Inside Squid Game: A Behavioral Scientist’s Perspective

When I first watched Squid Game, I thought I was just going to be another hit Netflix series. But within minutes, I found myself viewing an illustration of the decision-making processes I study and work with every day. The games immediately revealed how people think, choose, and react under risk, uncertainty, and social pressure.

And I wasn’t alone. Squid Game became one of the most globally watched TV shows in history, with the first season alone drawing 265 million views and over 2.2 billion hours watched, making it the top non-English show on Netflix (Netflix, 2026).

In this article, I highlight some of the most iconic games and the well-known behavioral science theories and psychological phenomena they brought to mind.

Red Light, Green Light: Optimism Bias

Even after seeing players abruptly killed in earlier rounds, contestants keep running, convinced they will succeed.

That’s optimism bias: the tendency to believe that we are less likely than others to experience negative outcomes (Sharot, 2011). It’s the same bias that makes people underestimate their personal risk for everything from traffic accidents to financial loss, until the consequences are right in front of them.

In Squid Game, optimism bias becomes literal life and death.

Dalgona Candy: Risk Compensation

Players given a needle and sugar try risky moves like biting or scraping aggressively. Why?

Because when people feel they have a tool or control, they often take more risks, even if the real danger hasn’t changed. This is known as risk compensation (Peltzman, 1975). The presence of a needle doesn’t make the game safer, but it feels like it does, and that subtle shift in perceived control changes behavior.

Tug of War: Social Proof

When forming teams, many players choose the strongest people, even though strategic coordination matters more.

This is social proof (Cialdini, 2001): when uncertain, people look to others to decide what must be the right choice. In group contexts, social proof can override independent thinking, and Squid Game shows how that can be costly.

Marbles: Loss Aversion

This game brings out intense betrayal as players must take away a friend’s chance to survive.

Loss aversion, where losses hurt twice as much as equivalent gains feel good (Kahneman & Tversky, 1979), drives irrational choices. Players will cling to marbles to avoid losing them, even when doing so lowers their chance of survival.

This bias demonstrates how fear of loss can overwhelm rational strategy.

Glass Bridge: Ambiguity Aversion

When players don’t know which glass panel is safe, hesitation spikes. That’s ambiguity aversion, the preference for known risks over unknown odds (Ellsberg, 1961).

Even rational players freeze when probabilities are hidden. Squid Game’s glass bridge perfectly dramatizes what behavioral economists observe in lab after lab: we avoid the unknown, even when waiting increases risk.

Please note that this list and its interpretation are based solely on my own perspective and may allow for multiple interpretations. Ultimately, the series became a mirror, reflecting the psychology behind the choices we make, even when we don’t realize it.

At the Center for Behavioral Decisions, we work on capacity building, advisory, and interactive workshops that aim to make behavioral science both informative and engaging. If you are interested in learning more about behavioral science and how it can be applied within your organization, we would be happy to hear from you at hello@becisions.com