IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/feb/natura/00551.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Endowment Effects in the Field: Evidence from India's IPO Lotteries

Author

Listed:
  • Santosh Anagol
  • Vimal Balasubramaniam
  • Tarun Ramadorai

Abstract

Winners of randomly assigned initial public offering (IPO) lottery shares are significantly more likely to hold these shares than lottery losers 1, 6, and even 24 months after the random allocation. This effect persists in samples of wealthy and highly active investors, suggesting along with additional evidence that this type of "endowment effect" is not solely driven by portfolio inertia or wealth effects. The effect decreases as experience in the IPO market increases, but persists even for the most experienced investors. These results suggest that agents' preferences and/or beliefs about an asset are not independent of ownership, providing field evidence derived from the behavior of 1.5 million Indian stock investors which is in line with the large laboratory literature documenting endowment effects. We evaluate the extent to which prominent models of endowment effects and/or investor behavior can explain our results. A combination of inattention and non-standard preferences (realization utility) or non-standard beliefs (salience based probability distortions) appears most consistent with our findings.

Suggested Citation

  • Santosh Anagol & Vimal Balasubramaniam & Tarun Ramadorai, 2016. "Endowment Effects in the Field: Evidence from India's IPO Lotteries," Natural Field Experiments 00551, The Field Experiments Website.
    • Handle: RePEc:feb:natura:00551
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://s3.amazonaws.com/fieldexperiments-papers2/papers/00551.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Alexander Gelber & Adam Isen & Judd B. Kessler, 2014. "The Effects of Youth Employment: Evidence from New York City Summer Youth Employment Program Lotteries," NBER Working Papers 20810, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Zhang, Donghang, 2004. "Why Do IPO Underwriters Allocate Extra Shares when They Expect to Buy Them Back?," Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 39(3), pages 571-594, September.
    3. Jack L. Knetsch & J. A. Sinden, 1984. "Willingness to Pay and Compensation Demanded: Experimental Evidence of an Unexpected Disparity in Measures of Value," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 99(3), pages 507-521.
    4. Götte, Lorenz & Cerulli-Harms, Annette & Sprenger, Charles, 2014. "Randomizing Endowments: An Experimental Study of Rational Expectations and Reference-Dependent Preferences," IZA Discussion Papers 8639, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    5. Dirk Engelmann & Guillaume Hollard, 2010. "Reconsidering the Effect of Market Experience on the “Endowment Effect”," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 78(6), pages 2005-2019, November.
    6. John Y. Campbell & Tarun Ramadorai & Benjamin Ranish, 2014. "Getting Better or Feeling Better? How Equity Investors Respond to Investment Experience," NBER Working Papers 20000, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. Tanjim Hossain & John A. List, 2012. "The Behavioralist Visits the Factory: Increasing Productivity Using Simple Framing Manipulations," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 58(12), pages 2151-2167, December.
    8. Michael S. Haigh & John A. List, 2005. "Do Professional Traders Exhibit Myopic Loss Aversion? An Experimental Analysis," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 60(1), pages 523-534, February.
    9. Browning, Martin & Francois Bourguignon & Pierre-Andre Chiappori & Valerie Lechene, 1994. "Income and Outcomes: A Structural Model of Intrahousehold Allocation," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 102(6), pages 1067-1096, December.
    10. Roland Fryer & Steven Levitt & John List & Sally Sadoff, 2012. "Enhancing the Efficacy of Teacher Incentives through Loss Aversion: A Field Experiment," Framed Field Experiments 00591, The Field Experiments Website.
    11. Ori Heffetz & John A. List, 2014. "Is The Endowment Effect An Expectations Effect?," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 12(5), pages 1396-1422, October.
    12. 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.
    13. Steven D. Levitt & John A. List & Susanne Neckermann & Sally Sadoff, 2016. "The Behavioralist Goes to School: Leveraging Behavioral Economics to Improve Educational Performance," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 8(4), pages 183-219, November.
    14. francesco lippi & Luigi Paciello & Fernando Alvarez, 2012. "Monetary Shocks with Observation and Menu Costs," 2012 Meeting Papers 439, Society for Economic Dynamics.
    15. Charles R. Plott & Kathryn Zeiler, 2005. "The Willingness to Pay–Willingness to Accept Gap, the "Endowment Effect," Subject Misconceptions, and Experimental Procedures for Eliciting Valuations," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 95(3), pages 530-545, June.
    16. Tim Loughran & Jay R. Ritter, 2002. "Why Don't Issuers Get Upset About Leaving Money on the Table in IPOs?," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 15(2), pages 413-444, March.
    17. Itzhak Ben-David & David Hirshleifer, 2012. "Are Investors Really Reluctant to Realize Their Losses? Trading Responses to Past Returns and the Disposition Effect," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 25(8), pages 2485-2532.
    18. Andersen, Steffen & Campbell, John Y. & Meisner-Nielsen, Kasper & Ramadorai, Tarun, 2014. "Inattention and Inertia in Household Finance: Evidence from the Danish Mortgage Market," Scholarly Articles 17492179, Harvard University Department of Economics.
    19. Samuel M. Hartzmark, 2015. "The Worst, the Best, Ignoring All the Rest: The Rank Effect and Trading Behavior," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 28(4), pages 1024-1059.
    20. Devin G. Pope & Maurice E. Schweitzer, 2011. "Is Tiger Woods Loss Averse? Persistent Bias in the Face of Experience, Competition, and High Stakes," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 101(1), pages 129-157, February.
    21. John A. List, 2003. "Does Market Experience Eliminate Market Anomalies?," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 118(1), pages 41-71.
    22. Steffen Andersen & John Y. Campbell & Kasper Meisner Nielsen & Tarun Ramadorai, 2020. "Sources of Inaction in Household Finance: Evidence from the Danish Mortgage Market," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 110(10), pages 3184-3230, October.
    23. Brad M. Barber & Terrance Odean, 2008. "All That Glitters: The Effect of Attention and News on the Buying Behavior of Individual and Institutional Investors," The Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 21(2), pages 785-818, April.
    24. Pedro Bordalo & Nicola Gennaioli & Andrei Shleifer, 2012. "Salience in Experimental Tests of the Endowment Effect," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 102(3), pages 47-52, May.
    25. John Y. Campbell & Tarun Ramadorai & Benjamin Ranish, 2015. "The Impact of Regulation on Mortgage Risk: Evidence from India," American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, American Economic Association, vol. 7(4), pages 71-102, November.
    26. 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..
    27. Brigitte C. Madrian & Dennis F. Shea, 2001. "The Power of Suggestion: Inertia in 401(k) Participation and Savings Behavior," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 116(4), pages 1149-1187.
    28. Santosh Anagol & Hugh Hoikwang Kim, 2012. "The Impact of Shrouded Fees: Evidence from a Natural Experiment in the Indian Mutual Funds Market," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 102(1), pages 576-593, February.
    29. Merton, Robert C, 1987. "A Simple Model of Capital Market Equilibrium with Incomplete Information," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 42(3), pages 483-510, July.
    30. Baker, Malcolm & Coval, Joshua & Stein, Jeremy C., 2007. "Corporate financing decisions when investors take the path of least resistance," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 84(2), pages 266-298, May.
    31. Charles Sprenger, 2015. "An Endowment Effect for Risk: Experimental Tests of Stochastic Reference Points," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 123(6), pages 1456-1499.
    32. Kahneman, Daniel & Knetsch, Jack L & Thaler, Richard H, 1990. "Experimental Tests of the Endowment Effect and the Coase Theorem," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 98(6), pages 1325-1348, December.
    33. Campbell, John Y. & Ramadorai, Tarun & Schwartz, Allie, 2009. "Caught on tape: Institutional trading, stock returns, and earnings announcements," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(1), pages 66-91, April.
    34. Joshua D. Angrist, 1998. "Estimating the Labor Market Impact of Voluntary Military Service Using Social Security Data on Military Applicants," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 66(2), pages 249-288, March.
    35. Andrew B. Abel & Janice C. Eberly & Stavros Panageas, 2013. "Optimal Inattention to the Stock Market With Information Costs and Transactions Costs," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 81(4), pages 1455-1481, July.
    36. Olivia S. Mitchell & Gary R. Mottola & Stephen P. Utkus & Takeshi Yamaguchi, 2006. "The Inattentive Participant: Portfolio Trading Behavior in 401(k) Plans," Working Papers wp115, University of Michigan, Michigan Retirement Research Center.
    37. Shefrin, Hersh & Statman, Meir, 1985. "The Disposition to Sell Winners Too Early and Ride Losers Too Long: Theory and Evidence," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 40(3), pages 777-790, July.
    38. Keith M. Marzilli Ericson & Andreas Fuster, 2011. "Expectations as Endowments: Evidence on Reference-Dependent Preferences from Exchange and Valuation Experiments," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 126(4), pages 1879-1907.
    39. Kachelmeier, Steven J & Shehata, Mohamed, 1992. "Examining Risk Preferences under High Monetary Incentives: Experimental Evidence from the People's Republic of China," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 82(5), pages 1120-1141, December.
    40. Terrance Odean, 1999. "Do Investors Trade Too Much?," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 89(5), pages 1279-1298, December.
    41. Thaler, Richard, 1980. "Toward a positive theory of consumer choice," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 39-60, March.
    42. David Hirshleifer & Sonya Seongyeon Lim & Siew Hong Teoh, 2009. "Driven to Distraction: Extraneous Events and Underreaction to Earnings News," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 64(5), pages 2289-2325, October.
    43. Nicholas C. Barberis, 2013. "Thirty Years of Prospect Theory in Economics: A Review and Assessment," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 27(1), pages 173-196, Winter.
    44. Dan A. Black & Jeffrey A. Smith & Mark C. Berger & Brett J. Noel, 2003. "Is the Threat of Reemployment Services More Effective Than the Services Themselves? Evidence from Random Assignment in the UI System," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 93(4), pages 1313-1327, September.
    45. Paul J. H. Schoemaker, 1990. "Are Risk-Attitudes Related Across Domains and Response Modes?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 36(12), pages 1451-1463, December.
    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. Spantig, Lisa, 2021. "Cash in hand and savings decisions," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 188(C), pages 1206-1220.
    2. Anagol, Santosh & Balasubramaniam, Vimal & Ramadorai, Tarun, 2021. "Learning from noise: Evidence from India’s IPO lotteries," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 140(3), pages 965-986.
    3. Miroslav Ferenèak & Dušan Dobromirov & Mladen Radišiæ & Aleksandar Takaèi, 2018. "Aversion to a sure loss: turning investors into gamblers," Zbornik radova Ekonomskog fakulteta u Rijeci/Proceedings of Rijeka Faculty of Economics, University of Rijeka, Faculty of Economics and Business, vol. 36(2), pages 537-557.
    4. Dietmar Fehr & Günther Fink & Kelsey Jack, 2019. "Poverty, Seasonal Scarcity and Exchange Asymmetries," NBER Working Papers 26357, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    5. John List, 2020. "Experimental tests of the endowment effect and the Coase theorem," Natural Field Experiments 00687, The Field Experiments Website.
    6. Nicola Lacetera & Claudio A. Piga & Lorenzo Zirulia, 2021. "Sticky Price for Declining Risk? Business Strategies with “Behavioral” Customers in the Hotel Industry," NBER Working Papers 28456, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. Francisco Gomes & Michael Haliassos & Tarun Ramadorai, 2021. "Household Finance," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 59(3), pages 919-1000, September.
    8. Liao, Jingchi & Peng, Cameron & Zhu, Ning, 2021. "Extrapolative bubbles and trading volume," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 118887, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    9. John List, 2021. "How Field Experiments in Economics Can Complement Psychological Research on Judgment Biases," Natural Field Experiments 00738, The Field Experiments Website.
    10. Steffen Andersen & Cristian Badarinza & Lu Liu & Julie Marx & Tarun Ramadorai, 2022. "Reference Dependence in the Housing Market," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 112(10), pages 3398-3440, October.
    11. Cristian Badarinza & John Y. Campbell & Tarun Ramadorai, 2016. "International Comparative Household Finance," Annual Review of Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 8(1), pages 111-144, October.
    12. Gatchev, Vladimir A. & Seth, Rama & Singh, Ajai & Vishwanatha, S.R., 2023. "Price bands and their effects on equity markets: Evidence from a natural experiment," Journal of Financial Markets, Elsevier, vol. 66(C).
    13. Ranganathan, Kavitha & Veeraraghavan, Madhu, 2023. "Pre-and-aftermarket IPO underpricing: Does use of proceeds disclosure matter?," Journal of Contemporary Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 19(3).
    14. Francesco D'Acunto & Nagpurnanand Prabhala & Alberto G. Rossi, 2018. "The Promises and Pitfalls of Robo-advising," CESifo Working Paper Series 6907, CESifo.
    15. Caglayan, Mustafa O. & Lawrence, Edward & Reyes-Peña, Robinson, 2023. "Hot potatoes: Underpricing of stocks following extreme negative returns," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 149(C).
    16. Steffen Meyer & Michaela Pagel, 2022. "Fully Closed: Individual Responses to Realized Gains and Losses," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 77(3), pages 1529-1585, June.
    17. Balasubramaniam, Vimal & Anagol, Santosh, 2018. "Learning from Noise: Evidence from India’s IPO Lotteries," CEPR Discussion Papers 13314, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    18. Clist, Paul & D’Exelle, Ben & Verschoor, Arjan, 2021. "An endowment effect for risk levels: Evidence from a Ugandan lab," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 182(C), pages 297-310.
    19. Liao, Jingchi & Peng, Cameron & Zhu, Ning, 2022. "Extrapolative bubbles and trading volume," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 110514, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.

    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. Francisco Gomes & Michael Haliassos & Tarun Ramadorai, 2021. "Household Finance," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 59(3), pages 919-1000, September.
    2. Stefano DellaVigna, 2009. "Psychology and Economics: Evidence from the Field," Journal of Economic Literature, American Economic Association, vol. 47(2), pages 315-372, June.
    3. Nicholas C. Barberis, 2013. "Thirty Years of Prospect Theory in Economics: A Review and Assessment," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 27(1), pages 173-196, Winter.
    4. Brown, Thomas C. & Morrison, Mark D. & Benfield, Jacob A. & Rainbolt, Gretchen Nurse & Bell, Paul A., 2015. "Exchange asymmetry in experimental settings," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 120(C), pages 104-116.
    5. Smith, Alec, 2019. "Lagged beliefs and reference-dependent utility," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 167(C), pages 331-340.
    6. John List, 2020. "Experimental tests of the endowment effect and the Coase theorem," Natural Field Experiments 00687, The Field Experiments Website.
    7. Alex Markle & George Wu & Rebecca White & Aaron Sackett, 2018. "Goals as reference points in marathon running: A novel test of reference dependence," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 56(1), pages 19-50, February.
    8. Committee, Nobel Prize, 2017. "Richard H. Thaler: Integrating Economics with Psychology," Nobel Prize in Economics documents 2017-1, Nobel Prize Committee.
    9. Clist, Paul & D’Exelle, Ben & Verschoor, Arjan, 2021. "An endowment effect for risk levels: Evidence from a Ugandan lab," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 182(C), pages 297-310.
    10. Nicholas C. Barberis, 2012. "Thirty Years of Prospect Theory in Economics: A Review and Assessment," NBER Working Papers 18621, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    11. Alex Imas & Sally Sadoff & Anya Samek, 2017. "Do People Anticipate Loss Aversion?," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 63(5), pages 1271-1284, May.
    12. Anbarci, Nejat & Arin, K. Peren & Kuhlenkasper, Torben & Zenker, Christina, 2018. "Revisiting loss aversion: Evidence from professional tennis," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 153(C), pages 1-18.
    13. Takanori Ida & Wenjie Wang, 2014. "A Field Experiment on Dynamic Electricity Pricing in Los Alamos:Opt-in Versus Opt-out," Discussion papers e-14-010, Graduate School of Economics Project Center, Kyoto University.
    14. Christina McGranaghan & Steven G. Otto, 2022. "Choice uncertainty and the endowment effect," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 65(1), pages 83-104, August.
    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. Charles Sprenger, 2015. "An Endowment Effect for Risk: Experimental Tests of Stochastic Reference Points," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 123(6), pages 1456-1499.
    17. Rosato, Antonio & Tymula, Agnieszka A., 2019. "Loss aversion and competition in Vickrey auctions: Money ain't no good," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 188-208.
    18. Steffen Andersen & Alec Brandon & Uri Gneezy & John List, 2014. "Toward an Understanding of Reference-Dependent Labor Supply: Theory and Evidence from a Field Experiment," Framed Field Experiments 00392, The Field Experiments Website.
    19. Anagol, Santosh & Balasubramaniam, Vimal & Ramadorai, Tarun, 2021. "Learning from noise: Evidence from India’s IPO lotteries," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 140(3), pages 965-986.
    20. Balasubramaniam, Vimal & Anagol, Santosh, 2018. "Learning from Noise: Evidence from India’s IPO Lotteries," CEPR Discussion Papers 13314, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • G11 - Financial Economics - - General Financial Markets - - - Portfolio Choice; Investment Decisions
    • G14 - Financial Economics - - General Financial Markets - - - Information and Market Efficiency; Event Studies; Insider Trading
    • C93 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Design of Experiments - - - Field Experiments
    • D12 - Microeconomics - - Household Behavior - - - Consumer Economics: Empirical Analysis

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:feb:natura:00551. 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: Francesca Pagnotta (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.fieldexperiments.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.