Psychological and environmental determinants of myopic loss aversion
AbstractEach economic actor is characterized by his own evaluations, traits, and strategies. Although heterogeneity of economic actors is widely acknowledged, little is known about the factors causing it. In this paper, we will examine the behavioral bias known as myopic loss aversion, and the environmental and psychological factors leading to different behavioral reactions. Myopic loss aversion has been used to suggest that fund managers should reveal information only rarely, to lead investors to choose options with (on average) higher returns. Specifically, we experimentally studied the impact of experience, individual differences, and emotions on behavioral responses to feedback frequency in an investment setting. Participants made investment decisions in one of three feedback frequency conditions: (1) they received feedback after each round and had the opportunity to make investment changes each time; (2) they received feedback after each round, but were only given the possibility to make changes every three rounds; and (3) they received aggregated feedback every three rounds, and also had the opportunity to make changes every three rounds. We collected information about personality and individual difference factors before the experiment. Finally, evaluations and emotions were measured every three rounds, immediately after feedback was given. We hypothesized that myopic loss aversion is not a general phenomenon, but that stable individual differences lead to different evaluations and emotional reactions concerning feedback. This implies that myopic loss aversion will only be present for some groups of people under certain conditions. As predicted, we found that myopic loss aversion is not generally observed; rather, we found both an experience effect and a personality effect. In particular, myopic loss aversion was particularly likely: (1) when initial investment rounds lead to negative investment experiences (i.e., losses); and (2) for investors with low self-efficacy concerning the investment situation. ‘Self efficacy’ is related to a personality profile characterized by confidence in decision-making abilities, high optimism, and low anxiety. Our results may help explain which individual and situational factors lead to myopic loss aversion, and should help researchers and practitioners provide optimal feedback to different types of investment clients.
Download InfoIf 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.
Bibliographic InfoPaper provided by University Library of Munich, Germany in its series MPRA Paper with number 9305.
Date of creation: 2008
Date of revision:
myopic loss aversion; risk taking; character traits; self efficacy; emotions; personality;
Find related papers by JEL classification:
- D53 - Microeconomics - - General Equilibrium and Disequilibrium - - - Financial Markets
- G11 - Financial Economics - - General Financial Markets - - - Portfolio Choice; Investment Decisions
- D81 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Criteria for Decision-Making under Risk and Uncertainty
- D14 - Microeconomics - - Household Behavior - - - Household Saving; Personal Finance
- C91 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Laboratory, Individual Behavior
This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:
- NEP-ALL-2008-07-05 (All new papers)
- NEP-CBE-2008-07-05 (Cognitive & Behavioural Economics)
- NEP-EXP-2008-07-05 (Experimental Economics)
- NEP-UPT-2008-07-05 (Utility Models & Prospect Theory)
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.:
- Kahneman, Daniel & Tversky, Amos, 1979.
"Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk,"
Econometric Society, vol. 47(2), pages 263-91, March.
- Amos Tversky & Daniel Kahneman, 1979. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk," Levine's Working Paper Archive 7656, David K. Levine.
- Hopfensitz, Astrid & van Winden, Frans A.A.M., 2007.
"Dynamic Choice, Independence, and Emotions,"
CEPR Discussion Papers
6038, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
- Astrid Hopfensitz & Frans van Winden, 2006. "Dynamic Choice, Independence and Emotions," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 06-087/1, Tinbergen Institute.
- Astrid Hopfensitz & Frans van Winden, 2007. "Dynamic Choice, Independence and Emotions," CESifo Working Paper Series 1949, CESifo Group Munich.
- John Haltiwanger & Michael Waldman, 1983.
"Rational Expectations and the Limits of Rationality: An Analysis of Heterogeneity,"
UCLA Economics Working Papers
303, UCLA Department of Economics.
- Haltiwanger, John & Waldman, Michael, 1985. "Rational Expectations and the Limits of Rationality: An Analysis of Heterogeneity," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 75(3), pages 326-40, June.
- Gneezy, Uri & Potters, Jan, 1997.
"An Experiment on Risk Taking and Evaluation Periods,"
The Quarterly Journal of Economics,
MIT Press, vol. 112(2), pages 631-45, May.
- Gneezy, U. & Potters, J.J.M., 1997. "An experiment on risk taking and evaluation periods," Open Access publications from Tilburg University urn:nbn:nl:ui:12-73908, Tilburg University.
- Gneezy, U. & Potters, J.J.M., 1996. "An experiment on risk taking and evaluation periods," Discussion Paper 1996-61, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
- John Haltiwanger, 1987.
"Responders Versus Nonresponders: A New Perspective on Heterogeneity,"
UCLA Economics Working Papers
436, UCLA Department of Economics.
- Haltiwanger, John & Waldman, Michael, 1991. "Responders versus Non-responders: A New Perspective on Heterogeneity," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 101(408), pages 1085-1102, September.
- Bellemare, C. & Krause, M. & Kroger, S. & Zhang, C., 2004.
"Myopic Loss Aversion: Information Feedback vs. Investment Flexibility,"
2004-32, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
- Bellemare, Charles & Krause, Michaela & Kroger, Sabine & Zhang, Chendi, 2005. "Myopic loss aversion: Information feedback vs. investment flexibility," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 87(3), pages 319-324, June.
- R. Mehra & E. Prescott, 2010.
"The equity premium: a puzzle,"
Levine's Working Paper Archive
1401, David K. Levine.
- Biais, Bruno & Hilton, Denis & Mazurier, Karine & Pouget, Sébastien, 2004.
"Judgmental Overconfidence, Self-Monitoring and Trading Performance in an Experimental Financial Market,"
IDEI Working Papers
259, Institut d'Économie Industrielle (IDEI), Toulouse.
- Bruno Biais & Denis Hilton & Karine Mazurier & Sébastien Pouget, 2005. "Judgemental Overconfidence, Self-Monitoring, and Trading Performance in an Experimental Financial Market," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 72(2), pages 287-312.
- Ben-Shakhar, Gershon & Bornstein, Gary & Hopfensitz, Astrid & van Winden, Frans, 2007. "Reciprocity and emotions in bargaining using physiological and self-report measures," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 28(3), pages 314-323, June.
- 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.
- Charles A. Holt & Susan K. Laury, 2002. "Risk Aversion and Incentive Effects," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 92(5), pages 1644-1655, December.
- Thaler, Richard H, et al, 1997. "The Effect of Myopia and Loss Aversion on Risk Taking: An Experimental Test," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, vol. 112(2), pages 647-61, May.
- Michael Haigh & John List, 2005.
"Do professional traders exhibit myopic loss aversion? An experimental analysis,"
Artefactual Field Experiments
00052, The Field Experiments Website.
- Michael S. Haigh & John A. List, 2005. "Do Professional Traders Exhibit Myopic Loss Aversion? An Experimental Analysis," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 60(1), pages 523-534, 02.
- Haigh, Michael S. & List, John A., 2002. "Do Professional Traders Exhibit Myopic Loss Aversion? An Experimental Analysis," Working Papers 28554, University of Maryland, Department of Agricultural and Resource Economics.
- Robert Axtell, 2007. "What economic agents do: How cognition and interaction lead to emergence and complexity," The Review of Austrian Economics, Springer, vol. 20(2), pages 105-122, September.
- Langer, Thomas & Weber, Martin, 2008. "Does commitment or feedback influence myopic loss aversion?: An experimental analysis," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 67(3-4), pages 810-819, September.
- Uri Gneezy & Arie Kapteyn & Jan Potters, 2003.
"Evaluation Periods and Asset Prices in a Market Experiment,"
Journal of Finance,
American Finance Association, vol. 58(2), pages 821-838, 04.
- Gneezy, U. & Kapteyn, A. & Potters, J.J.M., 2002. "Evaluation Periods and Asset Prices in a Market Experiment," Discussion Paper 2002-8, Tilburg University, Center for Economic Research.
- Uri Gneezy & Arie Kapteyn & Jan Potters, 2002. "Evaluation Periods and Assett Prices in a Market Experiment," Working Papers 02-02, RAND Corporation Publications Department.
- Benartzi, Shlomo & Thaler, Richard H, 1995.
"Myopic Loss Aversion and the Equity Premium Puzzle,"
The Quarterly Journal of Economics,
MIT Press, vol. 110(1), pages 73-92, February.
- Shlomo Benartzi & Richard H. Thaler, 1993. "Myopic Loss Aversion and the Equity Premium Puzzle," NBER Working Papers 4369, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- van der Heijden, Eline & Klein, Tobias J. & Müller, Wieland & Potters, Jan, 2012.
"Framing Effects and Impatience: Evidence from a Large Scale Experiment,"
IZA Discussion Papers
7085, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).
- van der Heijden, Eline & Klein, Tobias J. & Müller, Wieland & Potters, Jan, 2012. "Framing effects and impatience: Evidence from a large scale experiment," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 84(2), pages 701-711.
- Wieland Mueller & Eline van der Heijden & Tobias J. Klein & Jan Potters, 2011. "Nudges and Impatience: Evidence from a Large Scale Experiment," Vienna Economics Papers 1110, University of Vienna, Department of Economics.
- Olaf Hübler, 2012.
"Are Tall People Less Risk Averse than Others?,"
SOEPpapers on Multidisciplinary Panel Data Research
457, DIW Berlin, The German Socio-Economic Panel (SOEP).
- Hopfensitz, Astrid & Wranik, Tanja, 2009.
"How to adapt to changing markets: experience and personality in a repeated investment game,"
17835, University Library of Munich, Germany.
- Hopfensitz, Astrid & Wranik, Tanja, 2009. "How to Adapt to Changing Markets: Experience and Personality in a Repeated Investment Game," TSE Working Papers 09-122, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE).
- Stefan Zeisberger & Thomas Langer & Martin Weber, 2012. "Why does myopia decrease the willingness to invest? Is it myopic loss aversion or myopic loss probability aversion?," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 72(1), pages 35-50, January.
- Hopfensitz, Astrid, 2009. "Previous outcomes and reference dependence: A meta study of repeated investment tasks with and without restricted feedback," MPRA Paper 16096, University Library of Munich, Germany.
- Hopfensitz, Astrid, 2009. "Previous Outcomes and Reference Dependence: A Meta Study of Repeated Investment Tasks with Restricted Feedback," TSE Working Papers 09-087, Toulouse School of Economics (TSE).
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Ekkehart Schlicht).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.