IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0345883.html

Adaptability factors and behavioral biases of investors in frontier markets: An adaptive market hypothesis perspective

Author

Listed:
  • Jannatunnesa Jannatunnesa
  • Nurul Shahnaz Mahdzan
  • Abu Hanifa Md Noman

Abstract

The Adaptive Market Hypothesis (AMH) suggests that investors are imperfect but adaptive, allowing behavioral biases to persist and evolve over time. However, empirical research on how adaptability factors influence these biases in stock investment remains limited, especially in frontier markets. This study examines the impact of adaptability factors on herding (HRD) and overconfidence (OVR) biases among individual investors in Bangladesh, a frontier market. Employing purposive sampling, data were collected through structured face-to-face and online questionnaire surveys from 640 retail investors on the Dhaka Stock Exchange (DSE). Data were managed using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) and analyzed using SmartPLS 4.0 for Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM). The results show that all the external adaptability factors (social influence, consultation with financial advisors, and media) positively influence herding, while the internal adaptability factors (trading experience, self-reflection, and desire for learning) positively influence overconfidence. Financial literacy negatively affects both biases. The study offers insights for policymakers, regulators, and investors on the cognitive and social elements driving biased investment decisions, especially in frontier markets. To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this study pioneers a market adaptability model incorporating novel variables, labelled ‘adaptability factors’, grounded in AMH and bounded rationality.

Suggested Citation

  • Jannatunnesa Jannatunnesa & Nurul Shahnaz Mahdzan & Abu Hanifa Md Noman, 2026. "Adaptability factors and behavioral biases of investors in frontier markets: An adaptive market hypothesis perspective," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 21(3), pages 1-20, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0345883
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0345883
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0345883
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0345883&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0345883?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. Sendhil Mullainathan & Markus Noeth & Antoinette Schoar, 2012. "The Market for Financial Advice: An Audit Study," NBER Working Papers 17929, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    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. 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.
    2. Maxime Perodaud & Michela Chessa, 2026. "Hey, what did you expect ? Confirmation bias in credence goods markets: Theoretical and experimental analyses," Post-Print hal-05441370, HAL.
    3. Saugato Datta & Vikram Pathania, 2016. "For whom does the phone (not) ring? Discrimination in the rental housing market in Delhi, India," WIDER Working Paper Series 055, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    4. Sorravich Kingsuwankul & Chloe Tergiman & Marie Claire Villeval, 2023. "Why do oaths work? Image concerns and credibility in promise keeping," Working Papers hal-04209489, HAL.
    5. Lucas C. Coffman & Alexander Gotthard-Real, 2019. "Moral Perceptions of Advised Actions," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 65(8), pages 3904-3927, August.
    6. Francesco D'Acunto & Nagpurnanand Prabhala & Alberto G. Rossi, 2018. "The Promises and Pitfalls of Robo-advising," CESifo Working Paper Series 6907, CESifo.
    7. Chung, Sol & Agnew, Julie & Bateman, Hazel & Eckert, Christine & Liu, Junhao & Thorp, Susan, 2024. "The impact of mortgage broker use on borrower confusion and preferences," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 224(C), pages 229-247.
    8. Christopher P. Clifford & William C. Gerken, 2021. "Property Rights to Client Relationships and Financial Advisor Incentives," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 76(5), pages 2409-2445, October.
    9. Nicola Gennaioli & Andrei Shleifer & Robert Vishny, 2015. "Money Doctors," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 70(1), pages 91-114, February.
      • Nicola Gennaioli & Andrei Shleifer & Robert Vishny, "undated". "Money Doctors," Working Paper 69721, Harvard University OpenScholar.
      • Gennaioli, Nicola & Shleifer, Andrei & Vishny, Robert W., 2014. "Money Doctors," Scholarly Articles 12965657, Harvard University Department of Economics.
      • Nicola Gennaioli & Andrei Shleifer & Robert Vishny, 2012. "Money Doctors," Working Papers 464, IGIER (Innocenzo Gasparini Institute for Economic Research), Bocconi University.
      • Nicola Gennaioli & Andrei Shleifer & Robert W. Vishny, 2012. "Money Doctors," NBER Working Papers 18174, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
      • Nicola Gennaioli & Andrei Shleifer & Robert Vishny, "undated". "Money Doctors," Working Paper 228501, Harvard University OpenScholar.
      • Nicola Gennaioli & Andrei Shleifer & Robert Vishny, 2012. "Money doctors," Economics Working Papers 1355, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra.
    10. Francisco Gomes & Michael Haliassos & Tarun Ramadorai, 2021. "Household Finance," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 59(3), pages 919-1000, September.
    11. Mark Egan & Gregor Matvos & Amit Seru, 2019. "The Market for Financial Adviser Misconduct," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 127(1), pages 233-295.
    12. Kramer, Marc M., 2016. "Financial literacy, confidence and financial advice seeking," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 131(PA), pages 198-217.
    13. Hermansson, Cecilia & Song, Han-Suck, 2016. "Financial advisory services meetings and their impact on saving behavior – A difference-in-difference analysis," Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Elsevier, vol. 30(C), pages 131-139.
    14. Giné, Xavier & Mazer, Rafael Keenan, 2022. "Financial (dis-)information: Evidence from a multi-country audit study," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 208(C).
    15. Guiso, Luigi & Pozzi, Andrea & Tsoy, Anton & Gambacorta, Leonardo & Mistrulli, Paolo Emilio, 2022. "The cost of steering in financial markets: Evidence from the mortgage market," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 143(3), pages 1209-1226.
    16. Hlobil, T.M. & van Leuvensteijn, M., 2020. "Combining investment advice and asset management," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 197(C).
    17. Johannes Binswanger & Anja Garbely & Manuel Oechslin, 2023. "Investor beliefs about transformative innovations under uncertainty," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 90(360), pages 1119-1144, October.
    18. Tabea Bucher-Koenen & Andreas Hackethal & Johannes Koenen & Christine Laudenbach, 2025. "Gender Differences in Financial Advice," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 115(12), pages 4218-4252, December.
    19. Petr Houdek & Štěpán Bahník & Marek Hudík & Marek Vranka, 2021. "Selection effects on dishonest behavior," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 16(2), pages 238-266, March.
    20. Scherer, Bernd & Lehner, Sebastian, 2025. "What drives robo-advice?," Journal of Empirical Finance, Elsevier, vol. 80(C).

    More about this item

    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:plo:pone00:0345883. 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: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    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.