No abstract

Previous research shows that individuals make systematic errors when judging exponential growth, which has harmful effects for their financial well-being. This study analyzes how far individuals are aware of their errors and how these errors are shaped by arithmetic and conceptual problems. Whereas arithmetic problems could be overcome using computational assistance like a pocket calculator, this is not the case for conceptual problems, a term we use to subsume other error drivers like a general misunderstanding of exponential growth or overwhelming task complexity. In an incentivized experiment, we find that participants strongly overestimate the accuracy of their intuitive judgment. At the same time, their willingness to pay for arithmetic assistance is too high on average, often much above the actual benefits a calculator provides. Using a multitier system of task complexity we can show that the willingness to pay for arithmetic assistance is hardly related to its benefits, indicating that participants do not really understand how the interplay of arithmetic and conceptual problems shape their errors in exponential growth tasks. Our findings are relevant for policymaking and financial advisory practice and can help to design effective approaches to mitigate the detrimental effects of misperceived exponential growth.

No abstract

No abstract

We apply a machine-learning algorithm, calibrated using general human vision, to predict the visual salience of prices of stock price charts. We hypothesize that the visual salience of adjacent prices increases the decision weights on returns computed from those prices. We analyze the inferred impact of these weights in two experimental studies that use either historical price charts or simpler artificial sequences. We find that decision weights derived from visual salience are associated with experimental investments. The predictability is not subsumed by statistical features and goes beyond established models.