| Literature DB >> 35719601 |
Chaoran Chen1, Muhammad Ishfaq2, Farzana Ashraf3, Ayesha Sarfaraz4, Kan Wang5.
Abstract
The commodity market plays a vital role in boosting the economy. Investors make decisions based on market knowledge and ignore cognitive biases. These cognitive biases or judgment errors have a significant effect on investment decisions. Therefore, this study aimed to investigate the effect of emotional intelligence on decision-making. In addition, optimism bias and risk perception are the intervening variables between emotional intelligence and decision-making. So, this study contributes to the body of knowledge by examining the mediating role of optimism bias and risk perception. The data were collected from the respondents of the commodity market and the 370 questionnaires were distributed among the investors, of which 337 respondents gave their feedback. The convenience base sampling technique is used due to the easy access of respondents, time factor, and cost factor. Data entered into the SPSS Statistics Version 26 and PROCESS macro model 6 were used for serial mediation. AMOS was used for the validity and model-fit analysis. The results of this study aligned with the literature that there is a significant effect of emotional intelligence on decision-making. It also observed that optimism bias has a positive effect on decision-making. The finding of this study will be helpful for the brokers, the government, and especially the investors. This study also proposed that future studies on the stock exchange and real estate market comparative analysis can be conducted.Entities:
Keywords: commodity market; emotional intelligence; investment decisions; optimism bias; risk perception
Year: 2022 PMID: 35719601 PMCID: PMC9204191 DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2022.914649
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Psychol ISSN: 1664-1078
FIGURE 1Conceptual framework.
Breakdown of questionnaire.
| Composition of questionnaire | ||
|
| ||
| Particulars | No. of questionnaires | Percentage (%) |
| Questionnaires distributed | 370 | |
| Questionnaire completed | 337 | 91.08 |
| Questionnaire discarded | 18 | 4.86 |
| Questionnaire not received | 15 | 4.05 |
Total 370 questionnaires are distributed and 337 respondents’ data are entered in the SPSS 26.
Reliability statistics.
| Cronbach’s alpha | No. of items | |
| Decision-making | 0.712 | 05 |
| Emotional intelligence | 0.810 | 10 |
| Optimism bias | 0.830 | 12 |
| Risk perception | 0.753 | 04 |
Cronbach’s alpha >0.70; satisfactory.
Descriptive statistics.
| Frequency | Percent | |
|
| ||
| 25–30 | 28 | 8.30 |
| 31–35 | 167 | 49.55 |
| 36–40 | 116 | 34.42 |
| More than 40 | 26 | 7.71 |
|
| ||
| Women | 45 | 13.35 |
| Men | 292 | 86.64 |
|
| ||
| Matric | 54 | 16.02 |
| Intermediate | 76 | 22.55 |
| Bachelors | 98 | 29.08 |
| Masters | 82 | 24.33 |
| Post graduate | 27 | 8.01 |
Frequency distribution of respondents; age, gender, and education.
Validity.
| CR | AVE | MSV | EI | OB | RP | DM | |
| EI | 0.912 | 0.776 | 0.604 |
| |||
| OB | 0.897 | 0.637 | 0.224 | 0.07 |
| ||
| RP | 0.87 | 0.532 | 0.438 | 0.064 | 0.474 |
| |
| DM | 0.925 | 0.756 | 0.604 | 0.777 | 0.121 | 0.048 |
|
Model fit.
| Category | Indexes | Value of index | Threshold level |
| Absolute fit | RMSEA | 0.062 | <0.06 |
| CMIN/DF | 2.132 | <3.0 | |
| GFI | 0.908 | >0.90 | |
| Incremental fit | CFI | 0.921 | >0.90 |
| TLI | 0.943 | >0.90 | |
| NFI | 0.901 | >0.90 | |
| Parsimonious fit | PCFI | 0.806 | >0.50 |
| PNFI | 0.764 | >0.50 |
Model summary.
| Model |
|
| Sig | Unstandardized coefficients |
| Emo → DM | 0.503 | 0.253 | 0.000 | 0.273 |
| RP → DM | 0.428 | 0.183 | 0.019 | 0.191 |
| OPT → DM | 0.219 | 0.048 | 0.000 | 0.295 |
| Emo → OPT | 0.436 | 0.190 | 0.000 | 0.140 |
| Emo → RP | 0.563 | 0.316 | 0.000 | 0.221 |
| OPT → RP | 0.372 | 0.138 | 0.000 | 0.122 |
| Emo + OPT → RP → DM | 0.4475 | 0.200 | 0.000 | 0.235 |
Regression analysis; significant, if p < 5%; unstandardized coefficient = β.
Model summary.
| Hypotheses | Relationship/effect | Accepted/rejected |
| H1 | Emo → DM | Accepted |
| H2 | RP → DM | Accepted |
| H3 | OPT → DM | Accepted |
| H4 | Emo → OPT | Accepted |
| H5 | Emo → RP | Accepted |
| H6 | OPT → RP | Accepted |
| H7 | Emo → OPT → RP → DM | Accepted |
Emo, emotional intelligence; DM, decision-making; RP, risk perception; OPT, optimism bias.