IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ormnsc/v69y2023i6p3400-3414.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How to Alleviate Correlation Neglect in Investment Decisions

Author

Listed:
  • Christine Laudenbach

    (Leibnitz Institute for Financial Research Sustainable Architecture for Finance in Europe, D-60323 Frankfurt am Main, Germany)

  • Michael Ungeheuer

    (Department of Finance, Aalto University, FI-00076 Aalto, Finland)

  • Martin Weber

    (University of Mannheim, School of Business, D-68131 Mannheim, Germany; Centre for Economic Policy Research, London EC1V 3PZ, United Kingdom)

Abstract

We experimentally study how presentation formats for return distributions affect investors’ diversification choices. We find that sampling returns alleviates correlation neglect and constitutes an effective way to improve financial decisions. When participants get a description of the probabilities for outcomes of the joint return distribution, we confirm the findings of others that investors neglect the correlation between assets in their diversification choices. However, when participants sample from the joint distribution, they change their allocation between two assets in response to a change in their correlation in the predicted direction. The results are robust across two experiments that have participants with varying experience (students versus private investors).

Suggested Citation

  • Christine Laudenbach & Michael Ungeheuer & Martin Weber, 2023. "How to Alleviate Correlation Neglect in Investment Decisions," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 69(6), pages 3400-3414, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:inm:ormnsc:v:69:y:2023:i:6:p:3400-3414
    DOI: 10.1287/mnsc.2022.4535
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2022.4535
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/mnsc.2022.4535?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. repec:cup:judgdm:v:1:y:2006:i::p:159-161 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Richard H. Thaler & Shlomo Benartzi, 2001. "Naive Diversification Strategies in Defined Contribution Saving Plans," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 91(1), pages 79-98, March.
    3. Veronica Rappoport & Enrichetta Ravina & Daniel Paravisini, 2010. "Risk Aversion and Wealth: Evidence from Person-to-Person Lending Portfolios," 2010 Meeting Papers 664, Society for Economic Dynamics.
    4. Michael Ungeheuer & Martin Weber, 2021. "The Perception of Dependence, Investment Decisions, and Stock Prices," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 76(2), pages 797-844, April.
    5. Shlomo Benartzi, 2001. "Excessive Extrapolation and the Allocation of 401(k) Accounts to Company Stock," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 56(5), pages 1747-1764, October.
    6. Friend, Irwin & Blume, Marshall E, 1975. "The Demand for Risky Assets," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 65(5), pages 900-922, December.
    7. Kroll, Yoram & Levy, Haim & Rapoport, Amnon, 1988. "Experimental Tests of the Separation Theorem and the Capital Asset Pricing Model," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 78(3), pages 500-519, June.
    8. Hertwig, Ralph, 2017. "When to consider boosting: some rules for policy-makers," Behavioural Public Policy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 1(2), pages 143-161, November.
    9. Fred Schroyen & Karl Ove Aarbu, 2018. "Attitudes Towards Large Income Risk in Welfare States: An International Comparison," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 85(340), pages 846-872, October.
    10. Daniel Paravisini & Veronica Rappoport & Enrichetta Ravina, 2017. "Risk Aversion and Wealth: Evidence from Person-to-Person Lending Portfolios," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 63(2), pages 279-297, February.
    11. Edward T. Cokely & Mirta Galesic & Eric Schulz & Saima Ghazal & Rocio Garcia-Retamero, 2012. "Measuring risk literacy: The Berlin Numeracy Test," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 7(1), pages 25-47, January.
    12. Metrick, Andrew, 1995. "A Natural Experiment in "Jeopardy!"," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 85(1), pages 240-253, March.
    13. Christine Laudenbach & Annika Weber & Johannes Wohlfart, 2021. "Beliefs About the Stock Market and Investment Choices: Evidence from a Field Experiment," ECONtribute Discussion Papers Series 128, University of Bonn and University of Cologne, Germany.
    14. Kimball, Miles S & Sahm, Claudia R & Shapiro, Matthew D, 2008. "Imputing Risk Tolerance From Survey Responses," Journal of the American Statistical Association, American Statistical Association, vol. 103(483), pages 1028-1038.
    15. Rüdiger Weber & Annika Weber & Christine Laudenbach & Johannes Wohlfart, 2021. "Beliefs About the Stock Market and Investment Choices: Evidence from a Field Experiment," CEBI working paper series 21-17, University of Copenhagen. Department of Economics. The Center for Economic Behavior and Inequality (CEBI).
    16. Craig R. Fox & Liat Hadar, 2006. ""Decisions from experience" = sampling error + prospect theory: Reconsidering Hertwig, Barron, Weber & Erev (2004)," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 1, pages 159-161, November.
    17. Nicholas Reinholtz & Philip M. Fernbach & Bart de Langhe, 2021. "Do People Understand the Benefit of Diversification?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 67(12), pages 7322-7343, December.
    18. Ido Kallir & Doron Sonsino, 2009. "The Neglect of Correlation in Allocation Decisions," Southern Economic Journal, Southern Economic Association, vol. 75(4), pages 1045-1066, April.
    19. Christine Laudenbach & Annika Weber & Rüdiger Weber & Johannes Wohlfart, 2021. "Beliefs about the Stock Market and Investment Choices: Evidence from a Survey and a Field Experiment," CESifo Working Paper Series 9427, CESifo.
    20. Ido Kallir & Doron Sonsino, 2009. "The Neglect of Correlation in Allocation Decisions," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 75(4), pages 1045-1066, April.
    21. Mark Grinblatt & Matti Keloharju, 2001. "How Distance, Language, and Culture Influence Stockholdings and Trades," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 56(3), pages 1053-1073, June.
    22. Francesco D’Acunto & Nagpurnanand Prabhala & Alberto G Rossi, 2019. "The Promises and Pitfalls of Robo-Advising," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 32(5), pages 1983-2020.
    23. Ulrike Malmendier & Stefan Nagel, 2011. "Depression Babies: Do Macroeconomic Experiences Affect Risk Taking?," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 126(1), pages 373-416.
    24. Christine Kaufmann & Martin Weber & Emily Haisley, 2013. "The Role of Experience Sampling and Graphical Displays on One's Investment Risk Appetite," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 59(2), pages 323-340, July.
    25. Chen, Daniel L. & Schonger, Martin & Wickens, Chris, 2016. "oTree—An open-source platform for laboratory, online, and field experiments," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance, Elsevier, vol. 9(C), pages 88-97.
    26. Ido Kallir & Doron Sonsino, 2009. "The Neglect of Correlation in Allocation Decisions," Southern Economic Journal, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 75(4), pages 1045-1066, April.
    27. repec:cup:judgdm:v:7:y:2012:i:1:p:25-47 is not listed on IDEAS
    28. Urs Fischbacher, 2007. "z-Tree: Zurich toolbox for ready-made economic experiments," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 10(2), pages 171-178, June.
    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 & Duxbury, Darren & Nieber, Alexander & Zeisberger, Stefan, 2024. "Domain-dependent diversification: The influence of gain–loss domain on correlation choice," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 227(C).
    2. Florian Mudekereza, 2025. "Correlation Neglect in Games," Papers 2501.13019, arXiv.org.

    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. Michael Ungeheuer & Martin Weber, 2021. "The Perception of Dependence, Investment Decisions, and Stock Prices," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 76(2), pages 797-844, April.
    2. Weber, Martin & Laudenbach, Christine & Ungeheuer, Michael, 2019. "How to Alleviate Correlation Neglect," CEPR Discussion Papers 13737, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    3. Weber, Martin & Ungeheuer, Michael, 2016. "The Perception of Dependence and Investment Decisions," CEPR Discussion Papers 11188, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    4. Olschewski, Sebastian & Diao, Linan & Rieskamp, Jörg, 2021. "Reinforcement learning about asset variability and correlation in repeated portfolio decisions," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance, Elsevier, vol. 32(C).
    5. Alex Chinco & Samuel M. Hartzmark & Abigail B. Sussman, 2022. "A New Test of Risk Factor Relevance," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 77(4), pages 2183-2238, August.
    6. Guiso, Luigi & Sodini, Paolo, 2013. "Household Finance: An Emerging Field," Handbook of the Economics of Finance, in: G.M. Constantinides & M. Harris & R. M. Stulz (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Finance, volume 2, chapter 0, pages 1397-1532, Elsevier.
    7. Pinger, Pia & Schäfer, Sebastian & Schumacher, Heiner, 2018. "Locus of control and consistent investment choices," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 66-75.
    8. Fang, Ming & Li, Haiyang & Wang, Qin, 2021. "Risk tolerance and household wealth--Evidence from Chinese households," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 885-895.
    9. Francisco Gomes & Michael Haliassos & Tarun Ramadorai, 2021. "Household Finance," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 59(3), pages 919-1000, September.
    10. Filiz, Ibrahim & Nahmer, Thomas & Spiwoks, Markus & Gubaydullina, Zulia, 2020. "Measurement of risk preference," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance, Elsevier, vol. 27(C).
    11. D'Acunto, Francesco & Ghosh, Pulak & Jain, Rajiv & Rossi, Alberto G., 2022. "How costly are cultural biases?," LawFin Working Paper Series 34, Goethe University, Center for Advanced Studies on the Foundations of Law and Finance (LawFin).
    12. Sesil Lim & Bas Donkers & Patrick Dijl & Benedict G. C. Dellaert, 2021. "Digital customization of consumer investments in multiple funds: virtual integration improves risk–return decisions," Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, Springer, vol. 49(4), pages 723-742, July.
    13. Hossain, Tanjim & Okui, Ryo, 2024. "Belief formation under signal correlation," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 146(C), pages 160-183.
    14. Ibrahim Filiz & Thomas Nahmer & Markus Spiwoks & Kilian Bizer, 2018. "Portfolio diversification: the influence of herding, status-quo bias, and the gambler’s fallacy," Financial Markets and Portfolio Management, Springer;Swiss Society for Financial Market Research, vol. 32(2), pages 167-205, May.
    15. Pinger, Pia & Schäfer, Sebastian & Schumacher, Heiner, 2018. "Locus of control and consistent investment choices," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 66-75.
    16. John Y. Campbell, 2016. "Restoring Rational Choice: The Challenge of Consumer Financial Regulation," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 106(5), pages 1-30, May.
    17. Zeckhauser, Richard Jay & Tran, Ngoc-Khanh, 2011. "The Behavior of Savings and Asset Prices When Preferences and Beliefs are Heterogeneous," Scholarly Articles 5027955, Harvard Kennedy School of Government.
    18. Kai Barron & Tilman Fries, 2023. "Narrative Persuasion," Rationality and Competition Discussion Paper Series 469, CRC TRR 190 Rationality and Competition.
    19. Andries, Marianne & Bianchi, Milo & Huynh, Karen & Pouget, Sebastien, 2024. "Return Predictability, Expectations, and Investment: Experimental Evidence," CEPR Discussion Papers 19239, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    20. Ropele, Tiziano & Gorodnichenko, Yuriy & Coibion, Olivier, 2022. "Inflation Expectations and Corporate Borrowing Decisions: New Causal Evidence," IZA Discussion Papers 15614, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:inm:ormnsc:v:69:y:2023:i:6:p:3400-3414. 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: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.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.