Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Access to this document was granted through an Emerald subscription provided by All users group
For Authors
If you would like to write for this, or any other Emerald publication, then please use our Emerald for
Authors service information about how to choose which publication to write for and submission guidelines
are available for all. Please visit www.emeraldinsight.com/authors for more information.
About Emerald www.emeraldinsight.com
Emerald is a global publisher linking research and practice to the benefit of society. The company
manages a portfolio of more than 290 journals and over 2,350 books and book series volumes, as well as
providing an extensive range of online products and additional customer resources and services.
Emerald is both COUNTER 4 and TRANSFER compliant. The organization is a partner of the Committee
on Publication Ethics (COPE) and also works with Portico and the LOCKSS initiative for digital archive
preservation.
Abstract
Downloaded by 14.169.48.214 At 00:02 19 April 2018 (PT)
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to introduce the special issue of Review of Behavioural
Finance entitled “Behavioural finance: the role of psychological factors in financial decisions”.
Design/methodology/approach – The authors present a brief outline of the origins of behavioural
economics; discuss the role that experimental and survey methods play in the study of financial
behaviour; summarise the contributions made by the papers in the issue and consider their
implications; and assess why research in behavioural finance is important for finance researchers and
practitioners.
Findings – The primary input to behavioural finance has been from experimental psychology.
Methods developed within sociology such as surveys, interviews, participant observation, focus
groups have not had the same degree of influence. Typically, these methods are even more expensive
than experimental ones and so costs of using them may be one reason for their lack of impact.
However, it is also possible that the training of finance academics leads them to prefer methodologies
that permit greater control and a clearer causal interpretation.
Originality/value – The paper shows that interdisciplinary research is becoming more widespread
and it is likely that greater collaboration between finance and sociology will develop in the future.
Keywords Decision making, Psychology, Behavioural finance, Research work
Paper type Research paper
1. Introduction
According to Glaser et al. (2004, p. 527): “Behavioural finance as a subdiscipline of
behavioral economics is finance incorporating findings from psychology and sociology
into its theories. Behavioral finance models are usually developed to explain investor
behaviour or market anomalies when rational models provide no sufficient
explanations”.
Modern economics assumes that people choose between alternatives in a rational
manner (von Neumann and Morgenstern, 1944) and that they know the probability
distribution of future states of the world (Arrow and DeBreu, 1954). Modern finance
assumes that markets are efficient and that agents know the probability distribution of
future market risk (Markowitz, 1952; Merton, 1969). Research has been geared towards
searching for a better risk factor/pricing model.
In parallel with these theoretical developments, psychologists studying decision
Review of Behavioral Finance
Vol. 4 No. 2, 2012
making were collecting data that suggested that individuals do not always make
pp. 68-80 decisions in an optimal manner that those working in finance and economics assumed
r Emerald Group Publishing Limited
1940-5979
(e.g. Edwards, 1954, 1955). After a large corpus of data had accumulated, Bell et al.
DOI 10.1108/19405971211284862 (1988) argued that it is worth making a conceptual distinction between normative
models of decision making that identified optimal ways of making decisions, The role of
descriptive models that identified how people actually make decisions under different psychological
conditions, and prescriptive models that identified ways of improving decision making
when no normative models were available. They argued that economists may have factors
been unwise to assume that normative models are descriptive.
For many years, this behavioural research had little impact on economics.
Behavioural economics did not exist. Kahneman (2011) argues that it originated in the 69
early 1970s when Richard Thaler, then a graduate student in economics, demonstrated
that one of his professors was highly susceptible to the cognitive bias that is now
known as the endowment effect. Arguably, behavioural economics came of age
when Kahneman and Tversky (1979) published prospect theory and matured
after Kahneman’s receipt of the Nobel Prize for Economics in 2002 demonstrated that
economists considered behavioural research as worthy of inclusion in their field of
study.
Although Slovic (1972) drew the attention of those working within finance to the
Downloaded by 14.169.48.214 At 00:02 19 April 2018 (PT)
List (2005, p. 524) argue that Locke and Mann (2000) take the argument a step further
by suggesting that any research that ignores the use of professional traders is likely
to be received passively because “ordinary” individuals are unlikely to have any
substantial impact on market price since they are too far removed from the price
discovery process. Similar views have been expressed by Christensen-Szalanski and
Beach (1984) and Frederick and Libby (1986).
Of course, the similarity in the behaviour of finance professionals and lay people is
actually an issue that needs to be addressed via empirical studies. What have such
studies shown? In one of the first experimental papers to be published in the Journal of
Finance, Haigh and List (2005) reported an experiment using 54 professional futures
and options pit traders from the Chicago board of trade and showed that traders
exhibited more myopic risk aversion than students. Önkal and Muradoglu (1994, 1995,
1996) conducted a series of experiments comparing finance professionals and novices
in a task requiring probabilistic forecasting of stock prices. They found that finance
professionals were more over confident than novices but that they could reduce this
bias if they were given feedback. Thus, at least in certain financial tasks, differences
between professionals and lay people occur. So the research shows that, at least in
some financial tasks, conclusions drawn from studies of lay people do need to be
modified if they are to be applied to professionals. However, they need to be modified in
a surprising direction: biases have been found to be larger not smaller in professionals.
Clearly, experience does not always produce expertise.
This issue need not concern us when the finance tasks of interest are ones that are
normally carried out by lay people. Thus, for example, two of the papers in the current
issue are concerned with credit markets: they examine factors that influencing the use
of credit by lay people. Here sampling participants from the general population is
clearly the most appropriate approach. Furthermore, lay people now have increasing
access to stock markets via the internet. The distinction between individual investors
who are professional and those who are not is much less clear than it has been in the
past. Even in stock investment tasks, such as that reported in third paper in this
special issue, non-professional participants validly represent a section of the general
population that invests in stock markets.
More generally, experimenters are increasingly adopting web-based
experimentation (e.g. Lo and Harvey, 2012; Lo et al., 2012; Reimers and Harvey,
2011; Harvey and Reimers, 2012). Links to an experiment are posted in various forums.
RBF This allows participants to be drawn from a much broader demographic than that
4,2 provided by local students. It is even possible to carry out studies on specific
populations drawn from various countries by selecting particular forums on which to
post the web link to the experiment. For example, studies reported by Lo and Harvey
(2011) used this approach to show that availability of credit cards differentially
affects purchasing behaviour of compulsive and non-compulsive shoppers in the UK
72 and Taiwan.
In this issue, we have two papers that use experimental methods. The first paper is
written by Maria Andersson, Tommy Gärling, Martin Hedesström and Anders Biel
from the University of Gothenburg. They studied impact of the length of a time series
on the predictions of stock prices and investment decisions. The effectiveness of
judgment as a means of making forecasts from time series and as a basis for making
decisions using those forecasts is a well-researched area (Harvey and Bolger, 1996;
Lawrence et al., 2006). However, Andersson and colleagues were interested in it because
of their concern about short termism in financial markets (Stiglitz, 1989). They define
Downloaded by 14.169.48.214 At 00:02 19 April 2018 (PT)
short termism as a preference for actions in the near term that have detrimental
consequences in the long term. They argue that bonuses based on the performance
over the last year or even over the last quarter are signs of short termism. In three
experiments, they investigate the effect of longer evaluation intervals on financial
decisions.
In their first experiment, on students from the University of Gothenburg, they
conducted a laboratory experiment that lasts about 30 minutes. Participants played the
role of an investor employed by a company. They were presented with price series for
nine shares over five, ten or 15 days. Trends in the price series were systematically
varied. Participants were asked to make a prediction about the price before making
a purchase decision for up to 100 shares. No significant effects of the length of the price
series were observed either in predictions or in investments. In Experiment 2, the
authors added graphs of the price information because it is known that visually
displaying the data can make trends more salient. This time, they observed that the
predictions based on the longer price series of ten to 15 data points yielded smaller
prediction errors but there was no impact on investment decisions. Finally, in
Experiment 3, the authors added a condition intended to reduce participants’
information processing load: in this condition, each of five points represented
aggregated data over three days, thereby lowering the number of data points that had
to be processed. Price prediction errors were smaller in this condition than in
conditions in which either five or 15 non-aggregated points were presented and risk
taking for investments was closer to optimal.
Their paper is important for its policy implications in the context of the current
debate on bonuses. People are in general myopic. Graphs may counteract the myopic
tendency to a certain extent by defocusing the attention from the most recent
information. When the number of data points is reduced and averages are presented to
reduce local variation, both prediction and investment performance are improved.
Thus, to distract investors from myopic decisions, aggregation over time is a useful
strategy.
Our second paper is written by Sandie McHugh and Rob Ranyard from the
University of Bolton. They examined the effects of information about the long-term
financial consequences of different types of loans on credit repayment decisions. They
conducted two experiments with a random sample of 2,000 people from a high street
bank’s database of personal account customers. They processed 242 replies for the
paper that they present here. Two credit repayment scenarios, one with a credit card The role of
balance of £1,500 and one involving re-mortgage of a property loan of £40,000, were psychological
devised. In these scenarios, participants selected a monthly payment level when
given either no additional information, total cost information, loan duration factors
information, or both total cost and loan duration information. Controlling for
demographic information, the authors showed that provision of additional information
produced higher repayment levels. 73
In their second experiment, McHugh and Ranyard again examined the effects of
provision of information about the long-term consequences of repayment decisions.
However, in this experiment, which was conducted just after the 2008 financial crisis,
they used a wider variety of credit repayment scenarios. They also added questions
asking participants to estimate the likelihood that redundancy or illness would lead to
repayment difficulties, to assess levels of worry this likelihood would produce, and
to assess their levels of worry arising from the possibility of future rises in the cost of
living. Higher estimates of the likelihood of personal circumstances leading to
Downloaded by 14.169.48.214 At 00:02 19 April 2018 (PT)
repayment difficulties and worry about future increases in the cost of living reduced
repayment levels. In contrast, higher levels of education and worry about personal
circumstances causing repayment difficulties raised repayment levels.
The policy implications of the paper are important for retail banks. If they
provided information on the cost and duration of debt repayments, they could
speed up the repayment of loans, credit cards debts or mortgages. Selecting a lower
payment plan is associated with worry about a change in personal circumstances
causing repayment difficulties. Maybe lower repayment levels can be used as a means
of credit risk management and be associated with taking payment protection
insurance.
attitudes towards consumer credit differentiate credit users and non-users. These
results were robust to the needs of the household. Second, they show that, as credit
users’ attitude towards credit becomes more positive, they are more likely to finance
consumption with credit cards or point-of-sale lending than by using personal bank
credit or salary loans. In contrast, as the attitude of non-users becomes more favourable
towards credit, they increasingly prefer point-of-sale lending to credit cards. Finally,
Cosma and Pattarin show that the probability of taking on debt increases as the
attitude towards debt becomes more favourable. The probability of using credit cards
also increases as the number of income earners in the household increases and when
there are strong expectations that income will rise.
The paper is important in showing that, among the many determinants of credit
use, attitude plays a significant role. The cognitive component which determines
the individual’s decision-making framework is crucial. The psychological profile of the
borrower is an important factor in consumer credit decisions.
References
Arkes, H.R. and Ayton, P. (1999), “The sunk cost and Concorde effects: are humans less rational
than lower animals?”, Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 125 No. 5, pp. 591-600.
Arkes, H.R. and Blumer, C. (1985), “The psychology of sunk cost”, Organizational Behavior and
Human Decision Processes, Vol. 35 No. 1, pp. 124-40.
Arrow, K.J. and Debreu, G. (1954), “The existence of an equilibrium for a competitive economy”,
Econometrica, Vol. 23 No. 3, pp. 265-90.
Åstebro, T. and Elhedhli, S. (2006), “The effectiveness of simple decision heuristics: forecasting
commercial success for early-stage ventures”, Management Science, Vol. 52 No. 3, pp. 395-409.
Barberis, N., Huang, M. and Santos, T. (2001), “Prospect theory and asset prices”, Quarterly
Journal of Economics, Vol. 116 No. 1, pp. 1-53.
Bell, D.E., Raiffa, H. and Tversky, A. (1988), “Descriptive, normative, and prescriptive
interactions in decision making”, in Bell, D.E., Raiffa, H. and Tversky, A. (Eds), Decision
Making: Descriptive, Normative, and Prescriptive Interactions, Cambridge University
Press, Cambridge, pp. 9-30.
Biais, B., Hilton, D., Mazurier, K. and Pouget, S. (2005), “Judgmental overconfidence, self-
monitoring, and trading performance in an experimental financial market”, Review of
Economic Studies, Vol. 72 No. 2, pp. 287-312.
Bloomfield, R. and Hayes, J. (2002), “Predicting the next step of a random walk: experimental
evidence of regime-shifting beliefs”, Journal of Financial Economics, Vol. 65 No. 3, pp. 397-415.
Bloomfield, R., Libby, R. and Nelson, M.W. (2003), “Over-reliance on previous years’ earnings”,
Contemporary Accounting Research, Vol. 20, pp. 1-31.
Bloomfield, R.J. (2006), “Behavioral finance”, Johnson School Research Paper No. 38-06, available
at: http://ssrn.com/abstract¼941491
Burns, P. (1985), “Experience in decision making: a comparison of students and businessmen in a
simulated progressive auction”, in Smith, V.L. (Ed.), Research in Experimental Economics,
JAI Press, Greenwich, pp. 1-43.
Christensen-Szalanski, J.J. and Beach, L.R. (1984), “The citation bias: fad and fashion in the The role of
judgment and decision literature”, American Psychologist, Vol. 39 No. 1, pp. 75-8.
psychological
Coval, J.D. and Shumway, T. (2005), “Do behavioral biases affect prices?”, Journal of Finance,
Vol. 60 No. 1, pp. 1-34. factors
Daniel, K., Hirshleifer, D. and Subrahmanyam, A. (1998), “Investor psychology and security
market under- and overreaction”, Journal of Finance, Vol. 53 No. 6, pp. 1839-86.
Daniel, K., Hirshleifer, D. and Teoh, S.H. (2002), “Investor psychology in capital markets: evidence 77
and policy implications”, Journal of Monetary Economics, Vol. 49 No. 1, pp. 139-209.
Dawkins, R. and Brockman, H.J. (1980), “Do digger wasps commit the Concorde fallacy?”, Animal
Behavior, Vol. 28, pp. 892-6.
Dawkins, R. and Carlisle, T.R. (1976), “Parental investment, mate desertion and a fallacy”, Nature,
Vol. 262, pp. 131-3.
De Bondt, W.F.M. (1993), “Betting on trends: intuitive forecasts of financial risk and return”,
International Journal of Forecasting, Vol. 9 No. 3, pp. 355-71.
Downloaded by 14.169.48.214 At 00:02 19 April 2018 (PT)
De Bondt, W.F.M. and Thaler, R.H. (1985), “Does the stock market overreact?”, Journal of Finance,
Vol. 40 No. 3, pp. 793-805.
De Bondt, W.F.M. and Thaler, R.H. (1987), “Further evidence on investor overreaction and stock
market seasonality”, Journal of Finance, Vol. 42 No. 3, pp. 557-81.
De Bondt, W.F.M., Forbes, W., Hamalainen, P. and Muradoglu, Y.G. (2010), “What can behavioural
finance teach us about finance?”, Qualitative Research in Financial Markets, Vol. 2 No. 1,
pp. 29-36.
DeMiguel, V., Garlappi, L. and Uppal, R. (2007), “Optimal versus naı̈ve diversification:
how inefficient is the 1/N portfolio strategy?”, The Review of Financial Studies, Vol. 22
No. 5, pp. 1915-53.
Edwards, W. (1954), “The theory of decision making”, Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 51 No. 4,
pp. 380-417.
Edwards, W. (1955), “The predictions of decisions among bets”, Journal of Experimental
Psychology, Vol. 50 No. 3, pp. 201-14.
Frazzini, A. (2006), “The disposition effect and underreaction to news”, Journal of Finance, Vol. 61
No. 4, pp. 2017-46.
Frederick, D. and Libby, R. (1986), “Expertise and auditor’s judgments of conjunctive events”,
Journal of Accounting Research, Vol. 24 No. 3, pp. 270-90.
Gärling, T., Kirchler, E., Lewis, A. and van Raaij, F. (2009), “Psychology, financial decision
making, and financial crises”, Psychological Science in the Public Interest, Vol. 10 No. 1,
pp. 1-47.
Gervais, S. and Odean, T. (2001), “Learning to be overconfident”, Review of Financial Studies,
Vol. 14 No. 1, pp. 1-27.
Gigerenzer, G. and Kurzenhäuser, S. (2005), “Fast and frugal heuristics in medical decision
making”, in Bibace, R., Laird, J.D., Noller, K.L. and Valsiner, J. (Eds), Science and Medicine
in Dialogue, Praeger, Westport, CT, pp. 3-15.
Gigerenzer, G., Todd, P.M. and The ABC Research Group (1999), Simple Heuristics That Make Us
Smart, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
Glaser, M., Nöth, M. and Weber, M. (2004), “Behavioral finance”, in Koehler, D.J. and Harvey, N.
(Eds), Blackwell Handbook of Judgment and Decision Making, Blackwell, Oxford,
pp. 527-46.
Haigh, M.S. and List, J.A. (2005), “Do professional traders exhibit myopic loss aversion? An
experimental analysis”, The Journal of Finance, Vol. 40 No. 1, pp. 523-34.
RBF Haldane, A.G. (2012), “The dog and the frisbee”, Central Bankers Speeches, Bank for
International Settlements, Jackson Hole, Wyoming, available at: www.bis.org/review/
4,2 r120905a.pdf (accessed 14 September 2012).
Harvey, N. and Bolger, F. (1996), “Graphs versus tables: effects of data presentation format on
judgmental forecasting”, International Journal of Forecasting, Vol. 12, pp. 119-37.
Harvey, N. and Reimers, S. (2012), “Trend damping: under-adjustment, experimental artefact, or
78 adaptation to features of the natural environment?”, Journal of Experimental Psychology:
Learning, Memory, and Cognition.
Holte, R.C. (1993), “Very simple classification rules perform well on most commonly used
datasets”, Machine Learning, Vol. 3 No. 1, pp. 63-91.
Kahneman, D. (2011), Thinking, Fast and Slow, Penguin Books, London.
Kahneman, D. and Riepe, M.W. (1998), “Aspects of investor psychology”, The Journal of Portfolio
Management, Vol. 24 No. 1, pp. 52-65.
Kahneman, D. and Tversky, A. (1979), “Prospect theory: an analysis of decision under risk”,
Econometrica, Vol. 47, pp. 263-91.
Downloaded by 14.169.48.214 At 00:02 19 April 2018 (PT)
Kahneman, D., Slovic, P. and Tversky, A. (Eds) (1982), Judgment Under Uncertainty: Heuristics
and Biases, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Klein, J.T. (1990), Interdisciplinarity: Histories, Theories, and Methods, Wayne State University
Press, Detroit, MI.
Krouse, H.J. (1986), “Use of decision frames by elementary school children”, Perceptual and Motor
Skills, Vol. 63 No. 2, pp. 1107-12.
Lawrence, M., Goodwin, P., O’Connor, M. and Önkal, D. (2006), “Judgemental forecasting: a review
of progress over the last 25 years”, International Journal of Forecasting, Vol. 22 No. 3,
pp. 493-518.
Lo, H.-Y. and Harvey, N. (2011), “Shopping without pain: compulsive buying and the effects
of credit card availability in Europe and the Far East”, Journal of Economic Psychology,
Vol. 32 No. 1, pp. 79-92.
Lo, H.-Y. and Harvey, N. (2012), “Effects of shopping addiction on consumer decision making:
web-based studies in real time”, Journal of Behavioral Addictions.
Lo, H.-Y., Thomson, M. and Harvey, N. (2012), “Information search and product knowledge:
differences between shopaholics and general shoppers in Britain and Taiwan”, Journal of
Customer Behaviour.
Locke, P.R. and Mann, S.C. (2000), “Do professional traders exhibit loss realization aversion”,
working paper, The George Washington University, Washington, DC.
Maestripieri, D. and Alleva, E. (1991), “Litter defense and parental investment allocation in house
mice”, Behavioural Processes, Vol. 23 No. 1, pp. 223-30.
Markowitz, H.M. (1952), “Portfolio selection”, Journal of Finance, Vol. 7, pp. 77-91.
Merton, R.C. (1969), “Lifetime portfolio selection under uncertainty: the continuous-time case”,
Review of Economics and Statistics, Vol. 51 No. 3, pp. 247-57.
Mitchell, W.J.T. (1995), “Interdisciplinary and visual culture”, The Art Bulletin, Vol. 77 No. 4,
pp. 540-4.
Muradoglu, G. (1989), “Factors influencing stock demand in Turkey”, unpublished thesis,
Bogazici University, Istanbul.
Muradoglu, G. (2002), “Portfolio managers’ and novices’ forecasts of risk and return: are there
predictable forecast errors?”, Journal of Forecasting, Vol. 21 No. 6, pp. 395-416.
Muradoglu, G. and Önkal, D. (1994), “An exploratory analysis of portfolio managers’
probabilistic forecasts of stock prices”, Journal of Forecasting, Vol. 13 No. 7, pp. 565-78.
Muradoglu, G., Altay-Salih, A. and Mercan, M. (2005), “A behavioral approach to efficient The role of
portfolio formation”, The Journal of Behavioural Finance, Vol. 6 No. 5, pp. 202-12.
psychological
Odean, T. (1998a), “Are investors reluctant to realize their losses?”, Journal of Finance, Vol. 53
No. 5, pp. 1775-98. factors
Odean, T. (1998b), “Volume, volatility, price, and profit when all traders are above average”,
Journal of Finance, Vol. 53 No. 6, pp. 1887-934.
Odean, T. (1999), “Do investors trade too much?”, American Economic Review, Vol. 89 No. 5, 79
pp. 1279-98.
Önkal, D. and Muradoglu, G. (1994), “Evaluating probabilistic forecasts of stock prices in a
developing stock market”, European Journal of Operations Research, Vol. 74 No. 2,
pp. 350-8.
Önkal, D. and Muradoglu, G. (1995), “Effects of feedback on probabilistic forecasts of stock
prices”, International Journal of Forecasting, Vol. 11 No. 2, pp. 307-19.
Önkal, D. and Muradoglu, G. (1996), “Effects of task format on probabilistic forecasting of stock
prices”, International Journal of Forecasting, Vol. 12 No. 1, pp. 9-24.
Downloaded by 14.169.48.214 At 00:02 19 April 2018 (PT)
Post, T., van den Assem, M.J., Baltussen, G. and Thaler, R.H. (2008), “Deal or no deal? Decision
making under risk in a large-payoff game show”, American Economic Review, Vol. 98 No. 1,
pp. 38-71.
Reimers, S. and Harvey, N. (2011), “Sensitivity to autocorrelation in judgmental time series
forecasting”, International Journal of Forecasting, Vol. 27, pp. 1196-214.
Ricciardi, V. and Simon, H. (2000), “What is behavioral finance?”, The Business, Education and
Technology Journal, Vol. 2 No. 1, pp. 26-34.
Scheibehenne, B. and Broder, A. (2007), “Predicting Wimbledon 2005 tennis results by mere
player name recognition”, International Journal of Forecasting, Vol. 3 No. 3, pp. 415-26.
Serwe, S. and Frings, C. (2006), “Who will win Wimbledon? The recognition heuristic in
predicting sports events”, Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, Vol. 19 No. 4, pp. 321-32.
Shefrin, H. (2005), A Behavioral Approach to Asset Pricing, Elsevier, London.
Shefrin, H. and Statman, M. (1985), “The disposition to sell winners too early and ride losers too
long: theory and evidence”, Journal of Finance, Vol. 40 No. 3, pp. 777-90.
Slovic, P. (1972), “Psychological study of human judgment: implications for investment decision
making”, Journal of Finance, Vol. 27 No. 4, pp. 779-99.
Smith, A. (1776/1976), An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations,
Clarendon Press, Oxford.
Snook, B., Zito, M., Bennell, C. and Taylor, P.J. (2005), “On the complexity and accuracy
of geographic profiling strategies”, Journal of Quantitative Criminology, Vol. 21 No. 1,
pp. 1-26.
Speekenbrink, M., Twyman, M.A. and Harvey, N. (2012), “Change detection under autocorrelation”,
Proceedings of the 34th Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, Sapporo, August.
Stiglitz, J.E. (1989), “Using tax policy to curb speculative short-term trading”, Journal of Financial
Services Research, Vol. 3 No. 1, pp. 101-15.
Thaler, R.H. (1999), “The end of behavioural finance”, Financial Analysts Journal, Vol. 55 No. 1,
pp. 12-17.
Thaler, R.H. (2000), “From homo economicus to homo sapiens”, Journal of Economic Perspectives,
Vol. 14 No. 1, pp. 133-41.
Thaler, R.H. and Johnson, E.J. (1990), “Gambling with the house money and trying to break
even: the effects of prior outcomes on risky choice”, Management Science, Vol. 26 No. 6,
pp. 643-60.
RBF Tversky, A. and Kahneman, D. (1974), “Judgment under uncertainty: heuristics and biases”,
Science, Vol. 185 No. 4157, pp. 1124-31.
4,2
Von Neumann, J. and Morgenstern, O. (1944), Theory of Games and Economic Behaviour,
Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.
Walras, L. (1874/1954), Elements of Pure Economics, (Trans by W. Jaffe) George Allen and Unwin,
London.
80 Webley, P. and Plaisier, Z. (1998), “Mental accounting in childhood”, Citizenship, Social and
Economics Education, Vol. 3 No. 1, pp. 55-64.
Wübben, M. and von Wangenheim, F. (2008), “Instant customer base analysis: managerial
heuristics often ‘get it right’”, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 72 No. 1, pp. 82-93.
Further reading
Ricciardi, V. and Tomic, I. (2004), “An introduction to mutual fund investing: a practical approach
for busy people”, unpublished book.
Tversky, A. and Kahneman, D. (1981), “The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice”,
Downloaded by 14.169.48.214 At 00:02 19 April 2018 (PT)
Corresponding author
Gulnur Muradoglu can be contacted at: g.muradoglu@city.ac.uk