Publications in Refereed Journals

Bubbles and Financial Professionals (2019)
(with Weitzel, U., Huber, C., Huber, J., Kirchler, M., Lindner, F.) 
Review of Financial Studies

Ready-made oTree apps for time preference elicitation methods (2019)
(with Rose, M.)
 Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance

Evaluating the replicability of social science experiments in Nature and Science between 2010 and 2015 (2018)
(with Camerer, C., Dreber, A., Holzmeister, F., Ho, T.-H., Huber, J., Johannesson, M., Kirchler, M., Nave, G., Nosek, B., Pfeiffer, T., Altmejd, A., Buttrick, N., Chan, T., Chen, Y., Forsell, E., Gampa, A., Heikenstein, E., Hummer, L., Taisuke, I., Isaksson, S., Manfredi, D., Wagenmakers, E., and Wu, H.)
Nature Human Behaviour

No need for more time: Intertemporal allocation decisions under time pressure (2017) 
(with Lindner, F.
Journal of Economic Psychology

Working Papers

Client-Advisor Matching in the Finance Industry
Job Market Paper
In an experimental study with 441 subjects from the general population and 126 financial professionals, we test a novel matching procedure to assign advisors to clients. This matching is based on two simple self-assessed measures for risk-return preferences and the risk bearing capacity. Our findings show that a matching based on similarity in those risk attitudes is not only preferred by clients, but also significantly increases the delegation probability of investment decisions as well as overall client satisfaction compared to random matching. Additionally, we find that advisors are both willing and able to incorporate clients’ preferences in their investment decisions on the clients’ behalf. A potential drawback of the matching mechanism is that advisors have incentives to misrepresent their own attitudes if they compete for clients. The experimental results do not show evidence of this effect in practice, providing further support for the applicability of the proposed mechanism.

Overview of experimental results for participating financial professionals (in German):

Individual attitudes and market dynamics towards imprecision
(with Christoph Huber)

We analyze the impact of individual attitudes on market dynamics in a laboratory experiment with 320 participants under risk and imprecision, where imprecision is modelled in either probabilities, outcome realizations, or a combination of both. In two stages, we first elicit individual reservation prices for risky and imprecise lotteries and then analyze price dynamics in a continuous double auction environment with risky and imprecise fundamentals. Our results underpin the importance of whether imprecision is modelled in probabilities or outcomes on the individual level: On average, we find imprecision-in-outcomes seeking, but neutrality towards imprecision in probabilities, the combination of probabilities and outcomes, and risk. In markets, however, individual attitudes are overridden by market dynamics as past price developments are the main predictor for current realized prices. We find no significant differences between treatments with respect to market variables such as trading volume, volatility, and the dispersion of final asset holdings. Yet, at the market closing, we observe significant overpricing in the risk condition, as well as underpricing in conditions with imprecision in probabilities (supporting ambiguity aversion) and the combination of imprecise probabilities and outcomes, respectively.

Status and Reputation Nudging
(with Michael Kirchler and Stefan Palan)
Under Review

The Impact of Stress on Risky Choice: Preference Shifts or Noise?
(with Elle Parslow)

Work in Progress

Large gains, small losses? (Mis)representing returns in financial advice 
(with Christoph Huber)
Manuscript in preparation

Probability Weighting under Induced Anticipated Anxiety
(with Jan Engelmann and Christoph Huber)
Design and programming completed

Price Paths, Stress, and Evaluation Periods
Manuscript in preparation

Lying, Stress, and (false) Confessions
(with Fabio Galeotti)
Work in progress