> $1m rising from 0% to 1% seems much more significant than the chance of the same win rising from 20% to 21%. 0% to 1% is a much bigger change expected value

> $1m rising from 0% to 1% seems much more significant than the chance of the same win rising from 20% to 21%. 0% to 1% is a much bigger change expected value when viewed as a ratio. 20% to 21% is a change of about 5% whereas 0% to 1% is an infinite or 100% change. I think it is fair to say that the example does not demonstrate any human bias.