Escalas de Medida en la Toma de Decisiones de Inversión. Evidencia Empírica Basada en Cuestionarios MiFID.

Palabras clave

cuestionarios MiFID
test de los de conveniencia e idoneidad
medidas de proximidad ordinal


La Directiva Europea MiFID regula la prestación de servicios de inversión e intenta mejorar la protección de los inversores minoristas. Para conocer los conocimientos y la experiencia financiera de los inversores, esta directiva utiliza fundamentalmente dos tipos de cuestionarios: los de conveniencia e idoneidad los cuales se emplean diferentes escalas de medición. Dado que algunos subcampos de Finanzas Conductuales se centran en el estudio de los sesgos de percepción, el objetivo principal de este artículo es analizar algunas ventajas y desventajas de las escalas de calificación numérica y verbal, y examinar sus efectos en las percepciones de los inversores. Para ello, se llevó a cabo un estudio empírico basado en diferentes escalas de medida: verbal, escala de calificación numérica y escala verbal considerando proximidades. En esta contribución se emplea el concepto de medida de proximidad ordinal para recoger las percepciones de los individuos sobre las escalas ordinales.


Aghanya, D., Agarwal, V., and Poshakwale, S. (2020). Market in Financial Instruments Directive (MiFID), Stock Price Informativeness and Liquidity. Journal of Banking & Finance, 113, 105730. doi: 10.1016/j.jbankfin.2019.105730

Aspara, J. (2013). The Role of Product and Brand Perceptions in Stock Investing: Effects on Investment Considerations, Optimism and Confidence. Journal of Behavioral Finance, 14(3), 195-212. doi: 10.1080/15427560.2013.819803

Bellofatto, A., D’Hondt, C., and De Winne, R. (2018). Subjective Financial Literacy and Retail Investors’ Behavior. Journal of Banking & finance, 92, 168-181. doi: 10.1016/j.jbankfin.2018.05.004

Budescu, D. V., Weinberg, S., and Wallsten, T. S. (1988). Decisions Based on Numerically and Verbally Expressed Uncertainties. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 14(2), 281-294. doi: 10.1037/0096-1523.14.2.281

Busch, D. (2017). MiFID II and MiFIR: Stricter Rules for the EU Financial Markets. Law and Financial Markets Review, 11(2-3), 126-142. doi: /10.1080/17521440.2017.1412060

Casey, J. P., and Lannoo, K. (2009). The MiFID Revolution. Cambridge University Press. doi: 10.1017/CBO9780511770470

Chien, C. W., Bagraith, K. S., Khan, A., Deen, M., and Strong, J. (2013). Comparative Responsiveness of Verbal and Numerical Rating Scales to Measure Pain Intensity in Patients with Chronic Pain. The Journal of Pain, 14(12), 1653-1662. doi: /10.1016/j.jpain.2013.08.006

Coelho, P. S., and Esteves, S. P. (2007). The Choice between a Fivepoint and a Ten-point Scale in the Framework of Customer Satisfaction Measurement. International Journal of Market Research, 49(3), 313-339. doi: 10.1177/147078530704900

Dew, J., and Xiao, J. J. (2011). The Financial Management Behavior Scale: Development and Validation. Journal of Financial Counseling and Planning, 22(1), 43-60. doi: 0.1207/s15427579jpfm0604_3

Fang, B., Hope, O. K., Huang, Z., and Moldovan, R. (2020). The Effects of MiFID II on Sell-side Analysts, Buy-side Analysts, and Firms. Review of Accounting Studies, 25(3), 855-902. doi: 10.1007/s11142-020-09545-w

Ferreira-Valente, M. A., Pais-Ribeiro, J. L., and Jensen, M. P. (2011). Validity of Four Pain Intensity Rating Scales. Pain, 152(10), 2399-2404. doi: 10.1016/j.pain.2011.07.005

Franceschini, F., Galetto, M., and Varetto, M. (2004). Qualitative Ordinal Scales: The Concept of Ordinal Tange. Quality Engineering, 16(4), 515-524. doi: 10.1081/QEN-120038013

Fünfgeld, B., and Wang, M. (2009). Attitudes and Behaviour in Everyday Finance: Evidence from Switzerland. International Journal of Bank Marketing, 27(2), 108-128. doi: 10.1108/02652320910935607

Gadrich, T., Bashkansky, E., and Zitikis, R. (2015). Assessing Variation: A Unifying Approach for all Scales of Measurement. Quality & Quantity, 49(3), 1145-1167. doi: 10.1007/s11135-014-0040-9

García-Lapresta, J. L., and González del Pozo, R. (2019). An Ordinal Multi-Criteria Decision-making Procedure under Imprecise Linguistic Assessments. European Journal of Operational Research, 279(1), 159-167. doi: 10.1016/j.ejor.2019.05.015

García-Lapresta, J. L., González del Pozo, R., and Pérez-Román, D. (2018). Metrizable Ordinal Proximity Measures and Their Aggregation. Information Sciences, 448, 149-163. doi: 10.1016/j.ins.2018.03.034

García-Lapresta, J. L., Moreno-Albadalejo, P., Pérez-Román, D., and Temprano-García, V. (2021). A Multi-criteria Procedure in New Product Development Using Different Qualitative Scales. Applied Soft Computing, 106, 107279. doi: 10.1016/j.asoc.2021.107279

García-Lapresta, J. L., and Pérez-Román, D. (2015). Ordinal Proximity Measures in the Context of Unbalanced Qualitative Scales and Some Applications to Consensus and Clustering. Applied Soft Computing, 35, 864-872. doi: 10.1016/j.asoc.2015.02.035

Gomber, P., Clapham, B., Lausen, J., and Panz, S. (2018). The Impact of MiFID II/MiFIR on European Market Structure: A Survey Among Market Experts. The Journal of Trading, 13(2), 35-46. doi: 10.3905/jot.2018.13.2.035

Gonzalez del Pozo, R., Dias, L. C., and García-Lapresta, J. L. (2020). Using Different Qualitative Scales in a Multi-criteria Decision-making Procedure. Mathematics, 8(3), 458. doi: 10.3390/math8030458

González del Pozo, R., and García-Lapresta, J. L. (2019). Tratamiento Ordinal de las Escalas Cualitativas Utilizadas por el Centro de Investigaciones Sociológicas. Revista de Métodos Cuantitativos para la Economía y la Empresa, 28, 124-142. doi: 10.46661/revmetodoscuanteconempresa.3788

González del Pozo, R., and García-Lapresta, J. L. (2021). Managing the Smiley Face Scale used by Booking. com in an Ordinal Way. Journal of Theoretical and Applied Electronic Commerce Research, 16(2), 128-139. doi: 10.4067/S0718-18762021000200110

Hjermstad, M. J., Fayers, P. M., Haugen, D. F., Caraceni, A., Hanks, G. W., Loge, J. H., and European Palliative Care Research Collaborative (EPCRC). (2011). Studies Comparing Numerical Rating Scales, Verbal Rating Scales, and Visual Analogue Scales for Assessment of Pain Intensity in Adults: A Systematic Literature Review. Journal of Pain and Symptom Management, 41(6), 1073-1093. doi: 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2010.08.016

Islam, S.T., Khan, M.Y.H. (2019). Evaluating the changes in the European Banking Regulation – MiFID and its possible effects on the Global Economy: A Theoretical Study. Financial Markets, Institutions and Risks, 3(4), 24-31. doi: 10.21272/fmir.3(4).24-31.2019

Jansen, R., Kilian, A., and Loonen, T. (2016). MiFID II: Suitability and Appropriateness Practical guidelines for Investment Services. Techinical Report. University Amsterdam. doi: 10.13140/RG.2.2.13193.29288

Kahneman, D., Knetsch, J. L., and Thaler, R. H. (1991). Anomalies: The Endowment Effect, Loss Aversion, and Status Quo Bias. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 5(1), 193-206. doi: 10.1257/jep.5.1.193

Krishnan, R., and Beena, F. (2009). Measurement of Conformity to Behavior Finance Concepts and Association with Individual Personality. The IUP Journal of Behavioral Finance, 6, 25-40.

Likert, R. (1932). A Technique for the Measurement of Attitudes. Archives of Psychology, 22, 1-55.

Loonen, T., and Janssen, R. (2023). Implementation of MiFID II investor protection provisions by private banks within the European Union. Journal of Financial Regulation and Compliance, 31(1), 1-15. doi: 10.1108/JFRC-10-2021-0087

Loix, E., Pepermans, R., Mentens, C., Goedee, M., and Jegers, M. (2005). Orientation toward finances: Development of a Measurement Scale. The Journal of Behavioral Finance, 6(4), 192-201. doi: 10.1207/s15427579jpfm0604_3

Lozano, L. M., García-Cueto, E., and Muñiz, J. (2008). Effect of the Number of Response Categories on the Reliability and Validity of Rating Scales. Methodology: European Journal of Research Methods for the Behavioral and Social Sciences, 4(2), 73-79. doi: 10.1027/1614-2241.4.2.73

Menold, N., Kaczmirek, L., Lenzner, T., and Neusar, A. (2014). How do respondents attend to verbal labels in rating scales?. Field Methods, 26(1), 21-39. doi: 10.1177/1525822X13508270

Miloş, M. C., and Miloş, L. R. (2019). Challenges Regarding the Implementation of MiFID II. In International conference Knowledge-Based Organization, 25(2), 158-162. doi: 10.2478/kbo-2019-0073

Mitroi, A., and Oproiu, A. (2014). Behavioral Finance: New Research Trends, Socionomics and Investor Emotions. Theoretical and Applied Economics, 18(4), 153-166.

Preston, C. C., and Colman, A. M. (2000). Optimal Number of Response Categories in Rating Scales: Reliability, Validity, Discriminating Power, and Respondent Preferences. Acta Psychologica, 104(1), 1-15. doi: 10.1016/S0001-6918(99)00050-5

Prorokowski, L. (2015). MiFID II Compliance–are We Ready?. Journal of Financial Regulation and Compliance, 23(2), 196-206. doi: /10.1108/JFRC-02-2014-0009

Sadi, R., Asl, H. G., Rostami, M. R., Gholipour, A., and Gholipour, F. (2011). Behavioral Finance: The explanation of Investors’ personality and Perceptual Biases Effects on Financial Decisions. International Journal of Economics and Finance, 3(5), 234-241. doi: 10.5539/ijef.v3n5p234

Sjöberg, L., and Engelberg, E. (2009). Attitudes to Economic Risk Taking, Sensation Seeking and Values of Business Students Specializing in Finance. The Journal of Behavioral Finance, 10(1), 33-43. doi: 10.1080/15427560902728712

Stein, J. C. (1996). Rational Capital Budgeting In An Irrational World. The Journal of Business, 69(4), 429-455. doi: 10.3386/w5496

Stevens, S. (1946). On the Theory of Scales of Measurement. Science, 103, 677-680. doi: 10.1126/science.103.2684.677

Streiner, D. L., Norman, G. R., and Cairney, J. (2014). Scaling Responses. In: Health Measurement Scales: A Practical Guide to their Development and Use, 38-73. Oxford University Press, USA. doi: 10.1093/med/9780199685219.003.0004

Tversky, A., and Kahneman, D. (1981). The Framing of Decisions and the Pychology of Choice. Science, 211, 453-458. doi: 10.1126/science.7455683

Valiante, D. and Assi, B. (2011). MiFID Implementation in the midst of the financial crisis: results of an ECMI survey. ECMI Research Report No. 6.

Vlaev, I., Chater 1, N., and Stewart, N. (2009). Dimensionality of Risk Perception: Factors Affecting Consumer Understanding and Evaluation of Financial Risk. The Journal of Behavioral Finance, 10(3), 158-181. doi: 10.1080/15427560903167720

Wallsten, T. S., Budescu, D. V., and Zwick, R. (1993). Comparing the Calibration and Coherence of Numerical and Verbal Probability Judgments. Management Science, 39(2), 176-190. doi: 10.1287/mnsc.39.2.176

Warr, P., J. Cook, and T. Wall. (1979). Scales for the Measurement of Some Work Attitudes and Aspects of Psychological Well-Being. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 52 (2),129-48. doi: 10.1111/j.2044-8325.1979.tb00448.x

Windschitl, P. D., and Wells, G. L. (1996). Measuring Psychological Uncertainty: Verbal versus Numeric Methods. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 2(4), 343-364. doi: 10.1037/1076-898X.2.4.343

Zimmer, A. C. (1983). Verbal vs. Numerical Processing of Subjective Probabilities. In: Decision Making under Uncertainty. (R.W. Scholz, ed), 159-182. Elsevier. doi: 10.1016/S0166-4115(08)62198-6

Creative Commons License

Esta obra está bajo una licencia internacional Creative Commons Atribución-NoComercial-SinDerivadas 4.0.

Derechos de autor 2024 Behanomics