Abstract
AbstractThe growing demand for digital investment advisory services and the advancing technological process led to increased attention to this topic in recent literature. In light of these developments, the question arises whether conventional and digital advisors behave differently in their investment advisory decisions. I therefore conducted a systematic literature review and evaluated 97 publications on the determinants of conventional and digital investment advisory decisions. Based on the literature, five main determinants were identified that are important for investment advisory decisions. These determinants are identical for both variants of the advice, but there are differences in the way they are addressed. This systematic literature review provides an overview of the current state of research and can therefore help identify areas where investment advice can be improved in the future.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference111 articles.
1. Adam M, Toutaoui J, Pfeuffer N, Hinz O (2020) Investment decisions with robo-advisors: the role of anthropomorphism and personalized anchors in recommendations. In: Proceedings of the 27th European conference on information systems (ECIS). https://aisel.aisnet.org/ecis2019_rp/33
2. Ahn W, Lee HS, Ryou H, Oh KJ (2020) Asset allocation model for a robo-advisor using the financial market instability index and genetic algorithms. Sustainability 12(3):849–864. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12030849
3. Alsabah H, Capponi A, Lacedelli OR, Stern M (2021) Robo-advising: learning investors’ risk preferences via portfolio choices. J Financ Econom 19(2):369–392. https://doi.org/10.1093/jjfinec/nbz040
4. Angelova V, Regner T (2013) Do voluntary payments to advisors improve the quality of financial advice? An experimental deception game. J Econ Behav Organ 93:205–218. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jebo.2013.03.022
5. Baeckström Y, Marsh IW, Silvester J (2021) Variations in investment advice provision: a study of financial advisors of millionaire investors. J Econ Behav Organ 188:716–735. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jebo.2021.05.008