IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/jforec/v44y2025i5p1734-1754.html

Information Illusion: Different Amounts of Information and Stock Price Estimates

Author

Listed:
  • Andreas Oehler
  • Matthias Horn
  • Stefan Wendt

Abstract

We initiate a questionnaire‐based stock price forecast competition to analyze participants' perception of different amounts of information and the impact on stock price estimates. The results show that providing more information increases the perceived amount of relevant information but does not alter participants' stock price estimates and their accuracy. Individual participants' characteristics, such as gender, financial knowledge, or overconfidence, do not affect these findings. This means that the added information acts as placebic information and leads to information illusion. However, the added information has an impact on individual expectations about the stock price forecast competition itself and leads less overconfident investors to decrease their expectations regarding payoff and chances to win a prize. Our findings provide implications for practitioners and researchers alike. Both regulators and policy makers should consider that placebic information can significantly impact investors' perception, and, therefore, regulation on information that is provided to retail investors should focus on relevant and avoid irrelevant information. Researchers should be aware that placebic information asymmetrically influences expectations of participants in experiments who show different levels of overconfidence.

Suggested Citation

  • Andreas Oehler & Matthias Horn & Stefan Wendt, 2025. "Information Illusion: Different Amounts of Information and Stock Price Estimates," Journal of Forecasting, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 44(5), pages 1734-1754, August.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:jforec:v:44:y:2025:i:5:p:1734-1754
    DOI: 10.1002/for.3268
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://doi.org/10.1002/for.3268
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1002/for.3268?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. Alen Nosić & Martin Weber, 2010. "How Riskily Do I Invest? The Role of Risk Attitudes, Risk Perceptions, and Overconfidence," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 7(3), pages 282-301, September.
    2. 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..
    3. Shane Frederick, 2005. "Cognitive Reflection and Decision Making," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 19(4), pages 25-42, Fall.
    4. Andreas Oehler & Stefan Wendt & Florian Wedlich & Matthias Horn, 2018. "Investors' Personality Influences Investment Decisions: Experimental Evidence on Extraversion and Neuroticism," Journal of Behavioral Finance, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(1), pages 30-48, January.
    5. Oehler, Andreas & Horn, Matthias, 2019. "Does Households’ Wealth Predict the Efficiency of their Asset Mix? Empirical Evidence," Review of Behavioral Economics, now publishers, vol. 6(3), pages 249–282-2, August.
    6. Korniotis, George M. & Kumar, Alok, 2013. "Do Portfolio Distortions Reflect Superior Information or Psychological Biases?," Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 48(1), pages 1-45, February.
    7. Fama, Eugene F, 1970. "Efficient Capital Markets: A Review of Theory and Empirical Work," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 25(2), pages 383-417, May.
    8. Dennis Dittrich & Werner Guth & Boris Maciejovsky, 2005. "Overconfidence in investment decisions: An experimental approach," The European Journal of Finance, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 11(6), pages 471-491.
    9. Richard Deaves & Erik Lüders & Guo Ying Luo, 2009. "An Experimental Test of the Impact of Overconfidence and Gender on Trading Activity," Review of Finance, European Finance Association, vol. 13(3), pages 555-575.
    10. Shefrin, Hersh & Statman, Meir, 2000. "Behavioral Portfolio Theory," Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 35(2), pages 127-151, June.
    11. Andreas Oehler & Andreas Höfer & Stefan Wendt, 2014. "Do key investor information documents enhance retail investors’ understanding of financial products? Empirical evidence," Journal of Financial Regulation and Compliance, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 22(2), pages 115-127, May.
    12. Francisco Barillas & Jay Shanken, 2018. "Comparing Asset Pricing Models," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 73(2), pages 715-754, April.
    13. Abreu, Margarida & Mendes, Victor, 2012. "Information, overconfidence and trading: Do the sources of information matter?," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 33(4), pages 868-881.
    14. Andreas Oehler & Stefan Wendt, 2017. "Good Consumer Information: the Information Paradigm at its (Dead) End?," Journal of Consumer Policy, Springer, vol. 40(2), pages 179-191, June.
    15. Andreas Oehler & Andreas Höfer & Stefan Wendt, 2014. "Do key investor information documents enhance retail investors’ understanding of financial products? Empirical evidence," Journal of Financial Regulation and Compliance, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 22(2), pages 115-127, May.
    16. Robert F. Stambaugh & Jianfeng Yu & Yu Yuan, 2015. "Arbitrage Asymmetry and the Idiosyncratic Volatility Puzzle," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 70(5), pages 1903-1948, October.
    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. Oehler, Andreas & Horn, Matthias & Wendt, Stefan, 2020. "Information Illusion: Placebic Information and Stock Price Estimates," VfS Annual Conference 2020 (Virtual Conference): Gender Economics 224575, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    2. 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.
    3. Yogita Singh & Mohd. Adil & S. M. Imamul Haque, 2023. "Personality traits and behaviour biases: the moderating role of risk-tolerance," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 57(4), pages 3549-3573, August.
    4. Andreas Oehler & Matthias Horn & Stefan Wendt, 2022. "Investor Characteristics and their Impact on the Decision to use a Robo-advisor," Journal of Financial Services Research, Springer;Western Finance Association, vol. 62(1), pages 91-125, October.
    5. Andreas Oehler & Matthias Horn, 2021. "Behavioural portfolio theory revisited: lessons learned from the field," Accounting and Finance, Accounting and Finance Association of Australia and New Zealand, vol. 61(S1), pages 1743-1774, April.
    6. Shashank Kathpal & Asif Akhtar & Syed Khusro Chishty & Farrukh Rafiq, 2025. "Risk Perception as a Predictor of Heuristic Biases: The Role of Sex and Age," Asia-Pacific Financial Markets, Springer;Japanese Association of Financial Economics and Engineering, vol. 32(3), pages 1077-1098, September.
    7. Jackson Barngetuny (PhD), 2025. "Behavioral Biases and Real Estate Bubble Formation in Kenya: A Behavioral Finance and Neuroeconomic Perspective," International Journal of Finance and Accounting, IPRJB, vol. 10(4), pages 54-79.
    8. Mohrschladt, Hannes, 2021. "The ordering of historical returns and the cross-section of subsequent returns," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 125(C).
    9. K.S. Muehlfeld & G.U. Weitzel & A. van Witteloostuijn, 2012. "Fight or freeze? Individual differences in investors’ motivational systems and trading in experimental asset markets," Working Papers 12-18, Utrecht School of Economics.
    10. Ray Saadaoui Mallek & Mohamed Albaity, 2019. "Individual differences and cognitive reflection across gender and nationality the case of the United Arab Emirates," Cogent Economics & Finance, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 7(1), pages 1567965-156, January.
    11. 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.
    12. Andrea Lippi & Laura Barbieri & Mariacristina Piva & Werner De Bondt, 2018. "Time-varying risk behavior and prior investment outcomes: Evidence from Italy," Judgment and Decision Making, Society for Judgment and Decision Making, vol. 13(5), pages 471-483, September.
    13. Kothari, S.P. & Ramanna, Karthik & Skinner, Douglas J., 2010. "Implications for GAAP from an analysis of positive research in accounting," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(2-3), pages 246-286, December.
    14. Schneider, Julian & Oehler, Andreas, 2021. "Competition for visibility: When do (FX) signal providers employ lotteries?," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 78(C).
    15. Doncho Donev, 2017. "Price bubbles and financial markets efficiency," Economic Thought journal, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences - Economic Research Institute, issue 1, pages 115-131.
    16. Margarida Abreu, 2017. "How Biased is the Behavior of the Individual Investor in Warrants?," Working Papers REM 2017/07, ISEG - Lisbon School of Economics and Management, REM, Universidade de Lisboa.
    17. Butler, David & Cheung, Stephen L., 2018. "Mind, Body, Bubble! Psychological and Biophysical Dimensions of Behavior in Experimental Asset Markets," IZA Discussion Papers 11563, IZA Network @ LISER.
    18. Lorenzo Esposito & Lorenzo Marrese, 2021. "The impact of cognitive skills on investment decisions. An empirical assessment and policy suggestions," DISCE - Working Papers del Dipartimento di Politica Economica dipe0019, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Dipartimenti e Istituti di Scienze Economiche (DISCE).
    19. Krishnamoorthy Charith & A. A. Azeez, 2025. "Exploring Herding Instincts Through the Lens of Adaptive Market Hypothesis: Insights from a Frontier Market," Asia-Pacific Financial Markets, Springer;Japanese Association of Financial Economics and Engineering, vol. 32(4), pages 1211-1241, December.
    20. 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.

    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:wly:jforec:v:44:y:2025:i:5:p:1734-1754. 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: Wiley Content Delivery (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/jhome/2966 .

    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.