Experimental Economics

, Volume 19, Issue 2, pp 394–411 | Cite as

The influence of investment experience on market prices: laboratory evidence

  • Jürgen Huber
  • Michael Kirchler
  • Thomas StöcklEmail author
Original Paper


We run laboratory experiments to analyze the impact of prior investment experience on price efficiency in asset markets. Before subjects enter the asset market they gain either no, positive, or negative investment experience in an investment game. To get a comprehensive picture about the role of experience we implement two asset market designs. One is prone to inefficient pricing, exhibiting bubble and crash patterns, while the other exhibits efficient pricing. We find that (i) both, positive and negative, experience gained in the investment game lead to efficient pricing in both market settings. Further, we show that (ii) the experience effect dominates potential effects triggered by positive and negative sentiment generated by the investment game. We conjecture that experiencing changing price paths in the investment game can create a higher sensibility on changing fundamentals (through higher salience) among subjects in the subsequently run asset market.


Experimental finance Asset market Bubble Mispricing Information Experience 

JEL Classification

C92 D84 G10 



We thank Charles Noussair (the Editor) and two referees for their very constructive and helpful comments. We thank participants of SAET 2011 and Experimental Finance 2011 for helpful comments. Financial support by the Austrian National Bank (OeNB-Grants 12789 and 14953), the Austrian Science Foundation (FWF-Grants 20609 22400, START-Grant Y617-G11), and the University of Innsbruck (Nachwuchsförderung Stöckl) is gratefully acknowledged.

Supplementary material

10683_2015_9445_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (524 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (pdf 524 KB)


  1. Abdellaoui, M., Bleichrodt, H., & Kammoun, H. (2013). Do financial professionals behave according to prospect theory? An experimental study. Theory and Decision, 74, 411–429.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Andrade, E., Odean, T., & Lin, S. (2012). Bubbling with excitement: An experiment. Working Paper.Google Scholar
  3. Bradley, M., & Lang, P. J. (1994). The self-assessment manikin and the semantic differential. Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychiatry, 25(1), 49–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Breaban, A., Noussair, C. N. (2013). Emotional state and market behavior. Working paper.Google Scholar
  5. Cheung, S. L., Hedegaard, M., & Palan, S. (2014). To see is to believe—common expectations in experimental asset markets. European Economic Review, 66, 84–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Chiang, Y.-M., Hirshleifer, D., Qian, Y., & Sherman, A. E. (2011). Do investors learn from experience? Evidence from frequent ipo investors. The Review of Financial Studies, 24(5), 1560–1589.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Corgnet, B., Kujal, P., & Porter, D. (2010). The effect of reliability, content and timing of public announcements on asset trading behavior. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization, 76(2), 254–266.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Dufwenberg, M., Lindqvist, T., & Moore, E. (2005). Bubbles and experience: An experiment. The American Economic Review, 95(5), 1731–1737.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Edmans, A., Garcia, D., & Norli, O. (2007). Sports sentiment and stock returns. The Journal of Finance, 62(4), 1967–1998.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Feng, L., & Seasholes, M. S. (2005). Do investor sophistication and trading experience eliminate behavioral biases in financial markets? Review of Finance, 9, 305–351.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Fischbacher, U. (2007). z-tree: Zurich toolbox for ready-made economic experiments. Experimental Economics, 10(2), 171–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Gong, B., Lei, V., & Pan, D. (2013). Before and after: The impact of a real bubble crash on investors’ trading behavior in the lab. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 95, 186–196.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Greenwood, R., & Nagel, S. (2009). Inexperienced investors and bubbles. Journal of Financial Economics, 93, 239–258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Greiner, B. (2004). Forschung und wissenschaftliches Rechnen 2003, An online recruitment system for economic experiments. GWDG Bericht 63. Gesellschaft fuer Wissenschaftliche Datenverarbeitung, Goettingen, pp. 79–93.Google Scholar
  15. Haigh, M. S., & List, J. A. (2005). Do professional traders exhibit myopic loss aversion? An experimental analysis. The Journal of Finance, 60, 523–534.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Haruvy, E., Lahav, Y., & Noussair, C. (2007). Traders’ expectations in asset markets: Experimental evidence. The American Economic Review, 97(5), 1901–1920.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Hirshleifer, D. (2001). Investor psychology and asset pricing. The Journal of Finance, 56, 1533–1597.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hirshleifer, D., & Shumway, T. (2003). Good day sunshine: Stock returns and the weather. Journal of Finance, 58, 1009–1032.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Huber, J., & Kirchler, M. (2012). The impact of instructions and procedure on reducing confusion and bubbles in experimental asset market. Experimental Economics, 15, 89–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hussam, R. N., Porter, D., & Smith, V. L. (2008). Thar she blows: Can bubbles be rekindled with experienced subjects? The American Economic Review, 98(3), 924–937.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Izard, C. (1991). The psychology of emotions. New York: Plenum Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kaustia, M., & Knüpfer, S. (2008). Do investors overweight personal experience? Evidence from ipo subscriptions. The Journal of Finance, 63(6), 2679–2702.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Kindleberger, C. P. (2011). Manias, panics, and crashes: A history of financial crises (6th ed.). New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  24. Kirchler, M., Huber, J., & Stöckl, T. (2012). Thar she bursts—reducing confusion reduces bubbles. The American Economic Review, 102(2), 865–883.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Lakonishok, J., & Smidt, S. (1988). Are seasonal anomalies real? A ninety- year perspective. Review of Financial Studies, 1(4), 403–425.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Lei, V., & Vesely, F. (2009). Market efficiency: Evidence from a no-bubble asset market experiment. Pacific Economic Review, 14(2), 246–258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Lejarraga, T. (2010). When experience is better than description: Time delays and complexity. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making, 23, 100–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. List, J. A. (2003). Does market experience eliminate market anomalies? The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 118(1), 41–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Loewenstein, G., & Lerner, J. S. (2003). The role of affect in decision making. In R. J. Davidson, K. R. Scherer, & H. Goldsmith (Eds.), Handbook of affective science. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  30. Lohrenz, T., McCabe, K., Camerer, C. F., & Montague, R. (2007). Neural signature of fictive learning signals in a sequential investment task. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science, 104(22), 9493–9498.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Malmendier, U., & Nagel, S. (2011). Depression babies: Do macroeconomic experiences affect risk taking? The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 126, 373–416. doi: 10.1093/qje/qjq004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Nguyen, Y., & Noussair, C. N. (2014). Risk aversion and emotions. Pacific Economic Review, 19, 296–312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Noussair, C. N., Robin, S., & Ruffieux, B. (2001). Price bubbles in laboratory asset markets with constant fundamental values. Experimental Economics, 4, 87–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Palan, S. (2013). A review of bubbles and crashes in experimental asset markets. Journal of Economic Surveys, 27(3), 570–588.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Shapira, Z., & Venezia, I. (2001). Patterns of behavior of professionally managed and independent investors. Journal of Banking & Finance, 25, 1573–1587.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Shiller, R. J. (2000). Irrational exuberance. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  37. Smith, V. L., Suchanek, G. L., & Williams, A. W. (1988). Bubbles, crashes, and endogenous expectations in experimental spot asset markets. Econometrica, 56(5), 1119–1151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Stöckl, T., Huber, J., & Kirchler, M. (2015). Multi-period experimental asset markets with distinct fundamental value regimes. Experimental Economics, 18, 314–334. doi: 10.1007/s10683-014-9404-1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Stöckl, T., Huber, J., & Kirchler, M. (2010). Bubble measures in experimental asset markets. Experimental Economics, 13, 284–298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Sutter, M., Huber, J., & Kirchler, M. (2012). Bubbles and information: An experiment. Management Science, 58, 384–393.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Van Boening, M. V., Williams, A. W., & LaMaster, S. (1993). Price bubbles and crashes in experimental call markets. Economics Letters, 41(2), 179–185.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Van den Steen, E. (2004). Rational overoptimism (and other biases). American Economic Review, 94, 1141–1151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Weinstein, N. (1980). Unrealistic optimism about future life events. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39, 806–820.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Economic Science Association 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jürgen Huber
    • 1
  • Michael Kirchler
    • 1
    • 2
  • Thomas Stöckl
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Department of Banking and FinanceInnsbruck University School of ManagementInnsbruckAustria
  2. 2.Centre for FinanceUniversity of GothenburgGothenburgSweden

Personalised recommendations