Measuring behavioral biases in individual investors decision-making and sociodemographic correlations: a systematic review

IF 1.9 Q2 BUSINESS, FINANCE
Nicolas de Oliveira Cardoso, Eduarda Zorgi Salvador, Gustavo Broch, Frederike Monika Budiner Mette, Claudia Emiko Yoshinaga, Wagner de Lara Machado
{"title":"Measuring behavioral biases in individual investors decision-making and sociodemographic correlations: a systematic review","authors":"Nicolas de Oliveira Cardoso, Eduarda Zorgi Salvador, Gustavo Broch, Frederike Monika Budiner Mette, Claudia Emiko Yoshinaga, Wagner de Lara Machado","doi":"10.1108/qrfm-05-2022-0090","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<h3>Purpose</h3>\n<p>This paper aims to identify the impacts of sociodemographic covariates on behavioural biases (BB) scores; the psychometric evidence of the BB measurement instruments; and the main BB that influences the decision-making of individual investors.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Design/methodology/approach</h3>\n<p>Papers were retrieved through search using keywords in ten databases. This systematic review is based on 69 peer-reviewed papers, most of which were published between 2017 and 2021. The relevance of the included papers was assessed through the analysis of statistical/psychometric methods used, and content analysis of the BB literature and its sociodemographic correlations.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Findings</h3>\n<p>Overconfidence is higher in men and not related to age. There was no consensus regarding the relationship between BB and other sociodemographic variables. Most measuring instruments are <em>ad hoc</em>, showing ≤ 4 types of psychometric evidence and assessing ≤ 9 BB. Therefore, the findings demonstrate that there is no gold standard instrument for measuring investors’ BB. Furthermore, 37 BB were cited as influencers of individual investors’ decision-making and overconfidence, herding, anchoring, representativeness and loss aversion were the most prevalent.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Research limitations/implications</h3>\n<p>Considering that very few systematic reviews have been published in the behavioural finance area, this paper highlights the current state-of-the-art and identifies significant gaps in the literature that can be explored by further research.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->\n<h3>Originality/value</h3>\n<p>To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first systematic review that analyses the psychometric properties of instruments used for individual investors BB assessment.</p><!--/ Abstract__block -->","PeriodicalId":45060,"journal":{"name":"Qualitative Research in financial Markets","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Qualitative Research in financial Markets","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/qrfm-05-2022-0090","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"BUSINESS, FINANCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose

This paper aims to identify the impacts of sociodemographic covariates on behavioural biases (BB) scores; the psychometric evidence of the BB measurement instruments; and the main BB that influences the decision-making of individual investors.

Design/methodology/approach

Papers were retrieved through search using keywords in ten databases. This systematic review is based on 69 peer-reviewed papers, most of which were published between 2017 and 2021. The relevance of the included papers was assessed through the analysis of statistical/psychometric methods used, and content analysis of the BB literature and its sociodemographic correlations.

Findings

Overconfidence is higher in men and not related to age. There was no consensus regarding the relationship between BB and other sociodemographic variables. Most measuring instruments are ad hoc, showing ≤ 4 types of psychometric evidence and assessing ≤ 9 BB. Therefore, the findings demonstrate that there is no gold standard instrument for measuring investors’ BB. Furthermore, 37 BB were cited as influencers of individual investors’ decision-making and overconfidence, herding, anchoring, representativeness and loss aversion were the most prevalent.

Research limitations/implications

Considering that very few systematic reviews have been published in the behavioural finance area, this paper highlights the current state-of-the-art and identifies significant gaps in the literature that can be explored by further research.

Originality/value

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this is the first systematic review that analyses the psychometric properties of instruments used for individual investors BB assessment.

衡量个人投资者决策中的行为偏差和社会人口统计学相关性:系统回顾
目的探讨社会人口学协变量对行为偏差(BB)得分的影响;BB测量仪器的心理测量证据;以及影响个人投资者决策的主要BB。设计/方法/方法通过使用10个数据库中的关键词检索论文。该系统综述基于69篇同行评议论文,其中大部分发表于2017年至2021年之间。通过对所使用的统计/心理测量方法的分析,以及对BB文献及其社会人口学相关性的内容分析,评估所纳入论文的相关性。研究发现,男性的过度自信程度更高,且与年龄无关。关于BB和其他社会人口学变量之间的关系尚无共识。大多数测量工具是临时的,显示≤4种心理测量证据,评估≤9个BB。因此,研究结果表明,不存在衡量投资者BB的黄金标准工具。此外,37个BB被认为是个人投资者决策的影响因素,过度自信、羊群、锚定、代表性和损失厌恶最为普遍。考虑到在行为金融领域发表的系统综述很少,本文强调了当前的最新技术,并确定了文献中的重大空白,这些空白可以通过进一步的研究来探索。原创性/价值据作者所知,这是第一个分析个人投资者BB评估工具的心理测量特性的系统综述。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
10.50%
发文量
32
期刊介绍: Qualitative Research in Financial Markets is the only peer-reviewed journal dedicated to exploring the rapidly-growing area of research activity in finance that uses qualitative methods. Building on a long pedigree of finance research, the journal publishes international and innovative analyses and novel insights into financial markets worldwide
文献相关原料
公司名称 产品信息 采购帮参考价格
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信