What Characterizes Excessive Online Stock Trading? A Qualitative Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Excessive online stock trading appears to share similarities with gambling disorder. However, using gambling disorder criteria to assess excessive trading may not allow a full understanding of this phenomenon as specific aspects of the trading context that differ from gambling may be overlooked. This study explores the manifestations and consequences of excessive trading and its links with gambling disorder via the perceptions of online stock traders themselves. Data for thematic analysis were collected from a sample of online stock traders (N = 13) divided into two focus groups based on trading frequency (i.e., on a regular or occasional basis). Perceived manifestations of excessive trading included excessive preoccupation and frequent behaviors, and consequences that affect finances, relationships, work and health. Perceived links between gambling disorder and excessive trading concerned a shared incapacity to control behaviors, and chasing losses. Though excessive trading and gambling disorder are similar on many grounds, the assessment of trading behaviors should consider specific aspects such as the context within which they occur (e.g., state of the market). Implications for future research on excessive trading behaviors are discussed. RésuméLes transactions d’actions excessives peuvent présenter des similitudes avec le jeu pathologique. Cependant, appliquer des critères propres au jeu pathologique à des pratiques de transactions excessives en ligne ne permet pas nécessairement de bien comprendre ce phénomène, car il pourrait arriver qu’on néglige certains aspects particuliers du contexte transactionnel qui diffèrent du contexte du jeu. Cette étude explore les manifestations et les conséquences de pratiques transactionnelles excessives et ses liens avec le jeu pathologique, en se penchant sur les perceptions personnelles des négociateurs. Les données ont été recueillies pour une analyse thématique à partir d’un échantillon de négociateurs en ligne (N = 13), divisé en deux groupes de discussion en fonction de la fréquence des transactions (soit sur une base régulière ou occasionnelle). Parmi les manifestations perçues à propos de transactions excessives, on a pu voir des préoccupations excessives et de fréquents comportements et leurs conséquences sur les finances, les relations, le travail et la santé. Les liens communs perçus entre les troubles du jeu et la négociation excessive étaient l’incapacité à contrôler ses comportements et la récupération des pertes. Bien que la négociation excessive et les problèmes du jeu soient semblables sous divers aspects, l’évaluation de comportements de négociateurs devrait prendre en compte des aspects particuliers tels que le contexte dans lequel ces comportements se manifestent (par exemple, l’état du marché). Dans l’étude, on aborde aussi la portée de futures recherches sur les comportements de négociation excessive.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".