Experimental knocked the door: Part I

I proclaimed that I want to be a behavioural scholar in my second PhD-year. The passion to distinguish with my friends who pursued their PhD in UK (i.e Kamal and Frank) has brought to choose a way of life; a behavioural way. I started to read many behavioural economics papers (including finance and accounting), and drove myself to dig further about it. Luckily, I met Sari in my life.

Sari, who I coincidently met via Friendster, has brought me to a deeper view of behavioural science. She gave me idea to intersect my study with Psychology. Note that her final project of Bachelor degree took Theory Planned Behaviour which is applied in investigating diet person. It is a pinpoint for me to know broader about psychology.

Instead of going deeper on TPB, I learnt Jung Theory, Ellis’ Model, up to the psychometric test. There was a moment I was very happy knowing that we can measure of “mental health” using MMPI. Then I learnt further about how the psychologist conducted their research.

Most of the research in Psychology was conducted in experimental mode. Indeed, there is also many schools of thought in psychology arguing the reliability of doing experimental study in psychology. I drowned in psychology area. Then, I met my co-supervisor to know further about applying psychology in finance. He told me please read Kahneman and Tversky (1979) about Prospect Theory.  It was another pinpoint for me to learn further about behavioural finance. I went to library and met a book called “Psychological Finance” of Tvede.

In a short, I changed my whole PhD thesis to be more Psychological Finance. Previously, my thesis was about securities valuation. I went for my proposal defence and got a very good result. Thus, I intuitionally thought maybe something wrong with my thesis. My colleagues asked me how come investor behaviour can be captured by the market. I went to two international conferences; and the panellist asked the same issue. I started to think to use experimental study to cater the problem.

At first, my supervisor did not agree with me. But I WAS afraid that even though I explained about the “LABORATARY MARKET”, the examiners will not get about it. I changed my ontology and epistemology assumption of study for this. Now, I am doing a mixed method where I combined by quantitative result and my experimental result.

Interestingly, I found some PhD students who conducted their study in experimental way got hit badly by the examiners. I wonder why it can be happened. I went to many experimental workshops (Most of them were conducted in Kuala Lumpur! Only one workshop was in USM).I will tell you the wrong experimental study of some of my friends. I will share to you also the wrong experimental method that conducted in top-tier rank journal where I got it from Prof Tan (Nanyang Business School). (continued to part II)

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s