To see is to believe: Common expectations in experimental asset markets

Speculative Bubbles - An Introduction and Application of the Speculation Elicitation Task (SET)

“…The initial endowments were 13 In line with previous studies, e.g. Cheung et al (2014); Levine et al (2014), subgroups are composed without public knowledge on the determinants of selection. This ensures that our treatment variable, the degree of speculative tendency (average SET-score), constitutes the only dierence between markets.…”

Bubbles in hybrid markets: How expectations about algorithmic trading affect human trading

“…Subjects in one group are told that the other market participants were asked the same control questions, subjects in the other group are not told that all other participants got the same questions. Cheung, Hedegaard, and Palan (2014) find that markets in which subjects got an explicit reminder produce smaller bubbles and that subjects trade less in these markets.…”

“…Cheung, Hedegaard, and Palan (2014) explain bubbles in asset markets with the expectation that other market participants are less rational. Expecting more rationality in hybrid markets could discipline human traders and could be a cause for a different performance in the two types of markets.…”

“…Cheung, Hedegaard, and Palan (2014) manipulate the expectations subjects have about the rationality of other market participants. They ask all their subjects a large number of control questions on how a SSW market works and which trading strategies are rational.…”

Thinking Fast, Thinking Badly

“…While scores in the CRT have been related to risk preferences or behavioral biases (Frederick, 2005;Oechssler et al, 2009;Bergman et al, 2010;Hoppe and Kusterer, 2011;Cheung et al, 2014;Brañas-Garza et al, 2012;Andersson et al, 2016), we are not aware of any paper that directly tests the implicit assumption that the CRT measures the tendency to override an intuitive and spontaneous response that is incorrect and to engage in further reflection that leads to giving the correct response. More precisely, we lack evidence about the construct validity of the CRT showing that quick responses to the CRT are likely to be incorrect, while correct answers take longer.…”