My dissertation consists of three essays. The central theme of these essays is the psychological factors and biases that affect the portfolio allocation decision. The first essay entitled, “Are women more risk-averse than men?” examines the gender difference in risk aversion as revealed by actual investment choices. Using a sample that controls for biases in the level of education and finance knowledge, there is evidence that when individuals have the same level of education, irrespective of their knowledge of finance, women are no more risk-averse than their male counterparts. However, the gender-risk aversion relation is also a function of age, income, wealth, marital status, race/ethnicity and the number of children in the household. The second essay entitled, “Can diversification be learned?” investigates if investors who have superior investment knowledge are more likely to actively seek diversification benefits and are less prone to allocation biases. Results of cross-sectional analyses suggest that knowledge of finance increases the likelihood that an investor will efficiently allocate his direct investments across the major asset classes; invest in foreign assets; and hold a diversified equity portfolio. However, there is no evidence that investors who are more financially sophisticated make superior allocation decisions in their retirement savings. The final essay entitled, “The demographics of non-participation”, examines the factors that affect the decision not to hold stocks. The results of probit regression models indicate that when individuals are highly educated, the decision to not participate in the stock market is less related to demographic factors. In particular, when individuals have attained at least a college degree and have advanced knowledge of finance, they are significantly more likely to invest in equities either directly or indirectly through mutual funds or their retirement savings. There is also evidence that the decision not to hold stocks is motivated by short-term market expectations and the most recent investment experience. The findings of these essays should increase the body of research that seeks to reconcile what investors actually do (positive theory) with what traditional theories of finance predict that investors should do (normative theory).

Recent work in the area of retail financial services marketing almost invariably cite the deregulation of national and international financial markets as a major reason as to why financial institutions have a need for better knowledge of their customers' behaviors and needs. Among the most sought-after information are better ways to segment and target the market, that is, how do groups of households behave with regards to their savings and investments, why do they behave in certain ways, how can we reach them and how do they respond to marketing activities? In this thesis we will attempt to shed light on some salient aspects of the first two of these four questions.Three of the papers in this volume are based on the segmentation of the market for retail financial services based on different financial strategies, as expressed in households' portfolio choices. In the first two papers, such behavioral segmentation is carried out on data from samples of Swedish and Dutch households. Issues concerning the stability of segmentation over time are also highlighted. The third paper is also focused on the concept of heterogeneity, but this time as expressed by different agents within the individual household, the question being whether the marketing researcher needs to collect data from both spouses in family households. In the fourth paper behavioral segments are used as domains to examine differences in human intertemporal discounting. / Diss. Stockholm : Handelshögsk.

The overall objective of the thesis is to investigate needs and incentives of all income/wealth groups in order to explore ways and means to remedy the excessive economic inequality. A closer examination of individual decisions across richer and poorer households allows us to recognize conflicts of wants, needs and values and subsequently to draw recommendations for future policies. The first chapter examines households' preferences over the redistribution of wealth resources. The preferences of voting households are restricted by agents' present and future resource constraints. The wealth resources vary over the business cycle, which affects the grounds for speculations of voting households. We augment the standard Real-Business-Cycle (RBC) model by the majority voting on lump-sum redistribution employing a balanced government budget. Our findings indicate that for the usual elasticity of labor supply both transfers' level and share of output are procyclical, with the procyclicality increasing in the discrepancy between richer and poorer households. In the second chapter we analytically demonstrate that all economic agents face subsistence costs that hinder economic and financial decisions of the poor. We find that the standard two-asset portfolio-selection model with a time-invariant subsistence component in the common-across agents Stone-Geary utility function is capable of explaining qualitatively and quantitatively three empirical regularities: (i) increasing saving rates in wealth, (ii) rising risky portfolio shares with wealth, (iii) more volatile consumption growth of the richer. On the contrary, "keeping-up-with-the-Joneses" utility with a time-varying weighted mean consumption produces identical saving rates and portfolio asset shares across richer and poorer agents, failing to match the micro data. Finally, in the third chapter we use Epstein-Zin-Weil recursive preferences altered to include subsistence costs, as this form of utility function enables trade-off between stability and safety. We pursue an analytical investigation of a more complex multi-asset portfolio-choice model with perfectly insurable labor risk and no liquidity constraints and find further support of the data evidence. If households' total resources are anticipated to increase over time, poorer agents can afford to gradually escape subsistence concerns by choosing lower saving rates and accepting only minor portfolio risks as their consumption hovers close to the subsistence needs. The calibration part of the model economy shows that analytical results can quantitatively reconcile the data, too.