Advanced Search
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

Probability Judgements in Multi-Stage Problems: Experimental Evidence of Systematic Biases

Contents:

Author Info

  • Gneezy, U.

    (Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research)

Abstract

We report empirical evidence that in problems of random walk with positive drift, bounded rationality leads individuals to under-estimate the probability of success in the long run.In particular, individuals who were given the stage by stage probability distribution failed to aggregate this information in a multi-stage case.Estimations of the long run probability distribution did not differ much from the given stage-by-stage probability distribution, and were systematically lower than the accurate one.Applications to risk perception in financial markets are considered

Download Info

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
File URL: http://arno.uvt.nl/show.cgi?fid=3270
Our checks indicate that this address may not be valid because: 404 Not Found. If this is indeed the case, please notify (Richard Broekman)
Download Restriction: no

Bibliographic Info

Paper provided by Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research in its series Discussion Paper with number 1996-01.

as in new window
Length:
Date of creation: 1996
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:dgr:kubcen:199601

Contact details of provider:
Web page: http://center.uvt.nl

Related research

Keywords: bounded rationality; Probability; random walks; Estimation;

References

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
as in new window
  1. Mehra, Rajnish & Prescott, Edward C., 1985. "The equity premium: A puzzle," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 15(2), pages 145-161, March.
  2. Fama, Eugene F, 1991. " Efficient Capital Markets: II," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 46(5), pages 1575-617, December.
  3. Amos Tversky & Daniel Kahneman, 1979. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk," Levine's Working Paper Archive 7656, David K. Levine.
  4. Werner F. M. De Bondt & Richard H. Thaler, 1994. "Financial Decision-Making in Markets and Firms: A Behavioral Perspective," NBER Working Papers 4777, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  5. Arrow, Kenneth J, 1982. "Risk Perception in Psychology and Economics," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 20(1), pages 1-9, January.
  6. Camerer, Colin F, 1987. "Do Biases in Probability Judgment Matter in Markets? Experimental Evidence," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 77(5), pages 981-97, December.
  7. Machina, Mark J, 1989. "Dynamic Consistency and Non-expected Utility Models of Choice under Uncertainty," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 27(4), pages 1622-68, December.
  8. Hammond, P.J. & , ., 1987. "Consequentialist foundations for expected utility," CORE Discussion Papers 1987016, Université catholique de Louvain, Center for Operations Research and Econometrics (CORE).
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 in new window

Cited by:
  1. Jakob Grazzini, 2013. "Information dissemination in an experimentally based agent-based stock market," Journal of Economic Interaction and Coordination, Springer, vol. 8(1), pages 179-209, April.
  2. Ludwig Ensthaler & Olga Nottmeyer & Georg Weizsäcker & Christian Zankiewicz, 2014. "Hidden Skewness: On the Difficulty of Multiplicative Compounding under Random Shocks," CESifo Working Paper Series 4760, CESifo Group Munich.
  3. Gneezy, U. & Das, J.W.M., 1996. "Experimental Investigation of Percieved Risk in Random Walk Processes," Discussion Paper 1996-85, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.

Lists

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

Statistics

Access and download statistics

Corrections

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:dgr:kubcen:199601. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Richard Broekman).

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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