## 4 Study Results
### Hypothesis Testing
The results are presented in Figure 2. The two most commonly chosen methods were Consultation and Technical analysis, each of these being applied by more than 40% of investors of both genders. Our results can be compared with the analysis conducted by [PERSON] [38], who studied the role of the mass media in investor relations and found there to be a slow decline in the importance of financial news media in the investment process. However, he argued that financial news nevertheless plays a significant role in trading in the city and can, at times, still have a powerful impact on investment patterns. It can also be observed from Figure 2 that News was, for men, a more popular method than fundamental analysis, but equally as popular as No Strategy. Here, we reached similar results, albeit not for different periods (differing from [38], which compares the effects of mass media over time); however, we reached the conclusion that men are more likely to rely on news than women. Figure 2: Adopted investment approaches on TSE based on gender. Fourth, we analysed questionnaires with regard to the **age of investors**. For better segmentation, we divided the investors into three age groups (Table 2). People in the age group \">45\" are less likely to fall into confirmation bias than the two younger groups. Most of the groups of investors that appear to commit confirmation bias fall into the 36-45 age group. Additionally, it is noticeable that loss aversion is much higher in this age group (36-45) than in other age groups. The loss aversion question was designed to measure whether the investors prefer lower- risk investments to higher-risk ones. It emerged that, as we had expected, the youngest groups favour riskier investments. Even though the age group \">45\" is quite close to the youngest, the difference between them is still significant. There can also be observed significant differences in the hot hand fallacy between age groups. As can be recalled from the definition, both hot hand and gambler's fallacies involve the conclusion of future outcomes based on past events. In theory, it is reasonable to assume that these two phenomena will occur in parallel. If a person feels that the past values of their assets will affect future values, then their thought process would align with both hot hand and gambler's fallacies. However, we observed that a subtle difference between these two biases means that they may not necessarily occur together. In the case of the hot hand fallacy, there is no change of direction. It assumes a consistent series of outcomes in the future; if a company's returns have risen over the past two months, then this trend will continue into the future without any change. On the other hand, the gambler's fallacy states that if returns have decreased over the past two months, they are bound to increase in the future. Thus, the latter fallacy is based on a notable shift in circumstances. We assumed the hypothesis that both the gambler's and hot hand fallacies have the same mean, and they are equally preferred. However, based on the data, we rejected the null hypothesis, and we can assert that investors favoured consistency in their stock returns (hot hand) over changes to them (gambler's) (Table 3). Fifth, an important consideration is that we have used **positive framing** in asking both questions, that is, we have asked them in such a manner that the outcomes lean towards a better situation; if it is increasing, then it will continue to grow (hot hand), and if it is decreasing, then it is due to increase (gambler's). For both biases, we observed some optimistic responses since most investors agreed with them. In another question, we asked investors to give their opinions regarding Iran's economy, that is, whether or not it is growing. The majority of investors either strongly disagered (48.3%) or disagered (32.2%), which in total is 80.5%.