IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/vfsc20/224575.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Information Illusion: Placebic Information and Stock Price Estimates

Author

Listed:
  • Oehler, Andreas
  • Horn, Matthias
  • Wendt, Stefan

Abstract

This study analyzes investors' perception of placebic information and its impact on stock price estimates. We initiate a questionnaire-based stock price forecast competition among 196 undergraduate students in business administration. We show that placebic information increases the perceived amount of relevant information. Individual participants' characteristics, such as gender, financial knowledge or overconfidence, do not affect these findings. Placebic information does not alter participants' stock price estimates and their accuracy, but it has an impact on individual expectations about the stock price forecast competition itself. The findings indicate that placebic information leads to information illusion. As reaction to the illusion, less overconfident investors decrease their expectations with regard to payoff and chances to win a prize in the competition. More overconfident participants do not show the latter behavior. Our findings provide implications for practitioners and researchers alike. Since the participants in our study serve as a proxy for economically educated young adults who are likely to invest in stocks in the future, both regulators and policy makers should consider that placebic information can significantly impact investors' perception and, therefore, regulation on information that is provided to retail investors should focus on relevant and avoid irrelevant information. Researchers should be aware that placebic information asymmetrically influences expectations of participants in experiments who show different levels of overconfidence.

Suggested Citation

  • Oehler, Andreas & Horn, Matthias & Wendt, Stefan, 2020. "Information Illusion: Placebic Information and Stock Price Estimates," VfS Annual Conference 2020 (Virtual Conference): Gender Economics 224575, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
  • Handle: RePEc:zbw:vfsc20:224575
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/224575/1/vfs-2020-pid-39738.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Thomas Dohmen & Armin Falk & David Huffman & Uwe Sunde & Jürgen Schupp & Gert G. Wagner, 2011. "Individual Risk Attitudes: Measurement, Determinants, And Behavioral Consequences," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 9(3), pages 522-550, June.
    2. Francisco Barillas & Jay Shanken, 2018. "Comparing Asset Pricing Models," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 73(2), pages 715-754, April.
    3. Andreas Oehler & Stefan Wendt, 2017. "Good Consumer Information: the Information Paradigm at its (Dead) End?," Journal of Consumer Policy, Springer, vol. 40(2), pages 179-191, June.
    4. Andreas Oehler & Andreas Höfer & Stefan Wendt, 2014. "Do key investor information documents enhance retail investors’ understanding of financial products? Empirical evidence," Journal of Financial Regulation and Compliance, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 22(2), pages 115-127, May.
    5. Herbert A. Simon, 1955. "A Behavioral Model of Rational Choice," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 69(1), pages 99-118.
    6. 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..
    7. Dennis Dittrich & Werner Guth & Boris Maciejovsky, 2005. "Overconfidence in investment decisions: An experimental approach," The European Journal of Finance, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 11(6), pages 471-491.
    8. Oehler, Andreas & Horn, Matthias, 2019. "Does Households’ Wealth Predict the Efficiency of their Asset Mix? Empirical Evidence," Review of Behavioral Economics, now publishers, vol. 6(3), pages 249–282-2, August.
    9. Shefrin, Hersh & Statman, Meir, 2000. "Behavioral Portfolio Theory," Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 35(2), pages 127-151, June.
    10. De Bondt, Werner P. M., 1993. "Betting on trends: Intuitive forecasts of financial risk and return," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 9(3), pages 355-371, November.
    11. Alok Kumar & Jeremy K. Page & Oliver G. Spalt, 2013. "Investor Sentiment and Return Comovements: Evidence from Stock Splits and Headquarters Changes," Review of Finance, European Finance Association, vol. 17(3), pages 921-953.
    12. Abreu, Margarida & Mendes, Victor, 2012. "Information, overconfidence and trading: Do the sources of information matter?," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 33(4), pages 868-881.
    13. Brad M. Barber & Terrance Odean, 2008. "All That Glitters: The Effect of Attention and News on the Buying Behavior of Individual and Institutional Investors," Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 21(2), pages 785-818, April.
    14. Soosung Hwang & Alexandre Rubesam, 2018. "Searching the Factor Zoo," Working Papers 2018-ACF-03, IESEG School of Management.
    15. Alen Nosić & Martin Weber, 2010. "How Riskily Do I Invest? The Role of Risk Attitudes, Risk Perceptions, and Overconfidence," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 7(3), pages 282-301, September.
    16. Shane Frederick, 2005. "Cognitive Reflection and Decision Making," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 19(4), pages 25-42, Fall.
    17. Halko, Marja-Liisa & Kaustia, Markku & Alanko, Elias, 2012. "The gender effect in risky asset holdings," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 83(1), pages 66-81.
    18. Korniotis, George M. & Kumar, Alok, 2013. "Do Portfolio Distortions Reflect Superior Information or Psychological Biases?," Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 48(1), pages 1-45, February.
    19. Richard Deaves & Erik Lüders & Guo Ying Luo, 2009. "An Experimental Test of the Impact of Overconfidence and Gender on Trading Activity," Review of Finance, European Finance Association, vol. 13(3), pages 555-575.
    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. Borsboom, Charlotte & Janssen, Dirk-Jan & Strucks, Markus & Zeisberger, Stefan, 2022. "History matters: How short-term price charts hurt investment performance," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 134(C).
    2. P. Münchhalfen & R. Gaschler, 2021. "Attention Distribution of Current Key Investor Documents: Standardization as a Long-Term Goal of the PRIIP Regulation," Journal of Consumer Policy, Springer, vol. 44(1), pages 73-94, March.

    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. Andreas Oehler & Matthias Horn, 2021. "Behavioural portfolio theory revisited: lessons learned from the field," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 61(S1), pages 1743-1774, April.
    2. Andreas Oehler & Matthias Horn & Stefan Wendt, 2022. "Investor Characteristics and their Impact on the Decision to use a Robo-advisor," Journal of Financial Services Research, Springer;Western Finance Association, vol. 62(1), pages 91-125, October.
    3. Ranganathan, Kavitha & Lejarraga, Tomás, 2021. "Elicitation of risk preferences through satisficing," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance, Elsevier, vol. 32(C).
    4. Ray Saadaoui Mallek & Mohamed Albaity, 2019. "Individual differences and cognitive reflection across gender and nationality the case of the United Arab Emirates," Cogent Economics & Finance, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 7(1), pages 1567965-156, January.
    5. Khan, Mohammad Tariqul Islam & Tan, Siow-Hooi & Chong, Lee-Lee, 2017. "How past perceived portfolio returns affect financial behaviors—The underlying psychological mechanism," Research in International Business and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 1478-1488.
    6. Victor Stango & Joanne Yoong & Jonathan Zinman, 2017. "Quicksand or Bedrock for Behavioral Economics? Assessing Foundational Empirical Questions," NBER Working Papers 23625, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. Zamri Ahmad & Haslindar Ibrahim & Jasman Tuyon, 2017. "Institutional investor behavioral biases: syntheses of theory and evidence," Management Research Review, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 40(5), pages 578-603, May.
    8. Christian Ehm & Christine Kaufmann & Martin Weber, 2014. "Volatility Inadaptability: Investors Care About Risk, but Cannot Cope with Volatility," Review of Finance, European Finance Association, vol. 18(4), pages 1387-1423.
    9. Phan, Thuy Chung & Rieger, Marc Oliver & Wang, Mei, 2018. "What leads to overtrading and under-diversification? Survey evidence from retail investors in an emerging market," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance, Elsevier, vol. 19(C), pages 39-55.
    10. Victor Stango & Jonathan Zinman, 2019. "We Are All Behavioral, More or Less: Measuring and Using Consumer-Level Behavioral Sufficient Statistics," Working Papers 19-14, Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia.
    11. Zamri Ahmad & Haslindar Ibrahim & Jasman Tuyon, 2017. "Behavior of fund managers in Malaysian investment management industry," Qualitative Research in Financial Markets, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 9(3), pages 205-239, August.
    12. Victor Stango & Joanne Yoong & Jonathan Zinman, 2017. "The Quest for Parsimony in Behavioral Economics: New Methods and Evidence on Three Fronts," NBER Working Papers 23057, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    13. Maxime MERLI & Antoine PARENT, 2022. "Portfolio Diversification During the Belle Époque: When the Actual Portfolios of French Individual Investors Met Behavioral Finance," Working Papers of LaRGE Research Center 2022-01, Laboratoire de Recherche en Gestion et Economie (LaRGE), Université de Strasbourg.
    14. Stefano DellaVigna, 2009. "Psychology and Economics: Evidence from the Field," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 47(2), pages 315-372, June.
    15. Fey, Jan-Christian & Lerbs, Oliver & Schmidt, Carolin & Weber, Martin, 2020. "Risk attitude and capital market participation: Is there a gender investment gap in Germany?," ZEW Discussion Papers 20-080, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    16. Heß, Moritz & Scheve, Christian von & Schupp, Jürgen & Wagner, Aiko & Wagner, Gert G., 2018. "Are Political Representatives More Risk-Loving Than the Electorate? Evidence from German Federal and State Parliaments," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 4, pages 1-7.
    17. Jasman Tuyon & Zamri Ahmada, 2016. "Behavioural finance perspectives on Malaysian stock market efficiency," Borsa Istanbul Review, Research and Business Development Department, Borsa Istanbul, vol. 16(1), pages 43-61, March.
    18. Zhu, Dan & Hodgkinson, Lynn & Wang, Qingwei, 2018. "Academic performance and financial forecasting performance:A survey study," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance, Elsevier, vol. 20(C), pages 45-51.
    19. Sebastian Bachler & Felix Holzmeister & Michael Razen & Matthias Stefan, 2021. "The Impact of Presentation Format and Choice Architecture on Portfolio Allocations: Experimental Evidence," Working Papers 2021-15, Faculty of Economics and Statistics, Universität Innsbruck.
    20. Andrea Lippi & Laura Barbieri & Mariacristina Piva & Werner De Bondt, 2018. "Time-varying risk behavior and prior investment outcomes: Evidence from Italy," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 13(5), pages 471-483, September.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Placebic information; information illusion; information overload; financial decision making; experiments; forecasting; investor survey;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C91 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Laboratory, Individual Behavior

    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:zbw:vfsc20:224575. 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/vfsocea.html .

    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.