An Empirical Analysis of Overconfidence and Anchoring Biases in Investment Decision-Making

Behavioural finance has emerged as an important field of study by recognizing that investment decisions are not always based on rational analysis but are frequently influenced by psychological biases. Among these biases, overconfidence and anchoring significantly affect investors' judgment, risk perception, and portfolio decisions. The present study empirically examines the influence of overconfidence and anchoring biases on investment decision-making among retail investors in Belagavi city. The study adopts a descriptive and exploratory research design and utilizes both primary and secondary data. Primary data were collected through a structured questionnaire administered to retail investors using a random sampling technique. Out of 70 responses collected, 56 valid questionnaires were used for analysis after excluding incomplete responses. Descriptive statistical tools, including frequency, percentage, mean, and standard deviation, were employed to analyse the data.
The demographic profile indicates that the majority of respondents were male, young, well-educated, and belonged to low- and middle-income groups. The findings reveal that respondents exhibit a moderate level of overconfidence bias, with mean scores ranging from 3.13 to 3.80. Investors expressed strong confidence in the correctness of their investment decisions and showed a considerable tendency to rely on their own judgment while investing. The analysis also indicates a moderately high level of anchoring bias, with mean scores ranging from 3.39 to 3.89. Most respondents compared current market prices with purchase prices before selling investments and relied heavily on historical price trends and previous market information while making investment decisions. A comparative analysis suggests that anchoring bias is relatively more pronounced than overconfidence bias among the respondents. The study concludes that psychological biases substantially influence retail investors' decision-making and may lead to irrational investment behaviour, excessive trading, delayed selling decisions, and suboptimal portfolio performance. The findings highlight the need for behavioural finance education, investor awareness programmes, and objective investment strategies to minimize the adverse effects of cognitive biases and promote rational investment decision-making.

Overconfidence Bias, Anchoring Bias, Decision Making

1. Agrawal, S., Sharma, R., & Gupta, P. (2024). Behavioral biases and investment decision-making among young investors. Journal of Behavioral Finance, 25(1), 45–60. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Baker, H. K., & Nofsinger, J. R. (2010). Behavioral finance: Investors, corporations, and markets. John Wiley & Sons. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Baker, H. K., & Ricciardi, V. (2014). How biases affect investor behaviour. The European Financial Review, 5(2), 7–10. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Barber, B. M., & Odean, T. (2001). Boys will be boys: Gender, overconfidence, and common stock investment. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 116(1), 261–292. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. https://doi.org/10.1162/003355301556400 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Barberis, N., & Thaler, R. H. (2003). A survey of behavioral finance. In G. M. Constantinides, M. Harris, & R. M. Stulz (Eds.), Handbook of the Economics of Finance (Vol. 1, pp. 1053–1128). Elsevier. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Boda, J. R., & Sunitha, G. (2018). Investor's psychology in investment decision making: A behavioral finance approach. International Journal of Pure and Applied Mathematics, 119(7), 1253–1261. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Campbell, S. D., & Sharpe, S. A. (2009). Anchoring bias in consensus forecasts and its effect on market prices. Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, 44(2), 369–390. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0022109009090127 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Chandra, A. (2008). Decision making in the stock market: Incorporating psychology with finance. National Conference on Forecasting Financial Markets of India. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Fama, E. F. (1970). Efficient capital markets: A review of theory and empirical work. The Journal of Finance, 25(2), 383–417. https://doi.org/10.2307/2325486 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Gervais, S., & Odean, T. (2001). Learning to be overconfident. The Review of Financial Studies, 14(1), 1–27. https://doi.org/10.1093/rfs/14.1.1 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. George, T. J., & Hwang, C. Y. (2004). The 52-week high and momentum investing. The Journal of Finance, 59(5), 2145–2176. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6261.2004.00695.x [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Glaser, M., & Weber, M. (2007). Overconfidence and trading volume. The Geneva Risk and Insurance Review, 32(1), 1–36. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10713-007-0003-3 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. Jensen, M. C. (1978). Some anomalous evidence regarding market efficiency. Journal of Financial Economics, 6(2–3), 95–101. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1974). Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Science, 185(4157), 1124–1131. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.185.4157.1124 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1979). Prospect theory: An analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica, 47(2), 263–291. https://doi.org/10.2307/1914185 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Kaustia, M., Alho, E., & Puttonen, V. (2008). How much does expertise reduce behavioral biases? The case of anchoring effects in stock return estimates. Financial Management, 37(3), 391–412. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Kudryavtsev, A., Cohen, G., & Hon-Snir, S. (2013). Rational or intuitive? The effect of behavioral biases on investors' decision-making. Journal of Behavioral Finance, 14(4), 296–305. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Kumar, S., & Goyal, N. (2015). Behavioural biases in investment decision making: A systematic literature review. Qualitative Research in Financial Markets, 7(1), 88–108. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. https://doi.org/10.1108/QRFM-07-2014-0022 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. Northcraft, G. B., & Neale, M. A. (1987). Experts, amateurs, and real estate: An anchoring-and-adjustment perspective on property pricing decisions. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 39(1), 84–97. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-5978(87)90046-X [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

23. Odean, T. (1998). Volume, volatility, price, and profit when all traders are above average. The Journal of Finance, 53(6), 1887–1934. https://doi.org/10.1111/0022-1082.00078 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

24. Pompian, M. M. (2017). Behavioral finance and wealth management: Practical applications of behavioral finance to wealth management (2nd ed.). John Wiley & Sons. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

25. Shefrin, H. (2001). Behavioral corporate finance. McGraw-Hill. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

26. Simon, H. A. (1957). Models of man: Social and rational. John Wiley & Sons. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

27. Statman, M., Thorley, S., & Vorkink, K. (2006). Investor overconfidence and trading volume. The Review of Financial Studies, 19(4), 1531–1565. https://doi.org/10.1093/rfs/hhj032 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• Employee Suggestion Schemes as a Driver of Innovation and Value Creation in Organizations
• Profitability, Growth and Market Valuation of Leading Pharmaceutical Companies in India: A Comparative Financial Analysis
• Problems and Prospects of Sale Employees of Non-Banking Financial Companies
• Core Temperature Estimation and Thermal Management of Lithium-Ion Batteries Using a Nonlinear Adaptive Extended Kalman Filter
• A Conceptual Analysis of How Sustainable Public Procurement Practices Influence Value for Money in Developing Economies