General Finance

BehavioralFinance: An Introduction ArXiv ID: ssrn-1488110 “View on arXiv” Authors: Unknown Abstract This survey introduces and reviews the field of behavioral finance. It outlines the traditional finance approach, which builds upon rational acting investors, i Keywords: Behavioral Finance, Rational Investors, Cognitive Biases, Market Efficiency, General Finance Complexity vs Empirical Score Math Complexity: 1.5/10 Empirical Rigor: 2.0/10 Quadrant: Philosophers Why: This paper is a high-level survey that discusses theoretical concepts and empirical anomalies without presenting new mathematical models or implementation details for backtesting. flowchart TD A["Research Goal:<br/>Review Behavioral Finance Foundations"] --> B["Methodology:<br/>Literature Survey & Framework Analysis"] B --> C["Data/Inputs:<br/>Traditional Finance Models<br/>Cognitive Bias Studies"] C --> D{"Computational Process:<br/>Rational vs. Behavioral Comparison"} D --> E["Key Finding 1:<br/>Investors often deviate from rationality"] D --> F["Key Finding 2:<br/>Cognitive biases impact markets"] D --> G["Key Finding 3:<br/>Market efficiency challenged"] E & F & G --> H["Outcome:<br/>Integrated Behavioral Finance Framework"]

Economists’ Hubris - The Case of Mergers and Acquisitions ArXiv ID: ssrn-1418986 “View on arXiv” Authors: Unknown Abstract This paper is the first in a series of articles that look at the practical benefits of economics/finance literature to the world of business and policymakers an Keywords: applied finance, business strategy, economic policy, literature review, practical application, General Finance Complexity vs Empirical Score Math Complexity: 4.0/10 Empirical Rigor: 2.0/10 Quadrant: Philosophers Why: The paper discusses economic theory and its practical application to M&A, suggesting conceptual analysis rather than dense formulas, and lacks empirical backtests or data-heavy implementation in the provided excerpt. flowchart TD A["Research Goal<br>Evaluate if M&A economics<br>improves real-world outcomes"] --> B["Methodology<br>Systematic literature review<br>& case analysis"] B --> C["Data/Inputs<br>30+ years of M&A<br>research papers & deals"] C --> D["Computational Process<br>Compare theoretical models<br>against actual deal performance"] D --> E["Key Findings<br>Economic research shows<br>significant hubris in M&A<br>theories vs. practice"] E --> F["Outcome<br>Identifies gaps between<br>academic models and<br>business applications"]

Overconfidence in Psychology andFinance- An Interdisciplinary Literature Review ArXiv ID: ssrn-1261907 “View on arXiv” Authors: Unknown Abstract This paper reviews the literature on one of the most meaningful concepts in modern behavioural finance, the overconfidence phenomenon. Overconfidence is present Keywords: Behavioral Finance, Overconfidence Bias, Heuristics, Investor Psychology, Cognitive Biases, General Finance Complexity vs Empirical Score Math Complexity: 1.5/10 Empirical Rigor: 2.0/10 Quadrant: Philosophers Why: The paper is a literature review focusing on psychological theory and conceptual definitions with minimal mathematical formalism or quantitative modeling, and it relies on existing studies rather than presenting new backtests or implementation-heavy data analysis. flowchart TD A["Research Goal<br>Review overconfidence bias<br>in psychology & finance"] --> B["Key Methodology<br>Interdisciplinary literature review"] B --> C["Data/Inputs<br>Psychological & financial studies"] C --> D["Computational Process<br>Analysis of heuristics, biases<br>& investor psychology"] D --> E["Key Findings<br>Overconfidence significantly impacts<br>market decisions & asset pricing"]

100 Questions AboutFinance(100 Preguntas Sobre Finanzas) ArXiv ID: ssrn-1098814 “View on arXiv” Authors: Unknown Abstract This document has 100 questions from students, alumnae and other persons (judges, clients,…). They are useful to clarify some useful concepts in finance. Most Keywords: finance education, valuation, financial concepts, Q&A, General Finance Complexity vs Empirical Score Math Complexity: 1.0/10 Empirical Rigor: 0.5/10 Quadrant: Philosophers Why: The document is a collection of conceptual finance questions with minimal advanced math, and it lacks any data, backtesting, or implementation details, focusing instead on clarifying fundamental principles. flowchart TD A["Research Goal<br>Answer 100 Finance Questions"] --> B["Data Collection<br>Questions from Students & Professionals"] B --> C["Methodology<br>Concept Clarification & Analysis"] C --> D["Computational Process<br>Q&A Format Processing"] D --> E{"Key Findings/Outcomes"} E --> F["Finance Education Resource"] E --> G["Valuation Concepts Clarified"] E --> H["General Finance Q&A Framework"]

A Study of Fund Selection Behaviour of Individual Investors Towards Mutual Funds - with Reference to Mumbai City ArXiv ID: ssrn-876874 “View on arXiv” Authors: Unknown Abstract Consumer behaviour from the marketing world and financial economics has brought together to the surface an exciting area for study and research: behavioural fin Keywords: Consumer Behavior, Behavioral Finance, Financial Economics, Investor Psychology, General Finance Complexity vs Empirical Score Math Complexity: 1.5/10 Empirical Rigor: 3.0/10 Quadrant: Philosophers Why: The paper focuses on survey-based behavioral analysis with minimal advanced mathematical modeling, and the empirical work relies on descriptive statistics rather than rigorous backtesting or complex data implementation. flowchart TD A["Research Goal: Analyze fund selection behavior<br>of individual investors in Mumbai"] --> B["Methodology: Qualitative & Quantitative Analysis"] B --> C["Data Inputs: Structured Surveys &<br>Demographic Profiles of Investors"] C --> D{"Computational Process: Descriptive &<br>Inferential Statistical Analysis"} D --> E["Key Findings/Outcomes:<br>1. Cognitive biases heavily influence choices<br>2. Financial literacy moderates risk<br>3. Performance > Fees as decision driver"]