Dynamic Trading with Reference Point Adaptation and Loss Aversion

References

• Ackert LF, Charupat N, Church BK, Deaves R (2006) An experimental examination of the house money effect in a multi-period setting. Experiment. Econom. 9(1):5–16.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Arkes HR, Hirshleifer D, Jiang D, Lim S (2008) Reference point adaptation: Tests in the domain of security trading. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes 105(1):67–81.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Arkes HR, Hirshleifer D, Jiang D, Lim S (2010) A cross-cultural study of reference point adaptation: Evidence from China, Korea, and the us. Organ. Behav. Human Decision Processes 112(2):99–111.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Barberis N, Huang M (2001) Mental accounting, loss aversion, and individual stock returns. J. Finance 56(4):1247–1292.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Barberis N, Xiong W (2009) What drives the disposition effect? An analysis of a long-standing preference-based explanation. J. Finance 64(2):751–784.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Barberis N, Xiong W (2012) Realization utility. J. Financial Econom. 104(2):251–271.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Barberis N, Huang M, Santos T (2001) Prospect theory and asset prices. Quart. J. Econom. 116(1):1–53.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Baucells M, Weber M, Welfens F (2011) Reference-point formation and updating. Management Sci. 57(3):506–519.Link, Google Scholar
• Berkelaar AB, Kouwenberg R, Post T (2004) Optimal portfolio choice under loss aversion. Rev. Econom. Statist. 86(4):973–987.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Bernard C, Ghossoub M (2010) Static portfolio choice under cumulative prospect theory. Math. Financial Econom. 2(4):277–306.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Černý A, Kallsen J (2009) Hedging by sequential regressions revisited. Math. Finance 19(4):591–617.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Chiyachantana CN, Yang Z (2010) Reference point adaptation and disposition effect: Evidence from institutional trading. Technical report.Google Scholar
• De Giorgi EG, Post T (2011) Loss aversion with a state-dependent reference point. Management Sci. 57(6):1094–1110.Link, Google Scholar
• Gneezy U (2005) Updating the reference level: Experimental evidence. Experimental Business Research (Springer), 263–284.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Gomes FJ (2005) Portfolio choice and trading volume with loss-averse investors. J. Bus. 78(2):675–706.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Grinblatt M, Keloharju M (2001) What makes investors trade? J. Finance 56(2):589–616.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hardie BGS, Johnson EJ, Fader PS (1993) Modeling loss aversion and reference dependence effects on brand choice. Marketing Sci. 12(4):378–394.Link, Google Scholar
• He XD, Zhou XY (2011) Portfolio choice under cumulative prospect theory: An analytical treatment. Management Sci. 57(2):315–331.Link, Google Scholar
• He XD, Zhou XY (2014) Myopic loss aversion, reference point, and money illusion. Quant. Finance 14(9):1541–1554.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Hens T, Vlcek M (2011) Does prospect theory explain the disposition effect? J. Behavioral Finance 12(3):141–157.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Ingersoll JE, Jin LJ (2013) Realization utility with reference-dependent preferences. Rev. Financial Stud. 26(3):723–767.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Jin H, Zhou XY (2008) Behavioral portfolio selection in continuous time. Math. Finance 18(3):385–426.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kahneman D (2003) Experienced utility and objective happiness: A moment-based approach. Psych. Econom. Decisions 1:187–208.Google Scholar
• Kahneman D, Tversky A (1979) Prospect theory: An analysis of decisions under risk. Econometrica 47(2):263–292.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kahneman D, Wakker PP, Sarin R (1997) Back to bentham? Exolorations of experienced utility. Quart. J. Econom. 112(2):375–406.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Karlsson N, Loewenstein G, Seppi D (2009) The ostrich effect: Selective attention to information. J. Risk and Uncertainty 38(2):95–115.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kaustia M (2010) Prospect theory and the disposition effect. J. Financial Quant. Anal. 45(03):791–812.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kőszegi B, Rabin M (2006) A model of reference-dependent preferences. Quart. J. Econom. 121(4):1133–1165.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kőszegi B, Rabin M (2007) Reference-dependent risk attitudes. Amer. Econom. Rev. 97(4):1047–1073.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Kőszegi B, Rabin M (2009) Reference-dependent consumption plans. Amer. Econom. Rev. 99(3):909–936.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Mazumdar T, Raj SP, Sinha I (2005) Reference price research: Review and propositions. J. Marketing 69(4):84–102.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Meng J (2010) The disposition effect and expectations as reference point. Working paper, Peking University, Beijing.Google Scholar
• Odean T (1998) Are investors reluctant to realize their losses? J. Finance 53(5):1775–1798.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Pagel M (2012) Expectations-based reference-dependent preferences and asset pricing. Working paper, University of California, Berkeley, CA.Google Scholar
• Pagel M (2013) A news-utility theory for inattention and rebalancing in portfolio choice. Working paper, University of California, Berkeley, CA.Google Scholar
• Segal U, Spivak A (1990) First oder versus second order risk aversion. J. Econom. Theory 51:111–125.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Staw BM (1976) Knee-deep in the big muddy: A study of escalating commitment to a chosen course of action. Organ. Behav. Human Performance 16(1):27–44.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Thaler RH, Johnson EJ (1990) Gambling with the house money and trying to break even: The effects of prior outcomes on risky choice. Management Sci. 36(6):643–660.Link, Google Scholar
• Tversky A, Kahneman D (1992) Advances in prospect theory: Cumulative representation of uncertainty. J. Risk and Uncertainty 5(4):297–323.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Weber M, Zuchel H (2005) How do prior outcomes affect risk attitude? Comparing escalation of commitment and the house-money effect. Decision Anal. 2(1):30–43.Link, Google Scholar
• Yao J, Li D (2013) Prospect theory and trading patterns. J. Banking and Finance 37(8):2793–2805.Crossref, Google Scholar
• Zhou JD (2011) Reference dependence and market competition. J. Econom. Management Strategy 20(4):1073–1097.Crossref, Google Scholar