IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eme/qrfmpp/qrfm-04-2021-0072.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Long-lasting heuristics principles for efficient investment decisions

Author

Listed:
  • Gregory Gadzinski
  • Markus Schuller
  • Shabnam Mousavi

Abstract

Purpose - Behavioral solutions to our cognitive biases have long been studied in the literature. However, there is still ample evidence of behavioral biases in decision-making, with only limited improvement in the medium/long term even when debiasing methods are applied. The purpose of this paper is to describe how financial investors could benefit from a proactive management of emotions combined with a set of learning and decision-making heuristics to make more efficient investments in the long run. Design/methodology/approach - First, the authors offer a classification of the appropriate quantitative and qualitative methodologies to use in different ecological environments. Then, the authors offer a list of detailed heuristics to be implemented as behavioral principles intended to induce more long-lasting changes than the original rules offered by the adaptive toolbox literature. Finally, the authors provide guidelines on how to embed artificial intelligence and cognitive diversity within the investment decision architecture. Findings - Improvements in decision skills involve changes that rarely succeed through a single event but through a succession of steps that must be habitualized. This paper argues that implementing a more conscious set of personal and group principles is necessary for long-lasting changes and provides guidelines on how to minimize systematic errors with adaptive heuristics. To maximize their positive effects, the principles outlined in this paper should be embedded in an architecture that fosters cognitively diverse teams. Moreover, when using artificial intelligence, the authors advise to maximize the interpretability/accuracy ratio in building decision support systems. Originality/value - The paper proposes a theoretical reflection on the field of behavioral research and decision-making in finance, where the chief goal is to offer practical advices to investors. The literature on debiasing cognitive biases is limited to the detection and correction of immediate effects. The authors go beyond the traditional three building blocks developed by the behavioral finance literature (search rules, stopping rules and decision rules) and aim at helping investors who are interested in finding long-term solutions to their cognitive biases.

Suggested Citation

  • Gregory Gadzinski & Markus Schuller & Shabnam Mousavi, 2022. "Long-lasting heuristics principles for efficient investment decisions," Qualitative Research in Financial Markets, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 14(4), pages 570-583, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:eme:qrfmpp:qrfm-04-2021-0072
    DOI: 10.1108/QRFM-04-2021-0072
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/QRFM-04-2021-0072/full/html?utm_source=repec&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=repec
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers

    File URL: https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/QRFM-04-2021-0072/full/pdf?utm_source=repec&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=repec
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1108/QRFM-04-2021-0072?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Syed Aliya Zahera & Rohit Bansal, 2018. "Do investors exhibit behavioral biases in investment decision making? A systematic review," Qualitative Research in Financial Markets, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 10(2), pages 210-251, May.
    2. Pastor, Lubos & Stambaugh, Robert F., 2002. "Mutual fund performance and seemingly unrelated assets," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 63(3), pages 315-349, March.
    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. Larry G. Epstein & Martin Schneider, 2010. "Ambiguity and Asset Markets," Annual Review of Financial Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 2(1), pages 315-346, December.
    5. Manfred Gilli & Enrico Schumann, 2012. "Heuristic optimisation in financial modelling," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 193(1), pages 129-158, March.
    6. Oechssler, Jörg & Roider, Andreas & Schmitz, Patrick W., 2009. "Cognitive abilities and behavioral biases," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 72(1), pages 147-152, October.
    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. Samuelson, William & Zeckhauser, Richard, 1988. "Status Quo Bias in Decision Making," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 1(1), pages 7-59, March.
    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. Kaminski, Kathryn M. & Lo, Andrew W., 2014. "When do stop-loss rules stop losses?," Journal of Financial Markets, Elsevier, vol. 18(C), pages 234-254.
    11. Shefrin, Hersh & Statman, Meir, 2000. "Behavioral Portfolio Theory," Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 35(2), pages 127-151, June.
    12. Shabnam Mousavi & Gerd Gigerenzer, 2017. "Heuristics are Tools for Uncertainty," Homo Oeconomicus: Journal of Behavioral and Institutional Economics, Springer, vol. 34(4), pages 361-379, December.
    13. Smith, Adam, 1759. "The Theory of Moral Sentiments," History of Economic Thought Books, McMaster University Archive for the History of Economic Thought, number smith1759.
    14. Ishani Aggarwal & Anita Williams Woolley, 2019. "Team Creativity, Cognition, and Cognitive Style Diversity," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 65(4), pages 1586-1599, April.
    15. J. Tobin, 1958. "Liquidity Preference as Behavior Towards Risk," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 25(2), pages 65-86.
    16. Andrew W. Lo & Mark T. Mueller, 2010. "WARNING: Physics Envy May Be Hazardous To Your Wealth!," Papers 1003.2688, arXiv.org, revised Mar 2010.
    17. Conlisk, John, 1989. "Three Variants on the Allais Example," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 79(3), pages 392-407, June.
    18. Carlo Massironi & Giusy Chesini, 2016. "Kenneth Fisher’s heuristics," Qualitative Research in Financial Markets, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 8(2), pages 130-148, May.
    19. Forbes, William & Hudson, Robert & Skerratt, Len & Soufian, Mona, 2015. "Which heuristics can aid financial-decision-making?," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 199-210.
    20. Daniel Ellsberg, 1961. "Risk, Ambiguity, and the Savage Axioms," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 75(4), pages 643-669.
    21. William F. Sharpe, 1964. "Capital Asset Prices: A Theory Of Market Equilibrium Under Conditions Of Risk," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 19(3), pages 425-442, September.
    22. Oechssler, Jörg & Roider, Andreas & Schmitz, Patrick W., 2009. "Cognitive Abilities and Behavioral Biases," Working Papers 0465, University of Heidelberg, Department of Economics.
    23. Mousavi, Shabnam & Gigerenzer, Gerd, 2014. "Risk, uncertainty, and heuristics," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 67(8), pages 1671-1678.
    24. Sunstein, Cass R, 2003. "Terrorism and Probability Neglect," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 26(2-3), pages 121-136, March-May.
    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. Izhakian, Yehuda, 2020. "A theoretical foundation of ambiguity measurement," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 187(C).
    2. Ritika & Nawal Kishor, 2020. "Development and validation of behavioral biases scale: a SEM approach," Review of Behavioral Finance, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 14(2), pages 237-259, November.
    3. Roman M. Sheremeta, 2016. "Impulsive Behavior in Competition: Testing Theories of Overbidding in Rent-Seeking Contests," Working Papers 16-21, Chapman University, Economic Science Institute.
    4. John Y. Campbell, 2000. "Asset Pricing at the Millennium," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 55(4), pages 1515-1567, August.
    5. Haim Levy & Enrico De Giorgi & Thorsten Hens, "undated". "Prospect Theory and the CAPM: A contradiction or coexistence?," IEW - Working Papers 157, Institute for Empirical Research in Economics - University of Zurich.
    6. 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.
    7. Ramiah, Vikash & Xu, Xiaoming & Moosa, Imad A., 2015. "Neoclassical finance, behavioral finance and noise traders: A review and assessment of the literature," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 89-100.
    8. David Cesarini & Magnus Johannesson & Patrik K. E. Magnusson & Björn Wallace, 2012. "The Behavioral Genetics of Behavioral Anomalies," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 58(1), pages 21-34, January.
    9. Bruno S. Frey & Reiner Eichenberger, 1989. "Should Social Scientists Care about Choice Anomalies?," Rationality and Society, , vol. 1(1), pages 101-122, July.
    10. Laurent Denant-Boemont & Olivier L’Haridon, 2013. "La rationalité à l'épreuve de l'économie comportementale," Revue française d'économie, Presses de Sciences-Po, vol. 0(2), pages 35-89.
    11. 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.
    12. David Hirshleife, 2015. "Behavioral Finance," Annual Review of Financial Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 7(1), pages 133-159, December.
    13. Agliardi, Elettra & Agliardi, Rossella & Spanjers, Willem, 2016. "Corporate financing decisions under ambiguity: Pecking order and liquidity policy implications," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 69(12), pages 6012-6020.
    14. Sonntag, Dominik, 2018. "Die Theorie der fairen geometrischen Rendite [The Theory of Fair Geometric Returns]," MPRA Paper 87082, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    15. Eduard Marinov, 2017. "The 2017 Nobel Prize in Economics," Economic Thought journal, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences - Economic Research Institute, issue 6, pages 117-159.
    16. Michał Lewandowski, 2017. "Prospect Theory Versus Expected Utility Theory: Assumptions, Predictions, Intuition and Modelling of Risk Attitudes," Central European Journal of Economic Modelling and Econometrics, Central European Journal of Economic Modelling and Econometrics, vol. 9(4), pages 275-321, December.
    17. Michael Dempsey, 2015. "Stock Markets, Investments and Corporate Behavior:A Conceptual Framework of Understanding," World Scientific Books, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., number p1007, January.
    18. Stijn Claessens & M Ayhan Kose, 2018. "Frontiers of macrofinancial linkages," BIS Papers, Bank for International Settlements, number 95.
    19. Michel Verlaine, 2022. "Behavioral finance and the architecture of the asset management industry," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(5), pages 1454-1476, December.
    20. Cappelletti, Dominique & Mittone, Luigi & Ploner, Matteo, 2014. "Are default contributions sticky? An experimental analysis of defaults in public goods provision," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 331-342.

    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:eme:qrfmpp:qrfm-04-2021-0072. 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: Emerald Support (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.