Do Investors Rely on Robots? Evidence from an Experimental Study

机器人 业务 计算机科学 计量经济学 经济 人工智能
作者
Barbara Alemanni,Andrej Angelovski,Daniela Di Cagno,Arianna Galliera,Nadia Linciano,Francesca Marazzi,Paola Soccorso
出处
期刊:Social Science Research Network [RELX Group (Netherlands)]
被引量:5
标识
DOI:10.2139/ssrn.3697232
摘要

Robo advice has moved its first steps in the Anglo-Saxon countries and is now rapidly gaining market share at a global level. The phenomenon fueled a growing and still not conclusive institutional debate about potential benefits and risks to financial consumers, based also on investors’ biases and behaviours that online platforms could trigger to the detriment of robo advisees. The present paper provides some insights into attitudes and behaviours that might prevail in a digital environment among young investors, representing the category of users potentially more involved by the development of the automated advice. In detail, the study investigates whether individuals’ propensity to follow the recommendation received from an advisor changes depending on whether the advisor is a human or a robot. The analysis is based on data collected through an ad hoc developed laboratory experiment run in the Cesare Lab of LUISS University with a sample of 180 students. Students were given an initial monetary endowment and were asked to choose between six different portfolios of financial activities; after being profiled through a questionnaire aimed at eliciting their risk tolerance (Grable and Lytton’s Risk Tolerance Quiz; 2003), they received the advice, either from a human advisor or from a robo advisor (i.e. via a computer platform) depending on the treatment they had randomly assigned before entering the experimental session. Then, they were asked again to choose among the six portfolios in order to capture whether the propensity to follow the recommendation depends on its source (human versus robo). Finally, participants were asked to answer several questions eliciting risk preferences, financial literacy (actual and perceived) and digital literacy, serving as control variables when modelling the probability to follow the advice.Our results show that the probability to follow the advice does not depend on the source of the recommendation but rather on the alignment between the self-directed choice made before receiving the advice and the recommendation subsequently received: the propensity to follow the advisor (either human or robo) increases if the advice confirms individual’s own beliefs about her/his investor profile. This result might be explained by referring to individuals’ attitude towards the so called ‘confirmation bias’. However, when the self-directed choice differs from the recommendation received, participants may be more likely to follow the advice given by a human advisor and less likely to follow the advice formulated by an algorithm. Also the gender of the advisor seems to matter: women tend to follow the advice provided by a female advisor more frequently compared to the case of the recommendation given by a male advisor. This work is part of a wider research on FinTech that CONSOB started in 2016, in collaboration with several Italian universities, with the aim of exploring opportunities and risks for investor protection and the financial system as a whole, related to the application of technological innovation to the provision of financial services. In particular, supplementing Lener, Linciano and Soccorso (2019, edited by) and Caratelli et al. (2019), this document widens the field of investigation by referring to a specific target of the population - the so called millennials and post-millennials – and using complementary and innovative methods. According to an evidence-based approach, insights from the present study may suggest specific investor protection initiatives, also in terms of financial education activities designed for a clearly-identified segment of the population (the so called millennials and post-millennials, in this case).Evidence from the present work might be extended further with respect to the consumers’ perception of the fairness of algorithms used to provide financial services, the cognitive heuristics and biases underlying decision making process and investments in the digital environment and nudges which may be used to enhance investor protection.

科研通智能强力驱动
Strongly Powered by AbleSci AI
科研通是完全免费的文献互助平台,具备全网最快的应助速度,最高的求助完成率。 对每一个文献求助,科研通都将尽心尽力,给求助人一个满意的交代。
实时播报
2秒前
2秒前
Samuel应助困困采纳,获得20
3秒前
nsjdb发布了新的文献求助10
3秒前
李健应助hang采纳,获得10
3秒前
苹果万恶完成签到 ,获得积分10
4秒前
小番茄完成签到 ,获得积分10
4秒前
猩心完成签到 ,获得积分10
5秒前
江0325完成签到 ,获得积分10
5秒前
ding应助llqi9700采纳,获得50
5秒前
阿标发布了新的文献求助20
6秒前
6秒前
所所应助陈莹采纳,获得10
7秒前
。。。发布了新的文献求助10
7秒前
洁净的天荷完成签到 ,获得积分10
7秒前
WTH关闭了WTH文献求助
8秒前
8秒前
蓝天发布了新的文献求助50
11秒前
11秒前
11秒前
幸福的雪枫完成签到,获得积分10
11秒前
kyou发布了新的文献求助30
11秒前
12秒前
乐乐应助yang采纳,获得10
12秒前
13秒前
十三应助Zy189采纳,获得10
14秒前
cardiology完成签到,获得积分10
14秒前
余红完成签到,获得积分10
15秒前
顾矜应助小巧晓夏采纳,获得10
15秒前
出其东门发布了新的文献求助10
16秒前
哈比完成签到,获得积分10
16秒前
16秒前
17秒前
DAYDAY发布了新的文献求助10
17秒前
左旋多巴完成签到,获得积分10
19秒前
qiqi0426完成签到,获得积分10
19秒前
19秒前
19秒前
如意千易完成签到,获得积分10
20秒前
hang发布了新的文献求助10
21秒前
高分求助中
(应助此贴封号)【重要!!请各用户(尤其是新用户)详细阅读】【科研通的精品贴汇总】 10000
48V Low-voltage Power Distribution Network (PDN) Architecture Industry Report, 2024 800
Fundamentals of Pharmaceutical and Biologics Regulations: A Global Perspective, Second Edition 700
Matrix Methods in Data Mining and Pattern Recognition Second Edition 610
适配Micro-LED色转换的高兼容性量子点负性光刻胶制备与工艺研究 500
Direct and Iterative Linear System Solvers 500
Vander's Renal Physiology第10版 500
热门求助领域 (近24小时)
化学 材料科学 医学 生物 纳米技术 工程类 有机化学 化学工程 生物化学 计算机科学 内科学 物理 复合材料 催化作用 细胞生物学 无机化学 光电子学 物理化学 电极 基因
热门帖子
关注 科研通微信公众号,转发送积分 7306534
求助须知:如何正确求助?哪些是违规求助? 8924450
关于积分的说明 18908893
捐赠科研通 6969521
什么是DOI,文献DOI怎么找? 3212451
关于科研通互助平台的介绍 2381085
邀请新用户注册赠送积分活动 2189985