- Three rounds of 120 seconds, each adding five generated two-digit numbers. A setting uses 30 to 300 seconds per round.
- Points
- 10 points per correct answer for piece rate; 40 for the tournament winner and zero for others. A setting uses 1 to 100 piece-rate points. One randomly selected round sets final points.
- Opponents
- Three simulated opponents, fixed before the run at 2 to 8 correct answers per minute. Round 3 uses round 2's opponent scores. Ties are resolved at random.
- Choice and confidence
- Choose the rule before round 3. Estimate rank in round 2 after round 3 and before any rank feedback.
- Practice
- 20 seconds of addition with feedback, followed by both point rules and a tournament rule check.
This is a shorter points-based adaptation with simulated opponents and original generated problems. The published experiment used live groups and five-minute rounds and included a separate choice over past performance. Keyboard speed affects work counts.
Quality checks
Each session is marked valid, needs review or invalid, with the reason, before you see its scores.
Scored rows: the selected run's tournament entry and rank estimate. Entry has no correct answer. Missing work rounds, a missing choice or rank estimate and an incorrect rule check are flagged for review.
Why these rules
Entry and confidence describe decisions under these point rules. Arithmetic performance is recorded separately; there is no chance accuracy threshold for choosing to compete.
No percentile. Scores and quality flags only.
Running this test
Settings you can change
| Setting | Standard | Allowed |
|---|---|---|
| Work round (seconds) | 120 | 30 to 300 |
| Points per correct answer | 10 | 1 to 100 |
Yearly plans can change settings within these limits. Free and pay-as-you-go studies use the standard settings.
Need a setting this test does not have?
Devices and languages
- Timed test: participants need a desktop or laptop with a mouse or trackpad. Participant devices
- Languages: English, Spanish, French, German, Italian, Portuguese (Brazil), Chinese (Simplified) and Japanese.
- Available on: Every plan, including the free plan.
- No percentile. Scores and quality flags only. How norms work
- Recruiting online? See the setup guides for Prolific, Sona Systems, CloudResearch Connect and Qualtrics.
Cite and describe
Participants completed the Tournament Choice Task in a web browser (ConductCognition task version 1.0.0, scoring version 1.0.0; Niederle & Vesterlund, 2007), with the standard settings (work round (seconds): 120; points per correct answer: 10). The main score was tournament entry (1 for tournament, 0 for points per answer).
ConductCognition versions: task version 1.0.0, scoring version 1.0.0. Every export records the versions each session used, for a methods section.
- Niederle, M., & Vesterlund, L. (2007). Do women shy away from competition? Do men compete too much? The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 122(3), 1067-1101. https://doi.org/10.1162/qjec.122.3.1067
Source papers
Questions
How long does the Tournament Choice Task take?
About 8 to 10 minutes, as listed in the test library.
What device does a participant need?
Timed test: participants need a desktop or laptop with a mouse or trackpad. The browser must be Chrome, Edge, Firefox or Safari.
What scores does it produce?
Tournament Entry, Piece-Rate Correct Answers, Tournament Correct Answers, Chosen-Rule Correct Answers, Performance Change, Estimated Rank, Actual Rank, Rank Confidence Bias, Points Earned, Median Answer Time, Anticipations, Rounds Completed and Rule Check Correct. Each session is also marked valid, needs review or invalid, with the reason.
How widely is the Tournament Choice Task used in research?
119 papers from 2021 to 2025 name it in their title or abstract, down 10% compared with 2016 to 2020. That ranks it 222 of 582 test families in the ConductCognition test census (use grade C). Source: ConductCognition test census 0.39.0, counted 10 November 2026 from OpenAlex and ClinicalTrials.gov.
How much reliability evidence does the Tournament Choice Task have?
In the published research, 0 papers report its test-retest reliability and 3 registered clinical studies use it as an outcome (evidence grade C in the ConductCognition test census).
Does it report a percentile?
No. Scores and quality flags only.
Which settings can a researcher change?
Work round (seconds) (30 to 300) and points per correct answer (1 to 100). Settings can be changed on yearly plans; free and pay-as-you-go studies use the standard settings.
Which languages can participants use?
Participants can take this test in English, Spanish, French, German, Italian, Portuguese (Brazil), Chinese (Simplified) and Japanese. English is on every plan, and the other languages come with yearly plans. Have a native speaker read the machine-translated text before launch.
Is this a clinical test?
No. ConductCognition is for research use only. It runs, scores and exports the test; clinical interpretation is outside the platform.
Every test: the full test list.
Run this test in your next study
Start free with 10 free participants on any test, then use participant credits or a yearly plan.
Related tests