[mordae]

Did not even have to go to check the sources:

> And people are not particularly likely to sell a stock they believe has even odds of going up or down in price (in fact, in one study I performed, over 80 percent of participants said they would hold on to it).

He refuted himself right there, in the article.

[darkerside]

That's the problem with any of these social theories. Losing what? Gaining what? We're lacking a clear definitions of terms. I know it's a trope, but it really is just so unscientific.

[vezycash]

Note: What people say they'll do and what they end up doing are usually different.

Actual investor behavior is sell winning investment, and hold on to losing investment until loses triple. And sell for significant loss.

Recent Tesla short sellers come to mind.

[judofyr]

> Did not even have to go to check the sources

Yeah, it would be terrible if you read through 59 pages of well-cited, well-explained text and tried to understand what the author is saying. Might as well judge everything from one sentence in an online article written for popular audiences.

> He refuted himself right there, in the article.

That example is showing an example of Status Quo Bias that is completely orthogonal to losses/gains: People prefer inactivity to activity. If you construct an experiment where doing nothing constitutes the "loss" (e.g. keeping an item) and doing something is the "gain" (e.g. obtaining a new item) then you would expect people to prefer the first choice. For loss aversion to be a general principle you need to decouple it from the status quo bias.