Cited by 11Decision-Making and Behavioral EconomicsFinancial Literacy, Pension, Retirement AnalysisExperimental Behavioral Economics Studies

Hidden Skewness: On the Difficulty of Multiplicative Compounding Under Random Shocks

Ensthaler, Ludwig, Nottmeyer, Olga, Weizsäcker, Georg, Zankiewicz, Christian·2018·Management Science

Abstract

Multiplicative growth processes that are subject to random shocks often have an asymmetric distribution of outcomes. In a series of incentivized laboratory experiments, we show that a large majority of participants either strongly underestimate the asymmetry or ignore it completely. Participants misperceive the spread of the outcome distribution to be too narrowband, and they estimate the median and the mode to lie too close to the center of the distribution, failing to account for the compound nature of average growth. The observed biases are measured irrespective to risk preferences and they appear under a variety of conditions. The biases are largely consistent with a behavioral model in which geometric growth is confused with linear growth. This confusion is a possible driver of investors’ difficulties with real-world financial products like leveraged exchange-traded funds and retirement savings plans. Data and the online appendix are available at https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.2016.2618 . This paper was accepted by Teck-Hua Ho, behavioral economics.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1287/mnsc.2016.2618

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Ensthaler, L., Nottmeyer, O., Weizsäcker, G., & Zankiewicz, C.
Affiliations
  • WZB Berlin Social Science Center (DE)
  • IZA - Institute of Labor Economics (DE)
  • German Institute for Economic Research (DE)
Venue
Management Science
Published
2018-04
Volume
64
Issue
4
Pages
1693-1706
ISSN
  • 0025-1909 (ISSN-L)
  • 1526-5501
OpenAlex
W3022193740
Cited by
11
References
1
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 3 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 1
FWCI
1.07
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Management Science (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • University College London
  • Technische Universität Berlin
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › General Decision Sciences › Decision-Making and Behavioral Economics
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Accounting › Financial Literacy, Pension, Retirement Analysis
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Experimental Behavioral Economics Studies
Keywords
random shocks, skewness, geometric growth, compound growth, investor decision-making, leveraged ETFs, retirement savings, behavioral finance

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review