多资产市场中的投资者行为

Matjaž Steinbacher
{"title":"多资产市场中的投资者行为","authors":"Matjaž Steinbacher","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.1425000","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper analyzes the field of investors’ decision-making on a multi-asset market. It does it through a simulation games on a social network framework. It has been demonstrated that more stocks there are in the game and more changing alternatives investors have available to choose from, tougher it is for them to make decisions. Despite in most simulations the safest alternative was dominant, many investors opt for portfolio of the safest and the riskiest stock, by which they back the risk they take with some safe stocks. Non-omniscient investors behave chaotically. In all the cases, liquidity agents proved to be decisive elements of the games, though not always able to deliver the information of all the alternatives when too many alternatives are available.","PeriodicalId":341503,"journal":{"name":"Chicago Booth MICRO: Behavioral Economics (Topic)","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2009-06-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Behavior of Investors on a Multi-Asset Market\",\"authors\":\"Matjaž Steinbacher\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.1425000\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This paper analyzes the field of investors’ decision-making on a multi-asset market. It does it through a simulation games on a social network framework. It has been demonstrated that more stocks there are in the game and more changing alternatives investors have available to choose from, tougher it is for them to make decisions. Despite in most simulations the safest alternative was dominant, many investors opt for portfolio of the safest and the riskiest stock, by which they back the risk they take with some safe stocks. Non-omniscient investors behave chaotically. In all the cases, liquidity agents proved to be decisive elements of the games, though not always able to deliver the information of all the alternatives when too many alternatives are available.\",\"PeriodicalId\":341503,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Chicago Booth MICRO: Behavioral Economics (Topic)\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2009-06-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Chicago Booth MICRO: Behavioral Economics (Topic)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1425000\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Chicago Booth MICRO: Behavioral Economics (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1425000","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文分析了多资产市场中投资者的决策领域。它是通过社交网络框架上的模拟游戏实现的。事实证明,游戏中的股票越多,投资者可以选择的替代方案越多,他们就越难做出决定。尽管在大多数模拟中,最安全的选择占主导地位,但许多投资者选择最安全的股票和风险最高的股票组合,这样他们就可以用一些安全的股票来支持他们所承担的风险。非无所不知的投资者行为混乱。在所有情况下,流动性代理人都被证明是博弈的决定性因素,尽管当存在太多选择时,流动性代理人并不总是能够传递所有选择的信息。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Behavior of Investors on a Multi-Asset Market
This paper analyzes the field of investors’ decision-making on a multi-asset market. It does it through a simulation games on a social network framework. It has been demonstrated that more stocks there are in the game and more changing alternatives investors have available to choose from, tougher it is for them to make decisions. Despite in most simulations the safest alternative was dominant, many investors opt for portfolio of the safest and the riskiest stock, by which they back the risk they take with some safe stocks. Non-omniscient investors behave chaotically. In all the cases, liquidity agents proved to be decisive elements of the games, though not always able to deliver the information of all the alternatives when too many alternatives are available.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信