A typical behavioral pattern of investors is to reduce stock market exposure after a crash. We suggest a simple nudge based on the IKEA effect and the endowment effect that reduces this problem substantially: In case of a market crash, stockholders who have chosen their own portfolios are more likely to stick with their investment choices.
Mutual funds cannot consistently return better-than-average performance. Yet investors often pick their mutual funds based on past performance. Researchers Leonardo Weiss-Cohen, Philip Newall and Peter Ayton conducted a long-term Think Forward Initiative research project that sought to answer how their investment decisions could be improved.
Robo-advisors help investors deal with the complexity of the stock market. However, users of these new decision support systems are not immune to decision inertia – repeating supoptimal investment strategies regardless their negative financial consequences. I investigate two possible nudges to help user overcome decision inertia in robo-advisory environments.
People's failure to act is an important problem discussed in behavioral economics and finance. But inappropriate action can also be detrimental. Find out more about the action bias in this post.
Stocks yield much higher returns than bonds and other riskless securities. In fact, in the last 100 years US equities have seen an 8% average annual real return, compared to only a 1% return for more riskless securities. This gap is called the equity premium puzzle – why are equities valued so much higher than securities? One behavioral theory attributes the equity premium puzzle to what’s known as myopic loss aversion (MLA) – the idea that loss-averse investors (as all investors are) take too short-term a view of their investments, leading them to react overly negatively to short-term losses. We designed the first natural field experimental evidence to show that MLA exists for professional traders.
Ignorance is bliss: How much would you pay to avoid threatening information?
It is no secret that the way we speak to others has a strong impact on how we are perceived, and how successful our interactions will be. The lesson from cognitive science is this: When it comes to money, the way we speak to ourselves is equally important.
A common interpretation in behavioural finance is that rationality is the result of a pure cognitive process which can be behaviourally biased. While cognitive biases are influences that affect rationality from within the cognitive system, affective biases refer to those influences that affect the cognitive system from outside. Unfortunately, the assumption that rationality is a pure cognitive process is not well motivated. Rationality results from the intrinsic interaction between cognition and emotions.
