Matching Items (2)
Filtering by
- Creators: Dean, W.P. Carey School of Business
Description
This study aims to identify the potential irrationality in the personal investment decision-making habits of university students, as influenced by the framing effect, loss aversion, and related heuristics. Researchers conducted a cross-sectional study of 114 students (n = 102). Participants responded to a survey regarding their willingness to invest in certain hypothetical investment scenarios. Outcome was measured primarily using Likert scales and yes
o binomial options regarding the participant’s willingness to participate in a specific deal. The study was broken into three blocks, the first of which dealt with the framing effect and the subsequent two considered loss aversion. Of the data collected, there were multiple significant results found to support the framing effect and loss aversion. There was a significant difference between responses that were positively and negatively framed, and between varying upside potential in equivalent-risk scenarios. For block one, those participants who received the positive framing condition were more likely to invest in the master’s program than those who received the negative framing condition. For blocks two and three, the majority of participants exhibited loss averse behavior more extreme than the predicted amounts; closer to 4x the upside was required (rather than the predicted 2x) for the participants to participate in the deal. Although the results did replicate the framing effect and loss aversion, college students were more loss averse than was predicted.
o binomial options regarding the participant’s willingness to participate in a specific deal. The study was broken into three blocks, the first of which dealt with the framing effect and the subsequent two considered loss aversion. Of the data collected, there were multiple significant results found to support the framing effect and loss aversion. There was a significant difference between responses that were positively and negatively framed, and between varying upside potential in equivalent-risk scenarios. For block one, those participants who received the positive framing condition were more likely to invest in the master’s program than those who received the negative framing condition. For blocks two and three, the majority of participants exhibited loss averse behavior more extreme than the predicted amounts; closer to 4x the upside was required (rather than the predicted 2x) for the participants to participate in the deal. Although the results did replicate the framing effect and loss aversion, college students were more loss averse than was predicted.
ContributorsKlemish, Colby (Author) / Radway, Debra (Thesis director) / Arrfelt, Mathias (Committee member) / Goldinger, Stephen (Committee member) / Dean, W.P. Carey School of Business (Contributor) / Department of Psychology (Contributor) / Department of Finance (Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2019-05
Description
This paper analyzes responses to a survey using a modified fourfold pattern of preference to determine if implicit information, once made explicit, is practically significant in nudging irrational decision makers towards more rational decisions. Respondents chose between two scenarios and an option for indifference for each of the four questions from the fourfold pattern with expected value being implicit information. Then respondents were asked familiarity with expected value and given the same four questions again but with the expected value for each scenario then explicitly given. Respondents were asked to give feedback if their answers had changed and if the addition of the explicit information was the reason for that change. Results found the addition of the explicit information in the form of expected value to be practically significant with ~90% of respondents who changed their answers giving that for the reason. In the implicit section of the survey, three out of four of the questions had a response majority of lower expected value answers given compared to the alternative. In the explicit section of the survey, all four questions achieved a response majority of higher expected value answers given compared to the alternative. In moving from the implicit to the explicit section, for each question, the scenario with lower expected value experienced a decrease in percentage of responses, and the scenario with higher expected value and indifference between the scenarios both experienced an increase in percentage of responses.
ContributorsJohnson, Matthew (Author) / Goegan, Brian (Thesis director) / Foster, William (Committee member) / School of Sustainability (Contributor) / Economics Program in CLAS (Contributor) / Dean, W.P. Carey School of Business (Contributor) / Barrett, The Honors College (Contributor)
Created2019-05