Can anchoring explain biased forecasts? Experimental evidence

Lukas Meub and Till Proeger

Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance, 2016, vol. 12, issue C, 1-13

Abstract: Biased forecasts, particularly the inadequate adjustment from current values and excessive clustering, are increasingly explained as resulting from anchoring. However, experiments presented in support of this interpretation lack economic conditions, particularly monetary incentives, feedback for learning effects and an optimal strategy of unbiased predictions. In a novel forecasting experiment, we find monetary incentives to reduce anchoring for simple forecasting tasks only, while higher task complexity and risk increase the bias in spite of incentives for accuracy. Anchors ubiquitously reduce the forecasts’ variance, while individual cognitive abilities and learning effects show debiasing effects only in some conditions. Our results emphasize that biased forecasts and their specific variance can result from anchoring.

Keywords: Anchoring; Cognitive abilities; Forecasting; Heuristics and biases; Incentives; Laboratory experiment (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: C90 D03 D80 G17 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2016
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (7)

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214635016300296

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:eee:beexfi:v:12:y:2016:i:c:p:1-13

DOI: 10.1016/j.jbef.2016.08.001

Access Statistics for this article

Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance is currently edited by Michael Dowling and Jürgen Huber

More articles in Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Finance from Elsevier
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Catherine Liu ().