Gender Bias Influence on Financial Decision Maker's Strategies
Keywords:
Financial decision making, Behavioral finance, psychology, Gender bias and Choice strategy
Abstract
The paper addresses the question of the possibility of decision makers’ bias in their financial decisions done on behalf of their recipient. The paper sort to document the various bias components that are largely construed to affect decision makers financial strategy. The encapsulating factors affecting financial decision makers are identified. This short and small sample paper indicates that gender bias does not influence a decision maker’s financial choice strategy, but on the other hand it finds that decision makers’ age has a negative and significant influence on losses strategy post -manipulation phase. The possible justification for this should be that our sample consists of youth aged between 19-26 years.
References
1. Andersson, O., Holm, H. J., Tyran, J., & Wengstrom, E. (2014). Deciding for others reduces loss aversion. In KNUT Wicksell Working Paper (No. 4; Vol. 4).
2. Bacha, S., & Azouzi, M. A. (2019). How gender and emotions bias the credit decision-making in banking firms. Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance, 22, 183–191. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbef.2019.03.004
3. Batteux, E., Ferguson, E., & Tunney, R. J. (2019). Do our risk preferences change when we make decisions for others? A meta-analysis of self-other differences in decisions involving risk. PLoS ONE, 14(5), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0216566
4. Batteux, E., Ferguson, E., & Tunney, R. J. (2020). Do we make decisions for other people based on our predictions of their preferences? Evidence from financial and medical scenarios involving risk. Thinking and Reasoning, 26(2), 188–217. https://doi.org/10.1080/13546783.2019.1592779
5. Chatterjee, S., & Barcun, S. (1970). A nonparametric approach to credit screening. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 65(329), 150–154. https://doi.org/10.1080/01621459.1970.10481068
6. Deng, S., Mitsubuchi, T., Shioda, K., Shimada, T., & Sakurai, A. (2011). Combining technical analysis with sentiment analysis for stock price prediction. Proceedings - IEEE 9th International Conference on Dependable, Autonomic and Secure Computing, DASC 2011, 800–807. https://doi.org/10.1109/DASC.2011.138
7. Ifcher, J., & Zarghamee, H. (2020). Behavioral economic phenomena in decision-making for others. Journal of Economic Psychology, 77(June). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joep.2019.06.003
8. Juanchich, M., Sirota, M., & Bonnefon, J. F. (2020). Anxiety-induced miscalculations, more than differential inhibition of intuition, explain the gender gap in cognitive reflection. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 33(4), 427–443. https://doi.org/10.1002/bdm.2165
9. Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1979). Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk. Econometrica, 47(2), 263–292.
10. Liberman, N., Trope, Y., & Wakslak, C. (2007). Construal level theory and consumer behavior. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 17(2), 113–117. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1057-7408(07)70017-7
11. Losecaat Vermeer, A. B., Boksem, M. A. S., & Sanfey, A. G. (2020). Third-party decision-making under risk as a function of prior gains and losses. Journal of Economic Psychology, 77(September), 102206. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joep.2019.102206
12. Ludwig, J., Jaudas, A., & Achtziger, A. (2020). The role of motivation and volition in economic decisions: Evidence from eye movements and pupillometry. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 33(2), 180–195. https://doi.org/10.1002/bdm.2152
13. Michael, J., Gutoreva, A., Lee, M. H., Tan, P. N., Bruce, E. M., Székely, M., Ankush, T., Sakaguchi, H., Walasek, L., & Ludvig, E. A. (2020). Decision-makers use social information to update their preferences but choose for others as they do for themselves. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 33(3), 270–286. https://doi.org/10.1002/bdm.2163
14. Mullette-Gillman, O. A., Leong, R. L. F., & Kurnianingsih, Y. A. (2015). Cognitive fatigue destabilizes economic decision making preferences and strategies. PLoS ONE, 10(7), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0132022
15. Polman, E., & Wu, K. (2020). Decision making for others involving risk: A review and meta-analysis. Journal of Economic Psychology, 77, 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joep.2019.06.007
16. Skała, D., & Weill, L. (2018). Does CEO gender matter for bank risk? Economic Systems, 42(1), 64–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecosys.2017.08.005
17. Stiglitz, J. E. (1975). The Theory of Screening, Education, and the Distribution of Income. American Economic Review, 65(3), 283–300. http://www.jstor.org/stable/1804834%5Cnhttp://www.jstor.org/stable/1804834
18. Trope, Y., & Liberman, N. (2010). Construal-Level Theory of Psychological Distance. Pyschology Review, 117(2), 440–463. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0018963.Construal-Level
19. Tunney, R. J., & Ziegler, F. V. (2015). Toward a Psychology of Surrogate Decision Making. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 10(6), 880–885. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691615598508
20. Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1981). The Framing of Decisions and the Psychology of Choice. American Association for the Advancement of Science, 211(4481), 453–458.
21. Wang, T., Li, H., Zhou, X., Huang, B., & Zhu, H. (2020). Knowledge-Based Systems A prospect theory-based three-way decision model. Knowledge-Based Systems, 203, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.knosys.2020.106129
22. Yu, L., Li, X., Tang, L., Zhang, Z., & Kou, G. (2015). Social credit: a comprehensive literature review. Financial Innovation, 1(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40854-015-0005-6
23. Ziegler, F. V, & Tunney, R. J. (2015). Who’s been framed? Framing effects are reduced in financial gambles made for others. BMC Psychology, 3(9), 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40359-015-0067-2
2. Bacha, S., & Azouzi, M. A. (2019). How gender and emotions bias the credit decision-making in banking firms. Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance, 22, 183–191. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbef.2019.03.004
3. Batteux, E., Ferguson, E., & Tunney, R. J. (2019). Do our risk preferences change when we make decisions for others? A meta-analysis of self-other differences in decisions involving risk. PLoS ONE, 14(5), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0216566
4. Batteux, E., Ferguson, E., & Tunney, R. J. (2020). Do we make decisions for other people based on our predictions of their preferences? Evidence from financial and medical scenarios involving risk. Thinking and Reasoning, 26(2), 188–217. https://doi.org/10.1080/13546783.2019.1592779
5. Chatterjee, S., & Barcun, S. (1970). A nonparametric approach to credit screening. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 65(329), 150–154. https://doi.org/10.1080/01621459.1970.10481068
6. Deng, S., Mitsubuchi, T., Shioda, K., Shimada, T., & Sakurai, A. (2011). Combining technical analysis with sentiment analysis for stock price prediction. Proceedings - IEEE 9th International Conference on Dependable, Autonomic and Secure Computing, DASC 2011, 800–807. https://doi.org/10.1109/DASC.2011.138
7. Ifcher, J., & Zarghamee, H. (2020). Behavioral economic phenomena in decision-making for others. Journal of Economic Psychology, 77(June). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joep.2019.06.003
8. Juanchich, M., Sirota, M., & Bonnefon, J. F. (2020). Anxiety-induced miscalculations, more than differential inhibition of intuition, explain the gender gap in cognitive reflection. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 33(4), 427–443. https://doi.org/10.1002/bdm.2165
9. Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1979). Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk. Econometrica, 47(2), 263–292.
10. Liberman, N., Trope, Y., & Wakslak, C. (2007). Construal level theory and consumer behavior. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 17(2), 113–117. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1057-7408(07)70017-7
11. Losecaat Vermeer, A. B., Boksem, M. A. S., & Sanfey, A. G. (2020). Third-party decision-making under risk as a function of prior gains and losses. Journal of Economic Psychology, 77(September), 102206. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joep.2019.102206
12. Ludwig, J., Jaudas, A., & Achtziger, A. (2020). The role of motivation and volition in economic decisions: Evidence from eye movements and pupillometry. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 33(2), 180–195. https://doi.org/10.1002/bdm.2152
13. Michael, J., Gutoreva, A., Lee, M. H., Tan, P. N., Bruce, E. M., Székely, M., Ankush, T., Sakaguchi, H., Walasek, L., & Ludvig, E. A. (2020). Decision-makers use social information to update their preferences but choose for others as they do for themselves. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 33(3), 270–286. https://doi.org/10.1002/bdm.2163
14. Mullette-Gillman, O. A., Leong, R. L. F., & Kurnianingsih, Y. A. (2015). Cognitive fatigue destabilizes economic decision making preferences and strategies. PLoS ONE, 10(7), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0132022
15. Polman, E., & Wu, K. (2020). Decision making for others involving risk: A review and meta-analysis. Journal of Economic Psychology, 77, 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joep.2019.06.007
16. Skała, D., & Weill, L. (2018). Does CEO gender matter for bank risk? Economic Systems, 42(1), 64–74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecosys.2017.08.005
17. Stiglitz, J. E. (1975). The Theory of Screening, Education, and the Distribution of Income. American Economic Review, 65(3), 283–300. http://www.jstor.org/stable/1804834%5Cnhttp://www.jstor.org/stable/1804834
18. Trope, Y., & Liberman, N. (2010). Construal-Level Theory of Psychological Distance. Pyschology Review, 117(2), 440–463. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0018963.Construal-Level
19. Tunney, R. J., & Ziegler, F. V. (2015). Toward a Psychology of Surrogate Decision Making. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 10(6), 880–885. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691615598508
20. Tversky, A., & Kahneman, D. (1981). The Framing of Decisions and the Psychology of Choice. American Association for the Advancement of Science, 211(4481), 453–458.
21. Wang, T., Li, H., Zhou, X., Huang, B., & Zhu, H. (2020). Knowledge-Based Systems A prospect theory-based three-way decision model. Knowledge-Based Systems, 203, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.knosys.2020.106129
22. Yu, L., Li, X., Tang, L., Zhang, Z., & Kou, G. (2015). Social credit: a comprehensive literature review. Financial Innovation, 1(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40854-015-0005-6
23. Ziegler, F. V, & Tunney, R. J. (2015). Who’s been framed? Framing effects are reduced in financial gambles made for others. BMC Psychology, 3(9), 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40359-015-0067-2
Published
2021-08-31
How to Cite
Habimana, T., Nshimiyimana, Y. C., Gakwerere, S. K., & Benjamin, M. (2021). Gender Bias Influence on Financial Decision Maker’s Strategies. Central Asian Journal of Innovations on Tourism Management and Finance, 2(8), 58-67. Retrieved from https://cajitmf.centralasianstudies.org/index.php/CAJITMF/article/view/164
Section
Articles
Copyright (c) 2021 Theogene Habimana, Yves Claude Nshimiyimana, Samuel Kalihungu Gakwerere, Mudaheranwa Benjamin
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
In submitting the manuscript to the Central Asian Journal of Innovations on Tourism Management and Finance, the authors certify that:
- They are authorized by their co-authors to enter into these arrangements.
- The work described has not been formally published before, except in the form of an abstract or as part of a published lecture, review, thesis, or overlay journal.
- That it is not under consideration for publication elsewhere,
- The publication has been approved by the author(s) and by responsible authorities – tacitly or explicitly – of the institutes where the work has been carried out.
- They secure the right to reproduce any material that has already been published or copyrighted elsewhere.
- They agree to the following license and copyright agreement.
License and Copyright Agreement
Authors who publish with Central Asian Journal of Innovations on Tourism Management and Finance agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the Central Asian Journal of Innovations on Tourism Management and Finance right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0) that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors can enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the Central Asian Journal of Innovations on Tourism Management and Finance published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or edit it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) before and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.
