悉尼essay代写

堪培拉大学:投资者心理分析

堪培拉大学:投资者心理分析

本节选择了第二个主题进行讨论。因此,本节将分析专业投资者和个人投资者在描述其投资信念时,倾向于行为偏见的程度。未来,我们将为散户投资者在亏损后继续进行投资提供理由。行为金融学文献中的经验证据表明,个人不具备理性行为。Daniel et al.(2012)、Barberis and Thaler(2014)、Hirshleifer(2011)和Subrahmanyam(2013)等研究者利用理论和信念为解释股票收益、超额交易、超额波动和股票溢价之谜的可预测性提供了重要的模型。投资者不能被认为是理性的,或者市场没有效率(Feng and Seasholes, 2005)。其结果是,由于现有非理性投资者的存在,导致价格与基本价值存在显著偏离。为了解释价值溢价,人们正在付出一些实实在在的努力。
投资者不能被认为是理性的,或者市场没有效率。理性有一个非常独特的定义,考虑到即使在个性上有差异,每个理性的决策者将交付相同的行为。然而,有许多选择是非理性的,这在很大程度上取决于文化和个人差异。因此,个人投资者在财务决策方面具有不同社会行为的倾向(Daniel et al., 2012)。不同的文化背景和生活经历最终会导致不同的偏见,从而触发或抑制认知偏见。集体主义和个人主义水平对居民的行为倾向、风险态度和认知方式有显著影响。在集体主义社会中,个体具有承受更多风险的倾向。因此,来自不同文化或社会的个人将有不同的行为偏见,并将影响他们的财务决策(Seasholes and Zhu, 2010)。

堪培拉大学:投资者心理分析

The second topic has been selected for discussion in this section. Hence, this section will be analysing the extent to which professional and individual investors are prone towards behavioural biases, while characterising their beliefs in investment. Further ahead, reasons will be provided for the continuity of retail investors for investing themselves even after the loss of money. Empirical evidences in the literature of behavioural finance depict that individuals do not deliver rational behaviour. A number of researchers such as Daniel et al. (2012), Barberis and Thaler (2014), Hirshleifer (2011) and Subrahmanyam (2013) have provided significant models for explaining the predictability of stock return, excess trading, excess volatility and equity premium puzzle by the use of theories and beliefs. Investors cannot be considered rational or there is not efficiency in the markets (Feng and Seasholes, 2005). As a result, there is significant deviation of prices out of fundamental values because of the existing irrational investors. Several genuine efforts are being put in for explaining value premium.
Investors cannot be considered rational or there is not efficiency in the markets. There is an extremely unique definition of rationality considering that even if there are differences in personality, every rational decision maker will be delivering same behaviour. However, there are a number of options to be irrational that are highly dependent upon cultural and individual differences. Therefore, individual investors holds the tendency of behaving different from one society to the other in terms of financial decisions (Daniel et al., 2012). Differences in culture end up differentiating biases for triggering or suppressing cognitive biases by different cultural backgrounds and life experiences. The level of collectivism or individualism has a significant effect on behavioural tendencies, risk attitudes and cognitive styles of the inhabitants. Individuals in societies of collectivism hold the tendency of tolerating more risk. As a result, individuals from different cultures or societies will be having varying behavioural biases and will be impacting their financial decisions (Seasholes and Zhu, 2010).