There are hundreds of scientific articles on experimental asset markets. Almost all of them use a short and definite horizon. This may be one of the starkest differences between experimental settings and real-world financial markets, which usually have indefinite and comparatively long horizons. We analyze the implications of different end time assumptions in an asset market experiment in which we vary the length of the horizon and whether the end time is definite or indefinite. We find very similar price dynamics with recurring bubbles in all treatments.

We study the role of investor experience in the formation of asset price bubbles. We conduct a call market experiment in which participants trade assets with each other and a learning-to-forecast experiment in which participants only forecast future prices (while trade based on these forecasts is computerized). Each experiment comprises three treatments varying the information that participants receive about the fundamental value. Each experimental market is repeated three times. Throughout, we observe sizable bubbles that persist despite participant experience. Our findings in the call market experiment contrast with those in the literature. Our findings in the learning-to-forecast experiment are novel.

ABSTRACT An important feature of bond markets is the relationship between the initial public offering (IPO) price and the probability that the issuer defaults. On the one hand, the default probability affects the IPO price; on the other hand, the IPO price affects the default probability. It is a priori unclear whether agents can competitively price such assets. Our paper is the first to explore this question. To do so, we use laboratory experiments. We develop two flexible bond market models that are easily implemented in the laboratory. We find that subjects learn to price the bonds well after only a few repetitions.