是什么驱动了投资组合选择的异质性?制度、传统和行为因素的作用

Markku Kaustia, Andrew Conlin, N. Luotonen
{"title":"是什么驱动了投资组合选择的异质性?制度、传统和行为因素的作用","authors":"Markku Kaustia, Andrew Conlin, N. Luotonen","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2845963","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"We analyze stock market participation in 19 European countries over 2004-2013, jointly controlling for all relevant variables from prior literature. Previous work relies on a subset of these factors, and often lacks good risk aversion proxies. Our full model explains 30% of the variation in the participation decision. Institutional factors captured by country fixed effects contribute 9.5 percentage points; traditional individual-level factors, such as risk aversion and income, contribute 15 pp; recently identified factors, such as trust and health, contribute 5.5 pp. Most new factors offer little help explaining non-participation at the high end – among the wealthy and well-educated. We present evidence challenging and complementing existing interpretations of factors such as IQ, sociability, and trust. We suggest a hierarchical framework for thinking about effects in the high versus low end.","PeriodicalId":10477,"journal":{"name":"Cognitive Social Science eJournal","volume":"61 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-09-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"14","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"What Drives the Heterogeneity in Portfolio Choice? The Role of Institutional, Traditional, and Behavioral Factors\",\"authors\":\"Markku Kaustia, Andrew Conlin, N. Luotonen\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.2845963\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"We analyze stock market participation in 19 European countries over 2004-2013, jointly controlling for all relevant variables from prior literature. Previous work relies on a subset of these factors, and often lacks good risk aversion proxies. Our full model explains 30% of the variation in the participation decision. Institutional factors captured by country fixed effects contribute 9.5 percentage points; traditional individual-level factors, such as risk aversion and income, contribute 15 pp; recently identified factors, such as trust and health, contribute 5.5 pp. Most new factors offer little help explaining non-participation at the high end – among the wealthy and well-educated. We present evidence challenging and complementing existing interpretations of factors such as IQ, sociability, and trust. We suggest a hierarchical framework for thinking about effects in the high versus low end.\",\"PeriodicalId\":10477,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Cognitive Social Science eJournal\",\"volume\":\"61 3\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-09-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"14\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Cognitive Social Science eJournal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2845963\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cognitive Social Science eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2845963","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 14

摘要

我们分析了2004-2013年19个欧洲国家的股票市场参与度,共同控制了先前文献中的所有相关变量。以前的工作依赖于这些因素的一个子集,往往缺乏良好的风险规避代理。我们的完整模型解释了参与决策中30%的变化。国家固定效应所包含的制度因素贡献了9.5个百分点;传统的个人层面因素,如风险规避和收入,贡献了15个百分点;最近确定的因素,如信任和健康,贡献了5.5个百分点。大多数新因素对解释高端人群(富裕和受过良好教育的人群)的不参与几乎没有帮助。我们提出的证据挑战和补充现有的因素,如智商,社交能力和信任的解释。我们提出了一个层次框架来思考在高端和低端的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
What Drives the Heterogeneity in Portfolio Choice? The Role of Institutional, Traditional, and Behavioral Factors
We analyze stock market participation in 19 European countries over 2004-2013, jointly controlling for all relevant variables from prior literature. Previous work relies on a subset of these factors, and often lacks good risk aversion proxies. Our full model explains 30% of the variation in the participation decision. Institutional factors captured by country fixed effects contribute 9.5 percentage points; traditional individual-level factors, such as risk aversion and income, contribute 15 pp; recently identified factors, such as trust and health, contribute 5.5 pp. Most new factors offer little help explaining non-participation at the high end – among the wealthy and well-educated. We present evidence challenging and complementing existing interpretations of factors such as IQ, sociability, and trust. We suggest a hierarchical framework for thinking about effects in the high versus low end.
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信