causes,consequences,and cures of myopic loss aversion

  • 格式:pdf
  • 大小:266.17 KB
  • 文档页数:17

CAUSES,CONSEQUENCES,ANDCURESOFMYOPICLOSSAVERSION–ANEXPERIMENTALINVESTIGATION*GerlindeFellnerandMatthiasSutterWeuseanexperimenttoexaminethecauses,consequencesandpossiblecuresofmyopiclossaversion(MLA)forinvestmentbehaviourunderrisk.WefindthatbothinvestmenthorizonsandfeedbackfrequencycontributealmostequallytotheeffectsofMLA.Longerinvestmenthorizonsandlessfrequentfeedbackleadtohigherinvestments.However,whengiventhechoice,subjectspreferonaverageshorterinvestmenthorizonsandmorefrequentfeedback.Exploitingthestatusquobiasbysettingalonginvestmenthorizonorlowfeedbackfrequencyasadefaultturnsouttobeasuccessfulbehaviouralinterventiontoincreaseinvestmentlevels.Theconceptofmyopiclossaversion(MLA)hasbeenintroducedbyBenartziandThaler(1995)toexplainthepuzzlingevidencethatstockmarketsofferanabnormallyhighequitypremium,whichisknownastheequitypremiumpuzzle(MehraandPrescott,1985).MLAbasicallyconstitutesabehaviouralcombinationoflossaversion(KahnemanandTversky,1979;TverskyandKahneman,1992)andmentalaccounting(seeKahnemanandTversky,1984;Thaler,1985).Inthecontextoffinancialdecisionmaking,lossaversionmeansthatindividualsÕdisutilityfromsufferingalossisinabsolutetermshigherthantheutilityfromreceivinganequallyhighgain,andmentalaccountingimpliesthatlong-terminvestmentsareevaluatedaccordingtotheirshort-termreturns.AssumingthatinvestorssufferfromMLA,anabnormallyhighequitypremiumcanberationalisedinthatstocksarerelativelyunattractiveforinvestorsbecausestockpricesfluctuateandgeneratenotonlyfrequentgainsbutalsolosses.Basedonsimulationsofrealfinancialmarketdata,BenartziandThaler(1995)havearguedthatthesizeoftheequitypremiumisconsistentwithinvestorswhoweighlossestwiceaslargeasgainsandevaluatetheirportfoliosonanannualbasis.Inthisarticle,wefocusontworesearchquestionsrelatedtoMLA.First,weexaminewhethertheinfluenceofMLAoninvestmentdecisionsisdrivenbythefrequencyoffeedbackonperformanceorbythetimehorizonofaninvestment.Ifinformationfeedbackisthedrivingforce,subjectsshouldbebackward-lookingandmorelikelybasetheirinvestmentsonpreviousreturns.Ifthetimehorizonofaninvestment–i.e.theflexibilityinchangingone’sinvestmentlevels–istheimportantsourceofMLA,sub-jectswillratherbeforward-lookingand,therefore,probablylessaffectedbypastreturns.Weshowinanexperimentthatboththelengthoftheinvestmenthorizonandthefeedbackfrequencyhaveasignificanteffectoninvestmentlevels.Giventhisfind-ing,weaddress,second,howMLAcanbecontainedorattenuated.Thisissuehasnot*WethankLorenzGo¨tte,MartinWeberandparticipantsattheMaxPlanckWorkshopforBehaviouralFinanceatTegernsee,theGEWmeeting2005inCologneandseminarparticipantsintheQuantitativeFinanceSeminaratHumboldtUniversityBerlinforvaluablecomments.ThreeanonymousrefereesandLeonardoFelliprovideduswithseveralinsightfulsuggestionsonhowtoimprovethearticle.WegratefullyacknowledgeresearchassistancebyHa˚kanFinkandfinancialsupportfromtheMaxPlanckSociety,theCentreforExperimentalEconomicsattheUniversityofInnsbruck(sponsoredbyRaiffeisen-LandesbankTirol)andtheGermanScienceFoundation(throughtheLeibniz-AwardtoAxelOckenfels).TheEconomicJournal,119(April),900–916.ÓTheAuthor(s).JournalcompilationÓRoyalEconomicSociety2009.PublishedbyBlackwellPublishing,9600GarsingtonRoad,OxfordOX42DQ,UKand350MainStreet,Malden,MA02148,USA.

[900]beenaddressedintheliteratureonMLAsofarbutitseemshighlyrelevantforthedesignandregulationofreal-worldinvestmentsinriskyassets.Hence,welookforbehaviouralinterventionsthatmakesubjectsoptforlongerinvestmenthorizonsorlowerfeedbackfrequencyinordertoavoidthenegativeeffectsofMLAoninvestmentlevels.Itturnsoutthatsettingalonginvestmenthorizonorlongerfeedbackintervalsasadefaultisasuccessfulinterventionthatincreasesinvestmentlevelssignificantly.Hence,exploitingthestatusquobiascanattenuate,ifnotfullycure,theeffectsofMLA.TheanalysisofMLAbytheuseofcontrolledexperimentshasbeeninitiatedbytwoindependentpapers–Thaleretal.(1997)andGneezyandPotters(1997).Thaleretal.(1997)conductedanexperimentwheresubjectscouldinvestintwofundswithpositiveexpectedreturns,alowriskandreturnfundcorrespondingtoarealfive-yearbond,andahighriskandreturnfundmimickingastock-indexfund.Subjectshadtolearnaboutriskandreturndistributionswithexperience.Whenprovidingfeedback,investmentreturnswereaggregatedtoreflecteitheramonthly,yearlyorfive-yearlyhorizon,dependingonthetreatment.Resultsshowedthatinvestmentsinthemoreriskyfundwerehighestinthefive-yearlyconditionfollowedbytheyearlycondition.Theaggregationofshort-termoutcomesapparentlywassufficienttoreducethefre-quencyofexperiencinglossesandthustoincreaseinvestmentlevels.GneezyandPotters(1997)demonstratedthesameeffectinanexperimentwhereparticipantscouldinvestinariskylotterywhere,withprobabilitytwothirds,theinvestedamountwaslostbut,withprobabilityonethird,asubjectwon2.5timestheamountinvested.IntheÔhighÕtreatment,subjectscoulddecideontheinvestedamountineachsingleround(outof12roundsintotal)andreceivedfeedbackaboutthereturnaftereachround.IntheÔlowÕtreatment,subjectscouldonlychangetheirinvestmentamounteverythirdroundandalsoreceivedacumulativefeedbackforthreerounds,sothatgainsorlossescouldnotbeattributedtoaparticularround.IntheÔlowÕtreatment,subjectsinvestedsignificantlymoreintheriskylotterythanintheÔhighÕtreatment,demonstratingthatalongerevaluationperiodrendersariskyoptionwithpositiveexpectedreturnmoreattractive.Thisfindinghasbeenreplicatedinseveralotherexperiments,likeinthecontextofanassetmarket(Gneezyetal.2003),inarepeatedchoicetaskwithminimalinformation(BarronandErev,2003),withgroupsandindividualsasdecisionmakers(Sutter,2007)andithasbeenconfirmedtoexisttoanevengreaterextentinprofessionaltraders(HaighandList,2005).Inmostofthepreviousexperimentsitwasarguedthatlessfrequentfeedbackmakesriskyinvestmentsmoreattractive,wheninfactyetanothervariablewasvariedsimul-taneously:theinvestmenthorizonor,inotherwords,theflexibilityofchangingone’sinvestment.Individualslearnedaboutjointreturnsoveraspecificperiodoftimeandalsohadtocommittheirinvestmentforthatparticulartimespan.Thus,myopiclossaversionmightnotonlycruciallydependonfeedbackfrequencybutalsoontheinvestmenthorizon.Toassesswhetherbothfactors,oronlyasingleone,triggertheeffectsofMLAisthefirstpurposeofourarticle.Afterhavingrunthefirstexperimentpresentedbelowwefoundoutthattherearetwostudiesthathavealsoaddressedthisquestion.WhereasBellemareetal.(2005)arguethatthefrequencyoffeedbackdeterminestheeffectsofMLA,LangerandWeber(2008)identifyinvestmentflexibilityastherelevantfactor.OurresultswillsuggestthatbothfactorsaremoreorlessequallyimportantandthatMLAhasarobustimpactoninvestmentbehaviour.[APRIL2009]901CAUSESANDCURESOFMYOPICLOSSAVERSION