Climate Attitudes and Asymmetric Belief Updating in Sustainable Investments: Experimental Evidence from Hungary
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.15549/jeecar.v12i2.2133Keywords:
Behavioral Finance, Sustainable Investments, Environmental Economics, Investor PsychologyAbstract
This study examines whether and to what extent investors update their expectations for a green portfolio's performance upon receiving information that is either better or worse than the previously provided anchor. We conducted an experiment with 492 Hungarian investors to observe how their beliefs regarding green investment returns change when they receive good or bad news. Individuals with low green attitudes were more likely to revise their estimates in response to bad news than good news, indicating asymmetric updating. Moreover, individuals with strong green attitudes responded more strongly to good news than those with weak green attitudes. These findings suggest that attitudes toward climate issues influence how investors react to information about green portfolios. This study contributes to the literature on information processing in financial markets by highlighting the role of belief updating and climate attitudes in sustainable investment decision-making.
References
Alves, R., Krueger, P., & van Dijk, M. A. (2024). Drawing up the bill: Are ESG ratings related to stock returns around the world? SSRN DOI: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4770546
Afifi, W. A., & Weiner, L. J. (2006). Toward a theory of motivated information management. Communication Theory, 14(2), 167–190. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2885.2004.tb00310.x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2885.2004.tb00310.x
Alessi, L., Ossola, E., & Panzica, R. (2019). The greenium matters: Evidence on the pricing of climate risk: European Commission, Joint Research Centre Working Papers in Economics and Finance.
Barron, K. (2020). Belief updating: Does the 'good-news, bad-news' asymmetry extend to purely financial domains? WZB Discussion Paper No. SP II 2016-309r2. Wissenschaftszentrum Berlin für Sozialforschung (WZB), Berlin.
Bart, M., & Schlag, C. (2023). Inferring investor preferences for sustainable investment from asset prices. SSRN. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4655871 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4655871
Camerer, C. F. (1995). Individual decision making. In J. H. Kagel & A. E. Roth (Eds.), The handbook of experimental economics (pp. 587–703). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/9780691213255-010
Carlsson Hauff, J., & Nilsson, J. (2023). Is ESG mutual fund quality in the eye of the beholder? An experimental study of investor responses to ESG fund strategies. Business Strategy and the Environment, 32(4), 1189–1202. https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.3181 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.3181
Case, D. O., Andrews, J. E., Johnson, D., & Allard, S. L. (2005). Avoiding versus seeking: The relationship of information seeking to avoidance, blunting, coping, dissonance, and related concepts. Journal of the Medical Library Association, 93(3), 353–362.
Chen, A., Chen, Y., Nguyen, T., & Uddin, G. S. (2025). Goal-oriented preferences for green bonds: A model of sustainable investment strategies. Economic Modelling, 150, 107128. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econmod.2025.107128 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.econmod.2025.107128
Cotter, J., & Najah, M. M. (2013). Corporate climate change disclosure practices and regulation: The influence of institutional investors (pp. 81–97).https://doi.org/10.1108/S2043-9059(2013)0000005012 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/S2043-9059(2013)0000005012
Eil, D., & Rao, J. M. (2011). The good news-bad news effect: Asymmetric processing of objective information about yourself. American Economic Journal: Microeconomics, 3(2), 114–138. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1257/mic.3.2.114
Ertaç, S. (2011). Does self-relevance affect information processing? Experimental evidence on the response to performance and non-performance feedback. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 80(3), 532-545. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jebo.2011.05.012
Galai, D., & Sade, O. (2006). The 'Ostrich Effect' and the Relationship between the Liquidity and the Yields of Financial Assets. The Journal of Business, 79(5), 2741-2759, http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/505250 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/505250
Golman, R., Hagmann, D., & Loewenstein, G. (2017). Information avoidance. Journal of Economic Literature, 55(1), 96–135. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1257/jel.20151245
Giglio, S., Maggiori, M., Stroebel, J., Tan, Z., Utkus, S., & Xu, X. (2023). Four facts about ESG beliefs and investor portfolios. Technical report, National Bureau of Economic Research. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3386/w31114
Holt, C., & Smith, A. M. (2009). An update on Bayesian updating. Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, 69(2), 125–134. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jebo.2007.08.013
Hsu, P.-H., Li, K., & Tsou, C.-Y. (2023). The pollution premium. The Journal of Finance, 78(3), 1343–1392. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/jofi.13217
Jaynes, E. T. (2003). Probability Theory: The Logic of Science. Cambridge University Press. ISBN-10 0-511-06589-2, 527-545 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511790423
Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1973). On the psychology of prediction. Psychological Review, 80(4), 237–251. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037/h0034747
Karlsson, N., Loewenstein, G., & Seppi, D. (2009). The ostrich effect: Selective attention to information. Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, 38(2), 95-115. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11166-009-9060-6
Kunda, Z. (1990). The case for motivated reasoning. Psychological Bulletin, 108(3), 480–498. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.108.3.480 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037//0033-2909.108.3.480
Kress, J. C. (2022). Banking’s Climate Conundrum. American Business Law Journal, 59(4), 679–724. https://doi.org/10.1111/ablj.12217 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/ablj.12217
Lord, C. G., Ross, L., & Lepper, M. (1979). Biased assimilation and attitude polarization: The effects of prior theories on subsequently considered evidence. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37(11), 2098-2109 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037//0022-3514.37.11.2098
Myklebust, T. (2022). Climate-related Financial Risks: Considering an Emerging Framework for Assessment and Disclosure in a Regulatory Perspective. European Business Law Review, 33(Issue 3), 443–462. https://doi.org/10.54648/EULR2022020 DOI: https://doi.org/10.54648/EULR2022020
Narayan, B., Donald, O., Case, D. O., & Edwards, S. L. (2011). The role of information avoidance in everyday-life information behaviors. Proceedings of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 48(1), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1002/meet.2011.14504801085. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/meet.2011.14504801085
Nickerson, R. S. (1998). Confirmation bias: A ubiquitous phenomenon in many guises. Review of General Psychology, 2(2), 175–220. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/1089-2680.2.2.175. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037//1089-2680.2.2.175
Pant, P., & Mishra, K. K. (2024). Behavioural Economics and the Rise of Sustainable Investments (pp. 329–360). https://doi.org/10.4018/979-8-3693-9699-5.ch014 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4018/979-8-3693-9699-5.ch014
Pástor, L., Stambaugh, R. F., & Taylor, L. A. (2021). Sustainable investing in equilibrium. Journal of Financial Economics, 142(2), 550–571. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfineco.2020.12.011
Pedersen, L. H., Fitzgibbons, S., & Pomorski, L. (2021). Responsible investing: The ESG-efficient frontier. Journal of Financial Economics, 142(2), 572–597. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfineco.2020.11.001
Petajisto, A. (2023). Underperformance of concentrated stock positions. SSRN Electronic Journal.
http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4541122 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4541122
Sharot, T., Korn, C., & Dolan, R. (2011). How unrealistic optimism is maintained in the face of reality. Nature Neuroscience, 14(11), 1475–1479. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nn.2949
Sicherman, N., Loewenstein, G., Seppi, D. J., & Utkus, S. P. (2016). Financial attention. The Review of Financial Studies, 29(4), 863–897. https://doi.org/10.1093/rfs/hhv073 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/rfs/hhv073
Sunstein, C. R., Bobadilla-Suarez, S., Lazzaro, S. C., & Sharot, T. (2017). How people update beliefs about climate change: Good news and bad news. Cornell Law Review, 102(6), DOI: https://doi.org/10.31228/osf.io/qn5wp
Singh, S., Yadav, S., Singh, A., Krishna, Y. J., & Singh, A. (2024). Harnessing Technology for a Sustainable Future in Finance: The Role of Artificial Intelligence in Promoting Environmental Responsibility (pp. 367–378). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-63402-4_30 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-63402-4_30
Van der Weele, J. J. (2012). When ignorance is innocence: On information avoidance in moral dilemmas. SSRN Electronic Journal. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1844702 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1844702
Wiswall, M., & Zafar, B. (2015). How do college students respond to public information about earnings? Journal of Human Capital, 9(2), 117–169 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1086/681542
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Attila Zoltán Nagy, Sándo Erdős
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
The JEECAR journal allows the author(s) to hold the copyright and publishing rights of their own manuscript without restrictions.
This journal applies the Creative Attribution Common License to works we publish, and allows reuse and remixing of its content, in accordance with a CC-BY 4.0 license.
Authors are free to: Share — copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format and Adapt — remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially.
Under the following terms: Attribution — You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
No additional restrictions — The author may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.
The JEECAR Journal is committed to the editorial principles of all aspects of publication ethics and publication malpractice as assigned by the Committee on Public Ethics.
