IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/jospec/v18y2017i2p99-125.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Behavioral Biases Never Walk Alone

Author

Listed:
  • Isabel Abinzano
  • Luis Muga
  • Rafael Santamaria

Abstract

This article presents evidence of the impact of overconfidence bias in asset prices drawn from a study based on data from tennis betting exchanges. A series of betting strategies in tournaments with a clear-cut favorite are shown to yield significant economic returns. The impact of overconfidence bias on betting odds increases with trading volume, media coverage, and levels of disagreement between overconfident and cumulative prospect theory bettors. Just as in traditional financial markets, arbitrage limits are shown to be a necessary condition for the impact of behavioral biases on prices.

Suggested Citation

  • Isabel Abinzano & Luis Muga & Rafael Santamaria, 2017. "Behavioral Biases Never Walk Alone," Journal of Sports Economics, , vol. 18(2), pages 99-125, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:jospec:v:18:y:2017:i:2:p:99-125
    DOI: 10.1177/1527002514560575
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1527002514560575
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/1527002514560575?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Erik Snowberg & Justin Wolfers, 2010. "Explaining the Favorite-Long Shot Bias: Is it Risk-Love or Misperceptions?," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 118(4), pages 723-746, August.
    2. Richard Borghesi & Rodney Paul & Andrew Weinbach, 2009. "Market frictions and overpriced favourites: evidence from arena football," Applied Economics Letters, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 16(9), pages 903-906.
    3. Tversky, Amos & Kahneman, Daniel, 1992. "Advances in Prospect Theory: Cumulative Representation of Uncertainty," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 5(4), pages 297-323, October.
    4. Egon Franck & Erwin Verbeek & Stephan Nüesch, 2013. "Inter-market Arbitrage in Betting," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 80(318), pages 300-325, April.
    5. Harrison Hong & José Scheinkman & Wei Xiong, 2006. "Asset Float and Speculative Bubbles," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 61(3), pages 1073-1117, June.
    6. Lahvicka, Jiri, 2013. "What Causes the Favorite-Longshot Bias? Further Evidence from Tennis," MPRA Paper 47905, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    7. De Long, J Bradford & Andrei Shleifer & Lawrence H. Summers & Robert J. Waldmann, 1990. "Noise Trader Risk in Financial Markets," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 98(4), pages 703-738, August.
    8. Andrea Frazzini, 2006. "The Disposition Effect and Underreaction to News," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 61(4), pages 2017-2046, August.
    9. Kent Daniel & David Hirshleifer & Avanidhar Subrahmanyam, 1998. "Investor Psychology and Security Market Under- and Overreactions," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 53(6), pages 1839-1885, December.
    10. Shleifer, Andrei, 2000. "Inefficient Markets: An Introduction to Behavioral Finance," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780198292272, Decembrie.
    11. Alexander K. Koch & Hui-Fai Shing, 2008. "Bookmaker and Pari-Mutuel Betting: Is a (Reverse) Favourite-Longshot Bias Built-In?," Journal of Prediction Markets, University of Buckingham Press, vol. 2(2), pages 29-50, September.
    12. Michael J. Cooper & Roberto C. Gutierrez & Allaudeen Hameed, 2004. "Market States and Momentum," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 59(3), pages 1345-1365, June.
    13. Roger Vergin, 2001. "Overreaction in the NFL point spread market," Applied Financial Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 11(5), pages 497-509.
    14. Daniel Kahneman & Amos Tversky, 2013. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Leonard C MacLean & William T Ziemba (ed.), HANDBOOK OF THE FUNDAMENTALS OF FINANCIAL DECISION MAKING Part I, chapter 6, pages 99-127, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    15. Harrison Hong & Jeremy C. Stein, 2007. "Disagreement and the Stock Market," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 21(2), pages 109-128, Spring.
    16. Jose A. Scheinkman & Wei Xiong, 2003. "Overconfidence and Speculative Bubbles," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 111(6), pages 1183-1219, December.
    17. Paul Docherty & Steve Easton, 2012. "Market efficiency and continuous information arrival: evidence from prediction markets," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 44(19), pages 2461-2471, July.
    18. Franck, Egon & Verbeek, Erwin & Nüesch, Stephan, 2010. "Prediction accuracy of different market structures -- bookmakers versus a betting exchange," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 26(3), pages 448-459, July.
    19. White, Halbert, 1980. "A Heteroskedasticity-Consistent Covariance Matrix Estimator and a Direct Test for Heteroskedasticity," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 48(4), pages 817-838, May.
    20. Daniel Kahneman & Amos Tversky, 2013. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Leonard C MacLean & William T Ziemba (ed.), HANDBOOK OF THE FUNDAMENTALS OF FINANCIAL DECISION MAKING Part I, chapter 6, pages 99-127, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    21. Alessandro Innocenti & Tommaso Nannicini & Roberto Ricciuti, 2021. "The Importance of Betting Early," Risks, MDPI, vol. 9(4), pages 1-15, April.
    22. Michael A. Smith & David Paton & Leighton Vaughan Williams, 2006. "Market Efficiency in Person‐to‐Person Betting," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 73(292), pages 673-689, November.
    23. Hurley, William & McDonough, Lawrence, 1995. "A Note on the Hayek Hypothesis and the Favorite-Longshot Bias in Parimutuel Betting," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 85(4), pages 949-955, September.
    24. Masahiro Ashiya, 2015. "Lock! Risk-Free Arbitrage in the Japanese Racetrack Betting Market," Journal of Sports Economics, , vol. 16(3), pages 322-330, April.
    25. Jeremy Arkes, 2011. "Do Gamblers Correctly Price Momentum In Nba Betting Markets?," Journal of Prediction Markets, University of Buckingham Press, vol. 5(1), pages 31-50.
    26. Avery, Christopher & Chevalier, Judith, 1999. "Identifying Investor Sentiment from Price Paths: The Case of Football Betting," The Journal of Business, University of Chicago Press, vol. 72(4), pages 493-521, October.
    27. Nikolaos Vlastakis & George Dotsis & Raphael N. Markellos, 2009. "How efficient is the European football betting market? Evidence from arbitrage and trading strategies," Journal of Forecasting, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 28(5), pages 426-444.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Jinook Jeong & Jee Young Kim & Yoon Jae Ro, 2019. "On the efficiency of racetrack betting market: a new test for the favourite-longshot bias," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 51(54), pages 5817-5828, November.
    2. Isabel Abinzano & Luis Muga & Rafael Santamaria, 2019. "Hidden Power of Trading Activity: The FLB in Tennis Betting Exchanges," Journal of Sports Economics, , vol. 20(2), pages 261-285, February.
    3. Marius Ötting & Christian Deutscher & Carl Singleton & Luca De Angelis, 2023. "Gambling on Momentum in Contests," Economics Discussion Papers em-dp2023-08, Department of Economics, University of Reading.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Isabel Abinzano & Luis Muga & Rafael Santamaria, 2019. "Hidden Power of Trading Activity: The FLB in Tennis Betting Exchanges," Journal of Sports Economics, , vol. 20(2), pages 261-285, February.
    2. Franke, Maximilian, 2020. "Do market participants misprice lottery-type assets? Evidence from the European soccer betting market," The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 1-18.
    3. David Hirshleife, 2015. "Behavioral Finance," Annual Review of Financial Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 7(1), pages 133-159, December.
    4. Philip W. S. Newall & Dominic Cortis, 2021. "Are Sports Bettors Biased toward Longshots, Favorites, or Both? A Literature Review," Risks, MDPI, vol. 9(1), pages 1-9, January.
    5. Goto, Shingo & Yamada, Toru, 2023. "What drives biased odds in sports betting markets: Bettors’ irrationality and the role of bookmakers," International Review of Economics & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 252-270.
    6. Stefano DellaVigna, 2009. "Psychology and Economics: Evidence from the Field," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 47(2), pages 315-372, June.
    7. Hirota, Shinichi, 2023. "Money supply, opinion dispersion, and stock prices," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 212(C), pages 1286-1310.
    8. Edmonds, Christopher T. & Edmonds, Jennifer E. & Fu, Richard & Jenkins, David S., 2018. "Price momentum and the premium for meeting or beating analysts' forecasts of earnings," Advances in accounting, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 34-47.
    9. Barber, Brad M. & Odean, Terrance, 2013. "The Behavior of Individual Investors," Handbook of the Economics of Finance, in: G.M. Constantinides & M. Harris & R. M. Stulz (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Finance, volume 2, chapter 0, pages 1533-1570, Elsevier.
    10. Rebeggiani, Luca & Gross, Johannes, 2018. "Chance or Ability? The Efficiency of the Football Betting Market Revisited," VfS Annual Conference 2018 (Freiburg, Breisgau): Digital Economy 181563, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    11. Vincenzo Candila & Antonio Scognamillo, 2019. "On the Longshot Bias in Tennis Betting Markets: The Casco Normalization," Working Papers 3_236, Dipartimento di Scienze Economiche e Statistiche, Università degli Studi di Salerno.
    12. Martin Kukuk & Stefan Winter, 2008. "An Alternative Explanation of the Favorite-Longshot Bias," Journal of Gambling Business and Economics, University of Buckingham Press, vol. 2(2), pages 79-96, September.
    13. John Peirson & Michael A. Smith, 2010. "Expert Analysis and Insider Information in Horse Race Betting: Regulating Informed Market Behavior," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 76(4), pages 976-992, April.
    14. Angelini, Giovanni & De Angelis, Luca & Singleton, Carl, 2022. "Informational efficiency and behaviour within in-play prediction markets," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 282-299.
    15. Francisco Gomes & Michael Haliassos & Tarun Ramadorai, 2021. "Household Finance," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 59(3), pages 919-1000, September.
    16. Baars, Maren & Mohrschladt, Hannes, 2021. "An alternative behavioral explanation for the MAX effect," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 191(C), pages 868-886.
    17. Grinblatt, Mark & Han, Bing, 2001. "The Disposition Effect and Momentum," University of California at Los Angeles, Anderson Graduate School of Management qt6qg5d62p, Anderson Graduate School of Management, UCLA.
    18. Daniela Vesselinova Balkanska, 2018. "Disposition effect and analyst forecast dispersion," Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Springer, vol. 50(3), pages 837-859, April.
    19. Palomino, Frederic & Renneboog, Luc & Zhang, Chendi, 2009. "Information salience, investor sentiment, and stock returns: The case of British soccer betting," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 15(3), pages 368-387, June.
    20. Li An & Huijun Wang & Jian Wang & Jianfeng Yu, 2020. "Lottery-Related Anomalies: The Role of Reference-Dependent Preferences," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 66(1), pages 473-501, January.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:jospec:v:18:y:2017:i:2:p:99-125. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.