你有选择吗:信念更新和处置效应的含义

IF 2.5 2区 经济学 Q2 ECONOMICS Journal of Economic Psychology Pub Date : 2024-02-27 DOI:10.1016/j.joep.2024.102718
Kremena Bachmann
{"title":"你有选择吗:信念更新和处置效应的含义","authors":"Kremena Bachmann","doi":"10.1016/j.joep.2024.102718","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>The present paper evaluates the importance of belief updating for the prevalence of the disposition effect – the reluctance to sell assets at losses as compared to gains. In particular, the present paper studies whether restricting choices in investment risk taking decisions motivates different learning from the decision outcomes and whether such differences in learning cause differences in the emergence of the disposition effect. The results show that investors learn from negative outcomes more like Bayesians if their risk-taking decisions are restricted. Causal mediation analysis reveals that such differences in learning increases the probability to sell after losses, which improves the overall investment performance. Compared to gains, the differences in learning after losses explain also why investors making active risk-taking choices are less likely to sell after losses as compared to gains, while the effect is reversed when choices are restricted. These findings suggest that restricting the discretion in decisions influences the way investors learn from decision outcomes and these differences in learning can explain puzzling differences in the risk-taking behavior of individual investors.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48318,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Economic Psychology","volume":"102 ","pages":"Article 102718"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167487024000266/pdfft?md5=f0c9d73fb118664234a17df2e3b678d7&pid=1-s2.0-S0167487024000266-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Do you have a choice?: Implications for belief updating and the disposition effect\",\"authors\":\"Kremena Bachmann\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.joep.2024.102718\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>The present paper evaluates the importance of belief updating for the prevalence of the disposition effect – the reluctance to sell assets at losses as compared to gains. In particular, the present paper studies whether restricting choices in investment risk taking decisions motivates different learning from the decision outcomes and whether such differences in learning cause differences in the emergence of the disposition effect. The results show that investors learn from negative outcomes more like Bayesians if their risk-taking decisions are restricted. Causal mediation analysis reveals that such differences in learning increases the probability to sell after losses, which improves the overall investment performance. Compared to gains, the differences in learning after losses explain also why investors making active risk-taking choices are less likely to sell after losses as compared to gains, while the effect is reversed when choices are restricted. These findings suggest that restricting the discretion in decisions influences the way investors learn from decision outcomes and these differences in learning can explain puzzling differences in the risk-taking behavior of individual investors.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48318,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Economic Psychology\",\"volume\":\"102 \",\"pages\":\"Article 102718\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-02-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167487024000266/pdfft?md5=f0c9d73fb118664234a17df2e3b678d7&pid=1-s2.0-S0167487024000266-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Economic Psychology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167487024000266\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Economic Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167487024000266","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文评估了信念更新对处置效应(与收益相比,在亏损时不愿出售资产)普遍存在的重要性。本文特别研究了在投资风险决策中限制选择是否会促使投资者从决策结果中获得不同的学习,以及这种学习差异是否会导致处置效应的出现。结果表明,如果投资者的风险承担决策受到限制,他们会更像贝叶斯主义者那样从负面结果中学习。因果中介分析表明,这种学习差异会增加投资者在亏损后卖出的概率,从而提高整体投资绩效。与收益相比,投资者在亏损后的学习差异也解释了为什么与收益相比,做出主动风险承担选择的投资者在亏损后卖出的可能性更小,而当选择受到限制时,效果则相反。这些研究结果表明,限制决策的自由裁量权会影响投资者从决策结果中学习的方式,这些学习差异可以解释个体投资者风险承担行为中令人费解的差异。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Do you have a choice?: Implications for belief updating and the disposition effect

The present paper evaluates the importance of belief updating for the prevalence of the disposition effect – the reluctance to sell assets at losses as compared to gains. In particular, the present paper studies whether restricting choices in investment risk taking decisions motivates different learning from the decision outcomes and whether such differences in learning cause differences in the emergence of the disposition effect. The results show that investors learn from negative outcomes more like Bayesians if their risk-taking decisions are restricted. Causal mediation analysis reveals that such differences in learning increases the probability to sell after losses, which improves the overall investment performance. Compared to gains, the differences in learning after losses explain also why investors making active risk-taking choices are less likely to sell after losses as compared to gains, while the effect is reversed when choices are restricted. These findings suggest that restricting the discretion in decisions influences the way investors learn from decision outcomes and these differences in learning can explain puzzling differences in the risk-taking behavior of individual investors.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.20
自引率
31.40%
发文量
69
审稿时长
63 days
期刊介绍: The Journal aims to present research that will improve understanding of behavioral, in particular psychological, aspects of economic phenomena and processes. The Journal seeks to be a channel for the increased interest in using behavioral science methods for the study of economic behavior, and so to contribute to better solutions of societal problems, by stimulating new approaches and new theorizing about economic affairs. Economic psychology as a discipline studies the psychological mechanisms that underlie economic behavior. It deals with preferences, judgments, choices, economic interaction, and factors influencing these, as well as the consequences of judgements and decisions for economic processes and phenomena. This includes the impact of economic institutions upon human behavior and well-being. Studies in economic psychology may relate to different levels of aggregation, from the household and the individual consumer to the macro level of whole nations. Economic behavior in connection with inflation, unemployment, taxation, economic development, as well as consumer information and economic behavior in the market place are thus among the fields of interest. The journal also encourages submissions dealing with social interaction in economic contexts, like bargaining, negotiation, or group decision-making. The Journal of Economic Psychology contains: (a) novel reports of empirical (including: experimental) research on economic behavior; (b) replications studies; (c) assessments of the state of the art in economic psychology; (d) articles providing a theoretical perspective or a frame of reference for the study of economic behavior; (e) articles explaining the implications of theoretical developments for practical applications; (f) book reviews; (g) announcements of meetings, conferences and seminars.
期刊最新文献
Entrepreneurial worries: Self-employment and potential loss of well-being Empowered or informed? Seeking to mitigate gender differences in first-offer assertiveness through pre-negotiation interventions Cognitive dissonance, political participation, and changes in policy preferences Memory bias beyond ego: Selective recall of positive financial outcomes Moral hypocrisy and the dichotomy of hypothetical versus real choices in prosocial behavior
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1