MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4321446360 · doi:10.1111/auar.12395

Bayesian Investor Belief Updating Speed and Market Underreaction to Earnings Announcements

2023· article· en· W4321446360 on OpenAlexaff
Yan Han, Xin Cui, Gloria Yuan Tian, Peipei Wang

Bibliographic record

VenueAustralian Accounting Review · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicFinancial Markets and Investment Strategies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Lethbridge
FundersXiamen UniversityMinistry of Education of the People's Republic of ChinaRenmin University of ChinaNational Natural Science Foundation of ChinaDeakin University
KeywordsEarningsBayesian probabilityEconometricsBayesian inferenceEconomicsDuration (music)Information asymmetryEarnings growthFinancial economicsComputer scienceMicroeconomicsAccountingArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Building on the Bayesian Theorem, we propose a multi‐period market microstructure model to understand how Bayesian investors underact new information and the duration of market underreaction. Applying the model to post‐earnings‐announcement drifts, our simulation and regression analyses show that the duration of the post‐announcement price adjustment process and the post‐announcement drifts can be explained by the new measure of belief updating speed that quantifies the uncertainties faced by Bayesian investors when incorporating new information into prices. Our study highlights the importance of incorporating the belief uncertainties of uninformed investors in explaining market underreaction in the Bayesian framework.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.059
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.050

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.059
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.005
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.221 · 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

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAustralian Accounting ReviewSame topicFinancial Markets and Investment StrategiesFrench-language works237,207