discussion participants were given a $7 bonus, to be donated to a specified charity, of which they could wager all, some, or none. Our use of football games was motivated by the desire to give participants a task in which they could draw on their natural knowledge base to forecast the outcome of a real-world event. The risky shift has been studied previously using other forms of betting (see Myers and Lamm 1976; Isenberg 1986). Recruitment. Recruitment took place via Amazon Mechanical Turk. Informed consent was obtained from all study participants. An initial survey included de- mographic questions, a knowledge test on NFL teams and players, and a series of questions on risk tolerance, argumentation, and group discussion. The knowledge screening consisted of 19 questions that asked respondents to correctly pair team lo- cations and names and match current season players with teams. Those scoring 80% and above were eligible to take part in the full experiment. Subjects were allowed to participate in multiple weeks. Weekly Pre-Survey. In a weekly pre-survey, given 2-3 days prior to the discus- sion, subjects were asked to make a choice as to whether or not the favorite’s margin of victory would exceed the spread and to make a wager on their team choice ranging from $0 to $7 in whole dollar increments (see Supplementary Material). Group Assignment .A subset of the pre-survey subjects was used to populate discussion groups with respect to three dichotomous variables: (1) Policy side condi- tions were “favorite” and “underdog” in which all members had selected the favorite or underdog respectively. (2) Disagreement level, the difference between the highest and lowest wagers in the group, was either “high” or “low” with the possible wager distributions shown in Figure 3. High disagreement groups had a $7 difference and low could be $3, $4, or $5. (3) Network structure was either “complete” where all group members were connected or “chain” where the moderate ( w$_{1}$ ) and extreme ( w$_{3}$ ) 20