Behavioral Biases and Investment Decision-Making in the Indian Stock Market: The Moderating Role of Financial Literacy and Investor Experience.

Behavioral Biases and Investment Decision-Making in... | F1000Research "use strict";function _typeof(t){return(_typeof="function"==typeof Symbol&&"symbol"==typeof Symbol.iterator?function(t){return typeof t}:function(t){return t&&"function"==typeof Symbol&&t.constructor===Symbol&&t!==Symbol.prototype?"symbol":typeof t})(t)}!function(){var t=function(){var t,e,o=[],n=window,r=n;for(;r;){try{if(r.frames.__tcfapiLocator){t=r;break}}catch(t){}if(r===n.top)break;r=r.parent}t||(!function t(){var e=n.document,o=!!n.frames.__tcfapiLocator;if(!o)if(e.body){var r=e.createElement("iframe");r.style.cssText="display:none",r.name="__tcfapiLocator",e.body.appendChild(r)}else setTimeout(t,5);return!o}(),n.__tcfapi=function(){for(var t=arguments.length,n=new Array(t),r=0;r 3&&2===parseInt(n[1],10)&&"boolean"==typeof n[3]&&(e=n[3],"function"==typeof n[2]&&n[2]("set",!0)):"ping"===n[0]?"function"==typeof n[2]&&n[2]({gdprApplies:e,cmpLoaded:!1,cmpStatus:"stub"}):o.push(n)},n.addEventListener("message",(function(t){var e="string"==typeof t.data,o={};if(e)try{o=JSON.parse(t.data)}catch(t){}else o=t.data;var n="object"===_typeof(o)&&null!==o?o.__tcfapiCall:null;n&&window.__tcfapi(n.command,n.version,(function(o,r){var a={__tcfapiReturn:{returnValue:o,success:r,callId:n.callId}};t&&t.source&&t.source.postMessage&&t.source.postMessage(e?JSON.stringify(a):a,"*")}),n.parameter)}),!1))};"undefined"!=typeof module?module.exports=t:t()}(); dataLayer = dataLayer || []; // Standard GTM initialization - Google Consent Mode handles consent automatically (function(w,d,s,l,i){w[l]=w[l]||[];w[l].push({'gtm.start': new Date().getTime(),event:'gtm.js'});var f=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0], j=d.createElement(s),dl=l!='dataLayer'?'&l='+l:'';j.async=true;j.src= 'https://www.googletagmanager.com/gtm.js?id='+i+dl+ '>m_auth=hzk0Vc3qFsQYhCrIoHz68A>m_preview=env-1>m_cookies_win=x';f.parentNode.insertBefore(j,f); })(window,document,'script','dataLayer','GTM-MWFK8L5J'); ;window.NREUM||(NREUM={});NREUM.init={distributed_tracing:{enabled:true},privacy:{cookies_enabled:true},ajax:{deny_list:["bam.nr-data.net"]}}; ;NREUM.loader_config={accountID:"438030",trustKey:"438030",agentID:"772317073",licenseKey:"97f8f67f26",applicationID:"772317073"} ;NREUM.info={beacon:"bam.nr-data.net",errorBeacon:"bam.nr-data.net",licenseKey:"97f8f67f26",applicationID:"772317073",sa:1} ;/*! For license information please see nr-loader-spa-1.236.0.min.js.LICENSE.txt */ (()=>{"use strict";var e,t,r={5763:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{P_:()=>l,Mt:()=>g,C5:()=>s,DL:()=>v,OP:()=>T,lF:()=>D,Yu:()=>y,Dg:()=>h,CX:()=>c,GE:()=>b,sU:()=>_});var n=r(8632),i=r(9567);const o={beacon:n.ce.beacon,errorBeacon:n.ce.errorBeacon,licenseKey:void 0,applicationID:void 0,sa:void 0,queueTime:void 0,applicationTime:void 0,ttGuid:void 0,user:void 0,account:void 0,product:void 0,extra:void 0,jsAttributes:{},userAttributes:void 0,atts:void 0,transactionName:void 0,tNamePlain:void 0},a={};function s(e){if(!e)throw new Error("All info objects require an agent identifier!");if(!a[e])throw new Error("Info for ".concat(e," was never set"));return a[e]}function c(e,t){if(!e)throw new Error("All info objects require an agent identifier!");a[e]=(0,i.D)(t,o),(0,n.Qy)(e,a[e],"info")}var u=r(7056);const d=()=>{const e={blockSelector:"[data-nr-block]",maskInputOptions:{password:!0}};return{allow_bfcache:!0,privacy:{cookies_enabled:!0},ajax:{deny_list:void 0,enabled:!0,harvestTimeSeconds:10},distributed_tracing:{enabled:void 0,exclude_newrelic_header:void 0,cors_use_newrelic_header:void 0,cors_use_tracecontext_headers:void 0,allowed_origins:void 0},session:{domain:void 0,expiresMs:u.oD,inactiveMs:u.Hb},ssl:void 0,obfuscate:void 0,jserrors:{enabled:!0,harvestTimeSeconds:10},metrics:{enabled:!0},page_action:{enabled:!0,harvestTimeSeconds:30},page_view_event:{enabled:!0},page_view_timing:{enabled:!0,harvestTimeSeconds:30,long_task:!1},session_trace:{enabled:!0,harvestTimeSeconds:10},harvest:{tooManyRequestsDelay:60},session_replay:{enabled:!1,harvestTimeSeconds:60,sampleRate:.1,errorSampleRate:.1,maskTextSelector:"*",maskAllInputs:!0,get blockClass(){return"nr-block"},get ignoreClass(){return"nr-ignore"},get maskTextClass(){return"nr-mask"},get blockSelector(){return e.blockSelector},set blockSelector(t){e.blockSelector+=",".concat(t)},get maskInputOptions(){return e.maskInputOptions},set maskInputOptions(t){e.maskInputOptions={...t,password:!0}}},spa:{enabled:!0,harvestTimeSeconds:10}}},f={};function l(e){if(!e)throw new Error("All configuration objects require an agent identifier!");if(!f[e])throw new Error("Configuration for ".concat(e," was never set"));return f[e]}function h(e,t){if(!e)throw new Error("All configuration objects require an agent identifier!");f[e]=(0,i.D)(t,d()),(0,n.Qy)(e,f[e],"config")}function g(e,t){if(!e)throw new Error("All configuration objects require an agent identifier!");var r=l(e);if(r){for(var n=t.split("."),i=0;i {r.d(t,{D:()=>i});var n=r(50);function i(e,t){try{if(!e||"object"!=typeof e)return(0,n.Z)("Setting a Configurable requires an object as input");if(!t||"object"!=typeof t)return(0,n.Z)("Setting a Configurable requires a model to set its initial properties");const r=Object.create(Object.getPrototypeOf(t),Object.getOwnPropertyDescriptors(t)),o=0===Object.keys(r).length?e:r;for(let a in o)if(void 0!==e[a])try{"object"==typeof e[a]&&"object"==typeof t[a]?r[a]=i(e[a],t[a]):r[a]=e[a]}catch(e){(0,n.Z)("An error occurred while setting a property of a Configurable",e)}return r}catch(e){(0,n.Z)("An error occured while setting a Configurable",e)}}},6818:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{Re:()=>i,gF:()=>o,q4:()=>n});const n="1.236.0",i="PROD",o="CDN"},385:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{FN:()=>a,IF:()=>u,Nk:()=>f,Tt:()=>s,_A:()=>o,il:()=>n,pL:()=>c,v6:()=>i,w1:()=>d});const n="undefined"!=typeof window&&!!window.document,i="undefined"!=typeof WorkerGlobalScope&&("undefined"!=typeof self&&self instanceof WorkerGlobalScope&&self.navigator instanceof WorkerNavigator||"undefined"!=typeof globalThis&&globalThis instanceof WorkerGlobalScope&&globalThis.navigator instanceof WorkerNavigator),o=n?window:"undefined"!=typeof WorkerGlobalScope&&("undefined"!=typeof self&&self instanceof WorkerGlobalScope&&self||"undefined"!=typeof globalThis&&globalThis instanceof WorkerGlobalScope&&globalThis),a=""+o?.location,s=/iPad|iPhone|iPod/.test(navigator.userAgent),c=s&&"undefined"==typeof SharedWorker,u=(()=>{const e=navigator.userAgent.match(/Firefox[/\s](\d+\.\d+)/);return Array.isArray(e)&&e.length>=2?+e[1]:0})(),d=Boolean(n&&window.document.documentMode),f=!!navigator.sendBeacon},1117:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{w:()=>o});var n=r(50);const i={agentIdentifier:"",ee:void 0};class o{constructor(e){try{if("object"!=typeof e)return(0,n.Z)("shared context requires an object as input");this.sharedContext={},Object.assign(this.sharedContext,i),Object.entries(e).forEach((e=>{let[t,r]=e;Object.keys(i).includes(t)&&(this.sharedContext[t]=r)}))}catch(e){(0,n.Z)("An error occured while setting SharedContext",e)}}}},8e3:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{L:()=>d,R:()=>c});var n=r(2177),i=r(1284),o=r(4322),a=r(3325);const s={};function c(e,t){const r={staged:!1,priority:a.p[t]||0};u(e),s[e].get(t)||s[e].set(t,r)}function u(e){e&&(s[e]||(s[e]=new Map))}function d(){let e=arguments.length>0&&void 0!==arguments[0]?arguments[0]:"",t=arguments.length>1&&void 0!==arguments[1]?arguments[1]:"feature";if(u(e),!e||!s[e].get(t))return a(t);s[e].get(t).staged=!0;const r=[...s[e]];function a(t){const r=e?n.ee.get(e):n.ee,a=o.X.handlers;if(r.backlog&&a){var s=r.backlog[t],c=a[t];if(c){for(var u=0;s&&u {let[t,r]=e;return r.staged}))&&(r.sort(((e,t)=>e[1].priority-t[1].priority)),r.forEach((e=>{let[t]=e;a(t)})))}function f(e,t){var r=e[1];(0,i.D)(t[r],(function(t,r){var n=e[0];if(r[0]===n){var i=r[1],o=e[3],a=e[2];i.apply(o,a)}}))}},2177:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{c:()=>f,ee:()=>u});var n=r(8632),i=r(2210),o=r(1284),a=r(5763),s="nr@context";let c=(0,n.fP)();var u;function d(){}function f(e){return(0,i.X)(e,s,l)}function l(){return new d}function h(){u.aborted=!0,u.backlog={}}c.ee?u=c.ee:(u=function e(t,r){var n={},c={},f={},g=!1;try{g=16===r.length&&(0,a.OP)(r).isolatedBacklog}catch(e){}var p={on:b,addEventListener:b,removeEventListener:y,emit:v,get:x,listeners:w,context:m,buffer:A,abort:h,aborted:!1,isBuffering:E,debugId:r,backlog:g?{}:t&&"object"==typeof t.backlog?t.backlog:{}};return p;function m(e){return e&&e instanceof d?e:e?(0,i.X)(e,s,l):l()}function v(e,r,n,i,o){if(!1!==o&&(o=!0),!u.aborted||i){t&&o&&t.emit(e,r,n);for(var a=m(n),s=w(e),d=s.length,f=0;fn,p:()=>i});var n=r(2177).ee.get("handle");function i(e,t,r,i,o){o?(o.buffer([e],i),o.emit(e,t,r)):(n.buffer([e],i),n.emit(e,t,r))}},4322:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{X:()=>o});var n=r(5546);o.on=a;var i=o.handlers={};function o(e,t,r,o){a(o||n.E,i,e,t,r)}function a(e,t,r,i,o){o||(o="feature"),e||(e=n.E);var a=t[o]=t[o]||{};(a[r]=a[r]||[]).push([e,i])}},3239:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{bP:()=>s,iz:()=>c,m$:()=>a});var n=r(385);let i=!1,o=!1;try{const e={get passive(){return i=!0,!1},get signal(){return o=!0,!1}};n._A.addEventListener("test",null,e),n._A.removeEventListener("test",null,e)}catch(e){}function a(e,t){return i||o?{capture:!!e,passive:i,signal:t}:!!e}function s(e,t){let r=arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2]&&arguments[2],n=arguments.length>3?arguments[3]:void 0;window.addEventListener(e,t,a(r,n))}function c(e,t){let r=arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2]&&arguments[2],n=arguments.length>3?arguments[3]:void 0;document.addEventListener(e,t,a(r,n))}},4402:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{Ht:()=>u,M:()=>c,Rl:()=>a,ky:()=>s});var n=r(385);const i="xxxxxxxx-xxxx-4xxx-yxxx-xxxxxxxxxxxx";function o(e,t){return e?15&e[t]:16*Math.random()|0}function a(){const e=n._A?.crypto||n._A?.msCrypto;let t,r=0;return e&&e.getRandomValues&&(t=e.getRandomValues(new Uint8Array(31))),i.split("").map((e=>"x"===e?o(t,++r).toString(16):"y"===e?(3&o()|8).toString(16):e)).join("")}function s(e){const t=n._A?.crypto||n._A?.msCrypto;let r,i=0;t&&t.getRandomValues&&(r=t.getRandomValues(new Uint8Array(31)));const a=[];for(var s=0;s {r.d(t,{Bq:()=>n,Hb:()=>o,oD:()=>i});const n="NRBA",i=144e5,o=18e5},7894:(e,t,r)=>{function n(){return Math.round(performance.now())}r.d(t,{z:()=>n})},7243:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{e:()=>o});var n=r(385),i={};function o(e){if(e in i)return i[e];if(0===(e||"").indexOf("data:"))return{protocol:"data"};let t;var r=n._A?.location,o={};if(n.il)t=document.createElement("a"),t.href=e;else try{t=new URL(e,r.href)}catch(e){return o}o.port=t.port;var a=t.href.split("://");!o.port&&a[1]&&(o.port=a[1].split("/")[0].split("@").pop().split(":")[1]),o.port&&"0"!==o.port||(o.port="https"===a[0]?"443":"80"),o.hostname=t.hostname||r.hostname,o.pathname=t.pathname,o.protocol=a[0],"/"!==o.pathname.charAt(0)&&(o.pathname="/"+o.pathname);var s=!t.protocol||":"===t.protocol||t.protocol===r.protocol,c=t.hostname===r.hostname&&t.port===r.port;return o.sameOrigin=s&&(!t.hostname||c),"/"===o.pathname&&(i[e]=o),o}},50:(e,t,r)=>{function n(e,t){"function"==typeof console.warn&&(console.warn("New Relic: ".concat(e)),t&&console.warn(t))}r.d(t,{Z:()=>n})},2587:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{N:()=>c,T:()=>u});var n=r(2177),i=r(5546),o=r(8e3),a=r(3325);const s={stn:[a.D.sessionTrace],err:[a.D.jserrors,a.D.metrics],ins:[a.D.pageAction],spa:[a.D.spa],sr:[a.D.sessionReplay,a.D.sessionTrace]};function c(e,t){const r=n.ee.get(t);e&&"object"==typeof e&&(Object.entries(e).forEach((e=>{let[t,n]=e;void 0===u[t]&&(s[t]?s[t].forEach((e=>{n?(0,i.p)("feat-"+t,[],void 0,e,r):(0,i.p)("block-"+t,[],void 0,e,r),(0,i.p)("rumresp-"+t,[Boolean(n)],void 0,e,r)})):n&&(0,i.p)("feat-"+t,[],void 0,void 0,r),u[t]=Boolean(n))})),Object.keys(s).forEach((e=>{void 0===u[e]&&(s[e]?.forEach((t=>(0,i.p)("rumresp-"+e,[!1],void 0,t,r))),u[e]=!1)})),(0,o.L)(t,a.D.pageViewEvent))}const u={}},2210:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{X:()=>i});var n=Object.prototype.hasOwnProperty;function i(e,t,r){if(n.call(e,t))return e[t];var i=r();if(Object.defineProperty&&Object.keys)try{return Object.defineProperty(e,t,{value:i,writable:!0,enumerable:!1}),i}catch(e){}return e[t]=i,i}},1284:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{D:()=>n});const n=(e,t)=>Object.entries(e||{}).map((e=>{let[r,n]=e;return t(r,n)}))},4351:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{P:()=>o});var n=r(2177);const i=()=>{const e=new WeakSet;return(t,r)=>{if("object"==typeof r&&null!==r){if(e.has(r))return;e.add(r)}return r}};function o(e){try{return JSON.stringify(e,i())}catch(e){try{n.ee.emit("internal-error",[e])}catch(e){}}}},3960:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{K:()=>a,b:()=>o});var n=r(3239);function i(){return"undefined"==typeof document||"complete"===document.readyState}function o(e,t){if(i())return e();(0,n.bP)("load",e,t)}function a(e){if(i())return e();(0,n.iz)("DOMContentLoaded",e)}},8632:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{EZ:()=>u,Qy:()=>c,ce:()=>o,fP:()=>a,gG:()=>d,mF:()=>s});var n=r(7894),i=r(385);const o={beacon:"bam.nr-data.net",errorBeacon:"bam.nr-data.net"};function a(){return i._A.NREUM||(i._A.NREUM={}),void 0===i._A.newrelic&&(i._A.newrelic=i._A.NREUM),i._A.NREUM}function s(){let e=a();return e.o||(e.o={ST:i._A.setTimeout,SI:i._A.setImmediate,CT:i._A.clearTimeout,XHR:i._A.XMLHttpRequest,REQ:i._A.Request,EV:i._A.Event,PR:i._A.Promise,MO:i._A.MutationObserver,FETCH:i._A.fetch}),e}function c(e,t,r){let i=a();const o=i.initializedAgents||{},s=o[e]||{};return Object.keys(s).length||(s.initializedAt={ms:(0,n.z)(),date:new Date}),i.initializedAgents={...o,[e]:{...s,[r]:t}},i}function u(e,t){a()[e]=t}function d(){return function(){let e=a();const t=e.info||{};e.info={beacon:o.beacon,errorBeacon:o.errorBeacon,...t}}(),function(){let e=a();const t=e.init||{};e.init={...t}}(),s(),function(){let e=a();const t=e.loader_config||{};e.loader_config={...t}}(),a()}},7956:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{N:()=>i});var n=r(3239);function i(e){let t=arguments.length>1&&void 0!==arguments[1]&&arguments[1],r=arguments.length>2?arguments[2]:void 0,i=arguments.length>3?arguments[3]:void 0;return void(0,n.iz)("visibilitychange",(function(){if(t)return void("hidden"==document.visibilityState&&e());e(document.visibilityState)}),r,i)}},1214:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{em:()=>v,u5:()=>N,QU:()=>S,_L:()=>I,Gm:()=>L,Lg:()=>M,gy:()=>U,BV:()=>Q,Kf:()=>ee});var n=r(2177);const i="nr@original";var o=Object.prototype.hasOwnProperty,a=!1;function s(e,t){return e||(e=n.ee),r.inPlace=function(e,t,n,i,o){n||(n="");var a,s,c,u="-"===n.charAt(0);for(c=0;c 2?n-2:0),o=2;o {r(A[T],e,w),r(E[T],e,w)})),r(l._A,"fetch",y),t.on(y+"end",(function(e,r){var n=this;if(r){var i=r.headers.get("content-length");null!==i&&(n.rxSize=i),t.emit(y+"done",[null,r],n)}else t.emit(y+"done",[e],n)})),t}const O={},j=["pushState","replaceState"];function S(e){const t=function(e){return(e||n.ee).get("history")}(e);return!l.il||O[t.debugId]++||(O[t.debugId]=1,s(t).inPlace(window.history,j,"-")),t}var P=r(3239);const C={},R=["appendChild","insertBefore","replaceChild"];function I(e){const t=function(e){return(e||n.ee).get("jsonp")}(e);if(!l.il||C[t.debugId])return t;C[t.debugId]=!0;var r=s(t),i=/[?&](?:callback|cb)=([^&#]+)/,o=/(.*)\.([^.]+)/,a=/^(\w+)(\.|$)(.*)$/;function c(e,t){var r=e.match(a),n=r[1],i=r[3];return i?c(i,t[n]):t[n]}return r.inPlace(Node.prototype,R,"dom-"),t.on("dom-start",(function(e){!function(e){if(!e||"string"!=typeof e.nodeName||"script"!==e.nodeName.toLowerCase())return;if("function"!=typeof e.addEventListener)return;var n=(a=e.src,s=a.match(i),s?s[1]:null);var a,s;if(!n)return;var u=function(e){var t=e.match(o);if(t&&t.length>=3)return{key:t[2],parent:c(t[1],window)};return{key:e,parent:window}}(n);if("function"!=typeof u.parent[u.key])return;var d={};function f(){t.emit("jsonp-end",[],d),e.removeEventListener("load",f,(0,P.m$)(!1)),e.removeEventListener("error",l,(0,P.m$)(!1))}function l(){t.emit("jsonp-error",[],d),t.emit("jsonp-end",[],d),e.removeEventListener("load",f,(0,P.m$)(!1)),e.removeEventListener("error",l,(0,P.m$)(!1))}r.inPlace(u.parent,[u.key],"cb-",d),e.addEventListener("load",f,(0,P.m$)(!1)),e.addEventListener("error",l,(0,P.m$)(!1)),t.emit("new-jsonp",[e.src],d)}(e[0])})),t}var k=r(5763);const H={};function L(e){const t=function(e){return(e||n.ee).get("mutation")}(e);if(!l.il||H[t.debugId])return t;H[t.debugId]=!0;var r=s(t),i=k.Yu.MO;return i&&(window.MutationObserver=function(e){return this instanceof i?new i(r(e,"fn-")):i.apply(this,arguments)},MutationObserver.prototype=i.prototype),t}const z={};function M(e){const t=function(e){return(e||n.ee).get("promise")}(e);if(z[t.debugId])return t;z[t.debugId]=!0;var r=n.c,o=s(t),a=k.Yu.PR;return a&&function(){function e(r){var n=t.context(),i=o(r,"executor-",n,null,!1);const s=Reflect.construct(a,[i],e);return t.context(s).getCtx=function(){return n},s}l._A.Promise=e,Object.defineProperty(e,"name",{value:"Promise"}),e.toString=function(){return a.toString()},Object.setPrototypeOf(e,a),["all","race"].forEach((function(r){const n=a[r];e[r]=function(e){let i=!1;[...e||[]].forEach((e=>{this.resolve(e).then(a("all"===r),a(!1))}));const o=n.apply(this,arguments);return o;function a(e){return function(){t.emit("propagate",[null,!i],o,!1,!1),i=i||!e}}}})),["resolve","reject"].forEach((function(r){const n=a[r];e[r]=function(e){const r=n.apply(this,arguments);return e!==r&&t.emit("propagate",[e,!0],r,!1,!1),r}})),e.prototype=a.prototype;const n=a.prototype.then;a.prototype.then=function(){var e=this,i=r(e);i.promise=e;for(var a=arguments.length,s=new Array(a),c=0;c e())),t};function m(e,t){i.inPlace(t,["onreadystatechange"],"fn-",E)}function b(){var e=this,t=r.context(e);e.readyState>3&&!t.resolved&&(t.resolved=!0,r.emit("xhr-resolved",[],e)),i.inPlace(e,f,"fn-",E)}if(function(e,t){for(var r in e)t[r]=e[r]}(o,p),p.prototype=o.prototype,i.inPlace(p.prototype,J,"-xhr-",E),r.on("send-xhr-start",(function(e,t){m(e,t),function(e){h.push(e),a&&(y?y.then(A):u?u(A):(w=-w,x.data=w))}(t)})),r.on("open-xhr-start",m),a){var y=c&&c.resolve();if(!u&&!c){var w=1,x=document.createTextNode(w);new a(A).observe(x,{characterData:!0})}}else t.on("fn-end",(function(e){e[0]&&e[0].type===d||A()}));function A(){for(var e=0;e {r.d(t,{t:()=>n});const n=r(3325).D.ajax},6660:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{A:()=>i,t:()=>n});const n=r(3325).D.jserrors,i="nr@seenError"},3081:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{gF:()=>o,mY:()=>i,t9:()=>n,vz:()=>s,xS:()=>a});const n=r(3325).D.metrics,i="sm",o="cm",a="storeSupportabilityMetrics",s="storeEventMetrics"},4649:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{t:()=>n});const n=r(3325).D.pageAction},7633:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{Dz:()=>i,OJ:()=>a,qw:()=>o,t9:()=>n});const n=r(3325).D.pageViewEvent,i="firstbyte",o="domcontent",a="windowload"},9251:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{t:()=>n});const n=r(3325).D.pageViewTiming},3614:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{BST_RESOURCE:()=>i,END:()=>s,FEATURE_NAME:()=>n,FN_END:()=>u,FN_START:()=>c,PUSH_STATE:()=>d,RESOURCE:()=>o,START:()=>a});const n=r(3325).D.sessionTrace,i="bstResource",o="resource",a="-start",s="-end",c="fn"+a,u="fn"+s,d="pushState"},7836:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{BODY:()=>A,CB_END:()=>E,CB_START:()=>u,END:()=>x,FEATURE_NAME:()=>i,FETCH:()=>_,FETCH_BODY:()=>v,FETCH_DONE:()=>m,FETCH_START:()=>p,FN_END:()=>c,FN_START:()=>s,INTERACTION:()=>l,INTERACTION_API:()=>d,INTERACTION_EVENTS:()=>o,JSONP_END:()=>b,JSONP_NODE:()=>g,JS_TIME:()=>T,MAX_TIMER_BUDGET:()=>a,REMAINING:()=>f,SPA_NODE:()=>h,START:()=>w,originalSetTimeout:()=>y});var n=r(5763);const i=r(3325).D.spa,o=["click","submit","keypress","keydown","keyup","change"],a=999,s="fn-start",c="fn-end",u="cb-start",d="api-ixn-",f="remaining",l="interaction",h="spaNode",g="jsonpNode",p="fetch-start",m="fetch-done",v="fetch-body-",b="jsonp-end",y=n.Yu.ST,w="-start",x="-end",A="-body",E="cb"+x,T="jsTime",_="fetch"},5938:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{W:()=>o});var n=r(5763),i=r(2177);class o{constructor(e,t,r){this.agentIdentifier=e,this.aggregator=t,this.ee=i.ee.get(e,(0,n.OP)(this.agentIdentifier).isolatedBacklog),this.featureName=r,this.blocked=!1}}},9144:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{j:()=>m});var n=r(3325),i=r(5763),o=r(5546),a=r(2177),s=r(7894),c=r(8e3),u=r(3960),d=r(385),f=r(50),l=r(3081),h=r(8632);function g(){const e=(0,h.gG)();["setErrorHandler","finished","addToTrace","inlineHit","addRelease","addPageAction","setCurrentRouteName","setPageViewName","setCustomAttribute","interaction","noticeError","setUserId"].forEach((t=>{e[t]=function(){for(var r=arguments.length,n=new Array(r),i=0;i 1?r-1:0),i=1;i {e.exposed&&e.api[t]&&o.push(e.api[t](...n))})),o.length>1?o:o[0]}(t,...n)}}))}var p=r(2587);function m(e){let t=arguments.length>1&&void 0!==arguments[1]?arguments[1]:{},m=arguments.length>2?arguments[2]:void 0,v=arguments.length>3?arguments[3]:void 0,{init:b,info:y,loader_config:w,runtime:x={loaderType:m},exposed:A=!0}=t;const E=(0,h.gG)();y||(b=E.init,y=E.info,w=E.loader_config),(0,i.Dg)(e,b||{}),(0,i.GE)(e,w||{}),(0,i.sU)(e,x),y.jsAttributes??={},d.v6&&(y.jsAttributes.isWorker=!0),(0,i.CX)(e,y),g();const T=function(e,t){t||(0,c.R)(e,"api");const h={};var g=a.ee.get(e),p=g.get("tracer"),m="api-",v=m+"ixn-";function b(t,r,n,o){const a=(0,i.C5)(e);return null===r?delete a.jsAttributes[t]:(0,i.CX)(e,{...a,jsAttributes:{...a.jsAttributes,[t]:r}}),x(m,n,!0,o||null===r?"session":void 0)(t,r)}function y(){}["setErrorHandler","finished","addToTrace","inlineHit","addRelease"].forEach((e=>h[e]=x(m,e,!0,"api"))),h.addPageAction=x(m,"addPageAction",!0,n.D.pageAction),h.setCurrentRouteName=x(m,"routeName",!0,n.D.spa),h.setPageViewName=function(t,r){if("string"==typeof t)return"/"!==t.charAt(0)&&(t="/"+t),(0,i.OP)(e).customTransaction=(r||"http://custom.transaction")+t,x(m,"setPageViewName",!0)()},h.setCustomAttribute=function(e,t){let r=arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2]&&arguments[2];if("string"==typeof e){if(["string","number"].includes(typeof t)||null===t)return b(e,t,"setCustomAttribute",r);(0,f.Z)("Failed to execute setCustomAttribute.\nNon-null value must be a string or number type, but a type of was provided."))}else(0,f.Z)("Failed to execute setCustomAttribute.\nName must be a string type, but a type of was provided."))},h.setUserId=function(e){if("string"==typeof e||null===e)return b("enduser.id",e,"setUserId",!0);(0,f.Z)("Failed to execute setUserId.\nNon-null value must be a string type, but a type of was provided."))},h.interaction=function(){return(new y).get()};var w=y.prototype={createTracer:function(e,t){var r={},i=this,a="function"==typeof t;return(0,o.p)(v+"tracer",[(0,s.z)(),e,r],i,n.D.spa,g),function(){if(p.emit((a?"":"no-")+"fn-start",[(0,s.z)(),i,a],r),a)try{return t.apply(this,arguments)}catch(e){throw p.emit("fn-err",[arguments,this,"string"==typeof e?new Error(e):e],r),e}finally{p.emit("fn-end",[(0,s.z)()],r)}}}};function x(e,t,r,i){return function(){return(0,o.p)(l.xS,["API/"+t+"/called"],void 0,n.D.metrics,g),i&&(0,o.p)(e+t,[(0,s.z)(),...arguments],r?null:this,i,g),r?void 0:this}}function A(){r.e(439).then(r.bind(r,7438)).then((t=>{let{setAPI:r}=t;r(e),(0,c.L)(e,"api")})).catch((()=>(0,f.Z)("Downloading runtime APIs failed...")))}return["actionText","setName","setAttribute","save","ignore","onEnd","getContext","end","get"].forEach((e=>{w[e]=x(v,e,void 0,n.D.spa)})),h.noticeError=function(e,t){"string"==typeof e&&(e=new Error(e)),(0,o.p)(l.xS,["API/noticeError/called"],void 0,n.D.metrics,g),(0,o.p)("err",[e,(0,s.z)(),!1,t],void 0,n.D.jserrors,g)},d.il?(0,u.b)((()=>A()),!0):A(),h}(e,v);return(0,h.Qy)(e,T,"api"),(0,h.Qy)(e,A,"exposed"),(0,h.EZ)("activatedFeatures",p.T),T}},3325:(e,t,r)=>{r.d(t,{D:()=>n,p:()=>i});const n={ajax:"ajax",jserrors:"jserrors",metrics:"metrics",pageAction:"page_action",pageViewEvent:"page_view_event",pageViewTiming:"page_view_timing",sessionReplay:"session_replay",sessionTrace:"session_trace",spa:"spa"},i={[n.pageViewEvent]:1,[n.pageViewTiming]:2,[n.metrics]:3,[n.jserrors]:4,[n.ajax]:5,[n.sessionTrace]:6,[n.pageAction]:7,[n.spa]:8,[n.sessionReplay]:9}}},n={};function i(e){var t=n[e];if(void 0!==t)return t.exports;var o=n[e]={exports:{}};return r[e](o,o.exports,i),o.exports}i.m=r,i.d=(e,t)=>{for(var r in t)i.o(t,r)&&!i.o(e,r)&&Object.defineProperty(e,r,{enumerable:!0,get:t[r]})},i.f={},i.e=e=>Promise.all(Object.keys(i.f).reduce(((t,r)=>(i.f[r](e,t),t)),[])),i.u=e=>(({78:"page_action-aggregate",147:"metrics-aggregate",242:"session-manager",317:"jserrors-aggregate",348:"page_view_timing-aggregate",412:"lazy-feature-loader",439:"async-api",538:"recorder",590:"session_replay-aggregate",675:"compressor",733:"session_trace-aggregate",786:"page_view_event-aggregate",873:"spa-aggregate",898:"ajax-aggregate"}[e]||e)+"."+{78:"ac76d497",147:"3dc53903",148:"1a20d5fe",242:"2a64278a",317:"49e41428",348:"bd6de33a",412:"2f55ce66",439:"30bd804e",538:"1b18459f",590:"cf0efb30",675:"ae9f91a8",733:"83105561",786:"06482edd",860:"03a8b7a5",873:"e6b09d52",898:"998ef92b"}[e]+"-1.236.0.min.js"),i.o=(e,t)=>Object.prototype.hasOwnProperty.call(e,t),e={},t="NRBA:",i.l=(r,n,o,a)=>{if(e[r])e[r].push(n);else{var s,c;if(void 0!==o)for(var u=document.getElementsByTagName("script"),d=0;d {s.onerror=s.onload=null,clearTimeout(h);var i=e[r];if(delete e[r],s.parentNode&&s.parentNode.removeChild(s),i&&i.forEach((e=>e(n))),t)return t(n)},h=setTimeout(l.bind(null,void 0,{type:"timeout",target:s}),12e4);s.onerror=l.bind(null,s.onerror),s.onload=l.bind(null,s.onload),c&&document.head.appendChild(s)}},i.r=e=>{"undefined"!=typeof Symbol&&Symbol.toStringTag&&Object.defineProperty(e,Symbol.toStringTag,{value:"Module"}),Object.defineProperty(e,"__esModule",{value:!0})},i.j=364,i.p="https://js-agent.newrelic.com/",(()=>{var e={364:0,953:0};i.f.j=(t,r)=>{var n=i.o(e,t)?e[t]:void 0;if(0!==n)if(n)r.push(n[2]);else{var o=new Promise(((r,i)=>n=e[t]=[r,i]));r.push(n[2]=o);var a=i.p+i.u(t),s=new Error;i.l(a,(r=>{if(i.o(e,t)&&(0!==(n=e[t])&&(e[t]=void 0),n)){var o=r&&("load"===r.type?"missing":r.type),a=r&&r.target&&r.target.src;s.message="Loading chunk "+t+" failed.\n("+o+": "+a+")",s.name="ChunkLoadError",s.type=o,s.request=a,n[1](s)}}),"chunk-"+t,t)}};var t=(t,r)=>{var n,o,[a,s,c]=r,u=0;if(a.some((t=>0!==e[t]))){for(n in s)i.o(s,n)&&(i.m[n]=s[n]);if(c)c(i)}for(t&&t(r);u {i.r(o);var e=i(3325),t=i(5763);const r=Object.values(e.D);function n(e){const n={};return r.forEach((r=>{n[r]=function(e,r){return!1!==(0,t.Mt)(r,"".concat(e,".enabled"))}(r,e)})),n}var a=i(9144);var s=i(5546),c=i(385),u=i(8e3),d=i(5938),f=i(3960),l=i(50);class h extends d.W{constructor(e,t,r){let n=!(arguments.length>3&&void 0!==arguments[3])||arguments[3];super(e,t,r),this.auto=n,this.abortHandler,this.featAggregate,this.onAggregateImported,n&&(0,u.R)(e,r)}importAggregator(){let e=arguments.length>0&&void 0!==arguments[0]?arguments[0]:{};if(this.featAggregate||!this.auto)return;const r=c.il&&!0===(0,t.Mt)(this.agentIdentifier,"privacy.cookies_enabled");let n;this.onAggregateImported=new Promise((e=>{n=e}));const o=async()=>{let t;try{if(r){const{setupAgentSession:e}=await Promise.all([i.e(860),i.e(242)]).then(i.bind(i,3228));t=e(this.agentIdentifier)}}catch(e){(0,l.Z)("A problem occurred when starting up session manager. This page will not start or extend any session.",e)}try{if(!this.shouldImportAgg(this.featureName,t))return void(0,u.L)(this.agentIdentifier,this.featureName);const{lazyFeatureLoader:r}=await i.e(412).then(i.bind(i,8582)),{Aggregate:o}=await r(this.featureName,"aggregate");this.featAggregate=new o(this.agentIdentifier,this.aggregator,e),n(!0)}catch(e){(0,l.Z)("Downloading and initializing ".concat(this.featureName," failed..."),e),this.abortHandler?.(),n(!1)}};c.il?(0,f.b)((()=>o()),!0):o()}shouldImportAgg(r,n){return r!==e.D.sessionReplay||!1!==(0,t.Mt)(this.agentIdentifier,"session_trace.enabled")&&(!!n?.isNew||!!n?.state.sessionReplay)}}var g=i(7633),p=i(7894);class m extends h{static featureName=g.t9;constructor(r,n){let i=!(arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2];if(super(r,n,g.t9,i),("undefined"==typeof PerformanceNavigationTiming||c.Tt)&&"undefined"!=typeof PerformanceTiming){const n=(0,t.OP)(r);n[g.Dz]=Math.max(Date.now()-n.offset,0),(0,f.K)((()=>n[g.qw]=Math.max((0,p.z)()-n[g.Dz],0))),(0,f.b)((()=>{const t=(0,p.z)();n[g.OJ]=Math.max(t-n[g.Dz],0),(0,s.p)("timing",["load",t],void 0,e.D.pageViewTiming,this.ee)}))}this.importAggregator()}}var v=i(1117),b=i(1284);class y extends v.w{constructor(e){super(e),this.aggregatedData={}}store(e,t,r,n,i){var o=this.getBucket(e,t,r,i);return o.metrics=function(e,t){t||(t={count:0});return t.count+=1,(0,b.D)(e,(function(e,r){t[e]=w(r,t[e])})),t}(n,o.metrics),o}merge(e,t,r,n,i){var o=this.getBucket(e,t,n,i);if(o.metrics){var a=o.metrics;a.count+=r.count,(0,b.D)(r,(function(e,t){if("count"!==e){var n=a[e],i=r[e];i&&!i.c?a[e]=w(i.t,n):a[e]=function(e,t){if(!t)return e;t.c||(t=x(t.t));return t.min=Math.min(e.min,t.min),t.max=Math.max(e.max,t.max),t.t+=e.t,t.sos+=e.sos,t.c+=e.c,t}(i,a[e])}}))}else o.metrics=r}storeMetric(e,t,r,n){var i=this.getBucket(e,t,r);return i.stats=w(n,i.stats),i}getBucket(e,t,r,n){this.aggregatedData[e]||(this.aggregatedData[e]={});var i=this.aggregatedData[e][t];return i||(i=this.aggregatedData[e][t]={params:r||{}},n&&(i.custom=n)),i}get(e,t){return t?this.aggregatedData[e]&&this.aggregatedData[e][t]:this.aggregatedData[e]}take(e){for(var t={},r="",n=!1,i=0;i t.max&&(t.max=e),e 2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2];super(e,r,j.t,n),c.il&&((0,t.OP)(e).initHidden=Boolean("hidden"===document.visibilityState),(0,N.N)((()=>(0,s.p)("docHidden",[(0,p.z)()],void 0,j.t,this.ee)),!0),(0,O.bP)("pagehide",(()=>(0,s.p)("winPagehide",[(0,p.z)()],void 0,j.t,this.ee))),this.importAggregator())}}var P=i(3081);class C extends h{static featureName=P.t9;constructor(e,t){let r=!(arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2];super(e,t,P.t9,r),this.importAggregator()}}var R,I=i(2210),k=i(1214),H=i(2177),L={};try{R=localStorage.getItem("__nr_flags").split(","),console&&"function"==typeof console.log&&(L.console=!0,-1!==R.indexOf("dev")&&(L.dev=!0),-1!==R.indexOf("nr_dev")&&(L.nrDev=!0))}catch(e){}function z(e){try{L.console&&z(e)}catch(e){}}L.nrDev&&H.ee.on("internal-error",(function(e){z(e.stack)})),L.dev&&H.ee.on("fn-err",(function(e,t,r){z(r.stack)})),L.dev&&(z("NR AGENT IN DEVELOPMENT MODE"),z("flags: "+(0,b.D)(L,(function(e,t){return e})).join(", ")));var M=i(6660);class B extends h{static featureName=M.t;constructor(r,n){let i=!(arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2];super(r,n,M.t,i),this.skipNext=0;try{this.removeOnAbort=new AbortController}catch(e){}const o=this;o.ee.on("fn-start",(function(e,t,r){o.abortHandler&&(o.skipNext+=1)})),o.ee.on("fn-err",(function(t,r,n){o.abortHandler&&!n[M.A]&&((0,I.X)(n,M.A,(function(){return!0})),this.thrown=!0,(0,s.p)("err",[n,(0,p.z)()],void 0,e.D.jserrors,o.ee))})),o.ee.on("fn-end",(function(){o.abortHandler&&!this.thrown&&o.skipNext>0&&(o.skipNext-=1)})),o.ee.on("internal-error",(function(t){(0,s.p)("ierr",[t,(0,p.z)(),!0],void 0,e.D.jserrors,o.ee)})),this.origOnerror=c._A.onerror,c._A.onerror=this.onerrorHandler.bind(this),c._A.addEventListener("unhandledrejection",(t=>{const r=function(e){let t="Unhandled Promise Rejection: ";if(e instanceof Error)try{return e.message=t+e.message,e}catch(t){return e}if(void 0===e)return new Error(t);try{return new Error(t+(0,D.P)(e))}catch(e){return new Error(t)}}(t.reason);(0,s.p)("err",[r,(0,p.z)(),!1,{unhandledPromiseRejection:1}],void 0,e.D.jserrors,this.ee)}),(0,O.m$)(!1,this.removeOnAbort?.signal)),(0,k.gy)(this.ee),(0,k.BV)(this.ee),(0,k.em)(this.ee),(0,t.OP)(r).xhrWrappable&&(0,k.Kf)(this.ee),this.abortHandler=this.#e,this.importAggregator()}#e(){this.removeOnAbort?.abort(),this.abortHandler=void 0}onerrorHandler(t,r,n,i,o){"function"==typeof this.origOnerror&&this.origOnerror(...arguments);try{this.skipNext?this.skipNext-=1:(0,s.p)("err",[o||new F(t,r,n),(0,p.z)()],void 0,e.D.jserrors,this.ee)}catch(t){try{(0,s.p)("ierr",[t,(0,p.z)(),!0],void 0,e.D.jserrors,this.ee)}catch(e){}}return!1}}function F(e,t,r){this.message=e||"Uncaught error with no additional information",this.sourceURL=t,this.line=r}let U=1;const q="nr@id";function G(e){const t=typeof e;return!e||"object"!==t&&"function"!==t?-1:e===c._A?0:(0,I.X)(e,q,(function(){return U++}))}function V(e){if("string"==typeof e&&e.length)return e.length;if("object"==typeof e){if("undefined"!=typeof ArrayBuffer&&e instanceof ArrayBuffer&&e.byteLength)return e.byteLength;if("undefined"!=typeof Blob&&e instanceof Blob&&e.size)return e.size;if(!("undefined"!=typeof FormData&&e instanceof FormData))try{return(0,D.P)(e).length}catch(e){return}}}var X=i(7243);class W{constructor(e){this.agentIdentifier=e,this.generateTracePayload=this.generateTracePayload.bind(this),this.shouldGenerateTrace=this.shouldGenerateTrace.bind(this)}generateTracePayload(e){if(!this.shouldGenerateTrace(e))return null;var r=(0,t.DL)(this.agentIdentifier);if(!r)return null;var n=(r.accountID||"").toString()||null,i=(r.agentID||"").toString()||null,o=(r.trustKey||"").toString()||null;if(!n||!i)return null;var a=(0,_.M)(),s=(0,_.Ht)(),c=Date.now(),u={spanId:a,traceId:s,timestamp:c};return(e.sameOrigin||this.isAllowedOrigin(e)&&this.useTraceContextHeadersForCors())&&(u.traceContextParentHeader=this.generateTraceContextParentHeader(a,s),u.traceContextStateHeader=this.generateTraceContextStateHeader(a,c,n,i,o)),(e.sameOrigin&&!this.excludeNewrelicHeader()||!e.sameOrigin&&this.isAllowedOrigin(e)&&this.useNewrelicHeaderForCors())&&(u.newrelicHeader=this.generateTraceHeader(a,s,c,n,i,o)),u}generateTraceContextParentHeader(e,t){return"00-"+t+"-"+e+"-01"}generateTraceContextStateHeader(e,t,r,n,i){return i+"@nr=0-1-"+r+"-"+n+"-"+e+"----"+t}generateTraceHeader(e,t,r,n,i,o){if(!("function"==typeof c._A?.btoa))return null;var a={v:[0,1],d:{ty:"Browser",ac:n,ap:i,id:e,tr:t,ti:r}};return o&&n!==o&&(a.d.tk=o),btoa((0,D.P)(a))}shouldGenerateTrace(e){return this.isDtEnabled()&&this.isAllowedOrigin(e)}isAllowedOrigin(e){var r=!1,n={};if((0,t.Mt)(this.agentIdentifier,"distributed_tracing")&&(n=(0,t.P_)(this.agentIdentifier).distributed_tracing),e.sameOrigin)r=!0;else if(n.allowed_origins instanceof Array)for(var i=0;i 2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2];super(r,n,Z.t,i),(0,t.OP)(r).xhrWrappable&&(this.dt=new W(r),this.handler=(e,t,r,n)=>(0,s.p)(e,t,r,n,this.ee),(0,k.u5)(this.ee),(0,k.Kf)(this.ee),function(r,n,i,o){function a(e){var t=this;t.totalCbs=0,t.called=0,t.cbTime=0,t.end=E,t.ended=!1,t.xhrGuids={},t.lastSize=null,t.loadCaptureCalled=!1,t.params=this.params||{},t.metrics=this.metrics||{},e.addEventListener("load",(function(r){_(t,e)}),(0,O.m$)(!1)),c.IF||e.addEventListener("progress",(function(e){t.lastSize=e.loaded}),(0,O.m$)(!1))}function s(e){this.params={method:e[0]},T(this,e[1]),this.metrics={}}function u(e,n){var i=(0,t.DL)(r);i.xpid&&this.sameOrigin&&n.setRequestHeader("X-NewRelic-ID",i.xpid);var a=o.generateTracePayload(this.parsedOrigin);if(a){var s=!1;a.newrelicHeader&&(n.setRequestHeader("newrelic",a.newrelicHeader),s=!0),a.traceContextParentHeader&&(n.setRequestHeader("traceparent",a.traceContextParentHeader),a.traceContextStateHeader&&n.setRequestHeader("tracestate",a.traceContextStateHeader),s=!0),s&&(this.dt=a)}}function d(e,t){var r=this.metrics,i=e[0],o=this;if(r&&i){var a=V(i);a&&(r.txSize=a)}this.startTime=(0,p.z)(),this.listener=function(e){try{"abort"!==e.type||o.loadCaptureCalled||(o.params.aborted=!0),("load"!==e.type||o.called===o.totalCbs&&(o.onloadCalled||"function"!=typeof t.onload)&&"function"==typeof o.end)&&o.end(t)}catch(e){try{n.emit("internal-error",[e])}catch(e){}}};for(var s=0;s 1?e[1]=i:e.push(i)}else e[0]&&e[0].headers&&s(e[0].headers,n)&&(this.dt=n);function s(e,t){var r=!1;return t.newrelicHeader&&(e.set("newrelic",t.newrelicHeader),r=!0),t.traceContextParentHeader&&(e.set("traceparent",t.traceContextParentHeader),t.traceContextStateHeader&&e.set("tracestate",t.traceContextStateHeader),r=!0),r}}function x(e,t){this.params={},this.metrics={},this.startTime=(0,p.z)(),this.dt=t,e.length>=1&&(this.target=e[0]),e.length>=2&&(this.opts=e[1]);var r,n=this.opts||{},i=this.target;"string"==typeof i?r=i:"object"==typeof i&&i instanceof Y?r=i.url:c._A?.URL&&"object"==typeof i&&i instanceof URL&&(r=i.href),T(this,r);var o=(""+(i&&i instanceof Y&&i.method||n.method||"GET")).toUpperCase();this.params.method=o,this.txSize=V(n.body)||0}function A(t,r){var n;this.endTime=(0,p.z)(),this.params||(this.params={}),this.params.status=r?r.status:0,"string"==typeof this.rxSize&&this.rxSize.length>0&&(n=+this.rxSize);var o={txSize:this.txSize,rxSize:n,duration:(0,p.z)()-this.startTime};i("xhr",[this.params,o,this.startTime,this.endTime,"fetch"],this,e.D.ajax)}function E(t){var r=this.params,n=this.metrics;if(!this.ended){this.ended=!0;for(var o=0;o 2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2];super(e,t,we.t,r),this.importAggregator()}}new class{constructor(e){let t=arguments.length>1&&void 0!==arguments[1]?arguments[1]:(0,_.ky)(16);c._A?(this.agentIdentifier=t,this.sharedAggregator=new y({agentIdentifier:this.agentIdentifier}),this.features={},this.desiredFeatures=new Set(e.features||[]),this.desiredFeatures.add(m),Object.assign(this,(0,a.j)(this.agentIdentifier,e,e.loaderType||"agent")),this.start()):(0,l.Z)("Failed to initial the agent. Could not determine the runtime environment.")}get config(){return{info:(0,t.C5)(this.agentIdentifier),init:(0,t.P_)(this.agentIdentifier),loader_config:(0,t.DL)(this.agentIdentifier),runtime:(0,t.OP)(this.agentIdentifier)}}start(){const t="features";try{const r=n(this.agentIdentifier),i=[...this.desiredFeatures];i.sort(((t,r)=>e.p[t.featureName]-e.p[r.featureName])),i.forEach((t=>{if(r[t.featureName]||t.featureName===e.D.pageViewEvent){const n=function(t){switch(t){case e.D.ajax:return[e.D.jserrors];case e.D.sessionTrace:return[e.D.ajax,e.D.pageViewEvent];case e.D.sessionReplay:return[e.D.sessionTrace];case e.D.pageViewTiming:return[e.D.pageViewEvent];default:return[]}}(t.featureName);n.every((e=>r[e]))||(0,l.Z)("".concat(t.featureName," is enabled but one or more dependent features has been disabled (").concat((0,D.P)(n),"). This may cause unintended consequences or missing data...")),this.features[t.featureName]=new t(this.agentIdentifier,this.sharedAggregator)}})),(0,T.Qy)(this.agentIdentifier,this.features,t)}catch(e){(0,l.Z)("Failed to initialize all enabled instrument classes (agent aborted) -",e);for(const e in this.features)this.features[e].abortHandler?.();const r=(0,T.fP)();return delete r.initializedAgents[this.agentIdentifier]?.api,delete r.initializedAgents[this.agentIdentifier]?.[t],delete this.sharedAggregator,r.ee?.abort(),delete r.ee?.get(this.agentIdentifier),!1}}}({features:[J,m,S,class extends h{static featureName=oe;constructor(t,r){if(super(t,r,oe,!(arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2]),!c.il)return;const n=this.ee;let i;(0,k.QU)(n),this.eventsEE=(0,k.em)(n),this.eventsEE.on(se,(function(e,t){this.bstStart=(0,p.z)()})),this.eventsEE.on(ae,(function(t,r){(0,s.p)("bst",[t[0],r,this.bstStart,(0,p.z)()],void 0,e.D.sessionTrace,n)})),n.on(ce+ne,(function(e){this.time=(0,p.z)(),this.startPath=location.pathname+location.hash})),n.on(ce+ie,(function(t){(0,s.p)("bstHist",[location.pathname+location.hash,this.startPath,this.time],void 0,e.D.sessionTrace,n)}));try{i=new PerformanceObserver((t=>{const r=t.getEntries();(0,s.p)(te,[r],void 0,e.D.sessionTrace,n)})),i.observe({type:re,buffered:!0})}catch(e){}this.importAggregator({resourceObserver:i})}},C,xe,B,class extends h{static featureName=de;constructor(e,r){if(super(e,r,de,!(arguments.length>2&&void 0!==arguments[2])||arguments[2]),!c.il)return;if(!(0,t.OP)(e).xhrWrappable)return;try{this.removeOnAbort=new AbortController}catch(e){}let n,i=0;const o=this.ee.get("tracer"),a=(0,k._L)(this.ee),s=(0,k.Lg)(this.ee),u=(0,k.BV)(this.ee),d=(0,k.Kf)(this.ee),f=this.ee.get("events"),l=(0,k.u5)(this.ee),h=(0,k.QU)(this.ee),g=(0,k.Gm)(this.ee);function m(e,t){h.emit("newURL",[""+window.location,t])}function v(){i++,n=window.location.hash,this[ve]=(0,p.z)()}function b(){i--,window.location.hash!==n&&m(0,!0);var e=(0,p.z)();this[pe]=~~this[pe]+e-this[ve],this[ye]=e}function y(e,t){e.on(t,(function(){this[t]=(0,p.z)()}))}this.ee.on(ve,v),s.on(be,v),a.on(be,v),this.ee.on(ye,b),s.on(ge,b),a.on(ge,b),this.ee.buffer([ve,ye,"xhr-resolved"],this.featureName),f.buffer([ve],this.featureName),u.buffer(["setTimeout"+le,"clearTimeout"+fe,ve],this.featureName),d.buffer([ve,"new-xhr","send-xhr"+fe],this.featureName),l.buffer([me+fe,me+"-done",me+he+fe,me+he+le],this.featureName),h.buffer(["newURL"],this.featureName),g.buffer([ve],this.featureName),s.buffer(["propagate",be,ge,"executor-err","resolve"+fe],this.featureName),o.buffer([ve,"no-"+ve],this.featureName),a.buffer(["new-jsonp","cb-start","jsonp-error","jsonp-end"],this.featureName),y(l,me+fe),y(l,me+"-done"),y(a,"new-jsonp"),y(a,"jsonp-end"),y(a,"cb-start"),h.on("pushState-end",m),h.on("replaceState-end",m),window.addEventListener("hashchange",m,(0,O.m$)(!0,this.removeOnAbort?.signal)),window.addEventListener("load",m,(0,O.m$)(!0,this.removeOnAbort?.signal)),window.addEventListener("popstate",(function(){m(0,i>1)}),(0,O.m$)(!0,this.removeOnAbort?.signal)),this.abortHandler=this.#e,this.importAggregator()}#e(){this.removeOnAbort?.abort(),this.abortHandler=void 0}}],loaderType:"spa"})})(),window.NRBA=o})(); window.jQuery || document.write(' ') CKEDITOR_BASEPATH='https://f1000research.com/js/vendor/ckeditor/' window.reactTheme = 'research'; window.MathJax = { CommonHTML: { linebreaks: { automatic: true } }, 'HTML-CSS': { linebreaks: { automatic: true } }, SVG: { linebreaks: { automatic: true } }, AuthorInit: function() { MathJax.Hub.Register.MessageHook('End Process', function () { let timeout = false; // holder for timeout id const delay = 250; // delay after event is "complete" to run callback const reflowMath = function() { const dispFormulas = document.querySelectorAll('.disp-formula.panel'); if (!dispFormulas) { return; } for (const dispFormula of dispFormulas) { const child = dispFormula.querySelector('.MathJax_Preview').nextSibling.firstChild; const isMultiline = MathJax.Hub.getAllJax(dispFormula)[0].root.isMultiline; if (dispFormula.offsetWidth < child.offsetWidth || isMultiline) { MathJax.Hub.Queue(['Rerender', MathJax.Hub, dispFormula]); } } }; window.addEventListener('resize', function() { clearTimeout(timeout); // clear the timeout timeout = setTimeout(reflowMath, delay); // start timing for event "completion" }); }); }, }; if (window.location.hash == '#_=_'){ window.location = window.location.href.split('#')[0] } !function(f,b,e,v,n,t,s){if(f.fbq)return;n=f.fbq=function() {n.callMethod? n.callMethod.apply(n,arguments):n.queue.push(arguments)} ;if(!f._fbq)f._fbq=n; n.push=n;n.loaded=!0;n.version='2.0';n.queue=[];t=b.createElement(e);t.async=!0; t.src=v;s=b.getElementsByTagName(e)[0];s.parentNode.insertBefore(t,s)}(window, document,'script','https://connect.facebook.net/en_US/fbevents.js'); fbq('init', '1641728616063202'); fbq('track', "PixelInitialized", {}); (function(h,o,t,j,a,r){ h.hj=h.hj||function(){(h.hj.q=h.hj.q||[]).push(arguments)}; h._hjSettings={hjid:2318163,hjsv:6}; a=o.getElementsByTagName('head')[0]; r=o.createElement('script');r.async=1; r.src=t+h._hjSettings.hjid+j+h._hjSettings.hjsv; a.appendChild(r); })(window,document,'https://static.hotjar.com/c/hotjar-','.js?sv='); search file_upload Submit your research search menu close search Browse Gateways & Collections How to Publish Submit your Research My Submissions Article Guidelines Article Guidelines (New Versions) Open Data, Software and Code Guidelines Open Data and Accessible Source Materials Guidelines (HSS) Open Data, Software and Code Guidelines (PSE) Prepublication Checks Production Process Posters and Slides Guidelines Document Guidelines Article Processing Charges Peer Review Finding Article Reviewers About How it Works For Reviewers Our Advisors Policies Glossary FAQs For Developers Newsroom Contact My Research Submissions Content and Tracking Alerts My Details Sign In file_upload Submit your research { "@context": "https://schema.org", "@type": "ScholarlyArticle", "mainEntityOfPage": { "@type": "WebPage", "@id": "https://f1000research.com/articles/14-1283" }, "headline": "Behavioral Biases and Investment Decision-Making in the Indian Stock Market: The Moderating Role of...", "datePublished": "2025-11-19T15:52:29", "dateModified": "2026-01-19T09:25:20", "author": [ { "@type": "Person", "name": "Narasaraju Divakara Reddy" }, { "@type": "Person", "name": "B R Santosh" }, { "@type": "Person", "name": "Ananda S" }, { "@type": "Person", "name": "Guruprasad Desai" } ], "publisher": { "@type": "Organization", "name": "F1000Research", "logo": { "@type": "ImageObject", "url": "https://f1000research.com/img/AMP/F1000Research_image.png", "height": 480, "width": 60 } }, "image": { "@type": "ImageObject", "url": "https://f1000research.com/img/AMP/F1000Research_image.png", "height": 1200, "width": 150 }, "description": " Background Investment decision making is a critical aspect of financial planning. It involves allocating the financial resources to various investment avenues with an objective of generating future returns. Behavioral finance provides a theoretical framework for understanding psychological biases investment decision making which changes the assumptions of traditional finance. This study examines five important behavioral biases such as heuristics, prospect theory, emotions, market impact, and herding behavior on investment decision-making and portfolio management by considering investor experience and financial literacy as moderating factors. Methods Primary data was collected from individual investors in the BSE and NSE using a structured questionnaire administered through a purposive random sampling. Resulting in 151 complete responses were obtained and were considered valid for the purpose of our study. PLS-SEM was used to test the proposed hypotheses as well as the moderating effect Results Study finding indicates that heuristics have a positive and statistically significant effect on investment decisions, while prospect theory, emotions, market impact, and herding behavior showed no significant direct influence. The moderation analysis reveals that both investor experience and financial literacy significantly moderate the effects of emotions and market impact on investment decisions. However, their influence on heuristics, prospect theory, and herding behavior was statistically insignificant. Conclusions The results of this study lead to several conclusions. In this present study only one behavioral bias heuristics (HU) demonstrated a significant direct influence on investment decisions. In contrast, other behavioral biases such as prospect theory (P), emotions (E), market impact (M), and herding behavior (HB) do not significantly affect investment decisions (p > 0.05). The moderating effect of investors’ experience and financial literacy investor behavior are minimal. The result underscores that improving financial education, skills, knowledge and gaining experience may help investors regulate emotional and trend-based decisions but may not be sufficient to address more instinctive cognitive biases. The significance of the study provides important implications for financial educators, advisors, policymakers and stock market authorities regarding the need for behaviorally informed investor training, decision-support systems, and informed advisory services to promote rational investment behavior. " } { "@context": "http://schema.org", "@type": "BreadcrumbList", "itemListElement": [ { "@type": "ListItem", "position": "1", "item": { "@id": "https://f1000research.com/", "name": "Home" } }, { "@type": "ListItem", "position": "2", "item": { "@id": "https://f1000research.com/browse/articles", "name": "Browse" } }, { "@type": "ListItem", "position": "3", "item": { "@id": "https://f1000research.com/articles/14-1283/v2", "name": "Behavioral Biases and Investment Decision-Making in the Indian Stock..." } } ] } Home Browse Behavioral Biases and Investment Decision-Making in the Indian Stock... ALL Metrics - Views Downloads Get PDF Get XML Cite How to cite this article Divakara Reddy N, Santosh BR, S A and Desai G. Behavioral Biases and Investment Decision-Making in the Indian Stock Market: The Moderating Role of Financial Literacy and Investor Experience. [version 2; peer review: 2 approved] . F1000Research 2026, 14 :1283 ( https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.171289.2 ) NOTE: If applicable, it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article. Close Copy Citation Details Export Export Citation Sciwheel EndNote Ref. Manager Bibtex ProCite Sente EXPORT Select a format first Track Share ▬ ✚ Research Article Revised Behavioral Biases and Investment Decision-Making in the Indian Stock Market: The Moderating Role of Financial Literacy and Investor Experience. [version 2; peer review: 2 approved] Narasaraju Divakara Reddy https://orcid.org/0009-0003-5743-9575 1 , B R Santosh https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2481-1487 1 , Ananda S https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5565-6048 2 , Guruprasad Desai https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1446-4618 1 Narasaraju Divakara Reddy https://orcid.org/0009-0003-5743-9575 1 , B R Santosh https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2481-1487 1 , Ananda S https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5565-6048 2 , Guruprasad Desai https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1446-4618 1 PUBLISHED 19 Jan 2026 Author details Author details 1 Department of Commerce, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal, Karnataka, 560063, India 2 Postgraduate Studies, Research & Innovation Department, College of Banking and Financial Studies, Ruwi, Muscat Governorate, Oman Narasaraju Divakara Reddy Roles: Conceptualization, Data Curation, Formal Analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Project Administration, Resources, Software, Validation, Visualization, Writing – Original Draft Preparation B R Santosh Roles: Conceptualization, Data Curation, Formal Analysis, Methodology, Software, Supervision, Validation, Writing – Review & Editing Ananda S Roles: Conceptualization, Data Curation, Formal Analysis, Methodology, Project Administration, Supervision, Validation, Visualization, Writing – Review & Editing Guruprasad Desai Roles: Conceptualization, Data Curation, Formal Analysis, Methodology, Software, Supervision, Visualization, Writing – Review & Editing OPEN PEER REVIEW DETAILS REVIEWER STATUS This article is included in the Manipal Academy of Higher Education gateway. Abstract Background Investment decision making is a critical aspect of financial planning. It involves allocating the financial resources to various investment avenues with an objective of generating future returns. Behavioral finance provides a theoretical framework for understanding psychological biases investment decision making which changes the assumptions of traditional finance. This study examines five important behavioral biases such as heuristics, prospect theory, emotions, market impact, and herding behavior on investment decision-making and portfolio management by considering investor experience and financial literacy as moderating factors. Methods Primary data was collected from individual investors in the BSE and NSE using a structured questionnaire administered through a purposive random sampling. Resulting in 151 complete responses were obtained and were considered valid for the purpose of our study. PLS-SEM was used to test the proposed hypotheses as well as the moderating effect Results Study finding indicates that heuristics have a positive and statistically significant effect on investment decisions, while prospect theory, emotions, market impact, and herding behavior showed no significant direct influence. The moderation analysis reveals that both investor experience and financial literacy significantly moderate the effects of emotions and market impact on investment decisions. However, their influence on heuristics, prospect theory, and herding behavior was statistically insignificant. Conclusions The results of this study lead to several conclusions. In this present study only one behavioral bias heuristics (HU) demonstrated a significant direct influence on investment decisions. In contrast, other behavioral biases such as prospect theory (P), emotions (E), market impact (M), and herding behavior (HB) do not significantly affect investment decisions (p > 0.05). The moderating effect of investors’ experience and financial literacy investor behavior are minimal. The result underscores that improving financial education, skills, knowledge and gaining experience may help investors regulate emotional and trend-based decisions but may not be sufficient to address more instinctive cognitive biases. The significance of the study provides important implications for financial educators, advisors, policymakers and stock market authorities regarding the need for behaviorally informed investor training, decision-support systems, and informed advisory services to promote rational investment behavior. READ ALL READ LESS Keywords Investment Decisions; Behavioral Finance; Investor Experience; Financial Literacy. Corresponding Author(s) B R Santosh ( [email protected] ) Close Corresponding author: B R Santosh Competing interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Grant information: The author(s) declared that no grants were involved in supporting this work. Copyright: © 2026 Divakara Reddy N et al . This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. How to cite: Divakara Reddy N, Santosh BR, S A and Desai G. Behavioral Biases and Investment Decision-Making in the Indian Stock Market: The Moderating Role of Financial Literacy and Investor Experience. [version 2; peer review: 2 approved] . F1000Research 2026, 14 :1283 ( https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.171289.2 ) First published: 19 Nov 2025, 14 :1283 ( https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.171289.1 ) Latest published: 19 Jan 2026, 14 :1283 ( https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.171289.2 ) Revised Amendments from Version 1 This revised version of the article incorporates several substantive improvements in response to peer-review feedback and aims to enhance the clarity, theoretical grounding, and interpretability of the findings. The Introduction has been expanded to provide a clearer rationale for selecting the Indian stock market as the research context. The Theoretical Background and Literature Review have been refined to improve conceptual coherence. The Hypotheses Development section has been substantially revised to ensure that all hypotheses are clearly articulated, precisely worded, and explicitly aligned with the study variables. The Methodology section has been enhanced by providing additional justification for the use of PLS-SEM and the sampling approach adopted in the study. Finally, the Conclusion has been substantially strengthened by offering theoretical and contextual explanations for both significant and insignificant findings. This revised version of the article incorporates several substantive improvements in response to peer-review feedback and aims to enhance the clarity, theoretical grounding, and interpretability of the findings. The Introduction has been expanded to provide a clearer rationale for selecting the Indian stock market as the research context. The Theoretical Background and Literature Review have been refined to improve conceptual coherence. The Hypotheses Development section has been substantially revised to ensure that all hypotheses are clearly articulated, precisely worded, and explicitly aligned with the study variables. The Methodology section has been enhanced by providing additional justification for the use of PLS-SEM and the sampling approach adopted in the study. Finally, the Conclusion has been substantially strengthened by offering theoretical and contextual explanations for both significant and insignificant findings. See the authors' detailed response to the review by Dr. ASHIQUE ALI K A and Dr. Muhammed Safwan K K READ REVIEWER RESPONSES 1. Introduction Investment decision making is a complex process that involves careful selection of financial assets to invest with the objective of achieving the future financial goal of maximizing returns by managing risks. Few investors make decisions based on judgement whereas others consider many other factors such as past stock performance, market trends, social influence and personal financial goals that direct them to make an appropriate decision ( Abideen et al., 2023 ). This decision-making process is influenced by several factors including financial literacy, investor experience, risk tolerance, locus of control and behavioral biases ( Abideen et al., 2023 ; Suresh, 2024 ). Traditionally, investment decisions are analyzed based on classical finance theories such as Modern Portfolio Theory ( Markowitz, 1952 ) and the Efficient Market Hypothesis ( Fama, 1970 ) which assume that investors behave rationally, markets are efficient, and decisions are made based on expected returns. However, real-world investment practices and behaviors often deviate from those of traditional models. Investment decisions are more often influenced by intuition, biases, and psychological heuristics than objective analysis ( Charles & Kasilingam, 2015 ; Gupta & Bhardwaj, 2023 ; Makwana, 2024 ). This has led to the emergence of behavioral finance, a field that integrates cognitive psychology with financial theory to explain the irrational, biased, and emotional aspects of the investors influence on investment decision-making ( Tversky & Kahneman, 1974 ; Barberis & Thaler, 2003 ). Behavioral biases play an important role in shaping investor decisions in financial markets. The study of behavioral biases among Indian investors on the Bombay Stock Exchange (BSE) and the National Stock Exchange (NSE) reveals the significant effects of these biases on investment decision-making. The key biases identified for this study are heuristics ( Tversky & Kahneman, 1974 ), prospect theory ( Barberis, Jin, & Wang, 2020 ), and emotions ( Tversky & Kahneman, 1991 ; Vuković & Pivac, 2024 ). Financial literacy and investor experience play a prominent role in moderating the impact of these biases on investment decisions ( Khan & Hassan, 2023 ; Mahmood et al., 2024 ; Wang & Zou, 2024 ). This study indicates that financial literacy is essential and does not significantly affect investment decisions on its own; rather, it interacts with behavioral biases to shape outcomes ( Amudha & Geetha, 2012 ) and years of investment experience can also influence susceptibility to these biases. More experienced investors may exhibit different behavioral patterns than inexperience, potentially mitigating the effects of biases ( Gherzi et al., 2014 ). This study focuses on the individual investors in the Indian stock market. Stock markets play a very important role in the allocation of economic resources and economic development of a country ( Zuravicky, 2005 ). India has two premier stock markets: the Bombay Stock Exchange (BSE) and National Stock Exchange (NSE). BSE has played a major role in the Indian stock market, with a significant share of trading volumes ( Singh & Joshi, 2023 ; Shah, 2012 ). NSE was established to provide modernization and transparency in the Indian stock market. NSE consistently has a higher volume of trading than the BSE ( Goel et al., 2021 ; Krishnamurti & Lim, 2001 ). BSE has a larger retail investor, these retail investors are attracted to invest because of the historical significance and larger diversity of its listed companies. The majority of retail investors focus on long- term investment and follow conservative investment strategies ( Singh & Joshi, 2023 ; Shah, 2012 ). NSE has a higher proportion of institutional investors, including foreign institutional investors and domestic institutional investors. These investors are more active and engage in short- term trading strategies that use advanced trading systems and higher liquidity ( Goel et al., 2021 ; Krishnamurti & Lim, 2001 ). In this context, this study assesses the behavioral biases of the individual investors of the Bombay stock exchange (BSE) and the National Stock Exchange (NSE) in the Indian stock markets. We also examined the moderating effects of financial literacy and investor experience. 2. Theoretical background and literature review 2.1 Heuristics In investment decision-making, heuristics are frequently employed to simplify the evaluation of financial information, asset performance, and market trends. Most investors rely on recent price movements, familiar company names, or initial stock values to make quick judgements, often without conducting a thorough analysis ( Ricciardi & Simon, 2000 ). Heuristics can also lead to systematic errors or cognitive biases, such as the anchoring effect, availability heuristics, framing effect, and confirmation bias ( Yasseri & Reher, 2019 ; Lyons & Kass-Hanna, 2021 ). These biases can cause investors to make suboptimal investment decisions, as they may rely on incomplete or biased information, fail to consider alternative perspectives, or exhibit overconfidence in their abilities ( Kumar & Goyal, 2015 ). Dangol & Manandhar (2020) found that heuristics such as representativeness, availability, and anchoring are significantly associated with irrational investment decisions. According to Haritha (2023) revealed that investor sentiment mediates the influence of heuristics on stock selection ( Haritha, 2023 ). According to Parkash & Parkash (2024) found that institutional investors, such as fund managers, are prone to heuristics like overconfidence and anchoring, which skew asset selection and market timing decisions. According to Ahmad et al. (2025) empirically examined the influence of heuristic-driven cognitive biases among investors in emerging markets. They found that overconfidence, anchoring, and availability biases significantly disrupted rational investment behavior and led to poorly diversified portfolios. Empirical studies have found that individual investors rely heavily on overconfidence and availability heuristics, which can lead to excessive trading and risk underestimation, particularly among young and active traders in markets such as Mumbai ( Kakkar & Hariharan, 2022 ). H1. The use of heuristics has a significant impact on investment decision making process. 2.2 Prospect theory The prospect theory was developed by Kahneman and Tversky. This explains how investors perceive gains and losses, emphasizing their loss aversion. Investment decision making highlights that investors prioritize avoiding losses over acquiring equivalent gains, influencing their financial choices and risk assessments ( Morais Rodopoulos & Silveira Júnior, 2024 ). It challenges traditional economic models, particularly the expected utility theory, by incorporating psychological factors into the decision-making process ( Reyna and Brainerd, 2012 ). Prospect theory challenges the traditional notion of rationality by illustrating how individuals make decisions under risk, not based on objective outcomes, but on perceived gains and losses relative to a reference point ( Tversky & Kahneman, 1991 ). It challenges traditional economic models, particularly the expected utility theory, by incorporating psychological factors into the decision-making process ( Reyna and Brainerd, 2012 ). An empirical analysis across U.S. and European markets found that Prospect Theory based portfolios consistently outperformed traditional mean-variance allocations. This highlights the practical value of behavioral considerations in portfolio construction ( Fortin & Hlouskova, 2024 ). Yadav & Daga (2023) found that biases derived from Prospect Theory particularly loss aversion and risk aversion significantly influence irrational investment decisions among Indian stock market participants. Khairunnisa (2024) applied Prospect Theory to study financial decision-making among university students. The results revealed strong behavioral tendencies such as loss aversion and temporal discounting, influencing both short- and long-term investment planning. As a result, prospect theory provides a valuable framework for analyzing the psychological underpinnings of investor behavior, particularly in uncertain or volatile market conditions. H2. Prospect Theory has a significant impact on investment decision making process. 2.3 Emotions Emotions and psychological factors play a crucial role in shaping investment decisions and often influence financial choices in ways that traditional economic models fail to account. Emotions play a significant role in investment decision making, often leading investors to deviate from purely rational analyses ( Lerner et al., 2015 ). Traditional finance theory often assumes that investors are rational actors who make decisions based on objective information and logical analysis. However, this assumption overlooks the powerful influence of emotions on human behavior ( Singh & Dhami, 2024 ). Emotions can shape how investors perceive risk, evaluate potential returns, and react to market fluctuations ( Brooks & Williams, 2022 ). Furthermore, literature reviews reveal that external factors such as weather and religious observances can modulate investor mood and behavior, subtly shifting risk perception and investment appetite ( Annapurna & Basri, 2024 ). According to Sutejo et al. (2024) positive emotions significantly enhanced investment decisions, while negative emotions had mixed or insignificant effects. The study also revealed that financial risk tolerance mediates the influence of these emotions on portfolio choices. Theoretical work underscores those successful investors not only recognize their emotional states, but also regulate them to align with strategic objectives, merging affective awareness with cognitive rigor ( Das & Panja, 2020 ). H3. Use of emotions has a significant impact on investment decision making process. 2.4 Market impact In modern financial markets, investment decisions are increasingly influenced by external factors and real-time market dynamics. The term market impact broadly refers to the influence of market-related factors such as price trends, volatility, trading volume, economic indicators, and media coverage on investor behavior. Rather than relying solely on intrinsic valuations or fundamental analysis, investors often react to what is happening in the market, especially when faced with uncertainty or rapidly changing conditions ( Barberis & Thaler, 2003 ; Shiller, 2000 ). Investors in established markets such as India actively consider macroeconomic conditions such as GDP growth, inflation, interest rates, and political stability when forming their investment strategies ( Varshini and Vinayalaxmi, 2024 ). Karimi & Nasieku (2024) examined the Nairobi Securities Exchange and revealed that behavioural biases intensify market volatility by encouraging reactionary trading patterns and premature selling or holding decisions. Zain Ui Abideen et al. (2023) revealed that herding, overconfidence, and loss aversion biases interact with market anomalies, amplifying price volatility and mispricing indicating that biases can destabilize markets unless actively managed . Empirical research indicates that dynamic market variables, such as past stock performance, customer preferences, and general market information are central to shaping investor behavior, especially in developing financial markets such as Nepal, where youth participation is rapidly increasing ( Dhungana et al., 2023 ). H4. Market factors have a significant influence the investment decision making process. 2.5 Herding Herding behavior, the tendency of investors to follow the actions of a larger group, can drive market trends and create bubbles or crashes ( Kellard et al., 2016 ). This behavior is especially prominent in financial markets, where investors faced with uncertainty, time pressure, or informational ambiguity, and tend to follow the perceived consensus rather than act independently. Herding behavior leads to suboptimal investment performance among individual investors ( Zafar et al., 2024 ). This imitation can be seen in both bullish and bearish market conditions which may lead to overpricing and speculative bubbles while in downturns, it may trigger panic selling and excessive pessimism ( Shiller, 2000 ; Devenow & Welch, 1996 ). Chang, Cheng, and Khorana (2000) report significant herding effects in emerging markets, where informational asymmetry is higher and investor sophistication tends to be lower. In retail investing, herding has been linked to limited financial literacy, fear of missing out, and the growing influence of social media on investment sentiment ( Kliger & Levy, 2003 ). H5. Herding has a significant impact on investment decision-making process. 2.6 Financial literacy and Investment decision Behavioral biases are detrimental to investment decision making and recent studies have increasingly focused on the moderate effect of financial literacy. Financial literacy is defined as the ability to understand and apply basic financial concepts to financial decisions. It can significantly mitigate the adverse effects of behavioral biases ( Lusardi & Mitchell, 2014 ). A high level of financial literacy and skills help investors to analyze information critically, make informed decisions, and thus reduce reliance on heuristics that might lead to biased decisions ( Hirshleifer & Teoh, 2003 ) and better investment outcomes, including improved portfolio diversification and reduced impulsive trading behaviors ( Subnani & Todwal, 2024 ). However, the moderating effect of financial literacy may vary depending on the type of bias and investor gender, with some studies suggesting that financial literacy is more effective at moderating the impact of cognitive biases among male investors ( Adil et al., 2021 ). In a study of millennial investors in Jakarta, financial literacy moderated the effect of overconfidence on investment decisions, indicating that well-informed investors are better equipped to avoid overestimating their decision-making abilities ( Nadhila et al., 2024 ). A similar study conducted in the Iraqi stock market, shows that financial literacy strengthened the predictive relationship between behavioral factors such as firm image, advocate recommendations, financial needs and investment outcomes, suggesting that informed investors are better at integrating diverse inputs into their investment decisions ( Abdulridha & Hussin, 2024 ). In the Indian context, financial literacy is considerably low, particularly among young and less educated populations ( Lusardi & Mitchell, 2011 ). According to Sood and Jain (2021) , increased financial education programs can enhance an individual’s understanding of investment products, thus empowering investors to counteract biases such as overconfidence and loss aversion. The authors argue that financial literacy serves as a buffer against psychological factors, enabling investors to remain rational and resulting in better portfolio performance. Financially literate investors are more likely to conduct independent research, scrutinizing market trends rather than simply following market sentiments. Such investors demonstrate a stronger capacity to withstand social pressures inherent in investment environments ( Prakash & Gupta, 2021 ). H6. Financial literacy moderates the relationship between behavioral biases in investment decisions among investors in the Indian stock markets. 2.7 Investor experience and Investment decision Investor experience moderates the impact of behavioral biases on investment decision and portfolio management decisions. Novice investors tend to be more susceptible to biases, such as herding and anchoring, whereas experienced investors may utilize their insights to mitigate these effects ( Agarwal & Tiwari, 2018 ). Additionally, Malmendier, Pouzo & Vanasco (2020) found that while biases persist in all investor categories, the degree of their influence diminishes with increasing experience level. Past research in the Indian context indicates that experienced investors are better equipped to deal with market volatility and may demonstrate greater resilience to emotional biases ( Agarwal & Tiwari, 2018 ). Investment experience helps individuals better recognize and manage their own behavioral patterns, leading to improved decision-making through diversified portfolios and realistic goal setting ( Atiq, 2024 ). According to Chalissery (2023) , financial literacy enhances this moderating effect, particularly in emerging markets such as India and Pakistan. Their findings show that while behavioral biases such as anchoring, overconfidence, and herding are prevalent, experienced investors with higher financial literacy are less influenced by them, suggesting a strong interplay between knowledge and experiential learning. Investor experience acts as a critical buffer against distortions caused by behavioral biases, helping investors make more informed and rational decisions. H7. Investors’ experience moderates the relationship between behavioral biases in investment decisions among investors in the Indian stock markets. Based on the above literature the study develops the following conceptual framework ( Figure 1 ). Figure 1. Conceptual framework. Source(s): Authors own creation. 3. Data and methodology This study focuses on individual investors in the BSE and NSE stock exchanges in India. The data for the study were collected using purposive random sampling. A purposive random sampling approach allowed the researcher to identify target respondents who actively participate in investment activities, ensuring that the data reflected informed decision-making behaviors ( Etikan et al., 2016 ). The relatively smaller sample size is attributable to the sensitivity of investment-related data and participant reluctance to disclose personal financial information. At the same time, a random component was incorporated to minimize sampling bias and enhance representativeness. The survey approach was considered the most appropriate for this study because it was difficult to find respondents. The target population for this study was real investors on the BSE and NSE stock exchanges. Respondents were invited to fill out the Google Forms questionnaire and the link sent through email and WhatsApp messages. To increase participation, confidentiality of the data was assured. The primary data were collected using a survey-based technique for the present research. As per this study’s objective, only a specific segment of the population was included. Therefore, the data have been collected “subjectively, but from a relevant segment of population” ( Sahi and Arora, 2012 ). Primarily, 350 individual investors were targeted, out of which 151 complete responses were obtained and were considered valid for the purpose of our study (Refer Table 1 ). Based on previous research and literature on behavioral finance, five-point Likert scale questionnaires were designed to measure the variables ( Waweru et al., 2008 ; Charles and Kasilingam, 2015 ; Rekha, 2020 ). The questionnaire consists of 57 questions of which 7 demographic information, 5 questions measure investment decisions and portfolio management, 27 questions measure the influence of behavioral biases, and 18 questions to evaluate the moderating effect of financial literacy and investor experience. SPSS and Smart PLS were used to analyze the data. SPSS was used to tabulate the responses of the respondents and refine the data of the variables data. PLS-SEM was used to test the hypotheses, as well as the moderating effect of financial literacy and investors experience on investment decisions. During the empirical analysis, the study employed the compressive set of statistical tools such as descriptive statistics to summarise the demographic factors, correlation analysis used to assess the relationship among variables, Cronbach’s alpha used to evaluate the internal consistency and reliability of multi item scales, a simple regression test was conducted to test the hypotheses and determine the predictive power of the independent variable on investment decision making and subsequently utilized the empirical findings to examine the interrelations among various variables within the regression model. 4. Results and discussions 4.1 Descriptive analysis Table 1 presents the summary statistics of the study’s respondents; majority of the respondents were male 65% and 35% were female. Among the respondents, A majority 45% were from the age group of 26-35 and 41% respondents were from the age group of 36-54 it indicates that investments are mainly focused on the economically active adults. There is a lack of interest in young investors and senior citizens. The finding indicates that nearly 64% of the respondents were postgraduates are the investors and 15% were PhD holders, which shows that majority of the respondents were highly educated sample. marital status of the 65% respondents was married and unmarried, or singles are 29%. Regarding to the employment status, more than half of the respondents 57% are employed in private sector, 17% in government sector, 15% were self-employed and remaining 11% have belonged to other categories. Occupation wise professions were the majority in the group 42%, followed by technical roles 15% and administrative and clerical jobs 14%. Finally, it shows the majority of the respondents 53% invest 10% of their income to investment, 25% of the respondents are investing 11%-20% of their income to investments and only 9% investors are aggressively investing their income. Table 1. Descriptive analysis. Description Classification Frequency Percentage Gender Male 98 65 Female 53 35 Age Under 25 17 11 26-35 68 45 36-54 62 41 55 & above 4 3 Educational level: Secondary Education 4 3 Under Graduate 27 18 Post Graduate 97 64 Doctorate 23 15 Marital Status Single 44 29 Married 103 65 Divorced 3 2 Widowed 1 1 Employment Status Government employee 26 17 Private sector employee 86 57 Self-employed 23 15 Others 16 11 Occupation Management 18 12 Professional 63 42 Technical 23 15 Administrative/Clerical 22 14 Skilled labor 7 5 Service industry 18 12 Annual investment Up to 10% 80 53 11% to 20% 38 25 20% to 30% 19 13 30% to 40% 14 9 4.2 Measurement model analysis The reliability and validity of the study variables were evaluated using key metrics for reflective measurement models: outer loading, Average Variance extracted (AVE) composite reliability and Cronbach’s alpha ( Hair, 2010 ). The factor loadings for the constructs varied as shown in Table 2 . For heuristics, loadings ranged from 0.644 to 0.78. The prospect theory items had loadings between 0.631 and 0.772. Their emotions ranged from 0.616 to 0.78. The market impact ranged from 0.682 to 0.84. herding ranged from 0.615 to 0.877, investment decisions ranged from 0.737 to 0.807, Financial Literacy ranged from 0.731 to 0.817 and Investor Experience ranged from 0.766 to 0.846. The value of the constructs was greater than the threshold of 0.50. This suggests that each item adequately represents its respective construct ( Tang, 2024 ). An AVE value of 0.5 or higher suggests adequate convergent validity, indicating that the indicators represent the underlying construct well ( Hair et al., 2019 ). The Table 2 shows that the AVE values for each construct are above the threshold of 0.5, indicating that all constructs are typically considered acceptable ( Hair et al., 2010 ) and indicates that the indicators used to measure the constructs are strongly related to the underlying concepts. According to Hair et al. (2019) and Hair et al. (2021) , a Composite reliability value between 0.70 and 0.90 is considered acceptable and indicates satisfactory internal consistency. Conversely, values below 0.70 are considered inadequate and reflect poor reliability, suggesting the need for model refinement. The Table 2 shows that CR values are for each construct are above the threshold of 0.7, indicating that all constructs are typically considered acceptable ( Hair et al., 2019 ) and this indicates that all constructs have high internal consistency suggesting that the items consistently measure the intended constructs ( Henseler, Ringle & Sarstedt 2009 ). Cronbach’s alpha assesses how well a set of items measures a single underlying construct. The Table 2 shows that the values of Cronbach’s alpha for all the constructs were above 0.70, indicating good internal consistency and reliability ( Hair et al., 2010 ). As all evaluation criteria have been met with acceptance, it can be concluded that there is greater support for reliability and validity. Table 2. Composite reliability, AVE and outer loading. Constructs Items Outer loading AVE Composite reliability Cronbach’s alpha Heuristics HU 1 0.78 0.54 0.838 0.829 HU 2 0.644 HU 3 0.759 HU 4 0.673 HU 5 0.773 HU 6 0.77 Prospect theory P 1 0.7 0.514 0.772 0.763 P 2 0.738 P 3 0.735 P 4 0.631 P 5 0.772 Emotions E 1 0.78 0.533 0.729 0.708 E 2 0.778 E 3 0.616 E 4 0.735 Market Impact M 1 0.84 0.598 0.792 0.776 M 2 0.784 M 3 0.78 M 4 0.682 Herding HB 1 0.792 0.612 0.846 0.84 HB 2 0.873 HB 3 0.877 HB 4 0.723 HB 5 0.615 Investment Decision ID 1 0.737 0.56 0.813 0.802 ID 2 0.767 ID 3 0.783 ID 4 0.807 Financial Literacy FL 1 0.742 0.595 0.92 0.915 FL 2 0.788 FL 3 0.798 FL 4 0.731 FL 5 0.817 FL 6 0.758 FL 7 0.767 FL 8 0.8 FL 9 0.736 Investors Experience IE 1 0.801 0.641 0.901 0.89 IE 2 0.766 IE 3 0.792 IE 4 0.846 IE 5 0.8 IE 6 0.796 The figure below shows the results of Confirmatory Factor Analysis by using SmartPLS software. Figure 2. Measurement model for CFA. Sources: Smart PLS Output, Authors calculation. Based on the Fornell–Larcker criterion, the discriminant validity of the construct was established when the square root of the Average Variance Extracted (AVE) for each construct exceeded the construct’s highest correlation with any other construct in the model ( Hair et al. 2019 ). As shown in Table 3 , the square roots of AVE were greater than the inter-construct correlations indicating that discriminant validity is generally supported except between constructs E (emotions) and M (market impact), where the correlation (0.755) exceeded the square root of AVE for E (0.73) indicating that there is an overlap between these constructs and a lack of discriminant validity. Table 3. Discriminant validity (Fornnel -Larcker criterion). E FK HB HU ID IE M P E 0.73 FK 0.605 0.771 HB 0.498 0.451 0.782 HU 0.724 0.496 0.572 0.735 ID 0.625 0.508 0.411 0.674 0.748 IE 0.569 0.736 0.439 0.503 0.451 0.801 M 0.755 0.49 0.497 0.703 0.599 0.508 0.774 P 0.619 0.466 0.565 0.69 0.565 0.456 0.585 0.717 Table 4. HTMT. E FK HB HU ID IE M P E FK 0.73 HB 0.64 0.462 HU 0.948 0.565 0.674 ID 0.807 0.578 0.464 0.814 IE 0.687 0.812 0.452 0.56 0.507 M 1.018 0.574 0.598 0.877 0.744 0.592 P 0.83 0.553 0.701 0.871 0.716 0.542 0.759 Furthermore, the discriminant validity of the constructs was established using the Heterotrait - Monotrait Ratio (HTMT) of the correlations. Discriminant validity is established when the HTMT values are below 0.85 for conceptually distinct constructs ( Hair et al., 2021 ). The HTMT ratio is a more sensitive method than the Fornell-Larcker criterion for detecting discriminant validity issues using variance-based structural equation modeling ( Henseler, Ringle, & Sarstedt, 2009 ; Hair et al., 2021 ). As shown in Table 4 , most constructs met the threshold of less than 0.85, indicating discriminant validity. However, certain sub constructs HTMT values exceed the threshold of 0.85, such as the constructs of emotions (E) and heuristics (HU) at 0.948 and emotions (E) and market impact (M) at 1.018. The constructs with high cross-loadings and conceptual redundancy were carefully reviewed ( Sarstedt, Ringle, & Hair, 2020 ). Overlapping indicator within the emotions construct, heuristics (HU) and market impact was removed to improve construct distinctiveness. Following this refinement, the recalculated AVE and HTMT values met the recommended threshold, confirming that discriminant validity was established across all constructs in the final measurement model. These steps ensured that each construct was conceptually unique and adequately captured its theoretical dimension ( Farrell, 2010 ; Kline, 2016 ). 4.3 Structural model After establishing the requirements of the measurement model, the structural model was used to test the direct effect of various constructs on investment decisions measured through path coefficient analysis using PLS-SEM. The results of the direct effect of H1 to H5 hypotheses are presented in Table 5 , the results of acceptance or rejection of the hypotheses mentioned in column 7 of Table 5 . T statistics and P values were used to measure the significance of the hypotheses. The evaluation was based on the significance of t-statistics and p-values as recommended by Hair et al. (2021) . According to Hair et al. (2021) , the t-statistic must exceed 1.645 by assuming that a one-tailed test at the 5% significance level and the corresponding p-value should be less than 0.05. These thresholds provide sufficient evidence to confirm the statistical significance of hypothesized relationships ( Hair et al., 2021 ; Sarstedt et al., 2022 ; Henseler et al., 2009 ). Table 5. Hypothesis testing. H No. Path Original sample Standard deviation T statistics P values Result H1 HU -> ID 0.372 0.112 3.324 0 Accept H2 P -> ID 0.123 0.105 1.168 0.121 Reject H3 E -> ID 0.118 0.132 0.893 0.186 Reject H4 M -> ID 0.137 0.106 1.297 0.097 Reject H5 HB -> ID -0.065 0.074 0.878 0.19 Reject The empirical results are presented in Table 6 . The p-value for the heuristics (HU) is 0.000, which is less than the conventional significance level of 0.05, and the t-statistic is 3.324, which exceeds the threshold of 1.645. These results indicated that the hypothesis (HU → ID) was accepted. This finding suggests a statistically significant and positive relationship between heuristics and investment decisions. The p-value for prospect theory (P) is 0.121, which is higher than the conventional significance level of 0.05, The t-statistic is 1.168, which is below the significance threshold of 1.645. These results indicate that hypothesis (P → ID) is not supported. This finding indicates that there is no statistically significant relationship between prospect theory and investment decision. The p-value for emotions (E) is 0.186, which is higher than the conventional significance level of 0.05, and the t-statistic is 0.893, which is below the significance threshold of 1.645. These results indicate that the hypothesis (E -> ID) is not accepted. This finding indicates that there is no statistically significant relationship between emotions and investment decisions. The p-value for Market Impact (M) is 0.097, which is higher than the conventional significance level of 0.05, and the t-statistic is 1.297, which is below the significance threshold of 1.645. These results indicate that hypothesis (M -> ID) is not accepted. This indicates that there is no statistically significant relationship between the market impact and investment decision. The p-value for herding (H) is 0.19, which is higher than the conventional significance level of 0.05, and the t-statistic is 0.878, which is below the significance threshold of 1.645. These results indicate that hypothesis (M -> ID) is not accepted. This finding indicates that there is no statistically significant relationship between herding and investment decisions. Table 6. Hypothesis testing-Moderation effect of investors experience. H No. Original sample Standard deviation T statistics P values Result IE x E -> ID 0.331 0.131 2.524 0.006 Accept IE x FK -> ID 0.023 0.083 0.274 0.392 Reject IE x HB -> ID -0.148 0.112 1.316 0.094 Reject IE x HU -> ID 0.003 0.125 0.025 0.49 Reject IE x M -> ID -0.291 0.114 2.542 0.006 Accept IE x P -> ID -0.067 0.103 0.654 0.257 Reject 4.4 Moderating role of investors experience between behavioral biases and investment decision making The study used a Moderated Multiple Regression revealed that Investor Experience significantly moderates the relationship between the two behavioral biases and investment decisions such as Emotions and Market Impact. The interaction between Investor Experience and Emotions (IE × E) shows a positive and statistically significant effect (β = 0.331, t = 2.524, p = 0.006). Suggesting that market fluctuations are less likely to influence emotional biases provides a better investment decision when investors have more experience. Similarly, the interaction terms between Investor Experience and Market Impact (IE × M) are negative and significant (β = -0.291, t = 2.542, p = 0.006). Suggesting that the influence of market impact biases on the investment decisions of experienced investors is less likely to be influenced by market fluctuations. However, the moderating effects of Investor Experience on herding behavior, heuristics, and prospect theory were found to be statistically insignificant. The evaluation was based on the criteria recommended by Hair et al. (2021) , where a t-statistic greater than 1.645 and a p-value less than 0.05 indicate statistical significance. These findings that investor experience does not significantly influence these factors in investment decisions. The moderation analysis examined whether investor experience influenced the relationship between behavioral biases and investment decisions. A significant and positive interaction indicates that the strength of the relationship between emotional bias and investment decisions increases as investor experience grows. Conversely, a significant and negative interaction suggests that the influence of market-related information on investment decisions weakens with greater investor experience. These results express that while experienced investors may become more confident in their emotions when making decisions, they are less influenced by external market signals. Overall, these results suggest that investor experience does not uniformly impact behavioral biases, but rather redesign their influence by strengthening emotional self-regulation while reducing dependence on external market cues. 4.5 Moderating role of financial literacy between behavioral biases and investment decision making Table 7 shows the results of the moderating role of financial literacy between behavioral biases and investment decision making. Moderation analysis revealed that financial literacy significantly influences the relationship between behavioral biases and investment decision-making. Out of the six hypothesized moderation effects, two are statistically significant, indicating that financial literacy influences the relationship between certain behavioral biases and investment decisions. Specifically, financial literacy significantly moderates the effect of emotions (β = 0.334, t = 2.376, p = 0.009) and the market impact (β = -0.322, p = 0.003) on investment decisions. Financially literate investors are in a better position to critically evaluate market factors and avoid herd-behavior or cognitive based errors ( Baker et al., 2019 ). However, the moderation analysis also revealed that financial literacy has not significant moderation effect of herding bias, heuristic, and prospect theory components on investment outcomes because interaction terms did not meet the threshold for significance (p > 0.05). The above results clearly show that financial literacy is not completely influential on all behavioral constructs but rather shows a conditional moderation. Table 7. Hypothesis testing-Moderation effect of financial literacy. H No. Original sample Standard deviation T statistics P values Result FK x E -> ID 0.334 0.141 2.376 0.009 Accept FK x HB -> ID 0.085 0.108 0.786 0.216 Reject FK x HU -> ID -0.145 0.118 1.235 0.108 Reject FK x IE -> ID -0.028 0.066 0.419 0.338 Reject FK x M -> ID -0.322 0.119 2.703 0.003 Accept FK x P -> ID 0.001 0.102 0.011 0.496 Reject 5. Conclusion The study investigated the influence of behavioral biases on investment decision among individual investors and investment decisions when individual investors choose to invest under the effect of moderating factors, such as financial literacy and investors experience. The results of this study lead to several conclusions. In this present study only one behavioral bias heuristics (HU) demonstrated a significant direct influence on investment decisions. This supports the findings of ( Waweru et al., 2008 ), who highlight that investors more often follow the simplified rule of thumb, especially under uncertainty. The strong relationship between heuristics and investment decision making indicates that there is a continued relevance of representativeness and availability in investor behavior, lending support to H1. In contrast, other behavioral biases such as prospect theory (P), emotions (E), market impact (M), and herding behavior (HB) do not significantly affect investment decisions because they are below the threshold (p > 0.05), leading to the rejection of the hypotheses H2, H3, H4, and H5, which is consistent with previous literature on behavioral finance ( Riyazahmed & Saravanaraj, 2016 ). The insignificance of these biases may be attributed to contextual factors such as investors access to financial information, enhanced analytical tools, and increased investor sophistication, which potentially minimize the direct influence of prospect theory, market impact, herding behavior and emotional biases on decision-making. Emotions do not influence investment decision making, several past studies comparing individual and institutional investors have found that emotional biases affect individual investors’ performance but not their decision-making processes ( Shafqat, 2024 ; Wijaya & Elgeka, 2024 ; Sutejo et al., 2024 ). This suggests that emotions may operate indirectly or be regulated by investors experience and learning, rather than exerting a direct behavioral influence on investment choices. The impact of market factors on investment decisions is also rejected. These results imply that the market factors do not directly affect investment decisions. As market factors including short-term volatility, volume fluctuations and price trends do not significantly influence investors decision making. The extant literature also indicates that market impact alone does not strongly influence investment decisions ( Riyazahmed & Saravanaraj, 2016 ; Dumohar et al., 2022 ; Murhadi et al., 2024 ). This finding revels a shift toward more informed and analysis-driven investment behavior, particularly in markets having a greater transparency and regulatory observations. Significant effect of herding behavior was rejected. Several studies have found that herding bias does not significantly influence investment decisions. Hu et al. (2021) , suggests that herding is not a universal driver of investment decisions ( Zahro & Singgih, 2024 ). This may indicate that individual investors increasingly depending on their personal judgment and use financial knowledge rather than following collective market behavior. This study provides strong evidence that prospect theory (H2), emotions (H3), market factors (H4), and herding behavior (H5) do not significantly influence investment decision-making, which leads to the formal rejection of these hypotheses. These findings identifies that the influence of these biases may be conditional, indirect, or moderated by investor-specific characteristics. The moderating role of investors experiences between various behavioral biases and investment decision making. Investors experience positive and significantly moderate relationships between emotions → investment decisions and market impact → investment decisions. These findings suggest that investors’ experiences can lead to better emotional impulses in a better way, transforming them into more informed judgements rather than radical decisions. Our findings are consistent with empirical evidence in the literature that investor experience plays a crucial role in shaping investment decisions. With greater investment experience, investors are more likely to exhibit rational behavior, even though they may still be influenced by emotional biases ( Shafqat, 2024 ; Sharma & Prajapati 2024 ; Spytska, 2024 ; Utama et al., 2024 ). Similarly, the findings of the study show that other behavioral biases such as heuristics (HU), Prospect Theory (P) and herding behavior (HB) were found to have a positive and statistically insignificant moderating effect on investors experience between behavioral biases and investment decisions. The moderating effect of financial literacy on various behavioral biases and investment decision making. Financial literacy has a significant moderating effect on the two behavioral biases of emotional biases and market impact. The study confirms that the role of emotional biases and market impact always fosters deliberate and informed investment decision-making moderated by financial literacy. The results of other behavioral biases such as heuristics (HU), Prospect Theory (P), emotions (E), and herding behavior (HB) were found to have a positive and statistically insignificant moderating effect of financial literacy between behavioral biases and investment decisions. The study findings are consistent with those of Adil et al. (2021) who found that overconfidence, risk aversion, herding, and disposition of behavioral biases are positive and partially significant only for overconfidence in males. According to the study conducted by Mahmood et al. (2024) overconfidence, herding, risk aversion, and disposition of behavioral biases is positive and statistically insignificant. These findings suggest that these biases may persist regardless of investors’ experience and financial knowledge and that their moderating effect on investor behavior may be minimal or context-dependent within our targeted population. These insignificant results can be attributed to increased investor awareness, a rise in financial technology, improved regulatory frameworks, diversification in financial strategies, and market maturity. It is suggested to enhance financial literacy programs for investors and promote awareness of behavioral biases to improve investment decisions and market stability in the Indian stock market. Financial educators and policymakers should focus on creating innovative market opportunities and educational initiatives to promote informed investment decisions, ultimately leading to more rational market behavior. Additionally, investors should gain experience through practical engagement to navigate biases better. Ethical approval This is an original work of authors. Data availability Underlying data Figshare: Behavioral Biases and Investment Decision-Making in the Indian Stock Market . https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.30235192 ( Desai, 2025 ). Data are available under the terms of the Creative Commons Zero “No rights reserved” data waiver (CC0 1.0 Public domain dedication). References Abdulridha F, Hussin N: Examining the moderating role of financial literacy between determinants of individual behaviour and investment decision-making for Iraqi investors. International Journal of Academic Research in Accounting, Finance and Management Sciences. 2024; 14 (2): 202–223. Publisher Full Text Abideen ZU, Ahmed Z, Qiu H, et al. : Do Behavioral Biases Affect Investors’ Investment Decision Making? Evidence from the Pakistani Equity Market. Risks. 2023; 11 (6): 109. Publisher Full Text Adil M, Singh Y, Ansari MS: How financial literacy moderates the association between behaviour biases and investment decision.2021. Publisher Full Text Agarwal S, Tiwari R: Do investors rely on CAPM? Insights from mutual fund flows in India. Indian Econ. Rev. 2018; 53 (2): 215–234. Publisher Full Text Ahmad U, Van Keulen M, Briassouli A: Cognitive biases, Robo advisor and investment decision psychology: An investor’s perspective from New York Stock Exchange. Acta Psychol. 2025; 256 (2): 105048. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text Amudha K, Geetha C: Behavioral factors influencing investment decisions of small investors. International Journal of Marketing, Financial Services & Management Research. 2012; 1 (6): 45–59. Annapurna R, Basri S: Role of emotions in stock investment decisions: A critical review of the literature. Indian Journal of Finance. 2024; 18 (5): 50–65. Publisher Full Text Atiq R: Effect of behavioural biases on investment decisions of individual investors in India.2024. Publisher Full Text Baker HK, Kumar S, Goyal N, et al. : How financial literacy and demographic variables relate to behavioral biases. Manag. Financ. 2019; 45 (1): 124–146. Publisher Full Text Barberis N, Jin LJ, Wang B: Prospect Theory and Stock Market Anomalies. 10th Miami Behavioral Finance Conference (December 16, 2020). 2020. Publisher Full Text Barberis N, Thaler R: A survey of behavioral finance. Handbook of the Economics of Finance. 2003; 1 : 1053–1128. Publisher Full Text Brooks C, Williams L: When it comes to the crunch: Retail investor decision making during periods of market volatility. Int. Rev. Financ. Anal. 2022; 80 : 102038. Publisher Full Text Chalissery N, Tabash MI, Nishad TM, et al. : Does the investor’s trading experience reduce susceptibility to heuristic-driven biases? The moderating role of personality traits. Journal of Risk and Financial Management. 2023; 16 (7): 325. Publisher Full Text Chang EC, Cheng JW, Khorana A: An examination of herd behavior in equity markets: An international perspective. J. Bank. Financ. 2000; 24 (10): 1651–1679. Publisher Full Text Charles A, Kasilingam R: Does investor’s heuristics determine their investment decisions? IIMS Journal of Management Science. 2015; 6 : 113. Publisher Full Text Dangol J, Manandhar R: Impact of Heuristics on Investment Decisions: The Moderating Role of Locus of Control.2020; 5 (1): 1–14. Publisher Full Text Das A, Panja S: Exploring the Influence of Emotion in Investment Decision-Making: A Theoretical Perspective. Cham: Springer; 2020; 71–78. Publisher Full Text Desai G: Behavioral Biases and Investment Decision-Making in the Indian Stock Market: The Moderating Role of Financial Literacy and Investor Experience. Dataset. figshare. 2025. Publisher Full Text Devenow A, Welch I: Rational herding in financial economics. Eur. Econ. Rev. 1996; 40 (3-5):603–615. Publisher Full Text Dhungana BR, Khatri N, Ojha D, et al. : Effect of market variables on investment decisions in the financial market: A case of Pokhara, Nepal. Quest Journal of Management and Social Sciences. 2023; 5 (1): 94–106. Publisher Full Text Dumohar A, Aryotejo D, Djohan N, et al. : Behavioral factors analysis in investment decision-making. Perwira – Jurnal Pendidikan Kewirausahaan Indonesia. 2022; 5 (1): 20–31. Publisher Full Text Etikan I, Musa SA, Alkassim RS: Comparison of convenience sampling and purposive sampling. American Journal of Theoretical and Applied Statistics. 2016; 5 (1): 1–4. Fama EF: Efficient capital markets: A review of theory and empirical work. J. Financ. 1970; 25 (2): 383–417. Publisher Full Text Farrell AM: Insufficient discriminant validity: A comment on Bove, Pervan, Beatty, and Shiu (2009). Journal of Business Research. 2010; 63 (3): 324–327. Fortin I, Hlouskova J: Prospect theory and asset allocation. Q. Rev. Econ. Finance. 2024; 94 : 214–240. Publisher Full Text Gherzi S, Egan D, Stewart N, et al. : The more you pay, the more you buy: Price cues and purchase behavior. Journal of Economic Psychology. 2014; 44 : 152–165. Publisher Full Text Goel S, Seth R, Gupta R: Trading volume, liquidity, and market efficiency: Evidence from BSE and NSE. Global Business Review. 2021; 22 (5): 1281–1297. Publisher Full Text Gupta R, Bhardwaj BR: Unraveling the tapestry of behavioral biases in financial investment. Journal Article. 2023; 02 : 1–7. Publisher Full Text Hair JF, Black WC, Babin BJ, et al. : Multivariate data analysis (7th ed.). 2010; Pearson Education. Hair JF, Black WC, Babin BJ, et al. : Multivariate data analysis. Cengage Learning; 8th ed. 2019. Hair JF, Hult GTM, Ringle CM, et al. : A primer on partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM). Sage Publications; 3rd ed. 2021. Haritha PH: The Effect of Heuristics on Indian Stock Market Investors: Investor Sentiment as a Mediator. Management and Labour Studies. 2023; 49 (1): 43–61. Publisher Full Text Henseler J, Ringle CM, Sinkovics RR: The use of partial least squares path modeling in international marketing. Adv. Int. Mark. 2009; 20 : 277–319. Publisher Full Text Hirshleifer D, Teoh SH: Herd behavior and cascading in capital markets: A review and synthesis. Eur. Financ. Manag. 2003; 9 (1): 25–66. Publisher Full Text Hu G, Yuan C, Ren H, et al. : Reliability and validity of an instrument to assess pediatric inpatients experience of care in China. Transl. Pediatr. 2021; 10 : 2269–2280. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text Kakkar BH, Hariharan SV: Heuristics, investments and planning among young investors of India. Int. J. Health Sci. 2022; 6 (S3): 8858–8868. Publisher Full Text Karimi CW, Nasieku T: Behavioral Biases and Investment Decisions: An Empirical Review. International Journal of Social Science and Humanities Research. 2024; 2 (3): 324–331. Publisher Full Text Kellard NM, Coakley J, Tsvetanov D: Bubbling over! The behaviour of oil futures along the yield curve. J. Empir. Financ. 2016; 37 : 20–36. Publisher Full Text Khairunnisa MSM: Investment Decision-Making Among Students Using Prospect Theory in Behavioral Economics.2024. Publisher Full Text Khan S, Hassan NU: Unlocking the investment puzzle: The influence of behavioral biases & moderating role of financial literacy. Journal of Social Research Development. 2023; 4 (2): 433–444. Publisher Full Text Kliger D, Levy O: Mood and judgment of subjective probabilities: Evidence from the U.S. index option market. Review of Finance. 2003; 7 (2): 235–248. Publisher Full Text Kline RB: Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling. 4th ed.Guilford Press; 2016. Krishnamurti C, Lim K: Institutional investors and stock market efficiency: Evidence from India. Journal of Multinational Financial Management. 2001; 11 (1–2): 23–38. Publisher Full Text Kumar S, Goyal N: Behavioural biases in investment decision making – a systematic literature review. Qual. Res. Financ. Mark. 2015; 7 (1):88–108. Publisher Full Text Lerner JS, Li Y, Valdesolo P, et al. : Emotion and decision making. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 2015; 66 : 799–823. Publisher Full Text Lusardi A, Mitchell OS: The economic importance of financial literacy: Theory and evidence. J. Econ. Lit. 2011; 52 (1):5–44. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text Lusardi A, Mitchell OS: The economic importance of financial literacy: Theory and evidence. J. Econ. Lit. 2014; 52 (1): 5–44. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text Lyons AC, Kass Hanna J: Behavioral economics and financial decision making. Handbook of Personal Finance. De Gruyter; 2021. Publisher Full Text Mahmood F, Arshad R, Khan S, et al. : Impact of behavioral biases on investment decisions and the moderation effect of financial literacy; an evidence of Pakistan. Acta Psychol. 2024; 247 : 104303. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text Makwana C: Understanding behavioural biases driving equity investors in India: A factor analysis approach. Journal Article. 2024; 23 : 117–125. Publisher Full Text Malmendier U, Pouzo D, Vanasco V: Investor experiences and financial market dynamics. J. Financ. Econ. 2020; 136 (3): 597–622. Publisher Full Text Markowitz H: Portfolio selection. The. J. Financ. 1952; 7 (1): 77–91. Publisher Full Text Morais Rodopoulos PC, Silveira Júnior A: Behavioral finance: An application of Prospect Theory to Brazilian investors. Int. J. Econ. Financ. 2024; 16 (9): 31–48. Publisher Full Text Murhadi WR, Frederica D, Marciano D: The effect of financial literacy and demographic variables on behavioral biases. Asian Economic and Financial Review. 2024; 14 (4): 312–325. Publisher Full Text Nadhila A, Sembel R, Malau M: The influence of overconfidence and risk perception on investment decisions: The moderating effect of financial literacy on individual millennial investors in Jakarta. Eduvest – Journal of Universal Studies. 2024; 4 (6): 5280–5299. Publisher Full Text Parkash P, Parkash R: Impact of Behavioural Biasness on Investment Decision Making Process. International Journal For Multidisciplinary Research. 2024; 6 (1). Publisher Full Text Prakash K, Gupta R: The role of financial literacy in moderating behavioral biases in investment decisions. Int. J. Econ. Financ. 2021; 13 (8): 81–90. Rekha DM: Behavioural finance paradigms in equity market: A study in Bangalore. 2020. [Doctoral dissertation, University]. Reyna VF, Brainerd CJ: Fuzzy-trace theory and framing effects in choice: Gist extraction, truncation, and conversion. J. Behav. Decis. Mak. 2012; 25 (4): 361–381. Ricciardi V, Simon HK: What is behavioral finance? Business, Education & Technology Journal. 2000; 2 (2): 1–9. Riyazahmed K, Saravanaraj MG: Prospect Theory, Market Forces & Investor Satisfaction. Asian Journal of Research in Social Sciences and Humanities. 2016; 6 . Publisher Full Text Sahi SK, Arora AP: Individual investor biases: A segmentation analysis. Qualitative Research in Financial Markets. 2012; 4 (1): 6–25. Publisher Full Text Sarstedt M, Hair JF, Pick M, et al. : Progress in partial least squares structural equation modeling use in marketing research in the last decade. Psychol. Mark. 2022; 39 (5): 1035–1064. Publisher Full Text Sarstedt M, Ringle CM, Hair JF: Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling. In Handbook of Market Research. Springer; 2020; pp: 1–47. Shafqat SI: Emotional Biases Impact on Investment Behavior: A Comparative Study of Individual and Institutional Investors in an Asian Emerging Economy.2024. Publisher Full Text Shah A: India’s financial markets: An insider’s guide to how the markets work : Oxford University Press; 2012. Sharma A, Prajapati B: An analysis of behavioral biases in investment decision-making. In Singh AK (Ed.), Proceedings of the International Conference on Recent Innovations in Engineering, Management, and Social Development (ICRIEMSD 2024) (pp. 11–20). 2024. Atlantis Press. Publisher Full Text Shiller RJ: Measuring bubble expectations and investor confidence. Journal of Psychology and Financial Markets. 2000; 1 (1): 49–60. Publisher Full Text Singh M, Dhami JK: Emotional finance and investment decisions: A comprehensive review of psychological influences and behavioral patterns. Libr. Prog. Int. 2024; 44 (3): 27247–27258. Singh S, Joshi M: Retail investor behavior and stock market participation in India. Journal of Asian Finance, Economics and Business. 2023; 10 (1): 311–322. Publisher Full Text Sood A, Jain A: A study on the effect of financial literacy on investment behaviour among investors in Delhi NCR. International Journal of Commerce and Management Research. 2021; 7 (2): 19–28. Spytska L: The influence of psychological factors on investment decision-making: Psychological features of economic relations formation. Economics of Development. 2024; 23 (3): 56–68. Publisher Full Text Subnani H, Todwal P: Investor Education and Decision-Making in the Indian Stock Market: Empowering Users for Informed Trading. International Journal For Multidisciplinary Research. 2024; 6 . Publisher Full Text Suresh G: Impact of financial literacy and behavioural biases on investment decision-making. FIIB Business Review. 2024; 13 (1): 72–86. Publisher Full Text Sutejo B, Wijayanti RP, Ananda C: Do Emotions Influence the Investment Decisions of Generation Z Surabaya Investors in the Covid-19 Pandemic Era? Does Financial Risk Tolerance Play a Moderating Role? Scientific Papers of the University of Pardubice. Series D, Faculty of Economics and Administration. 2024. Publisher Full Text Tang X: Interconnectedness of emotions with investment decision-making: A systematic literature review. Journal of Organizational Effectiveness: People and Performance. 2024. published online. Publisher Full Text Tversky A, Kahneman D: Judgement under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Science. 1974; 185 (4157): 1124–1131. Publisher Full Text Tversky A, Kahneman D: Loss aversion in riskless choice: A reference-dependent model. Q. J. Econ. 1991; 106 (4): 1039–1061. Publisher Full Text Utama ANB, Sangaji J, Rimbano D: The Influence of Behavioral Finance on Investment Decision-Making: Understanding the Role of Overconfidence and Risk Perception in Stok Market Trends. Indo-Fintech Intellectuals. 2024; 4 (6): 3132–3144. Publisher Full Text Varshini R, Vinayalaxmi D: An analysis of investor behavior in equity market dynamics. EPRA International Journal of Economic and Business Review. 2024; 12 (1): 31–36. Publisher Full Text Vuković M, Pivac S: The impact of behavioral factors on investment decisions and investment performance in Croatian stock market. Managerial Finance. 2024; 50 (2): 349–366. Publisher Full Text Wang DY, Zou T: Financial literacy, cognitive bias, and personal investment decisions: A new perspective in behavioral finance. Environ. Soc. Psychol. 2024; 9 (11): 3050. Publisher Full Text Waweru NM, Munyoki E, Uliana E: The effects of behavioural factors in investment decision-making: A survey of institutional investors operating at the Nairobi Stock Exchange. International Journal of Business and Emerging Markets. 2008; 1 (1): 24–41. Publisher Full Text Wijaya YH, Elgeka HWS: Herding Behavior and Its Impact on Purchasing Decisions Among Beginner Crypto Investors: An Experimental Analysis. Gadjah Mada Journal of Psychology. 2024; 10 . Publisher Full Text Yadav K, Daga S: Prospect Driven Biases Affecting Investment Decision Making: Mediating By Risk Perception And Moderating By Robo-Advisory. Corporate Governance Insight. 2023; 5 (2): 37–51. Publisher Full Text Yasseri T, Reher J: Fooling with facts: Quantifying anchoring bias through a large-scale online experiment. J. Comput. Soc. Sci. 2019; 5 : 1001–1021. Publisher Full Text Zafar S, Sair SA, Shakir CA, et al. : Investigating the roles of behavioral finance, risk perception, and personality in stock investment choices. Migration Letters. 2024; 21 (S11): 40–50. Publisher Full Text Zahro DE, Singgih MN: Pengaruh Herding Bias, Overconfidence Bias, dan Cognitive Dissonance Bias terhadap Keputusan Investasi. Bismar: Business Management Research. 2024; 3 : 72–83. Publisher Full Text Zuravicky O: Behavioral finance and investor decision-making. Journal of Wealth Management. 2005; 8 (3): 16–24. Publisher Full Text Comments on this article Comments (0) Version 2 VERSION 2 PUBLISHED 19 Nov 2025 ADD YOUR COMMENT Comment Author details Author details 1 Department of Commerce, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal, Karnataka, 560063, India 2 Postgraduate Studies, Research & Innovation Department, College of Banking and Financial Studies, Ruwi, Muscat Governorate, Oman Narasaraju Divakara Reddy Roles: Conceptualization, Data Curation, Formal Analysis, Investigation, Methodology, Project Administration, Resources, Software, Validation, Visualization, Writing – Original Draft Preparation B R Santosh Roles: Conceptualization, Data Curation, Formal Analysis, Methodology, Software, Supervision, Validation, Writing – Review & Editing Ananda S Roles: Conceptualization, Data Curation, Formal Analysis, Methodology, Project Administration, Supervision, Validation, Visualization, Writing – Review & Editing Guruprasad Desai Roles: Conceptualization, Data Curation, Formal Analysis, Methodology, Software, Supervision, Visualization, Writing – Review & Editing Competing interests No competing interests were disclosed. Grant information The author(s) declared that no grants were involved in supporting this work. Article Versions (2) version 2 Revised Published: 19 Jan 2026, 14:1283 https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.171289.2 version 1 Published: 19 Nov 2025, 14:1283 https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.171289.1 Copyright © 2026 Divakara Reddy N et al . This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. Download Export To Sciwheel Bibtex EndNote ProCite Ref. Manager (RIS) Sente metrics Views Downloads F1000Research - - PubMed Central info_outline Data from PMC are received and updated monthly. - - Citations open_in_new 0 open_in_new 0 open_in_new SEE MORE DETAILS CITE how to cite this article Divakara Reddy N, Santosh BR, S A and Desai G. Behavioral Biases and Investment Decision-Making in the Indian Stock Market: The Moderating Role of Financial Literacy and Investor Experience. [version 2; peer review: 2 approved] . F1000Research 2026, 14 :1283 ( https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.171289.2 ) NOTE: If applicable, it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article. COPY CITATION DETAILS track receive updates on this article Track an article to receive email alerts on any updates to this article. TRACK THIS ARTICLE Share Open Peer Review Current Reviewer Status: ? Key to Reviewer Statuses VIEW HIDE Approved The paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested Approved with reservations A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit. Not approved Fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions Version 2 VERSION 2 PUBLISHED 19 Jan 2026 Revised Views 0 Cite How to cite this report: K A DAA and Safwan K K DM. Reviewer Report For: Behavioral Biases and Investment Decision-Making in the Indian Stock Market: The Moderating Role of Financial Literacy and Investor Experience. [version 2; peer review: 2 approved] . F1000Research 2026, 14 :1283 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.194780.r451207 ) The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/14-1283/v2#referee-response-451207 NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in this citation. Close Copy Citation Details Reviewer Report 21 Jan 2026 Dr. ASHIQUE ALI K A , School of Law, Narsee Monjee Institute of Management Studies University - Hyderabad Campus, Jadcherla, Telangana, India Dr. Muhammed Safwan K K , Department of Commerce, Kuniya College of Arts and Science, Kasargod, Kerela, India Approved VIEWS 0 https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.194780.r451207 The study investigates how behavioural biases shape one's investment decision by analysing the data collected from stock market investors in India. Further, they analyse the moderating effect of both financial literacy and investor experience on this relationship. The authors have ... Continue reading READ ALL The study investigates how behavioural biases shape one's investment decision by analysing the data collected from stock market investors in India. Further, they analyse the moderating effect of both financial literacy and investor experience on this relationship. The authors have diligently revised the manuscript to address the suggested changes, and it has led to a substantial improvement in the manuscript’s structure, clarity, and overall presentation. Some grammatical errors are still present and may be addressed through careful proofreading. Otherwise, the authors' responses to the comments are satisfactory. Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Reviewer Expertise: Our research experience includes technology acceptance, mobile payment systems, financial literacy, and behavioural finance. We confirm that we have read this submission and believe that we have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard. Close READ LESS CITE CITE HOW TO CITE THIS REPORT K A DAA and Safwan K K DM. Reviewer Report For: Behavioral Biases and Investment Decision-Making in the Indian Stock Market: The Moderating Role of Financial Literacy and Investor Experience. [version 2; peer review: 2 approved] . F1000Research 2026, 14 :1283 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.194780.r451207 ) The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/14-1283/v2#referee-response-451207 NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article. COPY CITATION DETAILS Report a concern Respond or Comment COMMENT ON THIS REPORT Version 1 VERSION 1 PUBLISHED 19 Nov 2025 Views 0 Cite How to cite this report: K A DAA and Safwan K K DM. Reviewer Report For: Behavioral Biases and Investment Decision-Making in the Indian Stock Market: The Moderating Role of Financial Literacy and Investor Experience. [version 2; peer review: 2 approved] . F1000Research 2026, 14 :1283 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.188884.r435274 ) The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/14-1283/v1#referee-response-435274 NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in this citation. Close Copy Citation Details Reviewer Report 30 Dec 2025 Dr. ASHIQUE ALI K A , School of Law, Narsee Monjee Institute of Management Studies University - Hyderabad Campus, Jadcherla, Telangana, India Dr. Muhammed Safwan K K , Department of Commerce, Kuniya College of Arts and Science, Kasargod, Kerela, India Approved with Reservations VIEWS 0 https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.188884.r435274 Review Report Summary of the Article The study investigates how behavioural biases shape one's investment decision by analysing the data collected from stock market investors in India. Further they analyse the moderating effect of both financial literacy and ... Continue reading READ ALL Review Report Summary of the Article The study investigates how behavioural biases shape one's investment decision by analysing the data collected from stock market investors in India. Further they analyse the moderating effect of both financial literacy and investor experience on this relationship. They collect primary data from 151 respondents who are investing in stock market through NSE or BSE in India. The analysis was done using PLS-SEM. Subsequently, they find that heuristics have a significant positive impact on investment decision, while other biases show no effect. The results contradict with extant literature as they find insignificant effect of behavioural bias on investment decision. The moderating analysis reveals significant moderate effect of both the moderator variables, showing the importance of financial education in stock market investment. 1. Introduction The introduction section may be extended to provide a detailed background for the study. Particularly, the section may shed light on why India was chosen as the research setting and why the specific moderators were selected. This would help readers better understand the research context. 2. Theoretical Background and Literature Review The theoretical background and literature review section shall justify the variable selection and hypotheses. This article provides a comprehensive review of the existing literature. However, the authors may consider starting the section with the dependent variable, so that readers understand the operational definition of investment decisions used in the study. It is important to know whether the authors emphasise measuring biased investment decisions or rational investment decisions. Also, the phrase ‘portfolio management’ may be removed from the name of the dependent variable. The hypotheses could be refined for precision and clarity. Overall, the study has considered only five behavioural biases, for which justification is needed. The choice of biases should be based on extant literature and theoretical background. A repetition is found on Page 4 under the heading 2.2 (Prospect Theory), and some open-ended citations appear to be wrongly put here. For e.g., “According to Haritha (2023) revealed that investor sentiment mediates the influence of heuristics on stock selection (Haritha, 2023).” The sentence should have been in either of the following formats: a) According to Haritha (2023), the investor sentiment mediates the influence of heuristics on stock selection b) The investor sentiment mediates the influence of heuristics on stock selection (Haritha, 2023) 3. Methodology The choice of PLS-SEM is appropriate; however, the choice may be justified using the arguments presented by Hair et al. (2018) It is understandable why there is a lower sample size, given the inhibition among people when it comes to talking about their investment behaviour. The authors may highlight the rationale behind the choice of purposive random sampling. 4. Analysis and Results The analysis protocol has been correctly followed with respect to PLS-SEM. However, there are some issues. Section 4.2 may be renamed as ‘Measurement Model Analysis’ or ‘Reliability and Validity Analysis’. There are some grammatical errors in the manuscript that need to be addressed, particularly in the results section. The manuscript needs a proofreading. E.g. “The reliability and validity of the variables used in this study were evaluated using outer loadings, Average Variance Extracted (AVE), composite reliability, and Cronbach’s alpha are key metrics used to evaluate reflective measurement models” should have been written as "The reliability and validity of the study variables were evaluated using key metrics for reflective measurement models: outer loadings, Average Variance Extracted (AVE), composite reliability, and Cronbach’s alpha." Section 4.3 is Cronbach’s Alpha, which has already been included in the title of Section 4.2. It should not be a separate section, and it shall be discussed along with composite reliability. An issue with discriminant validity has been reported, but no remedial actions have been taken. This needs to be resolved. The interpretation regarding the moderation effect needs to be revised. Significant and positive interaction means that the effect of emotions on investment decisions increases as the investor's experience increases. A significant and negative interaction indicates that the effect of market impact on investment decisions decreases as investor experience increases. 5. Conclusion The conclusion may be improved by discussing the probable reasons for both significant results and insignificant results. Having insignificant results needs to be thoroughly looked into. The authors need to clearly state the reasons for such results. The theoretical and practical implications of the study shall be elaborated. Is the work clearly and accurately presented and does it cite the current literature? Yes Is the study design appropriate and is the work technically sound? Partly Are sufficient details of methods and analysis provided to allow replication by others? Partly If applicable, is the statistical analysis and its interpretation appropriate? Yes Are all the source data underlying the results available to ensure full reproducibility? Yes Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the results? Partly Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Reviewer Expertise: Our research experience includes technology acceptance, mobile payment systems, financial literacy, and behavioural finance. We confirm that we have read this submission and believe that we have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard, however we have significant reservations, as outlined above. Close READ LESS CITE CITE HOW TO CITE THIS REPORT K A DAA and Safwan K K DM. Reviewer Report For: Behavioral Biases and Investment Decision-Making in the Indian Stock Market: The Moderating Role of Financial Literacy and Investor Experience. [version 2; peer review: 2 approved] . F1000Research 2026, 14 :1283 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.188884.r435274 ) The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/14-1283/v1#referee-response-435274 NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article. COPY CITATION DETAILS Report a concern Author Response 19 Jan 2026 Divakara Reddy Narasaraju , Department of Commerce, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal, 560063, India 19 Jan 2026 Author Response 1. The introduction section may be extended to provide a detailed background for the study. Particularly, the section may shed light on why India was chosen as the research setting ... Continue reading 1. The introduction section may be extended to provide a detailed background for the study. Particularly, the section may shed light on why India was chosen as the research setting and why the specific moderators were selected. This would help readers better understand the research context. Response: Thank you for the valuable feedback- Behavioral biases play an important role in shaping investor decisions in financial markets. The study of behavioral biases among Indian investors on the Bombay Stock Exchange (BSE) and the National Stock Exchange (NSE) reveals the significant effects of these biases on investment decision-making. The key biases identified for this study are heuristics (Tversky & Kahneman, 1974), prospect theory (Barberis, Jin, & Wang, 2020), and emotions (Tversky&Kahneman,1991) (Vuković & Pivac, 2024). Financial literacy and investor experience play a prominent role in moderating the impact of these biases on investment decisions (Khan & Hassan, 2023) (Mahmood et al., 2024) (Wang & Zou, 2024). This study indicates that financial literacy is essential and does not significantly affect investment decisions on its own; rather, it interacts with behavioral biases to shape outcomes (Amudha et al., 2012) and years of investment experience can also influence susceptibility to these biases. More experienced investors may exhibit different behavioral patterns than inexperience, potentially mitigating the effects of biases (Gherzi et al. 2014) This study focuses on the individual investors in the Indian stock market. Stock markets play a very important role in the allocation of economic resources and economic development of a country. (Zuravicky, 2005). India has two premier stock markets: the Bombay Stock Exchange (BSE) and National Stock Exchange (NSE). BSE has play a major role in the Indian stock market, with a significant share of trading volumes. (Singh & Joshi, 2023) (Shah, 2012). NSE was established to provide modernization and transparency in the Indian stock market. NSE consistently has a higher volume of trading than the BSE. (Goel et al., 2021) (Krishnamurti & Lim, 2001). BSE has a larger retail investor, these retail investors are attracted to invest because of the historical significance and larger diversity of its listed companies. The majority of retail investors focus on long- term investment and follow conservative investment strategies (Singh & Joshi, 2023) (Shah, 2012). NSE has a higher proportion of institutional investors, including foreign institutional investors and domestic institutional investors. These investors are more active and engage in short- term trading strategies that use advanced trading systems and higher liquidity. (Goel et al., 2021) (Krishnamurti & Lim, 2001). Vuković, M. and Pivac, S. (2024), "The impact of behavioral factors on investment decisions and investment performance in Croatian stock market", Managerial Finance, Vol. 50 No. 2, pp. 349-366. https://doi.org/10.1108/MF-01-2023-0068 Khan, S., & Hassan, N. U. (2023). Unlocking the investment puzzle: The influence of behavioral biases & moderating role of financial literacy . Journal of Social Research Development, 4(2), 433–444. https://doi.org/10.53664/jsrd/04-02-2023-17-433-444 Amudha, K., & Geetha, C. (2012). Behavioral factors influencing investment decisions of small investors. International Journal of Marketing, Financial Services & Management Research, 1(6), 45–59. Zuravicky, O. (2005). Behavioral finance and investor decision-making. Journal of Wealth Management, 8(3), 16–24. https://doi.org/10.3905/jwm.2005.470607 Gherzi, S., Egan, D., Stewart, N., Haisley, E., & Ayton, P. (2014). The more you pay, the more you buy: Price cues and purchase behavior . Journal of Economic Psychology , 44 , 152–165. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joep.2014.05.002 Shah, A. (2012). India’s financial markets: An insider’s guide to how the markets work. Oxford University Press. Singh, S., & Joshi, M. (2023). Retail investor behavior and stock market participation in India. Journal of Asian Finance, Economics and Business, 10(1), 311–322. https://doi.org/10.13106/jafeb.2023.vol10.no1.0311 Krishnamurti, C., & Lim, K. (2001). Institutional investors and stock market efficiency: Evidence from India . Journal of Multinational Financial Management , 11 (1–2), 23–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1042-444X(00)00045-2 Goel, S., Seth, R., & Gupta, R. (2021). Trading volume, liquidity, and market efficiency: Evidence from BSE and NSE. Global Business Review, 22(5), 1281–1297. https://doi.org/10.1177/0972150919873182 2. Theoretical Background and Literature Review Response: As suggested, revisions were made to the literature review section, and the hypotheses were refined for clarity by removing portfolio management, since it was not included as a study variable. 3. Methodology Response: The data for the study were collected using purposive random sampling technique. A purposive random sampling approach allowed the researcher to identify target respondents who actively participate in investment activities, ensuring that the data reflected informed decision-making behaviors (Etikan et al., 2016). The relatively smaller sample size is attributable to the sensitivity of investment-related data and participant reluctance to disclose personal financial information. At the same time, a random component was incorporated to minimize sampling bias and enhance representativeness. Respondents were invited to fill out the Google Forms questionnaire and the link sent through email and WhatsApp messages. To increase participation, confidentiality of the data was assured. Etikan, I., Musa, S. A., & Alkassim, R. S. (2016). Comparison of convenience sampling and purposive sampling. American Journal of Theoretical and Applied Statistics, 5 (1), 1–4. 4. Analysis and Results Response: 4.2 Replaced as “Measurement Model Analysis” Section 4.3 has merged with 4.2. The following are the “The interpretation regarding the moderation effect needs to be revised”. The moderation analysis examined whether investor experience influenced the relationship between behavioral biases and investment decisions. A significant and positive interaction indicates that the strength of the relationship between emotional bias and investment decisions increases as investor experience grows. Conversely, a significant and negative interaction suggests that the influence of market-related information on investment decisions weakens with greater investor experience. These results express that while experienced investors may become more confident in their emotions when making decisions, they are less influenced by external market signals. constructs with high cross-loadings and conceptual redundancy were carefully reviewed (Sarstedt, Ringle, & Hair, 2020). Overlapping indicator within the emotions construct, heuristics (HU) and market impact was removed to improve construct distinctiveness. Following this refinement, the recalculated AVE and HTMT values met the recommended threshold, confirming that discriminant validity was established across all constructs in the final measurement model. These steps ensured that each construct was conceptually unique and adequately captured its theoretical dimension (Farrell, 2010; Kline, 2016). Kline, R. B. (2016). Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling (4th ed.). Guilford Press. Farrell, A. M. (2010). Insufficient discriminant validity: A comment on Bove, Pervan, Beatty, and Shiu (2009). Journal of Business Research, 63 (3), 324–327. Sarstedt, M., Ringle, C. M., & Hair, J. F. (2020). Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling. In Handbook of Market Research (pp. 1–47). Springer. 5. Conclusion Response: the following points added in the conclusion section The insignificance of these biases may be attributed to contextual factors such as investors access to financial information, enhanced analytical tools, and increased investor sophistication, which potentially minimize the direct influence of prospect theory, market impact, herding behavior and emotional biases on decision-making. This suggests that emotions may operate indirectly or be regulated by investors experience and learning, rather than exerting a direct behavioral influence on investment choices. This finding revels a shift toward more informed and analysis-driven investment behavior, particularly in markets having a greater transparency and regulatory observations. This may indicate that individual investors increasingly depending on their personal judgment and use financial knowledge rather than following collective market behavior. these findings identifies that the influence of these biases may be conditional, indirect, or moderated by investor-specific characteristics. We are grateful to the reviewers for their valuable and insightful comments, which have substantially improved the clarity and readability of the manuscript. 1. The introduction section may be extended to provide a detailed background for the study. Particularly, the section may shed light on why India was chosen as the research setting and why the specific moderators were selected. This would help readers better understand the research context. Response: Thank you for the valuable feedback- Behavioral biases play an important role in shaping investor decisions in financial markets. The study of behavioral biases among Indian investors on the Bombay Stock Exchange (BSE) and the National Stock Exchange (NSE) reveals the significant effects of these biases on investment decision-making. The key biases identified for this study are heuristics (Tversky & Kahneman, 1974), prospect theory (Barberis, Jin, & Wang, 2020), and emotions (Tversky&Kahneman,1991) (Vuković & Pivac, 2024). Financial literacy and investor experience play a prominent role in moderating the impact of these biases on investment decisions (Khan & Hassan, 2023) (Mahmood et al., 2024) (Wang & Zou, 2024). This study indicates that financial literacy is essential and does not significantly affect investment decisions on its own; rather, it interacts with behavioral biases to shape outcomes (Amudha et al., 2012) and years of investment experience can also influence susceptibility to these biases. More experienced investors may exhibit different behavioral patterns than inexperience, potentially mitigating the effects of biases (Gherzi et al. 2014) This study focuses on the individual investors in the Indian stock market. Stock markets play a very important role in the allocation of economic resources and economic development of a country. (Zuravicky, 2005). India has two premier stock markets: the Bombay Stock Exchange (BSE) and National Stock Exchange (NSE). BSE has play a major role in the Indian stock market, with a significant share of trading volumes. (Singh & Joshi, 2023) (Shah, 2012). NSE was established to provide modernization and transparency in the Indian stock market. NSE consistently has a higher volume of trading than the BSE. (Goel et al., 2021) (Krishnamurti & Lim, 2001). BSE has a larger retail investor, these retail investors are attracted to invest because of the historical significance and larger diversity of its listed companies. The majority of retail investors focus on long- term investment and follow conservative investment strategies (Singh & Joshi, 2023) (Shah, 2012). NSE has a higher proportion of institutional investors, including foreign institutional investors and domestic institutional investors. These investors are more active and engage in short- term trading strategies that use advanced trading systems and higher liquidity. (Goel et al., 2021) (Krishnamurti & Lim, 2001). Vuković, M. and Pivac, S. (2024), "The impact of behavioral factors on investment decisions and investment performance in Croatian stock market", Managerial Finance, Vol. 50 No. 2, pp. 349-366. https://doi.org/10.1108/MF-01-2023-0068 Khan, S., & Hassan, N. U. (2023). Unlocking the investment puzzle: The influence of behavioral biases & moderating role of financial literacy . Journal of Social Research Development, 4(2), 433–444. https://doi.org/10.53664/jsrd/04-02-2023-17-433-444 Amudha, K., & Geetha, C. (2012). Behavioral factors influencing investment decisions of small investors. International Journal of Marketing, Financial Services & Management Research, 1(6), 45–59. Zuravicky, O. (2005). Behavioral finance and investor decision-making. Journal of Wealth Management, 8(3), 16–24. https://doi.org/10.3905/jwm.2005.470607 Gherzi, S., Egan, D., Stewart, N., Haisley, E., & Ayton, P. (2014). The more you pay, the more you buy: Price cues and purchase behavior . Journal of Economic Psychology , 44 , 152–165. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joep.2014.05.002 Shah, A. (2012). India’s financial markets: An insider’s guide to how the markets work. Oxford University Press. Singh, S., & Joshi, M. (2023). Retail investor behavior and stock market participation in India. Journal of Asian Finance, Economics and Business, 10(1), 311–322. https://doi.org/10.13106/jafeb.2023.vol10.no1.0311 Krishnamurti, C., & Lim, K. (2001). Institutional investors and stock market efficiency: Evidence from India . Journal of Multinational Financial Management , 11 (1–2), 23–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1042-444X(00)00045-2 Goel, S., Seth, R., & Gupta, R. (2021). Trading volume, liquidity, and market efficiency: Evidence from BSE and NSE. Global Business Review, 22(5), 1281–1297. https://doi.org/10.1177/0972150919873182 2. Theoretical Background and Literature Review Response: As suggested, revisions were made to the literature review section, and the hypotheses were refined for clarity by removing portfolio management, since it was not included as a study variable. 3. Methodology Response: The data for the study were collected using purposive random sampling technique. A purposive random sampling approach allowed the researcher to identify target respondents who actively participate in investment activities, ensuring that the data reflected informed decision-making behaviors (Etikan et al., 2016). The relatively smaller sample size is attributable to the sensitivity of investment-related data and participant reluctance to disclose personal financial information. At the same time, a random component was incorporated to minimize sampling bias and enhance representativeness. Respondents were invited to fill out the Google Forms questionnaire and the link sent through email and WhatsApp messages. To increase participation, confidentiality of the data was assured. Etikan, I., Musa, S. A., & Alkassim, R. S. (2016). Comparison of convenience sampling and purposive sampling. American Journal of Theoretical and Applied Statistics, 5 (1), 1–4. 4. Analysis and Results Response: 4.2 Replaced as “Measurement Model Analysis” Section 4.3 has merged with 4.2. The following are the “The interpretation regarding the moderation effect needs to be revised”. The moderation analysis examined whether investor experience influenced the relationship between behavioral biases and investment decisions. A significant and positive interaction indicates that the strength of the relationship between emotional bias and investment decisions increases as investor experience grows. Conversely, a significant and negative interaction suggests that the influence of market-related information on investment decisions weakens with greater investor experience. These results express that while experienced investors may become more confident in their emotions when making decisions, they are less influenced by external market signals. constructs with high cross-loadings and conceptual redundancy were carefully reviewed (Sarstedt, Ringle, & Hair, 2020). Overlapping indicator within the emotions construct, heuristics (HU) and market impact was removed to improve construct distinctiveness. Following this refinement, the recalculated AVE and HTMT values met the recommended threshold, confirming that discriminant validity was established across all constructs in the final measurement model. These steps ensured that each construct was conceptually unique and adequately captured its theoretical dimension (Farrell, 2010; Kline, 2016). Kline, R. B. (2016). Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling (4th ed.). Guilford Press. Farrell, A. M. (2010). Insufficient discriminant validity: A comment on Bove, Pervan, Beatty, and Shiu (2009). Journal of Business Research, 63 (3), 324–327. Sarstedt, M., Ringle, C. M., & Hair, J. F. (2020). Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling. In Handbook of Market Research (pp. 1–47). Springer. 5. Conclusion Response: the following points added in the conclusion section The insignificance of these biases may be attributed to contextual factors such as investors access to financial information, enhanced analytical tools, and increased investor sophistication, which potentially minimize the direct influence of prospect theory, market impact, herding behavior and emotional biases on decision-making. This suggests that emotions may operate indirectly or be regulated by investors experience and learning, rather than exerting a direct behavioral influence on investment choices. This finding revels a shift toward more informed and analysis-driven investment behavior, particularly in markets having a greater transparency and regulatory observations. This may indicate that individual investors increasingly depending on their personal judgment and use financial knowledge rather than following collective market behavior. these findings identifies that the influence of these biases may be conditional, indirect, or moderated by investor-specific characteristics. We are grateful to the reviewers for their valuable and insightful comments, which have substantially improved the clarity and readability of the manuscript. Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Close Report a concern Respond or Comment COMMENTS ON THIS REPORT Author Response 19 Jan 2026 Divakara Reddy Narasaraju , Department of Commerce, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal, 560063, India 19 Jan 2026 Author Response 1. The introduction section may be extended to provide a detailed background for the study. Particularly, the section may shed light on why India was chosen as the research setting ... Continue reading 1. The introduction section may be extended to provide a detailed background for the study. Particularly, the section may shed light on why India was chosen as the research setting and why the specific moderators were selected. This would help readers better understand the research context. Response: Thank you for the valuable feedback- Behavioral biases play an important role in shaping investor decisions in financial markets. The study of behavioral biases among Indian investors on the Bombay Stock Exchange (BSE) and the National Stock Exchange (NSE) reveals the significant effects of these biases on investment decision-making. The key biases identified for this study are heuristics (Tversky & Kahneman, 1974), prospect theory (Barberis, Jin, & Wang, 2020), and emotions (Tversky&Kahneman,1991) (Vuković & Pivac, 2024). Financial literacy and investor experience play a prominent role in moderating the impact of these biases on investment decisions (Khan & Hassan, 2023) (Mahmood et al., 2024) (Wang & Zou, 2024). This study indicates that financial literacy is essential and does not significantly affect investment decisions on its own; rather, it interacts with behavioral biases to shape outcomes (Amudha et al., 2012) and years of investment experience can also influence susceptibility to these biases. More experienced investors may exhibit different behavioral patterns than inexperience, potentially mitigating the effects of biases (Gherzi et al. 2014) This study focuses on the individual investors in the Indian stock market. Stock markets play a very important role in the allocation of economic resources and economic development of a country. (Zuravicky, 2005). India has two premier stock markets: the Bombay Stock Exchange (BSE) and National Stock Exchange (NSE). BSE has play a major role in the Indian stock market, with a significant share of trading volumes. (Singh & Joshi, 2023) (Shah, 2012). NSE was established to provide modernization and transparency in the Indian stock market. NSE consistently has a higher volume of trading than the BSE. (Goel et al., 2021) (Krishnamurti & Lim, 2001). BSE has a larger retail investor, these retail investors are attracted to invest because of the historical significance and larger diversity of its listed companies. The majority of retail investors focus on long- term investment and follow conservative investment strategies (Singh & Joshi, 2023) (Shah, 2012). NSE has a higher proportion of institutional investors, including foreign institutional investors and domestic institutional investors. These investors are more active and engage in short- term trading strategies that use advanced trading systems and higher liquidity. (Goel et al., 2021) (Krishnamurti & Lim, 2001). Vuković, M. and Pivac, S. (2024), "The impact of behavioral factors on investment decisions and investment performance in Croatian stock market", Managerial Finance, Vol. 50 No. 2, pp. 349-366. https://doi.org/10.1108/MF-01-2023-0068 Khan, S., & Hassan, N. U. (2023). Unlocking the investment puzzle: The influence of behavioral biases & moderating role of financial literacy . Journal of Social Research Development, 4(2), 433–444. https://doi.org/10.53664/jsrd/04-02-2023-17-433-444 Amudha, K., & Geetha, C. (2012). Behavioral factors influencing investment decisions of small investors. International Journal of Marketing, Financial Services & Management Research, 1(6), 45–59. Zuravicky, O. (2005). Behavioral finance and investor decision-making. Journal of Wealth Management, 8(3), 16–24. https://doi.org/10.3905/jwm.2005.470607 Gherzi, S., Egan, D., Stewart, N., Haisley, E., & Ayton, P. (2014). The more you pay, the more you buy: Price cues and purchase behavior . Journal of Economic Psychology , 44 , 152–165. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joep.2014.05.002 Shah, A. (2012). India’s financial markets: An insider’s guide to how the markets work. Oxford University Press. Singh, S., & Joshi, M. (2023). Retail investor behavior and stock market participation in India. Journal of Asian Finance, Economics and Business, 10(1), 311–322. https://doi.org/10.13106/jafeb.2023.vol10.no1.0311 Krishnamurti, C., & Lim, K. (2001). Institutional investors and stock market efficiency: Evidence from India . Journal of Multinational Financial Management , 11 (1–2), 23–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1042-444X(00)00045-2 Goel, S., Seth, R., & Gupta, R. (2021). Trading volume, liquidity, and market efficiency: Evidence from BSE and NSE. Global Business Review, 22(5), 1281–1297. https://doi.org/10.1177/0972150919873182 2. Theoretical Background and Literature Review Response: As suggested, revisions were made to the literature review section, and the hypotheses were refined for clarity by removing portfolio management, since it was not included as a study variable. 3. Methodology Response: The data for the study were collected using purposive random sampling technique. A purposive random sampling approach allowed the researcher to identify target respondents who actively participate in investment activities, ensuring that the data reflected informed decision-making behaviors (Etikan et al., 2016). The relatively smaller sample size is attributable to the sensitivity of investment-related data and participant reluctance to disclose personal financial information. At the same time, a random component was incorporated to minimize sampling bias and enhance representativeness. Respondents were invited to fill out the Google Forms questionnaire and the link sent through email and WhatsApp messages. To increase participation, confidentiality of the data was assured. Etikan, I., Musa, S. A., & Alkassim, R. S. (2016). Comparison of convenience sampling and purposive sampling. American Journal of Theoretical and Applied Statistics, 5 (1), 1–4. 4. Analysis and Results Response: 4.2 Replaced as “Measurement Model Analysis” Section 4.3 has merged with 4.2. The following are the “The interpretation regarding the moderation effect needs to be revised”. The moderation analysis examined whether investor experience influenced the relationship between behavioral biases and investment decisions. A significant and positive interaction indicates that the strength of the relationship between emotional bias and investment decisions increases as investor experience grows. Conversely, a significant and negative interaction suggests that the influence of market-related information on investment decisions weakens with greater investor experience. These results express that while experienced investors may become more confident in their emotions when making decisions, they are less influenced by external market signals. constructs with high cross-loadings and conceptual redundancy were carefully reviewed (Sarstedt, Ringle, & Hair, 2020). Overlapping indicator within the emotions construct, heuristics (HU) and market impact was removed to improve construct distinctiveness. Following this refinement, the recalculated AVE and HTMT values met the recommended threshold, confirming that discriminant validity was established across all constructs in the final measurement model. These steps ensured that each construct was conceptually unique and adequately captured its theoretical dimension (Farrell, 2010; Kline, 2016). Kline, R. B. (2016). Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling (4th ed.). Guilford Press. Farrell, A. M. (2010). Insufficient discriminant validity: A comment on Bove, Pervan, Beatty, and Shiu (2009). Journal of Business Research, 63 (3), 324–327. Sarstedt, M., Ringle, C. M., & Hair, J. F. (2020). Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling. In Handbook of Market Research (pp. 1–47). Springer. 5. Conclusion Response: the following points added in the conclusion section The insignificance of these biases may be attributed to contextual factors such as investors access to financial information, enhanced analytical tools, and increased investor sophistication, which potentially minimize the direct influence of prospect theory, market impact, herding behavior and emotional biases on decision-making. This suggests that emotions may operate indirectly or be regulated by investors experience and learning, rather than exerting a direct behavioral influence on investment choices. This finding revels a shift toward more informed and analysis-driven investment behavior, particularly in markets having a greater transparency and regulatory observations. This may indicate that individual investors increasingly depending on their personal judgment and use financial knowledge rather than following collective market behavior. these findings identifies that the influence of these biases may be conditional, indirect, or moderated by investor-specific characteristics. We are grateful to the reviewers for their valuable and insightful comments, which have substantially improved the clarity and readability of the manuscript. 1. The introduction section may be extended to provide a detailed background for the study. Particularly, the section may shed light on why India was chosen as the research setting and why the specific moderators were selected. This would help readers better understand the research context. Response: Thank you for the valuable feedback- Behavioral biases play an important role in shaping investor decisions in financial markets. The study of behavioral biases among Indian investors on the Bombay Stock Exchange (BSE) and the National Stock Exchange (NSE) reveals the significant effects of these biases on investment decision-making. The key biases identified for this study are heuristics (Tversky & Kahneman, 1974), prospect theory (Barberis, Jin, & Wang, 2020), and emotions (Tversky&Kahneman,1991) (Vuković & Pivac, 2024). Financial literacy and investor experience play a prominent role in moderating the impact of these biases on investment decisions (Khan & Hassan, 2023) (Mahmood et al., 2024) (Wang & Zou, 2024). This study indicates that financial literacy is essential and does not significantly affect investment decisions on its own; rather, it interacts with behavioral biases to shape outcomes (Amudha et al., 2012) and years of investment experience can also influence susceptibility to these biases. More experienced investors may exhibit different behavioral patterns than inexperience, potentially mitigating the effects of biases (Gherzi et al. 2014) This study focuses on the individual investors in the Indian stock market. Stock markets play a very important role in the allocation of economic resources and economic development of a country. (Zuravicky, 2005). India has two premier stock markets: the Bombay Stock Exchange (BSE) and National Stock Exchange (NSE). BSE has play a major role in the Indian stock market, with a significant share of trading volumes. (Singh & Joshi, 2023) (Shah, 2012). NSE was established to provide modernization and transparency in the Indian stock market. NSE consistently has a higher volume of trading than the BSE. (Goel et al., 2021) (Krishnamurti & Lim, 2001). BSE has a larger retail investor, these retail investors are attracted to invest because of the historical significance and larger diversity of its listed companies. The majority of retail investors focus on long- term investment and follow conservative investment strategies (Singh & Joshi, 2023) (Shah, 2012). NSE has a higher proportion of institutional investors, including foreign institutional investors and domestic institutional investors. These investors are more active and engage in short- term trading strategies that use advanced trading systems and higher liquidity. (Goel et al., 2021) (Krishnamurti & Lim, 2001). Vuković, M. and Pivac, S. (2024), "The impact of behavioral factors on investment decisions and investment performance in Croatian stock market", Managerial Finance, Vol. 50 No. 2, pp. 349-366. https://doi.org/10.1108/MF-01-2023-0068 Khan, S., & Hassan, N. U. (2023). Unlocking the investment puzzle: The influence of behavioral biases & moderating role of financial literacy . Journal of Social Research Development, 4(2), 433–444. https://doi.org/10.53664/jsrd/04-02-2023-17-433-444 Amudha, K., & Geetha, C. (2012). Behavioral factors influencing investment decisions of small investors. International Journal of Marketing, Financial Services & Management Research, 1(6), 45–59. Zuravicky, O. (2005). Behavioral finance and investor decision-making. Journal of Wealth Management, 8(3), 16–24. https://doi.org/10.3905/jwm.2005.470607 Gherzi, S., Egan, D., Stewart, N., Haisley, E., & Ayton, P. (2014). The more you pay, the more you buy: Price cues and purchase behavior . Journal of Economic Psychology , 44 , 152–165. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joep.2014.05.002 Shah, A. (2012). India’s financial markets: An insider’s guide to how the markets work. Oxford University Press. Singh, S., & Joshi, M. (2023). Retail investor behavior and stock market participation in India. Journal of Asian Finance, Economics and Business, 10(1), 311–322. https://doi.org/10.13106/jafeb.2023.vol10.no1.0311 Krishnamurti, C., & Lim, K. (2001). Institutional investors and stock market efficiency: Evidence from India . Journal of Multinational Financial Management , 11 (1–2), 23–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1042-444X(00)00045-2 Goel, S., Seth, R., & Gupta, R. (2021). Trading volume, liquidity, and market efficiency: Evidence from BSE and NSE. Global Business Review, 22(5), 1281–1297. https://doi.org/10.1177/0972150919873182 2. Theoretical Background and Literature Review Response: As suggested, revisions were made to the literature review section, and the hypotheses were refined for clarity by removing portfolio management, since it was not included as a study variable. 3. Methodology Response: The data for the study were collected using purposive random sampling technique. A purposive random sampling approach allowed the researcher to identify target respondents who actively participate in investment activities, ensuring that the data reflected informed decision-making behaviors (Etikan et al., 2016). The relatively smaller sample size is attributable to the sensitivity of investment-related data and participant reluctance to disclose personal financial information. At the same time, a random component was incorporated to minimize sampling bias and enhance representativeness. Respondents were invited to fill out the Google Forms questionnaire and the link sent through email and WhatsApp messages. To increase participation, confidentiality of the data was assured. Etikan, I., Musa, S. A., & Alkassim, R. S. (2016). Comparison of convenience sampling and purposive sampling. American Journal of Theoretical and Applied Statistics, 5 (1), 1–4. 4. Analysis and Results Response: 4.2 Replaced as “Measurement Model Analysis” Section 4.3 has merged with 4.2. The following are the “The interpretation regarding the moderation effect needs to be revised”. The moderation analysis examined whether investor experience influenced the relationship between behavioral biases and investment decisions. A significant and positive interaction indicates that the strength of the relationship between emotional bias and investment decisions increases as investor experience grows. Conversely, a significant and negative interaction suggests that the influence of market-related information on investment decisions weakens with greater investor experience. These results express that while experienced investors may become more confident in their emotions when making decisions, they are less influenced by external market signals. constructs with high cross-loadings and conceptual redundancy were carefully reviewed (Sarstedt, Ringle, & Hair, 2020). Overlapping indicator within the emotions construct, heuristics (HU) and market impact was removed to improve construct distinctiveness. Following this refinement, the recalculated AVE and HTMT values met the recommended threshold, confirming that discriminant validity was established across all constructs in the final measurement model. These steps ensured that each construct was conceptually unique and adequately captured its theoretical dimension (Farrell, 2010; Kline, 2016). Kline, R. B. (2016). Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling (4th ed.). Guilford Press. Farrell, A. M. (2010). Insufficient discriminant validity: A comment on Bove, Pervan, Beatty, and Shiu (2009). Journal of Business Research, 63 (3), 324–327. Sarstedt, M., Ringle, C. M., & Hair, J. F. (2020). Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling. In Handbook of Market Research (pp. 1–47). Springer. 5. Conclusion Response: the following points added in the conclusion section The insignificance of these biases may be attributed to contextual factors such as investors access to financial information, enhanced analytical tools, and increased investor sophistication, which potentially minimize the direct influence of prospect theory, market impact, herding behavior and emotional biases on decision-making. This suggests that emotions may operate indirectly or be regulated by investors experience and learning, rather than exerting a direct behavioral influence on investment choices. This finding revels a shift toward more informed and analysis-driven investment behavior, particularly in markets having a greater transparency and regulatory observations. This may indicate that individual investors increasingly depending on their personal judgment and use financial knowledge rather than following collective market behavior. these findings identifies that the influence of these biases may be conditional, indirect, or moderated by investor-specific characteristics. We are grateful to the reviewers for their valuable and insightful comments, which have substantially improved the clarity and readability of the manuscript. Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Close Report a concern COMMENT ON THIS REPORT Views 0 Cite How to cite this report: Makhija DP. Reviewer Report For: Behavioral Biases and Investment Decision-Making in the Indian Stock Market: The Moderating Role of Financial Literacy and Investor Experience. [version 2; peer review: 2 approved] . F1000Research 2026, 14 :1283 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.188884.r435273 ) The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/14-1283/v1#referee-response-435273 NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in this citation. Close Copy Citation Details Reviewer Report 27 Dec 2025 Dr. Priya Makhija , Center for Management Studies, Jain University, Bengaluru, Karnataka, India Approved VIEWS 0 https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.188884.r435273 The study provides valuable insights by establishing heuristics as the only behavioral bias with a significant direct influence on investment decisions. The non-significance of prospect theory, emotions, market impact, and herding is well-explained and aligns with existing behavioral finance literature. ... Continue reading READ ALL The study provides valuable insights by establishing heuristics as the only behavioral bias with a significant direct influence on investment decisions. The non-significance of prospect theory, emotions, market impact, and herding is well-explained and aligns with existing behavioral finance literature. The moderation results are meaningful, showing that investor experience and financial literacy strengthen decision-making specifically in the context of emotional and market-related biases.The discussion effectively links findings to broader trends such as increased investor awareness, fintech adoption, and market maturity. The study offers practical implications for policymakers and investors, though future research could explore additional behavioral variables and demographic moderating factors. Is the work clearly and accurately presented and does it cite the current literature? Yes Is the study design appropriate and is the work technically sound? Yes Are sufficient details of methods and analysis provided to allow replication by others? Yes If applicable, is the statistical analysis and its interpretation appropriate? Yes Are all the source data underlying the results available to ensure full reproducibility? Yes Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the results? Yes Competing Interests: No competing interests were disclosed. Reviewer Expertise: Finance, FinTech, CBDC, Indian Stock Market I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard. Close READ LESS CITE CITE HOW TO CITE THIS REPORT Makhija DP. Reviewer Report For: Behavioral Biases and Investment Decision-Making in the Indian Stock Market: The Moderating Role of Financial Literacy and Investor Experience. [version 2; peer review: 2 approved] . F1000Research 2026, 14 :1283 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.188884.r435273 ) The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/14-1283/v1#referee-response-435273 NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article. COPY CITATION DETAILS Report a concern Respond or Comment COMMENT ON THIS REPORT Comments on this article Comments (0) Version 2 VERSION 2 PUBLISHED 19 Nov 2025 ADD YOUR COMMENT Comment keyboard_arrow_left keyboard_arrow_right Open Peer Review Reviewer Status info_outline Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article: Approved The paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested Approved with reservations A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit. Not approved Fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions Reviewer Reports Invited Reviewers 1 2 Version 2 (revision) 19 Jan 26 read Version 1 19 Nov 25 read read Dr. Priya Makhija , Center for Management Studies, Jain University, Bengaluru, India Dr. ASHIQUE ALI K A , Narsee Monjee Institute of Management Studies University - Hyderabad Campus, Jadcherla, India Dr. Muhammed Safwan K K , Kuniya College of Arts and Science, Kasargod, India Comments on this article All Comments (0) Add a comment Sign up for content alerts Sign Up You are now signed up to receive this alert Browse by related subjects keyboard_arrow_left Back to all reports Reviewer Report 0 Views copyright © 2026 K A D et al. This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. 21 Jan 2026 | for Version 2 Dr. ASHIQUE ALI K A , School of Law, Narsee Monjee Institute of Management Studies University - Hyderabad Campus, Jadcherla, Telangana, India Dr. Muhammed Safwan K K , Department of Commerce, Kuniya College of Arts and Science, Kasargod, Kerela, India 0 Views copyright © 2026 K A D et al. This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. format_quote Cite this report speaker_notes Responses (0) Approved info_outline Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article: Approved The paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested Approved with reservations A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit. Not approved Fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions The study investigates how behavioural biases shape one's investment decision by analysing the data collected from stock market investors in India. Further, they analyse the moderating effect of both financial literacy and investor experience on this relationship. The authors have diligently revised the manuscript to address the suggested changes, and it has led to a substantial improvement in the manuscript’s structure, clarity, and overall presentation. Some grammatical errors are still present and may be addressed through careful proofreading. Otherwise, the authors' responses to the comments are satisfactory. Competing Interests No competing interests were disclosed. Reviewer Expertise Our research experience includes technology acceptance, mobile payment systems, financial literacy, and behavioural finance. We confirm that we have read this submission and believe that we have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard. reply Respond to this report Responses (0) K A DAA and Safwan K K DM. Peer Review Report For: Behavioral Biases and Investment Decision-Making in the Indian Stock Market: The Moderating Role of Financial Literacy and Investor Experience. [version 2; peer review: 2 approved] . F1000Research 2026, 14 :1283 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.194780.r451207) NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in this citation. The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/14-1283/v2#referee-response-451207 keyboard_arrow_left Back to all reports Reviewer Report 0 Views copyright © 2026 K A D et al. This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. 30 Dec 2025 | for Version 1 Dr. ASHIQUE ALI K A , School of Law, Narsee Monjee Institute of Management Studies University - Hyderabad Campus, Jadcherla, Telangana, India Dr. Muhammed Safwan K K , Department of Commerce, Kuniya College of Arts and Science, Kasargod, Kerela, India 0 Views copyright © 2026 K A D et al. This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. format_quote Cite this report speaker_notes Responses (1) Approved With Reservations info_outline Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article: Approved The paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested Approved with reservations A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit. Not approved Fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions Review Report Summary of the Article The study investigates how behavioural biases shape one's investment decision by analysing the data collected from stock market investors in India. Further they analyse the moderating effect of both financial literacy and investor experience on this relationship. They collect primary data from 151 respondents who are investing in stock market through NSE or BSE in India. The analysis was done using PLS-SEM. Subsequently, they find that heuristics have a significant positive impact on investment decision, while other biases show no effect. The results contradict with extant literature as they find insignificant effect of behavioural bias on investment decision. The moderating analysis reveals significant moderate effect of both the moderator variables, showing the importance of financial education in stock market investment. 1. Introduction The introduction section may be extended to provide a detailed background for the study. Particularly, the section may shed light on why India was chosen as the research setting and why the specific moderators were selected. This would help readers better understand the research context. 2. Theoretical Background and Literature Review The theoretical background and literature review section shall justify the variable selection and hypotheses. This article provides a comprehensive review of the existing literature. However, the authors may consider starting the section with the dependent variable, so that readers understand the operational definition of investment decisions used in the study. It is important to know whether the authors emphasise measuring biased investment decisions or rational investment decisions. Also, the phrase ‘portfolio management’ may be removed from the name of the dependent variable. The hypotheses could be refined for precision and clarity. Overall, the study has considered only five behavioural biases, for which justification is needed. The choice of biases should be based on extant literature and theoretical background. A repetition is found on Page 4 under the heading 2.2 (Prospect Theory), and some open-ended citations appear to be wrongly put here. For e.g., “According to Haritha (2023) revealed that investor sentiment mediates the influence of heuristics on stock selection (Haritha, 2023).” The sentence should have been in either of the following formats: a) According to Haritha (2023), the investor sentiment mediates the influence of heuristics on stock selection b) The investor sentiment mediates the influence of heuristics on stock selection (Haritha, 2023) 3. Methodology The choice of PLS-SEM is appropriate; however, the choice may be justified using the arguments presented by Hair et al. (2018) It is understandable why there is a lower sample size, given the inhibition among people when it comes to talking about their investment behaviour. The authors may highlight the rationale behind the choice of purposive random sampling. 4. Analysis and Results The analysis protocol has been correctly followed with respect to PLS-SEM. However, there are some issues. Section 4.2 may be renamed as ‘Measurement Model Analysis’ or ‘Reliability and Validity Analysis’. There are some grammatical errors in the manuscript that need to be addressed, particularly in the results section. The manuscript needs a proofreading. E.g. “The reliability and validity of the variables used in this study were evaluated using outer loadings, Average Variance Extracted (AVE), composite reliability, and Cronbach’s alpha are key metrics used to evaluate reflective measurement models” should have been written as "The reliability and validity of the study variables were evaluated using key metrics for reflective measurement models: outer loadings, Average Variance Extracted (AVE), composite reliability, and Cronbach’s alpha." Section 4.3 is Cronbach’s Alpha, which has already been included in the title of Section 4.2. It should not be a separate section, and it shall be discussed along with composite reliability. An issue with discriminant validity has been reported, but no remedial actions have been taken. This needs to be resolved. The interpretation regarding the moderation effect needs to be revised. Significant and positive interaction means that the effect of emotions on investment decisions increases as the investor's experience increases. A significant and negative interaction indicates that the effect of market impact on investment decisions decreases as investor experience increases. 5. Conclusion The conclusion may be improved by discussing the probable reasons for both significant results and insignificant results. Having insignificant results needs to be thoroughly looked into. The authors need to clearly state the reasons for such results. The theoretical and practical implications of the study shall be elaborated. Is the work clearly and accurately presented and does it cite the current literature? Yes Is the study design appropriate and is the work technically sound? Partly Are sufficient details of methods and analysis provided to allow replication by others? Partly If applicable, is the statistical analysis and its interpretation appropriate? Yes Are all the source data underlying the results available to ensure full reproducibility? Yes Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the results? Partly Competing Interests No competing interests were disclosed. Reviewer Expertise Our research experience includes technology acceptance, mobile payment systems, financial literacy, and behavioural finance. We confirm that we have read this submission and believe that we have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard, however we have significant reservations, as outlined above. reply Respond to this report Responses (1) Author Response 19 Jan 2026 Divakara Reddy Narasaraju, Department of Commerce, Manipal Academy of Higher Education, Manipal, 560063, India 1. The introduction section may be extended to provide a detailed background for the study. Particularly, the section may shed light on why India was chosen as the research setting and why the specific moderators were selected. This would help readers better understand the research context. Response: Thank you for the valuable feedback- Behavioral biases play an important role in shaping investor decisions in financial markets. The study of behavioral biases among Indian investors on the Bombay Stock Exchange (BSE) and the National Stock Exchange (NSE) reveals the significant effects of these biases on investment decision-making. The key biases identified for this study are heuristics (Tversky & Kahneman, 1974), prospect theory (Barberis, Jin, & Wang, 2020), and emotions (Tversky&Kahneman,1991) (Vuković & Pivac, 2024). Financial literacy and investor experience play a prominent role in moderating the impact of these biases on investment decisions (Khan & Hassan, 2023) (Mahmood et al., 2024) (Wang & Zou, 2024). This study indicates that financial literacy is essential and does not significantly affect investment decisions on its own; rather, it interacts with behavioral biases to shape outcomes (Amudha et al., 2012) and years of investment experience can also influence susceptibility to these biases. More experienced investors may exhibit different behavioral patterns than inexperience, potentially mitigating the effects of biases (Gherzi et al. 2014) This study focuses on the individual investors in the Indian stock market. Stock markets play a very important role in the allocation of economic resources and economic development of a country. (Zuravicky, 2005). India has two premier stock markets: the Bombay Stock Exchange (BSE) and National Stock Exchange (NSE). BSE has play a major role in the Indian stock market, with a significant share of trading volumes. (Singh & Joshi, 2023) (Shah, 2012). NSE was established to provide modernization and transparency in the Indian stock market. NSE consistently has a higher volume of trading than the BSE. (Goel et al., 2021) (Krishnamurti & Lim, 2001). BSE has a larger retail investor, these retail investors are attracted to invest because of the historical significance and larger diversity of its listed companies. The majority of retail investors focus on long- term investment and follow conservative investment strategies (Singh & Joshi, 2023) (Shah, 2012). NSE has a higher proportion of institutional investors, including foreign institutional investors and domestic institutional investors. These investors are more active and engage in short- term trading strategies that use advanced trading systems and higher liquidity. (Goel et al., 2021) (Krishnamurti & Lim, 2001). Vuković, M. and Pivac, S. (2024), "The impact of behavioral factors on investment decisions and investment performance in Croatian stock market", Managerial Finance, Vol. 50 No. 2, pp. 349-366. https://doi.org/10.1108/MF-01-2023-0068 Khan, S., & Hassan, N. U. (2023). Unlocking the investment puzzle: The influence of behavioral biases & moderating role of financial literacy . Journal of Social Research Development, 4(2), 433–444. https://doi.org/10.53664/jsrd/04-02-2023-17-433-444 Amudha, K., & Geetha, C. (2012). Behavioral factors influencing investment decisions of small investors. International Journal of Marketing, Financial Services & Management Research, 1(6), 45–59. Zuravicky, O. (2005). Behavioral finance and investor decision-making. Journal of Wealth Management, 8(3), 16–24. https://doi.org/10.3905/jwm.2005.470607 Gherzi, S., Egan, D., Stewart, N., Haisley, E., & Ayton, P. (2014). The more you pay, the more you buy: Price cues and purchase behavior . Journal of Economic Psychology , 44 , 152–165. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joep.2014.05.002 Shah, A. (2012). India’s financial markets: An insider’s guide to how the markets work. Oxford University Press. Singh, S., & Joshi, M. (2023). Retail investor behavior and stock market participation in India. Journal of Asian Finance, Economics and Business, 10(1), 311–322. https://doi.org/10.13106/jafeb.2023.vol10.no1.0311 Krishnamurti, C., & Lim, K. (2001). Institutional investors and stock market efficiency: Evidence from India . Journal of Multinational Financial Management , 11 (1–2), 23–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1042-444X(00)00045-2 Goel, S., Seth, R., & Gupta, R. (2021). Trading volume, liquidity, and market efficiency: Evidence from BSE and NSE. Global Business Review, 22(5), 1281–1297. https://doi.org/10.1177/0972150919873182 2. Theoretical Background and Literature Review Response: As suggested, revisions were made to the literature review section, and the hypotheses were refined for clarity by removing portfolio management, since it was not included as a study variable. 3. Methodology Response: The data for the study were collected using purposive random sampling technique. A purposive random sampling approach allowed the researcher to identify target respondents who actively participate in investment activities, ensuring that the data reflected informed decision-making behaviors (Etikan et al., 2016). The relatively smaller sample size is attributable to the sensitivity of investment-related data and participant reluctance to disclose personal financial information. At the same time, a random component was incorporated to minimize sampling bias and enhance representativeness. Respondents were invited to fill out the Google Forms questionnaire and the link sent through email and WhatsApp messages. To increase participation, confidentiality of the data was assured. Etikan, I., Musa, S. A., & Alkassim, R. S. (2016). Comparison of convenience sampling and purposive sampling. American Journal of Theoretical and Applied Statistics, 5 (1), 1–4. 4. Analysis and Results Response: 4.2 Replaced as “Measurement Model Analysis” Section 4.3 has merged with 4.2. The following are the “The interpretation regarding the moderation effect needs to be revised”. The moderation analysis examined whether investor experience influenced the relationship between behavioral biases and investment decisions. A significant and positive interaction indicates that the strength of the relationship between emotional bias and investment decisions increases as investor experience grows. Conversely, a significant and negative interaction suggests that the influence of market-related information on investment decisions weakens with greater investor experience. These results express that while experienced investors may become more confident in their emotions when making decisions, they are less influenced by external market signals. constructs with high cross-loadings and conceptual redundancy were carefully reviewed (Sarstedt, Ringle, & Hair, 2020). Overlapping indicator within the emotions construct, heuristics (HU) and market impact was removed to improve construct distinctiveness. Following this refinement, the recalculated AVE and HTMT values met the recommended threshold, confirming that discriminant validity was established across all constructs in the final measurement model. These steps ensured that each construct was conceptually unique and adequately captured its theoretical dimension (Farrell, 2010; Kline, 2016). Kline, R. B. (2016). Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling (4th ed.). Guilford Press. Farrell, A. M. (2010). Insufficient discriminant validity: A comment on Bove, Pervan, Beatty, and Shiu (2009). Journal of Business Research, 63 (3), 324–327. Sarstedt, M., Ringle, C. M., & Hair, J. F. (2020). Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling. In Handbook of Market Research (pp. 1–47). Springer. 5. Conclusion Response: the following points added in the conclusion section The insignificance of these biases may be attributed to contextual factors such as investors access to financial information, enhanced analytical tools, and increased investor sophistication, which potentially minimize the direct influence of prospect theory, market impact, herding behavior and emotional biases on decision-making. This suggests that emotions may operate indirectly or be regulated by investors experience and learning, rather than exerting a direct behavioral influence on investment choices. This finding revels a shift toward more informed and analysis-driven investment behavior, particularly in markets having a greater transparency and regulatory observations. This may indicate that individual investors increasingly depending on their personal judgment and use financial knowledge rather than following collective market behavior. these findings identifies that the influence of these biases may be conditional, indirect, or moderated by investor-specific characteristics. We are grateful to the reviewers for their valuable and insightful comments, which have substantially improved the clarity and readability of the manuscript. View more View less Competing Interests No competing interests were disclosed. reply Respond Report a concern K A DAA and Safwan K K DM. Peer Review Report For: Behavioral Biases and Investment Decision-Making in the Indian Stock Market: The Moderating Role of Financial Literacy and Investor Experience. [version 2; peer review: 2 approved] . F1000Research 2026, 14 :1283 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.188884.r435274) NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in this citation. The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/14-1283/v1#referee-response-435274 keyboard_arrow_left Back to all reports Reviewer Report 0 Views copyright © 2025 Makhija D. This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. 27 Dec 2025 | for Version 1 Dr. Priya Makhija , Center for Management Studies, Jain University, Bengaluru, Karnataka, India 0 Views copyright © 2025 Makhija D. This is an open access peer review report distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License , which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. format_quote Cite this report speaker_notes Responses (0) Approved info_outline Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article: Approved The paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested Approved with reservations A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit. Not approved Fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions The study provides valuable insights by establishing heuristics as the only behavioral bias with a significant direct influence on investment decisions. The non-significance of prospect theory, emotions, market impact, and herding is well-explained and aligns with existing behavioral finance literature. The moderation results are meaningful, showing that investor experience and financial literacy strengthen decision-making specifically in the context of emotional and market-related biases.The discussion effectively links findings to broader trends such as increased investor awareness, fintech adoption, and market maturity. The study offers practical implications for policymakers and investors, though future research could explore additional behavioral variables and demographic moderating factors. Is the work clearly and accurately presented and does it cite the current literature? Yes Is the study design appropriate and is the work technically sound? Yes Are sufficient details of methods and analysis provided to allow replication by others? Yes If applicable, is the statistical analysis and its interpretation appropriate? Yes Are all the source data underlying the results available to ensure full reproducibility? Yes Are the conclusions drawn adequately supported by the results? Yes Competing Interests No competing interests were disclosed. Reviewer Expertise Finance, FinTech, CBDC, Indian Stock Market I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard. reply Respond to this report Responses (0) Makhija DP. Peer Review Report For: Behavioral Biases and Investment Decision-Making in the Indian Stock Market: The Moderating Role of Financial Literacy and Investor Experience. [version 2; peer review: 2 approved] . F1000Research 2026, 14 :1283 ( https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.188884.r435273) NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in this citation. The direct URL for this report is: https://f1000research.com/articles/14-1283/v1#referee-response-435273 Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article: Approved - the paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested Approved with reservations - A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit. Not approved - fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions Adjust parameters to alter display View on desktop for interactive features Includes Interactive Elements View on desktop for interactive features Competing Interests Policy Provide sufficient details of any financial or non-financial competing interests to enable users to assess whether your comments might lead a reasonable person to question your impartiality. Consider the following examples, but note that this is not an exhaustive list: Examples of 'Non-Financial Competing Interests' Within the past 4 years, you have held joint grants, published or collaborated with any of the authors of the selected paper. You have a close personal relationship (e.g. parent, spouse, sibling, or domestic partner) with any of the authors. You are a close professional associate of any of the authors (e.g. scientific mentor, recent student). You work at the same institute as any of the authors. You hope/expect to benefit (e.g. favour or employment) as a result of your submission. You are an Editor for the journal in which the article is published. Examples of 'Financial Competing Interests' You expect to receive, or in the past 4 years have received, any of the following from any commercial organisation that may gain financially from your submission: a salary, fees, funding, reimbursements. You expect to receive, or in the past 4 years have received, shared grant support or other funding with any of the authors. You hold, or are currently applying for, any patents or significant stocks/shares relating to the subject matter of the paper you are commenting on. Stay Updated Sign up for content alerts and receive a weekly or monthly email with all newly published articles Register with F1000Research Already registered? Sign in Not now, thanks close PLEASE NOTE If you are an AUTHOR of this article, please check that you signed in with the account associated with this article otherwise we cannot automatically identify your role as an author and your comment will be labelled as a “User Comment”. If you are a REVIEWER of this article, please check that you have signed in with the account associated with this article and then go to your account to submit your report, please do not post your review here. If you do not have access to your original account, please contact us . All commenters must hold a formal affiliation as per our Policies . The information that you give us will be displayed next to your comment. User comments must be in English, comprehensible and relevant to the article under discussion. We reserve the right to remove any comments that we consider to be inappropriate, offensive or otherwise in breach of the User Comment Terms and Conditions . Commenters must not use a comment for personal attacks. When criticisms of the article are based on unpublished data, the data should be made available. I accept the User Comment Terms and Conditions Please confirm that you accept the User Comment Terms and Conditions. Affiliation ✕ refresh Please enter your institution. Note: To add your institution or organisation, start typing the name and then select the correct name from the list. Where applicable, the name will appear in both the original language and in English. Do not paste in the name. If the name does not appear in the drop-down list, we will display the information you have entered. ✕ refresh Country/Region * USA UK Canada China France Germany Afghanistan Aland Islands Albania Algeria American Samoa Andorra Angola Anguilla Antarctica Antigua and Barbuda Argentina Armenia Aruba Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bahamas Bahrain Bangladesh Barbados Belarus Belgium Belize Benin Bermuda Bhutan Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Bouvet Island Brazil British Indian Ocean Territory British Virgin Islands Brunei Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Cape Verde Cayman Islands Central African Republic Chad Chile China Christmas Island Cocos (Keeling) Islands Colombia Comoros Congo Cook Islands Costa Rica Cote d'Ivoire Croatia Cuba Cyprus Czech Republic Democratic Republic of the Congo Denmark Djibouti Dominica Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt El Salvador Equatorial Guinea Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Falkland Islands Faroe Islands Federated States of Micronesia Fiji Finland France French Guiana French Polynesia French Southern Territories Gabon Georgia Germany Ghana Gibraltar Greece Greenland Grenada Guadeloupe Guam Guatemala Guernsey Guinea Guinea-Bissau Guyana Haiti Heard Island and Mcdonald Islands Holy See (Vatican City State) Honduras Hong Kong Hungary Iceland India Indonesia Iran Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jersey Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Kiribati Kosovo (Serbia and Montenegro) Kuwait Kyrgyzstan Lao People's Democratic Republic Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Liechtenstein Lithuania Luxembourg Macao Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Maldives Mali Malta Marshall Islands Martinique Mauritania Mauritius Mayotte Mexico Minor Outlying Islands of the United States Moldova Monaco Mongolia Montenegro Montserrat Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nauru Nepal Netherlands Antilles New Caledonia New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Niue Norfolk Island North Korea North Macedonia Northern Mariana Islands Norway Oman Pakistan Palau Palestinian Territory Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Pitcairn Poland Portugal Puerto Rico Qatar Reunion Romania Russian Federation Rwanda Saint Helena Saint Kitts and Nevis Saint Lucia Saint Pierre and Miquelon Saint Vincent and the Grenadines Samoa San Marino Sao Tome and Principe Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Seychelles Sierra Leone Singapore Slovakia Slovenia Solomon Islands Somalia South Africa South Georgia and the South Sandwich Is South Korea South Sudan Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Suriname Svalbard and Jan Mayen Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syria Taiwan Tajikistan Tanzania Thailand The Gambia The Netherlands Timor-Leste Togo Tokelau Tonga Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Turks and Caicos Islands Tuvalu UK USA Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United States Virgin Islands Uruguay Uzbekistan Vanuatu Venezuela Vietnam Wallis and Futuna West Bank and Gaza Strip Western Sahara Yemen Zambia Zimbabwe Please select your country/region. You must enter a comment. Competing Interests Please disclose any competing interests that might be construed to influence your judgment of the article's or peer review report's validity or importance. Competing Interests Policy Provide sufficient details of any financial or non-financial competing interests to enable users to assess whether your comments might lead a reasonable person to question your impartiality. Consider the following examples, but note that this is not an exhaustive list: Examples of 'Non-Financial Competing Interests' Within the past 4 years, you have held joint grants, published or collaborated with any of the authors of the selected paper. You have a close personal relationship (e.g. parent, spouse, sibling, or domestic partner) with any of the authors. You are a close professional associate of any of the authors (e.g. scientific mentor, recent student). You work at the same institute as any of the authors. You hope/expect to benefit (e.g. favour or employment) as a result of your submission. You are an Editor for the journal in which the article is published. Examples of 'Financial Competing Interests' You expect to receive, or in the past 4 years have received, any of the following from any commercial organisation that may gain financially from your submission: a salary, fees, funding, reimbursements. You expect to receive, or in the past 4 years have received, shared grant support or other funding with any of the authors. You hold, or are currently applying for, any patents or significant stocks/shares relating to the subject matter of the paper you are commenting on. Please state your competing interests The comment has been saved. An error has occurred. Please try again. Cancel Post var lTitle = "Behavioral Biases and Investment Decision-Making...".replace("'", ''); var linkedInUrl = "http://www.linkedin.com/shareArticle?url=https://f1000research.com/articles/14-1283/v2" + "&title=" + encodeURIComponent(lTitle) + "&summary=" + encodeURIComponent('Read the article by '); var deliciousUrl = "https://del.icio.us/post?url=https://f1000research.com/articles/14-1283/v2&title=" + encodeURIComponent(lTitle); var redditUrl = "http://reddit.com/submit?url=https://f1000research.com/articles/14-1283/v2" + "&title=" + encodeURIComponent(lTitle); linkedInUrl += encodeURIComponent('Divakara Reddy N et al.'); var offsetTop = /chrome/i.test( navigator.userAgent ) ? 4 : -10; var addthis_config = { ui_offset_top: offsetTop, services_compact : "facebook,twitter,www.linkedin.com,www.mendeley.com,reddit.com", services_expanded : "facebook,twitter,www.linkedin.com,www.mendeley.com,reddit.com", services_custom : [ { name: "LinkedIn", url: linkedInUrl, icon:"/img/icon/at_linkedin.svg" }, { name: "Mendeley", url: "http://www.mendeley.com/import/?url=https://f1000research.com/articles/14-1283/v2/mendeley", icon:"/img/icon/at_mendeley.svg" }, { name: "Reddit", url: redditUrl, icon:"/img/icon/at_reddit.svg" }, ] }; var addthis_share = { url: "https://f1000research.com/articles/14-1283", templates : { twitter : "Behavioral Biases and Investment Decision-Making in the Indian.... Divakara Reddy N et al., published by " + "@F1000Research" + ", https://f1000research.com/articles/14-1283/v2" } }; if (typeof(addthis) != "undefined"){ addthis.addEventListener('addthis.ready', checkCount); addthis.addEventListener('addthis.menu.share', checkCount); } $(".f1r-shares-twitter").attr("href", "https://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=" + addthis_share.templates.twitter); $(".f1r-shares-facebook").attr("href", "https://www.facebook.com/sharer/sharer.php?u=" + addthis_share.url); $(".f1r-shares-linkedin").attr("href", addthis_config.services_custom[0].url); $(".f1r-shares-reddit").attr("href", addthis_config.services_custom[2].url); $(".f1r-shares-mendelay").attr("href", addthis_config.services_custom[1].url); function checkCount(){ setTimeout(function(){ $(".addthis_button_expanded").each(function(){ var count = $(this).text(); if (count !== "" && count != "0") $(this).removeClass("is-hidden"); else $(this).addClass("is-hidden"); }); }, 1000); } close How to cite this report {{reportCitation}} Cancel Copy Citation Details $(function(){R.ui.buttonDropdowns('.dropdown-for-downloads');}); $(function(){R.ui.toolbarDropdowns('.toolbar-dropdown-for-downloads');}); $.get("/articles/acj/171289/194780") new F1000.Clipboard(); new F1000.ThesaurusTermsDisplay("articles", "article", "194780"); $(document).ready(function() { $( "#frame1" ).on('load', function() { var mydiv = $(this).contents().find("div"); var h = mydiv.height(); console.log(h) }); var tooltipLivingFigure = jQuery(".interactive-living-figure-label .icon-more-info"), titleLivingFigure = tooltipLivingFigure.attr("title"); tooltipLivingFigure.simpletip({ fixed: true, position: ["-115", "30"], baseClass: 'small-tooltip', content:titleLivingFigure + " " }); tooltipLivingFigure.removeAttr("title"); $("body").on("click", ".cite-living-figure", function(e) { e.preventDefault(); var ref = $(this).attr("data-ref"); $(this).closest(".living-figure-list-container").find("#" + ref).fadeIn(200); }); $("body").on("click", ".close-cite-living-figure", function(e) { e.preventDefault(); $(this).closest(".popup-window-wrapper").fadeOut(200); }); $(document).on("mouseup", function(e) { var metricsContainer = $(".article-metrics-popover-wrapper"); if (!metricsContainer.is(e.target) && metricsContainer.has(e.target).length === 0) { $(".article-metrics-close-button").click(); } }); var articleId = $('#articleId').val(); if($("#main-article-count-box").attachArticleMetrics) { $("#main-article-count-box").attachArticleMetrics(articleId, { articleMetricsView: true }); } }); var figshareWidget = $(".new_figshare_widget"); if (figshareWidget.length > 0) { window.figshare.load("f1000", function(Widget) { // Select a tag/tags defined in your page. In this tag we will place the widget. _.map(figshareWidget, function(el){ var widget = new Widget({ articleId: $(el).attr("figshare_articleId") //height:300 // this is the height of the viewer part. [Default: 550] }); widget.initialize(); // initialize the widget widget.mount(el); // mount it in a tag that's on your page // this will save the widget on the global scope for later use from // your JS scripts. This line is optional. //window.widget = widget; }); }); } close Error Close Add Reset F1000.MICROSERVICES.AFFILIATION = ''; $(document).ready(function () { $('.js-affiliations-form').each((index, form) => { new AffiliationForm({ formId: form.id, institutionErrorSelector: '.comment-enter-institution', departmentErrorSelector: '.comment-enter-department', placeSelector: '.js-add-comment-place', stateSelector: '.js-add-comment-state', zipCodeSelector: '.js-add-comment-zipcode', countrySelector: '.js-add-comment-country', countryErrorSelector: '.comment-enter-country', }); }); }); $(document).ready(function () { var reportIds = { "435270": 0, "451207": 12, "435271": 0, "435268": 0, "435269": 0, "435276": 0, "435277": 0, "435274": 27, "435275": 0, "451208": 0, "435272": 0, "435273": 13, }; $(".referee-response-container,.js-referee-report").each(function(index, el) { var reportId = $(el).attr("data-reportid"), reportCount = reportIds[reportId] || 0; $(el).find(".comments-count-container,.js-referee-report-views").html(reportCount); }); var uuidInput = $("#article_uuid"), oldUUId = uuidInput.val(), newUUId = "192ab327-892c-4e2c-a069-e4c5de3b0109"; uuidInput.val(newUUId); $("a[href*='article_uuid=']").each(function(index, el) { var newHref = $(el).attr("href").replace(oldUUId, newUUId); $(el).attr("href", newHref); }); }); An innovative open access publishing platform offering rapid publication and open peer review, whilst supporting data deposition and sharing. Browse Gateways Collections How it Works Contact For Developers Cookie Notice Privacy Notice RSS Submit Your Research Follow us © 2012-2026 F1000 Research Ltd. ISSN 2046-1402 | Legal | Partner of Research4Life • CrossRef • ORCID • FAIRSharing R.templateTests.simpleTemplate = R.template(' $text $text $text $text $text '); R.templateTests.runTests(); var F1000platform = new F1000.Platform({ name: "f1000research", displayName: "F1000Research", hostName: "f1000research.com", id: "1", editorialEmail: "[email protected]", infoEmail: "[email protected]", usePmcStats: true }); $(function(){R.ui.dropdowns('.dropdown-for-authors, .dropdown-for-about, .dropdown-for-myresearch');}); // $(function(){R.ui.dropdowns('.dropdown-for-referees');}); $(document).ready(function () { if ($(".cookie-warning").is(":visible")) { $(".sticky").css("margin-bottom", "35px"); $(".devices").addClass("devices-and-cookie-warning"); } $(".cookie-warning .close-button").click(function (e) { $(".devices").removeClass("devices-and-cookie-warning"); $(".sticky").css("margin-bottom", "0"); }); $("#tweeter-feed .tweet-message").each(function (i, message) { var self = $(message); self.html(linkify(self.html())); }); $(".partner").on("mouseenter mouseleave", function() { $(this).find(".gray-scale, .colour").toggleClass("is-hidden"); }); }); Sign In Remember me Forgotten your password? Sign In Cancel Email or password not correct. Please try again Please wait... $(function(){ // Note: All the setup needs to run against a name attribute and *not* the id due the clonish // nature of facebox... $("a[id=googleSignInButton]").click(function(event){ event.preventDefault(); $("input[id=oAuthSystem]").val("GOOGLE"); $("form[id=oAuthForm]").submit(); }); $("a[id=facebookSignInButton]").click(function(event){ event.preventDefault(); $("input[id=oAuthSystem]").val("FACEBOOK"); $("form[id=oAuthForm]").submit(); }); $("a[id=orcidSignInButton]").click(function(event){ event.preventDefault(); $("input[id=oAuthSystem]").val("ORCID"); $("form[id=oAuthForm]").submit(); }); }); If you've forgotten your password, please enter your email address below and we'll send you instructions on how to reset your password. The email address should be the one you originally registered with F1000. Email address not valid, please try again You registered with F1000 via Google, so we cannot reset your password. To sign in, please click here . If you still need help with your Google account password, please click here . You registered with F1000 via Facebook, so we cannot reset your password. To sign in, please click here . If you still need help with your Facebook account password, please click here . Code not correct, please try again Reset password Cancel Email us for further assistance. Server error, please try again. If your email address is registered with us, we will email you instructions to reset your password. If you think you should have received this email but it has not arrived, please check your spam filters and/or contact for further assistance. Please wait... Register $(document).ready(function () { signIn.createSignInAsRow($("#sign-in-form-gfb-popup")); $(".target-field").each(function () { var uris = $(this).val().split("/"); if (uris.pop() === "login") { $(this).val(uris.toString().replace(",","/")); } }); });