IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/beexfi/v26y2020ics221463501930293x.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Prevention focus and prior investment failure in financial decision making

Author

Listed:
  • Ewe, Soo Yeong
  • Lee, Christina Kwai Choi
  • Watabe, Motoki

Abstract

This research demonstrates, across four experiments, that investors behave differently when a prior investment is perceived as a failure rather than as a loss. The research shows that individuals consistently prefer a conservative investment option in the condition of failure rather than a loss even though the risky option offers a chance to break even (Study 1 & 2). The same result was obtained even when the risky option offers a higher expected return (i.e. should be selected if the decision makers are rational) than the conservative option (Study 3). The tendency to be more risk-averse in the failure condition is due to the activation of situational prevention focus (Study 4). The research findings highlight the importance of understanding investors’ perceptions of their prior negative investment decision outcomes since risk-seeking behavior and buying behavior could be different when a prior investment is perceived as a failure or as a loss.

Suggested Citation

  • Ewe, Soo Yeong & Lee, Christina Kwai Choi & Watabe, Motoki, 2020. "Prevention focus and prior investment failure in financial decision making," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance, Elsevier, vol. 26(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:beexfi:v:26:y:2020:i:c:s221463501930293x
    DOI: 10.1016/j.jbef.2020.100321
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S221463501930293X
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.jbef.2020.100321?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Huang, Yu Chuan & Chan, Shu Hui, 2014. "The house money and break-even effects for different types of traders: Evidence from Taiwan futures markets," Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, Elsevier, vol. 26(C), pages 1-13.
    2. Soo Yeong Ewe & Ferdinand A. Gul & Christina Kwai Choi Lee & Chia Yen Yang, 2018. "The Role of Regulatory Focus and Information in Investment Choice: Some Evidence Using Visual Cues to Frame Regulatory Focus," Journal of Behavioral Finance, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(1), pages 89-100, January.
    3. Richard H. Thaler & Eric J. Johnson, 1990. "Gambling with the House Money and Trying to Break Even: The Effects of Prior Outcomes on Risky Choice," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 36(6), pages 643-660, June.
    4. Ronald Bosman & Frans van Winden, 2001. "Anticipated and Experienced Emotions in an Investment Experiment," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 01-058/1, Tinbergen Institute.
    5. Jiewen Hong & Angela Y. Lee, 2008. "Be Fit and Be Strong: Mastering Self-Regulation through Regulatory Fit," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 34(5), pages 682-695, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Sengupta, Atri & Deb, Soumya Guha & Mittal, Shashank, 2021. "The underlying motivational process behind portfolio diversification choice decisions of individual investors: An experimental design," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance, Elsevier, vol. 29(C).
    2. Ma, Alfred & Shu, Tse-Mei & Chen, Jieyu & Chau, Man Foon, 2024. "Does the investment performance measure matter? A perspective from regulatory focus theory," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance, Elsevier, vol. 41(C).
    3. Kumar, Satish & Rao, Sandeep & Goyal, Kirti & Goyal, Nisha, 2022. "Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance: A bibliometric overview," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance, Elsevier, vol. 34(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Peter A. F. Fraser‐Mackenzie & Tiejun Ma & Ming‐Chien Sung & Johnnie E. V. Johnson, 2019. "Let's Call it Quits: Break‐Even Effects in the Decision to Stop Taking Risks," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 39(7), pages 1560-1581, July.
    2. Bruno S. Frey, "undated". "Knight Fever towards an Economics of Awards," IEW - Working Papers 239, Institute for Empirical Research in Economics - University of Zurich.
    3. Hauke Jelschen & Ulrich Schmidt, 2023. "Windfall gains and house money: The effects of endowment history and prior outcomes on risky decision–making," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 66(3), pages 215-232, June.
    4. Maximilian Rüdisser & Raphael Flepp & Egon Franck, 2017. "When do reference points update? A field analysis of the effect of prior gains and losses on risk-taking over time," Working Papers 369, University of Zurich, Department of Business Administration (IBW).
    5. Niko Suhonen & Jani Saastamoinen, 2018. "How Do Prior Gains and Losses Affect Subsequent Risk Taking? New Evidence from Individual-Level Horse Race Bets," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(6), pages 2797-2808, June.
    6. Fenghua Wen & Zhifang He & Xu Gong & Aiming Liu, 2014. "Investors’ Risk Preference Characteristics Based on Different Reference Point," Discrete Dynamics in Nature and Society, Hindawi, vol. 2014, pages 1-9, April.
    7. Insoo Cho & Peter F. Orazem, 2021. "How endogenous risk preferences and sample selection affect analysis of firm survival," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 56(4), pages 1309-1332, April.
    8. Andrew W. Lo & Dmitry V. Repin & Brett N. Steenbarger, 2005. "Fear and Greed in Financial Markets: A Clinical Study of Day-Traders," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 95(2), pages 352-359, May.
    9. Peter John Robinson & W. J. Wouter Botzen & Fujin Zhou, 2021. "An experimental study of charity hazard: The effect of risky and ambiguous government compensation on flood insurance demand," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 63(3), pages 275-318, December.
    10. Sergio Sousa, 2010. "Small-scale changes in wealth and attitudes toward risk," Discussion Papers 2010-11, The Centre for Decision Research and Experimental Economics, School of Economics, University of Nottingham.
    11. Breaban, Adriana & van de Kuilen, Gijs & Noussair, Charles, 2016. "Prudence, Personality, Cognitive Ability and Emotional State," Other publications TiSEM 9a01a5ab-e03d-49eb-9cd7-4, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    12. Min Gong & David Krantz & Elke Weber, 2014. "Why Chinese discount future financial and environmental gains but not losses more than Americans," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 49(2), pages 103-124, October.
    13. Julien Jacob & Eve-Angéline Lambert & Mathieu Lefebvre & Sarah Driessche, 2023. "Information disclosure under liability: an experiment on public bads," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 61(1), pages 155-197, July.
    14. Mohamed Es-Sanoun & Jude Gohou & Mounir Benboubker, 2023. "Testing of Herd Behavior In african Stock Markets During COVID-19 Pandemic [Essai de vérification du comportement mimétique dans les marchés boursiers africains au cours de la crise de covid-19]," Post-Print hal-04144289, HAL.
    15. Ispano, Alessandro & Schwardmann, Peter, 2017. "Cooperating over losses and competing over gains: A social dilemma experiment," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 329-348.
    16. Chorvat, Terrence, 2006. "Taxing utility," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 35(1), pages 1-16, February.
    17. Dalton, Patricio S. & Nhung, Nguyen & Rüschenpöhler, Julius, 2020. "Worries of the poor: The impact of financial burden on the risk attitudes of micro-entrepreneurs," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 79(C).
    18. Duncan Luce, R., 1997. "Associative joint receipts," Mathematical Social Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 34(1), pages 51-74, August.
    19. Fellner, Gerlinde & Maciejovsky, Boris, 2007. "Risk attitude and market behavior: Evidence from experimental asset markets," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 28(3), pages 338-350, June.
    20. Roy Brouwer & Solomon Tarfasa, 2020. "Testing hypothetical bias in a framed field experiment," Canadian Journal of Agricultural Economics/Revue canadienne d'agroeconomie, Canadian Agricultural Economics Society/Societe canadienne d'agroeconomie, vol. 68(3), pages 343-357, September.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:beexfi:v:26:y:2020:i:c:s221463501930293x. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/journal-of-behavioral-and-experimental-finance .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.