Behavioral finance FAQ / Glossary (Obedience)
This is a separate page of the N-O section of the Glossary
Dates of related message(s) in the
Behavioral-Finance group (*):
Year/month, d: developed/ discussed,
Obedience to "experts"
00/8i,12i - 01/10i
+ see guru, overreliance
Beware of those men in white coats.
Intimidation or just the comfort of mimicry?
People tend to be intimidated by others who are seen as experts.
In that case, they might follow their recommendations more or less
That kind of obedience / dependence / submission (or naive trust)
can reach excessive levels with tragic consequences.
Those excesses has been shown for example by the "Milgram experiment",
although in that case obedience to expertise was combined with obedience
Deciders should keep being deciders.
They should not make counselors decide for them
Why are gurus followed ?Various individual biases are at work (lazy thinking, availability heuristic), but
above all, the feeling of safety brought by the mother of most collective
biases: mimicry (see that word).
Of course it does not mean that in matters where your knowledge is
limited, and to avoid falling into narcissism and illusions of knowledge /
experience (see those phrases), you should not look for outside
information and opinions.
But you stay the final decider.
Those informers / advisers, however comfortable their information /
advices or even orders make you feel should not be seen as the ultimate
response to the world uncertainty (see that word) , as you have to accept
that you are the one who do the bet.
Financial (and economic) examples
Money experts or quacks?
The economic shamans
Some economists, market commentators
or financial analysts reach a guru status .
Those pundits are seen as economic or market diagnostic / prediction
They always have a definitive answer that ignores the general
uncertainty mentioned above (*).
This affirmative / overconfident posture impresses their "followers /(*) even if themselves are not enemies of contradictions, and of
believers" and contribute to their lack of questioning their apparent
reverting their stances to new ...affirmative ones.
You will never see them expressing doubts)
The market incidences
Perfect / efficient markets suppose the independence of deciders
The guru phenomenon (like the herding phenomena) goes against
independent thinking and behavior and might explain some market flaws
(distortions from the large numbers / random "law" for example when many
people follow similar gurus).
In extreme cases, some "experts" use their clout and
domination to manipulate investors (see manipulation
Incidences for market players
who follow too blindly their advices
Also, many experts can themselves be influenced by the "peer
pressure"of colleagues In finance they are the other analysts or fund
That might explain for example why they tend to under react to new
situations (see reaction), none of them wanting to be the first to jump
into the new swimming pool
As a result they might under-perform the market.
Some studies have shown that picking stocks at random might
get better results than those of the average professional.
Please, don't tell it ;-)
(*) To find those messages: reach that BF group and, once there,
1) click "messages", 2) enter your query in "search archives".
Members of the Behavioral Finance Group,
please vote on the glossary quality at BF polls