## 4 Dataset
### Dataset Properties  
As mentioned in the previous subsection, in the first step, we excluded entries corresponding to contestants who failed to correctly answer the first question in the cash builder because they were, thus, disqualified from the second phase. Apart from this initial filtering, we did not explicitly remove outliers from the dataset. Because of the relatively small sample size and the subjective human elements influencing the gameplay, it was challenging to define clear outlier criteria. For instance, contestants with similar profiles and comparable offers might experience different outcomes, making it difficult to objectively determine which cases deviate meaningfully from the norm, given the dataset's size. After this preliminary filtering, the final dataset comprised 171 contestants, 53 of whom ultimately won their games. Appendix A presents a detailed statistical analysis of the whole dataset, while in this subsection, we highlight the most important insights. The left-hand-side graph in Figure 2 shows the breakdown of the contestants' cash builder results, while the right-hand-side graph indicates the distribution of the selected offer. The success in the cash builder was relatively evenly distributed across all five options, with a slight prevalence of five correct answers in the cash builder (EUR 2500). A significant portion of the contestants (58.5%) opted to compete against four chasers, while none has ever selected to compete against two. We noticed that as the age group increases, the percentage of contestants selecting the offer with four chasers rises, while the number of those selecting the offer with five chasers decreases. The only age group that did not choose to face four chasers most frequently was the second one (from ages 19 to 24), where as many as 47.6% of the contestants selected the offer with all five chasers. On average, older contestants tended to select offers with lower monetary prizes but a greater time advantage over the chasers than the younger ones did. An interesting observation is that younger contestants with lower results in the cash builder, on average, selected offers with more chasers compared to those of the older contestants with the same results. Both men and women most often selected the offer with four chasers. Women selected the offer with three and five chasers with equal frequency (22%), whereas men tended to choose five chasers (27.3%) more often than three (13.2%). On average, women selected \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c} \hline \hline
**The Rest of the Data** & **Chaser \#1** & **Chaser \#2** & **Chaser \#3** & **Chaser \#4** & **Chaser \#5** \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 8: The chaser order’s format. offers with EUR 1725 less prize money and a 2.3 s longer time advantage over the chasers than men did. An unexpected statistical finding was that the contestants who were recognized by the chasers from their previous participation on quiz shows or in local pub quizzes, on average, selected offers with fewer chasers and less prize money than those who were not, regardless of their cash builder result. Contestants from large cities, on average, selected offers with more chasers. Those from smaller cities competed for approximately EUR 1500 more prize money compared to that by those from middle-sized cities. Notably, 70% of the contestants from Pannonian Croatia selected the offer with four chasers. Regarding the intended use of the prize money, the contestants who planned to spend their winnings on education or donations selected the offer with four chasers in 70% of the cases, while those who intended to use the money for entertainment did so in 60% of the cases. When looking into the cash builder results, we observed that compared to the other contestants, those with the lowest scores for EUR 500 and EUR 1000 were more likely to select the offer with five chasers.