IDEAS home Printed from
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Cognitive Biases, Ambiguity Aversion and Asset Pricing in Financial Markets


  • Elena Asparouhova

    (University of Utah)

  • Peter Bossaerts

    (Caltech, EPFL Lausanne and CEPR)

  • Jon Eguia


  • William Zame



Agents with cognitive limitations may compute the expected value of a risky asset incorrectly. If market prices reflect the probabilities of the payoff-relevant states, agents who compute the probabilities incorrectly encounter a market price that is inconsistent with their calculation. We test whether observing the market price makes agents lose confidence in their own calculations. We hypothesize that agents who lose confidence in their own calculations seek to avoid the uncertainty by acquiring a portfolio that generates a sure return. They then become price insensitive: they do not adjust their portfolio with changes in relative prices, and therefore they do not affect prices. We identify price insensitive agents in an experiment, and we test three implications of our hypothesis: (i) price quality is inversely related to the proportion of price-insensitive agents; (ii) price-insensitive subjects hold more balanced portfolios, and (iii) price-insensitive subjects trade less. Our experiments strongly confirm the first two hypotheses and provide some evidence in support of the third, reinforcing our view that market prices trigger ambiguity averse decisions.

Suggested Citation

  • Elena Asparouhova & Peter Bossaerts & Jon Eguia & William Zame, "undated". "Cognitive Biases, Ambiguity Aversion and Asset Pricing in Financial Markets," Swiss Finance Institute Research Paper Series 09-20, Swiss Finance Institute.
  • Handle: RePEc:chf:rpseri:rp0920

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL:
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    1. Botond Kőszegi & Matthew Rabin, 2006. "A Model of Reference-Dependent Preferences," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 121(4), pages 1133-1165.
    2. R. Rockafellar & Stan Uryasev & Michael Zabarankin, 2006. "Generalized deviations in risk analysis," Finance and Stochastics, Springer, vol. 10(1), pages 51-74, January.
    3. Gilboa, Itzhak & Schmeidler, David, 1996. "Case-Based Optimization," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 15(1), pages 1-26, July.
    4. De Giorgi, Enrico, 2005. "Reward-risk portfolio selection and stochastic dominance," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 29(4), pages 895-926, April.
    5. Machina, Mark J, 1982. ""Expected Utility" Analysis without the Independence Axiom," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 50(2), pages 277-323, March.
    6. Mark J. Machina, 2009. "Risk, Ambiguity, and the Rank-Dependence Axioms," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 99(1), pages 385-392, March.
    7. Robert J. Aumann & Roberto Serrano, 2008. "An Economic Index of Riskiness," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 116(5), pages 810-836, October.
    8. Enrico Diecidue & Jeroen van de Ven, 2008. "Aspiration Level, Probability Of Success And Failure, And Expected Utility," International Economic Review, Department of Economics, University of Pennsylvania and Osaka University Institute of Social and Economic Research Association, vol. 49(2), pages 683-700, May.
    9. David B. Brown & Melvyn Sim, 2009. "Satisficing Measures for Analysis of Risky Positions," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 55(1), pages 71-84, January.
    10. Yaari, Menahem E, 1987. "The Dual Theory of Choice under Risk," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 55(1), pages 95-115, January.
    11. Kahneman, Daniel & Tversky, Amos, 1979. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 47(2), pages 263-291, March.
    12. Tversky, Amos & Kahneman, Daniel, 1992. "Advances in Prospect Theory: Cumulative Representation of Uncertainty," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 5(4), pages 297-323, October.
    13. Botond Koszegi & Matthew Rabin, 2007. "Reference-Dependent Risk Attitudes," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 97(4), pages 1047-1073, September.
    14. Philippe Artzner & Freddy Delbaen & Jean-Marc Eber & David Heath, 1999. "Coherent Measures of Risk," Mathematical Finance, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 9(3), pages 203-228.
    15. Mao, James C T, 1970. "Survey of Capital Budgeting: Theory and Practice," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 25(2), pages 349-360, May.
    16. Harry Markowitz, 1952. "The Utility of Wealth," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 60, pages 151-151.
    17. Peter Wakker & Daniel Deneffe, 1996. "Eliciting von Neumann-Morgenstern Utilities When Probabilities Are Distorted or Unknown," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 42(8), pages 1131-1150, August.
    18. Milton Friedman & L. J. Savage, 1948. "The Utility Analysis of Choices Involving Risk," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 56, pages 279-279.
    19. Quiggin, John, 1982. "A theory of anticipated utility," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 3(4), pages 323-343, December.
    20. Bosi, G. & Mehta, G. B., 2002. "Existence of a semicontinuous or continuous utility function: a unified approach and an elementary proof," Journal of Mathematical Economics, Elsevier, vol. 38(3), pages 311-328, November.
    21. Nishant Dass & Massimo Massa & Rajdeep Patgiri, 2008. "Mutual Funds and Bubbles: The Surprising Role of Contractual Incentives," Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 21(1), pages 51-99, January.
    22. George Wu & Alex B. Markle, 2008. "An Empirical Test of Gain-Loss Separability in Prospect Theory," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 54(7), pages 1322-1335, July.
    23. John W. Payne & Dan J. Laughhunn & Roy Crum, 1980. "Translation of Gambles and Aspiration Level Effects in Risky Choice Behavior," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 26(10), pages 1039-1060, October.
    24. Alexander Cherny & Dilip Madan, 2009. "New Measures for Performance Evaluation," Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 22(7), pages 2371-2406, July.
    25. John Payne, 2005. "It is Whether You Win or Lose: The Importance of the Overall Probabilities of Winning or Losing in Risky Choice," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 30(1), pages 5-19, January.
    26. Hans Föllmer & Alexander Schied, 2002. "Convex measures of risk and trading constraints," Finance and Stochastics, Springer, vol. 6(4), pages 429-447.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    More about this item


    Asset pricing; ambiguity aversion; cognitive bias; Bayesian updating; market experiments.;

    JEL classification:

    • G11 - Financial Economics - - General Financial Markets - - - Portfolio Choice; Investment Decisions
    • G12 - Financial Economics - - General Financial Markets - - - Asset Pricing; Trading Volume; Bond Interest Rates
    • G14 - Financial Economics - - General Financial Markets - - - Information and Market Efficiency; Event Studies; Insider Trading


    Access and download statistics


    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:chf:rpseri:rp0920. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Marilyn Barja). General contact details of provider: .

    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 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.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.