{"title":"Risk Preference Elicitation and Financial Advice Taking","authors":"David J. Streich","doi":"10.1080/15427560.2021.1974444","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Financial advisors rely on accurate measures of investor risk preferences. This study compares different risk elicitation methods (REMs) in terms of their perceived suitability and impact on financial advice taking. The results suggest that the perceived suitability of the suggested risk profile strongly predicts delegation to an advisory tool. REMs differ in terms of their perceived process similarity with the investor, which positively affects suitability (and thus, delegation) directly and through its positive effect on source credibility. Differences were also found with regards to the perceived complexity of the risk profiling task, which is positively related to suitability. In summary, the findings imply that applying suitable REMs matters not only because it avoids misrepresentation of an investor’s true risk preferences, but because it directly affects the propensity to delegate financial decision-making.","PeriodicalId":47016,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Behavioral Finance","volume":"16 1","pages":"259 - 275"},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2021-09-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Behavioral Finance","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15427560.2021.1974444","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"BUSINESS, FINANCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
Abstract
Abstract Financial advisors rely on accurate measures of investor risk preferences. This study compares different risk elicitation methods (REMs) in terms of their perceived suitability and impact on financial advice taking. The results suggest that the perceived suitability of the suggested risk profile strongly predicts delegation to an advisory tool. REMs differ in terms of their perceived process similarity with the investor, which positively affects suitability (and thus, delegation) directly and through its positive effect on source credibility. Differences were also found with regards to the perceived complexity of the risk profiling task, which is positively related to suitability. In summary, the findings imply that applying suitable REMs matters not only because it avoids misrepresentation of an investor’s true risk preferences, but because it directly affects the propensity to delegate financial decision-making.
期刊介绍：
In Journal of Behavioral Finance , leaders in many fields are brought together to address the implications of current work on individual and group emotion, cognition, and action for the behavior of investment markets. They include specialists in personality, social, and clinical psychology; psychiatry; organizational behavior; accounting; marketing; sociology; anthropology; behavioral economics; finance; and the multidisciplinary study of judgment and decision making. The journal will foster debate among groups who have keen insights into the behavioral patterns of markets but have not historically published in the more traditional financial and economic journals. Further, it will stimulate new interdisciplinary research and theory that will build a body of knowledge about the psychological influences on investment market fluctuations. The most obvious benefit will be a new understanding of investment markets that can greatly improve investment decision making. Another benefit will be the opportunity for behavioral scientists to expand the scope of their studies via the use of the enormous databases that document behavior in investment markets.
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
分享
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
扫码关注我们
