Smarter people own shares, study finds

Discussion in 'Stocks & Derivatives' started by Ouch, Jan 19, 2012.

  1. Ouch

    Ouch Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2010
    Messages:
    1,055
    Likes Received:
    5
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    Sydney, Australia
    Thoughts?

    Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/business/worl...le-own-shares-study-finds-20120119-1q7lz.html
     
  2. spannermonkey

    spannermonkey Well-Known Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2010
    Messages:
    15,802
    Likes Received:
    2,589
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    here there everywhere
  3. hawkeye

    hawkeye New Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2010
    Messages:
    2,929
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Perth, Australia
    Wow, great representative sample of the population. By a finance magazine, so don't expect much experimental rigour.
     
  4. Smoothcriminal

    Smoothcriminal New Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Oct 29, 2010
    Messages:
    1,426
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Perth
    Probably true - it's something people with intelligence can use said intelligence to think about, analyse, predict and otherwise occupy their minds when bored. Not sure if all the pondering enhances investment results but it keeps people amused.

    I'll offer up an anecdote on gambling that I often see correlate to shares:

    My parents occasionally like to go down to the pub of a weekend and have a punt on the horses, my father analyses statistics, history, weather conditions etc. before placing a bet my mum picks horses with names she likes - guess who wins more out of the 2 of them.

    edit: Also intelligent people probably think they can beat the system (the old adage about knowing just enough to get yourself in trouble) - thus casting their intelligence into doubt but there you have it.
     
  5. Ouch

    Ouch Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2010
    Messages:
    1,055
    Likes Received:
    5
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    Sydney, Australia
  6. silversardine

    silversardine Member

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2010
    Messages:
    757
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Location:
    Australia
    http://www.afajof.org/

    Journal of Science is a journal not a magazine - see above. 160 000 is a pretty good sample for any research. I agree perhaps some characterisitcs may have predisposed certain types of men to join te army, but since it was over time it is not soley army recruits since they would have moved on to other pursuits in life. Nevertheless intelligence is still the measure they were using with a particular test so in the end the sample is still fairly valid. Issues such as whether future employment may have affected the purchase of shares among other things could be relevant too.
     
  7. Argentum

    Argentum Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 7, 2010
    Messages:
    1,970
    Likes Received:
    40
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Australia
    why dont they just say smarter ppl invest money dumb ppl think about present only, you dont need to do a study for this, it doesnt matter whether its shares, bank deposits, pm or re.
     
  8. systematic

    systematic Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2010
    Messages:
    6,649
    Likes Received:
    341
    Trophy Points:
    83
    People with intelligence, also known as "information" ..... can use said intelligence, and the "smarter" you are the more stock you own ... also known as "insider trading" ...

    as for the other 99% .... roll up roll up and take a spin of the wheel of fortune ...
     
  9. Black_Sun

    Black_Sun New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2011
    Messages:
    1,031
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Australia
    They should also have studied the physical characteristics of the men, their sexual habits and hobbies, and then link this up with their stock market returns. This is after all, the "scientific method" is it not?

    Reminds me of all the scientific research that came out of tobacco companies. The scientists could keep their jobs only on the condition that they kept publishing reports which testified to the safety of smoking tobacco. Those scientists must have been good, because they worked at those tobacco factories for decades, and they had many scientific qualifications and letters after their names.

    Don't you love science? It doesn't have biased opinions and only focuses on the facts.
     
  10. Big A.D.

    Big A.D. Well-Known Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2009
    Messages:
    6,278
    Likes Received:
    186
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Sydney
    Okay, so while the link between intelligence and share ownership is interesting, it doesn't really tell us if people who are intelligent are more likely to own shares or if people who are intelligent are more likely to invest generally.

    I would hazard a guess that if data on other investments was available, it would show that intelligent people are also more likely to own bonds, real estate, precious metals, artwork and have a reasonable amount of cash in the bank as well.
     
  11. silversardine

    silversardine Member

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2010
    Messages:
    757
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Location:
    Australia
    Too many variables in any one study is not going to be helpful. Possibly these things have been studied and reported in other papers or perhaps they have not been shown to be relevant.

    I don't think there was any suggestion that these researchers were bought by ''the stock market''.
     
  12. silversardine

    silversardine Member

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2010
    Messages:
    757
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Location:
    Australia

    http://www.anderson.ucla.edu/x1927.xml

    Mark Grinblatt UCLA page with background, CV, papers etc...

    http://finance.aalto.fi/en/people/keloharju/

    Matti Keloharju ...as above info

    http://faculty.chicagobooth.edu/juhani.linnainmaa/

    Juhani Linnainmaa...as above...inof

    Links to each authors Univiersity profile and other research so you can check it out if you are interested.
     
  13. silversardine

    silversardine Member

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2010
    Messages:
    757
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Location:
    Australia
  14. hiho

    hiho Active Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2011
    Messages:
    7,816
    Likes Received:
    21
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Location:
    South Brisbane
    I smart I am 40% less wealfy
     
  15. Savige Silver

    Savige Silver New Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2010
    Messages:
    247
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I feel like I have just wasted 10 minutes of my life reading this BS
     
  16. hawkeye

    hawkeye New Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2010
    Messages:
    2,929
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Perth, Australia
    160 000 soldiers are not representative of the wider community. The best you can say about this study is more intelligent Finnish soldiers are more likely to invest in stocks. It doesn't say any more than that and in no way represents the wider community. Making wider claims than that based on such a sample set is bad science.

    EDIT: there is also the fact that they are going by IQ which is notoriously inefficient at predicting success overall. Far more factors are involved, motivation, hard work, etc...

    Overall, kind of pointless study imo with no conclusions of any worth.
     
  17. Anthony

    Anthony New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2011
    Messages:
    309
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Sydney
    Higher IQ = most likely higher income = greater ability to afford investments.

    It's not rocket surgery.

    Also in breaking news, those in housing commission are less likely to own investment properties.
     
  18. Black_Sun

    Black_Sun New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2011
    Messages:
    1,031
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Australia
    Are there any scientific studies backing up this claim?

    Did you hear about the guy who was given a scientific grant to study the mating habits of camels? His findings? Quite comprehensive really, summed up as, "The camels are banging away steadily and there's no shortage of them." Wow! We gave a guy money to tell us this :/ Or the other one about the guy who was given a grant to study some type of beetle... basically, he just stayed up that tree counting the beetles until the grant money ran out. Great way to earn a living, some people would say.
     
  19. Big A.D.

    Big A.D. Well-Known Member Silver Stacker

    Joined:
    Oct 30, 2009
    Messages:
    6,278
    Likes Received:
    186
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Sydney
    Perhaps not, but apart from being an incredibly huge sample, it includes one particular gender (so gender income disparity is eliminated) all of roughly the same age (19-20), all of roughly the same starting income (army pay), all from roughly the same geographic area (Finland), all investing in roughly the same market (the Finish stockmarket), all tested for their level of intelligence by the same organisation (the Finish Army) and all financial data tabulated by the same organisation (the Finish tax office).

    That's actually a pretty decent sample group for for what they were testing.
     
  20. renovator

    renovator Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2011
    Messages:
    6,989
    Likes Received:
    83
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    QLD
    Anthony you should be an analyst & write studies with that logic. Go take steve keens job. :lol:
     

Share This Page