Economia Comportamental e Finanças Comportamentais

doi: 10.1111/joes.
12262
BEHAVIORAL ECONOMICS AND BEHAVIORAL

FINANCE: A BIBLIOMETRIC ANALYSIS OF THE
SCIENTIFIC FIELDS
Daniel Fonseca Costa
Federal Institute of Minas Gerais
Francisval de Melo Carvalho

Federal University of Lavras
Bruno César de Melo Moreira

Federal Institute of Minas Gerais
Abstract. The aim of the study is to conduct a bibliometric analysis of the scientific field of
Behavioral Economics and Behavioral Finance. The research was conducted using the Web of Science
database, which returned 2617 articles, revealing that the amount of research within these fields has
grown over time. Furthermore, the results also prove the relevance of the works of Daniel Kahneman
and Amos Tversky for the field of Behavioral Economics and Finance, and Steven Hursh to Behavioral
Economics. It is still possible to note that the field of Behavioral Economics encompasses subjects that
connect human behavior with demand, consumption and price, with investments and with managerial
decisions, as well as with the role played by heuristics and cognitive biases in decision-making
processes. In turn, the field of Behavioral Finance is more focused on the study of errors of judgment
and of decision-making characteristics in financial investments. Additionally, it is inferred that the
field of Behavioral Economics is more wide-ranging than the field of Behavioral Finance, as the latter
is a byproduct of Behavioral Economics. Finally, a conclusion is then reached, demonstrating that
the fields of Behavioral Economics and Finance have turned into an important field of study.
Keywords. Bibliometric analysis; Behavioral economics; Behavioral finance
1. Introduction
Human behavior in decision-making processes has been the subject of a wide array of studies whose
goal, essentially, is to discern the influence of psychological, behavioral, and cognitive aspects in decision
making. Within this standpoint, a theoretical scientific framework was born, outlined as Behavioral
Economics, which, briefly put, aims to incorporate psychological aspects into the economic and financial
decision-making processes, concatenating as well forecast models that would incorporate the subjectivity
evidenced by individuals in real contexts. With such, the research conducted in Behavioral Economics
Corresponding author contact email: daniel.costa@ifmg.edu.br.
Journal of Economic Surveys (2019) Vol. 33, No. 1, pp. 3–24

C 2018 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
4 COSTA ET AL.
aims to study how individuals make decisions and the way they interact or influence other individuals,
organizations, markets, and society (Birnberg and Ganguly, 2012).
Therefore, amid the discussions centered on Economics, lies the belief that an increased realism of the
psychological cornerstones in the economic analysis will improve the field of economy in what concerns
the predictions of phenomena and also the recommendation of better economic policies (Camerer, 1999;
Camerer and Loewenstein, 2004), hence becoming, according to Tomer (2007), a school of economic
thought.
Nonetheless, it should be noted that Behavioral Economics does not absolutely reject the neoclassical
approach, one that is focused on the maximization of utility, as it grants a theoretical framework that
can be applied to the economic behavior (Camerer and Loewenstein, 2004), while accepting that the
rationality of individuals is limited (Simon, 1956; Kahneman and Tversky, 1979).
The development and enhancement of Behavioral Economics unfurled new branches of study, among
which it is possible to find the so-called Behavioral Finance (Tomer, 2007). In accordance with the
foundations of Behavioral Economics, the Behavioral Finance aims to incorporate psychological aspects
into the decision-making process, albeit focusing on financial decisions and on the financial market
(Shefrin, 2009).
Therefore, it is observed that the field of behavioral and experimental economics and finances has
developed itself with the aim of proving that the behavioral, cognitive, and emotional factors have an
influence on the decisions made by human beings (Kahneman and Smith, 2002), as well as to make
evident that there is a wide array of psychological aspects that determine the behavior of individuals in
relation to the use and acquisition of information (Garcı́a, 2013).
This comprehensiveness in this field of study has encompassed the relationship established between
human behavior and demand, consumption and price (Hursh, 1984; Hursh and Silberberg, 2008), with
investment risks (Kumar and Goyal, 2015), with market efficiency (Fama 1998; Shiller 2003), with the
intertemporal choice (Albrecht et al., 2011), with retirement planning (Thaler and Shefrin, 1981; Diamond
and Hausman, 1984; Wärneryd, 1999; Benartzi and Thaler, 2002; Mitchell and Utkus, 2003; Burtless,
2004; Garcia, 2006) and with the managerial decision-making processes (Schade and Koellinger, 2007),
while trying to find, in psychology, the concepts of heuristics and cognitive biases, in order to substantiate
the errors of judgment in decision-making processes (Tversky and Kahneman, 1974). Based on the above
considerations, it must be underlined that the research in the field of Behavioral Economics and finance has
taken several different routes, in an attempt to understand the impact that the psychological, behavioral,
and cognitive aspects actually have on the decisions soon to be taken by the individual, something that
illustrates the need for a bibliometric analysis in the area of Behavioral Economics and finance, in an
attempt to systematize the scientific output and also to understand the path that has been taken by this
theoretical field.
Thus, the present work has, as its objective, to carry out a bibliometric analysis of the scientific field
of Behavioral Economics and Behavioral Finance. Specifically, the research has the aim to understand if
there is a difference between Behavioral Economics and Behavioral Finance, uncover the main authors,
the main articles, the authorship network and the main journals, with the purpose to contribute to the state
of the art of the aforementioned issues.
2. Preliminary Discussion on Behavioral Economics and Finance

Some of the ideas of Behavioral Economics are not new. Adam Smith, for instance, denoted that the
psychological principles of individual behavior are as profound as his economic observations (Slovic,
1972; Camerer and Loewenstein, 2004). Generally speaking, Simon (1959) states that the economy could
affirm, as its own definition, that is the science that describes and predicts the behavior of several types
BIBLIOMETRIC ANALYSIS OF BEHAVIORAL ECONOMICS AND BEHAVIORAL FINANCE 5
of economic man, stressing the idea that it could depict and explain the economic behavior or act as
guidance for decisions on public policy, consumption or endeavors.
Accordingly, Behavioral Economics started to be recognized circa 1960, at the time when cognitive
psychology accepted the metaphor in which the brain is a device for information processing and not
a stimulus-response machine, in compliance with the behaviorist concept (Camerer and Loewenstein,
2004). Such understanding unleashed brand new studies on memory, problem solving and decision
making, which involved economic and financial aspects (Camerer and Loewenstein, 2004).
With the upsurge of psychology’s involvement with the economy, the unlimited rationality, which,
until that point, was advocated in financial and economic decision-making processes (Von Neumann and
Morgenstern, 1947), started to be criticized by defining men just as homo economicus, who is endowed
with a perfect rationality, self-interest, he is knowledgeable about his environment, he is skillful in
computational calculation, and has perfect information (Simon, 1955, 1956; Kahneman and Tversky,
1979). Facing such criticism, Simon (1955) proposed a behavioral model of rational choice, which
pushes for a limited rationality, whose decisions are calculated using dynamic adjusted processes,
relying on external (environmental) and internal factors (human traits). Therefore, the introduction
of behavioral, psychological and cognitive aspects in economic and financial decisions (Tversky and
Kahneman, 1974; Kahneman and Tversky, 1979) creates the room for the emergence of behavioral
economy, which, according to Thaler (2016), merely swaps the homo economicus (Econs) for the Homo
sapiens (Humans), based on the limited rationality, the choices and beliefs in the decision-making
process.
Thereby, Behavioral Economics depict a unification between psychology and economics (Camerer,
1999), hence being defined as a behavioral science, whose value of its economic concepts for psychology
is based on empirical validity, when tested in the laboratory, and on its utility when compared with
the behavioral concepts previously established (Hursh, 1984). Therefore, for Tomer (2007), Behavioral
Economics, in spite of their different branches, is a school of economic thought that stands out due to
having a much less narrow, rigid, intolerant, mechanical, separate, and individualistic perspective.
Given the aforementioned, the field of research in Behavioral Economics and finance expanded
their range, when Kahneman and Tversky (1979) presented an alternative theory about the act of
making individual decisions in high-risk environments, entitled the prospect theory, indicating several
abnormalities in human behavior, which violate the principles and the axioms of the expected utility
hypothesis by Von Neumann and Morgenstern (1947). Facing this, the expected utility hypothesis, also
known as neoclassical theory, was initially outlined as a regulatory model which depicts the behavior of
an idealized rational person and not as a descriptive model which explains the behavior of real people
(Tversky and Kahneman, 1986), being represented by a man who chooses between fixed and known
alternatives, attaching predictable outcomes to these (Simon, 1959). Nonetheless, for Simon (1959),
when perception and cognition intervene between the decision maker and his environment, the classic
model is no longer regarded as the most suited.
Therefore, in counterpoint with the expected utility hypothesis, the prospect theory proved that
subjective factors interfere in decision making, causing individuals to deviate from rational behavior
through behavioral abnormalities named cognitive biases (Kahneman and Tversky, 1979). In this sense,
Daniel Kahneman, along with Amos Tversky, discovered several heuristics and cognitive biases linked to
the process of making financial decisions (Tversky and Kahneman, 1974; Kahneman and Tversky, 1979;
Kahneman and Smith, 2002).
From these studies, the term Behavioral Finance was emphasized and stood out throughout the 1980s,
since, besides combining psychological, cognitive, and behavioral aspects in financial and economic
decision-making processes, it also assumed as its purpose the study of these same human factors, finding
an explanation for the individual’s rationality when facing the decision-making moments in financial
investments (Kumar and Goyal, 2015). Furthermore, the collaboration established between the field of
finances and other social sciences led to a broadening of the knowledge on the financial markets (Shiller,
6 COSTA ET AL.
2003). Therefore, the concept of Behavioral Finance challenged the efficient market’s perspective, being
regarded as an aid to the understanding of the investors’ behavior (Kumar and Goyal, 2015), being one
of the most vital and contradictory research programs for the vast majority of efficient markets theories
(Shiller, 2003). Thus, Behavioral Finance, according to Tomer (2007), is regarded as an offshoot of
Behavioral Economics, which is not an entirely independent field, rather an applied branch of Behavioral
Economics.
3. Methodology
The research is characterized as a bibliometric analysis, which was carried out using the articles extracted
from the citation indexing service Web of Science of Thomson Reuters, being also classified as descriptive
and endowed with a quantitative approach.
The bibliometric analysis should be systematic, in other words, it must be based on primary studies, it
must encompass goals and methods that are clearly stated, it also should be conducted using a clear and
reproducible methodology (Greenhalgh, 1997). Therefore, relying on quantitative techniques, this sort
of analysis allows the possibility to unveil significant aspects, such as the citations, co-citations, authors,
co-authors, periodicals, keywords, among other characteristics, such as the growth and distribution of
the bibliographic production (Hsu and Chiang, 2015; Sanchez-Riofrio et al., 2015; Costa and Carvalho,
2016; Prado et al., 2016; Costa et al., 2017).
Furthermore, the goal of the bibliometric analysis can be found in the production’s quantitative aspects,
in the dissemination of scientific output, in the use of registered information (Tague-Sutcliffe, 1992), in
the demonstration of the dynamics and trajectory of the publication of emerging research, and also in
the development of the scientific field over time (Liu et al., 2014). With that, the bibliometric analysis
is regarded, for the fields of social sciences (Carlson and Ji, 2011), as a strong and deeply important
instrument for the assessment of scientific outputs (Liu et al., 2014).
This way, the present research will be built abiding by the five stages defined by Costa et al. (2017) for
the execution of a bibliometric analysis, as presented in Table 1.
According to what is presented in Table 1, stages 1–3 represent, in a concise way, the definition of the
scientific field and the search procedures, focusing also on the methods used to collect and structure the
data. Stage 4 is centered on the analysis and discussion of scientific output within the selected sample,
using the previously established research criteria. At last, step 5 represents the analysis and discussion of
the results related to the citations of works comprised within the sample.
3.1 Selection of the Object of Analysis and Research Base

The selection of the object of analysis and research base constitutes the first step toward the assembly
of the bibliometric research detailed in Table 1. To address the first step of this stage, the chains named
Behavioral Economics and Behavioral Finance were defined as the work’s scientific and theoretical
fields. After doing this, a bibliometric analysis of the scientific fields of the Behavioral Economics and
Behavioral Finance was chosen as the study’s objective.
Addressing the third step of the first stage of the bibliometric analysis, the Web of Science from
Thomson Reuters Scientific was established as the basis for the research of articles related to the delimited
theoretical field. Web of Science is an important database in the scientific realm, as it allows the access
to more than 12,000 scientific and academics journals and has more than 1 billion references cited
(King, 2016). In addition, choosing just one database allows the standardization of data (Prado et al.,
2016).
Among the examples of bibliometric analyses that have relied on Web of Science as their research
database, it is possible to cite the articles of Liu et al. (2014), Hsu and Chiang (2015), Sanchez-Riofrio
Table 1. Stages of the Assembly of the Research and Bibliometric Analysis.
Stages Description
1 Selection the object of analysis and the (a) Define the work’s scientific and theoretical fields
scientific basis (b) Delimit the work’s objectives
(c) Choose the scientific basis in which the article
research will be conducted
2 Search procedures (a) Define the search terms
(b) Define the engines for an advanced search
(c) Define the search filters
3 Collecting and structuring the data (a) Define the reference manager software
(b) Define the bibliometric analysis software
(c) Download the references from the reference
manager format, from the bibliometric analysis
format and from the electronic spreadsheet format
(d) Import the files to the reference manager and to
bibliometric analysis software
4 Contextual analysis of the scientific (a) Analysis of the temporal volume of the selected
output related to the sample publications
(b) Analysis of the citations of the selected articles
(c) Analysis of the journals that published the selected
articles
(d) Analysis of the countries of origin of the selected
articles
(e) Analysis of the keywords of the selected articles
(f) Analysis of the scientific areas of the selected articles
5 Analysis of the citation networks (a) Analysis of citations and co-citations of the overall
carried out by the sample sample
(b) Analysis of the most cited authors
(c) Analysis of the main journals
Source: Costa et al. (2017).
et al. (2015), Prado et al. (2016), Qasim (2017), and Costa et al. (2017) who have consubstantiated the
relevance of this scientific database in their pontifications. Furthermore, the choice of Web of Science
as the only database allows a direct interaction with the reference management software EndNote R
and
with the bibliometric analysis software CiteSpace (Chen, 2004, 2006), which will be used in the present
work.
3.2 Search Procedures

Step 2 of Table 1 comprises the research procedures used in the bibliometric analysis. Therefore, these
are the search terms: Behavioral Economics and Behavioral Finance. In addition, the term behavioral
accounting was included within the search procedures, given the proximity between this field and the one
of Behavioral Economics and finances.
Adding to that, in the second step of the second stage, the Boolean operator OR was used for the purpose
of finding articles that had at least one of the search terms in their title, abstract, or keywords. Therefore, the
8 COSTA ET AL.
search was carried out on the Web of Science database, with the following expression being used to perform
an advanced search: TS = (behavio$ral financ* OR behavio$ral econom* OR behavio$ral account*),
in which “TS” means topic (title, abstract, and keywords), the symbol “$” indicates that there may be
a different spelling of the word (behavioral), the symbol “ ” searches the full term and the symbol “*”
amplifies the search for all words that begin with the described term, regardless of their complement
(finance and financial). In order to emphasize if there would be specific articles to each one of the areas,
the searches were also carried out with the terms separated, that is to say TS = (behavio$ral financ*),
TS = (behavio$ral econom*) e TS = (behavio$ral account*).
In addition, four search filters are set: (a) the search was delimited only to articles, (b) the search’s
time period was based on all available years, (c) the search was performed for all scientific fields, and (d)
the search was developed searching terms in English language, and the results ware presented without
restriction by language.
These definitions aim to reach the maximum possible amount of results, taking into consideration that,
in the very first search, it is not possible to know exactly the size of the researched scientific field.
3.3 Collecting and Structuring the Data

The third step of Table 1 is the collection and structure of data. In the first step of stage 2, EndNote
R
was chosen as the reference management software, and, in the third step, CiteSpace was selected as the
bibliometric analysis software (Chen, 2004, 2006). After that, the download of references was carried
out, using the Web of Science database, in the form of an electronic spreadsheet, in the EndNote R
format
and in CiteSpace format. Finally, the files downloaded from the database were imported to EndNote R
and CiteSpace and electronic spreadsheets were sorted for an analysis.
3.4 Contextual Analysis of the Scientific Output Related to the Sample

The fourth stage of Table 1 consists of performing a contextual analysis of the scientific output selected
by the sample whose purpose is to be acquainted with the publications selected by the search. In order to
do so, first of all an analysis was conducted on the number of articles of the sample, gathered throughout
the years. In addition to that, the citations of the selected articles were also analyzed, in order to identify
the sample’s most relevant publications. Furthermore, analyses on the journals that published the selected
articles were also performed, focusing as well on their countries of origin, the most used keywords and the
scientific fields. The analyses were carried out based on the information collected from Web of Science,
as well as on the use of the CiteSpace Software.
3.5 Analysis of the Citation Networks Carried Out by the Sample

The fifth stage of the bibliometric analysis, Table 1, consists of analzying and discussing the citation
networks carried out by the sample. This analysis will be performed in order to be acquainted with
the most important studies and authors cited by the works selected by the search criteria. Therefore, an
analysis was initially performed on the most cited works, and a discussion was enacted right after, focused
on the ratio between the main authors and the total amount of their works that happen to be cited by
the sample’s articles. Finally, the journals that have published the highest number of articles cited by the
sample were also analyzed. This procedure is extremely useful, as it allows to broaden the results found in
the database, providing a vision of the most important works, authors and journals within the established
theoretical field.
The Number of Articles Published per Year, 1967-2015.

400
346
350
304
300
259
250
250
199
200 183
137
150
109
100 73
83
56
38 43
50 18 20 18
27 28
19
27 30
1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 1 1 3 3 2 1 1 1 1 1
9 7 14 14
0
1967
1970
1971
1972
1977
1979
1987
1988
1973
1975
1976
1980
1981
1982
1984
1985
1986
1990
1991
1993
1994
1992
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2008
2006
2007
2009
2010
2015
2011
2012
2013
2014
Figure 1. The Number of Articles Published Per Year, 1967–2015.
Source: Outlined by the authors using the Web of Science database.
4. Results and Discussions
4.1 Contextual Analysis of the Sample’s Scientific Output

The survey was performed in November 2016 and the main search returned a total of 2617 articles,
which were published between 1967 and 2016, with these being used in the bibliometric analysis. The
specific searches returned 2019 articles for Behavioral Economics, 565 for Behavioral Finance and 69 for
Behavioral Accounting, with the term Behavioral Economics presenting a wider popularity. Therefore,
having the goal to be acquainted with the time frame of the publications gathered, a graph as outlined,
based on a previously established search criteria, which can be seen in Figure 1, showing the number of
articles published over time.
The sample’s very first work was published in 1967 by Behavioral Science, with the title of Experiments
in Behavioral Economics: Siegel and Fouraker Revisited, tallying 10 citations on Web of Science.
The work’s objective was to replicate the laboratory experiments of Siegel and Fouraker in bilateral
monopoly and duopoly, ratifying the general findings of the authors and exploring the interrelationships
of sociocultural and economic variables that influence business decision making (Johnson and Cohen,
1967). Therefore, when examining Figure 1, it is possible to note that the number of publications has
increased over time, particularly in 2015, a year when 346 articles were published concerning the fields
of Behavioral Economics, Behavioral Finance, and behavioral accounting.
Based on specific search patterns, the sample’s first article with the term “Behavioral Finance” entitled
Applying Behavioral Finance To Capital-Budgeting—Project Terminations was published in 1987, by
the Journal Financial Management. The paper suggests that not all managers follow standard financial
theory and the net present value approach to select, continue, or terminate investment projects, getting
trapped into projects that generate losses and thus, spending a considerable amount of resources trying to
rescue them (Statman and Caldwell, 1987).
When scrutinizing the publications over time (Figure 1), it is noted that the sample’s first article with
the term “Behavioral Economics” was published in 1967 and the sample’s first article with the term
“Behavioral Finance” was published in 1987, providing the fact that Behavioral Economics predates
10 COSTA ET AL.
Table 2. Articles With the Highest Number of Citations Among the 2617 Gathered by the Search.
No. Article Author Citation
1 The Weirdest People in The World? Henrich et al. (2010) 1162

2 Market Efficiency, Long-Term Returns, Fama (1998) 860
and Behavioral Finance
3 Twitter Mood Predicts the Stock Market Bollen et al. (2011) 500
4 Toward a Behavioral Economic Bickel and Marsch (2001) 473
Understanding of Drug Dependence:
Delay Discounting Processes
5 Hyperbolic Temporal Discounting in Vuchinich and Simpson (1998) 334
Social Drinkers and Problem Drinkers
6 Regulation For Conservatives: Camerer et al. (2003) 330
Behavioral Economics and The Case
for Asymmetric Paternalism
7 Discounting of Delayed Rewards: Myerson and Green (1995) 321
Models of Individual Choice
8 Promises and Partnership Charness and Dufwenberg 302
(2006)
9 Civil War Blattman and Miguel (2010) 257
10 Exploring the agency consequences of Schulze et al. (2003) 254
ownership dispersion among the
directors of private family firms
Behavioral Finance. This inference can be corroborated by the statement of Camerer and Loewenstein
(2004), which claims that Behavioral Economics started to be accepted as a new area of knowledge around
1960, and also by the proposition of Kumar and Goyal (2015), stating that concept of Behavioral Finance
was disseminated more vehemently in the 1980s.
Among the articles selected by the previously established search criteria, some of them stood out, given
the tally of citations on Web of Science. Therefore, Table 2 shows the 10 most often cited articles.
According to Table 2, the most quoted article in Web of Science, with 1162 citations, was The Weirdest
People in The World? published by Behavioral and Brain Sciences in 2010. The work establishes a
comparative review of the databases of all behavioral sciences, proposing that there is a substantial
variability in the experimental outcomes between populations and that the subjects “strangers” are
particularly uncommon when compared to the remaining frequent species (Henrich et al., 2010).
Having 860 citations, the second most quoted article was Fama (1998), published in 1998 by Journal of
Financial Economics, through which it was observed that, according to the estimates of market efficiency,
the visible anomalies may be an outgrowth of methodology itself and that the majority of the anomalies
associated with the long-term return have a tendency to vanish when reasonable changes are performed
in the technique.
In third, with 500 citations, was the article of Bollen et al. (2011), published by Journal of Computational
Science in 2011. The authors carried out an investigation to know if the measurements of collective
mood, arising from large-scale feeds on Twitter, are indeed correlated to the value of the Dow Jones
Industrial Average (DJIA) over time. The results manifested that the accuracy of the DJIA forecasts can
be considerably improved with the inclusion of specific dimensions of the public mood.
The work authored by Bickel and Marsch (2001) has the fourth spot with 473 citations. The article was
published by Addiction in 2001 and inspects how the delay discounting may offer an explanation for the
impulsiveness and loss of control that is shown by the addict.
The article authored by Vuchinich and Simpson (1998) was published in 1998 by Experimental
and Clinical Psychopharmacology and it tallies 334 citations. The authors carried out two studies and
established comparisons between the participants, differentiated by their usual consumption of alcohol
(social drinkers and problematic drinkers), to the extent that delay values of hypothetical amounts of
money were deducted.
The work of Camerer et al. (2003), published in 2003 by the University of Pennsylvania Law Review,
has 330 citations whose focus is placed on the impact of patronizing regulations on the consumer’s
sovereignty, taking into account the justification of the USA for such paternalism, assessing as well the
patronizing regulations and the implications for Behavioral Economics.
Holding the seventh place among the most cited, with 321 citations, the article authored by Myerson
and Green (1995), published in 1995 by Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, approaches
the framework of the mathematical relationship between a delayed rewarding and its present value.
The work authored by Charness and Dufwenberg (2006) was published by Journal of Monetary
Economics in 2006 and has 302 citations. The article experimentally scrutinized the communication’s
impact on trust and cooperation.
Published in 2010 by Journal of Economic Literature, the article of Blattman and Miguel (2010) hold
the ninth place with 257 citations. The article introduces a theoretical approach to the increasing number
of studies that depict the consequences of conflicts related to the civil war, particularly those focused on
the impact of war on institutions.
Finally, the work authored by Schulze et al. (2003) stands in 10th place among the most cited, tallying
254 citations. The article was published in 2003 by the Academy of Management Journal and relied on
the agency theory and also on insights extracted from the literature of behavioral and family economics,
in order to outline hypotheses related to the effect of ownership dispersion on the use of debt for family
businesses.
Therefore, when analyzing the specific searches for each term, it was noted that, among the articles
cited in Table 2, the work authored by Fama (1998) was the only one return for the search that had the term
“Behavioral Finance.” The remaining articles appeared in the search when using the term “Behavioral
Economics.”
Specifically, and already excluding the work authored by Fama (1998), the sample’s five most cited
articles for the term “Behavioral Finance” were the ones of Abreu and Brunnermeier (2003) with 229
citations in Web of Science, Shiller (2003) with 194 citations, Campbell (2000) with 157 citations, and
Daniel et al. (2002) and Malmendier and Shanthikumar (2007) with 117 citations.
The research conducted by Abreu and Brunnermeier (2003), entitled Bubbles and crashes, was
published by Econometrica and introduces a model in which a bubble of assets may endure despite
the presence of rational arbitrageurs, proving as well that the news may have an unbalanced impact when
considering their intrinsic content.
The article authored by Shiller (2003), published by The Journal of Economic Perspectives, entitled
From Efficient Markets Theory to Behavioral Finance, clearly underlines the significance of Behavioral
Finance in relation to the efficient markets theory.
Entitled Asset pricing at the millennium, the article authored by Campbell (2000), was published by the
Journal of Finance, aiming to inspect the field of asset pricing, emphasizing the interaction established
between the theory and the empirical work focused on risk and return.
The work authored by Daniel et al. (2002), entitled Investor Psychology in Capital Markets: Evidence
and Policy Implications, was published by Journal of Monetary Economics, carried out an extensive
review showing how the psychological biases affect the investor’s behavior and also the prices.

12 COSTA ET AL.
Table 3. Journals With the Highest Number of Publications Among the 2617 Articles.
Journals Frequency of publications Ratio (%)
Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior 65 2.48

Journal of Economic Behavior Organization 56 2.14
Psychopharmacology 55 2.10
Journal of Economic Psychology 50 1.91
Journal of Behavioral Finance 48 1.83
Drug and Alcohol Dependence 43 1.64
Experimental and Clinical Psychopharmacology 41 1.57
Quantitative Finance 33 1.26
Journal of Banking and Finance 32 1.22
Management Science 32 1.22
Partial sum 455 17.39
Other journals 2162 82.61
Total sum 2617 100.00
The article Are Small Investors Naive About Incentives? authored by Malmendier and Shanthikumar
(2007), was published by Journal of Financial Economics, having as its objective to analyze how investors
explain the distortions in stock investment, discussing as well possible explanations for the disparities
found in the negotiation responses, including the information costs and the investors’ naivety.
Given the aforementioned, it is noted that the sample’s main articles that are associated with the term
“Behavioral Economics” encompass a much broader range of subjects, and those gathered from the
term “Behavioral Finance” are instead focused on the market efficiency and on the relationship with the
investor’s behavior.
Working as a complement to the analysis of the main articles, the journals that have published the
highest number of articles related to the works gathered in this research have also been analyzed. Table 3
presents the 10 journals whose frequency of published articles was the highest.
According to what is shown in Table 3, the 10 journals published a total of 455 articles, hence
representing 17.39% of the 2617 articles selected by the search criteria previously established. Therefore,
the Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior stands out, tallying 65 published articles, which is
the equivalent to 2.48%. For this journal in particular, it is possible to put the emphasizes on the already
mentioned article Discounting of Delayed Rewards: Models of Individual Choice, published in 1995 by
Myerson and Green (1995), which has a total of 321 citations in Web of Science. Furthermore, the author
Steven R. Hursh is also a prominent name, with four articles (Hursh, 1984, 1991; Hursh and Winger,
1995; Hursh and Roma, 2013) published in this journal as a first author with, respectively, 252, 105, 117,
and 32 citations on Web of Science.
Regarding the volume of the scientific output, which has as its basis the relationship with the countries
of origin of the first author, Figure 2 presents the 10 countries that have published the highest number of
articles among the 2617 selected by the search.
According to Figure 2, it can be verified that the United States is the country that, within this field, has
the highest volume of publications with 1386 articles among the 2617 articles gathered for this sample,
followed by England, with 226 articles and Germany, with 150 articles. Analyzing such numbers, it is
possible to assess that the United States has published approximately 53% of the articles gathered in
this sample, something that stresses the country’s relevance and preeminence in the scientific output that
Figure 2. Network Between Countries Based on the First Author’s Country. [Colour figure can be viewed at
wileyonlinelibrary.com]
Source: Figure created by CiteSpace software.
concerns the fields of economy, finance, and accounting. As a matter of fact, France and the Netherlands
appeared in Figure 3, each one with a frequency of 79 articles published, Australia and Canada with 76
articles, China with 68 articles, Spain with 64 articles, and Israel with 52 published articles.
With four citations on Web of Science, Strategy for Behavioral Accounting Research was the sample’s
first article to be published by the United States, in Accounting Review in 1970, with the aim of helping
future research in behavioral accounting (Hofstedt and Kinard, 1970). Additionally, among 10 articles
most often cited, as shown in Table 2, the only one that makes no reference to the United States is the one
authored by Henrich et al. (2010), having Canada as its origin.
Furthermore, the bibliometric allowed an analysis of the main keywords used in the sample’s articles,
as it can be verified in Figure 3.
The 10 keywords that stand out in Figure 3 are as follows: Behavioral Economics with a frequency of
930 appearances; choice with 325 appearances; Behavioral Finance with a frequency of 304; risk with
283; behavior with 242; decision making with 199; information with 151; psychology with 148; demand
with 143 and prospect-theory with a frequency of 142. Therefore, when looking at Figure 3, it appears
that the highlighted words are deeply aligned to the fields of Behavioral Economics and finance.
Another point, which should be analyzed, based on the structure of bibliometric analysis show in
Table 1, is related to the scientific fields in which the sample’s articles are allocated. Based on what can
be observed in Figure 4, the main areas among the gathered articles for the sample are the following:
Business & Economics with 1180 articles published; Economics with 834 articles; Psychology with 499;
Business with 467; Psychiatry in fifth place with 195; Behavioral Sciences with 188; Government & Law
14 COSTA ET AL.
Figure 3. Network of the Main Keywords Among the 2617 Articles.

[Colour figure can be viewed at wileyonlinelibrary.com]
holds the seventh place with 171; Pharmacology & Pharmacy with 160; Neurosciences & Neurology with
158 articles; and Neurosciences appears in tenth place with 143 articles published.
When analyzing Figure 4, it is possible to infer the already existing connection between the fields of
economics and Behavioral Finance and the field of psychology, ratifying the assertion made by Kumar
and Goyal (2015), in which it is stated that Behavioral Finance combines psychological and behavioral
aspects when making financial and economic decisions. Additionally, given the representativeness of the
sample’s fields, it is therefore possible to verify that the fields of economics, business, management and
psychology are influencing other areas such as behavioral sciences, law, Neurosciences, among others.
4.2 Analysis of the Networks of the Scientific Output

The main search returned a total of 2617 articles. These articles cited several studies, with those sorted by
first author and year in Figure 5 being the ones that stood out the most. Therefore, the 10 most significant
works were, in first place, the article authored by Kahneman and Tversky (1979) with 447 citations,
followed by the one of Tversky and Kahneman (1974) with 196 citations found among the selected
articles, and, in third, the work authored by Thaler and Sunstein (2008) with 188 citations, followed by
articles of Tversky and Kahneman (1992), with 139 citations, Laibson (1997) with 126 citations, Hursh
and Silberberg (2008) with 125 citations, Hursh (1980) with 121 citations, Tversky and Kahneman (1981)
with 108 citations, Hursh et al. (1988) with 107 citations, and Hursh (1984) with 105 citations.
As it can be seen, Figure 5 introduces two properly defend blocks of authors, with the first being led
by the works of Daniel Kahneman and Amos Tversky, and the second by the works of Steven Hursh.
Given this, the work most often cited by the articles comprised within this search was the work authored
by Kahneman and Tversky (1979), entitled Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk, published
by the Econometrica in 1979, whose aim was to introduce an alternative theory on making individual
decisions in high-risk environments, counterweighting the expected utility theory, whose relevance was
Figure 4. Network of Publications Based on the Categories of Web of Science. [Colour figure can be viewed
at wileyonlinelibrary.com]
described in the preliminary discussions of this work. Next, Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and
Biases, published by Science in 1974, is the highlight, and whose purpose was to report on heuristics
related to judgment when coping with conditions of uncertainty (Tversky and Kahneman, 1974), with its
significance being explained by its embodiment of cognitive biases in research related to economics and
finance. It is worth mentioning as well that both articles are authored by Daniel Kahneman and Amos
Tversky, and so, given the network presented, it is possible to infer that these works represent a rather
significant milestone in the fields of Behavioral Economics and finance. Furthermore, two other works
authored by Tversky and Kahneman are among the most cited, with these being Tversky and Kahneman
(1981) and Tversky and Kahneman (1992).
The article of Tversky and Kahneman (1981), published in 1981 by Science, outlines decision problems
in which people violate systematically the requirements of consistency and coherence, and shapes these
violations of the psychological principles, which rule the perception of decision-related problems and
assessment of options. The work of Tversky and Kahneman (1992), published in 1992 by the Journal of
Risk and Uncertainty, conducts a positive analysis of an error of judgment related to heuristics, proving
that the error can be complemented by a negative analysis, aiming to explain the reason why the right
rule is not intuitively persuasive.
The third most often cited endeavor was the book authored by Thaler and Sunstein (2008), published in
2008 by Yale University Press, entitled Nudge: Improving Decisions about Health, Wealth, and Happiness.
Briefly put, the book addresses the paths of psychology in contemporary economics, shedding light on
arguments for the new paternalism in a compelling way.
Among the most often cited articles, the work of Laibson (1997), published in 1997 by Quarterly
Journal of Economics, analyzes the hyperbolic discount function of consumers who are faced with illiquid
asset sales decisions. The results suggest that as a result of this type of discount function consumers may
present inconsistent intertemporal behaviors and difficulties in pursuing long-term goals.
It was also possible to emphasize four articles that have Steven Hursh as their first author, tallying
a total of 458 citations within the sample’s articles. The work most often cited was Economic demand
and essential value, published by Psychological Review in 2008, whose aim was, based on the argument
16 COSTA ET AL.
Figure 5. Network Comprising the Most Cited Works Among the 2617 Articles of the Sample. [Colour figure
can be viewed at wileyonlinelibrary.com]
that the frequency response could index the reflex strength, to measure such strength using Behavioral
Economics methods, relying on demand curves to map how reinforcer consumption alters itself with
changes in price at different times (Hursh and Silberberg, 2008).
Aiming to contribute to the field of Behavioral Economics, Hursh’s second article, entitled Economic
Concepts for the Analysis of Behavior, published by Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior in
1980, discusses four points of the economic theory. With these being (a) a behavioral experiment is an
economic system and its characteristics (open or closed) can have a strong influence on the outcome, (b)
reinforcers can be distinguished by a functional property named elasticity, (c) reinforcers may interact as
complements and also as substitutes, and (d) and not a single simple-choice rule, strict correspondence
for instance, can explain the whole choice behavior (Hursh, 1980).
In yet another study authored by Hursh, entitled A Cost-Benefit-Analysis of Demand for Food, published
in 1988 by Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior, a test was carried out, involving the
proposition that states that the price’s fundamental dimension is a cost-benefit analysis, expressed as
the effort expended per unit of food value consumed. The work, using laboratory rats as subjects, tested
the generality of the concept of unit price, by varying four dimensions: fixed-ratio schedule, the number
of food pellets per fixed-ratio completion, the probability of reinforcement, and response lever weight or
effort (Hursh et al., 1988).
Finally, the article Behavioral Economics, published by the Journal of the Experimental Analysis of
Behavior in 1984, describes recent attempts to establish an economic basis and the benefits of Behavioral
Economics to behavioral psychology, based on more general terms related to principles of the economic
theory (Hursh, 1984).
Facing the scope comprised by the sample’s 10 most cited works, it was noted that the articles that
include Daniel Kahneman, Amos Tversky, and Steven Hursh are points of reference for the fields of
Behavioral Economics and finance.
Figure 6. Network of Authors Sorted by the Total of Cited Works Among the 2617 Articles of this Sample.
[Colour figure can be viewed at wileyonlinelibrary.com]
Therefore, it is possible to note in Figure 6 the influence, in the field of Behavioral Economics and
finance, that the articles of Daniel Kahneman and Amos Tversky have. Nonetheless, it is also possible
to infer that the authors, in addition to their vast influence over the field of Behavioral Economics,
were also some of the forerunners of the field now known as Behavioral Finance. Thus, the article of
Tversky and Kahneman (1974) dealt with the relationship between heuristics, judgment, and the decision-
making process, putting the spotlight on the influence of cognitive biases, representativeness, availability,
and anchoring in decision making when facing risk and uncertain situations. The work carried out by
Kahneman and Tversky (1979) represented a breakthrough for the field of Behavioral Finance, since it
challenged the expected utility theory and analyzed how differently people approach gains and losses.
Briefly put, the authors were able to reach the conclusion that individuals have a preference for risk in
situations of loss, in other words, they avoid the risk in win-win situations, thus jeopardizing themselves
in lose-lose situations.
In contrast, the work of Steven Hursh explores the Behavioral Economics with a more focused approach
to microeconomic issues, such as: discussing the relationship of human behavior with the demand’s
elasticity, the price and with the product’s demand and supply, in other words. By doing this, the work of
Hursh outlines a specific area within Behavioral Economics.
Giving these outcomes, it is noted that the field of Behavioral Economics encompasses several subjects
which establish a relationship between human and demand, consumption and price, investment risks,
market efficiency, managerial decision making, as well as the role of heuristics and cognitive biases that
work as justifications for errors of judgment in decision-making processes. Therefore, it is possible to
infer that the field of Behavioral Finance originally derives from Behavioral Economics, with the latter
being more comprehensive, as the first is, for the most part, dedicated to the study of errors of judgment
and decision-making aspects in financial investments. With that being said, it is noted that the diffusion
of Behavioral Finance as a branch of Behavioral Economics was influenced by the work of Kahneman
and Tversky (Tomer, 2007).
In addition, the following authors stand out, with their bodies of work being the most cited overall:
Kahneman D. with 811 citations, Thaler R. with 568, Tversky A. with 552, Hursh S.R. with 331, Bickel
18 COSTA ET AL.
Figure 7. Network of the Most Cited Works and Authors Among the 565 Articles Gathered by a Search Using
the Term “Behavioral Finance.” [Colour figure can be viewed at wileyonlinelibrary.com]
W.K. with 317, Camerer C. with 306, Loewenstein G. with 267, Fehr E. with 240, and Fama E.F. with
218. Figure 6 shows the outcome.
Figure 6 strengthens the relevance of Amos Tversky and Daniel Kahneman, and also the significance
of their endeavors for the field of economics and Behavioral Finance. This fact can be corroborated
by the search of Costa et al. (2017), and proved in 2002, when Daniel Kahneman was awarded
the Nobel Prize in Economics (Kahneman and Smith, 2002). Furthermore, it is also possible to
notice the importance of authors already mentioned, such as Thaler R., Hursh S.R., and Camerer
C.
In addition, it is possible to observe, when the search is confined to the term “Behavioral Economics”
that works and the authors who stand out the most are similar to those referenced in Figures 5 and 6,
respectively, proving the strength of the term Behavioral Economics among the search criteria, something
that can be verified by the fact that this term returns the highest number of works.
In order to stress even more vehemently the branch entitled Behavioral Finance, Figure 7 was outlined
with the aim of presenting the most important studies and authors cited by the sample, among this
theoretical framework. Figure 7(A) represents the 12 most cited works of the sample, whose search term
was, specifically, “Behavioral Finance” and Figure 7(B) highlights the most cited authors of the articles
selected by the sample for the term “Behavioral Finance.”
Based on Figure 7(A), it is possible to observe that the works carried out by Kahneman and Tversky
(1979) and Tversky and Kahneman (1974), besides being relevant to the field of Behavioral Economics,
are pioneering elements for Behavioral Finance. Moreover, Figure 7(B) also shows the relevance of the
authors Daniel Kahneman and Amos Tversky in this same field, who represent an important milestone
for the field of Behavioral Finance (Costa et al., 2017).
Eugene F. Fama is another important author among Behavioral Finance (Table 7(B)), winner of the
Nobel Prize in Economics in 2013, whose works most often cited in this sample are the following, as
presented in Figure 7(A): Fama (1970), Fama and French (1993), and Fama (1998). Briefly put, the work
of Fama adds empirical and theoretical contributions to the portfolio theory and asset pricing, in addition
to being absolutely crucial for the subject of market efficiency.
Figure 8. Network of Most Often Cited Journals Among the 2617 Articles of this Sample. [Colour figure can
be viewed at wileyonlinelibrary.com]
Furthermore, the work of Shefrin and Statman (1985) and of Daniel et al. (1998) approaches the use
of cognitive biases in investments and the one of de Barberis et al. (1998) presents an economic model
for the investor feelings, demonstrating how investors constitute their beliefs.
Finally, the 10 journals with the highest number of articles cited were all analyzed, as shown in
Figure 8. The following are the journals highlighted: in first place, the journal American Economic
Review with a frequency of 1174 citations; in second, the journal Quarterly Journal of Economics with
954; Econometrica stands out with 919 citations; the journal Science has 801 articles cited; in fifth place,
The Journal of Political Economy with 672; in sixth the Journal of Finance with 586; Journal of Economic
Behavior and Organization comes up in seventh place with 565; holding the eighth place, the Journal of
Economic Perspectives with 541 citations; the journal Psychological Review has 512 and the Journal of
the Experimental Analysis of Behavior stands in 10th place with 487 articles cited.
Besides being part of the journals that have published the highest number of works in the field of
economics and Behavioral Finance, it should be noted that some of these journals pointed out in Figure 8,
are also important for publishing some of the articles most often cited in the sample, such is the case of the
journal Econometrica, which published the article of Kahneman and Tversky (1979) and Science, which
published the article of Tversky and Kahneman (1974), and the one of Tversky and Kahneman (1981).
Furthermore, the journal Quarterly Journal of Economics published the work of Laibson (1997) and the
Psychological review published the article of Hursh and Silberberg (2008). Also worth mentioning, the
Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior published the works of Hursh (1980), Hursh et al. (1988)
and Hursh (1984). The aforementioned works, detailed above, are high points for being the most cited
ones among the 2617 articles analyzed, from a bibliometric standpoint. It also possible to highlight the
Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior and Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization,
for being the journals that have published more articles in the sample.
20 COSTA ET AL.
5. Conclusion
The objective of this search was to carry out a bibliometric analysis of the scientific fields of Behavioral
Economics and Behavioral Finance. Therefore, the study had the aim to discern if there is actually a
difference between Behavioral Economics and Behavioral Finance, uncover the main authors, the main
articles, the authorship network, and the main journals.
In order to address the objective of this research, a search was carried out using the Web of Science
database, hence gathering a sample of 2617 articles between 1967 and 2016. For the searches that used
separate terms, the term Behavioral Economics returned 2019 articles and the term Behavioral Finance
returned 565 articles.
Given the time frame of the selected works, it is possible to observe that the first work to be published,
within the sample, was the one authored by Johnson and Cohen (1967) and that the number of articles
published per year, generally speaking, is increasing on a constant basis, particularly in 2015, a year
that had 346 articles published. Furthermore, the sample’s first work that includes the term “Behavioral
Economics” was published in 1967 and the first article with the term “Behavioral Finance” was published
in 1987. Based on this, it can be inferred that Behavioral Economics precedes the field Behavioral Finance,
with the latter being considered a theoretical branch that arises from Behavioral Economics.
Moreover, it is possible to emphasize that the sample’s most cited article, with 1162 citations in Web of
Science, was the one authored by Henrich et al. (2010) and that the journal with more publications among
the 2617 articles of the sample was the Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior. Also, this
journal published four articles among the sample, which have Steven Hursh as their first author (Hursh,
1984, 1991; Hursh and Winger, 1995; Hursh and Roma, 2013) who, given the search results, is one of the
most influential authors within the field of Behavioral Economics.
Therefore, the results that emerged from the bibliometric analysis showed that the country that has
published the highest number of articles, among the sampled works, was the United States and that the
terms which appeared more frequently were, as expected, Behavioral Economics and Behavioral Finance,
with the former being more prominent, which ratifies the comprehensiveness of the field of Behavioral
Economics. Furthermore, it was observed that the field that has published the highest number of articles
was the one of Economy and Business, with the field of Psychology showing its relevance as well,
proving that the fields of Behavioral Economics and finance are associated with psychology, fostering
mutual influences.
In addition to this, the search results proved the importance of authors such as Daniel Kahneman and
Amos Tversky. The most cited work by the sample’s articles was the one of Kahneman and Tversky
(1979), followed by Tversky and Kahneman (1974). On the other hand, Steven Hursh emerges as a
prominent author, with four articles among the most cited (Hursh, 1980, 1984; Hursh et al., 1988; Hursh
and Silberberg, 2008). Taking such into consideration, it is proven that the works of Daniel Kahneman,
Amos Tversky, and Steven Hursh are extremely important to the field of Behavioral Economics. It is
noted that the whole body of work of Hursh enacts a more macroeconomic outlook over the field of
Behavioral Economics, as it deals with behavior when focusing on the elasticity of demand, consumption,
and price and that the work of Kahneman and Tversky, partners in several works, besides contradicting
the traditional economic theory, when it comes to rationality of the individual when making financial
decisions, devotes himself to the study of systematic deviations of human decisions against cognitive and
psychological factors, being extremely influent to the field of Behavioral Finance. Joining these authors,
Eugene Fama also emerged among the most cited in Behavioral Finance. His work became important as
it approached the market efficiency.
Given this whole context, it is possible to infer that the field of Behavioral Finance emerges from
Behavioral Economics, a fact also noted by Tomer (2007), having Daniel Kahneman and Amos Tversky
as its precursors. It is noted that the field of Behavioral Economics encompasses several subjects that
relate human behavior with demand, consumption and price, with investment risk and managerial decision
making, as well as the role of heuristics and cognitive biases that work as justifications for errors of
judgment in decision-making processes, and, on the other hand, the field of Behavioral Finance is primarily
devoted to the study of errors of judgment and of decision-making aspects in financial investment, of the
risk and return on investment, and also the behavior associated with market efficiency.
This bibliometric analysis has several important lessons. First, it reveals that the field of Behavioral
Finance originally derives from Behavioral Economics, with the latter being more comprehensive, as the
first is. Second, even though the field of behavioral finance is more recent and derived from behavioral
economics, it has a broader and less concentrated network of authors. Third, it was possible to perceive in
the selected texts a great preoccupation with the theoretical question while the practical implications of
the irrational behavioral ones, as well as possible solutions for the deviations of conduct observed, were
not subjects commonly addressed.
A conclusion is then attained, in which the fields of Behavioral Economics and Finance are growing
and becoming an important field of study, demonstrating that they both are fertile ground for research
and that the work of Daniel Kahneman and Amos Tversky are references among the field of Behavioral
Economics and, particularly, for the branch of Behavioral Finance.
Finally, this research, from a theoretical point of view, contributes to the field of Behavioral Economics
and finance, as it shows the route taken by the scientific outputs in these same fields, as well as their most
important works and authors. For further research, it is advised to carry out bibliometric analyses of the
theoretical branches arising from Behavioral Economics and the relationship of the field of Behavioral
Economics and Finance with specific terms, such as cognitive biases and heuristics.
References
Abreu, D. and Brunnermeier, M.K. (2003) Bubbles and crashes. Econometrica 71(1): 173–204.
Albrecht, K., Volz, K.G., Sutter, M., Laibson, D.I. and Von Cramon, D.Y. (2011) What is for me is not for you:
brain correlates of intertemporal choice for self and other. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience
6(2): 218–225.
Barberis, N., Shleifer, A. and Vishny, R. (1998) A model of investor sentiment. Journal of Financial Economics
49(3): 307–343.
Benartzi, S. and Thaler, R.H. (2002) How much is investor autonomy worth? The Journal of Finance 57(4):
1593–1616.
Bickel, W.K. and Marsch, L.A. (2001) Toward a behavioral economic understanding of drug dependence: delay
discounting processes. Addiction 96(1): 73–86.
Birnberg, J.G. and Ganguly, A.R. (2012) Is neuroaccounting waiting in the wings? An essay. Accounting,
Organizations and Society 37(1): 1–13.
Blattman, C. and Miguel, E. (2010) Civil war. Journal of Economic Literature 48(1): 3–57.
Bollen, J., Mao, H.N. and Zeng, X.J. (2011) Twitter mood predicts the stock market. Journal of Computational
Science 2(1): 1–8.
Burtless, G. (2004). Social norms, rules of thumb, and retirement: evidence for rationality in retirement planning
(November 2004). Working Paper No. 37, Center on Social and Economic Dynamics.
Camerer, C. (1999) Behavioral economics: reunifying psychology and economics. Proceedings of the National
Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 96(19): 10575–10577.
Camerer, C. and Loewenstein, G. (2004) Behavioral economics: past, present, future. Advances in Behavioral
Economics (New York: Princeton University Press).
Camerer, C., Issacharoff, S., Loewenstein, G., O’Donoghue, T. and Rabin, M. (2003) Regulation for conserva-
tives: Behavioral economics and the case for “asymmetric paternalism.” University of Pennsylvania Law
Review 151(3): 1211–1254.
Campbell, J.Y. (2000) Asset pricing at the millennium. Journal of Finance 55(4):1515–1567.
Carlson, K.D. and Ji, F.X. (2011) Citing and building on meta-analytic findings: a review and recommendations.
Organizational Research Methods 14(4): 696–717.
Charness, G. and Dufwenberg, M. (2006) Promises and partnership. Econometrica 74(6): 1579–1601.
22 COSTA ET AL.
Chen, C. (2004) Searching for intellectual turning points: progressive knowledge domain visualization.
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 101(Suppl. 1):5303–5310.
Chen, C. (2006) CiteSpace II: detecting and visualizing emerging trends and transient patterns in scientific
literature. Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology 57(3): 359–377.
Costa, D.F. and Carvalho, F.M. (2016) Relação entre gerenciamento de resultado e governança corporativa:
construindo um referencial teórico a partir de uma revisão sistemática da literatura. ForScience 4(1):
20–41.
Costa, D.F., Carvalho, F.M., Moreira, B.C.M. and Prado, J.W. (2017) Bibliometric analysis on the association
between behavioral finance and decision making with cognitive biases such as overconfidence, anchoring
effect and confirmation bias. Scientometrics 111(3): 1775–1799.
Daniel, K., Hirshleifer, D. and Subrahmanyam, A. (1998) Investor psychology and security market under- and
overreactions. The Journal of Finance 53(6): 1839–1885.
Daniel, K., Hirshleifer, D. and Teoh, S.H. (2002) Investor psychology in capital markets: evidence and policy
implications. Journal of Monetary Economics 49(1): 139–209.
Diamond, P.A. and Hausman, J.A. (1984) Individual retirement and savings behavior. Journal of Public
Economics 23(1):81–114.
Fama, E. (1998) Market efficiency, long-term returns, and behavioral finance. Journal of Financial Economics
49(3): 283–306.
Fama, E.F. (1970) Efficient capital markets: a review of theory and empirical work. The Journal of Finance
25(2): 383–417.
Fama, E.F. and French, K.R. (1993) Common risk factors in the returns on stocks and bonds. Journal of
Financial Economics 33(1): 3–56.
Garcı́a, M.J.R. (2013) Financial education and behavioral finance: new insights into the role of information in
financial decisions. Journal of Economic Surveys 27(2): 297–315.
Garcia, M.T.M. (2006) Individual responsibility for the adequacy of retirement income. Pensions: An
International Journal 11(3): 192–199.
Greenhalgh, T. (1997) Papers that summarise other papers (systematic reviews and meta-analyses). BMJ: British
Medical Journal 315(7109): 672.
Henrich, J., Heine, S.J. and Norenzayan, A. (2010) The weirdest people in the world? Behavioral and Brain
Sciences 33(2–3): 61-83.
Hofstedt, T.R. and Kinard, J.C. (1970) Strategy for behavioral accounting research. Accounting Review 45(1):
38–54.
Hsu, C.L. and Chiang, C.H. (2015) The financial crisis research: a bibliometric analysis. Scientometrics 105(1):
161–177.
Hursh, S.R. (1980) Economic concepts for the analysis of behavior. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of
Behavior 34(2): 219–238.
Hursh, S.R. (1984) Behavioral economics. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior 42(3): 435–452.
Hursh, S.R. (1991) Behavioral economics of drug self-administration and drug-abuse policy. Journal of the
Experimental Analysis of Behavior 56(2): 377–393.
Hursh, S.R., Raslear, T.G., Shurtleff, D., Bauman, R. and Simmons, L. (1988) A cost-benefit-analysis of demand
for food. Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior 50(3): 419–440.
Hursh, S.R. and Roma, P.G. (2013) Behavioral economics and empirical public policy. Journal of the
Hursh, S.R. and Silberberg, A. (2008) Economic demand and essential value. Psychological Review 115(1):
186–198.
Hursh, S.R. and Winger, G. (1995) Normalized demand for drugs and other reinforcers. Journal of the
Johnson, H.L. and Cohen, A.M. (1967) Experiments in behavioral economics—Siegel and Fouraker revisited.
Behavioral Science 12(5): 353–372.
Kahneman, D. and Smith, V. (2002) Foundations of behavioral and experimental economics. Nobel Prize in
Economics Documents 1. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15427579JPFM0401_02.
Kahneman, D. and Tversky, A. (1979) Prospect theory: an analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica:
Journal of the Econometric Society 47: 263–291.

King, C. (2016) Web of Science: 1 billion cited references and counting. <http://stateofinnovation.
thomsonreuters.com/web-of-science-1-billion-cited-references-and-counting%3E. Accessed 23 August
2016.
Kumar, S. and Goyal, N. (2015) Behavioural biases in investment decision making—a systematic literature
review. Qualitative Research in Financial Markets 7(1): 88–108.
Laibson, D. (1997) Golden eggs and hyperbolic discounting. Quarterly Journal of Economics 112(2): 443–477.
Liu, W.S., Gu, M.D., Hu, G.Y., Li, C., Liao, H.C., Tang, L. and Shapira, P. (2014) Profile of developments in
biomass-based bioenergy research: a 20-year perspective. Scientometrics 99(2): 507–521.
Malmendier, U. and Shanthikumar, D. (2007) Are small investors naive about incentives? Journal of Financial
Economics 85(2): 457–489.
Mitchell, O.S. and Utkus, S.P. (2003) Lessons from Behavioral Finance for Retirement Plan Design (October
2003). PRC Working Paper No. 2003-6.
Myerson, J. and Green, L. (1995) Discounting of delayed rewards—models of individual choice. Journal of the
Prado, J.W., Alcantara, V.D., Carvalho, F.D., Vieira, K.C., Machado, L.K.C. and Tonelli, D.F. (2016) Multiv-
ariate analysis of credit risk and bankruptcy research data: a bibliometric study involving different
knowledge fields (1968–2014). Scientometrics 106(3): 1007–1029.
Qasim, M. (2017) Sustainability and wellbeing: a scientometric and bibliometric review of the literature.
Journal of Economic Surveys 31(4): 1035–1061.
Sanchez-Riofrio, A.M., Guerras-Martin, L.A. and Forcadell, F.J. (2015) Business portfolio restructuring: a
comprehensive bibliometric review. Scientometrics 102(3): 1921–1950.
Schade, C. and Koellinger, P. (2007) Heuristics, biases, and the behavior of entrepreneurs. In M. Minniti (ed.),
Entrepreneurship: The Engine of Growth, Vol. 1 (pp. 41–63). Westport, CT: Praeger).
Schulze, W.S., Lubatkin, M.H. and Dino, R.N. (2003) Exploring the agency consequences of ownership
dispersion among the directors of private family firms. Academy of Management Journal 46(2): 179–194.
Shefrin, H. (2009) Behavioralizing finance. Foundations and Trends R
in Finance 4(1–2): 1–184.
Shefrin, H. and Statman, M. (1985) The disposition to Sell Winners Too Early and Ride Losers Too Long:
theory and evidence. The Journal of Finance 40(3): 777–790.
Shiller, R.J. (2003) From efficient markets theory to behavioral finance. The Journal of Economic Perspectives
17(1): 83–104.
Simon, H.A. (1955) A behavioral model of rational choice. The Quarterly Journal of Economics 69: 99–118.
Simon, H.A. (1956) Rational choice and the structure of the environment. Psychological Review 63(2): 129.
Simon, H.A. (1959) Theories of decision-making in economics and behavioral science. The American Economic
Review 49(3): 253–283.
Slovic, P. (1972) Psychological study of human judgment: implications for investment decision making. The
Journal of Finance 27(4): 779–799.
Statman, M. and Caldwell, D. (1987) Applying behavioral finance to capital-budgeting—project terminations.
Financial Management 16(4): 7–15.
Tague-Sutcliffe, J. (1992) An introduction to informetrics. Information Processing & Management 28(1): 1–3.
Thaler, R.H. (2016) Behavioral economics: past, present, and future. American Economic Review 106(7):
1577–600.
Thaler, R.H. and Sunstein, C.R. (2008) Nudge: Improving Decisions About Health, Wealth, and Happiness.
New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Thaler, R.H. and Shefrin, H.M. (1981) An economic theory of self-control. Journal of Political Economy 89(2):
392–406.
Tomer, J.F. (2007) What is behavioral economics? The Journal of Socio-Economics 36(3): 463–479.
Tversky, A. and Kahneman, D. (1974) Judgment under uncertainty: heuristics and biases. Science 185(4157):
1124–1131.
Tversky, A. and Kahneman, D. (1981) The framing of decisions and the psychology of choice. Science
211(4481): 453–458.
Tversky, A. and Kahneman, D. (1986) The framing of decisions and the evaluation of prospects. In Georg
J. W. Dorn Ruth Barcan Marcus and Weingartner Paul (eds.), Studies in Logic and the Foundations of
Mathematics, Vol. 114 (pp. 503–520). Amsterdam: Elsevier.

24 COSTA ET AL.
Tversky, A. and Kahneman, D. (1992) Advances in prospect theory: cumulative representation of uncertainty.
Journal of Risk and uncertainty 5(4): 297–323.
Von Neumann, J. and Morgenstern, O. (1947) Theory of Games and Economic Behavior, 2nd rev. ed. Princeton,
NJ: Princeton University Press.
Vuchinich, R.E. and Simpson, C.A. (1998) Hyperbolic temporal discounting in social drinkers and problem
drinkers. Experimental and Clinical Psychopharmacology 6(3): 292–305.
Wärneryd, K.-E. (1999). The Psychology of Saving: A Study on Economic Psychology. Cheltenham: Edward
Elgar Publishing.


Economia Comportamental e Finanças Comportamentais

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Economia Comportamental e Finanças Comportamentais

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

doi: 10.1111/joes.

BEHAVIORAL ECONOMICS AND BEHAVIORAL

Francisval de Melo Carvalho

Bruno César de Melo Moreira

Keywords. Bibliometric analysis; Behavioral economics; Behavioral finance

Corresponding author contact email: daniel.costa@ifmg.edu.br.

Journal of Economic Surveys (2019) Vol. 33, No. 1, pp. 3–24

2. Preliminary Discussion on Behavioral Economics and Finance

3.1 Selection of the Object of Analysis and Research Base

Table 1. Stages of the Assembly of the Research and Bibliometric Analysis.

3.2 Search Procedures

3.3 Collecting and Structuring the Data

and CiteSpace and electronic spreadsheets were sorted for an analysis.

3.4 Contextual Analysis of the Scientific Output Related to the Sample

3.5 Analysis of the Citation Networks Carried Out by the Sample

The Number of Articles Published per Year, 1967-2015.

4. Results and Discussions

4.1 Contextual Analysis of the Sample’s Scientific Output

No. Article Author Citation

1 The Weirdest People in The World? Henrich et al. (2010) 1162

Journal of Economic Surveys (2019) Vol. 33, No. 1, pp. 3–24

Journals Frequency of publications Ratio (%)

Journal of the Experimental Analysis of Behavior 65 2.48

Figure 3. Network of the Main Keywords Among the 2617 Articles.

4.2 Analysis of the Networks of the Scientific Output

Journal of Economic Surveys (2019) Vol. 33, No. 1, pp. 3–24

Journal of Economic Surveys (2019) Vol. 33, No. 1, pp. 3–24

Journal of Economic Surveys (2019) Vol. 33, No. 1, pp. 3–24

You might also like