IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ejn/ejbmjr/v9y2021i2p90-99.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Relationship between Decision-Making Heuristics and Perceived Quality of Life

Author

Listed:
  • Nahid Unkic

    (University of Tuzla, Bosnia and Herzegovina)

  • Jasmina Okicic

    (University of Tuzla, Bosnia and Herzegovina)

Abstract

The purpose of this research is to provide some insights into relationship between decision-making heuristics and perceived quality of life. Using the purposive sampling technique, data collection was carried out, in Bosnia and Herzegovina, from June to October 2020, yielding a sample of 319 valid responses. To gain a better understanding of the relationship between decision-making heuristics and the perceived quality of life, we, primarily, use descriptive statistical analysis, chi-square test and probit regression model. The research findings have revealed positive association between all three decision-making heuristics, i.e. representativeness, anchoring, availability, and perceived quality of life. Furthermore, the group with above-average perceived quality of life have higher representativeness, anchoring, and availability scores comparing to the group with below-average perceived quality of life. These differences are statistically significant. Furthermore, out of three decision-making heuristics components, availability, or a heuristic whereby people make judgments about the likelihood of an event based on how easily a similar example comes to mind, seems to be the strongest predictor of the perceived quality of life. Memories that are easily recalled are often insufficient for estimating likelihood of occurring similar events again in the future. In that respect, availability may produce low-quality information in the decision making process. Ultimately, this may lead to bad decisions.

Suggested Citation

  • Nahid Unkic & Jasmina Okicic, 2021. "The Relationship between Decision-Making Heuristics and Perceived Quality of Life," Eurasian Journal of Business and Management, Eurasian Publications, vol. 9(2), pages 90-99.
    • Handle: RePEc:ejn:ejbmjr:v:9:y:2021:i:2:p:90-99
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://eurasianpublications.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/EJBM-9.2.1.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Folkes, Valerie S, 1988. "The Availability Heuristic and Perceived Risk," Journal of Consumer Research, Journal of Consumer Research Inc., vol. 15(1), pages 13-23, June.
    2. Sanjit Dhami & Ali al-Nowaihi & Cass R. Sunstein, 2019. "Heuristics and Public Policy: Decision-making Under Bounded Rationality," Studies in Microeconomics, , vol. 7(1), pages 7-58, June.
    3. Richard B Evans & Yang Sun & Lauren Cohen, 0. "Models or Stars: The Role of Asset Pricing Models and Heuristics in Investor Risk Adjustment," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 34(1), pages 67-107.
    4. Richard B Evans & Yang Sun & Lauren Cohen, 2021. "Models or Stars: The Role of Asset Pricing Models and Heuristics in Investor Risk Adjustment," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 34(1), pages 67-107.
    5. Daniel Kahneman & Jack L. Knetsch & Richard H. Thaler, 1991. "Anomalies: The Endowment Effect, Loss Aversion, and Status Quo Bias," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 5(1), pages 193-206, Winter.
    6. Richard B Evans & Yang Sun, 2021. "Models or Stars: The Role of Asset Pricing Models and Heuristics in Investor Risk Adjustment [Which factors matter to investors? evidence from mutual fund flows]," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 34(1), pages 67-107.
    7. Shabnam Mousavi & Gerd Gigerenzer, 2017. "Heuristics are Tools for Uncertainty," Homo Oeconomicus: Journal of Behavioral and Institutional Economics, Springer, vol. 34(4), pages 361-379, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Victor DeMiguel & Javier Gil-Bazo & Francisco J. Nogales & André A. P. Santos, 2021. "Can Machine Learning Help to Select Portfolios of Mutual Funds?," Working Papers 1245, Barcelona School of Economics.
    2. Sofia Brito-Ramos & Maria Céu Cortez & Florinda Silva, 2022. "Do sustainability signals diverge? An analysis of labeling schemes for socially responsible investments ," Working Papers hal-04064367, HAL.
    3. Dang, Thuy Duong & Hollstein, Fabian & Prokopczuk, Marcel, 2022. "How do corporate bond investors measure performance? Evidence from mutual fund flows," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 142(C).
    4. Tran, Anh & Wang, Pingle, 2023. "Barking up the wrong tree: Return-chasing in 401(k) plans," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 148(1), pages 69-90.
    5. Naeem, Muhammad Abubakr & Chatziantoniou, Ioannis & Gabauer, David & Karim, Sitara, 2024. "Measuring the G20 stock market return transmission mechanism: Evidence from the R2 connectedness approach," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 91(C).
    6. Dasgupta, Amil & Choi, Jaewon & Oh, Ji Yeol Jimmy, 2019. "Bond Funds and Credit Risk," CEPR Discussion Papers 14134, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    7. Gantchev, Nickolay & Giannetti, Mariassunta & Li, Rachel, 2024. "Sustainability or performance? Ratings and fund managers’ incentives," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 155(C).
    8. Siu Kai Choy & Jason Wei, 2023. "Investor Attention and Option Returns," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 69(8), pages 4845-4863, August.
    9. Michel Verlaine, 2022. "Behavioral finance and the architecture of the asset management industry," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(5), pages 1454-1476, December.
    10. Yue Xu, 2022. "Reallocation of Mutual Fund Managers and Capital Raising Ability," CREATES Research Papers 2022-11, Department of Economics and Business Economics, Aarhus University.
    11. Blas A. Marin-Lopez & David Jimenez-Gomez & José-María Abellán-Perpiñán, 2022. "Behavioral Economics in the Epidemiology of the COVID-19 Pandemic: Theory and Simulations," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(15), pages 1-23, August.
    12. Jiang, Christine & Wang, Xianzhen, 2024. "Portfolio pumping and dumping among Chinese mutual fund companies," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 162(C).
    13. Omori, Kozo & Kitamura, Tomoki, 2023. "Investor response to Morningstar's ratings, category information, and alpha in the Japanese mutual fund market," International Review of Financial Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 89(C).
    14. Philippe Fevrier & Sebastien Gay, 2005. "Informed Consent Versus Presumed Consent The Role of the Family in Organ Donations," HEW 0509007, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    15. Wiebke Roß & Jens Weghake, 2018. "Wa(h)re Liebe: Was Online-Dating-Plattformen über zweiseitige Märkte lehren," TUC Working Papers in Economics 0017, Abteilung für Volkswirtschaftslehre, Technische Universität Clausthal (Department of Economics, Technical University Clausthal).
    16. Jose Apesteguia & Miguel Ballester, 2009. "A theory of reference-dependent behavior," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 40(3), pages 427-455, September.
    17. 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.
    18. Boyce, Christopher & Czajkowski, Mikołaj & Hanley, Nick, 2019. "Personality and economic choices," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 94(C), pages 82-100.
    19. Botond Kőszegi & Matthew Rabin, 2006. "A Model of Reference-Dependent Preferences," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 121(4), pages 1133-1165.
    20. Heavey, Emily & Baxter, Kate & Birks, Yvonne, 2019. "Financial advice for funding later life care: a scoping review of evidence from England," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 91497, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.

    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:ejn:ejbmjr:v:9:y:2021:i:2:p:90-99. 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: Esra Barakli (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    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.