IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cdl/ucscec/qt4kf382p6.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Humans, Robots and Market Crashes: A Laboratory Study ∗

Author

Listed:
  • Feldman, Todd
  • Friedman, Daniel

Abstract

We introduce human traders into an agent based financial market simulation prone to bubbles and crashes. We find that human traders earn lower profits overall than do the simulated agents (“robots”) but earn higher profits in the most crash-intensive periods. Inexperienced human traders tend to destabilize the smaller (10 trader) mar- kets, but otherwise they have little impact on bubbles and crashes in larger (30 trader) markets and when they are more experienced. Humans’ buying and selling choices respond to the payoff gradient in a manner similar to the robot algorithm. Likewise, following losses, humans’ choices shift towards faster selling. There are problems in properly identifying fundamentalist and trend-following strategies in our data.

Suggested Citation

  • Feldman, Todd & Friedman, Daniel, 2008. "Humans, Robots and Market Crashes: A Laboratory Study ∗," Santa Cruz Department of Economics, Working Paper Series qt4kf382p6, Department of Economics, UC Santa Cruz.
    • Handle: RePEc:cdl:ucscec:qt4kf382p6
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.escholarship.org/uc/item/4kf382p6.pdf;origin=repeccitec
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. J. Doyne Farmer, 2002. "Market force, ecology and evolution," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 11(5), pages 895-953, November.
    2. Boswijk, H. Peter & Hommes, Cars H. & Manzan, Sebastiano, 2007. "Behavioral heterogeneity in stock prices," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 31(6), pages 1938-1970, June.
    3. Dhananjay K. Gode & Shyam Sunder, 1997. "What Makes Markets Allocationally Efficient?," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 112(2), pages 603-630.
    4. Duffy, John, 2006. "Agent-Based Models and Human Subject Experiments," Handbook of Computational Economics, in: Leigh Tesfatsion & Kenneth L. Judd (ed.), Handbook of Computational Economics, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 19, pages 949-1011, Elsevier.
    5. Garman, Mark B., 1976. "Market microstructure," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 3(3), pages 257-275, June.
    6. John Duffy & M. Ünver, 2006. "Asset price bubbles and crashes with near-zero-intelligence traders," Economic Theory, Springer;Society for the Advancement of Economic Theory (SAET), vol. 27(3), pages 537-563, April.
    7. Axelrod, Robert & Tesfatsion, Leigh, 2006. "A Guide for Newcomers to Agent-Based Modeling in the Social Sciences," Staff General Research Papers Archive 12515, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    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. Hommes, Cars H., 2006. "Heterogeneous Agent Models in Economics and Finance," Handbook of Computational Economics, in: Leigh Tesfatsion & Kenneth L. Judd (ed.), Handbook of Computational Economics, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 23, pages 1109-1186, Elsevier.
    2. Cars Hommes & Florian Wagener, 2008. "Complex Evolutionary Systems in Behavioral Finance," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 08-054/1, Tinbergen Institute.
    3. Hommes, C.H., 2005. "Heterogeneous Agent Models in Economics and Finance, In: Handbook of Computational Economics II: Agent-Based Computational Economics, edited by Leigh Tesfatsion and Ken Judd , Elsevier, Amsterdam 2006," CeNDEF Working Papers 05-03, Universiteit van Amsterdam, Center for Nonlinear Dynamics in Economics and Finance.
    4. Baghestanian, Sascha & Walker, Todd B., 2015. "Anchoring in experimental asset markets," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 116(C), pages 15-25.
    5. Duffy, John, 2006. "Agent-Based Models and Human Subject Experiments," Handbook of Computational Economics, in: Leigh Tesfatsion & Kenneth L. Judd (ed.), Handbook of Computational Economics, edition 1, volume 2, chapter 19, pages 949-1011, Elsevier.
    6. Makarewicz, Tomasz, 2021. "Traders, forecasters and financial instability: A model of individual learning of anchor-and-adjustment heuristics," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 190(C), pages 626-673.
    7. Mikhail Anufriev & Jasmina Arifovic & John Ledyard & Valentyn Panchenko, 2013. "Efficiency of continuous double auctions under individual evolutionary learning with full or limited information," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 23(3), pages 539-573, July.
    8. Flaminio Squazzoni, 2010. "The impact of agent-based models in the social sciences after 15 years of incursions," History of Economic Ideas, Fabrizio Serra Editore, Pisa - Roma, vol. 18(2), pages 197-234.
    9. Hommes, Cars, 2011. "The heterogeneous expectations hypothesis: Some evidence from the lab," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 35(1), pages 1-24, January.
    10. Frank M. A. Klingert & Matthias Meyer, 2012. "Effectively combining experimental economics and multi-agent simulation: suggestions for a procedural integration with an example from prediction markets research," Computational and Mathematical Organization Theory, Springer, vol. 18(1), pages 63-90, March.
    11. Jakob Grazzini, 2013. "Information dissemination in an experimentally based agent-based stock market," Journal of Economic Interaction and Coordination, Springer;Society for Economic Science with Heterogeneous Interacting Agents, vol. 8(1), pages 179-209, April.
    12. Todd Feldman & Daniel Friedman, 2010. "Human and Artificial Agents in a Crash-Prone Financial Market," Computational Economics, Springer;Society for Computational Economics, vol. 36(3), pages 201-229, October.
    13. Rebecca Westphal & Didier Sornette, 2019. "Market Impact and Performance of Arbitrageurs of Financial Bubbles in An Agent-Based Model," Swiss Finance Institute Research Paper Series 19-29, Swiss Finance Institute.
    14. Ladley, Dan & Schenk-Hoppé, Klaus Reiner, 2009. "Do stylised facts of order book markets need strategic behaviour?," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 33(4), pages 817-831, April.
    15. Chen, Shu-Heng, 2012. "Varieties of agents in agent-based computational economics: A historical and an interdisciplinary perspective," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 1-25.
    16. Makarewicz, Tomasz, 2019. "Traders, forecasters and financial instability: A model of individual learning of anchor-and-adjustment heuristics," BERG Working Paper Series 141, Bamberg University, Bamberg Economic Research Group.
    17. Lu, Dong & Zhan, Yaosong, 2022. "Over-the-counter versus double auction in asset markets with near-zero-intelligence traders," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 143(C).
    18. Bulent Guler & Volodymyr Lugovskyy & Daniela Puzzello & Steven Tucker, 2021. "Trading Institutions in Experimental Asset Markets: Theory and Evidence," Working Papers in Economics 21/15, University of Waikato.
    19. Marco LiCalzi & Lucia Milone & Paolo Pellizzari, 2011. "Allocative Efficiency and Traders’ Protection Under Zero Intelligence Behavior," Dynamic Modeling and Econometrics in Economics and Finance, in: Herbert Dawid & Willi Semmler (ed.), Computational Methods in Economic Dynamics, pages 5-28, Springer.
    20. Ross M. Miller, 2012. "The Effect Of Boundary Conditions On Efficiency And Pricing In Double‐Auction Markets With Zero‐Intelligence Agents," Intelligent Systems in Accounting, Finance and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 19(3), pages 179-188, 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:cdl:ucscec:qt4kf382p6. 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: Lisa Schiff (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/ecucsus.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.