IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/hal/journl/hal-03634756.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Traditional versus Behavioral Finance Theory
[La théorie de la finance traditionnelle contre la théorie de la finance comportementale]

Author

Listed:
  • Assia Kamoune

    (ENCG - Ecole Nationale de Commerce et de Gestion - UH2MC - Université Hassan II [Casablanca])

  • Nafii Ibenrissoul

    (ENCG - Ecole Nationale de Commerce et de Gestion - UH2MC - Université Hassan II [Casablanca])

Abstract

According to traditional finance theorists, in an efficient market, investors think and behave "rationally" when trading, buying, and selling stocks, and each investor considers carefully all available information before making any trading or investment decisions. The theory of the financial market efficiency or efficient market hypothesis (EMH) corresponds to the theory of competitive equilibrium applied to the financial securities market. Indeed, efficiency assumes the atomicity of the market actors and that all the participants are in active competition with the aim of maximizing profits, so that none of them can alone influence the level of prices which will establish themselves in the market. However, behavioral finance, whose main purpose is to study the real behavior of investors in the financial markets, based on social and cognitive psychology, has come to demonstrate with convincing evidence that investors make major systematic errors and that psychological biases affect investors' investment decision-making. In other words, behavioral finance claims that investors tend to have psychological and emotional biases that lead to making irrational investment decisions. In this article, we will try in thefirst part to examine the nature and the extent of knowledge on the theory of the financial markets efficiency, one of the fundamental paradigms in traditional finance. Despite its considerable contribution to economic and financial theory, it has been hotly contested in recent years. In the second part,we will focus on the theory of behavioral finance, its main theory (prospect theory), its main biases and heuristics as well as its contribution and its limits.

Suggested Citation

  • Assia Kamoune & Nafii Ibenrissoul, 2022. "Traditional versus Behavioral Finance Theory [La théorie de la finance traditionnelle contre la théorie de la finance comportementale]," Post-Print hal-03634756, HAL.
  • Handle: RePEc:hal:journl:hal-03634756
    DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.6392167
    Note: View the original document on HAL open archive server: https://hal.science/hal-03634756
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://hal.science/hal-03634756/document
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.5281/zenodo.6392167?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. Gervais, Simon & Odean, Terrance, 2001. "Learning to be Overconfident," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 14(1), pages 1-27.
    2. Cade Massey & Richard Thaler, 2005. "Overconfidence vs. Market Efficiency in the National Football League," NBER Working Papers 11270, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. Shiller, Robert J, 1981. "Do Stock Prices Move Too Much to be Justified by Subsequent Changes in Dividends?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 71(3), pages 421-436, June.
    4. Shleifer, Andrei, 2000. "Inefficient Markets: An Introduction to Behavioral Finance," OUP Catalogue, Oxford University Press, number 9780198292272.
    5. Burton G. Malkiel, 2003. "The Efficient Market Hypothesis and Its Critics," Working Papers 111, Princeton University, Department of Economics, Center for Economic Policy Studies..
    6. Burton G. Malkiel, 2003. "The Efficient Market Hypothesis and Its Critics," Working Papers 111, Princeton University, Department of Economics, Center for Economic Policy Studies..
    7. 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..
    8. repec:pri:cepsud:91malkiel is not listed on IDEAS
    9. Shiller, Robert J., 1999. "Human behavior and the efficiency of the financial system," Handbook of Macroeconomics, in: J. B. Taylor & M. Woodford (ed.), Handbook of Macroeconomics, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 20, pages 1305-1340, Elsevier.
    10. Fama, Eugene F, 1970. "Efficient Capital Markets: A Review of Theory and Empirical Work," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 25(2), pages 383-417, May.
    11. Jegadeesh, Narasimhan & Titman, Sheridan, 1993. "Returns to Buying Winners and Selling Losers: Implications for Stock Market Efficiency," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 48(1), pages 65-91, March.
    12. Jensen, Michael C., 1978. "Some anomalous evidence regarding market efficiency," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 6(2-3), pages 95-101.
    13. Burton G. Malkiel, 2003. "The Efficient Market Hypothesis and Its Critics," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 17(1), pages 59-82, Winter.
    14. Shleifer, Andrei & Vishny, Robert W, 1997. "The Limits of Arbitrage," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 52(1), pages 35-55, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Stéphane Goutte & David Guerreiro & Bilel Sanhaji & Sophie Saglio & Julien Chevallier, 2019. "International Financial Markets," Post-Print halshs-02183053, HAL.
    2. Stefanescu, Razvan & Dumitriu, Ramona, 2016. "Particularitǎţi ale evoluţiei variabilelor financiare [Some particularities of the financial variables evolution]," MPRA Paper 73481, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised 02 Sep 2016.
    3. Brice Corgnet & Cary Deck & Mark DeSantis & David Porter, 2022. "Forecasting Skills in Experimental Markets: Illusion or Reality?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(7), pages 5216-5232, July.
    4. Roland Rothenstein, 2018. "Quantification of market efficiency based on informational-entropy," Papers 1812.02371, arXiv.org.
    5. David Hirshleife, 2015. "Behavioral Finance," Annual Review of Financial Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 7(1), pages 133-159, December.
    6. Ashok Chanabasangouda Patil & Shailesh Rastogi, 2019. "Time-Varying Price–Volume Relationship and Adaptive Market Efficiency: A Survey of the Empirical Literature," JRFM, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-18, June.
    7. John Y. Campbell, 2000. "Asset Pricing at the Millennium," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 55(4), pages 1515-1567, August.
    8. Daouda Lawa Tan Toe & Mamadou Toe & Tibi Didier Zoungrana, 2023. "Investigating the weak and semi-strong forms of Informational Efficiency on the West African Economic and Monetary Union’s Stock Exchange (BRVM) through returns predictability tests," SN Business & Economics, Springer, vol. 3(9), pages 1-27, September.
    9. Thomas Holtfort, 2019. "From standard to evolutionary finance: a literature survey," Management Review Quarterly, Springer, vol. 69(2), pages 207-232, June.
    10. Charron Jacques-Olivier, 2017. "Inefficient Debate. The EMH, the “Remarkable Error” and a Question of Point of View," Accounting, Economics, and Law: A Convivium, De Gruyter, vol. 7(3), pages 1-24, December.
    11. Chan, Wesley S. & Frankel, Richard & Kothari, S.P., 2004. "Testing behavioral finance theories using trends and consistency in financial performance," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 3-50, December.
    12. Muneer Shaik & S. Maheswaran, 2016. "Modelling the Paradox in Stock Markets by Variance Ratio Volatility Estimator that Utilises Extreme Values of Asset Prices," Journal of Emerging Market Finance, Institute for Financial Management and Research, vol. 15(3), pages 333-361, December.
    13. Committee, Nobel Prize, 2013. "Understanding Asset Prices," Nobel Prize in Economics documents 2013-1, Nobel Prize Committee.
    14. Achim BACKHAUS & Aliya ZHAKANOVA ISIKSAL, 2016. "The Impact of Momentum Factors on Multi Asset Portfolio," Journal for Economic Forecasting, Institute for Economic Forecasting, vol. 0(4), pages 146-169, December.
    15. Asif, Raheel & Frömmel, Michael, 2022. "Testing Long memory in exchange rates and its implications for the adaptive market hypothesis," Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, Elsevier, vol. 593(C).
    16. Paulo Sergio Ceretta & Alexandre Silva Da costa, 2017. "The Gap Effect on the Brazilian Exchange," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 37(4), pages 2505-2516.
    17. Azubuike Samuel Agbam, 2015. "Tests of Random Walk and Efficient Market Hypothesis in Developing Economies: Evidence from Nigerian Capital Market," International Journal of Management Sciences, Research Academy of Social Sciences, vol. 5(1), pages 1-53.
    18. Dionysia Dionysiou, 2015. "Choosing Among Alternative Long-Run Event-Study Techniques," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(1), pages 158-198, February.
    19. Itzhak Venezia, 2018. "Lecture Notes in Behavioral Finance," World Scientific Books, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., number 10751, January.
    20. Majumder, Debasish, 2013. "Towards an efficient stock market: Empirical evidence from the Indian market," Journal of Policy Modeling, Elsevier, vol. 35(4), pages 572-587.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Standard finance; Behavioral finance; Efficient market theory; Prospect theory; behavioral biases.;
    All these keywords.

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:hal:journl:hal-03634756. 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: CCSD (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/ .

    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.