MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2517731163 · doi:10.1177/0149206316664008

Sticky Decisions: Anchoring and Equity Stakes in International Acquisitions

2016· article· en· W2517731163 on OpenAlexafffund
Shavin Malhotra, Horatio M. Morgan, Pengcheng Zhu

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Management · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicCorporate Finance and Governance
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan UniversityUniversity of Waterloo
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsAnchoringHeuristicsEquity (law)BusinessPerspective (graphical)EconomicsMarketingPsychologySocial psychologyPolitical scienceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study proposes an anchoring perspective on international equity ownership decisions. Given the complex, uncertain nature of such decisions, we recognize the potential for heuristics such as anchoring to replace time-consuming and information-intensive analyses; specifically, top managers might draw on the recent international equity ownership decisions of others to determine how much equity stake to purchase in foreign target firms. Drawing on standard regression methods and more recently developed hedonic regression techniques, this study reveals some systematic effects of anchoring in international equity ownership decisions. Anchoring is more likely when international acquisitions occur under informational deficiencies in genuinely uncertain settings but less likely when the acquiring firms are managed by overconfident CEOs.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.052
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.052
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.005
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.040
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.229 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations45
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of ManagementSame topicCorporate Finance and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207