IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/pui/dpaper/206.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Do People Gamble or Invest in the Cryptocurrency Market? Transactional-Level Evidence from Thailand

Author

Listed:
  • Voraprapa Nakavachara
  • Roongkiat Ratanabanchuen
  • Kanis Saengchote
  • Thitiphong Amonthumniyom
  • Pongsathon Parinyavuttichai
  • Polpatt Vinaibodee

Abstract

Should cryptocurrencies be viewed as a gambling tool or a risky investment instrument? While their unpredictable returns resemble gambling, recent studies show their prices having a timevarying correlation with traditional risky assets like the S&P 500. Many institutional investors have, thus, included cryptocurrencies in their portfolios for diversification. This paper examines the behavior of cryptocurrency market participants and investigates whether they behave like gamblers or investors. Literature shows that gamblers often engage in loss-chasing behavior, escalating risk-taking after losses that may go on indefinitely. In contrast, investors typically exhibit risk aversion after losses, though some might increase risk-taking after “paper losses,†a phenomenon called the “realization effect.†Our study found high-risk individuals exhibit gambling-like behavior, chasing both realized and paper losses. In contrast, we found limited evidence that low-risk individuals engage in risk aversion and realization effect, similar to investors. These insights are crucial for policymakers, as loss-chasing can lead to the siutation where people taking on more risk than they can afford, potentially resulting in bankruptcy.

Suggested Citation

  • Voraprapa Nakavachara & Roongkiat Ratanabanchuen & Kanis Saengchote & Thitiphong Amonthumniyom & Pongsathon Parinyavuttichai & Polpatt Vinaibodee, 2023. "Do People Gamble or Invest in the Cryptocurrency Market? Transactional-Level Evidence from Thailand," PIER Discussion Papers 206, Puey Ungphakorn Institute for Economic Research, revised Feb 2024.
  • Handle: RePEc:pui:dpaper:206
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.pier.or.th/files/dp/pier_dp_206.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. 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.
    2. Richard H. Thaler, 2008. "Mental Accounting and Consumer Choice," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 27(1), pages 15-25, 01-02.
    3. Arnold, Marc & Pelster, Matthias & Subrahmanyam, Marti G., 2022. "Attention triggers and investors’ risk-taking," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 143(2), pages 846-875.
    4. Matthew Rabin & Georg Weizsacker, 2009. "Narrow Bracketing and Dominated Choices," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 99(4), pages 1508-1543, September.
    5. Flepp, Raphael & Meier, Philippe & Franck, Egon, 2021. "The effect of paper outcomes versus realized outcomes on subsequent risk-taking: Field evidence from casino gambling," Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Elsevier, vol. 165(C), pages 45-55.
    6. Andersen, Steffen & Hanspal, Tobin & Nielsen, Kasper Meisner, 2019. "Once bitten, twice shy: The power of personal experiences in risk taking," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 132(3), pages 97-117.
    7. 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..
    8. Alex Imas, 2016. "The Realization Effect: Risk-Taking after Realized versus Paper Losses," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 106(8), pages 2086-2109, August.
    9. Nicholas Barberis, 2012. "A Model of Casino Gambling," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 58(1), pages 35-51, January.
    10. Jacques Vella Critien & Albert Gatt & Joshua Ellul, 2022. "Bitcoin price change and trend prediction through twitter sentiment and data volume," Financial Innovation, Springer;Southwestern University of Finance and Economics, vol. 8(1), pages 1-20, December.
    11. Shefrin, Hersh & Statman, Meir, 1985. "The Disposition to Sell Winners Too Early and Ride Losers Too Long: Theory and Evidence," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 40(3), pages 777-790, July.
    12. Arvid O. I. Hoffmann & Thomas Post & Joost M. E. Pennings, 2015. "How Investor Perceptions Drive Actual Trading and Risk-Taking Behavior," Journal of Behavioral Finance, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 16(1), pages 94-103, January.
    13. Kraaijeveld, Olivier & De Smedt, Johannes, 2020. "The predictive power of public Twitter sentiment for forecasting cryptocurrency prices," Journal of International Financial Markets, Institutions and Money, Elsevier, vol. 65(C).
    14. Sebastian Ebert & Philipp Strack, 2015. "Until the Bitter End: On Prospect Theory in a Dynamic Context," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 105(4), pages 1618-1633, April.
    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. Christoph Merkle & Jan Müller-Dethard & Martin Weber, 2021. "Closing a mental account: the realization effect for gains and losses," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 24(1), pages 303-329, March.
    2. Markus Dertwinkel-Kalt & Jonas Frey, 2020. "Optimal Stopping in a Dynamic Salience Model," CESifo Working Paper Series 8496, CESifo.
    3. Jakusch, Sven Thorsten & Meyer, Steffen & Hackethal, Andreas, 2019. "Taming models of prospect theory in the wild? Estimation of Vlcek and Hens (2011)," SAFE Working Paper Series 146, Leibniz Institute for Financial Research SAFE, revised 2019.
    4. Ebert, Sebastian & Hilpert, Christian, 2019. "Skewness preference and the popularity of technical analysis," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    5. Rawley Heimer & Zwetelina Iliewa & Alex Imax & Martin Weber, 2021. "Dynamic Inconsistency in Risky Choice: Evidence from the Lab and Field," ECONtribute Discussion Papers Series 094, University of Bonn and University of Cologne, Germany.
    6. Vicky Henderson & Jonathan Muscat, 2020. "Partial liquidation under reference-dependent preferences," Finance and Stochastics, Springer, vol. 24(2), pages 335-357, April.
    7. Jakusch, Sven Thorsten, 2017. "On the applicability of maximum likelihood methods: From experimental to financial data," SAFE Working Paper Series 148, Leibniz Institute for Financial Research SAFE, revised 2017.
    8. Andrew Ellis & David J. Freeman, 2020. "Revealing Choice Bracketing," Papers 2006.14869, arXiv.org, revised Mar 2024.
    9. Mujcic, Redzo & Powdthavee, Nattavudh, 2022. "How Do Humans Respond to Huge Financial Losses?," IZA Discussion Papers 15536, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    10. Eduard Marinov, 2017. "The 2017 Nobel Prize in Economics," Economic Thought journal, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences - Economic Research Institute, issue 6, pages 117-159.
    11. Bernard, Sabine & Loos, Benjamin & Weber, Martin, 2021. "The disposition effect in boom and bust markets," SAFE Working Paper Series 305, Leibniz Institute for Financial Research SAFE.
    12. Henderson, Vicky & Hobson, David & Tse, Alex S.L., 2018. "Probability weighting, stop-loss and the disposition effect," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 178(C), pages 360-397.
    13. Cristiana Cerqueira Leal & Gilberto Loureiro & Manuel J. Rocha Armada, 2018. "Selling winners, buying losers: Mental decision rules of individual investors on their holdings," European Financial Management, European Financial Management Association, vol. 24(3), pages 362-386, June.
    14. Stivers, Adam & Tsang, Ming & Deaves, Richard & Hoffer, Adam, 2020. "Behavior when the chips are down: An experimental study of wealth effects and exchange media," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance, Elsevier, vol. 27(C).
    15. Kleinberg, Jon & Kleinberg, Robert & Oren, Sigal, 2022. "Optimal stopping with behaviorally biased agents: The role of loss aversion and changing reference points," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 133(C), pages 282-299.
    16. Jack Clark Francis, 2021. "Reformulating prospect theory to become a von Neumann–Morgenstern theory," Review of Quantitative Finance and Accounting, Springer, vol. 56(3), pages 965-985, April.
    17. Committee, Nobel Prize, 2017. "Richard H. Thaler: Integrating Economics with Psychology," Nobel Prize in Economics documents 2017-1, Nobel Prize Committee.
    18. Sarmiento, Julio & Rendón, Jairo & Sandoval, Juan S. & Cayon, Edgardo, 2019. "The disposition effect and the relevance of the reference period: Evidence among sophisticated investors," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance, Elsevier, vol. 24(C).
    19. Alex Imas, 2016. "The Realization Effect: Risk-Taking after Realized versus Paper Losses," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 106(8), pages 2086-2109, August.
    20. Youngsoo Choi & Woojin Kim & Eunji Kwon, 2020. "Are disposition effect and skew preference correlated? Evidence from account‐level ELW transactions," Journal of Futures Markets, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 40(2), pages 228-246, February.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Cryptocurrency; Realization Effect; Loss-Chasing; Behavioral Finance;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D81 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Criteria for Decision-Making under Risk and Uncertainty
    • G11 - Financial Economics - - General Financial Markets - - - Portfolio Choice; Investment Decisions
    • G41 - Financial Economics - - Behavioral Finance - - - Role and Effects of Psychological, Emotional, Social, and Cognitive Factors on Decision Making in Financial Markets

    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:pui:dpaper:206. 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/pierbth.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.