IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/tpr/restat/v92y2010i4p974-984.html

Investment Under Uncertainty: Testing the Options Model with Professional Traders

Author

Listed:
  • John A. List

    (University of Chicago and NBER)

  • Michael S. Haigh

    (Commodities Future Trading and Commission)

Abstract

An important class of investment decisions is characterized by unrecoverable sunk costs, resolution of uncertainty through time, and the ability to invest in the future as an alternative to investing today. The options model provides guidance in such settings, including an investment decision rule called the bad news principle: the downside investment state influences the investment decision, whereas the upside investment state is ignored. This study takes a new approach to examining predictions of the options model by using the tools of experimental economics. Our evidence, drawn from student and professional trader subject pools, is broadly consonant with the options model. (c) 2010 The President and Fellows of Harvard College and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Suggested Citation

  • John A. List & Michael S. Haigh, 2010. "Investment Under Uncertainty: Testing the Options Model with Professional Traders," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 92(4), pages 974-984, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:tpr:restat:v:92:y:2010:i:4:p:974-984
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.mitpressjournals.org/doi/pdf/10.1162/REST_a_00041
    File Function: link to full text
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version below or

    for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Omar Al-Ubaydli & John A. List, 2016. "Field Experiments in Markets," NBER Working Papers 22113, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Romain Gauriot Author e-mail: romain.gauriot@nyu.edu & Lionel Page Author e-mail: lionel.page@uts.edu.au, 2021. "How Market Prices React to Information: Evidence from Binary Options Markets," Working Papers 20200058, New York University Abu Dhabi, Department of Social Science, revised Oct 2021.
    3. Al-Ubaydli, Omar & Boettke, Peter, 2010. "Markets as economizers of information: Field experimental examination of the “Hayek Hypothesis”," MPRA Paper 27660, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    4. Huber, Christoph & König-Kersting, Christian & Marini, Matteo M., 2025. "Experimenting with financial professionals," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 170(C).
    5. Fahr, René & Janssen, Elmar & Sureth, Caren, 2014. "Can tax rate increases foster investment under entry and exit flexibility? Insights from an economic experiment," arqus Discussion Papers in Quantitative Tax Research 166, arqus - Arbeitskreis Quantitative Steuerlehre.
    6. Alexander Puetz & Stefan Ruenzi, 2011. "Overconfidence Among Professional Investors: Evidence from Mutual Fund Managers," Journal of Business Finance & Accounting, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(5-6), pages 684-712, June.
    7. Marco Angrisani & Marco Cipriani & Antonio Guarino, 2022. "Strategic Sophistication and Trading Profits: An Experiment with Professional Traders," Staff Reports 1044, Federal Reserve Bank of New York.
    8. Ryan Kellogg, 2014. "The Effect of Uncertainty on Investment: Evidence from Texas Oil Drilling," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 104(6), pages 1698-1734, June.
    9. Gong, Binglin & Lei, Vivian & Pan, Deng, 2013. "Before and after: The impact of a real bubble crash on investors’ trading behavior in the lab," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 186-196.
    10. Sheedy, Elizabeth & Zhang, Le & Tam, Kenny Chi Ho, 2019. "Incentives and culture in risk compliance," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 107(C), pages 1-1.
    11. Brian Albrecht & Omar Al-Ubaydli & Peter Boettke, 2022. "Testing the Hayek hypothesis: Recent theoretical and experimental evidence," Artefactual Field Experiments 00759, The Field Experiments Website.
    12. Marco Cipriani & Roberta De Filippis & Antonio Guarino & Ryan Kendall, 2020. "Trading by Professional Traders: An Experiment," Staff Reports 939, Federal Reserve Bank of New York.
    13. Omar Al-Ubaydli & Peter Boettke & Brian C Albrecht, 2022. "Testing the Hayek hypothesis: Recent theoretical and experimental evidence," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(7), pages 1-25, July.
    14. Jackson Dorsey, 2019. "Waiting for the Courts: Effects of Policy Uncertainty on Pollution and Investment," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 74(4), pages 1453-1496, December.
    15. Dillon Bowen, 2022. "Simple models predict behavior at least as well as behavioral scientists," Papers 2208.01167, arXiv.org.
    16. Wenqing Zhang & Prasad Padmanabhan & Chia-Hsing Huang, 2015. "Sequential capital investment decision making under extreme cash fl ow situations: evidence using Monte Carlo simulation," Journal of Business Economics and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 16(5), pages 877-900, October.
    17. Elizabeth Sheedy & Le Zhang & Dominik Steffan, 2022. "Scorecards, gateways and rankings: remuneration and conduct in financial services," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 62(3), pages 3239-3283, September.
    18. Driouchi, Tarik & Trigeorgis, Lenos & So, Raymond H.Y., 2020. "Individual antecedents of real options appraisal: The role of national culture and ambiguity," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 286(3), pages 1018-1032.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • C9 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments
    • C93 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Field Experiments
    • D01 - Microeconomics - - General - - - Microeconomic Behavior: Underlying Principles

    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:tpr:restat:v:92:y:2010:i:4:p:974-984. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: The MIT Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://direct.mit.edu/journals .

    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.