IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/kap/expeco/v24y2021i1d10.1007_s10683-020-09654-y.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Improving decisions with market information: an experiment on corporate prediction markets

Author

Listed:
  • Ahrash Dianat

    (University of Essex)

  • Christoph Siemroth

    (University of Essex)

Abstract

We conduct a lab experiment to investigate an important corporate prediction market setting: A manager needs information about the state of a project, which workers have, in order to make a state-dependent decision. Workers can potentially reveal this information by trading in a corporate prediction market. We test two different market designs to determine which provides more information to the manager and leads to better decisions. We also investigate the effect of top-down advice from the market designer to participants on how the prediction market is intended to function. Our results show that the theoretically superior market design performs worse in the lab—in terms of manager decisions—without top-down advice. With advice, manager decisions improve and both market designs perform similarly well, although the theoretically superior market design features less mis-pricing. We provide a behavioral explanation for the failure of the theoretical predictions and discuss implications for corporate prediction markets in the field.

Suggested Citation

  • Ahrash Dianat & Christoph Siemroth, 2021. "Improving decisions with market information: an experiment on corporate prediction markets," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 24(1), pages 143-176, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:kap:expeco:v:24:y:2021:i:1:d:10.1007_s10683-020-09654-y
    DOI: 10.1007/s10683-020-09654-y
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10683-020-09654-y
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10683-020-09654-y?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. Wolfers, Justin & Zitzewitz, Eric, 2006. "Five Open Questions About Prediction Markets," CEPR Discussion Papers 5562, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    2. Brandts Jordi & Macleod W. Bentley, 1995. "Equilibrium Selection in Experimental Games with Recommended Play," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 11(1), pages 36-63, October.
    3. Uri Gneezy & Jan Potters, 1997. "An Experiment on Risk Taking and Evaluation Periods," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 112(2), pages 631-645.
    4. Mariana Blanco & Dirk Engelmann & Alexander Koch & Hans-Theo Normann, 2010. "Belief elicitation in experiments: is there a hedging problem?," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 13(4), pages 412-438, December.
    5. Guillen, Pablo & Hakimov, Rustamdjan, 2018. "The effectiveness of top-down advice in strategy-proof mechanisms: A field experiment," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 505-511.
    6. Corgnet, Brice & Deck, Cary & DeSantis, Mark & Porter, David, 2018. "Information (non)aggregation in markets with costly signal acquisition," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 154(C), pages 286-320.
    7. Theo Offerman & Joep Sonnemans & Gijs Van De Kuilen & Peter P. Wakker, 2009. "A Truth Serum for Non-Bayesians: Correcting Proper Scoring Rules for Risk Attitudes ," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 76(4), pages 1461-1489.
    8. Guillen, Pablo & Hing, Alexander, 2014. "Lying through their teeth: Third party advice and truth telling in a strategy proof mechanism," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 178-185.
    9. Robert W. Hahn & Paul Tetlock, 2006. "Information Markets: A New Way of Making Decisions," Books, American Enterprise Institute, number 51409, September.
    10. Deck, Cary & Lin, Shengle & Porter, David, 2013. "Affecting policy by manipulating prediction markets: Experimental evidence," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 48-62.
    11. Andrew Schotter & Isabel Trevino, 2014. "Belief Elicitation in the Laboratory," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 6(1), pages 103-128, August.
    12. Florian Zimmermann, 2020. "The Dynamics of Motivated Beliefs," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 110(2), pages 337-361, February.
    13. Radner, Roy, 1979. "Rational Expectations Equilibrium: Generic Existence and the Information Revealed by Prices," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 47(3), pages 655-678, May.
    14. Shimon Kogan & Anthony M. Kwasnica & Roberto A. Weber, 2011. "Coordination in the Presence of Asset Markets," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 101(2), pages 927-947, April.
    15. Van Huyck, John B. & Gillette, Ann B. & Battalio, Raymond C., 1992. "Credible assignments in coordination games," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 4(4), pages 606-626, October.
    16. Erik Eyster & Matthew Rabin & Dimitri Vayanos, 2019. "Financial Markets Where Traders Neglect the Informational Content of Prices," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 74(1), pages 371-399, February.
    17. Benjamin J. Gillen & Charles R. Plott & Matthew Shum, 2017. "A Pari-Mutuel-Like Mechanism for Information Aggregation: A Field Test inside Intel," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 125(4), pages 1075-1099.
    18. James Dow & Itay Goldstein & Alexander Guembel, 2017. "Incentives for Information Production in Markets where Prices Affect Real Investment," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 15(4), pages 877-909.
    19. Hanson, Robin & Oprea, Ryan & Porter, David, 2006. "Information aggregation and manipulation in an experimental market," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 60(4), pages 449-459, August.
    20. Lionel Page & Christoph Siemroth, 2021. "How Much Information Is Incorporated into Financial Asset Prices? Experimental Evidence," Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 34(9), pages 4412-4449.
    21. Edward Simpson Prescott, 2012. "Contingent capital: the trigger problem," Economic Quarterly, Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond, vol. 98(1Q), pages 33-50.
    22. Justin Wolfers & Eric Zitzewitz, 2004. "Prediction Markets," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 18(2), pages 107-126, Spring.
    23. Lawrence Choo & Todd R. Kaplan & Ro’i Zultan, 2019. "Information aggregation in Arrow–Debreu markets: an experiment," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 22(3), pages 625-652, September.
    24. Siemroth, Christoph, 2019. "The informational content of prices when policy makers react to financial markets," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 179(C), pages 240-274.
    25. Douglas Davis & Oleg Korenok & Edward Simpson Prescott, 2014. "An Experimental Analysis of Contingent Capital with Market‐Price Triggers," Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 46(5), pages 999-1033, August.
    26. Marco Ottaviani & Peter Norman Sørensen, 2007. "Outcome Manipulation in Corporate Prediction Markets," Journal of the European Economic Association, MIT Press, vol. 5(2-3), pages 554-563, 04-05.
    27. Ben S. Bernanke & Michael Woodford, 1997. "Inflation forecasts and monetary policy," Proceedings, Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland, pages 653-686.
    28. Daniel Zizzo, 2010. "Experimenter demand effects in economic experiments," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 13(1), pages 75-98, March.
    29. Philip Bond & Itay Goldstein, 2015. "Government Intervention and Information Aggregation by Prices," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 70(6), pages 2777-2812, December.
    30. Philip Bond & Itay Goldstein & Edward Simpson Prescott, 2010. "Market-Based Corrective Actions," Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 23(2), pages 781-820, February.
    31. Nagel, Rosemarie, 1995. "Unraveling in Guessing Games: An Experimental Study," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 85(5), pages 1313-1326, December.
    32. Julian Romero, 2011. "The Effect of Hysteresis on Equilibrium Selection in Coordination Games," Purdue University Economics Working Papers 1265, Purdue University, Department of Economics.
    33. 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.
    34. Forsythe, Robert & Forrest Nelson & George R. Neumann & Jack Wright, 1992. "Anatomy of an Experimental Political Stock Market," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 82(5), pages 1142-1161, December.
    35. Stephen V. Burks & Jeffrey P. Carpenter & Lorenz Goette & Aldo Rustichini, 2013. "Overconfidence and Social Signalling," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 80(3), pages 949-983.
    36. Corgnet, Brice & DeSantis, Mark & Porter, David, 2020. "The distribution of information and the price efficiency of markets," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 110(C).
    37. Corgnet, Brice & DeSantis, Mark & Porter, David, 2020. "The distribution of information and the price efficiency of markets," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 110(C).
    38. Paul J. Healy & Sera Linardi & J. Richard Lowery & John O. Ledyard, 2010. "Prediction Markets: Alternative Mechanisms for Complex Environments with Few Traders," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 56(11), pages 1977-1996, November.
    39. Suresh Sundaresan & Zhenyu Wang, 2015. "On the Design of Contingent Capital with a Market Trigger," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 70(2), pages 881-920, April.
    40. Roberto A. Weber, 2006. "Managing Growth to Achieve Efficient Coordination in Large Groups," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 96(1), pages 114-126, March.
    41. Coutts, Alexander, 2019. "Testing models of belief bias: An experiment," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 113(C), pages 549-565.
    42. Bo Cowgill & Eric Zitzewitz, 2015. "Corporate Prediction Markets: Evidence from Google, Ford, and Firm X," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 82(4), pages 1309-1341.
    43. Brice Corgnet & Mark DeSantis & David Porter, 2015. "Revisiting Information Aggregation in Asset Markets: Reflective Learning & Market Efficiency," Working Papers 15-15, Chapman University, Economic Science Institute.
    44. Tingting Ding & Andrew Schotter, 2019. "Learning and Mechanism Design: An Experimental Test of School Matching Mechanisms with Intergenerational Advice," The Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 129(623), pages 2779-2804.
    45. Roth, Alvin E., 1986. "Laboratory Experimentation in Economics," Economics and Philosophy, Cambridge University Press, vol. 2(2), pages 245-273, October.
    46. Kenneth Oliven & Thomas A. Rietz, 2004. "Suckers Are Born but Markets Are Made: Individual Rationality, Arbitrage, and Market Efficiency on an Electronic Futures Market," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 50(3), pages 336-351, March.
    47. Page, Lionel & Siemroth, Christoph, 2017. "An experimental analysis of information acquisition in prediction markets," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 354-378.
    48. Romero, Julian, 2015. "The effect of hysteresis on equilibrium selection in coordination games," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 111(C), pages 88-105.
    49. Gary Charness & Aldo Rustichini & Jeroen Ven, 2018. "Self-confidence and strategic behavior," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 21(1), pages 72-98, March.
    50. Martin Spann & Bernd Skiera, 2009. "Sports forecasting: a comparison of the forecast accuracy of prediction markets, betting odds and tipsters," Journal of Forecasting, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 28(1), pages 55-72.
    51. Ledyard, John & Hanson, Robin & Ishikida, Takashi, 2009. "An experimental test of combinatorial information markets," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 69(2), pages 182-189, February.
    52. Berg, Joyce E. & Nelson, Forrest D. & Rietz, Thomas A., 2008. "Prediction market accuracy in the long run," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 285-300.
    53. repec:oup:econjl:v:129:y:2019:i:10:p:2779-2804. is not listed on IDEAS
    54. Alex Edmans & Itay Goldstein & Wei Jiang, 2015. "Feedback Effects, Asymmetric Trading, and the Limits to Arbitrage," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 105(12), pages 3766-3797, December.
    55. repec:fip:fedreq:y:2012:i:1q:p:33-50:n:vol.98no.1 is not listed on IDEAS
    56. Lionel Page & Robert T. Clemen, 2013. "Do Prediction Markets Produce Well‐Calibrated Probability Forecasts?-super-," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 123(568), pages 491-513, May.
    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. Dirk Bergemann & Marco Ottaviani, 2021. "Information Markets and Nonmarkets," Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 2296, Cowles Foundation for Research in Economics, Yale University.
    2. Lawrence Choo & Todd R. Kaplan & Ro’i Zultan, 2022. "Manipulation and (Mis)trust in Prediction Markets," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(9), pages 6716-6732, September.

    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. Lawrence Choo & Todd R. Kaplan & Ro’i Zultan, 2022. "Manipulation and (Mis)trust in Prediction Markets," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(9), pages 6716-6732, September.
    2. Christoph Siemroth, 2021. "When Can Decision Makers Learn from Financial Market Prices?," Journal of Money, Credit and Banking, Blackwell Publishing, vol. 53(6), pages 1523-1552, September.
    3. Siemroth, Christoph, 2019. "The informational content of prices when policy makers react to financial markets," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 179(C), pages 240-274.
    4. Brice Corgnet & Cary Deck & Mark DeSantis & Kyle Hampton & Erik O. Kimbrough, 2023. "When Do Security Markets Aggregate Dispersed Information?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 69(6), pages 3697-3729, June.
    5. 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.
    6. Bergemann, Dirk & Ottaviani, Marco, 2021. "Information Markets and Nonmarkets," CEPR Discussion Papers 16459, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    7. Andrea Albertazzi & Friederike Mengel & Ronald Peeters, 2021. "Benchmarking information aggregation in experimental markets," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 59(4), pages 1500-1516, October.
    8. Lian Jian & Rahul Sami, 2012. "Aggregation and Manipulation in Prediction Markets: Effects of Trading Mechanism and Information Distribution," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 58(1), pages 123-140, January.
    9. Siemroth, Christoph, 2014. "Why prediction markets work : The role of information acquisition and endogenous weighting," Working Papers 14-02, University of Mannheim, Department of Economics.
    10. Galanis, S. & Ioannou, C. & Kotronis, S., 2019. "Information Aggregation Under Ambiguity: Theory and Experimental Evidence," Working Papers 20/05, Department of Economics, City University London.
    11. Boleslavsky, Raphael & Kelly, David L. & Taylor, Curtis R., 2017. "Selloffs, bailouts, and feedback: Can asset markets inform policy?," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 169(C), pages 294-343.
    12. Lunawat, Radhika, 2021. "Learning from trading activity in laboratory security markets with higher-order uncertainty," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 90(C).
    13. Alba Ruiz-Buforn & Simone Alfarano & Eva Camacho-Cuena & Andrea Morone, 2022. "Single vs. multiple disclosures in an experimental asset market with information acquisition," The European Journal of Finance, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 28(13-15), pages 1513-1539, October.
    14. Ruiz-Buforn, Alba & Camacho-Cuena, Eva & Morone, Andrea & Alfarano, Simone, 2021. "Overweighting of public information in financial markets: A lesson from the lab," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 133(C).
    15. Bin-Tzong Chie & Chih-Hwa Yang, 2021. "Efficiency of the Experimental Prediction Market: Public Information, Belief Evolution, and Personality Traits," Advances in Management and Applied Economics, SCIENPRESS Ltd, vol. 11(4), pages 1-3.
    16. Boris Maciejovsky & David V. Budescu, 2020. "Too Much Trust in Group Decisions: Uncovering Hidden Profiles by Groups and Markets," Organization Science, INFORMS, vol. 31(6), pages 1497-1514, November.
    17. Lionel Page & Christoph Siemroth, 2021. "How Much Information Is Incorporated into Financial Asset Prices? Experimental Evidence," Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 34(9), pages 4412-4449.
    18. Brice Corgnet & Cary Deck & Mark Desantis & Kyle Hampton & Erik O Kimbrough, 2019. "Reconsidering Rational Expectations and the Aggregation of Diverse Information in Laboratory Security Markets," Working Papers halshs-02146611, HAL.
    19. Patrick Buckley & Fergal O’Brien, 0. "The effect of malicious manipulations on prediction market accuracy," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 0, pages 1-13.
    20. Corgnet, Brice & DeSantis, Mark & Porter, David, 2021. "Information aggregation and the cognitive make-up of market participants," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 133(C).

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Asymmetric information; Corporate prediction markets; Lab experiment; Market design;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • C92 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Laboratory, Group Behavior
    • D47 - Microeconomics - - Market Structure, Pricing, and Design - - - Market Design
    • D53 - Microeconomics - - General Equilibrium and Disequilibrium - - - Financial Markets
    • D82 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Asymmetric and Private Information; Mechanism Design

    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:kap:expeco:v:24:y:2021:i:1:d:10.1007_s10683-020-09654-y. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.