EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This research explores the complex field of behavioral finance, concentrating on individual investors'
cognitive capacities and how this affects investing decision-making. The study specifically looks into
the impact of social media on investing behaviors in addition to four major factors: familiarity bias,
disposition effect, loss aversion, and herding bias. The main goal was to evaluate how these cognitive
biases affect Indian investors and how they contribute to portfolio imbalances.

Important conclusions about the alignment of Indian investors with behavioral finance theories were
obtained using a thorough examination of survey data and behavioral patterns. According to the study, a
significant percentage of investors have herding bias tendencies, meaning they usually follow popular
investment ideas or market trends without doing their research. The disposition effect was also common,
which caused investors to hang onto unsuccessful investments for longer than winning ones, which
affected the performance of the portfolio.

Among Indian investors, loss aversion—a well-researched cognitive bias—was particularly effective,
encouraging risk-averse behaviors and an unwillingness to accept losses, even when doing so may result
in rewards. Similarly, investors' predilection for well-known assets or businesses, which frequently
results in concentrated portfolios and the disregard of diversification principles, was a major factor in
familiarity bias.

The study also demonstrated how social media platforms are increasingly impacting investment
decisions and how investors are prone to biases brought about by online information and market
sentiment. This influence frequently encouraged investors to follow the herd, enhancing cognitive biases
and causing imbalances in the portfolio.

All things considered, the results highlight the necessity of behavioral interventions, investor education,
and improved risk management techniques designed to counteract the common cognitive biases among
Indian investors. In dynamic market situations, investors can work toward balanced portfolios,
optimized risk-return profiles, and long-term financial success by raising knowledge, encouraging
rational decision-making frameworks, and using technology responsibly.

1
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Topic Page Number

Acknowledgment 4
Executive Summary 5
Abstract 7
Chapter 1: Introduction 8
Chapter 2: Literature Review 13
Chapter 3: Research Methodology 16
Chapter 4: Data Analysis 19
Chapter 5: Conclusion, Findings, and Implications 40
Chapter 6: Recommendations 42
Bibliography 44
Appendix: Questionnaire 47

2
 ABSTRACT

While the study of finance dates back thousands of years, behavioral finance is a relatively recent field

that looks at how individuals behave in the financial industry. Behavioral finance theories have their

roots in psychology and aim to comprehend how the emotions and cognitive errors of individual

investors impact their actions.

Finding out how much behavioral characteristics affected the stocks that individual investors chose from

the stock market was the aim of this study. Finding out how much behavioral influences affected the

stocks that individual investors bought in the stock market was its main objective. To accomplish the

objectives of the research, a descriptive survey methodology was chosen.

This study looks into how investors make decisions in the financial markets from a cognitive and

decision-making perspective. Gaining a thorough knowledge of how different cognitive aspects affect

investment decisions, risk management, and overall portfolio performance is the main goal. The study

takes a multidisciplinary approach to examine the cognitive components of investor behavior,

incorporating insights from psychology, economics, and finance.

The study aims to show that cognitive skills are closely related to investing performance. Higher

cognitive ability investors are more likely to make wise financial choices, such as diversifying their

portfolios and making long-term investments. Additionally, they are less prone to exhibit behavioral

biases like herd behavior, loss aversion, and disposition effects.

3
 CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION

Classical finance theory asserts that investors consistently make rational decisions grounded in complete

information, while behavioral finance argues that investors are swayed by their emotions, biases, and

cognitive constraints (Almansour, 2017). Contemporary finance theory and behavioral finance theory

engage in ongoing discussions regarding the impact of non-financial elements on stock prices. Modern

finance theory posits that the stock market operates efficiently, with prices reflecting all accessible

information accurately. In contrast, behavioral finance theory contends that psychological and emotional

dynamics can influence stock prices (Almansour B. Y., 2015). Studies have revealed that an extensive

array of factors within behavioral finance, such as emotional and cognitive biases, social influences,

perceptions of risk, personality traits, and risk perceptions, play a significant role in shaping investment

decisions (Ahmad, 2022). Some studies have examined the impact of these factors on investing

decisions and found that it would lead to less-than-ideal choices (Goswami, 2020), (Kartini, 2021).

A branch of behavioral economics known as "behavioral finance" states that humans are irrational as

classical finance theory suggests when it comes to making financial decisions, like investing. Curious

about how biases and emotions affect stock prices? Investors may find some behavioral finance offers

fascinating descriptions and explanations.

According to various researchers (Barber, 2008), investors act irrationally, despite the assumption made

by conventional theories of finance that people are rational investors (Baker, 2013) When making

investment decisions, people consider all available information. Researchers who focus on the selection

of specific stocks, such as (Barber B. a., 2001), highlight behavioral flaws in investors' financial

decisions. Numerous studies demonstrate that investors have a tendency to make poor investing

judgments, which leads to subpar investment outcomes. According to (Yoong, 2013), behavioral finance

suggests that investors may exhibit emotional and psychological responses that deviate from rational

4
behavior. Behavioral biases are the propensity for people to make poor investing decisions as a result of

mental illness.

When it comes to investing, investors have a risk-averse perspective, choosing a degree of risk

inclination, perception, and propensity that is smoother and more stable (Wildavsky, 1990) An investor's

perception of risk is dynamic and subject to vary depending on the circumstances, whereas their attitude

towards risk tends to remain constant. A greater perception of risk results in more frequent transactions

and lower stock market investment. Market participants often exhibit herding behavior as a result of a

low-risk perception, which hurts their investing decisions (Madaan, 2019).

The notion that psychological factors influence fluctuations in the stock market goes against established

theories supporting the effectiveness of financial markets. For example, Supporters of the Efficient

Market Hypothesis (EMH) argue that the market efficiently incorporates new information relevant to a

company's value, leading to swift pricing adjustments. Consequently, future price movements become

unpredictable, as both public and private information have already been assimilated into current prices.

Human psychology is rife with biases (Hoffmann, 2010). Among these biases are the overconfidence

that investors show in their forecasts, the disposition that makes them more likely to hold losing stocks

and sell winning ones, the risk aversion of individual investors, and the herd mentality of investors.

Numerous studies also attempt to shed light on investor behavior by taking into account several factors

in addition to investors' prejudices.

However, the efficient market theory is difficult for many who experienced the Internet bubble and the

subsequent crash to accept. Behaviorists clarify that illogical behavior is not unusual; rather, it is the

norm. Using relatively basic tests, researchers have consistently replicated instances of illogical conduct

outside of the finance industry. "Saying that financial wellness influences mental and physical health

and vice versa is an understatement. "It's just a cycle that occurs," stated Dr. Carolyn McClanahan, Life
5
Planning Partners Inc.'s founder and director of financial planning. "People who are experiencing

financial stress release hormones known as catecholamines. I believe that people are aware of

substances like adrenaline and similar things. People have probably heard of substances that can set your

entire body on fire, like adrenaline. It consequently has an impact on your mental well-being and

cognitive capacity. It impairs your physical well-being, exhausts you, and prevents you from falling

asleep. When you're unable to sleep, you start acting out to cope.

This is an illustration of an experiment: Offer someone the potential to win $100 if a coin is flipped, a

guaranteed $50, or nothing at all. They'll probably hold onto the sure thing for themselves. Conversely,

provide the choice between, 1) a $50 guaranteed loss, or 2) a $100 loss, or nothing at all, contingent on

the result of a coin flip. Rather than incur a $50 loss, the individual will probably select the second

option and flip the coin. This is known as loss aversion.

Many will decide to toss the coin rather than flip it, even though there is an identical chance that it will

land on one side or the other in every scenario, even if flipping it could result in an even greater loss of

$100. This is a result of the widespread perception that the possibility of diminished recovery is greater

than the possibility of enhanced gain.

Investors should prioritize avoiding losses at all costs. Think about the Nortel Networks investors whose

shares suffered a precipitous drop in value from over $100 in the early years of 2000 to less than $2 a

few years later. No matter how low the price goes, investors usually choose to keep their stocks rather

than go through the anguish of suffering a loss because they believe that the price will eventually

increase again.

Here are some key concepts and principles in behavioral finance:

i) Bounded Rationality: Due to cognitive constraints, humans are unable to properly digest

information and make rational decisions. Instead, people make difficult decisions simpler by

using heuristics, or mental shortcuts.

6
ii) Emotions and Biases: Decisions can be skewed by emotions like fear, greed, or

overconfidence. Common biases include confirmation bias, which is the propensity to look

for shreds of evidence to support pre-existing ideas, loss aversion, which is one of the

tendencies to favor avoiding losses over achieving similar benefits, and overconfidence in

one's talents.

iii) Herd Behavior: Individuals frequently imitate the behavior of others, particularly under hazy

or unclear circumstances. Due to investors' tendency to follow the herd and fail to adequately

evaluate information on their own, this can result in market trends and bubbles.

iv) Anchoring Bias: The purchasing price of a stock is one example of an arbitrary or irrelevant

reference point that investors may use to guide their actions. Decisions that are not ideal can

result from this anchoring effect, which can affect how values are perceived.

v) Prospect Theory: Daniel Kahneman and Amos Tversky proposed the prospect theory, which

holds that people generally evaluate potential benefits and losses concerning a reference

point, usually the status quo, and are surprisingly more sensitive to comparable losses than

the gains. This discrepancy could affect risk preferences and decision-making.

vi) Behavioral Biases: Many biases have been documented in the field of behavioral finance,

such as framing effects (different reactions to the same information presented in different

ways), availability bias (giving more weight to information that is easily accessible), and

self-attribution bias (attributing failures to outside factors and successes to skill).

vii) Limits to Arbitrage: Because arbitrage—the profitable exploitation of price differences—

requires logical investors to rectify mispricings, behavioral biases may endure in the

financial markets. Efficient market corrections may be thwarted by arbitrage restrictions,

such as transaction costs, restrictions on short sales, and behavioral biases among arbitragers.

Behavioral finance emphasizes the significance of comprehending and controlling human behavior

in investment decision-making by fusing ideas from behavioral economics and psychology to

present a more complex and realistic picture of the financial markets.

7
According to behavioral finance, individuals are inherently human even though they may not always

be rational. As a result, behavioral finance highlights the overall irrationality of investors and

highlights how fallible people may be in highly competitive marketplaces. Many assert that they are

not convinced by behavioral finance findings and note that methodology has an impact on long-term

anomalies that contradict the efficient market theory (Fama, 1988).

According to (Statman, 1999), investors frequently make certain mistakes, some of which are trivial

and others of which have deadly consequences. Investors risk severely damaging their money by

letting psychological bias and emotion influence their investment decisions. Due to these biases,

investors may take unacknowledged risks, encounter unexpected results, engage in unjustifiable

trading, and ultimately place the blame for negative events on others or themselves.

CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW

8
By the mid-1960s, the efficient market hypothesis had gained widespread recognition. Paul Samuelson

was the one who first made economists aware of Bachelier's findings. In 1965, Eugene Fama presented

his dissertation where he supported the concept of random walk hypothesis, while Samuelson

demonstrated a different version of the efficient market hypothesis. Later in 1970, Fama provided a brief

summary of the idea along with supportive evidence.

 (Bodie, 2009), Since the security prices are prone to change in reaction to new information, they

should account for all information that is currently openly available to the public. Because of

this, the price of securities that are in demand at any given moment ought to represent an

unbiased evaluation of all available data, including Investors must take into account the level of

risk associated with holding a security. In a market that is efficient in terms of information, the

expected returns that are implicit in the current price of a security should reflect the level of risk

associated with it. As a result, investors who purchase these securities at the efficient prices

should reasonably expect to earn a rate of return that is proportional to the perceived level of risk

associated with that particular stock.

The other scenario is that the inefficiencies of the security market are causing the stock price to

misreflect the new information. Potential causes include the investor's lack of access to new

information, their inability to interpret it correctly, the transaction cost of trading securities as a

barrier to free trading, restrictions on short sales, and, finally, the chance that they will be tricked

by the change in accounting principles.

 According to (Durand, 2013), investors who lack confidence tend to heed the advice of others.

According to research by (Ramadan, 2015), (Cakan, 2016), the Turkish Stock Market, and

Indian Stock Market, there is strong evidence of herd behavior in these markets. According to

Malik and Elahi (2014), investors' decisions are greatly impacted by herding bias.

 A theoretical model about the disposition of the gaining stock and the inclination to rely on the

assets that result in loss was developed by (Shefrin, 1985). According to (Kumar, 2015),
9
 investors are more likely to hold loss-making assets while attempting to sell appreciating stocks.

(Toma, 2015) also discovered that when making investing decisions, investors are predisposed to

disposition effects.

 Many studies attempt to link non-stock ownership to psychological variables and financial

education to explain the behavior of individual investors. One well-known example is Vissing-

Jorgensen's (2003) investigation into the possibility that money influences investors' rational

conduct beneficially. The findings indicate that "irrationality" and behavioral biases in stock

investment decline with household wealth. These results suggest that a potential reason why

many people do not own shares could be related to knowledge and transaction expenses

(Vissing-Jorgenssen, 2003).

 According to (Roth, 2014), men investors take on more risk, whereas female investors exhibit

risk aversion. According to (Statman M. , 2010), when making investing decisions,

knowledgeable portfolio managers are less likely to take a chance. It investigated how investing

decisions and risk perception are causally related. Previous research indicates that women are

less willing to take risks than men. Furthermore, research indicates that there is no correlation

between the assessed level of risk aversion and real behavior (Pinjisakikool, 2017).

Conclusion:

To sum up, this examination of the literature has shed light on the cognitive capacities of individual

investors, with a special emphasis on psychological concepts like loss aversion, herd mentality, and the

disposition effect. The aggregate influence of these behavioral biases on market dynamics and

investment decision-making is demonstrated by the reviewed studies. The prospect theory developed by

Kahneman and Tversky explains loss aversion bias, which highlights investors' propensity to

overestimate the pain of losses in comparison to gains. This tendency affects investors' risk choices and

trading behaviors. Herding behavior influences market trends and can result in pricing distortions. It is

typified by people imitating the acts of others under ambiguous circumstances. Shefrin and Statman's

10
study of the disposition effect illuminates investors' propensity to hang onto failing investments longer

than logical economic models anticipate, which affects portfolio performance.

Investors, financial experts, and legislators must be aware of these cognitive biases to create tactics that

reduce irrational decision-making, advance market efficiency, and improve overall investment results in

the financial markets. To expand on our knowledge and enhance decision-support resources in the field

of behavioral finance, future studies should carry out an investigation into these occurrences under

various market conditions and investor demographics.

CHAPTER 3: RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

11
The study, which intends to provide a collective, quantified investigation of the impact of the

relationship between investors' investing decisions and behavioral biases, has taken into consideration a

cross-sectional research approach. The study makes use of primary data because, in Lin's opinion

(2011), primary data more closely mimics investor behavior while making investment decisions than

secondary data. When gathering data, a survey-based approach has been taken into consideration. Only

a specific segment of the population is relevant in light of the research's goals.

Thus, information has been gathered and taken into consideration from "a relevant segment of the

population, but subjectively". The respondents in this study include those who make investments across

a variety of investment outlets. Individual investors from the Delhi-NCR area are also taken into account

as responses. The following are the reasons behind the region's selection:

1. Delhi has the highest per capita income in the country, three times that of the national average.

2. It also has a trading volume that exceeds 60% of the national average.

3. The general public in this region is capable of investing and is financially literate.

4. It was anticipated that 125 persons would participate. The survey management approach involved

sending the person questions via direct mail and the Internet. Out of those, 110 responses were obtained,

translating to about 88% response rate.

Purposeful sampling is employed to ensure that the sample aligns with the study's objectives and can

yield insightful findings. Researchers halt participant selection once data saturation is achieved,

indicating that further participants are unlikely to provide new or significant information. By carefully

selecting participants who closely align with the research topic, purposeful sampling enhances overall

research rigor, thereby increasing the credibility of both the data and findings. The study utilized a

questionnaire comprising twenty-four items to collect information on various factors influencing

investment decisions, categorized primarily into behavioral traits and demographic data.

A wide range of topics were covered in the section on demographic information, including gender, age,

experience, and education. There were questions regarding familiarity bias, disposition effect, herding,

risk perception, and loss aversion in the section on investment behavior determinants. Out of the twenty-
12
four questions, seventeen were specifically crafted to assess the behavioral factors impacting investment

decisions. These questions aimed to examine the emotional and psychological aspects that might sway

an investor's decision-making process.

1. Research Design:

a. Type of Study: To comprehend and characterize the cognitive capacities of individual

investors and their influence on investing decision-making, a descriptive research design is

selected. Observing and analyzing occurrences without changing factors, this kind of

research gave a thorough understanding of cognitive biases in investing behavior.

b. Research Approach: The method of choice is quantitative, emphasizing statistical analysis

and numerical data. To gather information on systematic investment decisions and cognitive

biases, surveys and tests are carried out.

2. Research Objectives:

a. Identifying Cognitive Biases: Finding common cognitive biases among individual investors

—like loss aversion, and the disposition effect—is the main goal. These biases have a big

impact on portfolio management techniques and investment decision-making.

b. Examining influences on decision-making: The study aims to explore how cognitive biases

affect the decision-making processes in investment. Understanding these factors enables us

to examine strategies for mitigating biases and improving the quality of decision outcomes.

c. Assessing Relationships: Evaluating the connections between risk aversion, financial

performance, and cognitive capacities is another goal. The patterns and correlations that

affect investors' overall financial results are revealed by this investigation.

3. Participants and Sampling:

a. Target Population: Individual investors with a range of demographic backgrounds—

including age, gender, income, education, and investment experience—are the study's target
13
 audience. This large sample size contributes to capturing a thorough picture of cognitive

biases across various investment groups.

b. Sampling Technique: The technique of stratified random sampling is utilized to guarantee

representation among different investor profiles. Stratification ensures that conclusions apply

to various investor categories and helps account for potential biases.

4. Data Collection:

a. Survey Instrument: Validated scales and items to measure cognitive biases (such as the

Herding Behavior Scale and the Loss Aversion Scale) are incorporated into a structured

questionnaire. In addition, the questionnaire asks about risk preferences, investment

behavior, financial literacy, and demographic data.

b. Variables: Financial objectives, investing behavior, risk tolerance, cognitive biases, and

demographic characteristics are all included in the data collection process (independent

variables). The research aims and hypotheses may be thoroughly analyzed thanks to this

extensive data set.

CHAPTER 4: DATA ANALYSIS

14
 a. Age Group: According to the survey shared with different investor profiles, the age group

18–25 had the largest number of respondents—54—almost 50% of all respondents. This age

group was followed by the age group 25–34, which accounted for over 28% of all responses.

Age Group Frequency

18-25 12

25-34 54

35-44 30

Above 44 14

Figure 3.1

b. Gender: As per the poll distributed along with various investor profiles, about half of the

participants were male. With more than 40% of all responses, females in this age bracket

came in second.

Gender Frequency

Female 43

Male 59

Prefer Not to Say 7

Other 1
15
 Figure 3.2

c. Marital Status: In the study distributed among various investor profiles, 55% of

respondents were single, and 42% were married.

Marital Status Frequency

Single 60

Married 46

Divorced 4

16
 Figure 3.3

d. Nature of Employment: Of the 110 people who completed the study, 61% were salaried

individuals, followed by 26% of self-employed.

Nature of Employment Frequency

Salaried 67

Student 15

Self-Employed 28

17
 Figure 3.4

e. Highest level of education: Of all those who completed the poll, 52, or 47% of the total,

were post-graduates, with a significant portion of respondents holding professional degrees

coming in second.

Education Level Frequency

10+2 8

Graduate 19

Post-Graduate 52

Professional 31

18
 Figure 3.5

f. Years of Investing Experience: Out of all the responses, 41% of investors were relatively

new to the market, with experience ranging from 0 to 2 years, followed by a range of 3 to 5

years. This information was used to determine the investor profile based on their level of

investing experience.

Investing Experience Frequency

0-2 45

3-5 30

6-8 25

Above 8 10

19
 Figure 3.6

g. Types of instruments you are most likely to invest in: Unsurprisingly, when asked which

investment choice they would prefer, nearly 70% of respondents said equity because it can

yield exceptional long-term returns.

Investment Options Frequency

Equity 75

G-Sec 25

Real Estate 8

Other 2

20
 Figure 3.7

h. Risk Perception: In the prior question on maximizing profits in the equities segment,

investors were asked about their degree of risk tolerance. The results showed that about 60%

of them were willing to accept a large amount of risk in exchange for possible gains.

Risk Tolerance Frequency

Modest Risk 30

Significant Risk 65

Minimal Risk 15

21
 Figure 3.8

i) Monthly Investment: When asked what percentage of their monthly income they generally

invested, 49% of the respondents said 10%–20%, which is a significant response.

Monthly Investment Frequency

Less than 10% 27

10%-20% 52

20%-30% 20

More than 30% 11

22
 Figure 3.9

j) Influence of social media: Not surprisingly, at least 70% of people fell into the category of

those who, in some way, are not influenced by social media and online forums for their

investment goals in the current context when social media has become a source for every

activity.

Social Media Influence Frequency

Yes, often 35

Yes, sometimes 40

No, rarely 19

No, never 16

23
 Figure 3.10

k) Herding Behavior: According to earlier research (cited in the literature review), the

countries where herding behavior is most commonly observed are Turkey and India. It

should come as no surprise, then, that 40% of respondents said they chose to follow the

majority response rather than carry out an in-depth investigation or consult experts.

Social Media Influence Frequency

Rely on gut feeling 18

Follow the majority option 47

Conduct a thorough research 20

Seeking advice 25

24
 Figure 3.11

l) Reaction to Sudden Declines: In response to questions regarding how they handle abrupt

drops in the value of the stocks in their portfolio, 48% of poll participants said they hang

onto their money and wait for a recovery.

Sudden Declines Frequency

Invest More 25

Hold onto them 52

Stop Investing 16

Sell Immediately 17

25
 Figure 3.12

m) Loss Aversion Bias: When asked if losing makes them feel worse than winning does, over

40% of respondents said that it is true. Of the 110 respondents, 38 agreed and 15 strongly

agreed with this statement, supporting the theory that loss aversion bias is highly observable

and well-founded.

Loss Aversion – I Frequency

Neutral 24

Agree 38

Disagree 30

Strongly Agree 15

Strongly Disagree 3

26
 Figure 3.13

n) Loss Aversion Bias: When asked if they sell their assets as soon as they start losing money

or hold onto them for too long in the hopes that they will increase, thirty percent of those

who filled out the questionnaire said they maintain their assets for too long.

Loss Aversion – II Frequency

Neutral 33

Agree 34

Disagree 25

Strongly Agree 9

Strongly Disagree 9

27
 Figure 3.14

o) Loss Aversion Bias: When considering what influences investors to sell their investments or

what prevents them from doing so, 48% of respondents said they were uncomfortable

accepting their losses, which is a significant contributor to a portfolio that is losing money.

Loss Aversion – III Frequency

Further Gains 17

Realizing Losses 52

Market Trends 36

Not Sure 5

28
 Figure 3.15

It is clear from doing a lot of study and analysis that people's decision-making is greatly influenced by

loss-averse behavior. The results repeatedly point to a common inclination among participants to place a

higher value on avoiding losses than on obtaining comparable benefits, which is in keeping with the

ideas put forward in prospect theory. This loss aversion bias shows up in a variety of settings,

influencing people's investing strategies, risk tolerance, and financial decisions in a range of

demographic scenarios.

Furthermore, loss aversion's widespread occurrence highlights how crucial it is to comprehend decision-

making and human behavior. Policymakers, financial advisers, and educators can create interventions,

strategies, and educational programs targeted at reducing the detrimental effects of biased decision-

making by taking into account the prevalence of loss aversion. Enhancing comprehension of loss

aversion and its consequences can help stakeholders promote logical and well-informed decision-

making, which will ultimately lead to better financial results and well-being for both individuals and

communities.

29
p) The Disposition Effect: When asked how they deal with assets whose prices have increased

too quickly, 40% of respondents said they sell their investments and turn a profit.

The Disposition Effect - I Frequency

Buy/Sell blatantly 15

Book Profits 45

Hold onto them 33

Invest in low-risk assets only 17

Figure 3.16

q) The Disposition Effect: When asked how they handle losing money on their investments,
46% of the respondents said they would stay invested in the hopes that its value will rise.

The Disposition Effect - II Frequency

Sell right away 16

30
 Remain Invested 49

Reassess 25

Purchase more 20

Figure 3.17

r) The Disposition Effect: To determine whether respondents would act similarly in the event

of a condition that would justify the disposition effect, a brief situation-based question was

asked of the respondents. Unsurprisingly, more than 50% of respondents indicated that they

would keep the investment that is losing money and sell the one whose value had increased.

The Disposition Effect - III Frequency

Sell the winner, hold the lose 35

Hold the loser, sell the win 56

Sell both 11

Retain both 8

31
 Figure 3.18

It is clear from a careful review and analysis of the information obtained from lengthy surveys that the

participants do, in fact, frequently and broadly follow the disposition effect. The results of the research

repeatedly show that people have a noticeable propensity to display the disposition effect in their

investing activities, which causes them to hang onto failing investments for a longer period than winning

ones. This phenomenon clarifies the psychological biases that affect financial market decision-making

and is in line with behavioral finance theories.

Moreover, the disposition effect's broad acceptance highlights how important it is in influencing

investment plans and portfolio management techniques. Investors, financial experts, and policymakers

can gain a better understanding of market behavior dynamics and devise methods to offset its negative

consequences by recognizing the prevalence of this behavioral bias. In the end, better financial results

and increased resilience in navigating turbulent market situations may result from initiatives to increase

awareness, offer education, and put behavioral interventions into practice. These measures may also

assist people in making more logical and educated investment decisions.

32
s) Familiarity Bias: When asked how they choose the companies they would want to invest in,

nearly 79% of the respondents said they either only invest in very reputable companies or

they are quite familiar with them.

Familiarity Bias Frequency

Invests in a reputable
60
business

Yes, often 21

Maybe 20

Rarely 9

Figure 3.19

t) Behavioral Finance: When asked how knowledgeable they are about

behavioral finance, if they use this methodology, etc., 50% of the respondents
stated they had some knowledge of it, and 20% had no idea what it was.

Behavioral Finance Frequency

33
 To some Extent 55

Familiar 30

No Idea 25

Figure 3.20

An extensive 22-point behavioral finance questionnaire has produced important new insights The study

delves into the complex interplay between investment decisions and cognitive processes. The intricate

interactions between psychological biases, behavior, and financial decision-making processes have been

made clear by this exhaustive analysis. The investigation reveals that cognitive biases have a noteworthy

influence on investment behaviors, affecting individuals' perceptions, assessments, and actions about

investment opportunities.

Out of all the cognitive biases that have been studied, a few stand out as having a particularly big impact

on how people make investing decisions in the complicated financial environment of today. Herd

mentality, in which people follow the herd without doing their research, is still a common occurrence

that affects investor attitudes and market dynamics. Parallel to this, familiarity bias causes investors to

favor well-known stocks or businesses, frequently ignoring diversification guidelines and subjecting

34
portfolios to concentrated risks. The disposition effect is a phenomenon that can cause a portfolio's

performance to be skewed over time. It is typified by an inclination To retain losing investments over an

extended period while swiftly selling winning ones.

It is impossible to overstate the growing impact of social media platforms on the dissemination of

financial information and the construction of investor attitudes. Due to the constant barrage of market

news, advice, and opinions available to them, investors nowadays frequently make snap decisions about

their investments based more on market feelings or short-term trends than on careful consideration.

Another well-known bias is loss aversion, which highlights investors' aversion to losses and encourages

cautious decision-making as well as the passing up of chances for portfolio growth.

These cognitive biases are evident in Indian individual investors but are frequently unconscious.

Cognitive biases are exacerbated by cultural, behavioral, and social factors, which can lead to

investment decisions that are not in line with long-term financial objectives. The end effect is frequently

an unbalanced portfolio with low diversification, higher-than-intended risk exposures, and lost

opportunities to build wealth.

A multifaceted strategy including investor education, financial literacy initiatives, and behavioral

interventions is needed to address these biases. Indian investors can better navigate the intricacies of the

market, attain better risk-adjusted returns, and work toward constructing sturdy, well-balanced

investment portfolios for long-term financial success by raising awareness about cognitive biases,

encouraging rational decision-making frameworks, and utilizing technology for informed investing.

35
 CHAPTER 5: CONCLUSION, FINDINGS AND

IMPLICATIONS

To sum up, this study looked at four aspects of behavioral finance in connection to risk awareness and

investment decision-making: familiarity bias, disposition effect, loss aversion, and herding behavior.

According to the research, these facets of behavioral finance significantly influence how individuals

assess risk and choose investments. Specifically, it was discovered that although overconfidence

significantly improved just investment decision-making, risk perception was dramatically improved by

social media platforms, disposition impact, and loss aversion. Additionally, the findings show a strong

positive correlation between the process of making the investment decisions and one's sense of risk.

Interestingly, the study also discovered that risk perception strongly making decisions related to

investment can be influenced in a positive manner by some factors. when all four behavioral finance

components are taken into account. This implies that the characteristics of behavioral finance have an

impact on investors' perceptions of the risks involved in their investments, which has an impact on the

actual investments that investors make. As a result, the study underscores the importance of considering

an individual's risk perception when making investment decisions, as it significantly influences their

willingness to take on risks and, consequently, the performance of their investment portfolio. Moreover,

investors should recognize their own behavioral biases and implement measures to mitigate their

influence on asset selection.

Investors should, for example, diversify their portfolio to protect against the negative consequences of

herding behavior and use a disciplined buying and selling strategy to decrease the effects of the

disposition effect.

36
Despite the notable findings and advancements made in this study, it's important to recognize certain

limitations. One such limitation pertains to the utilization of self-reported data, which could be

susceptible to social desirability bias and may not accurately reflect participants' actions. Additionally,

the study's applicability to other contexts may be limited due to its execution within a specific cultural

framework. Moreover, the study focused solely on individual investors, neglecting the influence of

institutional investors or broader market dynamics on investment choices. Lastly, the examination was

restricted to four distinct components of behavioral finance, overlooking potential additional factors that

could impact investment decision-making.

The study's discoveries carry substantial economic implications. By shedding light on the influence of

behavioral finance components on investment decision-making, the study challenges traditional notions

of market efficiency and rational decision-making. It suggests that biased investor behavior can lead to

mispricing and market inefficiencies, undermining the presumed efficiency of financial markets. Such

mispricing may result in economic distortions, affecting resource allocation and potentially precipitating

market bubbles. To uphold market stability, it is imperative for investors, financial institutions, and

policymakers to grasp the effects of behavioral biases on investment decisions, enabling them to make

informed assessments and take appropriate actions.

The study's findings have significant social repercussions. Behavioral biases can impact society and

individual investors in profound ways. When investors make bad investing decisions because of loss

aversion or the disposition effect, their financial stability may be in jeopardy. As a result, people could

suffer financial losses that have an impact on their overall financial stability and standard of living.

There might be broader social ramifications to this. The study underscores the significance of these

biases and urges individuals to adopt a more objective and autonomous approach when making

decisions. Enhanced financial literacy and the implementation of investor education initiatives may

empower individuals to make better-informed investment choices, thereby fostering financial stability

and mitigating the societal consequences associated with biased decision-making.

37
CHAPTER 6: RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FUTURE STUDIES

In light of the study's findings, several recommendations have been made for additional research in the

fields of behavioral finance and investment decision-making.

i. Initially, further investigation could explore the impact of additional behavioral finance variables

on risk evaluation and investment decision-making. While this study focused on four behavioral

finance factors—familiarity, loss aversion, disposition effect, and herding—it primarily

overlooked the influence of social media. Other pertinent behavioral finance elements such as

confirmation bias, framing, and anchoring warrant attention, as they could also shape these

variables. Hence, future research endeavors may explore these variables and their implications

on investors' risk perceptions and decision-making processes regarding investments..

ii. Future research could look into how cultural variations affect how risk assessment, investing

choices, and behavioral finance variables interact. The current study was carried out in Saudi

Arabia, which is a distinctive cultural context. Depending on the cultural setting, behavioral

finance components may or may not have a different effect on how risk is seen and how

investments are made. Thus, cross-cultural comparisons may be used in this issue's future

research. Subsequent research endeavors may examine the correlation of risk perception,

behavioral finance variables, and investment decision-making concerning diverse investment

categories. Stock investments were the main topic of this inquiry. However, there might be

variations in the way that behavioral finance elements, risk assessment, and investment decision-

making apply to different investment categories, including commodities or real estate.

38
iii. Furthermore, it is recommended that forthcoming research explore the potential correlation

between risk variables and an entrepreneurial mindset. To enhance comprehension of the risk-

entrepreneurship nexus in financial markets, this aspect warrants deeper exploration within the

context of both traditional and modern financial theories. By addressing these research gaps,

future studies can contribute to a more comprehensive understanding of the factors shaping risk

perception and investment decision-making. This, in turn, could influence the formulation of

more prudent investment norms and policies.

iv. Finally, future research could explore the impact of financial education and literacy on the

interplay between risk perception, behavioral finance factors, and investment decision-making.

Individuals with higher levels of financial literacy and education may exhibit reduced

susceptibility to biases associated with behavioral finance issues. Therefore, it is advisable for

forthcoming studies to compare individuals with varying levels of financial education and

literacy. Such investigations can offer insights into the extent to which risk perception,

investment decision-making, and behavioral finance elements are influenced by financial literacy

and comprehension. Understanding how individuals with diverse levels of financial education

address behavioral biases can inform the development of effective educational programs and

interventions aimed at enhancing decision-making skills and fostering overall financial well-

being.

39