Skip to main content

Your Money and Your Brain – Jason Zweig ****

It might seem a book about investing isn’t really suited to a popular science site, but hold on – Jason Zweig’s book is much more than a ‘how to make money on the stock market’ tome. Yes, it does give some lessons for would-be investors, but the subject of the book is much more interesting (with a scientific hat on). In fact the investment advice, when you come to it, is fairly bog standard stuff like the need to investigate a company before buying shares, not just relying on the shares’ track record on the stock exchange. This book is almost back to front. What it really is, is an in-depth exploration of why the way our brains work make us hideously unsuited to playing the stock market.
Before assessing the book as a whole, I do need to clarify one issue that nearly stopped me reading it. There’s an example on page 20 that just doesn’t make any sense. It is supposed to show how people make the wrong assumptions about the evidence they need to make a decision, but unfortunately the way the problem is stated makes the assumed ‘wrong answer’ correct. Zweig has attempted to correct this in the US paperback, but after discussing this with both the author and the academic on whose paper the example is based, it’s clear that the example would probably never be able to usefully show what was required here. So if you read the book and get hung up on the problem of the consultant who says the market rises every time after he predicts it, don’t. It doesn’t work – ignore it!
Once past that issue, the book has fascinating detail about the way different parts of the brain react to the types of stimuli presented to us by stock trading, whether it’s fear, risk, surprise, regret or prediction. By using MRI scans and other technology, Zweig takes us through how the brain reacts under those pressures, making the kinds of decision stock market players have to make and demonstrates not only what happens in the brain, but how our natural responses make us highly unsuited to the whole business. The aim is that we can be aware of these natural faults and overcome them, but the reality is it makes you feel that no one sane would ever have anything to do with these kinds of investments. It has always worried and irritated me when I hear on the news that a stock index has collapsed because traders were worried about something or panicking about something. The financial basis of our institutions shouldn’t be animal, reflexive reaction. Yet Zweig shows this is almost inevitable.
So whether, like me, the impact of the book is to make you think it’s time we did away with stocks and shares and introduced a more reasoned way of financing businesses, or, as Zweig intended, you use this as a book to get insight into the best possible way of investing, there can be no doubt that this is an interesting read and one that is much more about the brain and human response than it is about money. If you have an absolute aversion to matters financial you might find it a little hard going in places, but if, like me, you find business interesting and the human brain wonderful, this book will provide plenty of food for thought.

Paperback:  
Using these links earns us commission at no cost to you
Review by Brian Clegg
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Why Nobody Understands Quantum Physics - Frank Verstraete and Céline Broeckaert **

It's with a heavy heart that I have to say that I could not get on with this book. The structure is all over the place, while the content veers from childish remarks to unexplained jargon. Frank Versraete is a highly regarded physicist and knows what he’s talking about - but unfortunately, physics professors are not always the best people to explain physics to a general audience and, possibly contributed to by this being a translation, I thought this book simply doesn’t work. A small issue is that there are few historical inaccuracies, but that’s often the case when scientists write history of science, and that’s not the main part of the book so I would have overlooked it. As an example, we are told that Newton's apple story originated with Voltaire. Yet Newton himself mentioned the apple story to William Stukeley in 1726. He may have made it up - but he certainly originated it, not Voltaire. We are also told that ‘Galileo discovered the counterintuitive law behind a swinging o...
Post a Comment
Read more

How to Keep a Plane in the Sky - Alex Davies ****

If there's one big gap in the science writing sphere, it's popular engineering (you can quibble over whether engineering is science, but where else would you put popular engineering?). Alex Davies does the field a real service with this insightful introduction to the world of test engineering. The concept is simple. If we build something and sell it, we need to test it to make sure that it won't fail in a way that's dangerous to the consumer. The most obvious example is airliners, which feature at some length, but this applies to everything from cuddly toys to hair straighteners: someone needs to predict what could go wrong and to put the product through its paces to see if it will survive under any reasonable circumstances. When Davies is telling a story of test engineering in action, the book is a delight. He opens with the way that real bears are used to test if bears can get into coolers and trash cans - and the impressive ways these animals can  circumvent human in...
Post a Comment
Read more

On the Equality of All Things - Carlo Rovelli ****

There is a wide gulf between the worldviews of physicists and philosophers. Many physicists present a rather sweetly naive, child-like view of the world, where philosophers bring a distinctly more adult, cynical tone. This being the case, it can be a little worrying when a physicist dips a toe into the philosophical mire. Infamously, in The Grand Design , Stephen Hawking and co-author Leonard Mlodinow told us that philosophy was now dead because science could deal with anything it had previously been needed for. Thankfully, Carlo Rovelli is not trying to do away with philosophy, though it has to be said that when he veers into the topic that physicist's naivety can make it feel like the philosophising of an earnest eighteen-year-old. Take the opening paragraph, which tells us 'electrons and minds, stones and laws, judgements and galaxies do not essentially differ in nature from one another. They are notions that illuminate each other'. I almost expected a Pink Floyd soundtr...
Post a Comment
Read more