2008SSRN Electronic JournalOpen access

Contagion of Wishful Thinking in Markets

Nicholas Seybert, Robert J. Bloomfield

Open full text 10 citations

Abstract

Prior research provides only weak and controversial evidence that people overestimate the likelihood of desirable events (wishful thinking), but strong evidence that people bet more heavily on those events (wishful betting). Two experiments show that wishful betting contaminates beliefs in financial markets because wishful betters appear to possess more favorable information than they actually do. As a consequence, market interaction exacerbates rather than mitigates wishful thinking. This phenomenon, contagion of wishful thinking, could be problematic in many settings where people infer others' beliefs from their behavior.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Prior research provides only weak and controversial evidence that people overestimate the likelihood of desirable events (wishful thinking), but strong evidence that people bet more heavily on those events (wishful betting). Two experiments show that wishful betting contaminates beliefs in financial markets because wishful betters appear to possess more favorable information than they actually do. As a consequence, market interaction exacerbates rather than mitigates wishful thinking. This phenomenon, contagion of wishful thinking, could be problematic in many settings where people infer others' beliefs from their behavior.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 10 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Prior research provides only weak and controversial evidence that people overestimate the likelihood of desirable events (wishful thinking), but strong evidence that people bet more heavily on those events (wishful betting). Two experiments show that wishful betting contaminates beliefs in financial markets because wishful betters appear to possess more favorable information than they actually do. As a consequence, market interaction exacerbates rather than mitigates wishful thinking. This phenomenon, contagion of wishful thinking, could be problematic in many settings where people infer others' beliefs from their behavior.

Key concepts: Wishful thinking, Phenomenon, Motivated reasoning, Psychology, Economics, Social psychology, Epistemology, Political science

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Contagion of Wishful Thinking in Markets — Research Paper | ScholarLens