De La Salle University

School of Economics

MTSERCH Revision Sheet

Section: V24 Group Number: V247

Date Submitted: 10 DEC 2022

Dear Dr. Mariel Monica Sauler and Dr. Anne Marie Go,
MTSERCH Panel #1

We are pleased to report the summary of the revisions made in our project proposal entitled
“Influences of Information Asymmetry on Investor Overconfidence in the Stock Market.”
The group greatly appreciates your insightful comments and suggestions. We enumerated
below the main revisions performed in the manuscript:

Comments Responses from the Authors

Comment 1: “From Thank you so much for pointing this out. As suggested by its title,
what I understood the study mainly looks into how information asymmetries (i.e.,
about your variations in information quantity and quality) affects
presentation, your overconfidence scores. Initially, we had intended to use a 1×1
paper tries to do/ factorial experiment design and control quality, while varying only
achieve too much.” the quantity of information distributed. Adding how the quality of
information affects overconfidence was more of an afterthought
due to our acknowledgement of the fact that a person is affected
by both information quality and quantity. Hence, we assumed that
excluding information quality from our experiment and analysis
would likely decrease the significance of the paper.
It is true, however, that placing our interests in how investor
overconfidence affects trading behavior and performance in this
experimental stock market may be a stretch. This is especially so
since much literature already addressed this. Considering this, we
have entirely removed the third research question that asks, “What
is the effect of overconfidence on trading behavior and performance,
given asymmetric information in the stock market?”
 We also realize that, since the method consists of two sections (i.e.,
a questionnaire and a stock game), it may be more difficult to
accomplish contrary to our expectations, when considering time
constraints. Our group will discuss further on how we intend to
address this.

Comment 2: “ Your This is our mistake. Next time, we will be more mindful of the
presentation was not relevant things to present as well as the information presented in
informative enough the powerpoint. However, given the limited time we had, with the
for us to comment on vast information our paper presented, we initially concluded that
and critique your being simple was the way to proceed. Thank you for your comment,
research papers” and we will take note of this the next time we are going to present.

Again, thank you for spending time with us during the MTSERCH conference.

Thank you very much, and we hope you have a great term break ahead!

Sincerely,

He, Adel John

Huan, Glenn Rafael
Manalo, Margeaux Thereza
Manaloto, Giro Miguel