IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/intemj/v17y2021i4d10.1007_s11365-020-00697-4.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Financial forecasting and risky decisions: an experimental study grounded in Prospect theory

Author

Listed:
  • Rodney C. Shrader

    (University of Illinois at Chicago)

  • Mark Simon

    (University of Michigan—Flint)

  • Steven Stanton

    (Oakland University)

Abstract

This study employed prospect theory to examine relationships between effort invested in developing financial forecasts and risk taking. Results of an experimental study indicated that the more effort subjects invested in developing forecasts, the more likely they were to use those forecasts as their reference points when evaluating venture performance. Results also indicated that subjects who used forecasts as their reference points and exerted greater effort developing those forecasts were more likely to take risky actions when performance fell below their reference points. This study is the first to link effort to the type of reference point used and the first to link effort and the use of financial forecasts to risky decisions. In addition, it is one of only a few studies to employ prospect theory to examine risk taking decisions subsequent to start-up. Its results enhance our understanding of risk taking, prospect theory and reference points.

Suggested Citation

  • Rodney C. Shrader & Mark Simon & Steven Stanton, 2021. "Financial forecasting and risky decisions: an experimental study grounded in Prospect theory," International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Springer, vol. 17(4), pages 1827-1841, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:intemj:v:17:y:2021:i:4:d:10.1007_s11365-020-00697-4
    DOI: 10.1007/s11365-020-00697-4
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11365-020-00697-4
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11365-020-00697-4?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Johannes Abeler & Armin Falk & Lorenz Goette & David Huffman, 2011. "Reference Points and Effort Provision," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 101(2), pages 470-492, April.
    2. Martin Brown & Armin Falk & Ernst Fehr, 2004. "Relational Contracts and the Nature of Market Interactions," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 72(3), pages 747-780, May.
    3. Charness, Gary & Gneezy, Uri & Henderson, Austin, 2018. "Experimental methods: Measuring effort in economics experiments," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 74-87.
    4. Hvide, Hans K. & Panos, Georgios A., 2014. "Risk tolerance and entrepreneurship," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 111(1), pages 200-223.
    5. Saul Estrin & Tomasz Mickiewicz & Anna Rebmann, 2017. "Prospect theory and the effects of bankruptcy laws on entrepreneurial aspirations," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 48(4), pages 977-997, April.
    6. Brice Corgnet & Roberto Hernán-González & Stephen Rassenti, 2011. "Real Effort, Real Leisure and Real-time Supervision: Incentives and Peer Pressure in Virtual Organizations," Working Papers 11-05, Chapman University, Economic Science Institute.
    7. Cooper, Arnold C. & Woo, Carolyn Y. & Dunkelberg, William C., 1988. "Entrepreneurs' perceived chances for success," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 3(2), pages 97-108.
    8. Alwine Mohnen & Kathrin Pokorny & Dirk Sliwka, 2008. "Transparency, Inequity Aversion, and the Dynamics of Peer Pressure in Teams: Theory and Evidence," Journal of Labor Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 26(4), pages 693-720, October.
    9. Aguinis, Herman & Lawal, Sola O., 2012. "Conducting field experiments using eLancing's natural environment," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 27(4), pages 493-505.
    10. Cramer, J. S. & Hartog, J. & Jonker, N. & Van Praag, C. M., 2002. "Low risk aversion encourages the choice for entrepreneurship: an empirical test of a truism," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 29-36, May.
    11. 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..
    12. Marco Faravelli & Kenan Kalayci & Carlos Pimienta, 2020. "Costly voting: a large-scale real effort experiment," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 23(2), pages 468-492, June.
    13. Andreas Hack & Frauke Bieberstein & Nils D. Kraiczy, 2016. "Reference point formation and new venture creation," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 46(3), pages 447-465, March.
    14. Simon, Mark & Stanton, Steven J. & Townsend, Janell D. & Kim, John, 2019. "A multi-method study of social ties and crowdfunding success: Opening the black box to get the cash inside," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 206-214.
    15. Gavin Cassar, 2010. "Are individuals entering self‐employment overly optimistic? an empirical test of plans and projections on nascent entrepreneur expectations," Strategic Management Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 31(8), pages 822-840, August.
    16. Baron, Robert A., 2004. "The cognitive perspective: a valuable tool for answering entrepreneurship's basic "why" questions," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 19(2), pages 221-239, March.
    17. Daniel Kahneman & Dan Lovallo, 1993. "Timid Choices and Bold Forecasts: A Cognitive Perspective on Risk Taking," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 39(1), pages 17-31, January.
    18. repec:cup:judgdm:v:9:y:2014:i:2:p:167-175 is not listed on IDEAS
    19. Brinckmann, Jan & Grichnik, Dietmar & Kapsa, Diana, 2010. "Should entrepreneurs plan or just storm the castle? A meta-analysis on contextual factors impacting the business planning-performance relationship in small firms," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 25(1), pages 24-40, January.
    20. Simon, Mark & Houghton, Susan M. & Savelli, Sonia, 2003. "Out of the frying pan...?: Why small business managers introduce high-risk products," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 18(3), pages 419-440, May.
    21. Gary Charness & Daniela Grieco, 2019. "Creativity and Incentives," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 17(2), pages 454-496.
    22. repec:cup:judgdm:v:11:y:2016:i:3:p:223-242 is not listed on IDEAS
    23. Victor Martin-Sanchez & Ignacio Contín-Pilart & Martin Larraza-Kintana, 2018. "The influence of entrepreneurs’ social referents on start-up size," International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Springer, vol. 14(1), pages 173-194, March.
    24. Busenitz, Lowell W. & Barney, Jay B., 1997. "Differences between entrepreneurs and managers in large organizations: Biases and heuristics in strategic decision-making," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 12(1), pages 9-30, January.
    25. Manimala, Mathew J., 1992. "Entrepreneurial heuristics: A comparison between high PL (pioneering-innovative) and low PI ventures," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 7(6), pages 477-504, November.
    26. repec:cup:judgdm:v:12:y:2017:i:4:p:382-395 is not listed on IDEAS
    27. Simon, Mark & Houghton, Susan M. & Aquino, Karl, 2000. "Cognitive biases, risk perception, and venture formation: How individuals decide to start companies," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 15(2), pages 113-134, March.
    28. Daly, Timothy M. & Nataraajan, Rajan, 2015. "Swapping bricks for clicks: Crowdsourcing longitudinal data on Amazon Turk," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 68(12), pages 2603-2609.
    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. Stephen X. Zhang & Javier Cueto, 2017. "The Study of Bias in Entrepreneurship," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 41(3), pages 419-454, May.
    2. Dubard Barbosa, Saulo & Fayolle, Alain & Smith, Brett R., 2019. "Biased and overconfident, unbiased but going for it: How framing and anchoring affect the decision to start a new venture," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 34(3), pages 528-557.
    3. Andreas Hack & Frauke Bieberstein & Nils D. Kraiczy, 2016. "Reference point formation and new venture creation," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 46(3), pages 447-465, March.
    4. Saulo Dubard Barbosa & Alain Fayolle & Brett Smith, 2019. "Biased and overconfident, unbiased but going for it: How framing and anchoring affect the decision to start a new venture," Post-Print hal-01988083, HAL.
    5. Oliver Thomas, 2018. "Two decades of cognitive bias research in entrepreneurship: What do we know and where do we go from here?," Management Review Quarterly, Springer, vol. 68(2), pages 107-143, April.
    6. Martin Koudstaal & Randolph Sloof & Mirjam van Praag, 2015. "Are Entrepreneurs more Optimistic and Overconfident than Managers and Employees?," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 15-124/VII, Tinbergen Institute.
    7. Pindard-Lejarraga, Maud & Lejarraga, José, 2024. "Information source and entrepreneurial performance expectations: Experience-based versus description-based opportunity evaluations," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 172(C).
    8. T. K. Das & Bing-Sheng Teng, 1998. "Time and Entrepreneurial Risk Behavior," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 22(2), pages 69-88, January.
    9. Kambiz Talebi & Pouria Nouri & Abdolah Ahmadi Kafeshani, 2014. "What Factors Contribute to Entrepreneurs’ Decision Making Biases? A Comprehensive Study," International Journal of Management Sciences, Research Academy of Social Sciences, vol. 4(2), pages 59-68.
    10. Simon, Mark & Shrader, Rodney C., 2012. "Entrepreneurial actions and optimistic overconfidence: The role of motivated reasoning in new product introductions," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 27(3), pages 291-309.
    11. Charness, Gary & Gneezy, Uri & Henderson, Austin, 2018. "Experimental methods: Measuring effort in economics experiments," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 149(C), pages 74-87.
    12. Koellinger, Philipp & Minniti, Maria & Schade, Christian, 2007. ""I think I can, I think I can": Overconfidence and entrepreneurial behavior," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 28(4), pages 502-527, August.
    13. Elhem Ben Fatma & Ezzeddine Ben Mohamed & Léo-Paul Dana & Sami Boudabbous, 2021. "Does entrepreneurs’ psychology affect their business venture success? Empirical findings from North Africa," International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Springer, vol. 17(2), pages 921-962, June.
    14. Jaeyeob Jeong & Myeonggil Choi, 2017. "The Expected Job Satisfaction Affecting Entrepreneurial Intention as Career Choice in the Cultural and Artistic Industry," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(10), pages 1-16, September.
    15. Parker, Simon C., 2013. "Do serial entrepreneurs run successively better-performing businesses?," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 28(5), pages 652-666.
    16. Jahangir Yadollahi Farsi & Pouria Nouri & Abdollah Ahmadi Kafeshani, 2015. "Exploring the Interconnections between Sense making, Heuristics and Biases in the Field of Entrepreneurship," International Journal of Management Sciences, Research Academy of Social Sciences, vol. 6(2), pages 121-128.
    17. Thomas Astebro & Frank Fossen & Cédric Gutierrez, 2024. "Entrepreneurs: Clueless, Biased, Poor Heuristics, or Bayesian Machines?," Working Papers hal-04759301, HAL.
    18. Levesque, Moren & Schade, Christian, 2005. "Intuitive optimizing: experimental findings on time allocation decisions with newly formed ventures," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 20(3), pages 313-342, May.
    19. Hean Tat Keh & Maw Der Foo & Boon Chong Lim, 2002. "Opportunity Evaluation under Risky Conditions: The Cognitive Processes of Entrepreneurs," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 27(2), pages 125-148, April.
    20. Dohmen, Thomas, 2014. "Behavioral labor economics: Advances and future directions," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(C), pages 71-85.

    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:spr:intemj:v:17:y:2021:i:4:d:10.1007_s11365-020-00697-4. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.