IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/iza/izadps/dp7265.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Does Everyone Use Probabilities? Intuitive and Rational Decisions about Stockholding

Author

Listed:
  • Binswanger, Johannes

    (Tilburg University)

  • Salm, Martin

    (Tilburg University)

Abstract

We investigate the relationship between subjective probabilities of future stock market returns and decisions about stockholding. Specifically, we examine whether acting upon subjective probabilities is confined to individuals with high cognitive skills. We explore this question using data from the U.S. Health and Retirement Study (HRS). Our empirical analysis is guided by a novel and simple model based on the dual-systems framework from psychology (Kahneman, 2003). In our model, individuals with low cognitive skills make decisions in an intuitive non-probabilistic way based on cues and feelings. Individuals with high cognitive skills make decisions akin to the expected utility model. As predicted by our model, in our empirical analysis we find that there is a significantly stronger association between subjective return probabilities and stockholding decisions for individuals with high cognitive skills, compared to individuals with lower cognitive skills. The paper contributes to a better understanding of the role of cognitive skills in decision making under uncertainty.

Suggested Citation

  • Binswanger, Johannes & Salm, Martin, 2013. "Does Everyone Use Probabilities? Intuitive and Rational Decisions about Stockholding," IZA Discussion Papers 7265, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
  • Handle: RePEc:iza:izadps:dp7265
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://docs.iza.org/dp7265.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Kapteyn, Arie & Kleinjans, Kristin J. & van Soest, Arthur, 2009. "Intertemporal consumption with directly measured welfare functions and subjective expectations," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 72(1), pages 425-437, October.
    2. John J. McArdle & James P. Smith & Robert Willis, 2011. "Cognition and Economic Outcomes in the Health and Retirement Survey," NBER Chapters, in: Explorations in the Economics of Aging, pages 209-233, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. Kimball, Miles S & Sahm, Claudia R & Shapiro, Matthew D, 2008. "Imputing Risk Tolerance From Survey Responses," Journal of the American Statistical Association, American Statistical Association, vol. 103(483), pages 1028-1038.
    4. Martin Salm, 2010. "Subjective mortality expectations and consumption and saving behaviours among the elderly," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 43(3), pages 1040-1057, August.
    5. Jeffrey M Wooldridge, 2010. "Econometric Analysis of Cross Section and Panel Data," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 2, volume 1, number 0262232588, December.
    6. Fabian Gouret & Guillaume Hollard, 2011. "When Kahneman meets Manski: Using dual systems of reasoning to interpret subjective expectations of equity returns," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 26(3), pages 371-392, April.
    7. Francisco Gomes & Alexander Michaelides, 2005. "Optimal Life‐Cycle Asset Allocation: Understanding the Empirical Evidence," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 60(2), pages 869-904, April.
    8. Lance Lochner, 2007. "Individual Perceptions of the Criminal Justice System," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 97(1), pages 444-460, March.
    9. Gan, Li & Gong, Guan & Hurd, Michael & McFadden, Daniel, 2015. "Subjective mortality risk and bequests," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 188(2), pages 514-525.
    10. Carman, K.G. & Kooreman, P., 2010. "Flu Shots, Mammogram, and the Perception of Probabilities," Other publications TiSEM fba970b8-6fc7-449b-acf9-9, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    11. Kristin J. Kleinjans & Arthur Van Soest, 2014. "Rounding, Focal Point Answers And Nonresponse To Subjective Probability Questions," Journal of Applied Econometrics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 29(4), pages 567-585, June.
    12. Greene, William, 2010. "Testing hypotheses about interaction terms in nonlinear models," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 107(2), pages 291-296, May.
    13. Michael D. Hurd & Susann Rohwedder, 2012. "Stock Price Expectations and Stock Trading," Working Papers WR-938, RAND Corporation.
    14. Brian J. Zikmund-Fisher & Dylan M. Smith & Peter A. Ubel & Angela Fagerlin, 2007. "Validation of the Subjective Numeracy Scale: Effects of Low Numeracy on Comprehension of Risk Communications and Utility Elicitations," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 27(5), pages 663-671, September.
    15. Gábor Kézdi & Robert J. Willis, 2011. "Household Stock Market Beliefs and Learning," NBER Working Papers 17614, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    16. Robert B. Barsky & F. Thomas Juster & Miles S. Kimball & Matthew D. Shapiro, 1997. "Preference Parameters and Behavioral Heterogeneity: An Experimental Approach in the Health and Retirement Study," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 112(2), pages 537-579.
    17. Hanming Fang & Michael Keane & Ahmed Khwaja & Martin Salm & Dan Silverman, 2007. "Testing the Mechanisms of Structural Models: The Case of the Mickey Mantle Effect," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 97(2), pages 53-59, May.
    18. Ai, Chunrong & Norton, Edward C., 2003. "Interaction terms in logit and probit models," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 80(1), pages 123-129, July.
    19. Daniel Kahneman, 2003. "Maps of Bounded Rationality: Psychology for Behavioral Economics," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 93(5), pages 1449-1475, December.
    20. Michael D. Hurd, 2009. "Subjective Probabilities in Household Surveys," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 1(1), pages 543-564, May.
    21. Adeline Delavande & Michael Perry & Robert Willis, 2006. "Probabilistic Thinking and Early Social Security Claiming," Working Papers wp129, University of Michigan, Michigan Retirement Research Center.
    22. Wändi Bruine de Bruin & Katherine G. Carman, 2012. "Measuring Risk Perceptions," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 32(2), pages 232-236, March.
    23. Michael D. Hurd & Susann Rohwedder, 2012. "Stock Price Expectations and Stock Trading," NBER Working Papers 17973, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    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. Breunig, Christoph & Huck, Steffen & Schmidt, Tobias & Weizsäcker, Georg, 2021. "The Standard Portfolio Choice Problem in Germany," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 131(638), pages 2413-2446.
    2. Drerup, Tilman & Enke, Benjamin & von Gaudecker, Hans-Martin, 2014. "Measurement Error in Subjective Expectation and the Empirical Content of Economic Models," MEA discussion paper series 201414, Munich Center for the Economics of Aging (MEA) at the Max Planck Institute for Social Law and Social Policy.

    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. Binswanger, Johannes & Salm, Martin, 2017. "Does everyone use probabilities? The role of cognitive skills," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 73-85.
    2. Drerup, Tilman & Enke, Benjamin & von Gaudecker, Hans-Martin, 2017. "The precision of subjective data and the explanatory power of economic models," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 200(2), pages 378-389.
    3. Joan Costa-Font & Cristina Vilaplana-Prieto, 2022. "Biased survival expectations and behaviours: Does domain specific information matter?," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 65(3), pages 285-317, December.
    4. Drerup, Tilman H., 2019. "Eliciting subjective expectations for bivariate outcomes," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance, Elsevier, vol. 23(C), pages 29-45.
    5. Wu, Shang & Stevens, Ralph & Thorp, Susan, 2015. "Cohort and target age effects on subjective survival probabilities: Implications for models of the retirement phase," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 39-56.
    6. Vesile Kutlu-Koc & Adriaan Kalwij, 2017. "Individual Survival Expectations and Actual Mortality: Evidence from Dutch Survey and Administrative Data," European Journal of Population, Springer;European Association for Population Studies, vol. 33(4), pages 509-532, October.
    7. John Ameriks & Gábor Kézdi & Minjoon Lee & Matthew D. Shapiro, 2020. "Heterogeneity in Expectations, Risk Tolerance, and Household Stock Shares: The Attenuation Puzzle," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 38(3), pages 633-646, July.
    8. de Bresser, Jochem, 2019. "Measuring Subjective Survival Expectations : Do Response Scales Matter?," Other publications TiSEM 53bc2ec3-4126-4dfb-81f3-8, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    9. Teresa Bago d'Uva & Esen Erdogan Ciftci & Owen O'Donnell & Eddy van Doorslaer, 2015. "Who can predict their Own Demise? Accuracy of Longevity Expectations by Education and Cognition," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 15-052/V, Tinbergen Institute.
    10. Heiss, Florian & Hurd, Michael & van Rooij, Maarten & Rossmann, Tobias & Winter, Joachim, 2022. "Dynamics and heterogeneity of subjective stock market expectations," Journal of Econometrics, Elsevier, vol. 231(1), pages 213-231.
    11. Adeline Delavande & Jinkook Lee & Seetha Menon, 2017. "Eliciting Survival Expectations of the Elderly in Low-Income Countries: Evidence From India," Demography, Springer;Population Association of America (PAA), vol. 54(2), pages 673-699, April.
    12. Heiss, Florian & Hurd, Michael & Rossmann, Tobias & Winter, Joachim & van Rooij, Maarten, 2019. "Dynamics and Heterogeneity of Subjective Stock Market Expectations," Rationality and Competition Discussion Paper Series 157, CRC TRR 190 Rationality and Competition.
    13. repec:dau:papers:123456789/9805 is not listed on IDEAS
    14. Joachim Winter & Amelie Wuppermann, 2014. "Do They Know What Is At Risk? Health Risk Perception Among The Obese," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 23(5), pages 564-585, May.
    15. Yiqun Chen & Frank Sloan, 2014. "Subjective Beliefs, Deterrence, and the Propensity to Drive While Intoxicated," NBER Working Papers 20680, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    16. Bago d'Uva, Teresa & O'Donnell, Owen & van Doorslaer, Eddy, 2020. "Who can predict their own demise? Heterogeneity in the accuracy and value of longevity expectations☆," The Journal of the Economics of Ageing, Elsevier, vol. 17(C).
    17. Binswanger, Johannes, 2012. "Life cycle saving: Insights from the perspective of bounded rationality," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 56(3), pages 605-623.
    18. Claudio Michelacci & Luigi Paciello, 2020. "Aggregate Risk or Aggregate Uncertainty? Evidence from UK Households," EIEF Working Papers Series 2006, Einaudi Institute for Economics and Finance (EIEF), revised Apr 2020.
    19. Martin Salm, 2010. "Subjective mortality expectations and consumption and saving behaviours among the elderly," Canadian Journal of Economics, Canadian Economics Association, vol. 43(3), pages 1040-1057, August.
    20. Briggs, Joseph & Cesarini, David & Lindqvist, Erik & Östling, Robert, 2021. "Windfall gains and stock market participation," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 139(1), pages 57-83.
    21. Wölfel, Oliver & Heineck, Guido, 2012. "Parental risk attitudes and children's secondary school track choice," Economics of Education Review, Elsevier, vol. 31(5), pages 727-743.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    subjective expectations; probabilities; dual system decision making; cognitive skills; cognitive economics;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D03 - Microeconomics - - General - - - Behavioral Microeconomics: Underlying Principles
    • D81 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Criteria for Decision-Making under Risk and Uncertainty
    • D84 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Expectations; Speculations
    • G11 - Financial Economics - - General Financial Markets - - - Portfolio Choice; Investment Decisions

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:iza:izadps:dp7265. 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: Holger Hinte (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/izaaade.html .

    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.