IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/inm/ormnsc/v56y2010i4p606-620.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Prior Consequences and Subsequent Risk Taking: New Field Evidence from the Taiwan Futures Exchange

Author

Listed:
  • Yu-Jane Liu

    (Department of Finance, Guanghua School of Management, Peking University, Beijing 100871, People's Republic of China)

  • Chih-Ling Tsai

    (Graduate School of Management, University of California, Davis, Davis, California 95616)

  • Ming-Chun Wang

    (National Kaohsiung First University of Science and Technology, Kaohsiung 81164, Taiwan)

  • Ning Zhu

    (Graduate School of Management, University of California, Davis, Davis, California 95616; and Shanghai Advanced Institute of Finance (SAIF), Shanghai 200030, People's Republic of China)

Abstract

We use a data set from market participants in the Taiwan Stock Exchange Capitalization Weighted Stock Index options markets to demonstrate a strong positive relationship between prior trading outcomes and subsequent risk taking. In particular, investors in this market take above-average risks in afternoon trading after morning gains. The phenomenon is prevalent in all three types of market makers' accounts and across different types of market participants. Our findings are consistent with the argument that prior outcomes affect subsequent risk taking through a relationship that is sensitive to the model parameters (i.e., expected return, trading period, and curvature of the value function), because prospect theory can predict both increased and decreased levels of subsequent risk taking. We provide possible explanations behind the phenomenon and discuss reasons for the variety of findings in the existing literature.

Suggested Citation

  • Yu-Jane Liu & Chih-Ling Tsai & Ming-Chun Wang & Ning Zhu, 2010. "Prior Consequences and Subsequent Risk Taking: New Field Evidence from the Taiwan Futures Exchange," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 56(4), pages 606-620, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:inm:ormnsc:v:56:y:2010:i:4:p:606-620
    DOI: 10.1287/mnsc.1090.1131
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.1090.1131
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1287/mnsc.1090.1131?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. Lucy Ackert & Narat Charupat & Bryan Church & Richard Deaves, 2006. "An experimental examination of the house money effect in a multi-period setting," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 9(1), pages 5-16, April.
    2. Gervais, Simon & Odean, Terrance, 2001. "Learning to be Overconfident," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 14(1), pages 1-27.
    3. Shlomo Benartzi & Richard H. Thaler, 1995. "Myopic Loss Aversion and the Equity Premium Puzzle," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 110(1), pages 73-92.
    4. Chip Heath & Steven Huddart & Mark Lang, 1999. "Psychological Factors and Stock Option Exercise," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 114(2), pages 601-627.
    5. Brad M. Barber & Terrance Odean & Ning Zhu, 2009. "Do Retail Trades Move Markets?," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 22(1), pages 151-186, January.
    6. Joshua D. Coval & Tyler Shumway, 2005. "Do Behavioral Biases Affect Prices?," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 60(1), pages 1-34, February.
    7. Tversky, Amos & Kahneman, Daniel, 1992. "Advances in Prospect Theory: Cumulative Representation of Uncertainty," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 5(4), pages 297-323, October.
    8. David Genesove & Christopher Mayer, 2001. "Loss Aversion and Seller Behavior: Evidence from the Housing Market," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 116(4), pages 1233-1260.
    9. Nicholas Barberis & Ming Huang & Richard H. Thaler, 2006. "Individual Preferences, Monetary Gambles, and Stock Market Participation: A Case for Narrow Framing," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 96(4), pages 1069-1090, September.
    10. Keasey, Kevin & Moon, Philip, 1996. "Gambling with the house money in capital expenditure decisions: An experimental analysis," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 50(1), pages 105-110, January.
    11. Chevalier, Judith & Ellison, Glenn, 1997. "Risk Taking by Mutual Funds as a Response to Incentives," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 105(6), pages 1167-1200, December.
    12. repec:bla:jfinan:v:53:y:1998:i:6:p:1839-1885 is not listed on IDEAS
    13. repec:bla:jfinan:v:58:y:2003:i:2:p:821-838 is not listed on IDEAS
    14. Daniel Kahneman & Amos Tversky, 2013. "Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision Under Risk," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: Leonard C MacLean & William T Ziemba (ed.), HANDBOOK OF THE FUNDAMENTALS OF FINANCIAL DECISION MAKING Part I, chapter 6, pages 99-127, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    15. Nicholas Barberis & Wei Xiong, 2009. "What Drives the Disposition Effect? An Analysis of a Long‐Standing Preference‐Based Explanation," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 64(2), pages 751-784, April.
    16. Locke, Peter R. & Mann, Steven C., 2005. "Professional trader discipline and trade disposition," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 76(2), pages 401-444, May.
    17. Barber, Brad M. & Odean, Terrance & Zhu, Ning, 2009. "Systematic noise," Journal of Financial Markets, Elsevier, vol. 12(4), pages 547-569, November.
    18. Nicholas Barberis & Ming Huang & Tano Santos, 2001. "Prospect Theory and Asset Prices," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 116(1), pages 1-53.
    19. Terrance Odean, 1999. "Do Investors Trade Too Much?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 89(5), pages 1279-1298, December.
    20. Thaler, Richard, 1980. "Toward a positive theory of consumer choice," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 39-60, March.
    21. Battalio, Raymond C & Kagel, John H & Jiranyakul, Komain, 1990. "Testing between Alternative Models of Choice under Uncertainty: Some Initial Results," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 3(1), pages 25-50, March.
    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. Jakusch, Sven Thorsten, 2017. "On the applicability of maximum likelihood methods: From experimental to financial data," SAFE Working Paper Series 148, Leibniz Institute for Financial Research SAFE, revised 2017.
    2. Jakusch, Sven Thorsten & Meyer, Steffen & Hackethal, Andreas, 2019. "Taming models of prospect theory in the wild? Estimation of Vlcek and Hens (2011)," SAFE Working Paper Series 146, Leibniz Institute for Financial Research SAFE, revised 2019.
    3. Stefano DellaVigna, 2009. "Psychology and Economics: Evidence from the Field," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 47(2), pages 315-372, June.
    4. Li, Yan & Yang, Liyan, 2013. "Prospect theory, the disposition effect, and asset prices," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 107(3), pages 715-739.
    5. 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.
    6. Hsu, Yuan-Lin & Chow, Edward H., 2013. "The house money effect on investment risk taking: Evidence from Taiwan," Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, Elsevier, vol. 21(1), pages 1102-1115.
    7. von Beschwitz, Bastian & Massa, Massimo, 2020. "Biased short: Short sellers' disposition effect and limits to arbitrage," Journal of Financial Markets, Elsevier, vol. 49(C).
    8. Nicholas Barberis & Wei Xiong, 2009. "What Drives the Disposition Effect? An Analysis of a Long‐Standing Preference‐Based Explanation," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 64(2), pages 751-784, April.
    9. 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.
    10. Itzhak Venezia, 2018. "Lecture Notes in Behavioral Finance," World Scientific Books, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., number 10751, December.
    11. Barberis, Nicholas & Xiong, Wei, 2012. "Realization utility," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 104(2), pages 251-271.
    12. Francisco Gomes & Michael Haliassos & Tarun Ramadorai, 2021. "Household Finance," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 59(3), pages 919-1000, September.
    13. Pasquariello, Paolo, 2014. "Prospect Theory and market quality," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 276-310.
    14. Lin, Mei-Chen & Chou, Pin-Huang, 2011. "Prospect theory and the effectiveness of price limits," Pacific-Basin Finance Journal, Elsevier, vol. 19(3), pages 330-349, June.
    15. Juanjuan Meng & Xi Weng, 2018. "Can Prospect Theory Explain the Disposition Effect? A New Perspective on Reference Points," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 64(7), pages 3331-3351, July.
    16. Vicky Henderson, 2012. "Prospect Theory, Liquidation, and the Disposition Effect," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 58(2), pages 445-460, February.
    17. Patrick Roger, 2007. "Does the consciousness of the disposition effect increase the equity premium?," Working Papers of LaRGE Research Center 2007-01, Laboratoire de Recherche en Gestion et Economie (LaRGE), Université de Strasbourg.
    18. Barber, Brad M. & Odean, Terrance, 2013. "The Behavior of Individual Investors," Handbook of the Economics of Finance, in: G.M. Constantinides & M. Harris & R. M. Stulz (ed.), Handbook of the Economics of Finance, volume 2, chapter 0, pages 1533-1570, Elsevier.
    19. Sarmiento, Julio & Rendón, Jairo & Sandoval, Juan S. & Cayon, Edgardo, 2019. "The disposition effect and the relevance of the reference period: Evidence among sophisticated investors," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance, Elsevier, vol. 24(C).
    20. Kyle, Albert S. & Ou-Yang, Hui & Xiong, Wei, 2006. "Prospect theory and liquidation decisions," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 129(1), pages 273-288, July.

    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:inm:ormnsc:v:56:y:2010:i:4:p:606-620. 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: Chris Asher (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/inforea.html .

    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.