IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

Framing Effects in Stock Market Forecasts: The Difference Between Asking for Prices and Asking for Returns

  • Glaser, Markus


    (Sonderforschungsbereich 504)

  • Langer, Thomas


    (Westfälischen Wilhelms-Universität Münster Lehrstuhl für BWL, insbesondere Finanzierung)

  • Reynders, Jens


  • Weber, Martin


    (Lehrstuhl für ABWL, Finanzwirtschaft, insb. Bankbetriebslehre)

In this study, we analyze whether individual expectations of stock returns are influenced by the specific elicitation mode (i.e. whether forecasters have to state future price levels or directly future returns). We thus examine whether there are framing effects in stock market forecasts. We present questionnaire responses of about 250 students from two German universities. Participants were asked to state median forecasts as well as confidence intervals for seven stock market time series. Using a between subject design, one half of the subjects was asked to state future price levels, the other group was directly asked for returns. The main results of our study can be summarized as follows. There is a highly significant framing effect. For upward sloping time series, the return forecasts given by investors who are asked directly for returns are significantly higher than those stated by investors who are asked for prices. For downward sloping time series, the return forecasts given by investors who are asked directly for returns are significantly lower than those stated by investors who are asked for prices. Furthermore, our data shows that subjects underestimate the volatility of stock returns, indicating overconfidence. As a new insight, we find that the strength of the overconfidence effect in stock market forecasts is highly significantly affected by the fact whether subjects provide price or return forecasts. Volatility estimates are lower (and the overconfidence bias is thus stronger) when subjects are asked for returns compared to price forecasts. Moreover, we find that financial education improves answers of subjects. The observed framing effect and the overconfidence bias are less pronounced for subjects with higher financial education.

To our knowledge, this item is not available for download. To find whether it is available, there are three options:
1. Check below under "Related research" whether another version of this item is available online.
2. Check on the provider's web page whether it is in fact available.
3. Perform a search for a similarly titled item that would be available.

Paper provided by Sonderforschungsbereich 504, Universität Mannheim & Sonderforschungsbereich 504, University of Mannheim in its series Sonderforschungsbereich 504 Publications with number 05-40.

in new window

Length: 39 pages
Date of creation: 03 Nov 2005
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:xrs:sfbmaa:05-40
Note: Financial support from the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft, SFB 504, at the University of Mannheim, is gratefully acknowledged.
Contact details of provider: Postal: D-68131 Mannheim
Phone: (49) (0) 621-292-2547
Fax: (49) (0) 621-292-5594
Web page:

More information through EDIRC

Web page:

Order Information: Email:

No references listed on IDEAS
You can help add them by filling out this form.

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:xrs:sfbmaa:05-40. 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: (Carsten Schmidt)

The email address of this maintainer does not seem to be valid anymore. Please ask Carsten Schmidt to update the entry or send us the correct address

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 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.

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.