Tuesday, January 8, 2013

The Reason We Lose at Games... or the Market

From Phys.org, Very interesting stuff. It is just another piece of evidence that the market is not as efficient as some profess it to be. At least not in the sense that prices fully, rationally, and unbiasedly reflect available information.

This research could also have implications for the financial markets. Many economists base financial predictions of the stock market on theory – assuming that traders are infinitely intelligent and rational.

This, the academics argue, is rarely the case and could lead to predictions of how markets react being wildly inaccurate.
Much of traditional game theory, the basis for strategic decision-making, is based on the equilibrium point – players or workers having a deep and perfect knowledge of what they are doing and of what their opponents are doing.

Dr Galla, from the School of Physics and Astronomy, said: "Equilibrium is not always the right thing you should look for in a game."

"In many situations, people do not play equilibrium strategies, instead what they do can look like random or chaotic for a variety of reasons, so it is not always appropriate to base predictions on the equilibrium model."
"With trading on the , for example, you can have thousands of different stock to choose from, and people do not always behave rationally in these situations or they do not have sufficient information to act rationally. This can have a profound effect on how the markets react."

And the research paper
Game Theory Behavioral Finance

No comments:

Post a Comment